IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 IIIM 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 2.2 
 2.0 
 
 i.8 
 
 
 1.25 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 ■^ 
 
 6" — 
 
 
 ► 
 
 % 
 
 <y» >• 
 
 V, 
 
 m 
 
 /, 
 
 'el 
 
 ■f H 
 
 <5> 
 
 c3 
 
 ># 
 
 >(;^ 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 ^^ 
 
 V 
 
 ;\ 
 
 iV 
 
 \ 
 
 ^<fe 
 
 V 
 
 ^A, 
 
 
 6^ 
 
 ^F^>s^ 
 
 % 
 
 V 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. M580 
 
 (7U 872-4503 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICIVIH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la n^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiquds ci-des; jus. 
 
 □ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 □ 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagee 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul^e 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 □ Coloured maps/ 
 Cartes g^ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 ore de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 n Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Piancht 
 
 les et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relie avec d'autr&s documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 iistortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Bank leaves adcied during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas et^ film6es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires: 
 
 □ 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film^ au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es, tachet^es ou piqu^es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d^tach^es 
 
 I ~l Showthrough/ 
 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quality inegale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partieilement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t6 film^es d nouveau de facon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 ^X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
tails 
 
 du 
 sdifier 
 
 une 
 Tiage 
 
 rrata 
 to 
 
 pelure, 
 n d 
 
 D 
 
 32X 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 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. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 Les images Suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 pi'is grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de l'exemplaire filmd, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commengant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour §tre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est ftlmd d partir 
 de I'angle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
I 
 
 I 
 
 
QUESTIONS OF THE DAY 
 
 1:, 
 
<«»■ 
 
 Mm 
 
# 
 
 POLITICAL AND SOCIAL 
 
 BT 
 
 //^ 
 
 ESSAYS ON 
 
 QUESTIONS OP THE DAY 
 
 GOLDWIN SMITH, D.C.L. 
 
 AUTHOR OF "THE UNITED STATES: AN OUTLINE OF POLITICAL 
 
 HISTORY," AND "CANADA AND THE CANADIAN 
 
 QUESTION " 
 
 l^etn gork anb Eonton 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
 TORONTO: THE COPP CLARK COMPANY, LIMITED 
 
 1893 
 
 All rifjhts reserved 
 
ri i 5- 
 
 11C321 
 
 6 
 
 f^y G. 
 
 lOlrS 
 
 Copyright, 1893, 
 
 By macmillan and CO. 
 
 Ifartoool) ^Srfss : 
 
 J. S. Gushing & Co. — Berwick & Smith. 
 
 Boston, Mass., U.S.A. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 These Essays are the outcome of discussions in which 
 the writer luis been engaged on the several questions, and 
 are partly drawn from papers contributed by him to differ- 
 ent periodicals. 
 
 Of the subjects some are specially British, thougli not 
 without interest for a citizen of the United States; others 
 are common to both countries. 
 
 Some service may be done by bringing an important ques- 
 tion into focus, even when the reader does not agree with the 
 opinions of the writer. The opinions of the present writer 
 are those of a Liberal of the old school as yet unconverted 
 to State Socialism, who looks for further improvement not 
 to an increase of the authority of government, but to the 
 same agencies, moral, intellectual, and economical, which 
 have brought us thus far, and one of which, science, is 
 now operating with immensely increased power. A writer 
 of this school can have no panacea or nostrum to offer ; and 
 when a nostrum or panacea is offered, he will necessarily be 
 found rather on the critical side. He will look for improve- 
 ment, not for regeneration; expect improvement still to be, 
 as it has been, gradual; and hope much from steady, calm, 
 and harmonious effort, little from violence or revolution. In 
 his estimation the clearest gain reaped by tlie world from all 
 the struggles through which it has been going, amidst much 
 that is equivocal or still on trial, will be liberty of opinion. 
 
"" PHEFACK. 
 
 It will 1„. r„„„,l tiiat, tlu> subjects are treated for the 
 most part historically, („• on general principles, an.l that the 
 political student has schU.n. encroached on the domain of 
 the practical statesman. 
 
 The thanks ot the writer are due to the proprietors and 
 editors of the .\Wth Anu'nmn Iie>'>e>v, the Forum, the Nine. 
 teenth CVntm-y, and the Nuthml /{eriew, for their courtesy in 
 permitting him to draw upon articles which appeared in their 
 periodicals, as well as for the privilege which he has enjoyed 
 of being one of their contributors. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 i« 
 
 I'heface 
 
 .Social and Tndi-stiuai, Revolution 
 The Question ok DusESTAiti-isiiMENT 
 The Political Cuisis i\ E\(JLAxn . 
 The Kmpike . . 
 
 Woman Sukfkage 
 
 The Jewish Question 
 
 The Thish Question 
 
 rRoiuuiTiON IX Canada and the United States 
 
 APrEXDlX. 
 The Oneida Community and American Socialism 
 
 PA HE 
 V 
 
 1 
 
 59 
 91 
 127 
 18;} 
 221 
 203 
 309 
 
 3;}7 
 
 vii 
 
QUESTIONS OF TUE DAY. 
 
 SOCIAL AND INDUS'IRIAL REVOLUTION. 
 
 Thk belief that the human lot ean be levelled by eeonomioal 
 change, and the desirt^ to make the attempt, are at present 
 strong; they are giving birth to a in"'*itude of projects, and 
 in Europe ar(^ threatening society with ■ iivnlsion. In Amer- 
 ica the possession of property is as y 't mort; widely diffused 
 than in Enrojje, while the hope of .assessing pvoperty is still 
 nlmost universal. Eagerness to grasp a .'all share of the good 
 luings of the present life has been intensilied by the departure, 
 or decdine, of the religiou.s faith wlucli held out to the unfortu- 
 nate in this world the hope of indemnit} in another. " If to- 
 morrow we die, and death is the end, to-day let us eat and 
 drink ; and if we have not the wherewithal, let us see if we 
 cannot take from those who have." So multitudes are saying 
 in their hearts, and philosophy has not yet famished a (dear 
 reply. Popular education has gone far enough to mak(( the 
 masses think, not far enough to make them think deeply; 
 they read what falls in with their aspirations, and their 
 thoughts run in the groove thus formed; flattering theories 
 make way rapidly, and, like religious doctrines, are received 
 without examination by the credulous and uncritical. The 
 ignorant readers of a socialistic philosopher, while they are 
 incompetent to understand or scrutinise the arguments ad- 
 dressed to their intellects, imbibe the ai)peal addressed to 
 their feelings and desires, which are fortified by the impres- 
 sion that they have philosophy on their side. The number of 
 actual Communists or Socialists in any country is as yet small 
 compared with thuc of tl e population at large. Of wdiat is 
 
QUESTIONS OF llIK DAY. 
 
 callod Socialism in (iennany iiuicli apix-ars to bo mainly a 
 revolt against the burden of military service and taxation. 
 Yet Socialistic ideas and sentiments spread especially among 
 the artisan class, Avhicb is active-minded, is gathered in com- 
 mercial centres, lives on wages about the rate of which there 
 are fre<{uent dist)utes, is filled with craving for jdeasiire by 
 ever-present tem})tati()ns, and stirred to envy b}- the perpetual 
 sight of wealth. Envy is a pottnit factor in the movement, 
 and is being constantly infJauKMl by the ostentation of the 
 vulgar rich, who thus deserve, almost as much as tiie revolu- 
 tionary artisans, the name of a dangei'ous class. This is the 
 main source of that sort of social revolution which may be 
 called Satanism, as it seeks, not to reconstruct, but to destroy, 
 and to destroy not only existing })olitical institutions, but the 
 established code of morality, social, domestic, and personal. 
 Satanism manifests its(df in different countries under various 
 forms and names, such as Nihilism, Intransigentism, Petrolean 
 ('onimunism/ the dynamite Aving of Anarchism ; Nihilism 
 being defined with nu)re startling sharpness than the rest, 
 tl'ough the destructive spirit of all is the same. Social inno- 
 vation is evi>ry where more or less allied with, and impelled 
 by, the political and rtdigious revolution which fills the civil- 
 ised world; while tli(> revolution in science has helped to 
 excite the spirit of change in every sphere, little as Utopian- 
 ism is akin to science. 
 
