The Sun. — London, England, 1867-11-26 00:00:00

DR. LIVINGSTONE. Some important information with reference to the probability of Dr. Livingstone being yet alive was imparted by Sir Roderick Murchison last even ing to a crowded meeting of the Royal Geogra phical Society, at Burlington-house. The large room filled so speedily that the President commenced pro ceedings ten minutes before the time of meeting, and after a few introductory remarks read the fol lowing communicatian from Dr. Kirk, to which he bad referred in his letter of The Sun of the 19th inst. : " Zanzibar, Sept. 28. " My dear Sir Roderick,—You know that a ru mour has been current on the coast that a white man bad been seen near Ujiji. Such a story came to us at a time when it was luite impossible that Livingstone could be the man. Now, however, another narrative has reached us, and, if we believe it, it is I think difficult to avoid the conclusion that our distinguished traveller may even yet succeed and disprove the story given us of his death by the Johanna men. " A Banian trader at Bagamoyo told me three days ago that he had heard a rumour that some white man had been seen at Wemba ; of this he seemed to have doubt. To-day he brought a na tive, whom he introduced, and left alone with me. I entered into conversation, and led him on in an irregular way to give an account of his journey, without guiding his imagination by any leading questions, determining to meet him again and fill in the details. When I dismissed him, after my fi rs t conversation, it appeared that a ship would sail for Bombay immediately ; and, not to lose a chance, Mr. Churchill, the consul, to whom I gave the notes, at once sent all to Bombay, with a re quest that the substance might be telegraphed to the Foreign-office—viz., that we had now some grounds for believing that a white ',man resembling Livingstone had been seen to the south of the Sea of [ Li iii• " This native, with the rest of the caravan, left Bagamoyo and passed along the usual trade route to Wernba and ,Marunga, where they remained trading for some time, and again returned to the coast. When in one of the villages under Ma runga,:which is a region governed by several chiefs, more or less dependent on one paramount, a white man arrived with a party of 13 blacks, who spoke Suaheli. All had firearms, and six carried double-barrelled guns. The white man was of moderate height, not stout, dressed in white, and wore a cloth wrapped round his head. He gave the chief a looking-glass, and was offered ivory, which he declined, stating that he was not a trader. Be then went northwards. Ido not know that this man can tell much more. He is a simple carrier, who formed part of a caravan ; but if we find the bead man of the party, it will be possible, no doubt, then to identify the stranger, who seems, to our imagination, so like our long-lost friend ; and then only think of the revelations he will have to reveal to us. "It is decided that we go to Bagamoyo in two days to make inquiry, but we must do so quietly. " The story of a white man having been seen at Uruna, to the west of the lake, is a distinct thing from the more definite narrative we now have. But the one adds confirmation to the other, and shows us, if it be Livingstone on whose track we now are, that he has more than half finished his work, and is about to go to the Albert Nyanza. I may mention that there is now no doubt that the white man of whom I wrote formerly long ago as having been seen on one of the lakes by an Arab, who remained on the coast, vias a Turk, one of the traders from Gondokoro, having been met with in ➢lyanda by Zanzibar merchants. The description fully satis= fled me of this, and nothing is more probable. Thus the traders of Egypt and Zanzibar have now met in the interior of Africa. Speke's route has been quickly followed. How far this has been for the immediate benefit of Africa others may judge. In the end Africa will be overrun with traders in all directions, and then the vast resources of this conti nent will be shown. " P.S.—Since writing the above I have again seen my informant, and placed before him my hooks of photographic portraits. In the first he did not recognize the likeness of the man he saw in the in terior, although it contained a fine side view of Livingstone. In the second he at once pointed to a staring likeness of Livingstone, which I kept as a caricature, and said, ,' That is the man. But,' he added, ' come on to Bagamoyo, and see my master and the other men ; they have seen him also, and will tell you all they know.' " Suspend your opinion for a little. Mr. Churchill and I go in two days to Bagamoyo to make inquiry. Please communicate this news to Mr Webb, Miss Livingstone, and other friends ; but until my next maintain some caution. " JOHN KIRK." Sir R. Murchison also read the follov►ing commu nication from the Foreign-office : " Foreign-office, Nov. 23. " Sir,—l am directed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to transmit to you, for the infor mation of the Royal Geographical Society, the ac companying despatch, which has been received from her Majesty's Consul at Zanzibar, reporting that in formation has been received calculated to induce the belief that Dr. Livingstone was living seven months before the date of Mr. Churchill's despatch.—l am, Sir, your obedient servant, " J. MURRAY. " Sir R. I. Murchison, K.C.8." " Zanzibar, Sept. 28. "My Lord,—A native boat being on the point of leaving this for Makulla, near Aden, I hasten to transmit to your lordship the copy of a despatch of this day's date, that I have addressed to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Bombay, acquaint ing him Nith the intelligence, gathered within the last days from people who b►ave come from the inte rior of Africa, with reference to a white man having been seen seven months ago at a place called Ma runga, 650 miles due east of Zanzibar. Since writ ing the accompanying despatch, the slave on whose information more particularly the belief of Dr. Livingstone being alive may be based has, among a hundred photographs, recognised the portrait of Dr Livingstone, the man he saw at Marunga. (Cheers.) This is indeed glorious news (hear, hear), and Dr. Kirk and I leave this for Bagamoyo as soon as pos sible to gather further information from other mem bers of the caravan to which this slave in question is attached. " I have, &c., " H. A. MARCHILL." The enclosed statement, made in the luvali lan guage, before Dr. Kirk, her Majesty's Vice-Consul, by a native lately returned from the interior of Africa in addition to the portion quoted by Dr. Kirk in the preceding letter, gave the following particulars of his return route : " Marunga is a level country ; there are two rivers in it —one, the Chambezi, is full of hippopotami ; the other is smaller. In both the water flows gently to the north. The head chief of Marunga is named Kitumbua ; there are four others—namely, Chuga, Kasango, Chunka, and Chanza. From Marunga to Wemba is seven days' march. The chief of Wemba is named Clumbananga; there are under him Mtuka, Inwarowa, Marurani, and komba. From Wemba to Mambwe is two days, to Ungamwanga seven days, to Wiva two days. Inika is close to Wiva ; from Inika to Uragu three days, to Masua three days, to Utron one day, &c. This statement was mode only two hours before the departure of the mail. The Banian who brought the present infor mation also states that at Bagamoyo there is a ru mour that a white man has been seen alive in the country of Knrva, to the west of the Sea of Upii. It will be neees.saq to go to Bagamoyo fur the pur pose of obtaining further it.fertuation " Sept. 28, 1867." " JOHN KIRK. The President also read a letter from Mr. Price, chief of the Bombay Mission Church, written shortly after the news came of Dr. Livingstone's death, the material portion of which ran as follows : " There is, moreover, one circumstance to which no reference seems to have been made, but which, nevertheless, strongly induces me to disbelieve the reports which have come to hand, and to cherish the hope that Livingstone is still alive and pursuing his useful career of discovery in the heart of Africa. It will be remembered that the doctor took with him nine African Christian lads, who bad been brought up at our institution at Sharanpur. These were, without exception, intelligent youths, about 20 years of age, and had a tolerable knowledge of English. Most of them possessed strong physical development, and, being fired with a desire for enterprise, cheerfully volunteered to accompany Dr. Livingstone. I call to mind how, when the doctor had them together in my verandah, after giving them some account of the kind of life they had to expect and the difficulties that lay before them, he concluded his remarks by saying, very impressively, ' Now, my lads, you see we may have to encounter hardships and dangers ; but bear in mind, above all things, that whatever happens, you must stick close to me.' " In the course of the conversation which followed the reading of these papers it was remarked that the number of blacks seen with Dr. Livingstone ac corded with that ►mentioned in Mr. Price's letter. It was objected, however, that " the white man" had sent nothing by the hands of the trader to Zanzibar; and in explanation of this it was sug gested by the President that the trader, being in all probability a slaver, would hesitate to become the white man's messenger, and the white man might have thought it inexpedient to trust the slaver with a letter. It was deemed improbable that any white man, not a trader, save Dr. Livingstone, would be travelling in the interior, or that any other man should be accompanied by a party of blacks with double-barrelled guns. Mr. Wailer, who had been with Dr. Livingstone and Dr. Kirk in former ex peditions, said the information contained in them was more valuable than any before received ; it greatly increased his hopes for Dr. Livingstone's safety; and in reply to Mr. Layard, M.P., he stated that he believed the Indian youths who accompanied Dr. Livingstone would in the event of his death seek first to return to the coast, and give any informa tion they might possess to Dr. Kirk. Mr. Sherard Osborne and Captain Kennelly also concurred in the hopeful view expressed throughout by Sir Roderick Murchison; indeed, the only one who expressed a contrary opinion was Mr. Crawford, who said he could not bring himself to believe that Dr. Livingstone was yet living. At the close of the discussion, Sir Roderick stated that he had re ceived a letter from Sir Samuel Baker, who had hitherto been sceptical as to Dr. Livingstone's safety, in which he confessed that this fresh information had caused him to change his mind. He said in his letter that it would be very desirable if the Egyptian Government could be induced to favour an expedition from their end of Lake Tan ganyika—in that case he believed Dr. Livingstone would be met by the exploring party. That, he added, would be a glorious undertaking, and he would be very glad to join in it, as his present in. activity was worse than an African fever. OUR PRO7'O-PARENTS. Voltaire says somewhere, that the first time a white man met a nigger he must have felt exces sively astonished ; but not more so, he adds, than he himself would be if any one seriously assured him that both the white man and the black one were children of a common parent. What was thrown out in the shape of a joke by the infidel has been taken up and made a matter of scientific in vestigation by the learned. To prove that the various races of men spread throughout the earth are in reality different species, originating in differ rent proto-parents, with no blood connection be tween them, would be a great feather in the cap of Ethnologists and natural philosophers ; and what would possibly be equally delightful to some of them, a blow which would jar to its centre the framework of supernatural religion. The question of " the origin of the species" is therefore an important one, and one moreover on which much has been written in Germany and England and France—much that is worthy of the name of science, and much also which is only fit for the pastry-cook or the trunk-maker. It ap pears to us that Catholics can easily become too timid and retiring in the face of these bold disco verers in the kingdom of physical and natural science. Just as there is quackery in medicine, just as there are adventurers in politics, and just as there arc humbugs in religion, so there are pedants, rogues, and impostors, to be found in science. Because a man happens to take up the Baconian theory of induction, and applies inductive principles to the phenomena of the visible crea tion, he is not thereby at once proved to be a fair and a skilful, or an impartial and enlightened philosopher. Bold theories enough, indeed, are started every day, and bold assertions are made, and bold solutions to difficult problems are offered in abundance, and the public is attracted and listens to the novelty, and Catholics feel uneasy and perceive some subtle attack upon the Chris tian faith ; and yet all this boldness very often is nothing more than the stupid blundering of some smatterer, or the outcome of some pet idea which has been working its way through all man ner of tortuous windings into the light of day. It need hardly be remarked that not religion simply, but the whole plan of Christian civiliza tion, in its antagonism to heathendom, is mightily affected by this question of the species. Chris tianity and heathenism point in diametrically opposite directions. The one attracts, the other is repulsive and egotistic. Lactantius, for in stance, full of the omne 217211111 spirit of Chris tianity, exclaims—" Since we are all sprung from a common parent, we are related to each other by blood, and so hatred becomes a species of fratricide." Galen, on the other hand, full of the pagan principle of repulsion, declared to his friends, while inventing some new kind of cure, that he had his mind fixed in doing so exclusively on the Greeks, and that he " took no more account of Germans and barbarians than of bears and hogs, and other wild beasts." Several American writers, with Strauss and the materialists, violently maintain the theory of multiplicity ; for thus they are able to fix the abominations of cruelty, despo tism, and slavery upon a philosophical basis, and can take out, as it were, a species of scientific licence for shooting, robbing or poisoning the black man, as the case may be, and destroying him off the face of the earth, not from rapacity, but on the philosophic principle that the inferior species must make way for the more perfect, and the black man must be exterminated to make room for the white. What at the very outset seems to us rather strange is the hardihood of those philosophers who maintain that it is absolutely impossible that the races of men spread over the earth at this hour should all be the children of Adam and Eve, since it is notorious that the first origin of all things is buried in the most misty scientific obscurity. They never condescend to explain why the very case in point should be the one solitary exception to the universal rule. The fact is, as Liebig implies, they are not drawing their conclusions