Republican machine, in its alarm, got out an appeal, signed by all the Republican office-holders in the city and many prospective candidates, calling upon the voters to stand by the flag and save the Administration. The passion of this appeal, how ever, in the eyes of many voters, only made its puerility the more marked, and when the ballots were counted it was found that Dr. Gladden had a majority of seventysix against all the partisan Republicans and all the voters of both parties antagonistic to his reform programme. This programme of Dr. Gladden's, though conservative in the best sense of the word, was sufficiently radical to arouse the opposition of the municipal monopolies and the machine politicians under their control. One of the circulars distributed by the Non-Partisan Association of the ward was a brief letter from Dr. Gladden stating his position upon the questions at issue. The most important of these was the street railroad question, as most of the street railways of Columbus must be rechartered during the coming term of the Council. On this overshadowing municipal issue Dr. Gladden said: As to the street railway franchise, my opinion is that the thing to be secured is a reduction of fares, and not a contribution from the company to the city treasury. The highest contribution yet proposed is altogether inadequate, and the relief sought should be for the benefit of the people who use the railway. I believe that a straight three-cent fare-perhaps with a transfer rate of five cents-would enable the company to pay a good interest on what the road and its equipment have actually cost. They could not, probably, with that rate pay interest on the fictitious capital which they have issued; but it is not just that the users of the road should be taxed to pay interest on this kind of capital. The company ought to have a fair remuneration upon its actual investment, no more. We want to confiscate no man's earnings or savings; we want every man, capitalist or laborer, to have all his rights; but we want no man to be given legal power by the city to tax the rest of us to pay interest on watered stock. A three-cent fare will afford a good remuneration upon the actual cost of the plant and the equipment, and the city government, acting in the interest of the people, should secure for them the reduction in the cost of transportation. This means a great deal to thousands of people in this city who use the street-cars. The woman who works in my kitchen every week as laundress serves also four or five other families. She is careful and economical; she walks when she can to her work, but her streetcar fare costs her 50 cents a week. The difference between a 5-cent rate and a 3-cent rate means to her 20 cents a week, or $10 a year. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of workingmen with families to whom the dif ference between a 5-cent rate and a 3-cent rate would be $25 or $30 a year. Twenty-five or thirty dollars a year is a heavy tax upon the average workingman. Had Dr. Gladden's canvass resulted in nothing else than the circulation of this ringing protest against this almost univer sal but thoroughly oppressive form of indirect taxation, it would still have been an event of National importance; and the fact that with this programme, and without a strong party organization back of him, he was able to carry the wealthiest residence ward of a conservative city, gives evidence that municipal public spirit is everywhere becoming a stronger factor than class selfishness and partisan bigotry combined. Russia in the Far East Every international complication is surrounded at the beginning by sensational reports of combinations, projects for interference, and alliances for the purpose of taking advantage of a crisis. As a rule, these stories have no foundation in fact. When England went to war in South Africa, there were many dolorous predictions of deep-laid plots to strike at English rule in India, to drive England out of Egypt, to harass her in many ways. These stories were born of that kind of journalism which cares more for sensations than for news. But it has long been evident that the preoccupation of England in any quarter of the globe will be made the occasion, if it can be done without breaking the peace, of a Russian advance. The foreign policies of other countries change; that of Russia knows no variation. It was defined long ago; it has been constantly enforced by successive generations of statesmen. It is, in a sense, independent of the Czar; it embodies the instinct of the Russian governing classes, and it has been defined and consolidated by the practice of generations in a country in which public opinion has no weight and its changes are not reflected in the policy of the Government, and in which it is possible to pass down a definite line of action from one generation to another. The face of Russia has been turned toward the east and south for many decades, and she has quietly but stubbornly pushed her way from point to point. Her activity in the Far East has been watched and reported with the keenest interest during the past few years. The progress of the Trans-Siberian Railway is everywhere recognized as symbolizing the advancement of Russian authority and influence. It was Russia who stayed the hand of Japan when Japan would have plucked the fruits of her victory over China; and it has seemed for several years past as if a war between the two countries were imminent, if not inevitable. If there is to be such a war, there are many reasons why the Japanese should bring it on within a short time. They are now much more powerful by water than the Russians, and they will be more powerful by land until the Trans-Siberian