less of local crop-failures. This year is not an exception to the rule, but, after we strike the half-bushel off, we have enough and plenty to spare for everyone, both at home and abroad.

Theorists, agitators, and cranks try, and in a great measure have succeeded in sowing tares among the honest, hard-working people of our country, which bear fruit in discontent, strife, and riots. The great mass of our producers never have had in this country so much to eat, drink, and wear as they are enjoying at the present time.

Practically the growing season for 1895 has come to a close. In the main it has proved to be a very successful one. This is not the time or place to discuss the question which is best— bounteous crops at low prices, or average crops at high prices. It is a great satisfaction to know, no matter what the price may be, be it either great or small, that there is an abundance of nearly everything, and plenty to spare. the nation develops and the country grows, it does not seem to be any trouble to make crops, as science and machinery have put it within our power to increase our yields, and a cropfailure of the whole country is almost an impossibility.

As

The gigantic strides in farm machinery and all the appliances connected with moving and handling our vast crops has been reduced almost to a science. Farming is no longer a drudgery, and I take the position that no class of people who are obliged to earn their living by the sweat of their brow, accomplish it with so little friction or exertion of muscle, and it is hardly fair any longer to denominate this class of our people as "sons of toil."

WINTER WHEAT.

What has the country done this season? The first crop that comes to us every year is the winter wheat, grown almost exclusively in the states of Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri and Kansas. The crop this season has been a poor one both in quantity and quality. The causes which have brought about these results have been varied and can be attributed in the main to a dry winter and spring, with more or less development of insect life. Probably never, in the history of this crop, have final results been as disappointing as this season. Yet every cloud has its silver lining. Growers of winter wheat have been compensated this season by seeing the reserves of their old crops thoroughly cleaned up, and while the present is not reassuring, the future looks bright for the winter-wheat growers as well as the millers.

The paucity of this crop is made apparent from the fact that a large proportion of the winter-wheat mills of the country stand idle today for the want of wheat to grind. This strange situation would have been detrimental to the general interests in the winter-wheat belt had it not been for the fact that the winterwheat states do not depend exclusively upon this crop for their sources of wealth and rev

enue.

SPRING WHEAT.

The spring-wheat crop is grown almost exclusively in the Dakotas and in Minnesota, the acreage in the latter state growing smaller

every year, while in the Dakotas, on the contrary, it increases. It is an idea we often hear expressed, "When wheat is so low, why do the farmers continue to grow it?" I simply answer that question by asking, "What else would you expect a class of farmers to do who have been induced to go into a region eminently adapted in every way for the growing of this crop?" They simply are forced to do it, or quit.

The greatest efforts ever made to settle any region of this country and greatest inducements offered to emigrants, were made to thousands and tens of thousands of foreigners to come over and help us break up our vast unoccupied lands and compete with "American industry. "I think they have successfully accomplished their job.

The spring-wheat crop of 1895 has been variously estimated by statisticians at a very wide range of figures. The consensus of opinion is that in volume it is a large one; in quality, very badly mixed; and a very unsatisfactory crop to handle. The nature of things is such that the producers are shipping it very freely. Growers of spring wheat, as a class, are men of moderate means and hand-to-mouth farmers, and their year's work centers upon the success or the failure of a crop, and their circumstances are such that the price at harvest cuts practically no figure with them. They throw it upon the market just as fast as they can thresh it, procure teams to haul it and find cars to send it to the grain centers. This work is now going on; in fact, at its height. Without pretending to have any foresight as to future prices of wheat, with the situation which exists in our wheat markets in this country at the present time, the failure of the winterwheat crop and the poor quality of the springwheat crop must make a great demand and at good prices for every bushel of spring wheat grown, at home, irrespective of foreign markets.

THE OAT CROP.

The next crop which the country gathered this season and made a great success of, so far as quantity is concerned, was the oat crop. The magnitude of this crop exceeds in bushels that of the spring and winter wheat combined, and an average yield is nearly fifty per cent. of that of an average corn crop Agricultural machinery has enabled us to increase our acreage, put it in very cheaply, harvest it, and put it on the market with very little manual labor or

expense.

In the older states, in acreage, it nearly equals that of corn, for the reason that it enables the farmer to rotate his crops, plow and prepare the ground for another season. It also brings ready money to the farmer at a time of year when it is always acceptable. Probably no state in the nation grows more oats than the state of Illinois. While the crop this season is a large one, it did not average per acre the yield of 1894, which was a phenomenal one.

Iowa comes next in yield, and the state of Nebraska is a close third. These three states are not only large consuming states, but every season have very large surpluses of oats to throw upon the market. The Dakotas and Minnesota also, next to wheat and barley, give large acreages every year to this crop. As they

grow but little corn, the oat crop in these states is nearly all consumed at home. The introduction of electricity and the bicycle threatens very seriously to interfere in the near future, if it does not even now, with the general consumption of the oat crop. The movement of oats since harvest has not been very large, when we take into consideration the magnitude of the crop. It is generally conceded that the low price now ruling is the one great factor which prevents farmers from throwing their oats on the market at the present time.

