text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/482

466 sweet wild-flowers, to be pressed and carried away as souvenirs for our friends in the North, and re-mounting our horses, galloped towards the city.

On our way back we turned off from our road, and visited the great sugar ranch of San Antonio. The hacienda stands in a narrow cañon through which runs a small stream of pure water, and is surrounded by wide fields of luxuriant and rich-juiced cane, running up to the suburbs of the city. The sugar works are run by water-power, and though the crusher is of American make, all the other machinery and appliances are of the rudest and most primitive character.

The cane-juice is boiled in great, open, copper kettles set in brick-work, and is bailed from one to another until the last is reached, by naked-footed men, whose skin appears to be so indurated as to resist the action of the scalding fluid as thoroughly as the metal itself. The sugar, in its crude state, is placed in very large earthen moulds, wide at the top, and running to a point at the bottom, and covered with a peculiar clay made into a thin paste, which filtering through it, bleaches the mass to a pale brown color.

The sugar is sweet, and for coffee, fully equal to the article of a pale yellow hue called "coffee sugar" in the United States. This is the common product of the sugar haciendas of Mexico, and the process is that in general use all over the Republic from the Pacific to the Atlantic. With railways, a good and liberal system of revenue laws, and a few years of uninterrupted peace, Mexico could supply the United States, Canada, and much of Europe, with all the sugar required, and control the market of the world.

The coffee tree flourishes in the vicinity of Orizaba


text:
Page:The Bible Against Slavery (Weld, 1838).djvu/11

9 science, social affections, sympathies, hopes—marketable commodities! We repeat it, the reduction of persons to things; not robbing a man of privileges, but of himself; not loading with burdens, but making him a beast of burden; not restraining liberty, but subverting it; not curtailing rights, but abolishing them; not inflicting personal cruelty, but annihilating personality; not exacting involuntary labor, but sinking him into an implement of labor; not abridging human comforts, but abrogating human nature; not depriving an animal of immunities, but despoiling a rational being of attributes—uncreating a, to make room for a thing!

That this is American slavery, is shown by the laws of slave states. Judge Stroud, in his "Sketch of the Laws relating to Slavery," says, "The cardinal principle of slavery, that the slave is not to be ranked among sentient beings, but among things—obtains as undoubted law in all of these [the slave] states." The law of South Carolina thus lays down the principle, "Slaves shall be deemed, held, taken, reputed, and adjudged in law to be chattels personal in the hands of their owners and possessors, and their executors, administrators, and assigns, to ."—Brevard's Digest, 229. In Louisiana, "A slave is one who is in the power of a master to whom he belongs; the master may sell him, dispose of his person, his industry, and his labor; he can do nothing, possess nothing, nor acquire any thing, but what must belong to his master."—Civ. Code of Louisiania, Art. 35.

This is American slavery. The eternal distinction between a person and a thing, trampled under foot—the crowning distinction of all others—alike the source, the test, and the measure of their value—the rational, immortal principle, consecrated by God to universal homage, in a baptism of glory and honor by the gift of His Son, His Spirit, His word, His presence, providence, and power; His shield, and staff, and sheltering wing; His opening heavens, and angels ministering, and chariots of fire, and songs of morning stars, and a great voice in heaven, proclaiming eternal sanctions, and confirming the word with signs following.

Having stated the principle of American slavery, we ask, ? "To the law and the

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:The Bible Against Slavery (Weld, 1838).djvu/12

10 "testimony?" First, the moral law. Just after the Israelites were emancipated from their bondage in Egypt, while they stood before Sinai to receive the law, as the trumpet waxed louder, and the mount quaked and blazed, God spake the ten commandments from the midst of clouds and thunderings. Two of those commandments deal death to slavery. "," or, "thou shalt not take from another what belongs to him." All man's powers are God's gift to him. That they are his own, is proved from the fact that God has given them to him alone,—that each of them is a part of himself, and all of them together constitute himself. All else that belongs to man, is acquired by the use of these powers. The interest belongs to him, because the principal does; the product is his, because he is the producer. Ownership of any thing, is ownership of its use. The right to use according to will, is itself ownership. The eighth commandment presupposes and assumes the right of every man to his powers, and their product. Slavery robs of both. A man's right to himself, is the only right absolutely original and intrinsic—his right to whatever else that belongs to him is merely relative to this, is derived from it, and held only by virtue of it. is the foundation right—the post in the middle, to which all other rights are fastened. Slaveholders, when talking about their to their slaves, always assume their own right to themselves. What slaveholder ever undertook to prove his right to himself? He knows it to be a self-evident proposition, that a man belongs to himself—that the right is intrinsic and absolute. In making out his own title, he makes out the title of every human being. As the fact of being a man is itself the title, the whole human family have one common title deed. If one man's title is valid, all are valid. If one is worthless, all are. To deny the validity of the slave's title is to deny the validity of his own; and yet in the act of making a man a slave, the slaveholder asserts the validity of his own title, while he seizes him as his property who has the same title. Further, in making him a slave, he does not merely disfranchise the humanity of one individual, but of. He destroys the foundations. He annihilates all rights. He attacks not only the human race, but universal


text:
Page:Brundtland Report.djvu/63

 income distribution more inequitable. In the long run, such a path may not be sustainable; it impoverishes many people and can increase pressures on the natural resource base through overcommercialized agriculture and through the marginalization of subsistence farmers. Relying more on smallholder cultivation may be slower at first, but more easily sustained over the long term.

38. Economic development is unsustainable if it increases vulnerability to crises. A drought may force farmers to slaughter animals needed for sustaining production in future years. A drop in prices may cause farmers or other producers to over exploit natural resources to maintain incomes. But vulnerability can be reduced by using technologies that lower production risks, by choosing institutional options that reduce market fluctuations, and by building up reserves, especially of food and foreign exchange. A development path that combines growth with reduced vulnerability is more sustainable than one that does not.

39. Yet it is not enough to broaden the range of economic variables taken into account. Sustainability requires views of human needs and well-being that incorporate such non-economic variables as education and health enjoyed for their own sake, clean air and water, and the protection of natural beauty. It must also work to remove disabilities from disadvantaged groups, many of whom live in ecologically vulnerable areas, such as many tribal groups in forests, desert nomads, groups in remote hill areas, and indigenous peoples of the Americas and Australasia.