Railway is completed. When Russia has free and rapid means of communication, the conditions will be reversed. If the Japanese are to strike at all, they must strike soon, or it will be too late. It is in Korea that Russia is just now showing the greatest activity. She has demanded the concession of a piece of territory on the Korean coast, and the exclusive monopoly of the right to open the Korean mines. The demand for territory has apparently been conceded, for the simple reason that Korea could not refuse it; the demand for exclusive monopoly in mining meets an antagonist in Japan, which has many subjects engaged in the mining industry, and does not propose to have them ex demand is pressed at this time, which makes the situation significant and possibly critical. Like England, Japan needs food supplies from the great continents; like England, she is rapidly developing along industrial lines, and she promises to become the great commercial country of the Far East. She would have enforced the policy of the open door if she had been permitted to follow up her victory. She needs the open door herself. China and Korea are the nearest and the natural markets for her products; they need what she can produce, and she needs what they can raise. Under these circumstances freedom of commerce is absolutely essential to the growth, and indeed to the safety, of Japan. It is not simply a question of Japanese ambition; it is a question of necessary conditions in the evolution of the Japanese State and the independence of the Japanese people. It is also noted as a sign of the times and as the result of what were euphemistically called negotiations between Russia and Turkey, but which are really demands of the greater upon the weaker Power, that Turkey has made concessions to Russian capitalists which will enable Russia to construct lines of railroad which practically open up the interior of Turkey to Russian invasion whenever the Russians choose to use their concessions. cluded. The report which comes from Admiral Dewey's Candi Vancouver that an encounter has taken place between a Russian and a Japanese man-of-war has not yet been confirmed. Such a battle may not have taken place, but the report is by no means incredible. The tension between the two countries is so great that friction at any point may strike a fire which will kindle a great blaze in the East. There was apparently an understanding with Germany and France when Russia interfered at the end of the Japanese war, and the Japanese have the feeling that the three countries are working together in the Far East. They expect friendship only from the English, and possibly from ourselves, and just now England is preoccupied with the war in South Africa; it is this fact, in connection with the fact that the Russian dacy We do not think that Admiral Dewey's candidacy for the Presidency in its present form will be taken very seriously by the American people. That form is an interview in the New York " view in the New York "World," which we reprint entire : "Admiral, in view of the many conflicting nomination for the Presidency, will you makereports relative to your attitude toward a a statement to the World'?"" "Yes; I realize that the time has arrived when I must definitely define my position. "When I arrived in this country last September, I said then that nothing could induce me to be a candidate for the Presidency. Since then, however. I have had the leisure and inclination to study the matter, and have reached a different conclusion, inasmuch as so many assurances have come to me from my countrymen that I would be acceptable as a candidate for this great office. "If the American people want me for this high office, I shall be only too willing to serve them. It is the highest honor in the gift of this Nation; what citizen would refuse it? "Since studying this subject I am convinced very difficult one to fill, his duties being mainly to execute the laws of Congress. Should I be chosen for this exalted position, I would execute the laws of Congress as faithfully as I have always executed the orders of my supe that the office of the President is not such a riors." "Is there any political significance in your trips West?" 66 No; I am simply filling the engagements made months ago-long before I ever thought seriously of the Presidency." "On what platform will you stand?" "I think I have said enough at this time, and possibly too much." If the Democratic party should drop Mr. Bryan and take up Admiral Dewey, if it should drop the Chicago platform and adopt one more in consonance with oldfashioned Democratic ideas, if it should be silent about the currency, not renew its veiled attack on the Supreme Court, pronounce in favor of expansion but against imperialism, or even against any expansion which does not involve the admission of the people of the added territory to a share in all the privileges of citizenship, and of such a modification of the tariff as would prevent a protection of trusts and look toward the abandonment of all favoritism toward special industries, and if Admiral Dewey should accept this platform and make it his own, he would at once become a serious candidate, and no cautious prophet would undertake to forecast the result of the election. But with Mr. Bryan representing the Democratic organization, Mr. McKinley the Republican organization, and Mr. Debs the unorganized and discontented elements in the Nation, no man who represents only himself is likely to be a serious competitor in the Presidential contest. The President of the United States must be a leader in form, if not in fact. He must represent, if not a principle or set of principles, at least a sentiment or set of