can go direct to his employer, which would be a somewhat unusual proceeding here."

Mr. Steadman, writing in the same sense, says: "No doubt the best factories and workshops are far better than our own. Workmen are treated as men by their employers, who are always accessible to their men, and in most cases have far better opportunities for promotion than in this country, and are not subject to the same supervision. Thousands of Englishmen are employed, and in many cases hold positions of trust at good salaries. Taken as a whole, the Americans do not turn out better work than ourselves; in fact, to give my honest opinion, I do not consider it so good. As everywhere else, there are good and bad firms."

On the other hand, a dissentient note is sounded by Mr. James Cox, of the Associated Iron and Steel Workers, who says that he does not think the relations between employers and employed in the iron trade are better than they are in Great Britain; in wages disputes, they have much to learn from Great Britain.

V. THE INFERIOR MORALITY OF BRITISH WORKMEN, It is to the credit of the twenty-two trade-unionists that they bear unhesitating testimony to the superiority of the morality of the American workmen to those of Great Britain. Mr. Holmshaw calls attention to the remarkable fact that although there is no religious education in America, secular education there produces results that outwardly, at any rate, bear comparison with the British. There is a remarkable absence of bad language in the streets. This was particularly noticeable in the Saturday night crowds. It is not only outwardly that the Americans are more moral than the British.

Mr. Ashton finds that "gambling on horse-racing, etc., does not enter so largely into the life of the American workmen as into that of the English workmen.” He goes on to say that he "considers the American workmen more sober than the English workmen, and this is quite clear in every industrial center where a visitor may spend some time." This means, as explained in Mr. Holmshaw's report, that "it is unusual to see intoxicated men in the streets." In another part of his report, Mr. Holmshaw remarks:

"It is undoubtedly true that there is less drinking among American workmen than we find among our own. This applies not only to native Americans, but to Englishmen settled in America, who speedily fall into the accepted customs of the country. The workmen in the States commence work in the morning to time, and work steadily through the day. The Sheffield workman works harder than the American, and, of course, is in many cases equally sober; but it cannot be denied that there are many instances where the fatal drinking habits result in great waste of time, and consequent annoyance to the employer. The cause and remedy for this are, perhaps, the most serious questions that could engage the attention of the Sheffield manufacturer. Personally, I believe-especially after this brief glance at American workshops-that some of our obsolete customs of workshop management are at the root of this deplorable state of things. Enforced loss of men's time for trivial causes through no fault of their own too often gives the opportunity for leaving work which would otherwise not be sought."

The proof of the pudding is the eating thereof, and it is rather odd that betting and intemperance should thrive in the land of denominational education and be

almost eliminated in a country whose education is frankly secular.

VI.-IMPROVED MACHINERY.

It seems, however, that American workmen favor machinery more than British workmen do. "Indeed, here lies the distinctive feature of American industry," says Mr. Barnes,-"namely, the hankering after the latest machinery and best methods of working which pervade American industrialism." Other members of the commission declare that the workman in the States welcomes machinery more readily than the workman in Great Britain, and Mr. Mosely shows that labor-saving machinery is encouraged by the trade-unions and welcomed by the men, because experience has shown them that machinery is their best friend. He is very emphatic on this point, holding that the eagerness to adopt the latest machinery in America has saved the workman enormous manual exertion, raised his wages, tended toward a higher standard of life, and increased rather than diminished the number of men employed.

VII.-AMERICAN WORKMEN NOT "DRIVEN."

The statements made under this head will surprise most English readers. These have believed that one great element of American success was the fact that American workmen were driven at a tremendous pace. This delusion is dispelled by the report of the Mosely Commission. Mr. Barnes directly contradicts the assertion that American workmen operate two or three machines each. He also denies that piecework is general in America. Mr. T. Ashton, of the Operative Cotton Spinners, comes to a different conclusion.

"I don't think that the American workmen do more work in their early manhood than the English workmen, but they worry their minds more about what they have got to do, and this, combined with their hurryscurry system of getting through their work, may have the effect of deteriorating their physical powers and causing their working years to be shortened. The American workmen are thrown out of employment at an earlier age than the English workmen, and this is the opinion of all the workmen I conversed with upon the subject." Mr. Flynn says American employers believe that machines rather than men or women ought to be driven, and the clever workman who, by invention or suggestion, enables his employer to carry out this ideal is encouraged in a manner delightfully real and sincere.

