IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) y / A O /<. 1^ ^to 1.0 ^^ I.I 11.25 itt 1^ III 2.5 2.2 lia IIIIIM 1.8 U II!! 1.6 ^ 7 ? '^v^ ^ %^^ 'q.'- pi>' CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical Notes / Notes techniques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for fiinning. Physical features of this copy which may alter any of the images in the reproduction are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Certains difauts susceptibles de nuire d la quality de Ja reproduction sont not^s ci-dessous. Coloured covers/ Couvertures de couleur D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur D Coloured plates/ Planches en couleur D Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqudes Tight binding (may cause shadows or aistortion along interior margin)/ Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure) m n Show through/ Transparence Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es D Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents D D Pagination incorrect/ Erreurs de pagination Pages missing/ Des pages manquent D D D Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Plates missing/ Des planches manquent Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires D Maps missing/ Des cartes gdographiques manquent The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images sui\ antes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de I'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —► (meaning CONTINUED"), or the symbol V (meaiving "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la der- nidre image oe cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le svmbole V signifie "FIN". The original copy was borrowed from, and filmed with, the kind consent of the following institution: National Library of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de I'dtablissement prdteur suivant : Bibliothdque nationale du Canada Maps or plates too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper Inft hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as rec^uired. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes ou les pianches trop grandes pour dtre reproduites en un seul cliche sont film^es d partir de I'angle supdrieure gauche, de gauche d droite ot de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Le diagramme suivant illustre la mdthode : 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 -^^*. ^. , ..,-.*,;4,l-vl#J' 'J ;J^. ,14,,,,. , ^Ja!#k ." ; ^•>-- WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIEHCE? ASHLEY, . -.i.iA2^^. > ■*>*^*5'1. it / ' ^\% 4 '"■^'t^M'' H-^'— -y ■ y^ 7^4^ ^'V- ) WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIENCE? ^u Jlnaui]ural ^cctuvc (UVKN IN IHK CON\'()('ATI()N' JIAIJ. OK IHK UNIVEIISITV OF TORONTO, Dm NovKMUKK, 18S8. W. .] ASHLKY. M.A., rUOFKSSOFi (»K I'OMTlOAi. KCONOMV A\'I) CONSTITUTION A I. m^roilV; LA.TK I'KLI.nW ui' LlN:'OLN COLLEOK, OXF. "KD. TORONTO: KOW.SELL k HUTCHISON, 1888 ^"5c2 3 TO GUSTAV SCHMOLLER. WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIENCE? The addition of a new group of studies to the work of a University must always be a measure of ques- tionable expediency. It disturbs, if only for a time, that quiet continuance in well-doinf,^ to which a University must owe its strength ; it opens the door to endless proposals of innovation ; it entails an increased expenditure ; and it brings with it the evil of new machinery; above all, of additional examina- tions. And yet one of the most evident facts in University history, during the last thirty years, is the tendency in this direction. The most signal examples are those furnished by Philology and by the Physical and Biological Sciences. These have gradually forced their way into a posi- tion of equality with the older studies : their victory has been scarcely less complete in the old Universities of Europe with their conservative traditions, than in the New Country where Universities spring up like mushrooms. Now that the controversy is at an end, we can recognise that the change has been the result not of mere love of novelty, but of urgent need. It was because men came within sight of new truth, and of new means of discovering truth, in a way which opened up for them whole continents of possible know- ledge. Mcithcmatics, Metaphysics, and Classical Sciiolarsliip did not become in themselves less valu- able ; but other subjects were seen to be valuable of whose existence men had before scarcely dreamed. The Orbis Vctcrihus Notits was not smaller ; but it was no jonnrcr the whole world. " I'olitical Science " is the last new claimant for admission. Already two of the foremost Universities in America, Columbia and Cornell, have created separate courses of instruction under that name, and have each appointed a due staff of teachers. Others, such as Johns Hopkins, Michi^^ran, and Harvard, though they have not adopted the plan of creating a separate department for certain subjects, have given those subjects far greater prominence than before. In France again, one of the most hopeful signs of the times is the success of M. Boutmy's creation, the Free School of Political Science at Paris. Already it has done good work in the preparation of men