being a holy and unchangeable thing which has existed, or ought to have existed, from all eternity. It is simply that extent of territory which the Dukes, Kings, Commonwealths, and Tyrants of Paris have, in one age or another, contrived to win and keep. If he chooses to speak of France as a revolted province of Germany, he will not be speaking without authority. "A regno secessit Gallia nostro" is a very old saying indeed. If he is uncivil enough to speak of a large part of existing France as made up of the stealings of the last six hundred years, he will be saying what the historian cannot take upon himself to deny. Instead of allowing that France has any natural and eternal boundaries, he knows that the boundaries of France are of all boundaries the most fluctuating. He knows that there was a time when Stras burg and Metz, when Lyons and Marseilles, were not yet French. He knows that there was a time when Hamburg and Lubeck, when Rome and Triest, were French, so far as French occupation could make them so. He is tempted to think that, as French occupation has ceased in the one case, there may perhaps be no eternal law forbidding French occupation to cease in the other. He sees that all the acquisitions of France have been made at the expense of the Empire of which Germany was once the head, that a large portion of them has been made at the expense of the German Kingdom itself. When this war began, he saw within the French territory towns and districts which once were part of Germany, which still bear German names, and whose inhabitants still speak the German tongue. He saw one noble German city, the site of the great master-pieces of German art, held by France by virtue of an impudent robbery committed by a French King in a time of perfect peace. He saw mile after mile of the shore of the German stream turned into a French province and strengthened with fortresses directed as a menace against Germany. He knows, moreover, that other German lands, that the whole length of the German river, had been marked out as the next spoil, and that in this very war he is simply beating back those who would have seized them.

on the present case, about which an Englishman generally knows nothing at all, about which a Frenchman is positively fed upon falsehood, but which every well-educated German understands thoroughly. The Frenchman certainly believes that there is some special sanctity about his own country and nation which gives it privileges above all other countries and nations. It is in the eternal fitness of things that the French frontier should always go forward and never go back; that France should dismember other countries at pleasure, but that she should never be dismembered herself; that on every accession of power by a neighbour she must in common justice receive a compensating increase of territory, but that it is something wicked and preposterous for even a conqueror encamped on French soil to think of keeping any portion of his conquests. It seems to him perfectly right that France should, even without provocation, invade other countries and besiege their capitals, but that a foreign army should, even in strict self-defence, invade France and besiege her capital, seems to him not merely the adverse fortune of war, but something monstrous, unnatural, and sacrilegious. The Frenchman keeps on saying all this till he believes it himself, and till the Englishman half believes it also. The Englishman of himself unconsciously fancies France to be, not an arbitrary space on the map, but something as eternally traced by the hand of nature as his own island. He is fully prepared to think it something contrary to nature for the France of the map, like the Great Britain of the map, to grow smaller. And when he has been duly lectured by the Frenchman on natural boundaries, he half believes that the occupation of the west side of the Rhine by some Power other than France is something analogous to the occupation of the west side of the German Ocean by some Power other than England. Furthermore he gets a confused idea that a compact and united France is something which has existed from all eternity, while a compact and united Germany is a dream of yesterday, which perhaps first came into men's heads at Frankfort in 1848. Altogether He sees, in short, in France simply a conhe gets, wittingly or unwittingly, a kind of vague impression that the annexation of French territory by Germany is a process of a much more dreadful kind than the annexation of German territory by France.

Now the German has a different tale to tell. In his eyes France is very far from

stant, restless, insatiable aggressor on every German land. At last the tables are turned. Instead of the Frenchman being encamped on German soil, the German is encamped on French soil. What then are likely to be his feelings? It would not be very amazing if he gave way to feelings of pure vengeance, if he deemed