Thus, Mr. P. Watts, of the National Federation of Blast-Furnace Men, though he admits American superiority in the machinery used in his trade, failed to find evidence of the American workman running machinery at high pressure. The skilled men at the furnaces are mostly British; the unskilled are Poles, Scandinavians, and Italians-men of small stature and poor physique. "In the barrow-fitting department I did not see a man who could work beside a British blast-furnace man for a single shift." He looked in vain for the extraordinary "hustling" of which one so often reads.

In most cases, the hours of labor were found to be longer than in England, and holidays fewer, while wages in all cases were very much higher, in some of the trades twice the English figure. Piecework is common, but where weekly wages are paid, the men, according to Mr. Ashton, who is supported by those of his colleagues referring to the subject, "appear to act on the principle of giving a fair day's work for a fair day's wage, and in my opinion personal energy and initiative meet with fair reward from the employers."

Neither are the American workmen worked to death at an early age. Then, again, as Mr. Barnes points out, the American manager is more enterprising than the English manager, and more ready to introduce the latest and best of everything; he is a man who works hard himself, often the first in the workshop and the last out. Mr. Barnes, whose report is one of the most exhaustive and impartial in the book, agrees with Mr. Steadman that the American factories turn out work "qualitatively inferior to British work."

VIII. THE COMPARATIVE WELL-BEING.

Mr. Mosely, as will have been seen from the passage before quoted, believes that American workmen are better housed, better fed, and better clothed. But Mr. Barnes does not seem to be quite so sure about that. He says:

"The American workmen are better housed, but rents are much higher, in many instances double what they are in England. Underclothing and a coarser kind of clothes and boots are no dearer than here, but good outside clothing is from 40 to 50 per cent. higher. Food costs about the same as in England. After careful investigation, I came to the conclusion that, comparing wages and the cost of living, there is at least an average of 25 per cent. in favor of the American workman. A careful, sober man can undoubtedly save more money

than in England, and, judging from the range of our observations, heavy drinking is far from being customary. Betting on horse-racing is practically unknown to the American workman."

As a consequence of the high wages, Mr. Mosely says the average married man owns his own house. Mr. Barnes agrees, and adds what will make his fellowengineers at home marvel: "It is quite an exception for a man to pay rent to a landlord." Where rents are paid, however, they are very much higher than in English towns, and this fact is adduced by Mr. J. Cox, of the Associated Iron and Steel Workers, in explanation of the effort made by American workmen to buy their own houses. In large cities, the flat system prevails more than it does in England, and, according to Mr. Holmshaw, the average American workman is not housed any better than the average English workman. Mr. Hornidge, of the Boot and Shoe Operatives, declares that "so far as domestic comfort is concerned, we could give them points."

Women workers seem to be much better paid than they are in England. In one office, in Chicago, visited by Mr. Bowerman, of the London Society of Compositors, he found the women typesetters receiving the same wages as the men, but in the government printing office in Washington the women were paid two dollars a day as against four dollars paid to the men.

A

CCORDING to the dates still religiously printed at the head of each column on every page in the Bible appointed to be read in our churches, the world, with its satellites, the sun, the moon, and the stars, was created 4,004 years before the birth of Christ; 2,349 years before our era, the whole human race, with the exception of Noah and his family, was destroyed by a flood. In 1921 B.C., Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees for Canaan. In 1491 B.C., the Children of Israel made their famous exodus from Egypt; in the same year, the Ten Commandments, inscribed by the finger of God on tables of stone, were brought down from Sinai, and forty years later Moses died, having before that date written out the first five books of the Bible which bear his name.

To this day, it is probable that the majority of those who attend church on Sunday accept this chronology as part of the Word of God, a devoutly inspired and historically accurate narrative of the beginnings of the history of mankind.

THE DATES OF OTHER CODES.

Of late years, scholars dissecting the writings which are known as the Word of God, and subjecting them to critical analysis in philological crucibles, have made sad havoc with the simple faith of earlier times. Without entering into details or going into matters of controversy, it is now held by orthodox scholars that the earliest period to which we can date back the first written fragments of the law is the tenth century before Christ, or nearly five hundred years after the death of Moses.

*The Oldest Code of Laws in the World. The code of laws promulgated by Khammurabi, King of Babylon, B.C. 2285-2242." Translated by C. H. W. Johns, M.A. (T. & T. Clark, London.)