 No man with a brain and a h(>art can fail to be penetrated 
 with a sense of the uneipial distribution of wealth, or to be 
 willing to try any experiment which may hold out a reason- 
 able hope of putting an end to poverty. By the success of 
 su(di an exi)eriment, the happiness of the rich, of sueh, at 
 least, of them as are good nuMi, would be increased far more 
 than their riches would be diminished l>ut only the Nihilists 
 would desire blindly to plunge society into chaos. It is plainly 
 beyond our power to alter the fundamental conditions of our 
 being. There are inequalities greater even than those of 
 
 1 Out' of the French Communists, it seems, rejoices in tlie name l^ucit'er 
 Satan Vercinj'vtorix, 
 
SOCIAL AM) INDl'STUIAL HEVOLUTION. 
 
 wealth, whicli aro fixed nut by liuman lawgivers, but by nature, 
 such as those of health, strength, and intellectual power; and 
 these, almost inevitably, draw other inetiualities with them. 
 Injustice is human, and where inequality is the fiat, not of 
 man, but of a power above man, it is idle, for any practical 
 purpose, to assail it as injustice. The difference between a 
 good and a bad workman is, partly at least, the act of nature ; 
 yet to give the same wages to the good workman and the bad, 
 as Comnumists [)ropose, while it might be just from some 
 sui)erhuinan point of view, from the only point of view which 
 humanity can practically attain, would be unjust. 
 
 The universe may be tending to perfection, but perfection 
 has not yet been nor is its general huv. If Schopenhauer 
 had said that this was the worst of all conceivable worlds, he 
 would plainly have been wrong. It is possible to conceive a 
 world without affection, beauty, or ho2)e ; but when he said that 
 it was the worst of all possible worlds, that is, the worst of 
 all worlds that could subsist without dissolution, though he 
 might still be wrong, he was not so plainly wrong. Look 
 where we will, we see disorder, destruction, cruelty struggling 
 with order, achievement, and beneficence. Evolutionary pro- 
 gress itself has gone on since the beginning of geologic time 
 by the elimination or decimation of races, with much suffer- 
 ing to the eliminated or decimated. Animals live by preying 
 on other animals, inflicting pain and sometimes torture on 
 their prey. This is part of the constitution of the world. 
 Can anything be less like perfect justice than the distribution 
 of lots amongst living creatures of every kind through the 
 whole scale? The human frame is full of imperfections, and 
 liable to a thousand diseases, some of which may be caused 
 by imprudence or vice, but others by mere accident. The 
 natural character of man is full of evil and destructive pas- 
 sions. The world in which man lives wears everywhere the 
 same doubtful aspect. The weather ripens the harvest and 
 blights it; the wind wafts the ship and sinks it. An earth- 
 quake engulfs Lisbon, while they are dancing at Paris. 
 Beauty is intermixed with ugliness. The shapeliness of the 
 
QUESTIONS OF THK DAY 
 
 horse, the brilliancy of tho bird of paradise, are mated with 
 the loathsomeness of the puff adder and the toad. Imper- 
 fection apparently extends as far as the telescope can range ; 
 to the solar system in which there are evidences of irregu- 
 larity and wreck, as well as a moon devoid of atmosphere 
 and covered with extinct volcanoes, and even to the universe 
 beyond, if science has witnessed the destruction of a star. 
 Yet some of us imagine that the law of the social frame is 
 perfection, and that from the enjoyment of that perfection 
 we are debarred only ])y ini(]uitons and foolish laws or by 
 the selfishness of a privileged class, so that by repealing 
 the laws and overthrowing, or as the Jacobins thought, guil- 
 lotining, the class, we may enter into a social paradise. The 
 French Revolution was a dead-lift effort to level the human 
 lot and make felicity universal. It swept away abuses, a 
 great part of which Turgot, had he been allowed to accom- 
 l^lish his task, might have quietly removed. I)Ut it brought 
 on an avalanche of crime and suffering; it produced at once 
 a disorganisation of commerce and industry, involving the 
 deaths of a million of persons by misery ; afterwards it gave 
 birth to a military despotism and the Napoleonic wars; and it 
 has left behind as its legacies the volcanic })assions with wdiich 
 Europe still heaves, and which are always threatening it with 
 earthquakes or eruptions. After all, the comi)laints of the 
 French artisan about the inequalities of wealth and the distinc- 
 tions of class are just as passionate as ever. Apparently, to 
 lacerate and convulse the social organism is only too possible, 
 to transform it is beyond our power. This does not make it 
 the less our duty and interest to remove every social injustice 
 that can be removed, and level every unrighteous inequality 
 that is capable of being levelled. It limits effort only by 
 regulating hope. It bids us look for improvement, not for 
 regeneration, and prefer gradual reform to violent revolution. 
 
 The plans of innovation proposed vary much in character 
 and extent. Those which here Avill be briefly passed in review 
 are Communism, Socialism, Nationalisation of Land, Strikes, 
 ])lans for emancipating Labour from the dominion of Capital, 
 
SOCIAL AND IXDrSTUlAL UE VOLUTION. 
 
 by 
 
 for 
 ion. 
 acter 
 view 
 ikes, 
 pital, 
 
 and theories of innovation with regard to Currency and Banks, 
 the most prominent of which is Greenbackism, or the belief in 
 paper money. This seems a motley group, but it will be 
 seen on examination, that there runs through the whole the 
 same hope of bettering the condition of the masses without 
 increase of industry, or of the substantial elements of wealtli, 
 and without liniiting the multiplication of their numbers. 
 Through several there runs a tendency to violence and con- 
 fiscation. It may be safely said, that all the movements draw 
 their adherents from minds of the same speculative class, and 
 that industrial revolution is not, like industrial reform, often 
 recruited from the ranks of steady and ])rosperous industry, 
 Lassalle, the creator of German Socialism, and tlie brilliant 
 genius of tlie whole movement, is described to us as " a fashion- 
 able dandy noted for his dress, for his dinners, and, it must be 
 added, for his addiction to pleasure." " Chivalrous," we are 
 told he was, " susceptible, with a genuine feeling for the poor 
 man's case and a genuine enthusiasm for social reform ; a 
 warm friend, a vindictive enemy, full of ambition both of the 
 nobler and more vulgar type, beset with an importunate vanity 
 and given to primitive lusts, one in whom generous qualities 
 and churlish throve and strove side by side, and governed or 
 misgoverned a will to which opposition was almost a necessary 
 and native element." * He was tried for sedition when he was 
 twenty-three, upon which occasion, though his opinions can 
 hardly have been matured, he declared himself a social democrat 
 and revolutionary on principle. Much of his energy was spent 
 during eight jears in championing the cause of a countess, for 
 Avhom he at length procured a divorce and a princely fortune, 
 receiving as lis reward a handsome annuity. 
 