from in duction, but from their own imaginations. The learned German investigator, Bischof, tells us clear enough that science affords us no more information as to how the first plant came upon the earth, for instance, than it does of the primary construction of the heavens, or the primal causes of universal law. Materialists, who maintain that " matter alone is true and real," would have man spring out of the mould of the earth ; for, "if such be not the case," says Burmeister with charming naivte, " how can we account for the origin of life without reference to somehigher influence. If anything has ever been proved false by induction, it is this extraordinary theory of a " generatio cuptivoca .Tontanea ;" and if induction has ever proved anything to be true, it is what we may call Har vey's dictum of "onvie vivens ex ovo." Of course, much must depend on the definition of the term I " species." Weighty authorities such as Muller, Cuvier, Buffon, Saint Hilaire, and a host of others whom it would be wearisome to mention, agree in substance with Flourins that "l'espece vient de la jecondea continue." The character of each species, Buffon says, forms a type ; and while the accidental qualities vary, the essential ones remain unaltered. It is worthy of remark that Aristotle, in his de anima, has anticipated the moderns in the true definition of species. Morton and the leaders of the American school to which we have already re ferred seem to possess the monopoly of a defini tion which falls in with the practices of South American blayery. Theo men ) curiously and THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 26, 1867. nificantly enough, while they proclaim an inde finite variety of species, boldly, and in the face of all nature, deny the existence of distinction of race. They surely could never have made a study of the horse and his countless varieties, and it is evident that none of them ever assisted at a dog-show at London, Hamburg, or Munich. According to their teaching there are as many distinct species as there are races or even families of men; and th's they still continue to assert in spite of all the arguments of Blumenbach, whom they have found it conve nient to ignore, but whom they have not attempted to refute. The teaching of the highest authorities goes directly against the American sophists. They tell us that, just as in the animal kingdom and amongst plants there is a unity of species and a diversity of race, so is it also the case with man. The general consent is well summed up in the words of Muller—" The various races of men," he says, " are forms of one identical species which is prolific and perpetuates itself by gene ration. They are not species of a genus ; for if they were these bastards would not beget chil dren." Neither Morton nor Vogt, nor any other writer with whom we are acquainted, has been, able to break the force of this argument against the multiplicity of human species—namely, that throughout the vast animal world the mixing of two distinct species has never yet been known to produce creatures which could propagate them selves. At the very most there are instances of one reproduction, but after that procreation has invariably ceased. The American school has so far perceived the destructive force of this argument, that instead of attempting to refute it they have endeavoured, by boldness of assertion, to bend it over to their side. They tell us that with regard to mankind a mixture of two races eventually issues in barrenness. But the facts of the case go in just the opposite direction. The children of European and Philippine parents turn out fine ro bust men. The Mulatto is not only proverbially prolific and possessed of considerable personal beauty, but moreover, by his talents and his culture is capable of raising himself to a distinguished position in society. The inhabitants of Mexico and the Philippines of Nicaragua and Paraguay of New Granda and Curagao, alone offer sufficient contradiction to the American theory. Then an other proof of the oneness of the species consists in the similarity of conformation between those races which are the widest apart. The organiza tion of all is alike. The distinctions which sepa rate race from race are almost entirely confined to the pelvis and the skull. Nor do the variations in the latter modify to any great degree the facial angle. It ranges between 90 and 75 degs., and never falls below 75 in men, while in the monkey tribe it fluctuates between 30 and 64 degs., and has never been known to exceed 65 degs. Then the teeth in all men in number and general conforma tion is identical. What human being ever pos sessed a head and tusks like the chimpanzee and the gorilla ? While the difference between the brain of a European and a Hottentot, according to Tiedeman's and IVagner's experiments, is scarcely discernible, that of the monkey is altogether different. So with regard to the internal relation of the human family. Reason, senses, language, religion, are common to all, varying according to culture and climate and development. Burton speaks of black women with Grecian profiles. Blu menbach and Tiedeman speak of educated and even learned negroes—for instance, Poussaint Louver ture and Ira Aldridge. As to colour, Voltaire may have perpetrated a witticism, but his wit was not very wise. He might have remembered that the old saying, nimium ne crede colori, is not without its truth. To divide mankind into species according to their colour would create not only inconveniences but laughable absurdities. Were such a thing done, Richardson, the traveller, would rejoice in himself alone being of at least two different spe cies ; for he tells 113 that when he left Ghadames he was of a rosy tint, " but now," he says, " I am yellow, like these men." Barth would enjoy the same privilege. It is known to all travellers that Europeans who dwell any considerable time in Guinea become a copper colour ; in Egypt they take a smutty cast, and in Abyssinia they turn brown. Arabs of North Arabia are compara tively fair; in Mecca they are of a yellowish brown ; in the Desert their head is covered with wool, and in Nubia they become shining and black as jet. Europeans living in the tropics become olive, and in Africa they turn quite brown. Any one who will give himself the trouble to look at a Portuguese who has just come from a life on the coast of Africa, will at once perceive that colour is not ruled by difference of species, but by the in fluence of the sun and of the atmosphere. Some times the vastness of the population of the earth is offered as an objection to the possibility of man's origin in Adam. Such as make it cannot fully realize the results of geometrical progression. In 1589 a few Englishmen, with four women, were shipwrecked and cast upon an uninhabited island. In eighty years they multiplied to 12,000 men. Thum reckons that in 425 years 800,000,000 of men would be produced. One man and woman with their four children, multiplying at the rate of four to each pair, in a thousand years would double the population of the earth. This becomes more intelligible when we recollect that those countless herds of cattle which are now spread hill and dale in Paraguay and Buenos Ayres are all descended from one solitary bull and a few cows left there by Salagar in 1546. In a word, far from true science based upon severe induction being hostile in its results to the teachings of religion, the more it is studied, and the more scientific the methods employed, so much the more triumphantly do they testify to the harmony which must exist between truth and truth, between science and re ligion. Should the reader feel tempted to verify the facts brought forward in this article, we can refer him to Dr. Hettinger's learned " Apologie des Christenthams."