all the nations of civilised Europe, Germany is that in which revolution seems nearest at hand, and will when it comes be most dangerous. The great minister of brute force seats himself by the shore of modern politics, and orders back in earnest the current of his time. The waves of the democracy he has dared to trifle with × sweep away even now the sandy basis of his power! Turning to France, can anything be more remarkable than the contrast between the position now and nine years ago? Then the horrors of the downfall of the Commune, the burnings, the destruction of public monuments, the murder of the generals, induced many humane people to overlook the hideous cruelty with which it was suppressed. Those days when the populace held sway-and Paris was not so badly governed during that remarkable timeopened the eyes of the comfortable classes all over the world to the possibility of similar occurrences nearer to themselves. It seemed like a social nightmare, and was attributed to a strange access of excitement due to the prolonged strain of the siege. And now we see the Commune day after day glorified in journals of the highest influence. The amnesty of the Communists was carried as preparatory to one of the greatest national fêtes that France has ever seen. The returned political exiles and prisoners are regarded as the victims of the bourgeoisie, and the frightful scenes on the plain of Satory, the dreadful incidents of the voyage to New Caledonia, are remembered as the martyrdoms of the founders of the new social faith. Certainly, none could have anticipated that Communist principles would so soon make head again, not only in the capital but in the provinces. Yet we see they do. The denounced suspects of 1871 are the coming party of 1881, just as the 'fou furieux' of Thiers is for the moment master of France. The great meeting of the Socialists in Paris, when what we should consider the most subversive doctrines were openly promulgated, was significant enough. Their differences simply arose as to whether it would be advisable to attempt to carry out their programme by main force or allow legislative changes to work it out peacefully. As to the main objects to be aimed at there was practical unanimity, and the removal of private property as the basis. of modern social life was the conclusion arrived at by all. Yet the Communism of France, though perhaps more outspoken, is not as a whole so dangerous to the existing principles which govern society as the Socialism of Germany. There are those of the extreme party, no doubt, who superadd to the theories of Lassalle and Marx the completest acceptance of doctrines which utterly destroy the most rudimentary ideas of family life, and regard the connection between the sexes as a matter to be ordered solely in accordance with the views of the persons immediately concerned. In purely political matters the Rappel, the Citoyen, the Mot d'Ordre, the Intransigeant, and even the Justice, go great lengths, whilst the revolutionary sheets of But the very Marseilles and Lyons are even more pronounced. openness of all these discussions tends to a less dangerous state of affairs, and so far the principal agitations have been directed towards obtaining those cardinal liberties which we ourselves have secured long ago. Still, the movement has been very rapid there too, and the cruel expulsion of the monks and nuns shows that true toleration is not fully understood by those who claim infinite latitude for themselves. The increasing confidence of the nouvelles couches sociales in their future is very apparent. The election. of M. Beaurepaire at Besançon had much the same relation to French politics that the election of Hartmann at Hamburg had to German. It showed that men of more decided views were gaining ground on M. Gambetta, whose candidate was defeated, and that the French people were getting tired of an opportunism which had ceased to be opportune. Recent events have but enforced the hint then given. M. Clémenceau's successful visit to Marseilles, and the defeat of M. Ferry's Cabinet, are only straws which show the flow of French opinion; it is clear that the Conservative Republic in any very Conservative sense is at an end. Frenchmen are weary of the perpetual officialism which weighs upon them under the Republic as under the Empire; they long to feel that the Republic, which divides them the least, will no longer be afraid to trust them as Republicans. The advanced party, however, are ever on the watch, and when strikes occur the familiar Socialist catch-words are heard, showing that the ideas which brought about the national workshops of 1848 are ever in men's minds. In France, too, the militarisation and education of the masses is going steadily on at the expense of the well-to-do classes. Men who consider Gambetta reactionary and Clémenceau a too reluctant Liberal are far advanced enough to try the effect of new theories to their fullest extent. But the peasantry are distinctly Conservative, though increasingly Republican. That is true, and they may yet act as a drag upon the cities, though even so there is much more discontent in rural France than is commonly supposed, owing to the action of the mortgage companies and other credit organisations. A saviour of the society of small proprietors might still be welcomed, or a semi-Communistic Empire might come in to bridge over the transition period, if transition period it be. Seven millions of proprietors are not, however, likely to join in any loud cry for the division of goods with the prospect of having to divide again a few years later. Their thrift and industry have enabled them to make their life tolerably comfortable, and few people less understand the schemes of the agitators of the cities. It has been one of Gambetta's titles to confidence that he convinced the peasantry that nothing of the kind was to be feared from the new Republic. Meanwhile the State is taking the public works of the country more completely into control; the municipalities are more and more adopting the management of their own affairs, and thus the principle of joint control for the common good is being steadily introduced. Were it not for the religious difficulty, which has assumed so dangerous a shape, it is still possible that France, which has previously been the originator of great revolutionary troubles, might on the present occasion suffer less than other nations. But the questions at issue are those which most stir men's minds. Doubts as to the right of individual ownership, plans for the confiscation of all capital in order that an enormous experiment may be tried on the only scale which it is said will be successful, can scarcely be accepted without that sort of difference which ultimately leads to bloodshed. The heads of the French Republic are men of vigour and sagacity. But the power may pass from them to the hotter-headed orators who are now appealing to the passions of the poorer classes, successful though M. Gambetta seems likely to be at the present time.. As in Germany and France, so, though not to so noticeable an extent as yet, is it in Austria and Italy. In the former country decentralisation and home rule are carrying on a political struggle against the centralising plans which are thought necessary to keep the empire together, whilst