 Of Lassalle, of Karl Marx, of socialistic writers generally, 
 it may be said that they think almost exclusively of distri- 
 bution, paying little attention to ])roduotion. Production is the 
 more important factor of the two, but it affords no material for 
 the agitator. Let the fruits of labour by all means be as fairly 
 distributed as possible, still we cannot live by distribution. 
 
 1 See Contemporary Socialism, by John Rae. Page 05. 
 
QlIKSriONS OF TIIK J)AV. 
 
 T?y Communism is here meant the proposal to abrogate 
 altogether the institution of property. The reply to that 
 proposal is that property is not an institution but a fixed 
 element of human nature. A state of tilings in which a man 
 would not think that what he had made for liimself was his 
 own, is unknown to experience and beyond tlie range of our 
 conceptions. A monk may abjure property even in the work 
 of his own hands, but he feels that this is an abnegation and 
 a sacrifice. The autlior of the saying that property is theft 
 affirmed, by his use of the word theft, the rightful existence 
 of property, and it is highly probable that as a literary man 
 he would have asserted his claim to copyright, wliich is prop- 
 erty in its subtlest form. In early times property in land was 
 not individual but tribal ; it is so still in Afglianistan, while in 
 Russia and Hindustan it is vested in the village community 
 Avhich assigns lots to the individual cultivators ; still it is 
 proi)erty ; squat upon the land of an Afglian tribe, or of a 
 village community, Kussian or Hindu, in the name of hu- 
 manity, and you will be ejected as certainly as if you had 
 squatted on the land of an English s(piire. In primitive 
 hunting-grounds and pastures, property was less definite ; yet 
 even these would have been defended against a rival tribe. 
 Property in clothes, utensils, arms, must always have been 
 individual. Declare that everything belongs to the commun- 
 ity, still government must allot each citizen his rations; as 
 soon as he receives them the rations will be his own, and if 
 another tries to take them he will resist, and by his resistance 
 affirm the principle of individual property. 
 
 Religious societies, in the fervour of their youth, have for 
 a short time sought to seal the brotherhood of their members 
 by instituting within tlieir own circle a community of goods. 
 The primitive Christians did this, but they never thought of 
 abolishing property or proclaiming the communistic principle 
 to society at large. Paul distinctly ratifies tl'.e principle of 
 industry, ''Let him that stole steal no more; but rather 
 labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that 
 he may have to give to him that needeth." " Wliile the land 
 
SOCIAL A\n IN'DUSTRIAL RKVOLl IION. 
 
 'e for 
 
 libers 
 
 roods. 
 
 jht of 
 
 [ciple 
 
 lie of 
 
 itlier 
 
 that 
 
 land 
 
 roinaiuod," says Poter to Ananias, '• did it not remain tliine 
 own; and after it was sold was it not in thy ])owor '.' '' 
 Christian coniniunism, so-ealled, was in fact merely a. bcnclit 
 fund or club ; it was also short-lived ; as was the comnumism 
 of tlie jNIonastie orders, whi(!h soon gave way to individual pro- 
 prietorship on no ordinary scale in the persons of the al)l>ots. 
 
 Associations, called comnninistii^, have been loundcd in tlic 
 United States. l>ut these have been nothing- more than com- 
 mon homes for a small number of })eople, living together as 
 one household on a joint-stock fund. Their relations to the 
 comnnmity at large have been of the ordinary commercial 
 kind. The Oneida Comnuinity owned works carried on by 
 hired labour, and dealt with the outside world like any other 
 manufacturer ; nor did it make any attemjjt to propagate com- 
 munistic oi)inions. A religious dictatorshi}) seems essential 
 to the unity and peace of these households; but where they 
 have prospered economically the secret of their success has 
 been the absence of children, which limited their expenses 
 and enabled them to save money. Growing wealthy, they 
 have ceased to proselytise, and, if celibacy was kept up, have 
 become tontines. They afford no proof whatever of the prac- 
 ticability of communism as a universal system.' 
 
 What is the foundation of property ? We do not seek for 
 its theological foundation or for its moral foundation, but for 
 its economical foundation. Its economical foundation is that 
 it is the oidy known motive power of production. Slavery 
 has its whip ; but, saving this, no general incentive to labour 
 other than property has yet been devised. Communists think 
 that they can rely on love of the community, and they point 
 to the case of the soldier who they say does his duty volun- 
 tarily from a sense of military honour. It is replied that, so 
 far from being voluntary, a soldier's duty is prescribed by a 
 code of exceptional severity, enforced by penalties of the 
 sternest kind. 
 
 That the faunly and all its affections are closely bouiu 
 
 U'l 
 
 1 See Appendix. 
 
-r^— 
 
 8 
 
 QUESTIONS OK THE DAY 
 
 with property is evident; and tlie Nihilist is consistent in 
 seeking to destroy property and the family together. 
 
 Tracing pro[)erty to its source, we lind it has its origin, as a 
 general rule, not in " theft," but in labour, either of the hand 
 or of the brain, and in the frugality by which the fruits of la- 
 bour have been saved. lu the case of property which has been 
 inherited, Ave may liave to go back generations iu order to 
 reach this fact, but we come to the fact at last. Wherever 
 the labour has been honest, good we nuiy be sure has been 
 done, and the wealth of society at large, as well as that of the 
 worker, has been increased in the process. Some property 
 has, of course, been acquired by bad means, such as gambling 
 speculation, or unrighteous monopoly, and if we could only 
 distinguish this from the rest, confiscation might be just; for 
 there is nothing sacred in property apart from the mode in 
 which it has been acquired. But the tares cannot be separated 
 from the wheat; discrimination is im])ossible ; all that we can 
 do is to discourage as much as may be bad modes of acqui- 
 sition and refuse to pay homage to wealth ill acquired. 
 Hereditary w^ealth, owned by those who have themselves not 
 worked for it, strikes us as injustice ; often it is the moral ruin 
 of the heir, who sinks into a worthless sybarite. To prevent its 
 excessive accumulation is a proi)er object of the lawgiver, and 
 in fact such has been the tendency of legislation wherever 
 inheritance is not bound up with political institutions such as 
 the House of Lords. But to abolish inheritance seems out of 
 the question. Jiequest is merely a death-bed gift ; if we for- 
 bid a man to bequeath his wealth, he will give it away in 
 his lifetime, rather than leave it to be confiscated. A great 
 inducement to saving will thus be lost, and w^ithout saving 
 where would be the means of increased production, and how 
 would the economical world advance ? The waste of heredi- 
 tary wealth in idle hands is to be deplored. But we have 
 admitted that this is economically as Avell as physically an 
 imperfect world. After all, in an industrial and commercial 
 community like the United States, or even England, the 
 amount of inherited wealth must bear a small proportion to 
 
 i ■ 
 i 
 I ■ 
 
nsistont in 
 
 V. 
 
 origin, as a 
 of the hand 
 fruits of ki- 
 ich has been 
 in order to 
 Wherever 
 re has been 
 ; that of the 
 QB property 
 as gambling 
 could only 
 be just ; for 
 bhe mode in 
 be separated 
 that we can 
 les of acqni- 
 iU acquired, 
 mselves not 
 le moral ruin 
 o prevent its 
 awgiver, and 
 Ion wherever 
 ions such as 
 eems out of 
 ; if we for- 
 it away in 
 Ited. A great 
 Ithout saving 
 on, and how 
 J of heredi- 
 ut we have 
 lysically an 
 commercial 
 ngland, the 
 )roportion to 
 
 SOCIAL AND INDrsrUlAI- KKV* tH TION. 
 
