of the Church in England'; Green, History of England.'

EMANCIPATION IN LATIN-AMERICA, the Manumission of Slaves in Relation to the several Declarations of Independence. In Haiti, where African slavery was first introduced into America, the negroes received as a gift "the full liberty, equality, and fraternity» of the French republic in 1794, and by fighting established their independence in 1804. In Central America (when Ġuatemala, Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica were united in the Central American republic), the laws of 31 Dec. 1823 and 17 and 24 April 1824 emancipated all slaves, and made free, slaves of other countries coming to Central America. The slave trade was prohibited, under penalty of forfeiture of the rights of citizenship. H. H. Bancroft, in his 'History of the Pacific States,' says "Of all the nations of North America, to the Central American republic belongs the honor of having first practically abolished slavery.» We shall presently show, however, that this distinction fairly belongs to Mexico. Ecuador, which made its first effort to gain independence at Quito, 10 Aug. 1809, and actually threw off the yoke of Spain on 9 Oct. 1820, abolished slavery during the presidential term of General Urvina, 1852-56. The Argentine nation began its struggle for independence 25 May 1810, and at the Congress of Tucuman, 9 July 1816, the formal separation from Spain was declared. Article XV of the constitution of 25 Sept. 1860 provides that "there shall be no slaves in the Argentine nation. Those few who now exist in it shall become free at the very moment this constitution goes into effect. The indemnification which the declaration may involve shall be provided for by special law. Any contract involving the purchase or sale of a person shall be held to be a criminal offense.

Slaves introduced in any way whatever into the country shall become free by virtue of the fact that they have trodden the soil of the republic." In Colombia (New Granada) the number of negroes was never very great; it was estimated at 80,000 in the middle of the 19th century. The struggle for independence, beginning 20 July 1810, or as a vigorous insurrection in 1811, was continued after the union with Venezuela (December 1819), and the republic of New Granada was formed in 1831. În 1821 a law was passed by the republic of Colombia for the gradual manumission of slaves, and all born after that date were declared free at the age of 18,- that gradual process applying, of course, to all the territory of the Greater Colombia at the time of the law's enactment. (See COLOMBIA, History). A law of 1851 abolished slavery entirely in New Granada, by giving liberty to all who remained slaves on 1 Jan. 1852, provision being made for the payment of indemnity to the owners. The beginning of the war for independence in Mexico dates from 16 Sept. 1810 (see DOLORES, El Grito de); on 6 Nov. 1813 the first Mexican Congress, installed in the town of Chilpancingo, issued the declaration of independence and decreed the emancipation of slaves. This, therefore, was the starting point of emancipation on the mainland of America. Venezuela's declaration of independence (5 July 1811) was followed after 10 years by the

law for the gradual manumission of slaves which we have mentioned above, that is, the law of the Greater Colombia of 1821. Paraguayan independence should be dated from 11 June 1811, when an assembly of deputies began its sessions; for the resolution passed by this assembly, renouncing allegiance to Spain, was ratified as a declaration of independence by the Paraguayan Congress of 1 Oct. 1813. The question of African slavery was comparatively unimportant in Paraguay. "In 1865 there were negroes and mulattoes at Emboscada, Tabapy, and Aregui; but the negroes have now almost completely disappeared" (Handbook of Paraguay, September 1902, issued by International Bureau of the American Republics). Chile entered upon a contest with Spain on 18 Sept. 1810, and the independence of the country was proclaimed 12 Feb. 1818. The negro problem did not weigh upon that country, the population being recruited from Europe quite largely. The independence of Peru was declared at Lima 28 July 1821; that of the Dominican republic 1 Dec. 1821; that of Brazil 7 Sept. 1822; and Bolivia became an independent republic 6 Aug. 1825. In Brazil the conservative statesman, Silva Paranhos, obtained from the Parliament the passage of a bill (28 Sept. 1871) for the gradual extinction of slavery, which provided that thereafter every child born of a slave mother should be free, and created a special fund for emancipation by redemption. Private philanthropy, largely directed by the Masonic lodges, effected more than the fund created for this purpose; and the number of slaves began to decrease. A bill for the immediate and unconditional_abolition of slavery in Brazil was signed by Princess Regent Isabel 13 May 1888; the monarchy was overthrown 15 Nov. 1889; the new constitution approved 24 Feb. 1891. In Cuba the slaves were emancipated on the conclusion of the Ten Years' War, that is, in 1878, and Cuba became a republic 20 May 1902. The experiences of the French, Danish and British possessions may be referred to briefly in conclusion. Napoleon restored slavery in French Guiana, Martinique and Guadeloupe, although his efforts to accomplish the same result in Haiti were, as mentioned above, frustrated by the resistance of the blacks themselves. The freedom of all who were held in bondage throughout the French dominions was declared in 1848. Slavery in the Danish West Indies (Saint Thomas, etc.) was abolished also in 1848. The act to abolish slavery throughout the British colonies, providing £20,000,000 for compensation of the owners, was dated 28 Aug. 1833, and its effect was to free 770,280 slaves on 1 Aug. 1834, the number thus emancipated in Jamaica being 309,000.

