hitherto been confessedly inadequate. We have no space to enter here either into the intricacies of the Austrian Constitution or the plans and achievements of engineers. A rough sketch must suffice. In each of the Alpine lands appertaining to the Imperial Crown, which we for convenience usually call provinces, a permanent Commission is appointed, which has the charge of all matters that concern the mountain torrents. To it all representations with respect to the conduct of an unruly brook must be addressed, and it inquires into them on the spot. It weighs the amount of the danger and the claims of various districts, and then draws up proposals which are submitted to the Landtag or provincial Parliament, and when they have been approved, these are in due course laid before the Parliament of the Empire. The funds required by the single provinces are supposed to be contributed by them, but in undertakings of great extent or difficulty Imperial grants are made, and in all cases the central Government supplies highly-trained and competent officials to direct the works, without requir ing any remuneration for their services. To these large powers are granted in cases of emergency, and during disastrous floods soldiers are frequently employed for weeks together, not merely to rescue those whose lives are in danger, but as laborers in constructing the works necessary to regulate the course of the stream. In such cases, however, they receive extra pay.

Those streams are most dangerous which run down the steepest declines, because they are the most apt to wear away their banks, and it is easiest for them to bring down the fallen earth and stones of the uplands. The method at present chiefly adopted in regulating them is that of building a series of dams. These are little more than strong walls with apertures, through which the water can freely flow. They span the whole bed of the stream, and rise to a considerable height above it. By this contrivance the shingle is left behind while the book flows on in its usual course. In the course of years the upper bed is filled, and the dam is then raised from time to time as long as the condition of the banks permits. A brook which has been regulated in this way will, after the lapse of a longer or shorter period, run from cascade to cascade over distances which have only a slight fall, and where it will lose the greater part of its force. But it takes longer than might at first sight be supposed to bring about such a change. The masses of stone are at first piled so roughly on each other by the floods that after the level of the dam has been reached the water for years finds an easy way between them, and spouts through its former outlets, far below the surface of its new bed, leaving its dangerous freight behind. A waterfall makes a great impression on a tourist; a stream flowing downwards at a steep gradient hardly any; yet the latter is far more dangerous than the former, and where a series of artificial cascades is constructed it prevents the brook not only from carrying the rubble further, but also from preying upon the banks. By this means time is

afforded for the vegetation to grow on the comparatively level portions of the course.

It must be confessed that a succession of such dams does not add to the charms of a mountain valley; indeed, when first built, they are a positive eyesore; but even the most romantic would have little reason to regret the suppression of floods, if it could be accomplished. Frequently as they have been employed in novels, there is probably no natural spectacle which combines so much loss and danger with so little sublimity. It is surprising to see what used to be fields turned into a pond, and some of the incidents may be startling or even dramatic; but there is little beauty in an expanse of muddy water which is evidently in its wrong place, and the incidents are more effective in print than in reality. At any rate, even from a scenical point of view the entertainment is too costly. To have to look for years on long stretches of gray and barren rubbish instead of upon trees and greensward is too high a price to pay for a few hours' excitement.— Saturday Review.

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS IN ENGLAND.

[We here copy from the London Quarterly Review the opening and closing paragraphs of a long and exhaustive article entitled "Landed Income and Landed Estates," the greater portion of which is devoted to statistics substantiating the conclusions announced. From the omitted part we except a paragraph showing how the present state of things affects "those ministers of the Church who are unfortunate enough to derive the income of their benefices from glebe farms." After giving a number of special instances, the reviewer, quoting from the Morning Post says:

"I have the names of twenty livings, mostly in Bedfordshire, Suffolk, and Huntingdon, with aggregate glebe at just under 7,000 acres, or on an average of 350 acres each. Ten years ago the rental was over £12,000, or about 35s. an acre, the average being £600 apiece. It is now £3,731, being less than 11s. an acre, or £186 for each benefice; and even this amount is subject to large deductions for charges of various kinds. If the reader will picture to himself his own position if his entire income, whatever it may be, were suddenly reduced to one-third of its amount, he will have some notion of the unfortunate position of many of the clergy in what used to be the finest wheat-growing districts in England.”