LAWS IN THE
IN THE WORLD.*

Whoever wrote the "five books of Moses," Moses did not. The dates at which they were compiled vary, some coming down as late as the sixth or seventh century before Christ. But even when the higher criticism had done its worst, the laws of Moses were still primus inter pares among the ancient codes of the world. The Institutes of Manu do not pretend to go back beyond the tenth century, and they were first said to have been seen by any one in the fourth century. The laws of the Twelve Tables of the ancient Romans were engraved in brass 450 B.C. Confucius flourished in the sixth century. Solon framed the laws of Athens about 600, and Lycurgus those of Sparta in 800.

The Hebrew code, therefore, still had a respectable claim to primacy among all the laws framed in the name of God for the guidance and governance of men.

THE ANTIQUITY OF THE KHAMMURABI CODE. It is, however, no longer possible to claim for the Decalogue and the Levitical Law the pride of place which has for so many centuries been regarded as their incontestable right. Recent discoveries made by diligent diggers in Susa, in Persia, have brought to light a whole code of laws which date back to the year 2200 B.C., a period as far antecedent to the conventional date of the delivery of the law on Mount Sinai as the Norman Conquest was to the battle of Waterloo. These laws were collected and codified by the great King Khammurabi, who reigned at least twenty-two, and possibly twenty-three, centuries before Christ. Some of these laws in all probability date back for a thousand years and more before the reign of this monarch. "The oldest code in the world" was like the Code Napoleon, the summary and condensation of laws which had existed

long before the birth of the man who gave it his name. Nevertheless, there is no need to go further back than Khammurabi to establish for this newly unearthed monument the right to be regarded as the most venerable code of laws in the archives of mankind.

THE AMRAPHEL OF THE BIBLE.

Who was Khammurabi, whose name sounds so unfamiliar? It is the fashion to identify him with Amraphel, King of Shinar, one of the four kings who, in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, are said to have defeated the five kings of the plain, and were afterward overtaken and pursued by Abraham with three hundred and eighteen men. The dates do not correspond. Khammurabi was not King of Shinar, but of northern Babylonia, and the theory that the Napoleon of his time could be hunted with his three allies from Dan to Damascus is about as easy to believe as that von Moltke and the German legions, after conquering France, were chased across the frontier by the Lord Mayor of London and the Beefeaters of the Tower. Nevertheless, if you want to read up what there is known about Khammu

rabi in the encyclopædias, biblical and otherwise, you must turn to Amraphel.

WHAT IS KNOWN OF KHAMMURABI.

The latest edition of "The Encyclopædia Britannica," under the heading "Babylonia," gives the following brief account of the king:

"The Elamite supremacy was at last shaken off by the son and successor of Sin-muballidh, Khammurabi, whose name is also written Ammurapi and Khammuram, and who was the Amraphel of Gen. xiv. 1.

"The Elamites, under their king, Kudur-Lagamar, or Chedorlaomer, seem to have taken Babylon and destroyed the temple of Bel-Merodach; but Khammurabi retrieved his fortunes, and in the thirtieth year of his reign he overthrew the Elamite forces in a decisive battle and drove them out of Babylonia. The next two years were occupied in adding Larsa and Yamudbal to his dominion, and in forming Babylonia into a single monarchy, the head of which was Babylon. A great literary revival followed the recovery of Babylonian independence, and the rule of Babylon was obeyed as

far as the shores of the Mediterranean.

Vast numbers of contract tablets, dated in the reigns of Khammurabi and other kings of the dynasty, have been discovered, as well as autograph letters of the kings themselves, more especially of Khammurabi."

THE BURIED LIBRARIES OF BABYLON.

The discovery of the long-lost records of the early dynasties of Babylon dates back as far as 1874, when Mr. George Smith began to unearth clay tablets in the ruins of Nineveh and Babylon which tended to show that our accounts of the Creation and the Deluge in Genesis were really modified versions of the same stories committed to writing in Babylon long before the Mosaic era. Royal libraries were subsequently unearthed whose contents confirmed the importance of Mr. Smith's discoveries. But it was not until the end of the year 1901 that the great discovery was made which has enabled us of the twentieth century after Christ to read the very text of laws codified in Babylon in the twenty-third century before Christ.

THE MONUMENT OF BLACK DIORITE.

The following account of the discovery of the important record is taken from an interesting article in the London Times:

"The monument itself is a pillar of black diorite, eight feet high, was found by M. de Morgan at Susa, in the Acropolis mound, on December and January, 1901-02, and the whole has been carefully photographed and published, with a translation by Father V. Schiel, O.P., the Assyriologist of the expedition, by order of the French minister of public instruction, by Messrs. E. Leroux et Cie. The obverse of the column is surmounted by a plaque in bas-relief which represents the king standing before the throne of a seated divinity, from whose shoulders flames of fire proceed to form wings, who is dictating to the king the laws.

