business corporation, however, could not wholly shake off the burden of popular suspicion until put upon a new footing by aid from an unexpected quarter. North Carolina had been one of the sturdiest upholders of the rights of the people. She had unwillingly acceded to the establishment of a national government. She had failed to convince Congress that it ought to ask the people to forbid it to grant monopolies. In 1795 she struck out into a new field for herself and gave the modern world an object lesson in political science. For the first time since the beginnings of the Roman Empire," a sovereign State offered incorporation for business purposes to any who desired it, freely and on equal terms. As became a government venturing on so novel an experiment she confined her offer to a single class of business enterprises the construction of canals-but she gave a generous franchise, including the right of eminent domain, providing only that the works should become public property whenever the shareholders should have received their capital with interest at 6 per cent.' The example thus set was soon imitated by other States, and the vast number of business corporations formed under general laws that the nineteenth century brought forth to change the face of the United States witness the wisdom of making freedom of incorporation one of our fundamental political institutions. a Up to 1795 general incorporation laws had been restricted to the formation of religious, charitable, or literary corporations. Baldwin, Modern Political Institutions, 148, 174, 193, 194. Laws of North Carolina, Ed. 1821, I, 769. THE NATIONAL CANAL POLICY. By LINDLEY M. KEANBEY. The question of isthmus transit has been before the civilized world since the discovery of America. From this time to the present four different canal policies have been elaborated and to some extent applied. In the order of their historical succession these canal policies may be named: The national European policy, the Anglo-American policy, the international policy, and the national American policy. It will be enough if I set forth the historical antecedents and indicate the political consequents of the four canal policies in the order named. THE NATIONAL EUROPEAN POLIJY, The national European policy can only be called a canal policy by stretching the phrase to include all the varied schemes of isthmus transit that were then devised. Among these, canals figured as projects, but in practice interoceanic communication was effected by means of river routes, pack trails, and wagon roads. To appreciate the canal policy of these days we must call to mind the motives making for mercantilism and consider the conditions of absolute monarchy. To establish their mercantile systems and succeed in their struggles for political supremacy, it was imperative upon the absolute monarchs to maintain communication by sea with their colonial sources of supply and establish factories in distant countries for the acquisition of raw produce and treasure of all kinds. At first Europe's efforts were directed entirely toward the East, with a view to acquiring the wealth of the Indies. Newly discovered America was consequently regarded, in first instance, as a barrier land before Asia. With this idea in mind the Spanish monarchs sought first to solve the secret of the strait, and when this was found impossible to establish some artificial means of communication across the isthmus. Soon, however, the Spaniards discovered the New World to be rich in gold and silver, and henceforth interoceanic communication became a local expedient for the better acquisition of American supply. Routes were accordingly opened up into Mexico and Central America to bring the products of these countries to the seaboard and across Panama to transport the wealth of Peru from the Pacific to the Atlantic coasts. The occupation of the country made effectual by these means of access and egress gave Spain the monopoly of Mexico, Central America, and trans-Andean South America. But monopoly always arouses competition, and it was not long before buccaneers of other lands began to intercept the richly ladened Spanish galleons and to harry the coasts of the Central American mainland. These freebooter raids were soon followed by legitimated government expeditions, and eventually Spain found herself forced to defend her monopoly against her European rivals. England was the chief aggressor and by her pertinacity succeeded in establishing outposts in the West Indies and along the Spanish main, where she could best secure a share of the Caribbean sources of supply. The Darien settlement, of which so interesting an account has been given here this morning, was not sufficiently supported by the Crown to maintain itself, but in the West Indies and here and there along the Caribbean coast of the Central American mainland footholds were established so firmly as to be maintained till modern times. So much in brief for the historical antecedents of the national European canal policy. As for the policy itself, it found expression in Spain's demand to maintain her American monopoly, and in England's efforts to secure a share in such monopoly for herself. America was not considered in this policy, except as a source of supply to be exploited for the benefit of the European monarchs who succeeded in securing control; nor was any regard given to Europe as a whole. On the contrary, each of the two countries concerned was bent upon defeating the other, what though their commercial interests would have been better subserved by sharing the vast sources of supply. In short, the national European canal policy was simply the mercantile policy applied to the Ameri |