for the Civil Service ; and in the writings of its director and ot M. Sorel, one of its professors, it has produced some of the very best books on modern politics. But it is from Germany that the impulse has come. In its Universities, political studies — historical, economic, administrative, and legal, — have long been pursued with an energy unknown elsewhere. That a separ- ate department has not been created anywhere, except I believe at Tubingen, is due to the elastic character of German University organization, which 5 for many years we cannot liope to imitate here. But certainly the attention ^nven to tliese subjects, especi- ally to economics, is increasing- rather than diminish- ing in (lermany. Iwen in lCn,![;lancl tiiere is a movement in the same direction. The Modern History ScIkjoI .it Oxford, the llistcjry Tripos at Cambrid^L^e, both do something towards fitting men to form an intelligent judgment on tlu' political and economic (]uestioiis of their own time. 1 can only speak from i)ersonal knowledge of Oxford ; but certainly the History School there, though it has to struggle against the prestige of the Classical School, and against a tutorial system which almost stifles research, is growing in importance ever\' year. There is, then, a pretty general tendency towards the introduction into Universities of certain studies- And a general tendency is probably due to a ct.nimon cause ati'ecting ail the countries where the tendency shews itself. Beibre, however, we seek for this com- mon cause, there is a preliminary question to be answered — " What, indeed, is Political Science?" In the first place, I do not think that Universities are likely to understand by Political Science what is called " Sociology." The conception of a science of sociology, which shall arrive at and teach a general theory of " social development, structure, and func- tion," to use the language of Mr. Herbert Spencer, has been of great value. But its value has lain not in the positive results of professed sociologist but in the influence of such a conception upon stt dents of history and political economy. It h.i raised before ^.hem the hope that they may be abl to make out some sort of rational development in th life of humanity : it has aroused them to a perceptio of the relatively minor importance of what may b called the dynastic, and picturesque, and anecdoti sides of history : and it has reminded them that a! the manifestations of human activity are indissolubl connected with one another. If our history books ar no longer "drum and trumpet chronicles," if ou economists arc no longer content to give exclusiv attention to the workings ot individual self-intere^ in the pursuit of wealth, it is due largci/ to tli prophets of sociology. But while we agree witl them in thinking that we must try to get our head above the turmoil of isolated facts, and arrive a generalizations as to the meaning of facts, we canno but feel the dangers of a too soaring ambition. For th present, and probably for m.any years to come, it wil be wise to limit our view to smaller and more manage able groups of phenomena than the whole experienc of the race. We shall be content, for instance, if onh we can arrive at a satisfactorjr conclusion as to th^ stages by which what we understand as the famU came into being ; or the idea of property took th shape it has now ; or, to take an example of a some what different order, if we could ascertain whethe English history begins with a population of serfs or o freemen ; or if vc could <,^t a true and not a rosc- colourcil view of tlic conditions of industry whicli preceded tile advent of the factory, and of the changes which tliat advent produced. VViien these problems shall have been solved, atul a score of others, like them, it will then be time enough to seek to formulate laws applicable to the whole history of mankind. Certainly the results at which distinguished sociologists have a-ri\ed are not so enc )uragiiig that we can venture on making thr;m the basis of our teaching. That *' a diffe!-cntiation of the originally homogeneous mass of units into a co-ordinating part and a co-ordinated part is the indispensable initial ste^) in the growth of a society," which is Mr. Spencer's chosen example to " rr ,'cy a clear idea of the nature of sociological ti\.th," does not seem to be anything more than the statement in unnecessarily technical terms, that all societies have some sort of government. It does not in the least help us to understand how that govern- ment arose, or what has been its nature. Political Science is something more modest. It is systematic knowledge concerning the state or political society, — concerning its constitution, its functions, the organs by which these functions are discharged, its relation to the individual and to other societies. It falls into several well defined branches. Take first, Constitutional History and Law. Here we are called upon to examine the manner in which the 8 public authority is constituted, and the legal limi of its ]X)wcr. If a country has a written coi stitution, it will be our duty to study its provision^ to learn what those responsible for them intended tl provisions to mean ; to ascertain what interpretatic lias, as a