 
 
 that which is the product of industry and for which service 
 lias been rendered to the commuuity by its possessor. 
 
 That wealth is v)ften abused, fearfully abused, is too true ; 
 so are strength, intellect, power, and O])i»ortunities of all kinds. 
 It is also true that nothing can be more miserable or abject 
 than to live in idleness by the sweat of other men's brows. 
 lUit this is felt, in an increasing degree, by tiie better natures ; 
 private fortunes are more held subject to the moral claims 
 of the community; a spontaneous communism is thus making 
 way, and notably, as every observer will see, in the United 
 States. Charitable and benevolent institutions rise on all 
 sides. In the United States munificence was not arrested even 
 by the Civil War. This under the dead level system of Socialism 
 would necessarily cease, and would have to be rejdaced by 
 taxation administered by State officials. The sight of wealth 
 no doubt adds a moral sting to ])overty. The ostentation of 
 it, therefore, ought to be avoided, (^ven on the ground of 
 social prudence, by the rich. But the increase of wealth, 
 instead of aggravating, improves the lot even of the poorest. 
 In wealthy commmiities the destitute are relieved; in the 
 savage state they die. 
 
 By Socialism is meant the theory of those who for free mar- 
 kets, industrial liberty, competition, private contract, and the 
 present agencies of connuerce, propose in v'arious degrees to 
 introduce regulation and renumeration of industry by "the 
 State."' What is the State '.' People seem to s',4)[)ose that 
 there is something outside and above the members of the com- 
 nuinity which answers to this nanu\ and which has duties and 
 a wisdom of its own. Uut duties can attach only to persons, 
 wisdom can reside only in brains. The State, when you leave 
 abstractions and come to facts, is notliing but the government, 
 which can have no duties but those which the constitution 
 assigns it, nor any wisdom but that which is infused into it 
 by the mode of appointment or election. What, then, is the 
 government which Socialism would set uj), and to which it 
 would intrust powers infinitely greater than those which any 
 
10 
 
 C^UKSTIONS OK rilK DAY. 
 
 ruler has ever practically wielded, with duties infiuitely harder 
 than those which tlu^ higiu'st political wisdom has ever dared 
 to undertake ? This is the tirst (juestiou whicdi the Socialist 
 has to answer. His school denounces all existing govern- 
 ments, and all those of the past, as incompetent and unjust. 
 Wluit does he propose to institute iu tlu-ir room, and by what 
 l)rocess, elective or of any other kind, is the change to be 
 made ? Wlmre will he find the human nniterial out of which 
 he can frame this earthly Providem;e, infallible and incor- 
 ruptible, whose award shall be unanimously accejjted as supe- 
 rior to all existing guarantees for industrial justice ? The 
 chiefs of industry are condemiu'd beforehand as tyranni(^al 
 capitalists. Will tlie artisan submit willingly to the auto- 
 cratic rule of his brother? If he would, is it conceivable that 
 a man whose life had been spent in manual or mechanical 
 labour would be fit for supreme rule ? The (piestion. What is 
 the government to be, once more, presents itself on the thresh- 
 old and demands an answer. To accept an nidimited and 
 most searching despotism without knowing to whose hands it 
 is to be entrusted would evidently be madness. Curiously 
 enough, from nearly the same quarter from whicdi comes 
 Socialism, with its denumd for paternal government, comes also 
 Anarchism, demanding that there shall be no government at 
 all. It is idle to form theories, whether economical or social, 
 without considering the actual circumstances under which they 
 are to be applied, and the means and jjossibilities of carrying 
 them into effect. This is the merest truism, yet it is one 
 which, so far as we know, Socialism neglects. 
 
 Despotic a government must be, in order to secure sub- 
 mission to its assignment of industrial parts and to its award 
 of wages, especially if tlie wages are to be measured not by 
 the amount or (piality of the work, but by some higher law 
 of benevolence or desert. Despotic it must be to enable it to 
 compel indolence to work at all. Its power, practically, must 
 be made to extend beyond the sphere of industry to social, 
 domestic, and individual life. Kesistance to its decrees could 
 not be permitted, nor could it be deposed in case of tyranny 
 
 i 
 
SdClAI- AM) INDl S'liUAL l{KV( H-l'IK >N. 
 
 11 
 
 ly harder 
 v^er dared 
 I Socialist 
 rt rrovern- 
 id unjust. 
 1 V)y what 
 II ge to be 
 b of which 
 ind incor- 
 l as supe- 
 ic(^ ? The 
 tyrannical 
 
 the auto- 
 ivable that 
 luech.anical 
 n, What is 
 the thresh- 
 mited and 
 se liands it 
 
 Curiously 
 ii(!h conies 
 
 conies also 
 ernnient at 
 1 or social, 
 which they 
 of carrying 
 it is one 
 
 secure sub- 
 ;o its award 
 ired not by 
 higher law 
 enable it to 
 ically, must 
 y to social, 
 screes could 
 of tyranny 
 
 or abuse. Mherty, in short, wctuld he at an end, and it is 
 (litHcult to SI (' lidw progress couhl survive liberty. The 
 
 ■ inventor of each utoi)ia assumes tlie tinality of his system. 
 He takes it for granted that time, having now pnxhieed its 
 perfect fruit, will bear no more. IJut history and scieiu-e 
 
 . tell us that time is jikely to bear new fruit without end. 
 
 I Asfcignment of manual labour and payment for its perform- 
 ance by a paternal government are cronceivable, though not 
 practically feasible, lint how could men be told off for intel- 
 lectual labour, for scientitic rescsarch, for '•ivention'/ ('ould 
 the socialistic ruler ])ick out a Sh;dves[>eare, a Newton, or an 
 Arkwright, set him to his work and i)ay him while he was 
 about it ? What security would there be against a lapse into 
 intellectual barbarism ".' Is not Socialism a manual labourer's 
 dream ? Of the artisans whom these theories flatter, all whose 
 trades minister to literature, art, or retinement would be in 
 danger of fbuling themselves without work. 
 
 Some So(!ialists [)ro])ose to cut up the imlustrial and com- 
 mercial world into phalansteries, or sections of some kind, 
 for the purposes of their organisation. But industry and 
 commerce are networks covering the whole globe. To what 
 ])halanstery would the sailors, the railway men, and the 
 traders between different countries be assigned ? 
 
 Take any complex product of hunuiu labour, say, a piece 
 of cotton goods worth a penny. Let the Socialist trace out, 
 as far as thought will go, tlu^ industries whicdi, in various 
 ways, and in different parts of the world, have contributed 
 to the production, including the making of machinery, ship- 
 building, and all the em])loyments and branches of trade 
 ancillary to these ; let him (consider how. by the operation of 
 economic law, under the system of industrial liberty, the 
 single penny is distributed among all these industries justly. 
 ■ "even to the estimation of a hair." and then let him ask 
 f himself whether his government, or his group of govern- 
 
 I ments, is likely to do better than nature. 
 
 I Socialists claim the Factory laws as a recognition of their 
 I principle and as opening the door of industrial revfdution. 
 
12 
 
 tiUKSTlUNh UF rilK DAV. 
 