40. Changing the quality of growth requires changing our approach to development efforts to take account of all of their effects. For instance, a hydropower project should not be seen merely as a way of producing more electricity: its effects upon the local environment and the livelihood of the local community must be included in any balance sheets. Thus the abandonment of a hydro project because it will disturb a rare ecological system could be a measure of progress, not a setback to development. Nevertheless, in some cases, sustainability considerations will involve a rejection of activities that are financially attractive in the short run. /…

title: Page:Brundtland Report.djvu/63


text:
Page:Brundtland Report.djvu/78

{{c|

II. DECLINE IN THE 1980s
}}

8. The pressures of poverty and rising populations make it enormously difficult for developing countries to pursue environmentally sound policies even in the best of circumstances. But when international economic conditions are bad, the problems can become unmanageable. During the 1980s, economic growth rates declined sharply or even turned negative in much of the Third World, particularly in Africa and Latin America. Over the five years from 1981 to 1985, population growth outstripped economic growth in most developing countries. 9. Deteriorating Terms of trade, rising debt service obligations, stagnating flows of aid, and growing protectionism in the developed market economies caused severe external payment problems. The increased cost of foreign borrowing, at a time /…

title: Page:Brundtland Report.djvu/78


text:
Page:The Bible Against Slavery (Weld, 1838).djvu/13

11 being, and rushes upon. For rights are rights; God's are no more—man's are no less.

The eighth commandment forbids the taking of any part of that which belongs to another. Slavery takes the whole. Does the same Bible which prohibits the taking of any thing from him, sanction the taking of every thing? Does it thunder wrath against him who robs his neighbor of a cent, yet bid God speed to him who robs his neighbor of himself? Slaveholding is the highest possible violation of the eighth commandment. To take from a man his earnings, is theft. But to take the earner, is a compound, life-long theft—supreme robbery, that vaults up the climax at a leap—the dread, terrific, giant robbery, that towers among other robberies a solitary horror, monarch of the realm. The eighth commandment forbids the taking away, and the tenth adds, ";" thus guarding every man's right to himself and his property, by making not only the actual taking away a sin, but even that state of mind which would tempt to it. Who ever made human beings slaves, without coveting them? Why take from them their time, labor, liberty, right of self-preservation and improvement, their right to acquire property, to worship according to conscience, to search the Scriptures, to live with their families, and their right to their own bodies, if they do not desire them? They them for purposes of gain, convenience, lust of dominion, of sensual gratification, of pride and ostentation. , and pluck down upon their heads the plagues that are written in the book.—Ten commandments constitute the brief compend of human duty.—Two of these brand slavery as sin.

The giving of the law at Sinai, immediately preceded the promulgation of that body of laws called the "Mosaic system." Over the gateway of that system, fearful words were written by the finger of God—"." Ex. xxi. 16.

The oppression of the Israelites in Egypt, and the wonders wrought for their deliverance, proclaim the reason for such a law at such a time—when the body politic became a theocracy, and reverently waited for the will of God. They had just been emancipated. The tragedies of their house of bondage were the realities of yesterday, and peopled their memories with thronging horrors. They had just


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hajipur

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hajipur


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hajj

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hajj


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hājjī Khalīfa


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hake, Edward


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/483

Rh in all possible luxuriance, and the product of the but indifferently tilled plantations between this point and Paso del Macho, is sufficient to supply the demand for a considerable extent of country. Mexico produces nearly, or quite, enough coffee for home consumption, and under more favorable conditions of society could furnish in a short time, an almost unlimited quantity for export. To sum up in a word, the Republic of Mexico has within her limits resources of wealth and comfort unbounded, and the day will come—I trust it may not be far distant—when she will be regarded, with reason, as the Paradise of the world.

In Mexico, there are no great Express Companies to transport specie cheaply and quickly through the country, as in the United States; and as the roads swarm with bands of robbers, from one end of the Republic to the other, when there is a chance for plunder offered, it follows, that the safety of the silver and gold from the mines of the interior, on its way to the coast, becomes a matter of such importance that the Government is compelled to assume the responsibility of providing for it. Accordingly, the troops are always held ready to escort it from point to point, and protect it, at any risk, from attack and plunder.

Notice is .given, of the time a "conducta" will leave Guanajuato, San Luis Potosi, or other point for Mexico, and from Mexico for Vera Cruz, and shippers avail themselves of the opportunity offered, to forward the millions of hard dollars which accumulate in a few weeks or months at the center of one of the great mining districts, willingly paying the tax imposed in order to secure the protection of the Government troops; this protection is not always effectual, as recent events


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/484

468 that the escort itself, is, sometimes, not wholly trustworthy and incorruptible. When we were journeying towards the coast, the state of affairs along the route gave additional interest to the movements of the conductas.

For some weeks, the departure of the conducta from Mexico with treasure for Europe and the United States, had been the theme of much conversation all along the road. It was known that the pronunciados in the State of Puebla had their eyes upon this conducta, and would certainly attack it if they found themselves strong enough, or the guard weak enough, to warrant them in the attempt. Then it was further known, that Gen. Negrete had been in Mexico in disguise, and it was feared that his clandestine visit had some connection with a project to attack this conducta; and therefore the Government had made extraordinary arrangements for its protection.

From the hour of its starting from the Capital, down to the end of the trip, the bulletin-board at the Lonja at Vera Cruz, had shown the daily progress of the conducta, adding "all safe" at each new announcement. The precautions taken had proved all-sufficient, and the most dangerous portion of the road was passed or would be passed in a day or two. The silver was expected to reach Vera Cruz in season for the American steamer Cleopatra on the 10th of January.