matter of fact, been put upon them ; how f and in what wav the\' have been enforced ; and discover what changes in the essential character ^ the li^overnment ma\' have taken ])lace beneath £ unchanging theory or an unchanging machinery, the constitution is unwritten, we have to disentatig tlie principles which characterise it, and to ascerta the sanctions, if any, upon which they rest. Tl State whose constitution must engage the largest sha of our attention, the Dominion of Canada, will presei the further problem cremated by Confederation, — tl relative limits of central and provincial authority, ; determined by legislative enactment, b)' legal decisio and by usage. The method of study which we shall probably fir most profitable will be largely historical and conipan live. We must of course beiWn b\^ mastering tl various enactments and precedents whicli wou guide a court of law in deciding questions submittc to it. But our object is not merely that of tl lawyer or politician. The lawyer wishes to kno how certain words are likely to be interpreted by tl courts. The politician wishes to know how certa measures, which he proposes to advocate or attac stand, or may be made to appear to stand, in relation to the letter of the constitution. Our object is to ascertain what the real character of the constitution is; and to this end contrast is the most valuable of means. Wc must compare the constitution in its present sta^e with its earlier stages, the constitution of one country with that of another. This is the more im{)erative if we are to end with pronouncini^, as I think we must attempt to pronounce, a judi^ment of some kind on the constitution we have been exami- ning : — " it has such and such merits, such and such defects: how are these defects to be remedied?' The wisdom of statesmen may succeed in devising new safeguards and better institutions : but meantime some light is to be gained by enquiring whether the same evils have appeared in other countries ; if so, whether any attempt has been made to meet them, and with what success ; and if they have not appeared, what reason can be assigned for their absence. •fc»* We shall find, I doubt not, that the underlying causes of constitutional differences are social rather than strictly political, — that they depend on the rela- tion between the wealth of a country and its inhabi- tants, on the nature of that wealth, on the manner in which it is produced, and the way in which it is divided. Wc shall find, moreover, that most of the movements and forces which cause constitutional questions to be raised and lead to constitutional changes, still more the political contests waged within lO the lines of constitutions, are at bottom economic in their character. For instance, the real cause of the Reform Hill of 1832 in England was no mere theor)- as to the justice of giving every man a share in his own government, but the growth of a great anci powerful manufacturing class. By a necessary and easy transition, therefore, we pass from the sphere of Constitutional History and Constitutional Law to that of Political Economy. Political Economy is the subject to which, both by preference and in accordance with the requirements o{ the new department, my own attention will be mainly directed ; and I shall not scruple to rely upon your patience while I explain the point of view from which I regard it. Ten or fifteen years ago Political Economy occupied, in English-speaking countries, no very dignified or useful position. In England it was represented by two very able men, Cairnes and Jevons. Neither of these, however, had any considerable influence upon the educated public ; and the professorial teaching at Oxford and Cambridge was of but small scientific importance. In University and College instruction. Political Economy was the convenient stopgap. It was thought to be especially good for Passmen, and Passmen certainly found it ths easiest subject on which to " get through." A large immber of the women who availed themselves of the new opportunities for higher 1 1 education, turned their attention to it ; and there were not wanting scoffers who said that the reason was because PoHtical Economy was easier than Classics or Mathematics. It had also this practical recommenda- tion, — that any clever man could be put to teach it at a day's notice. 15ut few clever men really believed in it as a useful possession in after-life. Nobody was inclined to deny that it was all true — " so far as it went," — but there was a sort of feeling that it didn't go very far ; and that considerations which the econo- mist declared he must disregard in order to arrive at scientific precision, rendered the " pure theory " of little avail. Meanwhile the very term Political Economy stank in the nostrils of intelligent working men. Mechan- ics' Institutes had been fed upon it for half a century to show artisans how that everything in the industrial world was for the best ; or, at any rate, that it could not be improved by combination, or by the interference of the State. It was true that Free Trade, with its cheap loaf, was a victory for the political economists, as well as for the manufacturing over the agricultural interest : but Free Trade was by this time a