population of Africa more than half. It is not the first propagation of Islam that has to be explained; but it is the permanency with which it retains its hold upon its converts. Christianity is less tenacious in its grasp. An African tribe once converted to Islam never reverts to paganism, and never embraces Christianity. Though quite unfitted for the higher races, it is eminently adapted to be a civilizing and elevating religion for barbarous tribes. Christianity is too spiritual, too lofty. Islam has done for civilization more than Christianity. ("Oh, oh.") Take, e.g., the statements of English officials or of lay travellers as to the practical results of Islam. When Mohomedanism is embraced by a negro tribe, paganism, devil worship, fetishism, cannibalism, human sacrifice, infanticide, witchcraft, at once disappear. The natives begin to dress, filth is replaced by cleanliness, and they acquire personal dignity and self-respect. Hospitality becomes a religious duty, drunkenness becomes rare, gambling is forbidden, immodest dances and the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes cease, female chastity is regarded as a virtue, industry replaces idleness, licence gives place to law, order and sobriety prevail, blood feuds, cruelty to animals and to slaves are forbidden. A feeling of humanity, benevolence, and brotherhood is inculcated. Polygamy and slavery are regulated, and their evils are restrained. Islam, above all, is the most powerful total abstinence association in the world, whereas the extension of European trade means the extension of drunkenness and vice and the degradation of the people; while Islam introduces a civilization of no low order, including a knowledge of reading and writing, decent clothing, personal cleanliness, veracity, and self-respect. Its restraining and civilizing effects are marvellous. How little have we to show for the vast sums of money and all the precious lives lavished upon Africa! Christian converts are reckoned by thousands, Moslem converts by millions. These are the stern facts we have to face. They are extremely unpleasant facts; it is folly to ignore them. We ought to begin by recognizing the fact that Islam is not an anti-Christian faith, but a half Christian faith-an imperfect Christianity. ("Oh.") Islam was a replica of the faith of Abraham and Moses, with Christian elements. Judaism was exclusive. Islam is cosmopolitan-not, like Judaism, confined to one race, but extended to the whole world. Moslems acknowledge four great teachers-Abraham, the friend of God; Moses, the prophet of God; the Lord Jesus, the work of God; and Mahomed, the apostle of God. In the creed of Islam the Lord Jesus stands the highest of the four. Though the teaching of Mahomed falls grievously short of the teaching of St. Paul, there is nothing in it antagonistic to Christianity. It is midway between Judaism and Christianity. It is better than Judaism, inasmuch as it recognizes the miracles and the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. This reformed Judaism swept so swiftly over Africa and Asia because the African and Syrian doctors had substituted abstruse metaphysical dogmas for the religion of Christ. They tried to combat licentiousness by celibacy and virginity. Seclusion from the world was the road to holiness, and dirt was the characteristic of monkish sanctity. The people were practically polytheists, worshipping a crowd of martyrs, saints, and angels. Islam swept away this mass of corruption and superstition. It was a revolt against empty theological polemics; it was a masculine protest against the exaltation of celibacy as the crown of piety. It brought out the fundamental dogma of religionthe unity and greatness of God. It replaced monkliness by manliness. It gave hope to the slave, brotherhood to mankind, and recognition to the fundamental facts of human nature. The higher Christian virtueshumility, purity of heart, forgiveness of injuries, sacrifice of self-these are not the virtues of Islam. The Christian ideal is unintelligible to savages; but the lower virtues which Islam inculcates are what the lower races can be brought to understand-temperance, cleanliness, chastity, justice, fortitude, courage, benevolence, hospitality, veracity, and resignation. They can be taught to cultivate the four cardinal virtues, and to abjure the seven deadly sins. The Christian ideal of the brotherhood of man is the highest; but Islam preaches a practical brotherhood-the social equality of all Moslems. This is the great bribe which Islam offers. The

