Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

Neatness in the Highway, The country highway is the connect ing, link of the American farmers. It binds the farms together instead of separating then', and furnishes the means by which a neighborhood may be a unit in the nation. The “com mon road” is a common interest, and is the common expression of a com mon life. Along it tht stranger passes and from it he gains lasting and very accurate impressions of those who make it what it is. If a highway was for travel and nothing more, and travel was simply the getting from one place to another, then a good roadbed i f the shortest length between connected points would meet the full demands of a country road. But people travel largely for pleasure and when the going is a duty, they desire to mix as rnuen comfort with the commisstou as is possible. I’he roadside is the constantly changing panorama of all • who pass along any highway. The writer knows of two equally good roads, so far as the roacbed is concerned, at equal distances from a village. One is kept clean, not ex pensively so, the grass is cut, and it well pays the owners of the land for their work. The other common road has half-finished ditches along the side, which bristle with Canada this tle and other vile weeds. The fences are hedgerows of tilth and propagation beds for noxi >us plants that each year seed down the whole neighborhood with expensive pests. The farmers along this portion of the highway, have with one accord, turned the road into a common “slop jar,” into which they throw everything that is not fit to be seen. In one place is a large brush heap, upon which the trimmings of the trees in the dooryard are annually thrown, and become an object of fright to many a horse that passes by starlight. A little further on is the logyard of a farmer. The roadside is appropriated as a place where the necessary rails are si>lit from year to year. In this brush the turkeys build a nest, and behind the logs a litter of pigs first sees the light of day. Born upon the highway, these animals hold all the claims of their birthright. The next farmer has his barn “on the road,” and with the tumble down piles of old lumber, interspersed with broken harrows and cultivators which surround it, the passer-by must either shut his eyes, and nose, too, or be a witness to a thriftless, and even a dis gusting scene. Not far up the road things are even worse, for, instead of the barn, the house is on the public highway, and the carriage track is daily sprinkled with the chips that fly from the slow and melancholy chopper in his boundless roadside woody ard. Tne farmers along the well-kept roadway have no better farms than their slip-shod neighbors on the other side c f the village ; they perhaps do not make any more money. But there are some things in which they are vastly superior. They live on a higher plane, and therefore a comparison is difficult to make, and not at all neces sary. The well-k«-pt road gets all the pleasure driving; no one thinks of going into the ul kempt district except on business. The tidy road is a double and mutual comfort to those who desire to take a pleasure drive aud the farmers who dwell along the highway. Nothing enlivens the com mon life of the farmer and his family like the sight of frequent vehicles upon the highway. The difference in the cost ot keep ing the two extremes of country road is in favor of the one that is neat and pleasing to the eye. There is an in crease of hay and a great saving of labor in weed killing. The roadside that is left to itself is not mowed and yields only weeds. The value of the farms, though the same at the outset, are widely differ ent now. Though the fertility of the acres may be not far from the same, the well-kept land is always salable at a good price, while the shiftless farmer must seek a buyer for his laud. The rows of maple and elm trees that were planted along the good road fifteen years ago cost but a trifle at the time, but are now so valuable that to cut them down would be counted a sin. They pay a good interest in the shade and beauty which they afford, while at the same time the work of wood-makiug is going on.” The Princess Louise has retu#ued to Victoria, aud the Maiquls ol Lome has gone further into the interior of British Columbia. Foman Cruelty. A National Cons:oration of Inhumanity. That at an advanced period of mater ial civilization spectacles thereof the one grand interest consisted in the elaborate and wholesale torture and carnage of men and animals should I not only have been tolerated with scarcely a protest for centuries, but should have formed the chief and in dispensable amusement of both sexes and all classes of the population, in eluding the highest—this appears on first sight to modern thinkers a moral fact almost incredible in its atrocity. And so firm, moreover, was their hold on popular sympathy that they lasted long after the conversion of the empire to Christianity. Constantiue, to be sure, issued an edict suppressing the gladiatorial shows, hut it was suffered to remain a dead letter, and it was not till nearly a century later, when the Asiatic monk Telemachus leaped into the arena and separated the combat ants at the cost of his own life—he was fetoned to death by ibe indignant spectators — that these games were finally abolished. Something may be due to the religious origin of the cus tom, which is commonly alleged to have sprung out ol a rite ot human sacrifice