 I ! 
 
 Hut it is difficult to sec wliy the cnt'onuMuont of hygienic regu- 
 lations or sjilVguiU'ds U)v lilc and liiuh is more socialistic in the 
 (jasc of a fa(;tory than in the case of a city, or wliy the protec- 
 tion (jf women and children who cainiot protect themselves 
 a.^'iiinst industrial <'ruelty and abuse is more socialistic than 
 the i)roteetion of them against wife-heating or infanticide. 
 How far legislation shall go in this diretrtion must he deter- 
 mined not by any theory, socialistic or anti-socialistic, but by 
 the character and circumstan(!es of the particular community. 
 In some comnnmities strict legislation will In' recjuired in 
 cases where in others individual intelligence and individual 
 sense of duty will suffice. That the l''actory Acts have not in- 
 duced any radical change in the imlustrial system the com- 
 plaints of the Socialists themselves are proof. 
 
 Ownership of public establishments and services, again, is a 
 question ai)art, defined by the necessities of governnumt, and 
 involves n(jthing socialistic. (lovei'unu'ut ol)viously niust own 
 everything necessary to public order or national defencie; it 
 nmst own the postal service, to which its protection is plainly 
 necessary, and to the postal service the telegraphic; service nuiy 
 be reasonably united. On the other hand, the National Avork- 
 shops at Paris, the creation of the socialist Louis lilane, were 
 a failure; even the (lovernment dock-yards in England, though 
 rendered necessary by the exigencies of national defence, are 
 said t(j be conducted less economically than private ship-yards. 
 Australians tell us that with them governnu'ut ownership of 
 railways answers w(dl. There is no reason why it should not, 
 provided the government is pure. I'he cost of competing 
 lines is saved, and if the stimulus of competitive enterprise is 
 withdrawn, tliat of administrative emulation nuiy take its 
 place. Countries might be nanu'd which, if the government 
 owned raihvays as well as subsidised them, w^ould be plunged 
 into corruption. In all government establishments there is 
 danger of corruption, still more of laziness, torpor, and som- 
 nolent routine. 
 
 More truly socialistic is the assumption by the State of the 
 duty of popular education. The prevailing opinion is that it is 
 
SOCIAL AND INDIS'I'IJIAI. I{ HVoM' I'lON. 
 
 l:t 
 
 ^uniic rcgii- 
 listic in tlie 
 
 the proteo- 
 
 tlu'inselv«^s 
 iilistic than 
 
 int'iinti<!i(h'. 
 st he (Ictcr- 
 istic, but by 
 conununity. 
 
 iT(iuii'('(l in 
 I indiviiUuil 
 have not in- 
 ■ni the com- 
 
 s, again, is a 
 
 rnniont, anil 
 
 ;ly nuist own 
 
 dt't'tMice; it 
 
 m is ])hainly 
 
 scrvici' may 
 
 tional work- 
 
 lUanc, were 
 
 and, tliough 
 
 lit 'fence, are 
 
 ship-yards. 
 
 wnership of 
 
 should not, 
 
 competing 
 
 ntcr[)rise is 
 
 ay take its 
 
 government 
 
 be plunged 
 
 its there is 
 
 r, and som- 
 
 >tate of the 
 is that it is 
 
 tlie manifest duty of the Stidc U> ]ir(>vidt' schools for every- 
 body's children (Hit ol' the ]iul)lie taxes. It might l)e tliought 
 that nothing was more manifest than the duty of every man to 
 provide education as well as food and (dothes for his own chil- 
 dren, since it is by his act that they come into the wiu'ld; 
 or less nmnifest than the duty of the prudent man who defers 
 marriagi' till he has the means of bringing up a family, to 
 provide as a tax-)»ayer for the schooling oi the (diildren of his 
 less ]>rudent ncighboui's. Tlu^ wisdom whiidi sets itself above 
 justice ought to be very high. There are some, it seems, who 
 would not only educate the children of the poor gratuitously, 
 tiiat is, out of the public taxes, but would give the school chil- 
 dren meals and v.ven clothes at the public expense. They can 
 scarcely doubt that of such a .system of almsgiving, widespread 
 )taui)erism would be the fruit. "When the duty is undertaken 
 by the State, parental duty in regard to education and whatever 
 goes with it of family character, must expire. Let those who 
 think that the intellectual fruits of the State maidiine substi- 
 tuted for voluntary agencies are entirely satisfactory, read the 
 series of papers in the New York Fornm,^ giving an account of a 
 tour of inspection among the public schools of the TTnited 
 States. The formation of character and manners the system 
 liardly professes. If it did, the manmu-s would too often belie 
 the (daim. It lacks motive power in that line. The original 
 New England school was the school of a small group of families 
 carried on under the eyes of the parents, not uni)arental, 
 therefore, and it was intensely religious. These conditions 
 are changed. Politics too and ward-demagogism lay their 
 hands on the election of school trustees. The high s(du)ols 
 are largely accused of helping to set the farmer's sons and 
 daughters above farm work, and sending them, for Avhat they 
 think higher employment, to the already over-crowded cities. 
 If this or any other mischief is being done, there is no remedy. 
 You cannot stop the State machine. AVluit is voluntary, when 
 it fails, stops of itself. However, State education is com- 
 mended to us on the ground of political necessity. We are 
 
 ' Vols. TV., v., and VI. 
 
■•«•■ 
 
 'n 
 
 14 
 
 QUKSTFUNS OK riir, DAY. 
 
 told tliiit. \vt' iiuist tMliiciitc our uiastcrs. rtipuhii' ij^'iioriiiinc 
 with iM>[iiilii,r suriiaj,'!' would he I'litiil to tlii' coiuiiiunity. 'I'liis 
 |)uts Stiite cduciitioii not on so('iiilisti(i ;j;i'ounds hut on that of 
 |t<diti('iil nt'ccssity, and necessity, whether [tolitieal, niilitary, 
 or sanitary, must he supreme. 'I'he worst of it is that unless the 
 truan(!y laws are ni(»re strictly enforced than is usually pos- 
 sihltr in a. denioeraey. the dangerous (dasses are not in sciiool. 
 
 Differentiation marks advance, and a centralisation which 
 should reduce JiU functions to those of a sinj,de organ, would 
 1)(* not an advance hut a degradation in the political as in the 
 aninuil world. 
 
 :| 
 
 I ! 
 
 A special form of Socialism is Agrarianisin. whicdi demands 
 the Nationalisation of Land. This has received an impulse 
 from rcM'cnt legislation for Ir(daii(l. Xot that the Irish tenant 
 farmer is an agi'arian socialist, or a socialist of any kind; what 
 he wants is to oust the landlord, and have the farm to himself; 
 if you demand, as a nuMuhei' of the eoiunuinity, a share of his 
 land, he will give you six feet of it. lie exaets a heavy rent 
 for a little croft from the farm labourer in his employment. 
 The sirens of Nationalisation have sung to him in vain. Nor 
 did the framers of the Laud Acts profess to abrogate or assail 
 private projx'rty in land ;, they ])rofessed only to adjust by legis- 
 lation a dispnte between two classes of property-holders whi(di 
 threatened the pea(!e of the State. Jhit the natural conse- 
 quences have been a general disturbance of ideas, and an 
 increase of hope and activity among the apostles of agrarian 
 revolution. 
 