— Westminster Gazette. fabrics 5 cents per lb., of cotton produced. Mr. STEVENS calculates this would be a protection of upwards 10 cents a yard, which would argue great want of skill and enterprise in the American manufacturer if he did not monopolise the cotton market of the world. And having first destroyed the foreign manufacture the "garrulous old man" then again reverts to the product of the tax by which the inhabitants of the United States would be relieved by the sum levied on foreigners of over $60,000,000. There is an old saying which Mr. STEVENS has forgotten, but which nurses often tell children, " that they cannot eat their pudding, and have it." Here is a great American statesman first annihilating the foreign manufacture of cotton, and at the same time adding a third to the export of the staple, which must, of course, be worked by the ruined factories, and levying an enormous sum as a tax on the trade over whose destruction he is chuck ling. Absurd, however, as is this blunder, it is rational when compared with the argument by which he arrives at the annihilation of European cotton industry. An export duty is always paid by the producer. Cotton in Liverpool, the market which rules all others, sells not at the price fixed by the producer, but at that which it can command. While Mr. STEVENS was writing, the very staple which formed his subject was selling on the flags of the Liverpool Exchange at a ruinous loss to the Southern planter. Instead of leaving the producer a profit on which the United States might have levied an export tax, we doubt at this moment whether it repays him the cost of the labour expended. If the United States levied the tax proposed by Mr. STEVENS the cotton trade would pass for ever from American hands, and great would be the rejoicing in India and in Egypt. But presuming that Mr. STEVENS was right, instead of wrong, in supposing that the Southern States had a monopoly of cotton production, the tax he proposes would still be levied on the producer. He is aware, as his own practice has shown, that men get as much as they can for what they have to sell. It is no business of the purchaser what the cost has been. He simply buys at the lowest price at which the article re quired can be purchased. Can Mr. STEVENS sup pose that the broker acting for the Southern planter does not now get as high a price as the article can fetch, yet the price, if we are right, does not actually pay the cost of production. Could he screw it up, he does so without any spur of export duty, put ting the balance of profit in bis pocket. If he could sell cotton against its weight in gold, that would be the price, and no less. But this would be quite independent of the cost of the staple. If the United States charged as an export duty its weight in silver, it would be so much out of the planter's profit, but it would add nothing to the price in Liverpool, which is simply the most the man can get. But if the article, instead of leaving a vast margin of profit, leaves little or none, the producer is crushed by an export duty which under such circumstances, he cannot pay. Ac cording to Mr. STEVENS the planter fixes the price, telling the purchaser, we suppose, that the United States, having added an export duty of three cents, he has raised the price of Ameri can cotton to meet this lid. per lb. Now the gist of what we say is, that if he could do this he would not now be selling cotton at a loss, nor wait till the duty was levied to raise the price, nor confine himself to the amount of the tax, but run it up to the extreme he could get. Poor THAD. STEVENS then expresses his wonder that not only the representatives of the Mississippi Valley resisted his scheme, but, more amazing still, the manufacturers of New England. We have touched on a single subject of Mr. STEVENS'S letter, as it most readily shows the obvious blunders of which he may be capable. Hence we may learn the value of his argument in favour of paying the National Debt in greenbacks. Well might Mr. STEVENS ask, " What is money ?" for it is clear he has but a mild idea. Money means stamped coin ; a dollar is defined by the laws of the United States as so many grains of gold. When the Government bor rowed, it handed to the lenders promises to pay so many dollars—that is, a certain weight in gold in a specified time, and until then guaranteed a certain I semi-annual interest. Here was a specifil contract. But Mr. STEVENS'S alleging that money is not stamped coin, but anything the law makes it, states that the Government can pay its debt by substi tuting for the interest-bearing bond, another paper bearing no interest at all. After detailing the great difficulties he experienced as chairman of a committee in raising loans after the issue of the first two or three, he goes on to sneer at the " sweet communion between Jew and Gentile, at the SHA DRACIIS, AIESHACIIS, and ABEDNEGOS, at the European capitalists, the ROTHSCHILDS, GOLD SMITHS, and the other money-dealers, from whom his Government eventually obtained the necessary funds. How was it the United States found any difficulty in borrowing ? Because the stability of the Government was then doubted. Because the because a debt might be Statesgreat i war nto f t r h a e g n me n t s a nd prog r es s ing might have split the incurred which the nation, impatient of taxation, might repudiate. The United States was triumph ant, the Union more strongly cemented, and, so far, those who had faith enough in the future of the United States to advance it money have been right, and have reaped the benefit. Now, however, such upright statesmen as THADDEUS STEVENS uses this very success as an argument against the bloated capitalists by whose money the United States was enabled to carry on the war that preserved the Union. But why argue against the childish theories of a sick old man, who tells his own moral prin ciples in this simple story :—" A constituent of mine, within two months of the adjournment of the Con gress that passed this law, informed me that he had guaranteed to a gentleman in Philadelphia before the passage of the law a judgment of $28,000 ex pressly payable in gold. The creditor demanded the money. It was then worth about two or three times its nominal value. He went to him and ten dered the amount in greenbacks. He refused to accept, and issued execution, and the Court set it aside, and compelled him to take the lawful money of the United States which had been offered to him. Whether this transaction was a moral or immoral one every gentleman must judge for himself, and will judge according to his position. If a man be dealing for himself with his own money, I can understand his right to bestow the half or the whole of the sum upon his creditors either under the fancy of gene rosity or honour. But when he is acting as trustee for others, and paying out the money of cestui que trusts and wards, it seems to me there may be in morals, although not in law, a question about the difference." The poor old gentleman writes bit terly, and somewhat idiotically in the opening paragraphs of his letter. He knows that he " will incur sharp and frivolous criticism from able editors, whose age is scarcely more than 80 years, and who will probably discover in my answer evidence of old age and decaying intellectual powers. Of all this I am myself conscious, and only regret the pain which it gives those youthful gentlemen to make such delicate suggestions." Now, if Mr. STEVENS does not accept the decaying intellectual powers, the alternative is one we have no wish to apply to a sturdy old statesman who has manfully fought out his battle in life. It must be painfully evident to all who ever respected the man who led in Con gress, that the comments on the above story show a moral obliquity. There can be no doubt at all about the morality of the transaction, except, perhaps, among professed thieves, who openly assert their right to take who have the power, and to keep who can. Mr. STEVENS'S con stituent was a barefaced and impudent swindler; and the most amazing part of the story is the auda city of the scoundrel in boasting of his villany to Jr. STEVENS. The man who can defend or in any way justify such a transaction is a fit advocate for repudiation.