matter of ancient history, while the opposition of economists to Trade Unions was a matter of every day history. Unfortunatelv it was not the economists of authoritv who had the public ear ; they, by this time, had aban- doned in large measure their old attitude ; and even Miss Martineau lived to repent having written her 12 stories in l^olitical Econoniv ; but tlic ncwspapcrr. .sti repeated the lani^uagc of an earlier period and wer always ready in any trade dispute to tell \vorkini,^me: that the " laws " of Politieal ICcononiy were ai^ains tlicm. Witli statesmen, too, Political I'xononu' was ii an almost e(]uall\- bad case. ( 'onserxatixes remem bered that the\' had carried the h^actory Acts ii the teeth of tlie manufacturers' aj^pcals to Politico Kconon:\'. Liberals found the same dread authorif put in their i)ath, when they proposed to rcL^ulate th conditions of contract between Irish landlords am tenants. The consequence was, that each side becam call( MS ; and after "wolf" had been cried so ofter were inclined to conjecture there w as no wolf in exist etice. Political Economy was still treated with distan respect : politician.s expressed the rei^ret with whicl they found themseh^cs obliged, by unfortunate neces sity, and under altoijether exceptional circumstance to " violate its laws." But the bold phrase of Mj (jlatlstone, " that the principles of Political Econom; must be rele^^ated to the planet Saturn," showci tile direction in which opinion was tending. Eron custom and politeness a section was still assignei to Economics at the meetings of the British Asso ciation ; but biologists and mathematicians shruggei their shoulders over the scientific pretentions of thei economic companions, and it was even suggeste( that the Association would gain in dignity by doini without their assistance. 13 In the United States, unt"' tlie civil war, Political Economy wa.-. apparently tau<;ht only because it was tauL,Hit in ICnj^land, and, ;'s in iMi^^land, was found an I easy way of "ivin^c;- students soniethini^- to do. It had not even the interest of beiiv^a cure for the discontent of workmen, because as )'et there was scarcely any discontent to cure : and men of the world were not likely to take a hii^h view of the value of a science whose professors were free traders or protectionists according to the state in which they taui^ht. Meanwhile a revolution was being accomplished in German)-. There the doctrines of Adam Smith and his successors had never gained the same complete dominance as in I^igland. The chief duty of pro- tfessors of Political Science was the preparation of candidates for tlie civil service; and consequently they were let! to look at matters with the eyes of a(,iministrators, and not, as economists in iMigland through the spectacles of the merchant or manufacturer. The Government of Prussia, with all its faults, de- .serves the reputation )f having fostered the national interests of the country, and of having defended the weak against the strong. The abolition of the feudal fetters on land, to take the most notable example, had been the work, not of revolution or of popular agitation, but of the Government guided b}- Stein and Ilardenberg. Hence the German economists had b}- no means the prejudice against Govern- ment action which was natural to an English or 14 Frcncli Liberal. And thc}' could not fail to be in- fluenced by what lias been the ^rcat achievement of German thought ir. the last fifty years, — the dis- covery and application of the Historical M^ethod. The Historical Method had already transform^-^d the study of law when it passed to Political Economy. It began to be seen that economic principles could not claim to be true at all times and places, and that their truth was relative to certain conditions which may be absent or change. The tendency to (hscontent with the old Political Economy was strengthened with the growth of Socialism, — when it was found that the orthodox doctrine showed no way out of the difficul- ties which the social clianges of the century had brought ; and still more that the orthodox doc- trine itself could be claimed, with much shew of truth, as the foundation of their most dangerous enemy, the scientific Socialism of Marx and Lassalle. The r-'.iult was evident when, at the Congress of Eisenach in 1872. it became apparent, to the conster- nation of parliamentary i^iberals and newspapers, that the great majority of professors in German Universities taught a Political P2conomy which was not that of the reputed founders of the science. Before long a similar movement began to shew itself in England. Carlyle and Ruskin had for years assailed the current Political liconomy and all its works. Their criticism was in the main true and salutary ; yet it was only too easy to show that they 4 15 iriisuiuicrstood wliat tlic (.'Cotioniist intended his science to be. Hut about ten years i\<^o the strange sij^ht was to be witnessed of an onshiu<^hton economic orthodoxy, not bv muddle-headed philanthropists or imscicntific men of letters, but by men with a compe- tent knowledi^^e of economic literature; men, moreover, in positions of authority as teachers of economics, — by Cliffe Leslie, a professor at Dublin, b)- Mr. Int^ram, from