offered at the tombs of great men; though some scholars, like Mommsen, deny the existence of human sacrifice at Rome. - Later on motives of \ olicy OQnspired to sustain the practice, both as a means ot keep ing up the military spirit of the people and as offering the sole opportunity under a despot Emperor for the thou sands of citizens then assembled in presence of their sovereign and his Minister to present petitions and make known th>ir grievances. Still these explanations do not cairy us very far. Theatrical entertain ments, such as the Greeks delighted in, would have answered the latter purpose quite as well, but for appre ciating such refined amusements these ghastly orgies of blood quite unfitted the Roman populace. And it is a curious fact., noted by a distinguished modern writer, that, as different kinds of vice, which might appear to have no mutual connection, do yet act and reacton one another, so here the in tense craving after excitement engen dered and gratified by gladiatorial combats served to stimulate the taste for such orgies of sensuality as de scribed by historians like Tacitus and Soetouius. And hencs was not only Hercules buri t ou 'he stage, not in tfligy but iu the person of a condemned criminal, but the deeds of gods and heroes were represented, as Juvenal says, to the life. Nor can it be ques tioned—and it is chiefly in or lei to illustrate that terrible lesson that we have referred to the subject here—that the gladiator shows betrayed not mere ly ind fferenee to human suffering, but that capacity for real and keen plea ure in the contemplation of suffering, as such, which many are loath, for the credit of human na ure, to admit. Suetonius, for instance, tells us that it was the sptcial delight of Cli udius to watch ibe faces of the expiring glad iators, as be had come to take a kind of artistic pleasure in observing the variation in their agony. Heliogabalus aud Galerius used to regale themselves while at the table with the spectacle of animals devoured by wild beasts ; and Lactantius says of Galerius “he never supped without human blood.” And what is more horrible still “beau tiful eyes, trembling with passion, looked dowmupon the light ; and the noblest ladies in Rome, even the Em press herself, had been known to crave the victor’s love.” A story told by Bt Augustine exhibits the ghastly fascina tion of the spectacle. A Christian friend of his \iad somehow been drawn into the amphitheatre, which Chris tians were strlcly forbidden to enter, and rt solved to gui rd against tliB temp tation to sinful ei j< yment by keeping his eyes closed ; a sudden cry led him to look up, aud he was unable to with draw his gaze again. If it shocks us to find among a high ly civilized people tills national conse cration of cruelty, it is perhaps more startling that with a few exceptions the novelists and i hllosophers of the day had not a word to say against it. The refined and gentle hearted Cicero calmly observes that some men think these spectacles cruel and inhuman, but to make this use of criminals is really lo present to the eye au excellent discipline against suffering and death. Juvenal’s aristocratic feelings were outraged at the Roman nobility con descending to act as gladiators; but there is nothing to show that the spec tacle in itself < fftmled him. Seneca ai d Plutarch, as we pointed out before, adopt a very d ffbreut tone, and Mar cus Aurelius ordered the gladiators to fight with blunted swords, as he also ordered that no rope-dancers should perform without a" net or a mattress being spread beneath them. But such rare aud houorab e exceptions onl.v help to prove the rule. During the reign of te nor in Fn nee a spirit very like that of the worst period of the Roman empire was evoked, and it has been observed that in both cases the grossest inhumanity was sometimes found united with affection for ani mals—that is, for pet animals. Four nier w .s devoted to a squirrel, Couthon to his spaniel, and Marat kept doves. But it way well be questioned whether these particular affections indicate any general temper ot mercy toward man kind. Even* the most blood thirsty moi ster may have a sincere partiality for 1 is own belongings, paramour, or friend, or child. It is not clear that the Marshal de Re'z, the historical original of Bluebeard, whose name'ess atrocities might have caused Nero to i lush, was wholly devoid of such feel* iugs Statistical. The Potato Crop. The potato crop is said to be almost as much of a failure this year in west ern New York as it was last. New York produced last jear 25.000,0d0 bushels and the rest of the country 80.000. 000—in all 115,000,1 00, or fully 20.000. 