— Anglo-American Times. • IADTERTISEMENT.I - Holloway's Pills. With the darkening days and changing temperatures the digestion becomes impaired, the liver disordered, and the mind dis pondent, unless the cause of the irregularity be expelled from the blood and body by an alterative like these pills. They go directly to the source of the evil, thrust out all impurities from the circulation, reduce distempered organs to their natural state, and correct all defective or contami nated secretions. Such easy moans of instituting health, strength, and cheerfulness should be in the possession of all whose stomachs are weak, whose minds are much harassed, or whose brains are overworked. Holloway's is essentially a blood-tempering medicine, whereby its in fluence reaching the remotest fibre of the pain effects a universal good, . • . • CHRONIC PAUPERISM. TO THE EDITOR OF THE " WESTMINSTER GAZETTE." SlR,—The Weseminster Gazette of November 2, contains an able article on a subject of momentous importance—" Chronic Pauperism." It would' be an ungracious, and, I hope, a vain attempt, to endeavour to discourage the writer of that article in the praiseworthy efforts he is making, in so bold and exemplary a manner, to arouse the nation to , 4 grapple with an evil from which there is no escape, and which must be faced." So far from wishing to discourage him, I bid him God speed, and would do all that in me lies to aid his exertions. Ile will not, I hope, accuse me of any discouraging inten tion if I suggest that possibly he may not have considered, in its full extent, the enormous diffi culty of the subject. I remember hearing, several years ago, that some wealthy and benevolent in dividual, who then mourned over the chronic pauperism of the country, had offered the sum of £5OO, to be awarded by competent judges, to any writer who should account for the fact, which he assumed, that wealth implies poverty, and that in the richest countries the direst distress is to be found. Ido not vouch for the precise words, but this was the sense of the proposal. As may be sup posed, a sum of £5OO would call out many an essay. But I perfectly remember hearing that the sum was never paid, the judges declaring that every essay had utterly failed to deserve it. If then, to every peculiar circumstance named by our author, as well as to the religious aspect of the affair, is to be added the fact that, under the most favourable circumstances, exactly in proportion to the wealth of a nation there is a tendency to poverty, one gets a glimpse of the enormous difficulty of the task to which we are invited. Of the fact that there is a degree of squalid poverty in England unknown elsewhere there cannot, in my mind, be a question. At the same time, we must be well aware that the fact is by no means universally admitted. Many, on the contrary, will be found stoutly io deny it. Whether from the self-complacency which is so marked a feature in the character of John Bull, or from his ignorance of other countries, or from both causes combined, certain it is that the feel ing of very many amongst us is, that English paupers are as superior to all other paupers as every thing in England is to every thing every where else. But never was mistake more entire. I remember spending a day, some years ago, in Paris with the late lamented Baron Alderson. I spent the day with him by appointment, in order to meet a mutual friend, who had engaged to ac company him into the most abject scenes of poverty in that great metropolis. Our friend, an English convent, resident for many years in Paris, was an active member of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, and a constant visitor in the most wretched districts of the town. He came, at Baron Alder son's expressed desire, to show him the lowest points which misery had reached. We spent several hours in the investigation, and were introduced, no doubt, into scenes of great suffering and desti tution. But I well remember how often Baron Alderson requested that he might be shown abodes of still deeper poverty. When assured that he had seen the worst, his verdict was that he could state, from actual experience, that there was a de gree of destitution and degradation in London utterly unknown in Paris. Again, it was my lot, in days long past, to accompany some friends from the Continent on their first visit to London. I spent several interesting days in lionizing them about the town. It was the height of the season, and our principal thoroughfares were thronged with equipages such as no other city on earth can parallel. But there was another side to the picture which we English are apt to overlook, but which my friends were not slow to discover, and to which they frequently called my attention. As we passed down Regent-street, or Bond-street, I was often asked to cast my eye upon some gaunt spectacle of misery which dared to stalk about in grim contrast to the splendid pageant which was passing by. I have learned a lesson from those few days. I have often pondered on them during a lengthened residence in a third-rate, but most happy Conti nental kingdom, where the gorgeous magnificence, and the intense misery of London, are alike un known. Often, too, as I now pass along our crowded streets, I remember, and remember it to stamp it with my full concurrence, the conclusion come to by my friends as the result of their visit to London, that they did not know which had most astonished them, its magnificence or its misery. The fact, then, conceded, how is it to be met ? What is to be done ? How is this gigantic evil, which, if increased beyond a certain point, must be our ruin, to be faced? This is the question of questions. Bic labor hoc opus est. Were I com petent to give an answer, I feel, sir, that I must take an over-weaning view of your good nature were I to count on your affording me space for my lucubrations. I feel, however, earnestly anxious on this subject, and I express the hope, in all sim plicity, that abler pens than mine may challenge a space in your columns, and occupy it with a power to which I cannot aspire. Just, however, to break ground in this great and momentous field I single out one point. At first sight it may appear a small one ; but ample experience justifies me in asserting my conviction that the more it is examined the more wide-spread and important will be found its bearing on this great question. I allude to the case of our do mestic servants. It would astonish any one who has spent no time—happy for us if we spent more —in visiting the poor, how large an influence, both by their numbers, and still more by their habits of life, those who have once been servants exercise on the poverty which surrounds them. I venture to say that no one who has not made the matter a subject of special observation would believe, beforehand, what a large proportion of our poor have once been