Full statistics are given as to the ownership of the land in the United Kingdom, which we thus summarize: The entire number of persons who own more than ten acres is about 180,000; those who own less than ten acres, and are mainly only house-holders, holding less than one-hundredth part of the land. Descending to particulars, we are told thatexcluding properties under one acre in extent-one-fourth of the whole territory is held by 12,000 persons, at an average of 16,200 acres ; another fourth by 6,200 persons at an average of 3,150 acres; another fourth by 50,770 persons, at an average of 380 acres; while the remaining fourth is held by 261,830 persons, at an average for each person of 70 acres. From such facts, the writer draws the conclusion that "it is of importance to the country, and of pressing importance to landlords, if they wish to be secure from confiscation and pillage in the future, that the land-owning class should be increased. Nothing tends more to keep a country together and free it from revolutionary and socialistic brands than the fact of a large number of freeholders in the community. It is what has saved France again and again, and we believe it wil! save Engiand if not neglected too long. Whatever may be

said about peasant proprietorship, the great fact remains that it is the one force which opposes most strongly the doctrine of plunder and confiscation; and it is for this reason, if for this reason alone, that we consider that it behoves every landlord to give every facility for the establishment of small freeholds. Already there are indications that something of the sort is going on. That the system will assume large proportions before long we feel confident; and unless the march of revolutionary power is too strong for us, it will be attended with success."-ED. LIB. MAG.]

THE astounding changes which have taken place in the last ten or twelve years in the condition and prospects of the agricultural interests of England, and consequently in the position of the owners and occupiers of land, have naturally called much attention to the present condition and future prospects of the landed interest. We live in a country having a limited area, densely populated, and abounding in great cities; yet we are unable to grow agricultural produce at a profit. Farms that formerly were eagerly sought for by numerous competitors, all substantial men with capital and credit, are now waiting in vain to be hired. Land, which was the favorite investment, and was in such demand that it not unfrequently fetched forty years' purchase on rents which were known to have been raised just before the sale, is at the present moment almost unsaleable. In Essex, but a few miles distant from the largest city in the world, there is a spot from which, it is said, there can be seen nineteen large farms, all vacant, without tenants, and for the most part uncultivated; this too in a county which only a few years back used to be one of our greatest food-producing districts. Fifty years ago we raised nearly all the corn required in the United Kingdom, supplies from foreign countries being only brought into requisition when the crops were damaged or deficient. Our population has now doubled, and we only supply a third of what they eat in the shape of bread. We are also dependent to a large extent on foreign countries for the supply of meat consumed at home; reckoning here, not only the actual meat imported, but also the meat-making substances, such as Indian corn, barley, oats, and linseed. It is estimated in this way that two-fifths of our animal food is produced directly or indirectly in other countries. . . .

As oats, barley, hay, and green crops, which are principally used for the manufacture of meat, are during the present year [1887] lamentably deficient, and in some cases, especially as regards green crops, total failures, it is not too much to say, that we shall be a third short in our winter keep, and therefore those farmers who wish to fatten stock during the winter months must invest largely in foreign feeding stuffs. The poverty of the majority of our farmers makes it almost impossible that they will be able to afford to fatten much stock this winter by the purchase of foreign food, so that the advantage of any increase in price of cattle will only benefit the foreigner, and to some extent our colonists.