 These theorists hold that private ])roperty in land is "a bold, 
 base, enornuius wrong, like that of chattel slavery." ]\Ir. 
 Herbert Spencer had said, " Had we to deal with the parties 
 who originally robbed the human race of its heritage, we might 
 make short work *)f the matter." To wdiich the Nationalist 
 rejdies: "Why not make short work of the matter anyhow? 
 For this robbery is not like the robbery of a horse or a sum of 
 money, that ceases with the act. It is a fresh and continuous 
 robbery that goes on every day and every hour." It is proposed 
 
«<»('1AI. AM> INDI STHIAI- UK\<»MrioN, 
 
 IS 
 
 • I^IIOl'illlCC 
 
 lity. This 
 
 on that of 
 
 1, iiiilitiiry, 
 
 t llllll'SS flic 
 
 isually i»t)s- 
 
 iii Sclldol. 
 
 itiou which 
 •jfan, would 
 al as in the 
 
 eh demands 
 
 ""'. 
 
 :in imimlsc 
 
 1 
 
 Irish tenant 
 
 kind; what 
 
 to himself; 
 
 
 share of his 
 
 
 heavy rent 
 
 
 niployment. 
 
 
 vain. Nor 
 
 
 iite or assail 
 
 
 list l)y le<^is- 
 
 
 )lders which 
 
 
 tural conse- 
 
 
 ■as, and an 
 
 
 of agrarian 
 
 
 . is "a bold. 
 
 i 
 
 ery." Mr. 
 
 
 the parties 
 
 
 e, we might 
 
 
 Nationalist 
 
 .i 
 
 cr anyhow? 
 
 i 
 
 or a sum of 
 
 f 
 
 continuous 
 
 1 
 
 ; is proposed 
 
 to forfeit, eitlicr ((pi'iily. oi' uiuicr the thin disguise (if ;i use uf 
 the taxing iKiwer, eveiy man's Ireehold, even the farm whieh 
 tlie sett lei' liiis just reclaimed hy the sweat of his own brow 
 from the wilderness; and it is emphatieally added, in language 
 whieli soumls like the exultation of injustice, that no comjien- 
 sation is due; the man l)eiiig mertdy ejected from that which 
 never ixdonged to him, as a wrongful [tosscssor is ejectecl hy 
 a court of law. That the Htate has, iiy the most solemn ami 
 repeated guarantees, ratilied pi-ivate proprietorshii) and under- 
 taken to protect it, matters nothing; nor even that it has itsidf 
 recently sold the laud of the proprietor, signed the deed of 
 sale, and received the payment. .\ghast, perha[)S, at his own 
 proposal, the reformer afterwards suggests that in mercy, not 
 of right, comj)ensation for improvements, though not for the 
 lar 1 may be granted. I'.ut it the nation compensates for all 
 improvements, it may as well at once give a deed of <[uit 
 claim foi- the land. 
 
 In the tirst ]»lace, how do the Natioualisers mean to carry 
 into effect their schemes of resumption'.' They can hardly 
 suppose that large classes will allow themsidves to be stripped 
 of all they possess, and turned out with tlieir wives and chil- 
 dren to beggary, without striking a lilow for their freeholds. 
 There would probably be civil war, in which it is by no means 
 cci'tain that the agrarian philos()]iher and his disciples would 
 get the better of tlu» owners and tilhu's of land; while, if they 
 did, social peace would hardly ensue. 
 
 Tn the second place, as it is to the government that all land, 
 or the rent of all land, is to be made over, we must ask the 
 agrarian socialist, wdiat form of government he means to give 
 us? The theorists themselves d(uiounce, as loudly as any one, 
 theknavery andcorrujjtionof the ])oliticians, who would luardly 
 he made pure and upright simply by [)utting the management 
 of all the land of the nation into their hands. I'tfipians are 
 always forgetting that in introducing their systems they will 
 have to deal with the world as it is. 
 
 Why is property in land thus singled out for forfeiture; and 
 why are its holders selected for especial denunciation? Be- 
 
•mw^ 
 
 16 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 cause, say the Xutioiialisers, the hind is the gift of God to 
 mankind, and ought not to be apjiropriated by any individual 
 owner. This wouhl preehide appropriation by a nation, as 
 well as appropriation by :i man; but let that pass. In every 
 article which we use, in the paper and type of the very book 
 which advocates confiscation, there are raw materials and 
 natural forces, which are just as much the gift of (iod as the 
 land. God made tlie wool of which your coat is woven to grow 
 on the sheep's back, and endowed steam with the [)ower to work 
 the engine of tlie mill. God, for tlie matter of that, gave every 
 man his brain and his limbs. Iiaud is worth nothing, it is 
 worth no more tlian the same extent of sea. till it is brought 
 under cultivation by labour, which must be that of ])articular 
 men. The value is the creation of individual labour and capi- 
 tal, in this case, as in the case of a manufacture. Circum- 
 stances, such as the growth of neighbouring cities, may favour 
 the landowners. Gircumstances may favour any owner or 
 producer. They may also be unfavourable to any owner or 
 producer, as they have been of late to the landowners and 
 agricultural producers in England; and unless the State means 
 to protect the liolder of property against misfortune it lias 
 surely no right to mulct him for his good luck. The coal and 
 iron beds of Wyoming and Montana, we are told, which to-day 
 are valueless, will in fifty years from now be worth millions on 
 millions, simply because in the nu\antime population will have 
 greatly increased. They will be wortli notliing unless they 
 are worked, and where is the wrong if metals or beef or wool 
 or anything else is wortli more to the ])roducer when produced 
 in the midst of a swarming ])o])ulation than when produced in 
 a desert? 
 
 Nor is there anything specially unjust, or in any way pecu- 
 liar, about the mode in which tlie labourer on land is paid by 
 tlie landowner or capitalist. Every labourer virtually draws 
 his pay from the moment when he begins his work. He draws 
 it in credit, which enables him to get what he wants at the 
 baker's and grocer's, if not at once in cash. 
 
 All land will, of course, fall under the same rul<\ The lot 
 
SOCIAL AM) INDrSTKlAL HKVOhUTIUN. 
 
 17 
 
 of God to 
 individual 
 nation, as 
 
 In every 
 very book 
 erials and 
 God as the 
 en to grow 
 >'ev to work 
 gave every 
 liing, it is 
 is brought 
 
 particular 
 
 r and capi- 
 
 Circuni- 
 
 nay favour 
 
 owner or 
 ' owner or 
 wners and 
 tate means 
 une it lias 
 le (!oal and 
 licli to-day 
 uillions on 
 1 will have 
 nless they 
 ef or wool 
 1 produced 
 roduced in 
 
 way i)ecu- 
 is paid by 
 
 ally draws 
 }fe draws 
 
 nts at the 
 
 Tlie lot 
 
 on which the nuichanic has built his house, will he nationalised 
 as well as the ranch. 
 
 It would appear that natural produce, being equally with 
 the land the gift of the Creator, should be equally exempt 
 from the possibility of lawful ownership, so that we sliould 
 Ije justified in repudiating our milk bills because cows feed on 
 
 grass. 
 
 Is Poverty the offspring of land-ownership or the land laws? 
 Any one who is not sailing on the wings of a theory can 
 answer that question by looking at the facts before his eyes. 
 Poverty springs from many sources, personal and general; 
 from indolence, infirmity, age, disease, intemperancie; from the 
 I'ailure of harvests and tlie decline of local trade; from the 
 growtli of population beyond the means of subsistence. If 
 th(! influence of the last cause is denied, let it be shown what 
 impelled the migrations by which the earth has been peopled. 
 Poverty has existed on a large scale in great commercial cities, 
 which the land laws could but little affect, and even in cities 
 like Venice, which had no land at all. 
 