On Monday, January 3d, the long looked for conducta came filing into the City of Orizaba, and the whole of the irregular, wide, main street of the town was filled with it. There were two million seven hundred thousand dollars in this conducta, and the entire train resembled a division of a grand army in


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Law, Andrew Bonar

LAW, ANDREW BONAR (1858-), British statesman, was born in New Brunswick, in Canada, on Sept. 16 1858, the son of a Presbyterian minister, the Rev. James Law, by his marriage with Eliza, daughter of William Kidston of Glasgow. Though his early life was passed, and his education begun, in Canada, he, a Scot on both sides, came to Scotland when still a boy, and finished his schooling at the Glasgow high school. He entered at once into commercial life in Glasgow, and became a member of a kinsman's firm, William Kidston & Sons, iron merchants, subsequently joining William Jacks & Co., iron merchants. His success as an iron merchant led to his becoming chairman of the Glasgow Iron Trade Association. But success in business did not satisfy him. He retired with a sufficient competence, and went into Parliament in 1900 as Conservative and Unionist member for the Blackfriars division of Glasgow. His experience in business had led him to the conclusion that Free Trade, in the Cobdenite sense, was no longer beneficial for Great Britain. He made a distinct impression on the House by a speech on April 22 1902, in favour of Hicks-Beach's corn duty, which was imposed in order to find money to carry on the Boer War. In that speech he predicted that, if the cry for protection were again seriously raised in Great Britain, it would not be in the interests of agriculture, but in those of working men, who saw their employment disappearing. The speech so much impressed Mr. Balfour that he introduced Mr. Law into his Government as Parliamentary Secretary of the Board of Trade; and Mr. Joseph Chamberlain's Tariff Reform movement, which was started in the following year, showed how right Mr. Law was in his diagnosis of the future. As the movement proceeded, Mr. Law was regarded as, along with Mr. Austen Chamberlain, the most decided Tariff Reformer left in the Ministry after Mr. Chamberlain's resignation. When he was accused by the Liberals in 1904 of being a Protectionist, he explained on Feb. 9 that he wanted, like Cobden, to improve foreign trade, but adapted his means to present conditions. The Government did not object to imports as such, but wished to see more raw material and fewer manufactured goods. He dwelt on the injury to the working classes caused by “dumping” and unfair foreign competition. He made several speeches in the country in this year and the next, of which the gist was that British trade policy must be relative to circumstances, which had wholly changed from what they were in Cobden's time. He saw the true field for commercial expansion within the Empire, and therefore advocated preferential duties.

There is no doubt that he chafed, in these years, at the slow rate at which his chief, Mr. Balfour, moved, in the direction of Tariff Reform; but, though he would have preferred a more whole-hearted acceptance of Mr. Chamberlain's programme, he remained loyal to the Prime Minister. He shared in the general rout of the Unionists in Jan. 1906, but returned to Parliament in May for Dulwich at a by-election. The withdrawal of Mr. Chamberlain from active work in Parliament, owing to ill-health, left the stalwart Tariff Reform Ministry without a leader; his son, Mr. Austen Chamberlain, was his natural representative; but Mr. Law, by a series of fighting speeches both in the House and in the country, made himself particularly congenial to the more prominent members of that section. In 1907, the year of the Imperial Conference, he pleaded strongly for Colonial Preference, a policy against which, in spite of the support which it obtained from Dominion Ministers, Sir Henry

Government set its face. He denounced Mr. Lloyd George's famous budget of 1909 as vindictive and socialistic. In the new Parliament returned in Jan. 1910 Mr. Austen Chamberlain and he had the satisfaction of mustering 254 votes (against only 285) in favour of a Tariff Reform amendment to the Address. He left his constituency to fight N.W. Manchester in the election of Dec. 1910, but failed to capture the seat. He returned to Parliament, however, in a by-election for Bootle in March 1911, in time to take his share in the fight over the Parliament bill. But he kept aloof from the “Diehard” movement, and warmly defended his leader, Mr. Balfour, from the reproaches cast upon him. This loyal attitude, no doubt, was one of the reasons, and his strong Tariff Reform programme was another, which recommended him to his party as Mr. Balfour's successor in the leadership when the claims of Mr. Austen Chamberlain and Mr. (afterwards Lord) Long appeared to divide the Unionists pretty evenly. Both the rivals stood aside, and on Nov. 13 1911 Mr. Law was unanimously elected Leader in the Commons, Lord Lansdowne continuing to lead the party in the Lords.

He remained leader for nine years and a few months, the first three years and a half in Opposition and the rest in office. He was very trenchant in his criticism of the Government; thus giving satisfaction to ardent spirits in the Unionist ranks, but causing ministerial speakers to contrast his bitterness and violence with Mr. Balfour's quieter methods. He led a strong fight against the ministerial bills introduced to take advantage of the Parliament Act, and protested vehemently against the relentless closure by which they were driven through the House of Commons. He accused ministers of violating two fundamental conditions of representative government: that the Ministry should not ride roughshod over the minority, and that they should make no vital change till it was clearly desired by the majority of the people. Of the Welsh Disestablishment measure he said that a meaner bill, or one brought forward by meaner methods, had never been placed before the House; in view of the growth of materialism, he protested against depriving a spiritual organization of its funds. But his principal concern was the Home Rule bill and the situation created by it in Ireland. Before it was introduced he went to Belfast in Easter week, and at a great demonstration, presided over by Sir Edward Carson, encouraged the Ulstermen to trust to themselves; Belfast was again, he said, a besieged city; the Government by the Parliament Act had erected a boom against them—they would burst that boom; and it would be said of them that they had saved themselves by their exertions, and would save the Empire by their example. After nearly four months of strenuous opposition to the bill in Parliament, he renewed and strengthened his encouragement to Ulster by declaring, at a large Unionist gathering at Blenheim on July 27, that the Ulster people would submit to no ascendancy, and that he could imagine no lengths of resistance to which they might go in which he would not be ready to support them, and in which they would not be supported by the overwhelming majority of the British people. The Ulster Covenant was adopted in the following Sept.; and, in the course of the prolonged fight in Parliament in the autumn and winter over the bill, Mr. Law took occasion to say that his words at Blenheim were deliberate, written down beforehand, and that he withdrew nothing. Government, he maintained, had no moral right to force through a revolution. When Sir E. Carson moved on New Year's Day 1913 to exempt Ulster from the operation of the bill, Mr. Law defined his position thus. If the bill were—as he claimed it should be—submitted to the electors and approved by them, he and his party would not encourage Ulster to resist. But if it was forced on Ulster he would assist in the resistance. In spite of his efforts the bill was carried through all its stages by an unbroken phalanx of Liberals, Labour men, and Nationalists, showing a majority in important divisions of 110; and was only rejected by the Lords in the early months of 1913.