According to these figures the outlook is singularly gloomy, and probably the agricultural year of 1887-1888 will be one of the worst this country

has ever known. Of hay there is a deficiency of at least two million tons, and also a similar amount in straw; at the most favorable computation the deficiency in turnips is more than ten million tons, in oats four million quarters. It is stated that to replace these losses twelve million quarters of foreign barley would have to be forthcoming, or else 4,000,000 quarters of oats more than are usually imported. Although the crops of barley, oats, and maize, are unusually good in Russia and the Danubian Principalities, the demand for forward shipment, notwithstanding the low prices, is very small. Nothing is more indicative of the present dearth of capital amongst the British agriculturists than that, with the prospect of an almost certain profit by buying stock at the present ruinous prices and feeding it with Russian barley or oats or Danubian maize at figures below anything known for a century, the trade in these articles remains undemonstrative, and values are little more than maintained. The unremunerative prices of grain have been the cause of many acres of land once productive for tillage being laid down in grass; but as they are unsuited for grass and unproductive as pasture, they now, after great expense, only let for a few shillings, whereas a few years back they made pounds per acre.

At every turn the British agriculturist appears to be beaten out of the field..

The unremunerative price of corn, and the consequent laying down of arable in pasture, have very much contracted the labor market. This very fact ought to lend an additional stimulus to the movement, for increasing the number of land-owners, as many laborers who now find themselves destitute of employment would, if they had the opportunity of acquiring small freeholds, gladly avail themselves of any scheme that would enable them to do so. Meanwhile the agricultural interest, as it at present exists, has to face immense difficulties. What is in the future no one knows. How it will all end no one dares to guess. That it is a question of vital and national importance no one with commonsense will deny. There is a "Health of Nations" as well as a "wealth: " who shall say that the former is not as important as the latter? The decrease of the rural population, from whom we have always drawn fresh blood and vigorous constitutions to replace the wear and tear of the cities, cannot be viewed without alarm and apprehension.

Are our country districts to become depopulated, our villages and hamlets, on which we have so justly prided ourselves, deserted? Are our country towns to become decayed and neglected, and their tradesmen and professional men, who are dependent on the neighboring district, practically ruined? Are our laborers to leave their homes to swell the great mass of the unemployed in our great cities, and there lead a life compared with which the hardest moments of their present lives would be as paradise on earth? Is the farmer to gather up what he can out of the wrecks of what

used to be a moderate fortune, and leave the home in which he was born, and the country of which he used to be proud, for some distant land in which he can find interest for his money, remuneration for his labor, or at all events fair play? And lastly, will the landowner himself be obliged to leave the home of his fathers-a home which may have been endeared to him by a thousand memories, which has historical associations and incidents preserved through a long line of ancestors? Are all the noble mansions and their beautiful surroundings, of which we are as a nation so justly proud, to fall into disuse and become no more? Are our manly fieldsports, which have done so much to give our people the fine constitutions and powers of endurance they possess, and make them manly, courageous, and self-reliant, to pass away? If England loses these things, she loses much that makes her England, and makes us ready to love her, cherish her, and protect her. It is the rural life of England, quite as much as her commerce and mighty cities, that have been at once the wonder and the envy of all nations. How often do we hear foreigners say to us, "We have much finer things than your towns, but we have nothing like your country life: it is as unique as it is delightful, and as delightful as it is unique."Quarterly Review.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN*

We have met to honor the greatest statesman the greatest statesman this country has produced. Only a few years ago there were two parties in the United States, neither of them with honor enough, or moral character enough, or a clear perception enough to denounce an institution that involve, the commission of crime.

A few men-a few good and splendid spirits-not only thought but knew that a wrong like that could not live for ever; a few men prophesied the dawn of another day. A few men said our flag some time shall cease to pollute the air in which it waves. Among these was the man whose name we honor to-night. He saw, with prophetic vision, that a house divided against itself could not stand. He was patriotic enough to defend the right, and no man yet has ever shown patriotism by defending the wrong. He only is a true patriot who endeavors to make his country nobler, grander, and nearer just. The man who defends the mistakes and crimes of his fellow-men is a political panderer and a wretched demagogue. I always thank the man who points out my faults, if he does it through tenderness and love; the man who flatters your crimes is your enemy.

*This is the address delivered before the Brooklyn Republican League by Mr. Robert G. Ingersoll, February 12, 1888, that being the seventy-ninth anniversary of the birthday of Lincoln.