 The increase of poverty itself is a fiction. The nundier 
 (if people, in all civilised countries, living in plenty and 
 comfort, has vastly increased; and tliougli, with a vast in- 
 crease in nund)ers, there is m^cessarily a jjositive increase of 
 misfortune and destitution, even the poorest are not so ill off 
 now as they were in tlu> times of i)rimitive barbarism, when 
 lamine stalked through tlu' unsettled tribes, though there was 
 no "monopoly'' of land. Tlie London slums are hideous, but 
 they are a mere spot in a vast expanse of decent homes, which 
 is rejiresented as not only the mate of poverty, but its source. 
 'I'he two or three millions of English in the days of the I'lan- 
 tagenets had more room and larger shares of the free gifts of 
 nature than the tliiily millions have now. JUit the working 
 classes of those days lived in cliimneyless hovels, and, as Dr. 
 •lessop thinks, had, in Norfolk, but a single garment, not more 
 wearing linen then than wear silk now. Loathsome diseases 
 such as leprosy were common, and a third of the population 
 was carried off at once bv the lilack Death. Local famines were 
 
r.J.tm 
 
 mm^ 
 
 mm^m 
 
 «P 
 
 mm 
 
 18 
 
 QrK8TI0NS OF THH DAY 
 
 Crequoiit, owing to the want of niacliincry of (listribution. If 
 dissiitisfaotion was not manifcstetl in strikes, it was manifested 
 in the insurrection of \Vat Tyler. Is there less poverty in 
 unprogressive eountries, such as the kingdoms of the East, or 
 Spain and Italy, than in those wliich have been the seats of 
 progress? That, of the increased wealtli of England and other 
 industrial countries, the largest sliare lias gone to wages seems 
 to be clearly proved. Nor can it he doul)ted that the remuner- 
 Jition of manual labour lias risen, comjiared witli that of intel- 
 lectual work. 
 
 We cannot all be husbandmen or personally make any use of 
 land. Wliat Ave want, as a community, is that the soil shall 
 produce as much food as possible, so that we may all live in 
 plenty; and facts as well as reason seem to show that a high 
 rate of production is attained only where tenure is secure. 
 The greater the security of tenure, the more of his labour and 
 capital the husbandman will put into tlie land, and the larger 
 the harvest will be. It has been said, and though an over- 
 statement, the saying has truth in it, that if you give a man 
 the freehold of a desert, he will make it a garden, and if you 
 give him the lease of a garden, he will make it a desert. The 
 spur which proprietorship lends to industry is proverbially 
 keen in the case of ownership of land. The French peasant is 
 a remarkable proof of this. Originally, all ownership was 
 tribal; and if tribal ownership has, in all civilised countries, 
 given place to private ownership, this is the verdict of civilisa- 
 tion in favour of the present system. Where tribal ownership 
 has lingered, as in Ivussia and in Afghanistan, general barbar- 
 ism has lingered with it. The idea that a wicked company of 
 land-grabbers aggressed upon the public proj)erty, and set up 
 a monopoly in their own favour, is a fancy as baseless as the 
 Social Contract of Kousseau, or any of the other figments 
 respecting social origins which our knowledge of primeval his- 
 tory has dispelled. Did this extraordinary tit of spoliation 
 conie Avithout concert upon every one of the countries noAv 
 included in the civilised world? Where are the records or the 
 traces of this series of events? 
 
SOCIAL AND INDlsrUIAL KKV( H.UTION. 
 
 1{> 
 
 ution. If 
 iianil'ested 
 )overty in 
 le East, or 
 e seats of 
 and other 
 iges seems 
 i remuner- 
 t of intel- 
 
 any nse of 
 
 soil shall 
 
 all live in 
 
 lat a high 
 
 is secure. 
 
 labour and 
 
 the larger 
 
 ii an over- 
 
 ive a man 
 
 and if you 
 
 lert. The 
 
 •overbially 
 
 peasant is 
 
 rship was 
 
 countries, 
 
 if civilisa- 
 
 owiiership 
 
 •al barbar- 
 
 )iupany of 
 
 ind set up 
 
 ■ss as the 
 
 Hgments 
 
 meval his- 
 
 spoliation 
 
 tries now 
 
 rds or the 
 
 Is it intended tliat the tenure nf those wlio are to hold the 
 land under the State shall be secure? If it is, nothing will 
 have been gained; i)ri\'ate property, and what, to excite odium, 
 is called monopoly, though there are luuidreds of thousands of 
 lU'oprietors, will return under another form. The only result 
 will be a change of tlie name from freeholder to something 
 ex])ressive of concession in })erpetuity by the State; and this 
 uill l)e obtained at tlie expense of a shock to agriculture 
 the innuediate effect of whicli might be a deartli. That 
 we liave all a right to live upon the land is a pro[)osition, 
 in one sense, absurd, unless the cities are to b(^ abandoned, and 
 we are to revert to the primeval state; in another sense, true, 
 though subject to the necessary limit of pojiulation. Jiut wliat 
 Xationalisation practically proposes is, that a good many of us, 
 instead of living, shall, by reduced production, l)e deprived of 
 bread and either l)e driven into exile or die. 
 
 The Xationalisation movement sometimes assumes the name 
 of the Single Tax movement, which promises us unspeakable 
 benefits if we will throw the whole burden of taxation on 
 unimproved land. AVlio would be found to lu)ld land? Shift 
 the incidence of taxation as you will, it makes itself felt 
 directly or indirectly by the whole community. If justice is 
 to reign in the fiscal region, the service rendered by government, 
 whether national or municii)al, ouglit to be as far as possible the 
 measure of taxation, and there is nothing to which government 
 and })olice render so little service as unimproved land. 
 
 When we talk of Nationalising, it is well to remember, tliat 
 though territory is still national, nations no longer live upon 
 the i)roduce of their own territory alone, and that the scope of 
 l)lans of change must be enlarged so as to embrace the com- 
 mercial world. 
 
 A niildtu' school of agrarian socialists proposes to confiscate 
 only what it calls the unearned increnu'ut of land, that is, any 
 additional value wliich. from time to time, may accrue through 
 the action of surrounding circumstances and the general pro- 
 gress of the community, without exertion or outlay on the part 
 of tlie individual ownei-. Very sharp and skilful inspectors 
 
'.^ Vl»^ t 
 
 irv 
 
 9PViPi|i 
 
 t 
 
 20 
 
 QrESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 would be required to watc^h the increase and to draw tlie line. 
 A question might also arise, whether, if unearned increment 
 is to be taken away, accidental decrement ought not to be made 
 good. But here, again, we must ask, why landed property 
 alone is to be treated in this way? Property of any kind may 
 grow more valuable without effort or outlay on the owner's 
 part. Is the State to seize upon all the premium on stocks? 
 A mechanic buys a pair of boots; the next day leather goes 
 up; is the State to take toll of the mechanic's boots? 
 