in the service of those above them. And yet a moment's consideration might prepare them for the fact. Look round at the countless number of houses in this vast metropolis where servants are employed. Remember, too, that the good old days, which some of us can recollect, have well nigh passed away, when it was a servant's pride to have grown grey in the service of his or her employer, when as children we loved to see in the chimney-corner some venerable old figure who talked to us of our grandfathers or great grand fathers. The family compact now-a-days seems to be a short sojourn —extravagant indulgence —pay ment as long as you are able to work hard—and the moment that, from whim on one side, or insolence on the other, either party is dissatisfied, let us part never to meet again. The numbers, therefore, who under such a system pass from comfortable abodes into the lanes and alleys of our great cities is enormous. And not only so, but of all poor the most hopelessly poor are old servants. Such was my experience during several bitter years spent as the Protestant incumbent of an important parish containing upwards of 12,000 souls. Whenever I entered an abode where misery sat enthroned amidst emblems of more than usual despair—an abode whence a husband, on returning home, would be sure to turn away sickened and appalled to seek refuge in the nearest gin palace, I feel confident that in the mistress of that dreary chamber it was an even chance that I saw one who had been once a servant. The utter appearance of desolation, the inability to make an effort, the revolting mix ture of faded bed ornaments with rags which no darning needle had ever attempted to repair, these have often told me their tale. Oftentimes have my suspicions resulted in despairing descriptions of luxurious mansions where, in past days, luxury and extravagance were the rule both for employers and employed. We have, then, in the midst of us a class whose numbers are incalculable, whose ex travagance when momentary assistance is afforded, whose despair when want arrives, exert the most baneful influence, in a thousand ways, on the surrounding population. And whose is the fault? The fault, if not wholly, mainly of employers. It is a sad and solemn reflection for the rich that the class which comes into nearest contact with them is, perhaps, the very worst in the community. We too often ruin our servants. We take many of them from the humblest abodes and introduce them at once to habits of reckless and uncontrolled extravagance. We wonder at the result, and amuse ourselves with the racy utterances and whimsical portraits of a flunkeyism which is the creature of our own hands. And truth is often stranger than these fictions. If we cannot always, from the realities of daily life, equal the wit of Punch, we can, at all events, frequently adduce facts which come up to or go beyond any of his fanciful representations. I knew an instance the other day myself of a poor woman to whom, from sheer charity, employment was given in order to rescue her from utter destitution. The spell of old age of service was upon her. Sne indignantly threw up her means of subsistence, because on one occasion salt meat formed the staple of her repast, and because on another there was no pudding after dinner. For this fact I pledge myself, and for this, further, that the last words uttered by this mis guided woman, on indignantly throwing up her livelihood, were, that accustomed as she was at home to pudding after dinner, she could not pos sibly serve where it was not supplied ! A very short time and she was begging at the door on which she had turned her back. Punch may easily furnish pictures of greater wit than this, but I defy him to go beyond it in extravagance. And here I crave Punch's pardon for a moment. I have often, I own, smiled—as who can fail to do? —at his masterly sketches, and cannot wonder at his purveying for so productive a market. But, nevertheless, I cannot but lament that one of our most crying evils—one from which all suffer and against which all protest —one which involves, I fear, great guilt, and beyond a doubt involves deep misery, should be turned into one of the surest and readiest sources of popular amusement. What, then, is to be done A mighty work is here in this one department. Many will turn aside from it as impracticable. And yet if so—if this one evil presents overwhelming difficulties, what are we to say of those which we are told we must face, and whose name is legion ? Towards the amelioration of chronic pauperism one essential step—if there be a shadow of reason in what I have thus feebly urged—is the amelioration of the condition of our servants. To effect this we must review our whole position, and submit to learn lessons from the past. We must define anew the relations which ought to subsist between masters and servants. We must sit at the feet of our grandmothers, and learn how, in the good old time, they managed their households. We must take our stand, and try to recall the days when the dietary and the dress, especially, of under-servants were the sub jects of strict regulation when Master and Mistress, and not Mr. and Mrs. A. or B.—were the respected names by which the heads of a family were designated. The same causes will once more produce the same effects. Our servants will ruin their place. Instead of our maid-servants aping their mistresses, if not trying to eclipse them, in dress and habits of self-indulgence, their very costume will mark their dependent condition. Their dietary, plain but ample, will present some difference between their table and that of those they serve. Upper servants will catch a new spirit and exercise a healthy influence on the lower ranks of the establishment. Kindnesses which, under our present system, are grumbled at as in sufficient, will sink into grateful hearts. The aim and pride of servants will be to keep their places, and to remain connected with those whose discipline and tenderness combined have trained them to habits of order, obedience, and attachment. Houses will become abodes of friends observing strictly the post to which Providence has called them, instead of abodes in which hard taskmasters on the one hand, and conspirators against their authority on the other, are herded under the same roof. When circumstances oblige servants to seek homes of their own, they will enter them better members of society and not worse, in virtue of their previous connection with the rich. Neighbours will have them as well-ordered links between the upper and the lower classes, as the heads of economical, tidy, and virtuous homes, and not, as at present, as the victims of a poverty peculiar to themselves. Their homes will no longer be the watchwords of wretchedness, disaffection, and disorder, but will be pointed out as examples of cleanliness, comfort, and decorum.