MARRION WILCOX.

EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, the announcement issued by Abraham Lincoln 1 Jan. 1863 abolishing slavery in all military sections of the South except those territories occupied by Union arms. The Republican administration at the outbreak of the Civil War was awkwardly placed for dealing with slavery. To assail it in its own territory was not only to belie the past professions of the party, but to alienate so much Northern support as to assure failure; nor indeed had the great bulk of the party any thought beyond fettering the slave

power for future aggression. On the other hand, to leave slavery untouched was not only to chill the energies of the most reliable upholders of the War, but to give foreign countries a pretext for asserting that the North was fighting merely for dominion, and that the Southern cause was that of liberty and morally entitled to help. The former horn of the dilemma was much the sharpest; and the government moved very cautiously, restraining its subordinates like Fremont (30 Aug. 1861) and Hunter (9 May 1862) from forcing its hand by emancipation orders. On 9 Aug. 1861 an act had declared masters employing slaves against the government barred from further claim to them; but that was a mere warning and rule of court. The first embarrassing problem was how to deal with slaves in conquered districts, or who had come within its lines: was the government to act as slaveholders' trustee and return them to servitude? The growing resentment against slavery as a convertible term for the rebellion, and disgust at being slave-catchers to the behoof of their enemies, supplied the answer, and on 13 March 1862 all army officers were forbidden to return fugitive slaves; their surrender from any quarter was made harder (though the Fugitive-Slave Law was not formally abolished till 28 June 1864); on 17 June 1862 all captured, deserted or fugitive slaves of owners in rebellion were freed. As to the main body who plainly could not be left in unchanged status as the core of a fresh abscess, Lincoln's wish was for compensated emancipation; he sent a special message to Congress 6 March, and that body passed a joint resolution 10 April, declaring that the United States ought to co-operate with any State which would adopt gradual abolition, by paying for the slaves, and on 16 April those in the District of Columbia were thus emancipated; but despite his repeated urgencies, the border States would take no measures of the kind. On 19 June the slaves in the Territories were freed.

The final blow came, as John Quincy Adams 20 years before had forecast that it would, by using the President's war power to suppress insurrection. As the second year of the conflict wore on, the majority demanded the crippling of its enemy by the most efficient means, and very many believed that a threat of general emancipation would bring about a general surrender. Lincoln wished for a great victory first, that it might not appear the selfish resource of an overmatched power; but the discouraging Peninsular campaign obliged him to satisfy his supporters by holding this bludgeon over the enemy. On 22 Sept. 1862 he issued a proclamation announcing that 100 days after, on 1 Jan. 1863, the Executive would issue another proclamation designating the States or parts of States then deemed in rebellion, evidence to the contrary being the presence of bona-fide representatives in Congress, that all slaves in the designated sections should be permanently free, and that the civil and military authorities of the United States would maintain their freedom, and would not repress any effort of theirs to make it good. The only result was a retaliatory proclamation by Jefferson Davis 23 December, ordering that captured negro Federal soldiers and their officers should be turned over to the States, and that Gen.