CORN IS KING.

Now we come to the crop of crops. Corn is king. While we hear always a great deal of talk in the speculative world, and, in fact, the world at large, about the wheat crop, a failure of the wheat crop never begins to bring to us such universal distress and bad years of business as the failure of a crop of corn.

This has been preeminently a corn year. While it has had several very close calls, yet at ever crisis something has turned up which has bridged the chasm and we have finally landed, safe on the golden shore. The season has been such a remarkable one, and at the same time one of such great extremes, that I do not think it out of place to attempt to diagnose some of the causes which have brought us, through wind and weather, such happy results.

The winter of 1893 and '94 was a dry one. The ground froze very deep. There had also been prepared a much larger area of fall plowing than usual, incidental upon the large acreage of oats which had been grown, the previous season, enabling the farmer to take advantage of this situation. The spring of 1895 was an early and a very dry one, and the universal reports while the crops of the country were going into the ground, were that "the ground was never in better condition." "It breaks up like an ash-heap." "Crops have been put into the ground in excellent shape."

We had just rain enough to give the corn a good start. Everything either sown or planted in the spring, made phenomenal growth until the 13th and 20th of May, when the crops received a sudden and severe set-back by killing frosts. After the crops recovered they made rapid strides, notwithstanding we had a dry summer, and the oat crop never matured with as little rain as it did this season.

The gist of the whole matter is this, that the pulverization of the soil by a dry and freezing winter, accompanied by the dry season, germinated every seed that was sown and put life and vigor into the grain; hence the crops seemed to be able to withstand all the extremes and hardships they were called to encounter during the time of their growth, and have brought themselves to a successful termination.

To say that the corn crop of 1895 has matured successfully and promises now in bushels to give the country a phenomenal yield, is a statement that bare figures cannot convey. A bushel of wheat simply means so much flour. It is converted into practically nothing else, and when it is barreled up and sent forth on its errand to feed and sustain the world, it has accomplished its mission; but the uses, and we might say abuses, to which corn is put, are many and varied. It is not only bread, but

promises this winter, in many parts of our country, to be fuel. The corn belt proper consists of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Kentucky and Tennessee. For the last few years Illinois has become a diversified state so far as her crops are concerned a system of agriculture which has added greatly to her permanent wealth. Her corn crop this season, with very few exceptions in certain localities, promises to be the largest crop she has ever made, and the question, "What shall I do with it?" is already beginning to bother her.

I do not think we need to spend much thought as to its disposal; the great thing is to grow it and see it safely housed in its little crib. In the northern part of Illinois corn is now almost universally used for feeding hogs and cattle. The amount which was sold and shipped out of the state in its natural condition (by that I mean shelled) bears a very small percentage to the total amount of the crop grown.

Illinois also converts a great deal of her corn into glucose and whisky. Iowa has been very successful this season with her corn. There are a few counties where dry weather has reduced the yield of the crop, but she also will come to the front this fall with the largest crop she has ever produced. Iowa is a very large hog and cattle state, and at the same time a large exporter of corn. The corn crop of Nebraska, in 1894, was practically a total failure. Hence, the conditions this season in that state, as to the final outcome of the corn, have been watched with more than usual interest.

Nebraska has suffered this season, in the eastern and southern portions of the state, more or less, from severe drouth, and while the crop promises to be a good and large one, yet it will not come up to the anticipations and prospects that it gave for a full return early in the season.

Missouri is also a great corn state. It ships out very little corn, however, the great bulk of it finding its way into food for stock of all kinds -cattle, hogs, mules and horses.

Kansas, this season, thinks, and no doubt she has every reason to, that she is going to give the country the largest crop of corn she ever made in a single year. This state is always a large shipper of corn, a vast amount generally finding its way into southern markets.

I now come back again to Ohio and Indiana. Ohio has suffered some from drouth this season. She does not, however, pay as much attention to or make corn a specialty. She has no reason to complain of her corn crop this season. Indiana is preeminently a corn state, and has also, under many trials, largely those of drouth, been able to keep her position and fill the place she justly deserves as a great corn-producing State.

We must not forget that Kentucky and Tennessee have made the largest crop of corn in their history. This corn is consumed almost exclusively at home, being converted into horses, cattle and hogs.

I have tried to take you as concisely as possible over the wheat, oat and corn belts of the country, and without the use of figures to give you, not a statistical, but a practical idea of the immensity of the crop and let you imagine for yourselves the vast benefits it will bring, not only to sections, but to the country at large.