—l am, sir, your very faithful servant, London, Nov. 13. J. IL IV. 7HE CONDITION OF AUSTRIA. A letter from Vienna, dated Nov. 15, says :—The political and social condition of Austria is at the present moment so decomposed, so entirely rotten, that a thinking man, truly attached to the land and the dynasty, can only with difficulty and with much reluctance bring himself openly to dis cuss the subject. But since I must speak my mind, I will do so simply and honestly, that those of your readers who are not so well acquainted with the state of things here may be enabled to form a correct opinion of our present unenviable condition. To-day I will confine myself to the discussion of the Concordat question. The ad dress of the bishops and the answer of the Emperor, has brought this conflict to a point. There are some respectable Catholics who think the bishops would have acted wiser to have kept silent ; the reasons adduced for this opinion have failed to convince me ; but that the Emperor would have done well to have kept silent, or, better still, to have given quite a different answer, of that I have never had the slightest doubt. We are embarked in the Revolution, if as yet only latent—if, as the Ilistonsch-Politische Bleitter of Munich lately expressed it, the dominant Radi calism will be for awhile content with climbing to the roof-top of our old monarchy over the servile backs of the Ministers, Baron Beust and Count Audrassy. The latent Revolution rules here, and an open Revolution would long since have broken out in the streets of Vienna, had not our poor Emperor confided the Government to the foreign Saxon Baron, who, to make use again of a very telling expression of the Historich-Politische Bleitter, jumps into the water, to fetch and carry at the call of the leading Jewish journals. To such a pass is it come in Vienna, that such a palliative ' can be snatched at as a means of rescue from worse things. Had our Emperor as much politi cal as military courage, he would not have turned out of his path to avoid the risk of a Vienna street Revolution. He is now, indeed, bound hand and foot ; the Minister domineers over the Emperor, the Chamber domineers over the Minister, and the Chamber, in turn, is swamped and domineered over by the revolutionary Jews, the mob, and the half-educated youth, to whom Professor Arndts, in the teeth of their tumultuous bearing, has just read a lesson on boy-government. He has suddenly be come as unpopular a professor as he had before been popular. As a member of the Upper House he had the courage to present addresses in favour of the Concordat. In this chaotic state of things the bishops of Austria, or, rather, those of the western half of the old empire, have had the courage to speak the truth on the subject of the Concordat—the whole truth, the overpowering truth, bright and full as the sun at midday—ex posing the falsehoods with which the very air here is, as it were, full as with a swarm of noxious insects. This brings to my mind the following saying of our Holy Father, Pius IX., spoken in very similar circumstances :—" The greatest evil of our times is the unprecedented growth and power of falsehood. This might closes around me day by day in ever changing form, and I have no weapon to oppose to it but that of the pure and simple truth." The bishops of Austria have followed the example of this great Pope. I trust in God that sooner or later this, the only practical and correct path, will lead to victory. But it is also true that an immediate success was not to be expected. Nor was it to be looked for that the Emperor all at once should find the courage to oppose his ',veto to the present Ministry, which most certainly is now doing the bidding of the Revolution. The Emperor reproaches the bishops with not taking sufficiently into consideration his quality of constitutional sovereign ; apparently the Emperor meant to indicate by these words that he was a monarch fettered by the Revolution. For his quality of constitutional sovereign could not hinder bin firm dismisi g hip Minihter ) much less from dissolving the present, without doubt, Meg a Chamber. But, as a monarch robbed by the Revo lution of all freedom of action, the Emperor could not claim any special consid era ti o n on the part of the bishops; while, on the other side, it be• hoved the bishops to defend the most sacred terests of the Church and of the Empire. He who places himself at the side of the Revolution_ 10 identifies himself with it—he can only i m pute to himself the consequences of his own deeds. You know me well enough to understand the pnil l which such an expression of opinion costs me. It would be difficult to find any one more devoted to the house of Austria and to the Empe ror Francis Joseph than I am. But the sacred prin ciples here in question stand higher in my re gard than all princes and dynasties. On this polo' every honourable man must be ar w itness to t he truth, as the bishops have do n e. That the evil pe r " petrated may be yet retrieved, I will not deny ; b ut ' unfortunately, as far as I am aware, matters sta ll ' with us at the present moment as described, doubtless, also, not without deep pain, by the torich-Politische Bldtter in its last number. Th e House of Hapsburg has solemnly yielded up its claim to the protectorate of the Catholic Church' and delivered up the interests of the Church to the good:pleasure of a furious Radicalism, and to a Par' liament built on this same Radicalism. Frase ia Joseph has burst asunder the last bond whi ch yet bound together the various nationalities of Austria, the common interests of Catholicism and that at a moment when at Rome signs are abroad calculated to raise the despondent energies even of the weak. At a moment wh en Louis Napoleon, turning towards the Cahn' lie Church, with a glance at anti-Roman Pru s " sia, lets fall hearty blows on the back of poor Italy, in the hope that their smart may be felt by the Prussian ass which bears it--at such a moment the Emperor of Austria suns himself in the bolu s of an ephemeral Viennese mob-popularity, for' getting that the same bearing which in the Jewis h capital of Vienna wins for him the hearts of the clamorous, estranges a many hundred times greater number of true and faithful hearts over the whole Empire. To discover what sort of a rabble it is that are feting the Emperor, it is not necessary to descend so low as the streets ; it is s ufficien t to cast a glance upon the Chamber of our rePre" sentatives. There, for instance, we see Pr' Miihlfeld, who, report says, rejoices in the Ps' session of four wives (I am, indeed, perscu lalli acquainted with him, though I have never enter ed his harem). He is the champion of the onslaugh t on the Concordat, and has l a t e ly d e li ver ed a m ost vulgar speech filled with unmeaning denunciati ons against the bishops. As the honourable memb er for Tyrol, Professor Greuter, showed his &OP: proval of such unbecoming attacks, the demagog ue ' only let loose a strain of still more vulgar abuse' which was followed by a clamour of applause from his party, in which Professor Greuter was made e' appear to join one of the heroes of their party ' the renowned Dr. Schindler having had recou rs e to the dignified device of hiding himself beh ind Professor Greuter, and then calling out, Bra /° bravo I" The same Dr. Miihlfeld advan ce d as a proof of the nullity of the Concordat th 3 as a State contract it could have no validity ; such a pact was only possible between two teroPe' a Sovereigns, and that as a law o f th e St a te it co uld only have effect until abrogated. An enduring stale compact, as the introductory p a t en t t er med it, W 7. a contradictio in adjecto. Absurd as such rant-i n, : may appear to a jurist, it is not these discours e ; which excite the greatest furore among the Rad ical public. These demagogues, in order to stir tO 0 ° depths the feelings of the populace, make use of al : eloquence hovering on the steep heights of mad- ness. For instance, they insist that the battle of Konigsgratz requires the abolition of the Concorda.t, . Since this watchword has been passed, that tO tw; Concordat is to be attributed the defeat e t Austria, not a word more is heard of the w all' of llinterlodungsgewchren, of the faults in t' l Exercier-l?eglonent, ofthe abuses in the Plet ho o of advancement. A wit, lately, who happene d ' o , j t be thrown into the society of such