that trade in general, and the trade of woollen goods in particular, should be free; and it was in compliance with this cry that, under James I, the Levant Company had enlarged itself by the admission of new adventurers. About the middle of the 18th century the ancient jealousy revived. In 1744 an eminent citizen and influential politician declared in Parliament that all companies were pernicious and should be abolished. His sentiments met with loud applause in and out of Parliament; and the Turkey Merchants were selected as the first victims. The Company managed to save its Charter, but was obliged to modify its by-laws. On the ground that annual shippings restricted navigation, Parliament resolved that every member of the Company should in future be free to ship goods to Turkey at whatever season he thought proper. Ten years later, in obedience to the same clamour against monopolies,' Parliament enacted that, instead of being confined to citizens of London and noblemen's younger sons, the Company should be thrown open to all British subjects on payment of 201.; and, to use the words of a contemporary zealot, that all the members should be secured from 'the tyranny of oppressive by-laws, contrived by a monopolising cabal.' That these enactments were well-intentioned need not be disputed; that they proved ineffectual and even harmful is shown by the event. But Parliament did not stop there. As the Levant Company had now become more diffuse, it was felt that it would be less easy for it to enforce the old regulations against the Plague. Hence, there being no proper quarantine system in England, a summary law was passed, forbidding all ships from infected ports to approach our shores. The upshot was that the English were often compelled to suspend their trade with Turkey, while the French, thanks to their excellent lazaretto at Marseilles, were able to carry on theirs with perfect security. A few attempts were made to combat French ascendancy at its root by improving the quality and reducing the price of English cloth, but without success. The wool passed to the English manufacturers through so many hands, and wages were so high, that, though the article might be almost as good as the French, it cost a great deal more. In 1768 Parliament, to prevent a total collapse, made the Levant Company a grant of 5000l. But the relief, inadequate at best (the Company's debt at Constantinople alone amounted to over 10,000l.), was neutralised by the outbreak of the Russo-Turkish War. During the six years that hostilities lasted, all the Frank residents went in constant dread of massacre at the hands of a mob infuriated by defeat and insurrection. The Turks believed that the whole of Christendom was in league against them, and their animosity was particularly directed towards the English; for, not to mention other proofs of England's Russophile attitude, Britons distinguished themselves in the service of the Russian fleet, which blockaded the Ottoman coasts and took a prominent part in the destruction of the Sultan's navy at Chesmé. The Porte, it is true, anxious not to add to its enemies, heaped civilities upon the English ambassador, John Murray, granting him everything he asked for the protection of English subjects. Indeed, at moments the Porte appeared inclined to accept England's mediation; and the ambassador hoped to obtain for English goods exemption from the misteria duty-a concession which would have put our trade on an equal footing with the French. But it is clear from Murray's delirious despatches that the Sultan's Ministers only played with him; and the French, whose neutrality was as benevolent towards Turkey as ours was towards Russia, continued to enjoy preferential treatment. Just then Sir James Porter, a diplomatist with wide commercial experience, who, during his embassy at Constantinople (1747-62) had studied the problem on the spot, published his State of the Turkey Commerce considered from its Origin to the Present Time.' The main object of this eminently instructive work was to point out the circumstances to which the French owed their superiority, and to urge upon the English the adoption of the same protective methods. But no one listened. The current had set in too strongly against protection; and those on whom depended the preservation of the Turkey trade were no longer much interested in the support of it. For the decline of English enterprise in the Levant synchronised with rapid progress elsewhere. While the French elbowed us out of the Ottoman Empire, we annexed their Indian and and American colonies. Absorbed in the exploitation of those vast areas where we were masters, our capitalists and legislators paid little attention to a part of the world where France, through her geographical vicinity, diplomatic influence, and more efficient organisation, was too powerful a rival. Thus nothing was done to arrest the decadence of the Levant Company. In 1788 our exports to the whole of the Ottoman Empire were valued at only 47,8387., while those of France to Syria alone amounted to a quarter of a million. The disorganisation of France owing to the Revolution, and the assumption by England of the rôle of Turkey's protector, did not stimulate English commerce with the Near East to such an extent as might have been expected or as is commonly imagined. In 1792 our exports to Turkey were estimated at over 