B. F. Butler should be hanged if captured. On the 1st of January the threatened proclamation was issued, as "by virtue of the power in me vested as commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for repressing said rebellion. It designated Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana except 13 "parishes" or counties, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia except West Virginia and seven other counties, as in rebellion, emancipated all the slaves in them; enjoined these freedmen to abstain from all violence except in self-defense, and to work faithfully for reasonable wages; announced that suitable members of them would be received into United States military and naval service, and for this act invoked "the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God.”

The curious feature of this proclamation is that it abolished slavery only in the sections not under the military power of the United States, and left it untouched in those which were, namely, the ones specially excepted by it, "which are, for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued." Hence it was argued by the Democrats that it had no legal force whatever, and emancipated no one; a question the Supreme Court never passed on. It was always accepted by the majority party, however, as a continuing act, applying as fast as any of that territory fell into the Union power, and not necessary to repeat. Politically, the results were enormous. Recognition of the Confederacy thenceforward meaning a flat maintenance of slavery instead of freedom, the entire anti-slavery sentiment of France and Great Britain was thrown against those countries' interference, which at once became unthinkable. It drove away many lukewarm Northern Republicans, and brought many local and State defeats to the administration; but it took the party "off the fence" and made it a coherent organization with one firm, open principle, for many years unassailable. In the South, as defeat meant emancipation by their enemies and it would be no worse if done by themselves, some of the leaders (as Lee) seriously thought of offering freedom to slaves to fight in their armies in the latter part of the war, hoping to save independence and the control of their own destinies at least.

EMANTS, ĕm'änts, Marcellus, Dutch poet and descriptive writer: b. Voorburg, near The Hague, 12 Aug. 1848. His volumes of travels display his keen observation and his poetical imagination. Among his best are A Journey Through Sweden' (1877); Monaco (1878); Along the Nile' (1884); 'From Spain' (1886). He holds a permanent place in the literature of the Low Countries through his charming narrative poems, Lilith' (1879); 'The Shimmer of the Gods' (1883).

EMANUEL THE GREAT, king of Portugal: b. 31 May 1469; d. Lisbon, 13 Dec. 1521. He ascended the throne in 1495. During his reign were performed the voyages of discovery of Vasco da Gama, of Cabral, of Americus Vespucius and the heroic exploits of Albuquerque, by whose exertions a passage was found to the East Indies (for which the way was prepared by the discovery of the Cape of

Good Hope in 1486 by Bartolomeo Dias), the Portuguese dominion in Goa was established, the Brazils, the Moluccas, etc., were discovered. The commerce of Portugal under Emanuel was more prosperous than at any former period. The treasures of America flowed into Lisbon and the reign of Emanuel was justly called "the golden age of Portugal." He died deeply lamented by his subjects, but hated by the Moors and Jews, whom he had expelled. As a monument of his discoveries Emanuel built the monastery at Belem, where he was buried. He was a friend to the sciences and to learned men. He left 'Memoirs on the Indies.'

EMBA, ĕm'bä, a river in the district of Orenburg, Asiatic Russia; the Russians call it Jemba, the Kirghiz, Dchem. It rises at three Sources in the western slope of the Mugodchar foothills, flows sluggishly through an area of steppes, is about 200 feet wide and 500 miles long, and forms a delta at its embouchure in the Caspian. It is not navigable, but abounds in fish. The fortress Embinsk is built on its upper

waters.