convert is admitted at once to an exclusive social caste; he becomes a member of a vast confraternity of 150,000,000. A Christian convert is not regarded as a social equal, but the Moslem brotherhood is a reality. We have over much " dearly beloved brethen" in the reading desk, but over little in daily life. (Laughter.) True, the Koran offered a material paradise, but the social privileges attained in this world are a more potent motive. The Jews, of all races the most susceptible to lofty religious ideas, needed nevertheless a training of 2000 years before they were fitted for the higher teaching of Christ. Can we expect the negro, with a low moral and cerebral development, with centuries of fetishism and savagery behind him, to receive at once that lofty Christian morality for which even the prophets and heroes of Hebrew history were not prepared? The teaching of Islam is not too spiritual or too exalted, but it is the school which may educate the African into fitness for a higher faith. The Church of England has not been able to make any permanent impression on the African. Islam, with its material paradise, or the Salvation Army, with its kettledrums (laughter), or the Church of Rome, with its black madonnas, may be able to descend to the level of the negro, but the Church of England, with its Thirty-nine Articles, will not be the Church of equatorial Africa for many generations. The two great practical difficulties in the way of the conversion of Africa are polygamy and domestic slavery. Mahomet, like Moses, did not prohibit them; that would have been impossible; but he endeavoured to mitigate their evils. Slavery is no part of the creed of Islam. It was tolerated as a necessary evil by Mahomet as it was by Moses and St. Paul. In the hands of the Moslem it is a very mild institution, far milder than negro slavery in the United States, Polygamy is a more difficult question. Moses did not prohibit it. It was practised by David, and it is not directly forbidden in the New Testament, though contrary to its spirit. Mahomet limited the unbounded licence of polygamy; it is the exception rather than the rule in the most civilized Moslem lands, European Turkey, Algiers, and Egypt. The more intelligent Moslems are of opinion that the time is coming for its restraint or abolition, as unsuited to the times. The Bishop of Lahore, among others, has made a courageous protest for the admission of polygamist converts to baptism, though not to holy orders. It is unreasonable and cruel to expect a convert to put away a wife to whom he has been lawfully married by the law of Islam. Are these women, the mothers of a man's children, to be turned adrift to a life of ignominy? No man fit to become a Christian would be capable of such an unnatural and cruel act. Polygamy, with all its evils, has its counterbalancing advantages. It has abolished female infanticide, and gives every woman a legal protector. Owing to polygamy Mahomedan countries are free from professional outcasts, a greater reproach to Chistendom than polygamy is to Islam. The strictly regulated polygamy of Moslem lands is infinitely less degrading to women and less injurious to men than the promiscuous polyandry which is the curse of Christian cities, and which is absolutely unknown in Islam. The polyandrous English are not entitled to cast stones at polygamous Moslems. (Hear, hear.) Let us first pluck out the beam from our own eye before we meddle with the mote in our brother's eye. The four chief evils of Mahomedan lands-polygamy, slavery, servile concubinage, and licence of divorce-are no exclusive reproach to Islam. Within our own memory, if not now, they have all prevailed in aggravated forms in the United States-a land nominally Christian and peopled by a race of English brotherhood. If Christian missions are to make any way in Africa we must change our tactics. European teachers will never christianize Africa-the experiment has been tried and has failed. The climate alone is a fatal obstacle, and the social gulf is too wide. The heathen tribes can only be converted by bringing over from the United States civilized Christian negroes in large numbers. With regard to Moslems, can we not attack the fortress of Islam from within, rather than

*

"A case of polygamy was unknown in Candia, amidst a population of 40,000 Mussulmans."-Urquhart's "Spirit of the East," vol. ii., p. 388.

from without? Instead of raising antagonism by denouncing Mahomet as a false prophet and Moslems as infidels, let us begin by showing, not how much Christianity differs from Islam, but how much it resembles it. Let us remember that in some respects Moslem morality is better than our own. In resignation to God's will, in temperance, charity, veracity, and in the brotherhood of believers, they set us a pattern we should do well to follow. Islam has abolished drunkenness, gambling, and prostitutionthe three curses of Christian lands. Islam is the closest approach to Christianity which has been able to take hold of Eastern or Southern nations. It is superior to the grovelling superstition of the Coptic and Abyssinian churches. Moslems are already imperfect Christians; let us try to perfect their religion rather than vainly endeavour to destroy it, and we may possibly transform Islam into Christianity. Thus we may find that in God's scheme, Mahomet has been preparing the way for Christ, (Cheers.)

MR. JOSEPH THOMPSON ON ISLAM IN AFRICA.

(From the "Times," 14 November.)

TO THE EDITOR OF THE "TIMES."

Sir, I have such a very lively admiration of the spirit and courage displayed by Canon Taylor in the praiseworthy campaign he has instituted that I beg to be allowed to say a word in his support.