273,000l.; but of this sum only about 99,000l. represented British merchandise; the rest consisted of foreign goods carried out in British ships. In 1800 also we exported nearly 167,000l. worth of goods, but these included such an occasional item as 170 cannon. The truth seems to be that the Levant Company was too old a body to adapt itself to new conditions. It languished on till 1825, and then succumbed to nature's law. Its end was dignified, as became an aristocratic corporation with a pedigree two and a half centuries old. In announcing to the Turkey Merchants the decision to take away their Charter, the British Government explained that the measure resulted solely from considerations of public expediency, and in no degree from any disrespect or disposition to impute any blame to their past administration.' Thereupon the Turkey Merchants met for the last time, and, after making a handsome provision for their disbanded servants, surrendered their privileges and quietly dissolved themselves. G. F. ABBOTT. Vol. 233.-No. 463, 2 A Art. 7.-WOMEN AND THE CHURCH. 1. The Ministry of Women. A Report by a Committee appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, with appendices and illustrations. S.P.C.K., 1919. 2. Report of the Joint Committee on the Ministry of Women to the Convocation of Canterbury, 1919. 3. The Ministry of Deaconesses. By Deaconess Cecilia Robinson. New Edition. Methuen, 1914. 4. Women and the Church. By R. H. Streeter and E. Picton Turbervill. Fisher Unwin, 1917. 5. Women and Church Work. Edited by Cyril C. B. Bardsley. Longmans, 1917. 6. Women and the Church of England. By A. Maude Royden. Allen and Unwin, 1917. 7. Women in the Administration of Missions. By M. C. Gollock. International Review of Missions, No. 4. 1912. MANY things have combined of late years to give prominence to the work done by women for the Church, and in consequence to call for new consideration of their position in it and of the functions that may be entrusted to them. They have been given work of many different kinds, and the need for their co-operation has been increasingly felt in past years, but they have had neither place nor authority in the Councils of the Church or the parish, and their position has been considered inferior to that of the most inexperienced curate. In consequence, the highly educated university woman has not seen in church-work thus organised a sufficient sphere for her energies, and has turned to other careers which offered more responsibility and independence. The suffrage movement, with its emphasis on the right of women to claim opportunity for the full development and free use of all their powers in the service of the State, naturally called fresh attention to their subordinate position in the Church. When the new demands made upon them by the war revealed in them latent and unexpected capacities, the restlessness of women at being restrained in any direction increased. It was not that they desired to assert themselves or to make new claims in order to satisfy new ambitions. No doubt some were actuated by personal motives, but the great majority saw the crying need for service which they could render; they saw regulations as regards the service of the State broken down; they were called to undertake work of which beforehand no one would have thought them capable, in order to help their country in its dire need. But the Church was as unyielding as ever, and yet the Church's need of their services was and remains great and urgent. It is not only that women long to serve the Church, but that a living Church cannot in these difficult days dispense with their services. As latent and unexpected capacities were discovered in them by which they could help the State, so, if only the Church will have the courage to make a fuller use of their services, new sources of spiritual power will be opened up. The State could not do without them during the war against its enemies; can the Church afford to refuse to employ their full service in its war against the evil forces in the world? The National Mission made much use of them both on its councils and in its actual work. They were called upon to address meetings large and small on religious subjects, in crowded schoolrooms and parish halls; but in the beautiful parish churches which stood empty near by, and which would have provided the space and the devotional atmosphere so much to be desired, their voices were not allowed to be heard. It would have seemed possible to make experiments at least during the National Mission, and some Bishops were willing to do so, but it was known that certain sections of the Church would refuse to take any part in the Mission if women were allowed to speak in consecrated buildings. Therefore it was thought better to refuse permission; and in some cases permission, once given, was withdrawn. Some of these women knew, or at least their friends knew, that they could speak as well and had as living a message as the majority of the men missioners. Many, both men and women, believed that their co-operation was indispensable to the work of the Mission. Every one knew how short-handed the clergy were, owing to the absence of so many with the army. Here was help both ready and efficient, which was only partially used. The majority of women, of course, submitted without questioning. Others were driven to think out the whole |