profitable to the headstrong but able and brilliant Palmerston. Three years afterward the queen called him to form for her a government, and for years he was one of her most faithful and most trusted helpers. The fact seems to be that an element in the unwritten constitution which had been left undefined has gained a satisfactory clearness of outline through her strong practical judgment, her moral discernment, and her breadth of view. Not very long before her reign the ministry were on occasions liable to find their authority suddenly reduced to that of mere clerks registering and executing the royal will. In the reaction from this point toward democracy which has issued in a true constitutional government, the royal prerogative may naturally have seemed to some minds totally abolished. The present reign has shown that while the prerogative is no longer as of old valid to nullify the will of the people fully expressed through parliament, nor to act independently of the ministers of the crown or contrary to their practically unanimous advice, it at times may extend virtually to the making and unmaking of prime ministers; and that it includes the sovereign's right to be made fully acquainted with all proposed governmental proceedings, to be conferred with in reference to them, and to give opinion and advice which must be thorougly discussed; as also to refuse the royal sanction to any measure which has not been adopted with at least approximate unanimity in the cabinet. It is a profound truth that the greatest of all forces is moral force; and a British sovereign who lacks this or knows not how to use it, will probably exert only a somewhat shadowy power-which indeed is all that it is desirable for the nation that such a person should exert. On the other hand, a British sovereign who has it will find sooner or later that his words from the throne will have as much force as there is force in the reason of his words. Victoria, so far from being a figure-head, has for half a century had more of actual power than any other person in the realm.

Illustrative of the queen's personal influence on foreign affairs in Europe, is a fact which, after twenty years, has been made public within a few months by Prince Bismarck. It is of interest also as explaining his dislike toward Victoria and all her family, for which no reason has heretofore been known. It will be remembered with what surprising rapidity the French republic recovered from the Franco-German war of 1870. Bismarck, who had hoped that France had been so weakened that Germany need fear nothing more from her for a generation, decided in 1875 that the conflict must be renewed for the still further weakening of France before she should regain full strength. But his plan to pick a quarrel with that country was thwarted by the old emperor, who was supposed to have been influenced by Czar Alexander II. of Russia. Bismarck has now published a letter which he wrote to Emperor William in 1875, from which it appears that it was by the personal intervention of Queen Victoria that the aged emperor was influenced to refuse a renewal of hostilities. This is not the only time that continental Europe has been saved from the horrors of war by the personal intervention of this international peace-maker.

In the administration of the affairs of her Indian empire, her majesty has shown the same delicate discretion and forceful tact which have marked her relations with other parts of her dominions. This is seen in all her correspondence with British statesmen in India and British leaders at home; in her advice during critical periods, such as the Indian Mutiny; in her creation of special honors which

the Oriental mind esteems most highly, for the reward of services, and her wise selection of representative Indian leaders to receive them; in her sending the Prince of Wales and Prince Albert Victor at different times to represent her personally before the people; in her sympathy with distress and generosity for its relief during times of famine and plague; in her personal interest in all the means of material, mental, and moral progress; and last, but not least, in her acceptance of the title of Empress. The assumption of this title had been suggested to the queen by the governor-general of India, Lord Ellenborough, as early as 1843, as a means of removing practical difficulties in the relations of the Indian local government with the native rulers. The word for "queen" in Persian or Hindustani signifies inmate of a royal harem." It had in fact come to be but little used, and was not in any case the dignified, settled, and comprehensive title requisite for effective administration under a united and supreme authority. However, it was not until 1876—and then only by a majority of seventy-five in the house of commons-that the assump tion of the title was authorized by act of parliament. On January 1, 1877, Victoria was proclaimed Empress of India by the governor-general at the durbar in Delhi. This at once placed her, in the important matter of titles on an equality with the emperor of Russia, and gave an environment of dignity and splendor to the crown which the Eastern mind alone knows how to appreciate. Coupled with the creation of such imperial orders as those of the Star of India, the Indian Empire, and the Crown of India, it has probably done more in that Oriental land to crystallize the loyalty of native chiefs and princes into practical shape and action than all the talk of parliamentary liberty and civilizing British influences could have achieved in centuries.

Queen Victoria has outlived all the members of the privy council at the time of her accession, all except two of the peers then holding their titles, all except six of the members of the house of commons. During her reign there have been eleven lord chancellors, ten prime ministers, five archbishops of Canterbury and six of York. In the United States there have been seventeen presidents; in Canada ten viceroys; in France one king, one emperor, and six presidents; on the throne of Prussia five kings; in Russia three emperors.