"The inscription which covers this stately monolith is the longest Babylonian record ever discovered. It contained originally about three thousand lines of writing, divided into forty-nine columns; but five columns on the front have been erased by some Elamite king, probably Sutruk Nakhunti, who served the stele of Naram-Sin in a similar manner. The writing is a very beautiful type of the best archaic script, a kind of blackletter cuneiform, long used by kings for royal inscriptions, after the cursive writing was invented-as, for example, the Cyprus monolith of Sargon II., B.C. 721, in the Museum at Berlin. The inscription opens with a long enumeration of the king's titles, of his installation as king by the gods, and of the elevation of Babylon to the position of capital."

KHAMMURABI AS HE SEEMED TO HIMSELF.

From this preliminary inscription we learn at least what King Khammurabi thought about himself. It begins thus:

"In that day, I, Khammurabi, the glorious Prince, the worshiper of my God, justice for the land for witness, plaintiff and defendant; to destroy the tyrant, and not to oppress the weak like unto the Sun god, I promulgated.

"(I am) the settler of the tribes, the director of the people, who restored its propitious genie [winged bull] to the city of Assur, who caused it to shine with splendor; the King who in the city of Nineveh, in the temple Dubdub (?), has made brilliant the adornments of the goddess Istar.

"The law of the land as to judgments, the decisions of the land as to decisions, my precious decrees for the information of the oppressed, upon this stone I wrote and placed in the temple of Merodach in Babylon.

"I was a master who was unto my people as the father who had begotten them.

"Law and justice I established in the land, I made happy the human race in those days."

The monument enters into some detail as to the god whom Khammurabi worshiped. In the opening of the inscription he is called "the Supreme God, the King of the Spirits of Earth, the Lord of Heaven and Earth who foretells the destiny of all." Nippur is his holy city, and his temple "the Mountain House." So much for the author of the code and the god in whose name he promulgated it. Now for the code itself.

THE SCOPE OF the code.

It is full of quaint and interesting regulations which shed a flood of light upon the civilization of the Euphrates valley five thousand years ago. If it does not fully bear out what Mr. Boscawen says as to the high position and equal rights enjoyed by women in these ancient days, it shows that they were not regarded as the mere chattels of man. Less could hardly be expected from a race whose name for the mother was "the Goddess of the Home." The code consists of two hundred and eightytwo articles; about sixty, or more than a fifth, are devoted to the definition of woman's rights. About thirty of the articles still extant regulate the tenure and taxation of land. There are many articles prescribing punishment for various kinds of assault, the system being that of the eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth subsequently adopted by the Hebrews. The code insists much on the sanctity of the oath, to which an importance was attached that seems strange in these days when perjury is so common.

THE ORDEAL OF THE HOLY RIVER.

There is also frequent insistence on trial by ordeal of water. It was evidently believed that the Holy River, the Euphrates, was an infallible court of last appeal. One of the first articles runs thus :

"If a man has placed an enchantment upon a man, and has not justified himself, he upon whom the enchantment is placed to the Holy River [Euphrates] shall go; into the Holy River he shall plunge. If the Holy River holds [drowns] him, he who enchanted him shall take his house. If, on the contrary, the man is safe, and thus is innocent, the wizard loses his life and his house."

THE LICENSING LAWS FOUR THOUSAND YEARS AGO.

The same expedient was resorted to in case of a breach of the licensing laws. In Babylonia, curiously enough, all the wine merchants appear to have been

women.

"If a wine merchant has not received corn as the price of drink, has received silver by the great stone, and has made the price of drink less than the price of corn, that wine merchant one shall put her to account to throw her into the water."

A rather drastic penalty for selling drink too cheap. It was, however, less severe than the punishment for allowing disorder on licensed premises.

"If a wine merchant has collected a riotous assembly in her house, and has not seized those rioters and driven them to the palace, that wine merchant shall be put to death."

The law as to desertion is clear. The wife of a man who fled from his city was free to marry again, nor could her husband, on his return, compel her to return. If a husband was carried away as captive, his wife was free to marry again if she had no means of livelihood. If she had maintenance, and married again, "one shall put that woman to account and throw her into the waters." If, however, she had no means of livelihood and had children by her second marriage, her husband could compel her to return to him when he returned from captivity, but the children by the second marriage remained with the father.