From experience I know how dangerous it is to venture to recognise any good in any living religion outside the orthodox pale and its immediate vicinity, or to offer any criticism on the method adopted by Church agencies to propagate their creeds. The critic's motives are sure to be misrepresented and held up to opprobrium, while his facts will probably be ignored. He soon discovers that the Church or its missionary agencies loves not the light, or at least only such as passes through authorized loopholes or specially supplied coloured glass.

As an observer of somewhat varied experience in Eastern, Central, and Western Africa, where I have seen Christianity and Mahomedanism in contact with the negro, I would claim to be heard. It has been argued. by some of your correspondents that in Eastern Africa and the Nile basin you see Islam in its true colours in congenial association with the slave trade and all forms of degradation and violence. A more baseless statement could not be conceived. I unhesitatingly affirm--and I speak from a wider experience of Eastern Central Africa than any of your correspondents possess-that if the slave trade thrives it is because Islam has not been introduced to these regions, and for the strongest of all reasons, that the spread of Mahomedanism would have meant the concomitant suppression of the slave trade. Islam is not preached to the negro because the Muscat Arabs desire to retain their slave-hunting grounds. To do otherwise would have been to hail the natives as brother Mussulmans where they hoped to capture slaves. In the same way many of our Christian traders, you may rest assured, would resist most strenuously the introduction of missionaries of their religion into their trading grounds, if it was not found that the profession of Christianity among the natives was not incompatible with a large consumption of gin. It is sometimes convenient, however, to confound a people with their religion-when it does not come too near home.

Again, it has been triumphantly pointed out that the religion of Mahomed does not spread in the eastern division of the African continent. That is perfectly true. I have already mentioned one potent reason. There is a second equally important. Islam, like Christianity, is brought among the natives by an alien race-a race in every respect far above them-a race which characterizes them as Wa-sherzi (wild men). The Muscat Arab is cut off by a wide gulf from the negro. He does not attempt to pass it. By being thus cut off from the race the negro makes no attempt to acquire its religion nor its manners. But while I unhesitatingly affirm that the slave trade flourishes in Eastern Central

Africa because Islam is not there, only its professor, I as confidently assert that this so much reviled religion has done one great service there. It has prevented the spread of the liquor traffic. In Zanzibar itself the Sultan has been impotent to arrest the traffic, because Christian nations objected to any restriction of "trade." Happily, on the mainland he has hitherto been allowed a freer hand in enforcing the rules of his religion, and so done an enormous service in preventing the demoralization of the easily seduced blacks. How long this will last now that Germany's "pioneers of civilization " are descending upon the land remains to be seen. Turning now to Western Africa and the Central Soudan-which I also have had the opportunity of visiting-we find a far different state of things prevailing. Here we have Islam as a living, active force, full of the fire and energy of its early days, proselytizing too with much of the marvellous success which characterised its early days. Here we have it preached equally in the streets of Sierra Leone and among the debased cannibal tribes of the Niger basin. With the disingenousness which makes them attempt to fasten the evils of the slave trade upon Islam, the defenders of the Christian faith seek with might and main to minimize and distort the facts about the success of Islam in Western Central Africa. Unable to recognise any good except it comes through orthodox channels, they seek to describe its advance as a terrible calamity and unmixed evil to the African. They declare-as they have been taught from their childhood-that Mahomedanism can only be propagated by means of fire and sword. They delight to draw pictures of the poor terror-stricken negro on his knees, his hut in flames behind him, his wives and children, with halters round their necks, being dragged off by ferocious men to make slaves of, while a demon-like Mussulman stands over him with drawn sword, giving him the alternative of "death or the Koran.'