000 lees than the average for the past ten years. If, as is reported, the New York crop is only 22.000,000, or less than last year, the high price of potaloes is likely to last for another twelvemonth, to the very serious loss of the community. In the last fiscal year over $4,500,000 < f potatoes were imported, against $874,019 in 1881, 5274.220 in 1880 and $1,345.919 in 1879, another bad potato year. In spite of cheap breadstuffs, a po( r potato crop is likely to continue this large imi ort ol an article of food. Canal Enterprise. The Kraw Canal.is the third great international water- way in which French capital is interesting itself, the other two—one completed and one begun—being the Suez and Panama canals. The Isthmus of Kraw, which the canal is intended to cut, is the narrow neck of laud to which the Malaysian Peninsula shrinks midway between Rangoon and Singapore. Two riv< rs, both navigable, leave only six or eight miles of sand and soft veins of sandstone to be cut in order to furnish a -water-way from the Bay of Bengal to the Gulf of Siam. Such a canal can be easily dug at a cost of not over $20,000,000, and it would open a way for at least 1,500,000 tons to and from China. It would changf the current of the trade which now goes thiough the Straits of Malacca and shorten by a week the v >yage to China. A French company is organ ized to build it, but England is sure finally to control it. Ocean Freight*. The engagements of room in: de for grain during the wtek have been light, and amount to only 26,000 bushels of win at taken at 3d. forth# Le^land line. The asking rate for grain to Liver po >1 is 3d., and for Lon don shippers are offering 4d. There is, however, next to no call for room or for vessels to take grain Iu New York business has also declined, and only a'few charters and engagements have been made during the past few days. To Liverpool the grain rate is about 4|d.; Loudon, 5£d.; Glasgow, 3£ u8$d ; Hull, 6d ; Antwerp, 7d. A steamer has been taken from New York to Cork for orders, 11,060 qrs. at 5s. l&d* ex-Dunkirk. The movement in provisions here has been light, and to Liverpool tne rate has been 15s., and to London 22s. 6d. The tobacco engagements iiave been light, and to Liverpool the rate is 20s., aud to London 25s. There has been very little doing in cotton, although a few inquiries have been made for Septem ber room. In sack flour there has been a moderate demand, and the rate to Liverpool is 12s. 6.1., hut to London It is 18s. 9d., wilh not much demand. The exports of wheat from New York last week have been a little larger than for the previous week, amounting to 1,825,488 bushels, against 1,764.773 the previous week, aud 1,169,054 for the corresponding week last year. The decrease iu the exports of corn is most marked. For the month of July the total txportH of corn from ^lie i ouutry were 343,898 bushels, aud’for i he same mouth last year the exports were 10,784,921 bushels. For the seven months of this year the total o^ i>rts have been 10.523,791 bushels, against f 0,299,820 same time last yeur. Who Owns Monty. This appears to be such a simple question that even a little child might be expected to answer it correctly. Nine out of ten people will reply : “ Money of course belongs to the per son who earns it,” and the nine people in ten who make this reply will be iu the wrong. Rightfully, money cannot be earned. But if I agree to do a certain piece of work for live dollars, and am paid five dollars, have I not earned five dollars? No. Then what have I earned ? You haved earned the right to use five dol lars. No one, do what he may, can make money ; if he attempts to do so, the result will be fine aud imprisonment. He may make a watch, a spade, a house, and rn ny other things, all of which, because made by private or in dividual enterprise, can become the property of the makers or.of those to whom the makers give and sell them. Blit money no one dares to make, un less he is willing to incur the conse quent pe'nalties. Tne nation alone through its government can create money; then fore, money is national property ; and while national property, cannot also be private property; and money remains national propel ty so long as it is money. The nation alone has power to create money, and what is created belongs exclusively to the creator of it. The nation alone has power to withdraw 7 all or part of tne money; could the nation do this if money were private property ? The nation alone has the power to repair the mutilated or to restore the destroyed tokens which represent money ; could the nation do this if money were private property ? Ouly the nation can prosecute those who mutilate or eounterleit the tokens which npresent rnorey; could the nation do this if money were private property ? In short, from the date of the appearance of the currency until its final withdrawal, the nation exercises over it a 1 those rights and privileges wuich belong only to its exclusive ownership. Money i-s as much national property as a national highway or national bridge. Everyone who has earned the right to use the highway or bridge, may do so freely to the full extent of his power, for business or for pleasure, and no one may legally interfere with his doing so, or dispossess him of the part of the highway or bridge he may be actually upon ; but this liberty to freely use the highway or bridge, gives him no right of private ownership to either of them, in whole or in part. Likewise, every one who has earned the right to use the national property called money, may do so freely to the full extent of his ability, either for business or for pleasure, aud no one may legally interfere with him or rob him of the money he holds. But this liberty to thus freely use money, aud this protection accorded to him in that use, give him over the monfey no right of private ownership. Now, money being national and not private property, it follows, that no person or association can justly levy a toll or tax upon others for the use of money.. Buppose a traveler who has earned the right to use a national highway, should insist that the part upon which he stands belongs to him exclusively, and make that an excuse for charging other travelers toll for the privilege of using the few or more feet of highway he thus controls. Is it likely