Meanwhile Mr. Law had to encounter difficulties among his own followers. The two branches of the party, the

and the Liberal Unionists, had indeed been fused, in May 1912, into one party with a combined national Unionist organization. But the present differences were not on the old lines, but on the extent to which the policy of Tariff Reform should be carried. Mr. Law and Lord Lansdowne announced in Nov. 1912 that they no longer held themselves bound, by the policy advocated by Mr. Balfour before the second election of 1910, to submit the first Tariff Reform budget to a referendum. At once a large section of Unionists, especially in Unionist Lancashire, became alarmed lest their electoral chances should be jeopardized by the prospect of food taxes imposed without reference to the people. Mr. Law endeavoured to reassure these doubters by a speech at Ashton-under-Lyne on Dec. 16. He refused altogether to haul down the flag of Tariff Reform; it was his policy to give British workmen a preference, both in the home and in the colonial market; but he said that a Unionist Government did not intend themselves to impose food duties. What they would do would be to call a colonial conference; and they wished to be authorized to meet colonial views if in the conference the colonies considered a duty on wheat to be necessary. This declaration did not satisfy the free fooders; but there was a general disposition to compromise the question without injuring the unity of the party. Finally, on Jan. 14 1913, in answer to a memorial from the bulk of the Unionist M.P.'s— a memorial which wished for a reassurance as to food duties, but strongly deprecated a change of leadership—Mr. Law announced that he and Lord Lansdowne were willing to agree that food duties should not be imposed without the approval of the electorate at a subsequent general election; and to remain leaders in deference to their followers' appeal, in spite of the party's disregard of their advice. After this declaration the unrest in the party gradually died down.

Mr. Law maintained his stout opposition to the Home Rule and Welsh Church bills on their second and third appearances in the sessions of 1913 and 1914. But in the course of 1913 he found that, partly no doubt owing to his insistence, Ministers began to appreciate the serious difficulty to Home Rule presented by Ulster's determined attitude. Accordingly he stated in the House that Unionists would welcome an Irish settlement by general consent, but would not make new friends by betraying old; and in Oct., in answer to Mr. Asquith's overtures at Ladybank, he said that he and his colleagues would consider any proposals with a real desire to find a solution if possible. If there were not such a solution, he foresaw national disaster and ruin. He attended a great demonstration in Dublin on Nov. 28 and declared then that Ulster would not submit, and the Unionist party would not allow her to be coerced. He did not find in Mr. Asquith's proposals, in the session of 1914, for exclusion by county option for six years, any sufficient compromise; but he formally announced that, if they were endorsed by the country, Lord Lansdowne would use his authority in the Lords to have them passed without delay. The offer was not accepted, and Mr. Law, though he joined the Buckingham Palace Conference in a last hope of aiming at a reasonable settlement, was anticipating the immediate outbreak of civil war in Ireland when the World War supervened.

He had always been anxious for good relations with Germany, provided that they were not attained at the expense of France; for, like Sir Edward Grey, he based his whole foreign policy on the maintenance of the Entente, and therefore supported the Foreign Secretary steadily against Radicals and Labour men and Nationalists. The only quarrel he had with the increased armaments proposed by Mr. Churchill was that he doubted whether they were adequate. Accordingly, directly the crisis became acute, he wrote, on Sunday Aug. 2, on behalf of Lord Lansdowne and their colleagues, tendering to Mr. Asquith the unhesitating support of the Opposition in any measures necessary to support France and Russia; and he warmly welcomed Sir E. Grey's speech of Aug. 3, which converted the country to the justice and inevitableness of war. Not only did he render a steady support to Ministers in Parliament; but he aided the national cause and promoted recruiting by speeches at

in Belfast and elsewhere; and even when criticism of the mismanagement of the war began legitimately to raise its head in the early months of 1915, he used his influence, in the national interest, to repress or moderate its expression in Parliament. The tenor of his speeches was always to encourage Ministers in vigorous action—on such questions, for instance, as the mobilization of industry, the treatment of aliens and the provision of munitions. In spite, therefore, of the vigour, or even violence, of his opposition before the war, it was comparatively easy for Mr. Asquith to approach him in May 1915 with a view to the formation of a National Coalition Government, and for him to respond with immediate acceptance. He believed, he subsequently told a Unionist audience, that the Opposition could have turned out the Government at this time owing to the indignation about the shortage of munitions; but that would have meant an election and renewal of party feeling, and so have prevented the concentration of effort on the war. He brought seven of his colleagues into the Cabinet with him— Lord Lansdowne, Mr. Balfour, Mr. Austen Chamberlain, Mr. Long, Lord Curzon, Lord Selborne and Sir Edward Carson— and he himself took the Secretaryship of State for the Colonies. This was an office which, however congenial to Mr. Law with his colonial birth and his belief in Colonial Preference, did not bring him much into the limelight; and, influential as he was in the councils of the Ministry, in public he was content to play a comparatively subordinate part. To his loyalty to his chief, during their 18 months' association, Mr. Asquith himself subsequently bore emphatic testimony. While the controversy on compulsory military service was raging in the late autumn of 1915, he stated his own view to be that it was a better system than the voluntary system, but could only be gained at too high a price—namely, the price of national unity. But when circumstances had overcome Mr. Asquith's antipathy to compulsion, Mr. Law took charge of the first military service bill in the House of Commons in Jan. 1916, and got it through all its stages with little difficulty. Another policy which he threw his energies into carrying out was the utilization of the economic forces of the Allies in the prosecution of the war. He promoted the Economic Conference in Paris in June 1916, and represented his country on the occasion, with Mr. Hughes, the Australian Premier, and Lord Crewe as his colleagues. He cordially concurred in the cooperative and protective resolutions then adopted (see ) and joined Mr. Asquith in recommending them to the House of Commons. He was a member of the War Committee of the Cabinet, but, like Mr. Lloyd George, he was far from satisfied with its organization and powers. It was natural, therefore, that he should be one of the four persons (the others being Mr. Lloyd George himself, Sir Edward Carson, and a Labour member) to whom Mr. Lloyd George, forcing the issue on Dec. 1, asked Mr. Asquith to confide the absolute conduct of the war. The crisis started by this demand produced, in the course of a few days, first Mr. Lloyd George's and then Mr. Asquith's resignation; and the King, adopting the ordinary constitutional course, sent on Dec. 5 for Mr. Bonar Law, who had become, through by-elections before the war, the leader of the largest single party in the House of Commons, and invited him to form an administration. He took the view that for the due prosecution of the war a Coalition Government was necessary. He could count on the assistance of Mr. Lloyd George, but Mr. Asquith and his principal Liberal colleagues refused their coöperation. Moreover, he felt that Mr. Lloyd George was the Minister whom the country demanded. So he resigned his commission, and on Mr. Lloyd George's acceptance of the premiership he promised full coöperation from his party.