That is the stereotyped notion how Mahomedanism is propagated-an idea, I suppose, handed down from previous generations. Happily, I have had an opportunity of seeing for myself, and seeing differently. The greatest triumphs of Islam in the Central and Western Soudan have been by peaceful and unassuming agencies-the erratic Fellani herdsman in the past, the energetic and enterprising Hausa or Nupé trader in the present. From somewhere about the 12th century the herdsman has been engaged spreading his religion from Lake Chag to the Atlantic, with the result that the entire region became honeycombed with little Mahomedan coteries by the end of last century. They but wanted a leader to throw off the yoke of paganism and proclaim the Unity of God. With the beginning of this century came the leader in the person of Fodiyo, and in a surprisingly short time Mahomedanism was established as the reigning religion over a huge extent of country, giving an impetus to the barbarous tribes which has produced the most astounding results. In these latter years the chief agent in the spread of Islam has been, as I have already remarked, the Hausa or Nupé trader. Protected by the sanctity of his business, the negro merchant penetrates into every tribe within hundreds of miles of his own home. He mixes with the barbarous pagan as one of like blood with himself; he sleeps in the same house, he eats the same food. Everywhere he carries his religion with him, its great central features unobscured by unthinkable and transcendental dogmas. He has just so much of doctrine as his pagan brother can understand and assimilate. The trader remains a month, or it may be six months or a year. During that time he is admired for his fine clothes, and the people around begin to ape him. They see nothing which they may not hope to aspire to; there is nothing in his religion they do not understand. In this manner have the seeds of civilization and Islam been scattered broadcast among numerous savage tribes, till the land resounds with the inspiring din of a hundred industries, and morning, noon, and evening rises the watchword of Islam, and knees which were formerly bent to stocks and stones now bend before the One God, and lips which have quivered with enjoyment over the flesh of a brother man are employed to acknowledge His greatness and compassionateness.

If Islam has not always been propagated by such peaceful means, what is there to wonder at? Have we not required something like eighteen centuries to learn that we have no right to force our religion on others? What wonder, then, if ardent negro propagandists should seek occasionally to force the blessings of their religion on their unbelieving and stubborn brethren ?

I cannot venture to trespass further upon your valuable space, however attractive may be the theme. I may, however, be permitted a word in explanation of my position.

It may appear from the above that I think Mahomedanism is a more suitable religion for the African than Christianity. Far be from me the thought. I am prepared to say, however, that it is more suited to the African than Christianity as taught. "By their fruits ye shall know them." Applying that rule to Africa, there can be no denying the fact that Mahomedanism has immeasurably the best of it. What are the petty results of over three hundred years of Christian contact, as shown on the West Coast of Africa, compared with the immense civilizing work of the reviled religion in the Central and Western Soudan? It is enough to make our Christian missionaries hang their heads. Only they rarely learn anything, rarely take a lesson. The secret of the latter's want of success is easily found. They have never attempted to mingle common sense with their teaching. With astounding blindness and obstinacy they persist in senseless and impracticable methods, ever attempting to graft the higher, nay, the very highest, conceptions of the Christian religion upon low, undeveloped brains incapable of their comprehension, not to speak of their assimilation, trusting, however, in Providence to do the watering and give the increase. Till the missionary learns the necessity of not preaching from his level, but of getting down to the savage's, he will never make any permanent headway; he can but produce

a veneer.

These observations I make in the role of the candid friend.

No one is

a more sincere admirer of the missionary than I; no one knows better the noble lives of many, the singleness of purpose with which they pursue the course they think the only true one. They seem to me the best and truest heroes which this 19th century has produced. Nobody has more reason to speak well of them than I, and rejoice that they have spread over the waste places of the earth. In the heart of the Dark Continent I have been received as a brother, I have been relieved when I was destitute, I have been nursed when I was half dead, and time after time I have been sent on my weary way rejoicing that there is such a profession of men as Christian missionaries. I have not a word to say against the men; I simply attack their methods, believing that they might yet not only rival the success of Mahomedanism, but far exceed it. I am yours obediently,

Edinburgh, November 10.

JOSEPH THOMSON.

ISLAM IN ASIA MINOR.

EXTRACT FROM THE LETTER OF A CORRESPONDENT ON THE FAMINE IN ASIA MINOR.

(From the "Times," 27 September.)

Wherever the central Stamboul administration is directly responsible, it is hardly too much to say there is corruption, fraud, and every evil work, and the good government of Central Anatolia is at first sight all the more incomprehensible; yet the fact remains that in this vast country, peopled by many nationalities, life and property are safe, crime almost unknown, the peasants neither overtaxed nor subjected to any kind of oppression, but happy to all outward seeming, and devoted to the Padisha they have never seen, and for whom many have fought and bled without receiving a piastre of pay; the police is active and efficient, and religious troubles are hardly dreamt of; the internal organization of each district and commune is in perfect order, and justice appears to be less