below the social strain is beginning to be felt. The agrarian difficulties which were aggravated by the crisis of 1873 have not yet been overcome. Hungary itself is in a doubtful condition; throughout the empire, the evictions and the attempts to check emigration have produced a bad effect. Still, there is far more liberty than in Germany, and therefore, in spite of the pressure of the conscription and the bitterness felt in some instances against the aristocratic class, the danger to existing institutions is not nearly so great. Socialism is not yet an organised force. In Italy, notwithstanding the factious conduct of sections of the Republican party, of the Barsanti clubs, the Irredentist agitation, and the mad language of some prominent men, the same may be said. The troubles at present are likely to be more political than social, though one would affect the other, and a stir in any other part of Europe would be felt there also. For we see that even in Norway and Sweden, where the bulk of the population is well-to-do, and in Denmark as well, no sooner does pressure come than Socialist agitators appear, and the regular Communist cries are heard. Of Russia it is needless to speak. There the revolution, if it comes, will probably take an agrarian shape, an outburst of MiddleAge barbarism, which has little in common with the agitations of Western Europe. The Nihilism of Russia may possibly be the spark to fire the whole European magazine of combustibles, but the ignorance of the greater part of the population renders any comparison between the two states of society futile. The Socialist proclamations of the Revolutionary Committee are altogether premature. A despotism has to be destroyed, a people educated, and some idea of political life Jews. the paradox: be really a The permitted to grow up before Russian Socialism can What, however, renders the situation in regard to all countries more hazardous than would otherwise be the case, is that remarkable facility of communication which has been the growth of the present generation. Railroads, telegraphs, cheap newspapers, may all be said to date for the Continent since 1848. As we see, excitement is now in the air. It is felt and communicates itself to vast masses of men without any apparent reason. A wave of political, social, financial disturbance passes from one great centre to another now as it never did before. And those who are concerned in Socialist manœuvres are specially ready to take advantage of this. The two great centres of agitation are Geneva and London. There the exiled speedily come together. The Socialist from Germany, the Communist from France, the Nihilist from Russia, each betakes himself at first to his solitary garret; but all soon get known to one another, suggest ideas for common action, and keep one another informed as to the progress made in each country towards the common goal. Thus has been re-formed an International Organisation more formidable than that which fell into discredit by its participation in the Paris Commune. In this way the advance can be observed all along the line. If baffled in Germany, it is making head in France; if in France men's minds turn from the new ideas, Austria or Italy affords encouragement. And thus poor men bound together by an enthusiasm for what is little more than an abstraction, resolve to carry out that programme which to most of us Englishmen seems a very midsummer madness, of elevating the whole race of civilised men by a complete change of the conditions in which man has yet been civilised. They resolve, I say, and when they see an opportunity they mean to execute. The condition of Europe may favour their plans. But now comes what is perhaps the most remarkable feature in the whole of this Continental movement. Much has been said from time to time of the power of Jews in modern society. Lord Beaconsfield, always proud of his race, has pointed out their superiority in many directions, and all would admit that in money-getting and in music they are in some sort inspired. But the influence of Jews at The increasing famine in Russia must play into the hands of the revolutionary party. Hunger is ever the best insurrectionist, and unless the Government acts more wisely than at present the peasantry will become disaffected. the present time is more noticeable than ever. That they are at the head of European capitalists, we are all well aware. The fact that during a long period they were absolutely driven into money-dealing as their sole business, seems to have developed an hereditary faculty of accumulation which, money being the power it now is, gives influence in every direction. In politics many Jews are in the front rank. The press in more than one European capital is almost wholly in their hands. The Rothschilds are but the leading name among a whole series of capitalists, which includes the great monetary chiefs of Berlin and Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfort. They have forced their way into the nobility of every country, and in all the vast financial schemes of recent years the hand of the Jews has been felt both for good and evil. That their excessive wealth, used as it has been, acts as a solvent influence in modern society, cannot be questioned. The barriers of religion and caste prejudice melt away before it. But whilst on the one hand the Jews are thus beyond dispute the leaders of the plutocracy of Europe, holding in large as well as in small matters, in the great centres as well as in the villages of Russia and Roumania, the power of the purse, another section of the same race form the leaders of that revolutionary propaganda which is making way against that very capitalist class represented by their own fellow-Jews. Jews-more than any other men-have held forth against those who make their living not by producing value, but by trading on the differences of value; they at this moment are acting as the leaders in the revolutionary movement which I have endeavoured to trace. Surely we have here a very strange phenomenon. Whilst the hatred against one section of Jews is growing in Germany, Russia, Roumania, and indeed all through Eastern Europe, to such an extent that they are persistently persecuted, and the question even in educated Germany threatens to become a political danger, the more the others, remaining poor and trusting only to their brains for influence, are gaining ground on the side of the people. In America we may note a similar state of things; the dislike of the rich Jews is increasing among all the well-to-do classes, whilst the revolutionary Jew from Germany and France has been at work among the artisan class in the great cities. Those, therefore, who are accustomed to look upon all Jews as essentially practical and conservative, as certain, too, to enlist on the side of the prevailing social system, will be obliged to reconsider their conclusions. But the whole subject of the bad and good effects of Jewish influence on European social conditions is worthy of a more thorough investigation than can be undertaken here. Enough, that in the period we are approaching not the slightest influence on the side of revolution will be that of the Jew. The position of Great Britain and her colonies, as well as the United States, differs from that of European countries inasmuch as |