In this second Coalition Mr. Law's position was much more considerable than in the first. His followers supplied the main body of its supporters; and he himself was rather the partner of his chief than his second-in-command. He became not merely Chancellor of the Exchequer, but also leader of the House of Commons, the Prime Minister concentrating his energies on the work of the War Cabinet (see ), the supreme directing authority, of which Cabinet Mr. Law was also a

member, though he was not expected to give regular attendance. At first the House of Commons was disposed to resent the apparent neglect with which it was treated by being asked to accept a deputy as its leader in place of a Prime Minister who was himself an M.P.; and cries for “Lloyd George” were raised when Mr. Law rose to play the leader's part in the debate on the Address in 1917. But the respect and, after a while, even the affection of the House were won by his business habits, his courtesy, his readiness to yield on non-essentials coupled with firmness in essentials, his exceptional clearness of head and of expression, and his extraordinary capacity for impromptu reply, without taking a note, at the close of a long debate on an intricate subject involving perhaps complicated figures.

It was his duty to obtain votes of credit from time to time from Parliament to carry on the war; and in the two years for which this Government was responsible the total voted amounted to more than £5,500,000,000, as compared with some £3,200,000,000 during the preceding period of two years and four months. But of course it must be remembered that not merely were munitions provided in 1917 and 1918 on an unprecedented scale, but that prices had risen enormously until, towards the close of the war, they were about double those of four years before. As Chancellor of the Exchequer Mr. Law had to find the money to meet this gigantic cost. This he did principally by means of two great loans, and by immense increases of taxation. The first loan was launched in Jan. 1917, and its basis was the issue of a 5% Government stock at 95; but there was also a 4% tax-compounded loan issued at par, and there were various provisions for conversion of certain previous issues. It brought in the enormous sum of £1,000,312,950 from no fewer than £5,289,000 subscribers; and Mr. Law justly hailed it both as an expression of the will of the people to win the war and also as evidence of the financial ability of the country to see it to a successful conclusion. The second loan, which was launched in Oct. of the same year, was of a new and ingenious character. The title of the issue was National War Bonds, and it combined the advantages of short-term securities, such as Exchequer bonds, and three sorts of longer-dated securities for seven and ten years. The interest was, as before, 5%, or 4% “tax-compounded,” and elaborate and comprehensive rights of conversion were given. The amount was unlimited; all the securities were for continuous sale till further notice. Mr. Law explained that his hope was that the new War Bonds would lead to a steady and persistent flow of money loaned to the State without the financial dislocation inseparable from a great loan. His hope was justified. Interest was stimulated in the National War Bonds by various devices from time to time, such as the use of “tanks” as collecting boxes, the institution of a “Business Men's” week and a “Feed the Guns” week, and the transformation of Trafalgar Square in Oct. 1918 into a shell-shattered French village. From the time they were first put on sale till Jan. 11 1919, £1,446,625,613 of these bonds were sold, and nearly £50,000,000 small post-office bonds in addition.

Mr. Law's first budget, that of 1917, coming as it did after the great increases which Mr. McKenna had made in taxation, only raised the excess profits tax from 60 to 80%, and increased the taxes on entertainments, tobacco and dogs. He had proposed to double the tobacco duty, but on reconsideration came to the conclusion that with this burden it would be impossible to keep down the price of the cheaper kinds, and so reduced the additional duty to one of 50%. His great taxing budget was that of 1918, introduced during the early stages of the great German offensive. This imposed additional taxation calculated to bring in no less than £114,000,000. Income-tax was raised from 5s. to 6s.; farmers' tax was doubled; super-tax was increased; the stamp on cheques was to be 2d. instead of 1d.; beer and spirit duties were doubled, and tobacco and match and sugar duties raised; letters were to be 1½d. and postcards 1d. He budgeted for a revenue of no less than £842,050,000. He explained that it was his duty to levy as much as the nation could bear; but at the same time he must not cripple industry. Besides the taxes already mentioned, all of which were carried

through; there was considerable opposition to the increased tax on cheques. Mr. Law also proposed a tax on luxuries, following the general principles adopted in this matter by the French Government. He got the House to set up a select committee to prepare a schedule with the advice of the traders who would be affected; but the report of the committee was not received sufficiently early in the year to enable Parliament to pass upon it, and the project was abandoned. He also appointed another select committee to consider how to control expenditure, the chairman of which, Mr. Herbert Samuel, told him that his fault as a Chancellor of the Exchequer was that he was “too amiable.” The fault that the City of London found with him was that he was too much occupied as Leader of the House and member of the War Cabinet to give sufficient attention to finance.

His influence in the Government was especially felt in economic questions. It must have been with peculiar gratification that he announced to the House of Commons in April 1917 that the Imperial War Cabinet had accepted the principle of Imperial Preference; and that it was hoped that each part of the Empire, having due regard to the interests of the Allies, would give specially favourable treatment and facilities to the produce and manufactures of other parts of the Empire—a hope which, as regards the mother country, was translated into action in the budgets introduced under Mr. Law's leadership after the war. After the sittings of the Imperial War Cabinet in 1918 he spoke of the resolutions then passed in favour of retaining the control of essential raw materials as an immense move forward in the whole conception of trade policy. In May 1918 he told the House of Commons that the French Government had denounced all commercial conventions containing “most-favourable-nation” clauses; and that, in view of the probable scarcity of raw material after the war, the British Government would take a similar course. He had warned the German Government in the previous Dec. that the longer war lasted, the less raw material there would be to go round, and, as the Allies would help themselves first, the less there would be for Germany to receive. In regard to Ireland, he frankly admitted, Unionist though he was, the need for a change. What was wanted was a settlement, but the sacrifices would have to be on all sides if a settlement was to be obtained. He remonstrated, however, with the Nationalists for their threats in the session of 1918 and indignantly rejected as preposterous their claim to self-determination as a condition precedent to the entry of Britain into the Peace Conference. He opposed throughout the war a firm front both to pacifists and to pessimists. He asked the pacifists what other method there was, in the circumstances, of saving the liberties of the country except by fighting for them; and the constant readiness of his countrymen to bear the heaviest taxation and to subscribe to loan after loan was again and again treated by him as a certain pledge of eventual victory. Nor was he ever in doubt as to the necessity of fighting until the Germans surrendered. “We are fighting,” he said, some six weeks before the Armistice, “for peace now and for security for peace in the time to come. You cannot get that by treaty. There can be no peace until the Germans are beaten and know that they are beaten.”