the President's chair in the Economic Section of the l^ritish Association, and a little later b)- Arnold Toynbee, an Oxford tutor. In Kn<;land, as in Germany, one of the main causes had been, the growth of In'storical studies: another was the success wliich had attended those measures of leii^islation which ran counter to the maxim of laisstc fairc. A further cause was the influence of Comte. But clearly it was the example of German economists which gave the signal for revolt. It is imj^ortant to notice the scientific character of this new movement. Up to that time the only Political Plconomy thought possible was the Political Economy of the old l^nglish school. If their doctrines were untrue, then Political Economy was untrue and ought to disappear But now the argument was, not that all Political P2conomy was valueless, but that a particular Political Economy, a particular set of doc- trines was at fault. i6 It is (lifficult to describe in c^ciu-ral terms the posi- ti^)ii of the }'()uni^cr economists. Thc\' differ from one another in the empiiasis tl'.e)' hi\- on tliis or that idea, and some (T them ;^t) to extremes in reaction lUit the jjjeneral conchisions to which tliey come ma)- per- liaps he f.iiri\* stated thus : a Poh'tical hxonom\' is [)ossihle whirh shall be of real wdue to societ)' ; in it the old doctrines will be shewn to be not untrue, but U) ha\e otdy a relative truth, and to deserve a much h.^s important place than has been assi^i^ned to them ; and th • direction (ov fruitful work is no lon''er in the pursuit of the abstract deductive method which has done as much service as it is ca[).ible of, but in followin<»" new methods of invcstii^ation — historical, statistical, inductive. In all the countries of ICurope, and n(nv lastl\' in America, the stagnant waters have been stirred. In h'r.mce the establishment, in 187S, of professorships of economics in the provincial law faculties has had the effect to the surprise of everyone, of bringing into existence a bod)' of teachers most of whom are in opposition to the tradition of Say and the Journal des Itlconomistes ; and a couple of years ago a number of heterodox "young men from Germany" successfully organized the American Economic Association. I 4 You will be inclined to ask, I imagine, why I have not reserved this historical narrative for my future pupils. I have thought it well to dwell upon it in this place, because I wish to make it clear that while I I 17 cconv:)mic studies arc now bciii^ [)ursucd in other countries with n seriousness and ardour altogether new, a j^reat number of its teachers occupy a scientific position differctit in many important respects from that of the older economists ; and that this divcri^encc is not the result of individual caprice, b.;t of a move- ment of thou'dit common to all civilized countries. It will have been evident that I regard these recent tendencies with sympalh)-. Jkit there has been so much va^uie talk about " inductive " and '•deductive," the phrase " the new political economy ' has been used to cover so much sentimcntalism, that I must crave your attention while I make my own position somewhat clearer. In the first place, I altogether repudiate the idea which most people as.-:,ociatc with the term " the new political economy." The old political economy was a neat little body of compen- dious "laws" and maxims ; and it is naturally sup- posed that now an opposition set of doj^mas is being broui;ht forward. But it was just this confidence in neat dogmas that was the main fault of the average economist of the old school. Nor can I agree with those who would try to disregard the orthodox teach- ing altogether. Much of it was founded on obser- vation and hi.story. The evil consequences of indis- criminate poor relief, for instance, were demonstrated by the history of England during the fir.st thirty years of this century ; they can be explained by some very obvious facts of human nature ; and men iS 7 need tube frc(iucntly reminded of them, — even though vvc may think th.it poor law reformers usually took too narrovv a view of the social maladies they sought to cure. Indeed I should ^o very much furllur, and even accept most of the so-called " laws " of rent, waives, profits, and price, as hyj)othetically true, — that is, true under certain conditiuns, of which the exist- ence of complete com[K'tition is the most important. Herein 1 am the docile pupil c)f Mill and Cairnes ; 1 differ from them only in laying gi eater stress on the conditions. The tendencies which they exi)ress tlo exiMt in society, with important consequences ; and when the economist looks out ujKjn the industrial world to study any specific question, the knowledge of what well-informed and undiluted and uniinptded self-interest would produce will help to interpret the facts before him. But having mastered this modicum of abstract theory, — no difficult task, — the important thing, it seems to me, is to directly tackle the pressing economic questions of the pres- ent. The method of investigation, in my opinion, most fruitful I would call the historical, did I not know that the term invites misapprehension. It is asked what light is thrown upon the difficulties of to-day by merely antiquarian