S. THORNTON K. PRIME.

Those rules of society which regulate the relations between individuals constitute government. Every individual's conduct is of two kinds--that which concerns himself only and that which concerns his fellow-men.

When Alexander Selkirk lived alone on his desolate island, he was bound by all the laws affecting his personal character that he was subject to when in civilization. He was obliged to follow the dictates of his conscience, and, although his sphere of personal action was narrow and his responsibility in a sense limited, yet so far as it existed he was bound by it. Outside the realm of pure morals he was a law unto himself, since there were no persons there whose rights he could personally invade. But when he took the man Friday to live with him, the whole situation was changed. A condition of society existed. Although Selkirk was of the most civilized race, he was bound by certain duties to the untutored savage, whose rights he was obliged to respect. It is true that, so far as his moral nature was concerned, there was no difference in the situation; but as to his general sphere of action he was bound by laws that were more or less clearly defined.

The savage, Friday, was entitled to life, liberty and comfort in so far as he did not invade Selkirk's rights, and the converse was equally true. Selkirk could not beat his newly acquired comrade unless as a salutary regulation for their mutual good. He could not make Friday do all the work while he enjoyed all the benefits of that labor. Each was equally entitled to his share of the proceeds of their mutual labor. Each had rights that must be respected, and these rights were that the other should do his duty. We are speaking now in a purely theoretical sense. Every principle of government that would properly regulate the intercourse between these two is applicable to the largest and most civilized nation.

The necessity of government arises from the fact that man is, by nature,

gregarious, or social, and from the further fact that, except in the crudest state of barbarism, he cannot maintain himself without dependence on others (E. B., Vol. XIV. 354-367). There have been hermits who have lived an almost animal existence, entirely apart from society. There are tribes which exist, or have existed, in a degraded condition, with very few regulations; but those only emphasize the fact that man, as a rule, has lived in communities, and in established relations with his fellows. As civilization has progressed the regulations have become more complex and more clearly defined. In the African jungle, where people subsist largely on wild fruits and game, a very simple form of government would suffice; and yet, in these communities, we often find a very complicated system, and one which is more strictly enforced than in more civilized communities, where there is often constant evasion of, and disrespect for, the laws.

We can get at the nature and growth of government fairly well by assuming a possible case. Imagine a shipload of emigrants, of various nationalities, on board an English vessel bound for Australia. While on shipboard, all are under the laws of the British Government, exactly as if they were in London. Under these laws, the captain of the vessel is the absolute master of all on board. He can shoot any person he pleases in case of mutiny, or in case of an attempt to destroy the ship. He is the executive, legislative, and judicial power over all on board, subject only to the laws of Great Britain, which give him ample powers in the premises. Should he become crazed, however, the second in command can forcibly take charge of the vessel, and put the captain in irons. In extreme cases, where the captain has exceeded authority, and seems bent on a line of action likely to result in the destruction of the lives of those on board, he can, in like manner, be superseded, and similarly, the third in command can displace the second, and so on; but in such cases the action is subject to review of the courts when port is made. In case the captain dies, or is disabled, and the pas

sengers fear for their safety on the ground that the second in command cannot properly conduct them to port, they may (and have done so) elect one of their own number to take charge of the vessel. In this case it must be clearly shown afterwards that it was absolutely for the good of all concerned that the usual laws should thus be set aside. Otherwise those who wrested the power from the proper authority are liable to be held for conspiracy, if not for mutiny.

But we will pass from this point to the main one in question. The ship, containing two hundred souls of a dozen nations is, to all intents and purposes, English soil. We will suppose that a storm arises, the vessel is blown out of her course and is wrecked on an uninhabited island; one not charted, and so far out of the ordinary course of vessels that it is apparent that the shipwrecked people have years, perhaps a lifetime, ahead of them on this spot. A new condition of affairs immediately arises. They are no longer on English soil. The captain no longer has authority over the crew or the passengers, and some entirely new arrangement must be made for the government of a community in which all have an equal interest. In an earlier age some one of the party, by means of his natural strength and capacity for leadership, might, by mere force, assume authority and compel obedience to his commands. The community would then become a despotism. Or, the oldest and most representative of the men might take upon themselves the conduct of affairs, each having a following of families and friends. This would approach the patriarchal system. But in this day it is likely that a general conference would be held and certain evidently proper men, representing all interests, would be chosen to conduct affairs, with one man as executive head, leaving certain matters of great importance to a general council. This would be a representative form of government; the one most prevalent in civilization. Certain manifestly necessary rules would be adopted, and these would be altered or extended as experience would make necessary. One can see that a system founded on justice could easily be established and continue as long as the governing power derived its authority from "the just consent of the governed." Differences might

arise requiring compromises below the ideal of government, and a secession of dissatisfied persons might take place and two governments be set up. There might be strife and even war between them, until time had shown that an adjustment should take place, when the two communities might resolve themselves into a confederacy which would leave to each particular group the conduct of affairs not affecting the other, while both should be governed by laws in which both were equally interested. This state of affairs, extended, would approach to the federation of States which constitute our Union.