that the time was at last come when he might do by his enemy as his enemy had so often done by him. Such feelings might be unchristian, unjust, impolitic, but they would certainly not be unnatural. If the conqueror were to dismember the conquered land according to no law but his own pleasure, he would be simply doing after the manner of conquerors. To declare Rouen and Bordeaux to be incorporated with Germany would not be more The obvious answers which a neutral violent, more contrary to nature, than it may be expected to make to any form of was to declare Hamburg and Lübeck to the claim have been already hinted at. be incorporated with France. It is worth They chiefly amount to this. The people bearing in mind that the furthest extrem- of the districts proposed to be annexed do ity of vengeance on conquered France not desire annexation. Even where they would be simple retaliation, would be sim-are German in speech and origin, they have ply what conquerors have done over and long become French in feeling, and altoover again upon incomparably slighter gether abhor the notion of separation provocation. It might be easy to argue from France. Their annexation would that in dealing with a State which has therefore be in itself unjust. And it would spent a life of aggression for the last six also be impolitic. No strength can be hundred years, the only way to hinder gained by the acquisition of unwilling subfuture aggressions is to crush it once jects, and France would be so embittered and forever. Is there anything wonderful by the dismemberment that she would or blamable if German statesmen demand never cease from efforts to regain the lost such a cession of fortresses, such a rectifi- provinces, and a succession of wars would cation of frontier, as may defend Germany be the probable result. at least for a while from the attacks of her restless neighbour? Is anything wonderful or blamable if German popular feeling goes a step further, and, taking a more purely historical and sentimental view, demands that a Power whose eyes are so ceaselessly set upon German lands shall be made to give up every inch of German land which it has still within its grasp?

Strasburg the more enlightened feeling in Germany demands all that, like Strasburg, is still German, and rejects anything that is not. That a large body of German opinion carefully insists on this distinction at least shows that the conclusion which it supports, whether sound or unsound in itself, is a conclusion based on argument and reflection, and is not the mere instinct of insatiable conquerors.

To arguments of this kind the German would probably answer that the rights of the people to choose their own government, and not to be transferred from one government to another against their will, though a good general rule, cannot be held, and is not held, to apply in all cases. He might possibly ask whether all of those who use this argument against him would be willing to trust the connexion between Great And here it will be as well to notice Britain and Ireland to a universal ballot how strictly the views of liberal and well- of Irishmen. He might go on to ask informed Germans, as distinguished from whether some of his opponents did not the possible views of either statesmen or deny the right of the Confederate States soldiers, confine themselves to the districts of America to choose their government which are still German in speech. The for themselves. If the safety of Germany Knische Zeitung, for instance, takes infi- he would perhaps add of Europe — calls nite pains to make its leaders distinguish be- for the cession of the whole or any part of tween Deutschlothringen and Wülschlothring- Elsass or Lothringen, he would argue that en, between that part - much the smaller the wishes of the inhabitants cannot be part of the Duchy which still keeps to allowed to stand in the way of the safety its German speech, and that part which of Germany. These arguments, these has become thoroughly French in speech retorts, may be sound or may be unsound; as well as in allegiance. Elsass and but they are so obvious that they are sure Deutschlothringen must be kept; but the to be made. The German might go on to notion of keeping Wälschlothringen is cast argue that the unwillingness of the people aside with a sort of horror. Statesmen of these provinces would not be very longand soldiers may settle as they will about lived; that, if they turned easily from the fortress of Metz; but Germany, as Germans into Frenchmen, they would Germany, simply claims so much territory still more easily be turned back from as still remains German, and not an inch Frenchmen into Germans, and that the beyond. Strasburg is won, and he must next generation would be good Germans be a sanguine Frenchman indeed who born. He might also perhaps argue that hopes to get it back again. And with the times are now very different from the

-

times when France annexed them. It the dismemberment would not be percepti might well be that the district which in ble. Moreover one alleged object of the the seventeenth century was transferred dismemberment is, by giving Germany a from the rule of some petty German prince stronger frontier to do something to secure to that of the great French monarchy may her against the effects of the bitterness very well have immediately gained by the which the present war cannot fail to leave change, but that for the same district to behind it in any case. Such arguments as be transferred back again, not to the rule these may not convince neutrals, they cerof any petty German prince, but to form tainly will not convince Frenchmen; but part of the great German nation, with its it is as well to bear in mind that Germany mighty future before it, was a gain yet has arguments on her side, arguments alike more incontestable. As to the alleged historical, sentimental, and politic. And bitterness which the dismemberment would it implies no approval of annexation to leave behind in France, he would answer bear in mind, what is beginning to be forthat France, as it is, will be so em-gotten, that the most that Germany threatbittered by mere want of success, by the ens to do in her war of defence has at any crushing of her schemes of aggrandize- rate more to be said for it than the least ment and by the invasion of her territory, of what France threatened to do in her that the increase of bitterness caused by war of aggression.