As the general election approached he responded heartily to Mr. Lloyd George's proposal that the Coalition should be continued, and that the country should be definitely invited to return candidates who should undertake to support the Coalition Government; and he joined with him in issuing the letters or certificates, nicknamed “coupons,” accepting Coalition candidates. He also signed with Mr. Lloyd George a joint manifesto, in which a good measure of his own economic doctrines held a conspicuous place. He left Bootle and stood for Central Glasgow, the business quarter of his own city, being returned by a huge majority. The result of the general election greatly strengthened his position, as the Unionists had a considerable predominance in the new House of Commons.

When the Ministry was reconstituted in Jan. 1919 the arrangement by which Mr. Law led the House of Commons was continued, as the Prime Minister would be much away at the Peace

Conferences; but he was relieved of the Chancellorship of the Exchequer, which was transferred to Mr. Austen Chamberlain, he himself taking the sinecure office of Lord Privy Seal. He was constituted one of the British plenipotentiaries at the Conference; but his duties at Westminster seldom allowed him to go to Paris, though he ultimately affixed his signature to the Treaty of Versailles. The business of the session mainly consisted of measures either to demobilize the forces which had been mobilized for the war and restore previous peace conditions, or to improve the social condition of the people in accordance with the pledges of the joint leaders' election manifesto. Mr. Law's handling of the business of the House was, as ever, efficient and conciliatory; but for the greater occasions Mr. Lloyd George returned; and Mr. Law's most outstanding appearance in this session was when he announced that the Government were prepared to adopt the Sankey report in the spirit as well as in the letter, and to take all necessary steps to carry out its recommendations without delay. This was said of the first report, which contained no decision on nationalization; but it was afterwards unfairly alleged by Labour speakers that the Government, by refusing to accept the principle of nationalization, approved in a subsequent report, had broken Mr. Law's pledge. The main business of the session of 1920 was the Irish Home Rule bill, which Mr. Law justified as giving to Ireland the largest measure of self-government compatible with national security and pledges given. He strongly upheld in the House of Commons the measures taken, first by Mr. Macpherson and then by Sir Hamar Greenwood, to restore law and order in that country; and definitely refused to interfere in the case of the Lord Mayor of Cork who, sentenced to imprisonment for conducting a rebel organization, went on hunger-strike and eventually succumbed in gaol. The affection in which Mr. Law was held by the House which he led was shown this session in a peculiarly happy manner. The members, with few exceptions, subscribed to give a wedding present to his daughter on her marriage to Maj.-Gen. Sir F. W. Sykes, Controller-General of Civil Aviation.

Mr. Bonar Law was whole-heartedly in favour of the Coalition, and frequently adjured his Conservative friends to remain true to it. In its cause he sacrificed his health. In March of the following session, that of 1921, while he was in the full swing of his multifarious activities, he suddenly broke down, and was recommended by his medical advisers to abandon his work at once. The shock to the public, to the House of Commons, to his party, and to Mr. Lloyd George was great; and genuine expressions of regret were heard on every side. Mr. Lloyd George seemed almost unmanned in telling the news to the House; and it was clear that he felt that a great prop of his Government had fallen. Mr. Law resigned office, but not his seat for Glasgow. He went away immediately to rest in the south of France; and his health rapidly improved, so that by the autumn he was well again. He married in 1891 Annie Pitcairn, daughter of Harrington Robley, of Glasgow, by whom he had a family; but he was left a widower in 1909. Two sons perished in the World War. (G. E. B.)


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Lawes-Wittewronge, Sir Charles Bennet

LAWES-WITTEWRONGE, SIR CHARLES BENNET, (1843-1911), English sculptor, was born at Teignmouth Oct. 3 1843. The only son of Sir John Lawes of Rothamsted (see ), he was educated at Eton and Cambridge, where he was a notable athlete. Subsequently he devoted himself to sculpture, while doing much also to further the scientific side of the Lawes Agricultural Trust, founded by his father, of which he was chairman. In 1882 he was defendant in a famous libel action, brought by another sculptor, Mr. Belt, for a criticism published in Vanity Fair, imputing dishonesty to Mr. Belt in taking credit for work done by another man. The question of how much a sculptor may be aided by others in work to which he attaches his name was inconclusively debated through a long and costly trial, and the verdict of the jury, awarding £5,000 damages to the plaintiff, was much discussed at the time. He died at Rothamsted, Herts., Oct. 6 1911.


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/96

80


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Lawless, Emily

LAWLESS, EMILY (1845-1913), Irish novelist and poet, was born at Lyons, co. Kildare, June 17 1845. She was the

daughter of the 3rd Baron Cloncurry and wrote a number of novels and verses dealing with Irish life. Of her novels Hurrish (1886), With Essex in Ireland (1890) and Grania (1902) are the most important, and of her verses With the Wild Geese (1902) is the best-known volume. She was given an hon. degree at Dublin University in 1905. She died at Gomshall, Surrey, Oct. 19 1913.