Law is defined as a rule of action. It is essential in every concern of life that there be some regulation. That which concerns man's relation to the state, no matter what his condition or the nature of the government, is generally termed "The Law," in distinction from those rules which guide other forms of conduct. It is only in recent times that there has been any scientific application of law. Formerly it was purely experimental and indeterminate. Its growth has now brought us to a point where we may consider it critically as an institution.

Law is of two kinds—that which is written, called statutory, under which term may be included not only the acts of legislative bodies, but the fundamental law, when written, as in the case of our own Constitution. But there is another element which, in England (and until recently in America), prevails to a large extent, called Common Law. This is made up of the ancient customs and fixed usages of the people put into concrete form by the decisions of judges. It is based on common sense and is merely the application of general principles to particular cases. It has in this country been largely supplemented by special statutes, but still is an important factor in legal affairs. For instance, under common law, the keeper of an inn (hotel of any kind) is responsible for the goods of his guest against loss from any source whatever except that caused by acts of God or the common enemy.

This is not a matter of statute regulation, but it is based on abstract justice, and it has been established by a long series of opinions, and one can easily see the propriety of it. The guest at an inn is a stranger; he has not the means to protect his goods as at his own

home; a thief may enter his room, or fire may break out and he lose his goods from no fault of his own. He reposes absolute confidence in the innkeeper, pays him for entertainment, and is entitled to be protected in his property under ordinary circumstances. But it is evident that if lightning strike the inn and destroy his goods, or a tornado demolish it -these being called acts of God-or it be captured in time of war by the enemy, the loss cannot be charged to the innkeeper, because he could not prevent, in any way, the loss. But against loss from all other sources the innkeeper has been held responsible even to the extent that, in a most celebrated case, where a man applied for a room at an inn but got none, as all were taken, and who then left his satchel in the office and went into the barroom and took a drink, and on returning found that some one had stolen his satchel, the court held that the innkeeper was responsible for the loss, as he kept a house of public entertainment to which the public was invited, and he must protect the property even of a man who only took a glass of liquor on the premises. This is an extreme case, but is of interest as showing how the common law works.

This law holds good in this country. except where it has been changed by statute. Most states require an innkeeper to maintain a safe for valuables in which the guests may place small articles of value, and the innkeeper is responsible for such valuables only when they have been committed to his safe-keeping. Thus, if, in most states, a man takes his watch to his room and a thief steals the watch and his trousers, the guest can recover the value of his trousers, but not of his watch, which he should have placed in the safe. But the statute also provides that the innkeeper is liable if he has not placed in a conspicuous place, in every guest-room, the fact that a safe is in the office for the purpose. This statute has grown out of experience. In an early day, when inns were small and the dangers fewer, the principle of the common law was held ample; but, experience showing that the risks had very greatly increased, and that the innkeeper was not willing to assume responsibility without charging the guest insurance in the shape of higher rates for entertainment, the statute was enacted as being just to both parties. In any action brought for

the recovery of goods lost at an inn, the innkeeper must show that he has complied with the statute; failing that, the principle of the common law applies, and he must pay the loss.

But suppose the innkeeper should visit the same man who recovered for his loss in the inn, and spend the night at his house as a free guest, and a thief should steal his watch and trousers; in this case the innkeeper would have no redress at law, since the private citizen did not keep a public house, was not licensed and gave no guarantee for the safety of the goods of his guest.

This example is given here because it shows the difference between common and statute law, and involves principles which pervade all just government, as we shall see farther on.

Some sort of government being a necessity, it is made possible by the fact that man is usually docile, is amenable to discipline and as a rule loves order. Furthermore, there is instinctive in the great mass of mankind a desire to be led. Few men desire, or are competent for leadership in any walk of life, while the great mass are imbued with hero-worship. If by nature every man desired to become a leader, it is evident there could be no government. It is in the acquiescence of the many in the rule of the few that government has its greatest strength. The great mass of men would "rather bear the ills they have than fly to others that they know not of.” It is evident, from a thousand instances, that men have maintained themselves in leadership of a most brutal sort by more than mere brute force. The master of a hundred slaves is constantly at the mercy of those who may choose to wreak vengeance; and yet, not only have insurrections of such kind been few, but there have been thousands of instances where men have submitted to be tortured and slain when they might easily have slain their tormentors. There is something in the working of the established order of things that is a powerful force in its own maintenance. "Discipline," says Carlyle, "is the greatest miracle in the world."

While we are to discuss the principles of government, it must be remembered that no government of importance has ever been founded upon pure theory. It is a matter of experience, and though our present civilization presents a great ad