MANY thousands of workers will rise this morning to pursue their work; many thousands of critics (their natural enemies as the workers would say) will rise to pursue their work.

Without undervaluing criticism, we may admit that a great deal of needless pain is caused by it; and that, as a general rule, we all sympa thize more with the doers than the critics.

The object of this short essay is to aid the criticized in bearing criticism.

The first thing is not to pretend not to care for hostile criticism. That form of insincerity never helped any man.

One of the best conforts in the case of hostile criticism is to remember the proverb, "Many men, many minds." Any man who has done anything which provokes much comment, will tell you that it is astonishing how diverse are the opinions of persons whom you would admit to be equally qualified for criticizing. That which pleases one, disgusts another; and vice versa. This diversity of opinion in mankind might alone suffice to comfort those who furnish matter for the criticism in the world.

culates the gain or loss by double entry. There were such and such prosperous winds in favour of the good ship Mary-Anne, and there were such and such adverse winds against the good ship. She came into a port where there were no British goods, or she came into a port which was overstocked with them. In a word, separate the venture from yourself, and consider it a distinct transaction.

--

Vain and retrospective persons suffer most from hostile criticism. Go on working. What you have done — what has been said about it— soon moves into the region of the past, and it moves much more quickly for you, when you give your mind to attempting something new.

As a general rule, never reply to hostile criticism; do not waste your fire by returning the shot aimed at you from behind a stone-wall. This, of course, applies only to anonymous criticism, which is now the principal public criticism in the world.

We must beware, however, of confining our views of criticism to that branch of it which deals with politics, literature, or art. Domes But, unfortunately, the worst part of criti-tic criticism is perhaps the most common form cism is misrepresentation. No man can pre- of criticism, and not the least difficult to bear. tend to be quite indifferent to that. You, the But the general rules given above are not inapperson criticized, are made out to have said this, plicable in this case. And this additional rule thought that, done the other thing; and, in re- may be given-namely, that the person critiality, you did not say this, think that, or do the cized, who is most probably the active and deother thing. This is undoubtedly a great griev-cisive person, should reflect that there is little else left for the other persons but to criticize; But look at the whole matter as a question of and he or she would not like their minds to be forces. So much force is lost by this misrepre-inert. It is only slaves who do not venture to sentation; but do not take the matter to heart, criticize. Every ruler, whether of a family or as if misrepresentation were a circumstance that of a kingdom, must admit that his actions and belonged to you alone. It besets all human ef- his decisions would hardly be of interest to himself if they would not endure, and ultimately triumph over, the criticisms of those whom be

ance.

fort.
Look at the whole matter as a merchant would
at any separate venture of his, of which he cal-governs.

Arthur Helps,

MOTHER GOOSE'S MELODIES: Porter & Coates, 822 Chestnut St. Philadelphia. — Surely Mother Goose must feel herself a swan indeed in this elegant attire. The grace, sprightliness and arch simplicity of the original designs in this exquisite rendering of our old favorite, have met with loving appreciation and been most faithfully reproduced in Chromos. These have been pronounced equal in beauty and finish to foreign art, but they need no such comparison to justify our admiration. Many old as well as young children will be charmed with what we may venture to call, in advance, the most beautiful gift-book of the season, and will be grateful to those who have prevailed on the distinguished authoress to let them be sharers in so much pleasure.

TEN TIMES ONE IS TEN: THE POSSIBLE REFORMATION. A Story in Nine chapters. By Col. Frederic Ingham (Rev. E. E. Hale). Boston: Roberts Bros. Price $1.25, cloth.

PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY BY

LITTELL & GAY, BOSTON.

TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION.

FOR EIGHT DOLLARS, remitted directly to the Publishers, the LIVING AGE will be punctually for warded for a year, free of postage. But we do not prepay postage on less than a year, nor where we have to pay commission for forwarding the money.

Price of the First Series, in Cloth, 36 volumes, 90 dollars.

Second "
Third

The Complete Work,

66 20

50

Any Volume Bound, 3 dollars; Unbound, 2 dollars. The sets, or volumes, will be sent at the expense of the publishers.