wim!acres, w' be were attributing the conquests of Prussia W t ' Concordat, asked with an i nnocen t mien w hat paragraphs they had in mind ; he s hould like to re refer to them, especially as he was at a loss to concile the victories of Custozza and Lissa with articles so injurious to our service. The Morgue rust, which has particularly bu s ! eci itself in bringing the Concordat into connec tion with our defeat in Ktinigsgrdtz, following out 0 little things as well as in great this mania, at tri , buted the other day to the Concordat the fact til:1:0 a clergyman was seen, as reported, walking in the a town park with a dog unbound (which is aga il/ ; mob the police regulations). And, doubtless, their, - 0 , of readers have no misgivings but that the Li e at cordat contains articles which free the clergy fr ° o the police regulations which bind the profane public as to dogs. Neither do they doubt of ''' at existence of certain articles in the Coneer ci . „, which makes it absolutely impossible for us to van' quish a Prussian army. tha t But do not let all this lead you to imagine these party leaders, taken on the whole, have n i ; degree of weight or solid influence with the peq or even with the journalists. A few weeks tp lt the Presse declared it to be a melancholy fact' e s only too true, that the House of Represeran ti o was in a state of complete inner dissolution , a, to that new ideas and new leaders must be fou na An a carry on the labours of the Reichsrath. rs • the Neue Free Presse says in one of its num b° t —" Our House of Representatives has a ni ,ho °' uncertain existence ; its leader is chance. the crisis in which we find ourselves is felt ill House in all its members. As it is at preseu.,t c n o or o stituted—we speak it with deep sorrow—this I ' l o is a picture of desolation, a languid body that s ee rather to vegetate than to live. No one has o r compact party in this House t o f a ll back on ; Assembly which either Baron von B eus t one . This Asse-na ' which has the pretensi on o f b e i ng a popular RePre of sentative Assembly, dissolves into a nunl bel i o as small, powerless fractio n s, a n d these frn c ' again melt into a number of single heterogeae 41 individuals. Such condemnations resound u° JP • e h sides, and such is the political power before W olo t not only such a pitiable wight, as our v a l' ep h, Reichs Kanzler, but before which Francis P s Emperor of Austria, has bowed his head, do :1 1 1 13 1 d ing at the same time from his bishops th at icoli also, as he has done, should bow before it. an d ;• possumus, was the answer. A Catholic spiri t ,1 Catholic strength yet lives in Austrian hearts' A to The Republicans of Maryland have presertt e ` - h • e 11 Chief Justice Chase a copy of the recent decision by he freed coloured apprentices, printed on satin and P0."11 somely framed. We wonder what the Chief Jotice do with it, perhaps hand it down to his posterity a s 35°H nip of a just judge. wife 01 THADDEUS STEVENS'S LETTER. The " garrulous old man," as Mr. STEVENS calls himself, could not be expected to stick to his text, and before he gets half way he drops currency and takes up protection. The rise of England's manu facturing supremacy is traced to the most stringent act that ever protected domestic industry from the possibility of foreign competition. Surrounding the world from drum beat to drum beat, she stood sen tinel to protect her own people against the en croaching industry of other nations, so that the sentinels could call out almost audibly to each other Watchman, what of the-night ?" It is impossible for Mr. STEVENS to dwell on this subject without a glaring display of the fallacies he holds. The reasons he gives in favour of an export duty on cotton would be passed in contempt if they came from an unknown man. Emanating as they do from the leader in Congress, although a painful exposure of the style of intellects which often rule in the world, still they carry weight, and may even impose on some. "By our constitution," Mr. STEVENS ob serves, " all export duties are prohibited. That constitution was made before either cotton or tobacco were articles of any a2count in cur foreign trade, and was evidently intended to prevent the power of chocking the experts of grain, t emp t e d b y w h at were then the Corn Laws of Engl md, which laid a heavy duty on the importation Of all grain. I admit that, with the exception of cotton and tobacco, ex port du: ie3 would never be resorted to, for they would increase the prosperity of . no part of the country." The argument which follows may be thus summarised : The manufacturing pros perity of Europe rests on American cotton. Other countries cannut produce a substitute equalling ours even at two or three times the cost. Hence one-half the native price of cotton might be imposed on thee xport without reducing it a pound. Thus the tax imposed would be thrown on the foreign merchant and manufacturer, to the benefit of the United States revenue. Mr. STEVENS calcu lates that the present average of 1 ,501,862,1981b5. exported will soon be increased one-third, making the average 2,002,482,930, which at three cents per lb. export duty would bring in $60,074,487. The present internal tax which now falls upon the United States manufacturers would then be levied upon foreign operators, protecting American Births. FRASER— On the 24th inst., at 45, Minories, the G. A. Fraser, Esq., of a son. eIP MILLER —On the 24th inst., at 99, Eaton-place, te Mrs. Miller, of a son. A e ns- POWELL— On the 25th inst., at 21, Palace -gar.„ of Kensington, the wife of Maurice Powell, Ps`r' daughter. Marriages. /fo to, FORSTER—MACLEAN—At. H o ly T r i n ity, Goeco t , ° , Thos. B. Forster, M.D., R.N., of Keybarn P 0° 711; 13 Emily Charlotte Melville, Cal,t. Donald Maclean, of tyh'oeu2ndgest daughter cl WRIGHT—STOCKLEY—On the 20th Qiuuset:na'st IltlOtrf''.lsP.isfse°34 Pt gin ,jer o Chapel, Chiritia, Limerick, John Wright, Ca lOtith Regiment 14.1. to Sarah M‘Dowall,.(l3u° Major-Genoral Stockloy,' earrig Beg, Lirner le. Deaths. Vecil GUEST— On the 22d inst., Dudley ,J o s ep h at aged 75. „ HAMILTON—On the 24th inst., at 48, Euston-scllresiT Rev. James Hamilton, D.D ,of Regent-sclut'te teli terian Church, aged 100 11° WOODS— On the 21st inst • at the Castle and Fa; Aldersgate-street, Charles W. Woods, aged a* . T. W e lsbo WELSH—On the 22d inst • at East Moulsey, 0/ Esq., of Lloyd's, aged 34. WHITMORE On the 23d inst, at Waltham Cr ° " -- ' . rt Alfred Whitmore, Esq., aged 47 . 4 . _O O l. V' YATES—On the 17th inst., at Bro na ttached , sg`mpton, 49, W. Wingfield Yates, half-pay u vvV- 4, - ------------ A 1)11'. 1 London : Printed and Published by WILA w • — ~,,,,.1 4 1 4° IZ ot of No. 112, strand, Printer, at Viz Suiv - Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, iu tle lauldleiamattoclay,AoTinuber 26, 1561,. Arl Aft London R This It b 7 the wholp s: R, IZinal "U It t iu s Abv eo Preolvq, '''"aYAt) dtat,ouni rric rkT AtTx . Prt ne i n tnri atellin 2 eoNti Mr. R . The ber, the I Vorri Pearanc Prival Itenade W] Ono NN PIT] GEE. ~~ {'~~: bItLT if all the I d ' o • Ito °De Thitt mc , A_RG Thi, 4 0. ent w() a 81 znor 'll4l. `l7. 11.Lreiend oin I tt kt o li Par aitut u tt , Itn.t h; Rieh Tl, ,(3h, 0 1,3p, ~2„, 4-ki7 tt 1,",4ni Aft Aft Aft Aft Aft Aft -__ ttir kt, 1,1 tOr 6414} - Ali !th,i,nn it ~j~t~ Dt loo ? ,; / q, k tallmte.'t ti 0 1,1 1. ) , l eF la R\ I rT G L the fie to ‘ l5 De don. 41\ii th e by Atr qfz ee Itil A k . eit ° TT.) C't Itt Atr 4 o 4 A)tp st,'..t; Z l l t h i .o a th e Dng~ i h'"n , 1• 4.1) t,)? T Z , I), -•an KIT `l'sZ;,c, No• 0 11 1-I MF ;._ }„q, W t i 5?( bp„ tt , t " t vlto, I