The Golden Jubilee of the queen's reign was celebrated in 1887 with an enthusiasm of joy unequalled in British history. The present year may be expected to witness, in the Diamond Jubilee in June, a celebration as unique in its grandeur as the occasion is unique in history, surpassing in its deep meaning any other regal or imperial event for many generations past. No intimation of a desire for such a celebration came from the queen: it is the spontaneous uprising of the nation's heart. When it became evident that the British people should insist on establishing some permanent commemoration of the day and of the beloved and venerated sovereign, the Prince of Wales made the felicitous suggestion of a form of commemoration which would "attach the sentiment of gratitude for the blessings which the country has enjoyed during the last sixty years to a scheme of per manent beneficence." The scheme involves the organizing of a phil anthropic foundation which shall enlarge the provision through all time to come for all the hospitals in the city of London.

In this year of jubilee the United States claims its place close to its mother-country in rendering the tribute of congratulation and honor to the gracious and venerated lady whose throne is not only that of queen and empress, but also in the hearts of her subjects and of the civilized world.

THE EASTERN CRISIS.

AS S it was with the diplomacy of Europe in the past, so it is now, and so, probably, it always will be as long as the burden of history shall continue to unfold itself. Treaties, alliances, "concerts" serve but to obscure to the common eye an under-drift of persistent jealousies, mutual distrusts, and secretly cherished purposes. Behind such incidents as those now occurring in the Levant, a secret web of most intricate design is always woven. Even diplomats themselves are but instruments, often unconscious ones, for the working out of the plan; and it is only later, when the whole can be viewed from a standpoint more remote in time, that the design stands out in clear light to all.

The full significance of present developments in southeastern Europe cannot at this early stage be understood: the air is full of rumors, explanations, misstatements, and half truths. But certainly the spectacle of the six great Christian powers of Europe bound hand and foot to the Juggernaut car of Ottoman territorial integrity, beneath which are being crushed the aspirations and lives of liberty-loving peoples, is calculated to put some strain upon one's faith in the beneficence of that unceasing purpose which runs through and overrules all things. But it is also true that while the concert of the powers has proven only a very inefficient instrument of reform in Turkey, the sole alternative to that concert would be interference by one or more isolated powers, which would in all probability precipitate a conflict of incalculable extent and of doubtful issue even as regards the ends primarily aimed

at.

And so, if the rules of diplomatic action admit of choice between lesser and greater evil, it is not unlikely that a calm judgment will admit the wisdom of the united determination of the powers, even at the sacrifice of sentiment and natural inclination, not to allow, if possible the Cretan incident to issue in an open rupture between Greece and Turkey. It is not that they hate Turkey less, but that they love peace, and themselves, and their moneyed and commercial interests, and the opportunity to work out their secretly cherished designs, more. A formal outbreak between Greece and Turkey would at once undo all the diplomatic work achieved at Constantinople; it would probably be the signal for another uprising in chronically unsettled Macedonia; Austria-Hungary and the other powers would almost inevitably be drawn into the struggle for protection of their interests and by virtue of their alli

Vol. 7-2.

ances. The end no man could see; and the dire possibilities of such a catastrophe for both Europe and Asia no imagination could exaggerate.

It is the great powers who are primarily and directly responsible for the maintenance of the Ottoman empire. In all of them a strong popular sympathy has manifested itself for the little maritime kingdom which has shown

itself the champion knight of Christendom, and which has now undertaken single-handed a work of mercy and rescue from Turkish oppression before which the powers themselves, to judge from their attitude in similar crises in the past, would have stood in inert and helpless hesitation. This work of rescue, undertaken partly from a sense of Christian duty and partly also, doubtless, from motives of political ambition, was no sooner entered upon than it was practically accomplished. For, differ as the powers may in their aims, they have been throughout the present crisis united in their determination not to allow Crete to revert to the unchecked rule of the sultan. The primary object of the Greek intervention in the island has already been practically secured. And with the prolongation of the diplomatic armistice, every effort is being made to effect a compromise which. will not only be acceptable to the sultan but at the same time will allow King George of Greece to retreat with dignity from the unique position into which he has been driven by an irersistible wave of popular sentiment.

Crete. The present outbreak in Crete is the natural. result of long-standing Turkish misrule. A brief review of the history of the island will assist to an understanding of the situation.

THE SCENE OF THE PRESENT CRISIS IN SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE.

History of the Island.-Crete lies about 150 miles directly south of Athens. It is the largest of the "isles of Greece" being about 156 miles long and 30 miles in extreme breadth. It is mountainous and volcanic, but very fertile in parts, its chief products being cotton, tobacco, olive oil, grapes, oranges, lemons, wine, silk, and wool. It is inhabited by about 270,000 people of Greek extraction, of whom 70,000 are Moslems. There are only three large towns, Canea (the present capital), Candia or Heraklion, and Retimo, with 23,000, 14, 000, and 8,000 inhabitants respectively. In ancient times Crete was famous as Homer's "Island of a Hundred Cities," and its king. Idomenens, led a fleet to share in the conquest of Troy. At the time of the Persian invasion of Greece, the island was populous and pros. perous, being divided into several independent republics, which, how. ever, had frequent differences to adjust among themselves. Its people were noted for their prowess, and Cretan archers were famous in the Persian and Peloponnesian wars. The Komans were the first