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Lawrence, Thomas Edward

LAWRENCE, THOMAS EDWARD (1888-), British traveller, archaeologist and soldier, was born in Wales Aug. 15 1888, and educated in Jersey and at Dinard as well as at the High School, Oxford, proceeding on to Jesus College, Oxford, and graduating 1st class in modern history 1910. He went the same year to Carchemish on the Euphrates, as assistant in the British Museum's excavation of that ancient Hittite site. There he was still working when the outbreak of the World War and the decision of Turkey to join the Central European Powers put an abrupt stop to all archaeological work and called Lawrence to what proved a wider field. From Oct. to Dec. 1914 he worked at home in a department of the War Office. In 1915 he went to Egypt as a staff captain. The following spring he was in Mesopotamia at Army Headquarters, whence he returned to Cairo as intelligence officer for the Mesopotamia expeditionary force. In the autumn he was attached to the Arab Bureau at Cairo, under Lt.-Comm. D. G. Hogarth, being then a staff captain on the Foreign Office list, not under War Office control. In that capacity he was attached in 1917 to the staff of Gen. Sir F. Wingate, the general in command of the Hejaz expeditionary force. This gave Lawrence his great opportunity. He possessed, to an extraordinary degree, a power of getting into intimate association with the Arabs of the desert, such as has belonged to but one or two of his predecessors in Arabian travel, and he combined with this gift the soldier's instinct and a capacity for leadership which raised him at once to the first rank of commanders in desert warfare. The story of how he raised and led a force of Arabs, which cut the Hejaz railway, pushed forward in the van of Allenby's advancing army and were first into Damascus, is but faintly reflected in the dry official record of his various promotions to major (Aug. 1917) and lieutenant-colonel (1918), when he was transferred to Gen. Allenby's staff.

To decorations and official recognitions he was notoriously indifferent. He was a Prince of Mecca, a Chevalier of the Legion of Honour, the holder of the Croix de Guerre (with palms), the Italian silver medal and various British war medals. But what he cared for was the cause of the Arabs, whom he had learned to know and admire, and for whose interests he pleaded at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. In that year he was demobilized and retired into academic life, being elected to a research fellowship at All Souls College, Oxford. Unofficially he remained in frequent touch with the Emir Faisal; but he did not reëmerge officially until March 1921, when Mr. Winston Churchill, on succeeding Lord Milner at the Colonial Office, appointed Lawrence to be his adviser there on Middle Eastern affairs, with a view to the subsequent creation of a special department dealing with them.


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/485

Rh. There were forty-six carts, each drawn by fourteen to eighteen mules and loaded with over sixty thousand dollars in specie, and pack-animals and carts for the baggage of the escort, and the escort itself consisted of eight hundred men of all arms, viz; five hundred picked infantry, including two companies of Zapodores from the capital, under the immediate command of Major Rocha, nearly three hundred cavalry, and a detachment of artillery with two field-pieces, all under the command of Colonel Lerya of the regular army of Mexico.

The conducta did not take the railway, but marched down the old stage road, via Puebla, and came on, direct, toward Vera Cruz. Their encampment in the streets of Orizaba presented one of the most novel and interesting spectacles imaginable. Each cart had its separate guard, and the whole a general one, which was changed from hour to hour, day and night, with military precision; and whether on the march or in camp, on the wild mountains or in a quiet city like Orizaba, the care and watchfulness was never for a moment relaxed. I have already described the manner of the marching of a detachment of Mexican troops as we saw it between Colima and Guadalajara; but this was a repetition of that scene on a grander and more extended scale.

Of course the conducta was the grand feature of the day, and caused a great excitement, and an unwonted appearance of life in the streets of Orizaba. At night the spectacle, when the troops were preparing their suppers and making ready for the night, was more wild and picturesque than during the day.

In the morning, the long train of treasure-laden carts,


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/486

470 with its advance-guard, rear-guard, and immediate escort was in motion at an early hour, the trumpets and kettle-drums of the different corps filling the air with the harsh, discordant music, even before day-break, and making sleep at our quarters impossible.

Mr. Seward's party were to have been off for Paso del Macho, at 5 o'clock, to meet the special train formerly kept for the special use of Maximilian and his family, and still known as "the Imperial Train," sent up from Vera Cruz, for the occasion; but owing to bungling mismanagement they were delayed until after 7 o'clock, and, of course, compelled to crowd on all speed to make up for lost time. The long train of the conducta was in motion, taking up all the highway, but when word was sent that Mr. Seward was at the rear, it halted and made room for the coach to pass, and the officers and men of each corps presented arms as he went by.

I went down to Vera Cruz ahead of the conducta, passing it on the way, and so had an opportunity of seeing it arrive at its destination and witnessing the final scene. The dangerous Pass of the Chiquihuite having been made successfully, on arriving at Paso del Macho—the western end of the Vera Cruz section of the railway—the cavalry and artillery were dismissed, and the specie transferred to the cars—a special having been provided—and thence went on to Vera Cruz under escort of the infantry only. The two million seven hundred thousand dollars in specie was all packed in coarse sacks of maguey fibre, each sack holding three thousand dollars, and it required twelve closed box, freight-cars to transport it.

When the special train arrived at Vera Cruz the cars


text:
Template:ItSS1923/doc

This template in used for the Index to Short Stories in Index:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu,

Usage

Parameters
(The usage example below may help understand these.)

Usage example
In the example, repeated application with different indentation levels is shown:

title: Template:ItSS1923/doc


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/487

Rh were run down to the Custom House Plaza in front of the entrance to the mole, and there they remained until all the money was shipped on board the steamers for New York and Europe. The American steamer Cleopatra carried about one million on the 10th of January, and the French steamer of the 13th,—owing to a quarrel about charges between the owners of the American steam line and the shippers, I believe—the remainder. Our American steamers ought, in fact, to monopolize the specie-carrying trade of Mexico, and could probably do so with a little effort.

While the cars remained in the plaza the troops were quartered under a portal in front of the train. A guard patrolled on each side of the cars day and night, and a soldier with a loaded musket stood on the roof of each car all the time. The point is further commanded by the guns of San Juan de Ulloa, and the treasure was therefore as safe as gunpowder, balls, and bayonets could make it.

It was, of course, not absolutely necessary to take such extraordinary precautions for the protection of this special conducta in Vera Cruz where all was then quiet; but it is the custom of the Government to require the officers in charge of the escort to see that discipline is never relaxed for a moment, and that all the regulations are carried out to the letter, until the treasure is delivered to consignees in the city, or safely on board the steamers, and then responsibility ceases. The Government gets eight per cent, on every dollar—amounting to two hundred and sixteen thousand dollars on this conducta alone—when it passes through the Custom-House gateway, as export duty, and is bound to afford full protection to the owners.