such impudence and dishonesty would re ceive the least toleration ? Neverthe less, as regards that national property called money, this impudence and dis honesty are daily and hourly tolerated under the sanction of law by hun dreds of thousand of people. Every one who has earned the right to use money ^ssutues that the money he happi ns to hold is his private prop erty; and acting upon this assuinp tion,straight way charges his neighbors alL he can for the privilege of using it. I have said that this pernicious practice is sanctioned by' law; the Government, the Nation sanctions it by fixing the maximum toll or inter est which individuals‘and corporations shall charge for the privilege of using the money they hold. But how could Government fix the rate of tax or toll to be charged for the use of money, if money were private property ? Does not this fact without further evidence prove that mom y is publio, is national property ? Why does not government fix the rent to be charged for houses and lands, or the hire of horses, car riages, etc.? Bimply because these are private aud not publio property. Gov ernment establishes the maximum rate of interest for monoy because money is national property; and, be cause it belongs to the nation, only the nati< n has a right to say what snail be charged for its use. j .But since the uaticu as the exclusive owner of money, has a right to fix the rate of interest which shall be charged for the use of its property, why maxe a fuss when it does do so, and allows individuals to pocket that tax or interest ? Have not I, as tjm owner of a house, the right to reL another appropriate to his own use® the rent paid for the use of my house? Assuredly I have ; but it must be re membered that when discussing a question like this, we arc governed by the rule of practice and not by the ex ceptions to that jule. It is the rule for the owner of a house to himself enjoy the rent ort revenue derived from it; and applying this rule to uational property, we conclude, and very justly, that the revenue derived from that property should be divoted to ibe use of the nation. Suppose the nation, because it has the right, were to allow travelers on a national highway to charge their fellows toil for the use of particular parts these travelers took a fancy to hold, and thereby pocketed a consid-' erable revenue without much labor or risk to themselves; would it be long ere that highway was appropriated through! ut its whole extent by these toll-gatherers? Then fancy the re sult : The whole population forced to pay in the aggregate, an enormous tax or toll to a comparatively few for the use of what should be fiee and open to all without charge; and these comparatively few growing enormous ly rich at the «xpense of their neigh bors, with what should belong to the owner, to the nation, as the rightful recipient of the revenue derived from its property. This is a fancy sketch as regards the national highway, but is a true sketch as regards the national currency. Gi vernment allows Individuals to levy a tax or toll upon others for the use of a national property called money, which should be open and free to all without charge; and per mits those who gather this toll gr in terest, to appropriate it to their own U3e instead of giving it to the nation, the real owner, to be used for the benefit of all without distinction. As an illustration of what this per nicious practice can accomplish, I will instance the national banks. These institutions have sli ce their appear ance levied a tax upon the people for the use of money to the txient of fifteen hundred millions of dollars. This tax after deducting the cost of collection, &o., has been Appropriated byi say, two hundred and fifty thou sand stockholders, at the expense of a nation of fifty millions, to whom, as the owners of the money,this enormous revenue belongi d. Had the revenues derived by individuals apfl corpora tions from the tax or interrot for the use of that national property called money, been appropriated to the bene fit of i's owner—the nation—the panic of : 73 would not have occurred. Borne workingmen who read this may, perhaps, remark : “ No doubt this is all true, but what ooncern is it of ours? we pay no tax or interest for the use of money, bee vase no one will lend us any ; and we receive no such tax, because we have no money to lend.” A little or* flection, however, will satisfy the most skeptical that this question concerns workingmen more th* n any other class in the communi ty. Who really finally pa’d the fifteen hundred millions of tax levied by the national banks for the use of money? And who ultimately pay all the taxes levied for the use of money?—The workingmen and women. They paid and do pay it in their wages, their clothing, their food, their drink, their rent, their pleasures, yea, they pay it in the cost of being laid away in their last resting place ; for usury respects neither the cradle nor the grave. Bulwer: —“ Wnen the Turk does anything, consider what is the reason able, straightforward interpretation to place on that act. Then eliminate absolutely that conclusion. Any other may be possible; but that cer tainly will not be.” Recent experiments show that the tensile strtugth of glass is between 2000 and 9000 pounds per square inoh, and the crushing strength between 000 and 10,000 per square inoh. Mr. Traullonie finds that flooring glass one inoh square aud one loot between the end supports breaks under a load of 170 pounds