sentiments. He is not a mere Executive. It is his constitutional duty to recommend measures to Congress, and to veto such as appear to him clearly wrong in principle or inexpedient in policy. But, beyond this, he is the leader of his own party. The people expect him to have a policy, that they may know whether to support him in it or not. They are willing to follow, but not blindly; they are willing to trust their leader as to methods-perhaps too willing-but not as to ends. No man long retains a position of political popularity in America who does not stand, or is not supposed to stand, for some principle. That principle may be nothing better than " to the victor belong the spoils," and the leader may be followed for the sake of the spoils, as is Mr. Croker in New York City. That principle may be liberty and union, to be preserved at whatever cost, and the leader may be followed for the realization of these noble ideals in the National life, as was Abraham Lincoln. But no personal enthusiasm will create a following for any man in America who is not the avowed and trusted representative of some principle, or some sentiment which in popular esteem serves as a principle. Twice in the history of the country the attempt has been made to elect a man to the Presidency purely on his personal popularity. The disastrous defeats of Winfield Scott and of Horace Greeley have demonstrated the futility of such efforts. If Admiral Dewey desires to serve the people of the United States as their President, he must determine what political principles he means to represent and what political purposes he wishes to accomplish. He cannot be elected, no one can be elected, on no other platform than "Should I be chosen for this exalted position, I would execute the laws of Congress as faithfully as I have always executed the orders of my superiors." The President of the United States is neither a servant to wait for orders from the people, nor a master to give orders to the people; he is the agent of the people, to propose a policy to them, and elected by them to execute that policy because they approve of it. The "hired man theory of the Presidential office is not popular in America. It is consonant neither with the dignity of that office, the efficiency of its administration, the real promotion of public interests, nor the honor of the people. Democracy does not consist in the absence of leadership; it consists in the power of the people to choose and to dismiss their leaders. To abjure public leadership is not the way to secure an election to be the leader of the ,, public. The President of the United States is something more than a kind of upper butler selected to provide whatever menu the varying tastes of the public may order for the table. The Doctrine of Election We publish on another page this week a recent sermon of the Rev. Lyman Abbott on "Paul's Doctrine of Election," in which he states that doctrine as it is found in the writings of Paul by what we may call the modern liberal school. This doctrine is, in brief, that mercy is as essential an attribute of divinity as justice, that redemption is as universal in its scope and purpose as is sin in its influence, and that the only election which the Bible knows is an election to service. Referring our readers to this sermon for a fuller exposition of the gospel of universal grace, as it has been preached continuously in the evangelical Church from the time of Paul to the time cf Phillips Brooks, we take "these angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number is so certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or diminished," why should there be any missionary organization, any revival movement, any moral reform effort--for that matter, any preaching of the Gospel? We believe that the doctrine that the human race was tried and condemned in Adam, that God has chosen from Adam's descendants certain specially favored ones to be the recipients of his mercy, that his mercy is limited to those and extended to no other, and the provision of his mercy is adequate for those and inadequate for any other, is a heresy as inconsistent with Scripture as it is with any broad view of life, any true philosophy, or any of the more generous instincts of the human race; and a heresy all the more dangerous because it assumes to itself the title "orthodox." this occasion to protest against those who The Power of the Resur undertake to characterize this interpretation of Scripture and this understanding of the divine government as "heretical." If it be so, the heresy was shared by Clement of Alexandria, Martin Luther, the Wesleys, and in later time and in New England by Lyman Beecher, Albert Barnes, and Charles G. Finney. If it be heresy, out of heresy grew the great missionary organizations of the present time, the Home Missionary Society, the American Board, and the other home and foreign missionary organizations in other denominations. Out of it also grew the great moral reform movements, the temperance agitation and the anti-slavery agitation, with their resultant discrediting of the saloon in the one case and abolition of slavery in the other. It would be difficult to mention a single eminent divine identified with the doctrine of particular election and limited atonement who made any material contribution, in the last century or the beginning of this, either to the organization of the great missionary societies or to the efficiency of the great moral reform movements. If, indeed, it be true that "some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death," and that rection An Easter Homily The New Testament doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is not that he was raised from