research into the gilds of the 14th century. Much more, perhaps, than the critic sup- poses. But the method I mean is the method of direct observation and generalisation from facts, whether past or present ; a method you can call " inductive'* if you wish to be polite, or " empirical " if 19 you wish to indicate scorn. Let me make my meaning clearer by an example. When a historian, hke Dr. Stubbs, wants to find out the cliaracter of tlic adminis- trative system cstabHslicd by Ilcnry II. he ljocs to the laws and chronicles of the period, selects the more im- portant facts by the rules of evidence, and then generalises Irom them. It seems to me that the economist could examine, for instance, the position of the agricultural interest in Ontario by just the same sort of method. The evidence will be more copious, and he may have more difficulty in distinguishing trustworthy from untrustworthy statements, but his frame of mind and his procedure may be substantially the same as in the case of the historian. And the results will be of the same sort. The historian does not end with a '* law of administration," but he sketches the main outlines of the financial or judicial organisa- tion. So the economist will not aim at ending with a " law of rent " or a " law of production " based on Ontatian facts, but with a picture of Ontarian agri- culture, and of the influences that affect it. Having got to certain conclusions on a particular economic question, it seems to me, it is then the duty of the economist to point out the evils or dangers, if any, that may be present, and to suggest means for their removal. Some English economists indeed declare that their subject is a science, not an art, — that they must strictly limit themselves to the explanation of what is, and give no hint as to what should be. But I 20 there has ticvcr yet been an cci^nomist who lias not somctiincs frivoii advice in spite of himself: certainly the great public looks to the economist for pracUcal guidance ; and it is hotter to accept the situation. Surely he who has given more careful consideration than others to the economic side of social life, oi dit to be more capable of giving sound advice abo^t t. Criticism, however, presupposes a standartl ; we can- not praise or blame this or that action, this or that group of facts, except with reference to some test. And two such standards present themselves, the moral standard, and what, by the abuse of the term " economic," has been called the " nurcK' economic " standard. The moral standard is thai furnished by the simple precept to do unto others as we would that they should do unto us. It is still ap])licable to a wide range of conduct, — how wide it should be the duty of theological professors to ascertain, and of the pul[)it to teach. Ihit there are difficulties attending its use for our purpose. In the first place, it is becom- ing impossible, in an increasingly large number of cases, to apply the standard of what would be just as between individuals ; cases, in which, if the term "justice" is to be used at all, it must itself be in- terpreted by something beyond the mere individual. And, in the second place, even when we can decide without hesitation that a particular condition of things is morally wrong, our conclusion is not likely to carry the weight we should wish for it with those we most desire to influence, — those, namely, who exercise 1 1 f* I 31 Xhn Icp^islativc and administrative authority of tlic state. They liavc come to ho possessed with an exaj^t^crated helief in the privaie nature of morality ; a helief that tiic state has nothini;' to do vvitli moralit)' as such, so lon^ as there is no ohvious breach of public order, no violent seizure uf property, or injury to per- son. To say that a thine; is morally uron^^ is only to jirovoke the reply that it must be left to conscience and the clerLjy. Can we then fall back on the econoinic standard, the amount of wealth pn)duccd ? 1 think not It will he found, 1 believe, that many of the L;ravest evils of the present time have arisen from the almost exclusive use, durini^^ the past half century, of this criterion, — from the satisfaction people have felt in the belief that a certain course (jf action led to an increase in the production of " wealth," without stop- pine^ to consider the intrinsic cliaracter of tlu' wealth, or the wa)' in which when produced it was distributeil. The title of the Department which has just been created, and of the Chair which has been entrusted to mc, su<;^csts another, and, I would hope, a more useful and trustworthy standard. It is the Department of Po/i/ica/ Science, and the Chair of /W/V/r*?