Morning journal and courier., 1893-10-26

of COST Nervinoff was one of the wealth
lest men In Russia.

of cost. Nervinoff was one of the wealth
lest men in Russia.
Lord Justice Bowen of England has made
decidedly witty remark. He had never
sat in admiralty proceedings until the
other day, and before entering upon his
unaccustomed duties he addressed few
words of explanation to the learned coun-
sci in attendance. He explained he was
new to the situation and asked their in
diligence. f'And may there" said he, "be
no moaning of the bar when put out to
sea-"
Specialists in throat diseases are, 1t Is
said, beginning to take unusual interest in
culinary methods. They advise kitchen
quarantine on wash days and boiled din
nsr days, giving as a reason that the steam
from boiling clothes and picked meats
that requires much heat produces many
illnesses of the respiratory organs and ag-
gravates slight or chronic diseases of the
nose, throat and lungs. Patients are sd-
vised to vacate apartments that have dark
or Ill ventilated Kitchens and to keep all
babies and ailing children out of the
kitchen when cooking is going on.
In the Absjo valley is a small, low piece
of country, about five miles from Havana,
capable of producing tobacco enough to
make $4,000 cigars annually. Without
question, the tobacco is the finest grown.
The result is the kings and noblemen of
England, Russia, Germany, France and
other European countries gobble them up.
Every single cigar made of Vuelta Absjo
tobacco is sold to them at prices ranging
from $40 to $3.50 hundred. These cigars
are bought and paid for long before the
crop is ever harvested. Manufacturers,
however, with remarkable GOODNESS proceed
to call all qualities and kinds of Cuban
cigars Havana and Vuelts Abajo, when half
of them never saw a cigar of that growth.
NJ. Francis Maynard, the editor of the
Figaro, recently printed an article which
has attracted good deal of attention in
Paris The burden of 1t is that the coun-
try is never go quiet as when the chambers
are not sitting. He does not propose that
the senators and deputies should be sbol
ished altogether, but asks whether 1t would
not be possible to vote the estimates for a
period of three years. This, he says, at
least would prevent the regular annual in
crease of taxation. He demands to know
how many essential laws are passed every
twelve months. One, he thinks, at the
most, but, for the sake of argument, he will
admit two. The discussion of them, he
says, would necessitate the presence of
deputies for about two months. He would
have no interpretations, no questions, and
no waste of time. At the expiration of
two months the ministry would explain its
policy and solicit vote of confidence. If
1t obtained this vote 1t would make its bow
and close the session. If defeated, 1T would
cede its place to another cabinet. In tie
event of crisis, as, for instance, some for
eign complications, deputies could be sum-
moned to Paris in twenty-four hours. II.
Francis Maynard adds that he does not ex-
peot that any heed will be paid to his sug
gestion, but says that he defes anyone to
prove that parliament does any useful work
for more than two months in the year, or
that the debate on the budget is anything
but mere formality.
If anybody knows what the Senate of
the United States can or cannot do, or
ought or ought not to do, 1t Is the Hon.
George F. Edmunds, who was a member of
that body for many years and presided
over 1t for several. He says: 1t Is comps-
tent for the Senate to determine at any
time whether any senator. or any number
of senators are abusing the privilege of de-
bate or transgressing the orderly and earn
est course of the business of the body. If,
in the unfortunate and mortifylng state of
circumstances now existing in the Senate,
any senator should raise the question that
the debate had become obstructive, and in
sist upon vote being taken on Whatever
question might be pending, 1t would be
the duty of the presiding officer to rule
upon that question of order. Whichever
way he should rule, his decision would be
subject to the judgment of the Senate on
appeal. That appeal would be debstable,
but by the same law have stated 1t could
not be debated obstructivsly, and when
thus debated, and the debate on the appeal
should, in the judgment of the Senate, be-
come obstructive, second point of order
could be raised aud decided as before
That decision could also be the subject of
appeal, but the second appeal would not
be debatable. Thus, in very short time,
a day or two at most, the Senate could
come to determination whether Ii wished
to do business or not, and 1t could come to
it lawfully, regularly, aud in entire accord
anoe with every existing rule of the Senate.