the dead by a power acting on him from without and raising him from the dead, but that he had in himself the power of an endless life. He was the resurrection and the life, and, therefore, immune from death; death had no dominion over him; he laid down his life and he took it again, because he had power to lay it down and to take it again. And what the New Testament repre sents as true respecting Jesus Christ, it represents as true of Christ's followers. The sons of God have in themselves the immortality of their Father. He that liveth and believeth in Christ does not die and rise again from the dead; he shall never die. Paul follows after Christ that he may know the power of his resurrection. Eternal life is not a gift to be bestowed on the child of God hereafter; he hath eternal life. Immortality is not a bequest to be by and by received; it is a present possession. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is, therefore, not a miraculous prophecy of a future resurrection; it is a witness of a present fact. It attests the power of the divine life. As the germinating of a single seed is evidence of a dormant power of life in all similar seeds, so the uprising of this one Son of God is a demonstration of a dormant life in all sons of God. As a caterpillar, seeing one of his kin enter a chrysalis and emerge a butterfly, might reason, when he entered his tomb, that it was only to prepare for his resurrection, so the Christian, seeing the unconquerable life of his Lord, by it interprets the intimations of immortality in his own soul. Thus the resurrection of Christ is an evidence both of a before unrealized power and of a before unrecognized standard of life. The power is that of an immortal; the standard is that which belongs to the immortals. All values in life are to be estimated by their relation to one who is living a deathless life; all questions are to be answered by one who is made but a little lower than God. Easter gives a new interpretation to human nature, a new solvent to life's mysteries, a new explanation of the divine-human powers of the soul, a new point of view for all objects and all problems. Christian Science is mistaken in supposing that pain and sickness are not real. They are as real as death, to which they conduct. But as there is an inner citadel which death cannot enter, so there is a hidden life which pain cannot torment and sickness cannot weaken. There is a real decay which destroys the husk, that the seed emancipated may rise into the light and air of the world above its prison house. So there is a death which destroys the body; this death is real; the sicknesses and pains which accompany us in this life are meant to be reminders of the fact that for us emancipation is coming; but pain, sickness, and death are all the instruments for that emancipation; and we ourselves, the true, the divine, the immortal selves, are untouched by them. It is often said that faith in immortality is growing to be a dim and uncertain hope, and many a book is written and many a sermon preached and many a lecture de livered to show the sweet reasonableness of that faith. But it may be that we are losing faith in immortality, not because in a scientific age it seems to be less rational, but because in a materialistic age there is really less of it; because we are cultivating the husk at the cost of the germ; because we are indulging the animal at the cost of the spiritual. If we are not living an immortal life here, how can we believe in an immortal life hereafter? Immortality is a present possession, not a mere future expectation; and the way to be strong in the hope of future life is to be rich in the life immortal here. A New Evangelism In Dr. N. D. Hillis's admirable letter resigning from the Chicago Presbytery because leading members in that Presbytery object to his New School views, he makes one suggestion which seems to us worthy of a wider application than he gives to it: Misunderstanding my real spirit (perhaps through my imperfect statements), some have said that I am drifting away from the Christian faith and becoming interested in philosopposite is the truth. If, for a moment, I may ophy and literature. Nevertheless, the exact open to you my heart, I will say that two months ago I went to Chicago and asked Dr. Gunsaulus to join me in a movement next autumn, that, with one or two other pastors, we might spend a month in going from town to town and from city to city, to speak, morning, afternoon, and night, upon the need of the revival of the sense of justice and law in American life; upon the peril of our materialism, mammonism, and the destruction of our higher ideals; upon the perils that threaten the Sabbath, the only day dedicated to brooding, the vision hour, and the higher spiritual life; upon the decline of moral instruction in our homes and the dangers to the American family; upon the importance of the revival of the noblest ideals of our Puritan fathers and the sweet reasonableness of Christian faith; upon the danger of an atrophy of conscience and the importance of personal forsaking of sin, and a personal acceptance of Christ and Christianity as the essentials of the higher life. Of late it has seemed to me that unless our churches put away all minor issues and present a solid front, our Christian civilization is to be overwhelmed by the forces of mammon and greed, through the luxury of the selfish rich and the indifference of the discon tented poor. Dr. Hillis does not say what reply Dr. Gunsaulus made to this proposition. It would be theologically interesting to see two such recognized and pronounced liberals attempting an evangelistic ministry; although it is possible that the very curiosity |