/ Economy. All the studies of this course are concerned ultimately with society in its or<^aniscd form as the State ; and in all of them, accordingh', the final test in any matter must be the welfare of the State. The association of Economics with the other subjects of the course will be of the greatest advantage by forcing us to look at 22 phenomena in their relation to the whole of society^ and not merely in their relation to the individual. This chani^e in the point of view of economists has already in large measure taken place ; and it is illus- trated by the fact that wlicncver nowadays a University cannot afford to have a whole Professor for Politi- cal Economy, the subject is almost always associ- ated with History, while until recently it was usually an appendage to the Chair of Moral IMiilosophy. What is, or will be, for the welfare of the State, is not always, it must be allow^ed, easy to make out. But again and again it is clear enough, when once we are sure of our facts. It may sometimes be demonstrated, to take an extreme case, that if certain forces operate unchecked, they will inevitably produce classes dangerous to the ver}- existence of the State. Conckisions much less startling than these, conclu- sions merelv that the State will be harmfully affected if individuals continue to act in a particular way, wilt give the economist an evident claim on the attention of statesmen, and this is an advantage which no other sort of appeal would secure. Their attention is desirable. For I believe thai the same thought that supplies a standard of judgment suggests the direction to which we may often look for aid in removing the ills we discover. It is coming to be recognized, by practical measures, if not yet in prin- ciple, that the state has a positive duty as well as a negative, and that it cannot limit its action to the pro- 23 tection of life and propcrt\'. Most of the younf^er economists feel that since the very exercise of indi- vidual riglits rests on the existence of society, of which the state is the organised expression, the state can justly claim, in the interest of the com- mon good, to modify individual rights. Of course their eyes are oi)en to the great risks which attend what is called "state interference ": they are not likely to forget the danger of increasing the official class with such an object lesson as the iJnited St itcs before them. Accordingly thcv do not go to the extrcne of preaching state action in all departments as the remedy for all our ills. Hut, on the other hand, they no longer accept Jatsse.a faire as a geperal principle. Each case, they think, must be decided on its merits, on a balance of advantages and disadvantages. The state may wisely do some things and not others ; and it may do things in some countries which in others it ought to be prevented from attempting. I have left myself but little time to speak of the other branches of Political Science,— of Political Phil- osophv, Jurisprudence, Municipal Lav, International Law, and History. Of these, Political Philosophy and Jurisprudence are both very closely allied to Econo- mics. At every turn in the work of social or political reform we are confronted with the questions of the purpose of the state, of the limits of individual liberty, and of the opposing claims of order and progress. No plan seems more likely to help us to clear 24 ideas on the subject than that of followinj^^ the liistory of political theory from Plato and Aristotle to Hegel and Ilcrl.ert Spencer, and examining the relation of the theoiies of each to the conditions of government at the time. The historical method of dealing with political theory is the more likely to beof use, since it is coming to be seen that the State itself is subject to develo})- ment; and that all we can say is, that the State at such and such a period may wisely undertake certain duties, not that the State r/y such has necessarily certain functions. Jurisprudence presents a strik- ing analogy. The analytical jurisprudenc ' Austin sought to define what constituted a law ; tii . nistorical school of Maine seeks rather to trace ho ,v the modem conception of a law arose, and how the great legal ideas of propert)-, inheritance, crime, and the like, obtained their [^resent sliape. Of the more strictly legal studies which are to form part of the Political Science Curriculum in this place, — the luiglish and Roman law, — I am not competent to speak. Mere I find myself in the company of jurisconsults whose learning puts a layman to shame. I comfort myself by remembering the counsel of an eminent constitutional lawyer in Mngland, to whom I mentioned that it did not seem quite decided whether I was to belong to Law or Artfj. Me ad\ised me to place myself on the side of the lawyers, on the ground that the lawyers are more in touch with practical life. I recognize, of course, the great value of a know- 25 ledge of the rudiments of English law to the future politician, joLirnah'st, or administrator. As an econo- mist I feel that far too little attention has been triven to the economic consequences of the legal framework of society, the legal barriers within which individual in- terest is left free to work. 15ut I am disposed to be on my guard lest my legal colleagues should yield too easily to a generous enthusiasm for the extension of the knowledge of the law. Let us now go back to the question with which we s^L out. Why has Political Science already found a place for itself among the studies of other Univer- sities, and why is it wise to give it a place at Toronto ? It is significant that in Economics, the subject which, in my opinion, forms the most important part of Tolitical Science, the beginnings of University teach- ing were closely connected with great political and in- dustrial movements. In Germany and Italy