If a man wished to put away his wife or concubine who had borne him children, "to that woman he shall return her her marriage portion, and shall give her the usufruct of field, garden, and goods, and she shall bring up her children."

After the children were grown up, "from whatever is given to her children, they shall give her a share like that of the son, and she shall marry the husband of her choice."

If a childless wife is put away, he shall give her money as much as her dowry, and shall repay her her marriage portion which she brought from her father's house.

GROUNDS FOR DIVORCE.

In cases of misconduct by the wife, the dow 'y was forfeited.

"If the wife of a man who dwells in the house of that man has set her face to go forth, and has acted the fool, and wasted his house, and impoverished his house, they shall call her to accouat. If the husband shall say, 'I put her away,' he shall put her away. She shall go her way; for her divorce he shall give her nothing."

The wife could divorce her husband if she hated him and said "Thou shalt not possess me," providing that she could prove that she had been economical and had no vice; and if her husband had gone out and greatly belittled her, in that case she was entitled to her marriage portion. If, however, she had not been economical, but had been "a goer about," had wasted her house and belittled her husband, "one shall throw her into the waters."

THE MARRIED WOMAN'S PROPERTY ACT B.C. 2200. A wife could inherit land, house, or goods from her husband, but although she could leave such inheritance to her children whom she loved, she could not give it to her brothers. Neither wife nor husband could be seized for the ante-nuptial debts of the other, but for debts contracted after marriage both were answerable. A wife who on account of another man had caused her husband to be killed was sentenced to death by impalement.

The property of a wife went to her children or to her father at her death; her husband had no right to inherit it. The children of a second marriage shared equally with those of the first marriage in their father's property. If a slave married the daughter of a gentleman, the children were free. Her marriage portion was her own on the death of her husband, and her owner could only take half of the slave's property at death.

AN EYE FOR AN EYE.

If a man struck his father, his hand was cut off. If a man caused the loss of a gentleman's eye, his own

was torn out; but if it was only a poor man's eye, he paid one mina of silver. The same rule was applied when a limb was shattered. If a tooth was knocked out, "one shall make his tooth fall out."

If a wound were caused by accident, such must be attested by oath, and the man who caused it "shall answer for the doctor."

If a man struck a gentleman's daughter so that she miscarried, he had to pay ten shekels; but if the woman died, "one shall put to death his daughter." The penalty was five shekels in the case of a poor man's daughter, and two shekels in the case of a gentleman's maid-servant.

FOR THE PROTECTION OF PROPERTY.

The laws for repression of theft were severe. Brigands and burglars were doomed to death. Any man caught stealing from a burning house was thrown into the flames and burned to death. A constable who neglected to perform a mission or hired some one else to do it was put to death. So was any one who harbored a fugitive slave and refused to produce him at the demand of the commandant. The stealing of the son of a freeman was punishable with death. A thief who stole ox, sheep, ass, pig, or ship had to pay thirtyfold, or, if he were a poor man, tenfold. If he could not pay, he was killed. The receiver of stolen goods was put to death. So was any one who stole goods from temple or palace, and so, also, was any one who uttered threats against a witness.

DOCTORS AND CONTRACTORS.

Doctors' responsibilities were severely enforced. If a patient treated with a lancet of bronze for a severe wound were to die, or if he lost an eye through the opening of an abscess, "one shall cut off his hands."

The fee for curing the shattered limb or the diseased bowel of a gentleman, a poor man, and a gentleman's servant was five, three, and two shekels, respectively.

"If a brander, without consent of the owner of a slave, has branded a slave with an indelible mark, one shall cut off the hands of that brander."

A contractor whose house fell upon the owner of the house and killed him was put to death; if no life was lost, the builder must rebuild the house at his own cost. A boatman who wrecked a ship which he hired had to render ship for ship to the owner.

SUMPTUARY LAWS.

Several articles set forth the wages to be paid to various descriptions of workmen. Others fix the hire of oxen, of wagons, of boats, etc.

If a man handed over his wife, his son, or his daughter to deliver himself from distraint for debt, they were to be set free in the fourth year.

A very curious law ordered any judge who altered his judgment after it was pronounced to pay twelvefold the penalty in the said judgment, after which he was expelled from the judgment seat.

Most of those who have written about the Code of Khammurabi have professed themselves surprised at the resemblance between it and the so-called Laws of Moses. But the difference is greater than the likeness.. The ethical superiority of the Levitical Law to that of Khammurabi is as great as the superiority of the head of a man to the head of a chimpanzee.