would be public officials instead of private ones.

9. No doubt great difficulties must attend the resumption, by mankind at large, of their rights to the soil. The question of compensation to existing proprietors is a complicated one-one that perhaps cannot be settled in a strictly equitable manner. Meanwhile, in our tender regards for the vested interests of the few, let us not forget that the rights of the many are in abeyance; let us remember that the injustice inflicted on the mass of mankind, is an injustice of the gravest nature. Men may by-aud-by learn that to deprive others of their rights to the use of the earth, is to commit a crime inferior only in wickedness to the crime of taking away their lives or personal liberties.

THE LAND-QUESTION.

A REPORT OF L. BUCHNER.

The 16th of September, in 1888, an association for land-reform, in Frankfort, was organized, to which many gentlemen from all parts of Germany, also from Holland and Switzerland joined. The standpoint of the association is, in general, that of Henry George, who, by his renowned book on "Progress and Poverty," revived the very old question. The purpose of the association is to enlighten the public mind in regard to the fundamental cause of the economical distress of many people. It sees it, principally, in the uneven distribution of soil, and in the accumulation of enormous riches which private persons collect by interests and ground rents, without working themselves. Sec, 1 of the statutes details how, as the annual savings bear new interests, hereby an increasing deficiency originates in the use of national and iuternational goods, which the needy masses are not able to make up, because they

must raise the continually increasing tributes of interests and rents for the growing property of their creditors and landlords, who employ their revenues less and less for the purchase of consumable objects. The opportunity of work hereby becomes more and more difficult; the struggle for it is sharpened, and so the fact of increasing need and of the want of employment can be explained. At the same time, the capacity to generate more wealth and the possibility of affluence is more growing.

In order to emerge from this abyss, the association demands the abolition of the right to sell and invest land, and to return to the usage of the ancient Germans according to which the soil of Germany belonged to the German nation, and only this, in its single tribes, possessed the right to dispose of the land. It was in the course of the discussion at large expounded that the ancient German right was, by degrees, supplanted by the Roman right, which gave too much way to the right of private property, while the highest principle of natural right must be that the soil on which we are born and have to live must be the common property of all, as well as the air which we breathe. If it were possible to occupy the air like land, it would have been done long ago, and the poor, or he who comes too late would find neither a place where to put his head, nor where he could breathe, except if he were willing to give the faculties which Nature has conferred upon him in bondage to the monopolist of soil and air.

The speaker of the association continued to say that it is, in his opinion, a crying injustice that the increasing worth the soil gains in or close to thriving cities, or in the neighborhood of railroads and factories becomes

a profit solely to single persons who own it by mere accident, while this worth is only the result of the activity and industry of all or many, and, therefore, ought to be of profit to all or to the commonwealth. This point of the discussion seemed to the convention to be so important and evident that they resolved to fix their entire attention on it, while the reform of land possession could only in a far distant time be expected. It cannot be thought of it before people, generally, are convinced that such a measure is just and necessary. To the contrary, it will not be difficult to convince governments and legislative bodies of the injustice of the mentioned enhancement of worth in private hands, and to cause a corresponding legislation.

Louis Buchner, the celebrated author of the work "Matter and Force," was president of the association. It elected a secretary and constituted a periodical to be the organ of its further transactions.

A SPEECH ON THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN.

(Delivered before the Liberal League in San Jose, 1879.)

THE WIFE IS INFERIOR IN POLITICAL RIGHTS. FELLOW-CITIZENS :

In olden times the wife was entirely subject to man; she was the slave of her husband. If a man wanted a wife, she was robbed by him, or sold to him by her father. In England till the last century, she was given away by the father; a bad custom which the poets often assailed in their plays; it is now fallen in disuse. Woman ought to be as free as men: By nature their rights ought to be equal, for women belong, like men, to mankind; both have the like nature, the like destination, and, in general, the like faculties. But, they

say, the Christian religion restored the wife to her just rights. No, for on her wedding day she has to avow obedience to her husband. She is denied the right of suffrage, though she has to pay taxes. But without representation there is no right of taxation-a principle for which our forefathers fought the Revolutionary

war.

"BUT IN A FAMILY ONE RULER IS WANTED."

But it is claimed, that in a family one person must be the ruler. It is not so in every association, not in partnership. Do husbands not boast that wives are their better halves? Why, then, do they preclude them from the use of equal rights? The equality of married persons is not only the sole mode of justice to both sides, but also necessary for their happiness and for the moral cultivation of mankind. The family should be a school of sympathy in equality, of living together in love, without power on one side and obedience on the other; this it ought to be between the parents; it would then be a model to the children. I have no relish for the doctrine: "what is mine, is yours," but: "what is yours, is not mine." In most Constitutions of our country equality of rights of property is already secured to woman; in this way also girls cannot be entrapped by wooers who propose for the sole purpose of getting their money.

The arrangement by which the man earns the income, and the wife superintends the domestic expenditure, seems in general the most suitable division of labor.

SPECIAL DUTIES OF THE WIFE.

Besides, the special part of the wife is the physical suffering of bearing children, and the whole responsibil ity of their care and education in early years; indeed she takes her fair share, or usually takes the larger. I avow that my parents are my greatest benefactors, but,

if I must distinguish between them I would say that my mother was my greater benefactor. And still, though my father enjoys every constitutional right, my mother is denied the right of suffrage. Is this legal justice?

"BUT WOMEN ARE UNFIT, BY NATURE, FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND HIGHER PERFORMANCES OF MIND."

But, they object, "women are unfit for public affairs." The same law which excludes unfit men excludes unfit women; at least a FEW will be fit. Can a woman not be a Homer, an Aristotle, Michael Angelo, or a Beethoven? She can be a Queen Elizabeth, an Empress Maria Theresa, a Deborah, a Joan of Arc. "Well, but after all, men have larger brains than women." This fact is doubtful, nay, its assertion is untrue, according to the doctrine of many celebrated physicians. They say this: "Woman's body has less dimensions. Comparatively, women have as much brain as men. In the weight of male and female brain there is, comparatively no diflerence." Besides, it may be said that the hrain of women is finer, that their blood circulates quicker to the brain; their brain is sooner exhausted, but, too, is sooner recovering itself.

OPINIONS OF CELEBRATED MEN ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

OF STUART MILL.-But I will not urge further my opinion; I wish to present the verdict of highly celebrated authorities on women's rights. Plato, the renowned Greek philosopher, two thousand years ago, taught the doctrine that both sexes ought to be free. Permit me to quote, a few passages from the famous book of Stuart Mill, "Subjection of Women." Says he: "Women are not capable for the lucrative occupations and the high social functions. Are women less gifted