they were associated with the creation of paternal bureaucracies; and the professorships of " Chamber Sciences " estab- lished by l^rederick William I. about 1727, and in Naples and Milan some forty years later, were pri- marily intended to train administrative officials. In England the establishment of chairs of Political Economy was the offspring of the industrial revolution which rendered obsolete the old conditions both of manufacture and trade. In like maniur the present action of Universities is due to the perception of a grave political situation. Every civilized country is rapidly 26 being democratised in fact as well as in theory ; by wliich I mean that everywhere political power is falling to the numerical majority of the male inhabitants, and that " tiie masses " are everywhere bccominii^ less disposed to vote at the bidding of their social superiors. But the numerical majority of the people are ignorant, and if things are allowed to go on as they arc going on, will inevitably fall a prey to the arts of unscrupulous party politicians. With the United States before us he would indeed be an optimist who could believe that when churches are once disestab- lished, and aristocracies destroyed, and every man has a vote, the work of the political reformer is at an end. The numerical majority, again, are poor. It is equally inevitable, therefore, that attempts should be made to use their political power to secure a different distri- bution of wealth. I will not here consider how far the social difficulties from which we now suffer arc the outcome of the industrial freedom and the mechanical improvements of our own time, nor how far the attempts to secure better conditions by combination or by the action of the state may or may not be justifiable. Anyhow, it is evident that economic ques- tions are more and more foicing themselves to the front, and whatever one's sympathies may be, it is cer- tain that many unwise measures will be proposed. With a Democratic Government, politics can only be saved from corruption by a large number of citi- zens taking an active part in politics who have given V 27 a serious and honest attention to the questions at issue, and are determined to make their weight felt. To meet the industrial difficulties, again, which press upon us for solution, an impartial study of the situ- ation, with all the c'.id Economic Science can give us, is our only hope. In the Old World where a revo- lutionar)' .socialism is a menacing danger, I should urge this with n.ore vehemence than you might think suitable in this place ; for on a continent whose sur- face has as yet only been lightly scratched, it may seem absurd to talk of thrcateniuLT social convul- f sions. Still I would remind you that here in this Province you have strikes and pauperism, just as in Europe : that on this continent single individuals, or small groups of individuals, have gained control of industrial and mercantile operations vastly larger than in Europe ; and that, ,11 the other hand, associations of working men bigger than any over there have come into existence. All these things may present no immediate danger ; I know too little of the New World ^ to have an opinion ; but at any rate they deserve care- ful attention. f Even, however, if we put vital questions such a^ the relation between labour and capital on one side, it is obvious that with the growth of great industrial states, economic issues must play an increasingly large part in politics. Examples will at once occur to you in the currency, and in railroad management. If I allude to tariffs I am aware I get on dangerous ground. Yet I suppose both parties would agree that to arrive M 28 i M at an impartial and even a true conclusion as to the advisability of a certain policy, is not beyond the bounds of human ability. And they would further agree that to examine in detail the tariff history of a country, and the facts presented by the several industries, is more likely to lead to a wise conclusion as to what should be done, than if we confine ourselves to the current ^generalities as to selfishness or patriotism. The introduction of the studies of Philology and Natural Science into University life we have seen to have been due to a widening conception of the sphere of knowledge. I think it may be said that the intro- duction of I^olitical Science is due to a widening con- ception of personal duty. The work of governing a great modern state is not an easy one ; it is not one which average common sense and party management can be left alone to control. I will not here lay stress on the advantages of such a course to the man who intends to " enter politics," to the man who looks for- ward to journalism, to the future civil servants of the country. These lie on the surface, and 1 am sure they will prove sufficiently attractive to men of ambition. I leave it to my legal colleagues to dwell on its value as an introduction to the profession of a lawyer. And I shall hope to find another occasion for urging upon the clergy what appears to me the close connection of Economics with Ethics. To-day I prefer to take a broader ground, to remind you of the perils of an igno- rant democracy, and to plead for the education oj the citizen. \