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/488

472 Much of the silver is delivered to the consignees at their counting houses in the city, and there recounted, and repacked in smaller bags containing but one thousand dollars each. I saw in the house of Schliden & Co., one day, a party of natives at work counting and repacking a half million of these bright new dollars. They get twelve and a half cents for each one thousand dollars which they count and sew up in the new bags, and are very expert in detecting defective or base coin. It is said that when they pour a bag of these dollars upon the table, they will decide in an instant whether they are of the coinage of Zacatecas, Guanajuato, or Mexico, by the difference in the ring of each, though it is wholly imperceptible to the ear of the uninitiated. If the bags are found short the deficit is charged to the shippers at Mexico or Guanajuato; if in excess—and this is not uncommon—the overplus is credited to the shippers.

I have never seen any specie-counters or experts, who, could beat these uneducated Indian-blooded Veracruzanos, save the Chinese experts, who do the same business for the banks in San Francisco, and who can discount the world beyond a doubt.

The scene reminded me of an incident which occurred at the city of Mexico when Gen. Scott entered the capital in triumph. A detachment of Harney's dragoons were quartered in the Palacio National, and before order was fully restored they broke open a room in the Treasury department in which they found a large number of Mexican dollars—fourteen or sixteen large sacks, if memory serves me.

In an instant they went for the coin, and a general scramble took place. One would get a sack upon his


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/489

Rh shoulder, when another would slash it open with a bowie-knife or sword, and the precious pesos would pour down in a shower upon the floor. Another would fill a haversack with them, only to meet with the same treatment. At last they got the doors closed and came to an understanding. All the coin was piled down on the floor, and a fair division made. Then each took his share of the plunder and concealed it around his quarters as best he might. Harney was unable to understand for the time, how it was that this party kept so remarkably quiet and appeared so well satisfied, but after a while the secret leaked out.

A dragoon bought something on the streets, and offered a dollar in payment. The seller—a Mexican of course—touched the coin to his teeth, and returned it respectfully, with the single remark, "Cobre Señor!" Another was offered, and "Cobre Señor!" was still the cry. Another, and another, and still no change. The dragoon smelled a rat, and returned, a sadder and a wiser man, to his quarters. Each of the fortune-finders by himself, tried to buy something, sooner or later, and met with the same discouraging remark.

It turned out that the coin was the plunder of an unauthorized private mint—in fact a bogus-money factory—which had been pounced upon by the Government, and there was not a single dollars worth of genuine silver in the entire pile. A cheaper looking lot of disappointed speculators never congregated in a "played out" Western town, or skedaddled from a base metal camp in one of the Pacific Coast mining districts, than was seen that night among Uncle Sam's boys in the "Palace of the Montezumas."


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/490

R. SEWARD, worn out by the fatigues of the long journey from Manzanillo to the Gulf Coast, remained resting at Orizaba until Tuesday, January 4th, being for the first time in three months in a position to enjoy a little undisturbed quiet.

During his stay he ascended the famous Sierra de Borregas—or mountains of the Sheep—which overlook the city. The ascent of from eight hundred to one thousand feet perpendicularly, was made on foot, and was accomplished by the ex-premier with, apparently, as little fatigue as was experienced by any of the party.

On Sunday, the 2d of January, the party visited the Indian village of Jalapena, in a deep and romantic gorge or canon in the mountains near the source of the Rio Blanco, the stream on which are situated the Falls of Rincon Grande, described in the last chapter. The inhabitants paid Mr. Seward every possible attention, and the visit, though devoid of startling incident, was a very pleasant one to the party.

On the Monday following, a deputation of the simple Indians came down to Orizaba, to present Mr. Seward with a curiously carved and stained cane, of a peculiar wood growing by the banks of the Blanco. This cane is of a single piece of wood, and the handle represents an eagle's foot with extended talons, very


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/491

Rh artistically carved by a native and wholly untutored artist. Among the hundreds of presents, many of which are very valuable, received by Mr. Seward in California and Mexico, I doubt if any will give him more pleasure than this.

I have already described the road from Orizaba to Vera Cruz. The Seward party was overtaken a few miles below Orizaba, by Joseph Branniff, the railway contractor's superintendent, who was going down to Paso del Macho, with a light buggy drawn by two fast mules. Mr. Seward accepted a seat with Mr. Branniff in this carriage, and they went over the seventeen leagues at a pace, which, if it did not endanger the necks of the party, at least, gave Mr. Seward a shaking which he will remember to the end of his life.

The magnificent scenery of the Chiquihuite Pass delighted him more than anything which he had seen since the Barranca de Beltran, and so reminded him of the scenery of Africa as to cause him to remark, that it only wanted a lion or two by the road-side to complete the picture, and make the illusion perfect. There are plenty of tigers lurking in the chaparral along this road, and the number of way-side crosses ought to be good evidence that they have a very satisfactory substitute for lions.

The work of constructing the railway at this point is truly herculean and reminds one of that upon the Central Pacific Railroad, where it passes over the summit of the Sierra Nevada. It is described as follows, in a late number of the Diario Oficial of the City of Mexico:

"After leaving the station of Paso del Macho, the road passes, by means of a bridge three hundred feet


text:
Page:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu/492

476 long and one hundred feet nigh, that immense neck of land which separates the base of the first level portion of the Cordilleras from the plains of the terra caliente, or the hot country. This bridge, the mason-work of which is entirely finished, only lacks the iron floor in order to be open to the public. Having passed this great work, we arrive, by a series of curves as boldly as scientifically run, at the great bridge of San Alejo, which is not as high as that of Paso de Macho, but several feet longer. From San Alejo to Chiquihuite there is nothing but deep cuts through the solid rock, and enormous terrepleins, making the great inequalities of that broken ground entirely disappear. Chiquihuite Bridge, which is over three hundred feet long, is elevated more than one hundred and fifty feet above that abyss, where the foaming, cold stream that gives its name to this part of the mountain, forever leaps and boils. The boldest spirit would not suspect the real tours de force conceived in the running of this road accomplished by the skill of Mr. Buchanan, and completed under the direction of Mr. Branniff, chief of construction.

"On leaving the bridge, the road follows the main highway for some distance, by a terreplein of sixty feet high, supported by a wall ten feet thick, and suddenly, as in the shifting of scenes in a theatre, the road runs around the mountain, suspended on its sides. It was necessary to cut it through solid rock, of which the side of this mountain is composed. The laborers engaged in this unequal piece of work have to hold on to the rocks, and are held up by ropes, which makes them resemble, at a distance, bees in a honey-comb. The road continues for about one hundred metres along