EMBALMING, the art of preserving the body after death. It was probably invented by the Egyptians, whose bodies thus prepared for preservation are known as mummies, but it also prevailed among the Assyrians, Scythians and Persians. It is at least as old as 4000 B.C. The Egyptian mummies were placed in costly coffins ready for sepulture; but were frequently kept some time before being buried- often at home -and even produced at entertainments, to recall to the guests the transient lot of humanity. The usual method of embalming among the ancients was as follows: The intestines and brains were taken out, and the cavities filled up with a mixture of balsamic herbs, myrrh, cassia, etc.; the arteries and other vessels were injected with balsams. The ancient Egyptians filled the cavities of the trunk with aromatic, saline and bituminous stuff. The cloths in which the mummies were swathed were saturated with similar substances. So effectual were some of the processes that after 2,000 or 3,000 years, the soles of the feet are still elastic and soft to the touch. By 700 A.D., when embalming practically ceased in Egypt probably 730,000,000 bodies had been thus treated; many millions of them are still concealed. In 1881 upward of 30 mummies of potentates, including that of Rameses II, were discovered together at Deirel-Bahari. (See MUMMY). The Persians employed wax for embalming; the Assyrians, honey; the Jews aloes and spices. Alexander the Great was preserved in wax and honey. Desiccated bodies, preserved by atmospheric or other influence for centuries, have been found in France, Sicily, England and America, especially in Central America and Peru. The art of embalming was probably never wholly lost in Europe. The body of Edward I, buried in Westminster Abbey in 1307, was found entire in 1770. The body of Canute, who died in 1036, was found very fresh in Winchester Cathedral in 1776. The bodies of William the Conqueror and of Matilda, his wife, were found entire at Caen in the 16th century.

Chaussier's discovery, in 1800, of the preservative power of corrosive sublimate, by which animal matter becomes rigid, hard and grayish, introduced new means of embalming; but, ow

VOL. 10-18

ing to the desiccation, the features do not retain their shape. The discovery of the preservative power of a mixture of equal parts of acetate and chloride of alumina, or of sulphate of alumina, by Gannal, in 1834, and of arsenic by Tranchini, pyroxilic spirits by Babington and Rees in 1839, and of the antiseptic nature of chloride of zinc, have led to the application of these salts to the embalming of bodies required to be preserved for a limited time. The latest method common in the United States is an injection of a fluid into the femoral artery and the cavity of the abdomen. The most efficient agents are mercuric chloride, arsenic and zinc chloride. Embalming has taken the place of ice in preserving the dead until funeral services are ended. The reasons for this are its preservation of the body for transportation and leisurely disposal and its absolute prevention of communication of infection, either before the body is buried or after it has crumbled and mingled with earth in a cemetery. Consult Budge, The Mummy) (2d ed., London 1894); Dhonan and Nunnamaker, Hygiene and Sanitary Science' (Cincinnati 1913); Eckles, 'Practical Embalmer' (Philadelphia 1904);

Gannal, Traité d'embaumement (Paris 1838; trans. by Harlan, Philadelphia 1840); Myers, 'Champion Textbook of Embalming) (5th ed., Springfield, Ohio, 1908); Pettigrew, History of Egyptian Mummies' (London 1834); Smith, G. E., A Contribution to the Study of Mummification in Egypt' (Cairo 1906); Sucquet, 'Embaumement (Paris 1872). See DEAD, DISPOSAL OF THE; MUMMY.

EMBANKMENT. SIPPI LEVEE SYSTEM.

See LEVEE; MISSIS

EMBARGO IN THE UNITED STATES. Prohibition of foreign commerce, to distress foreign countries and obtain the revocation of hostile measures; "peaceful war," intended to be cheaper than actual warfare and equally efficient, but in fact injuring ourselves deeply and the others little, and ending in real war at last. Our embargoes belong exclusively to the French-English wars of 1794-1814. Their ultimate cause was that the agricultural classes, who controlled the administration, did not believe in commerce, and preferred abolishing it to spending anything for its protection; moreover, they were mainly Southern and Democratic, the commercial interests mainly New England and Federalist, and the former were not loath to spare themselves the cost of war by impoverishing the latter. The first embargo was for 60 days, due to mutual orders of France and England for seizure of neutrals which placed the United States between hammer and anvil. Jay's Treaty (q.v.) of 19 Nov. 1794, for 12 years measurably protected our commerce, but near its end conditions became infinitely worse. In 1806-07 the thronging mutual blows of England and Napoleon, ending in the former's Orders in Council of 11 November, and the latter's Milan Decree of 7 Dec. 1807, made practically every neutral vessel good prize to one or the other. Even more intolerable were the rights of search and impressment claimed by Great Britain, which swept several hundred American sailors every year into the British fleets, and in one massacre (see CHESAPEAKE AND LEOPARD) outraged and humiliated this country beyond forgiveness. But aside from the reasons above given, few landsmen believed