 The fact is, that the vision of certain economists is distorted, 
 and their views are narrowed by hatred of the landlord class. 
 Too many landlords are idle and useless members of society, 
 especially in old countries, under the operation of lingering 
 feudal laws ; but owners of other kinds of hereditary property 
 are often idle and useless too. Tliat the land should have been 
 so improved as to be able to pay the owner as well as the 
 (cultivator, does tlie comnuuiity no harm. This we see plainly, 
 where the owner, instead of being a rich man, is a charitable 
 institution. Xor, is any outcry raised, wlien the same person, 
 being owner and cultivator, unites with the wages of one the 
 revenue of the other. The belief that there is some evil 
 mystery in rent, lias been fostered by the metaphysical dis- 
 quisitions of economists, who seem to liave been entrapped 
 by tlieir disregard of any language but one. Rent is noth- 
 ing but the hire of land, and there is no more mystery 
 about it than tliere is about the hire of a machine or a 
 horse. In (xreek, tlie word for the hire of land and of a 
 chattel is the same. 
 
 The desire of (confiscating the proi)erty of landowners is, in 
 European (countries, closely connected with the objects of politi- 
 cal revolution, lint public spoliation, though it might com- 
 mence, would not end here, nor would there be any ground for 
 fixing this as its limit. Let a reason be given for confiscating 
 real estate honestly acquired, and the same reason will hold 
 good for confiscating personalty, the labourer's wages, and 
 the copyright of the author and the plant of the journalist 
 who wins popularity by advocating spoliation of his neigh- 
 
 J 
 
bOCIAL AND INDU8TKIAL REVOLUTION. 
 
 21 
 
 boiir. If property is theft, the property in the Savings Bank 
 is theft like the rest. 
 
 Peasant proprietorship is as mnch opposed as anything can 
 possibly be to nationalisation of land; so the Nationalisers, 
 when they o.pproach the peasant pro[)rietor, speedily find. 
 J Jut there are some who look to it with unbounded hope. The 
 political arguments in its favour are well known; among them 
 is the adamantine resistance which it offers to communism of 
 all kinds. Economical considerations are apparently against 
 it, since a farmer on the great scale in Dakota will raise as 
 nuich grain -with a hundred labourers as is raised by ten times 
 the number of French peasants. Socially there are arguments 
 both ways. The advantage, and, indeed, the ultimate existence 
 of the manorial system, must depend upon the presence of the 
 landowner upon his estate and his perfornumce of his duties to 
 his tenants. But the life of the peasant in France, and even 
 in Switzerland, is hard, and sometimes almost barbarous, wliile 
 he can scarcely tide over a bad harvest without falling into 
 the money -lender's hands. On the American continent, where 
 the people are more educated, their tendency seems to be, 
 when they can, to exchange life on the farm, which they find 
 dull an.l lonely, for the more social life of the city. Perhaps 
 the time may come when agriculture will be carried on scien- 
 tifically, and upon a large scale, to furni.sh food for an urban 
 population. The life on a great farm will be social, and will 
 exercise liigher intelligence than spade labour. England, the 
 enthusiasts of peasant proprietorshi]) should remember, is 
 organised on the manorial system, not only with manor houses 
 but with large farms and large farm buildings to correspond. 
 Do they intend to clear away the large farm buildings as well 
 ;is tlie manor houses, and to construct a set adapted to small 
 holdings in their room? 
 
 Liberation of labour from the exactions of t)ie capitalist is 
 the liope of those who set on foot co-operative works. These, 
 hitherto, have generally failed from inability to wait for the 
 
o<> 
 
 QrESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 market, and tide over bad times, from want of a guiding hand, 
 and from the unwillingness of the artisan to resign his inde- 
 pendence and liis liberty of moving from place to place; 
 though tlie last cause is less oi)erative with the submissive 
 Frenchman than with his sturdy English or American compeer. 
 Capital, spelt with a big initial letter, swells into a malignant 
 giant, the personal enemy of labour; spelt in the natural 
 way, it is simply that with which labour starts on any enter- 
 prise, and without which no labour can start at all, unless it 
 be that of the savage grubbing roots with his nails. It 
 includes a spade as w.ell as factory plant that has cost millions; 
 it includes everything laid out in education or training. We 
 might as well talk of emancipating ourselves from the tyranny 
 of food or air. Every co-operative association must have some 
 capital to begin with, either of its own or borrowed, the lender, 
 in the latter case, representing the power of large capital just 
 as much as any emjjloyer. The aggregation of great masses 
 of capital in one man's hands is a social danger, and one 
 against Avhich legislators ought, l)y all fair means, to guard, 
 though it is sometimes not without a good as])ect; witness the 
 New York Central Railroad, Avhich could hardly have been 
 brought to its present state by managers under the necessity 
 of providing an equally large dividend every year. But the 
 operation of the joint-stock principle, it seems, is evidently 
 producing a gradual change in this respect. It will often be 
 found that the rate of ])rofit nuide by a great capitalist is far 
 from excessive, though his total gains may be large. Mr. 
 Brassey's total gains were large, but tlie rate of his profits 
 did not exceed five per cent, Avhile it is very certain that with- 
 out him ten thousand workmen, destitute of capital, scientific 
 skill, and powers of command, could not have built the Victoria 
 Bridge. Co-operative farming seems to hold out more hope 
 than co-operative manufactures. Still it would need capital 
 and a head. 
 
 "I 
 
 To get rid of competition, and substitute for it fraternity 
 among workers, is the other aim of co-operation. But the 
 
SOCIAL AND INDLSTUIAL K EVOLUTION. 
 
 211 
 
 iing hand, 
 his inde- 
 to place ; 
 ubiuissive 
 I compeer, 
 malignant 
 le natural 
 any enter- 
 , unless it 
 nails. It 
 t millions; 
 iiing. We 
 lie tyranny 
 have some 
 the lender, 
 capital just 
 eat masses 
 r, and one 
 to guard, 
 tvitness the 
 have been 
 e necessity 
 But the 
 evidently 
 ill otten be 
 xlist is far 
 [irge. Mr. 
 his profits 
 that with- 
 1, scientific 
 le Victoria 
 more hope 
 eed capital 
 
 fraternity 
 But the 
 
 co-operative societies must compete with each other, while, as 
 buvers, having regard to clieapness in their purchases, they will 
 themselves be always ratifying the i)rincipleof competition, and, 
 at the same time, tliat of paying the workmen not on the fraternal 
 jtrinciple, but according to tlie amount and value of his work. 
 Every heart must be touched by fraternity and visli tliat 
 co-operation could take the place of comi)etition, which, in its 
 grinding severity, is too like many other things in this hard 
 world. But, after all, choose any manxifactured article, con- 
 sider tlie nuiltitude of people wlio in various trades and differ- 
 ent countries liave co-operated in the production, yet have not 
 coin])eted with each other, and it will be seen that, even as 
 things are, there is more of co-operation than of competition 
 among the workers. 
 
 Co-operative stores have nothing but a misleading name in 
 common with co-operative works. They simply bring the 
 consumer into direct relation with the producer, and give him 
 the benefit of wholesale prices, which may be perfectly well 
 done, so long as the officers of the assocuation can be trusted to 
 exercise for the society the same degree of skill and integrity 
 in the selection of goods which the retail tradesman exercises 
 for himself. Retail establishments, however, of the ordinary 
 kind, l)ut on a large scale, like that of the late A. T. Stewart, 
 in Xew York, with low prices, and, best of all, ready-money 
 payment, afford the i)ractical benefits of co-operation. 
 
 From Unionism and strikes, again, too much seems to have 
 been hoped by the workingman. They have not seldom 
 enabled him to make a fairer bargain with the master, and 
 they are ])erfectly lawful; though it is daily becoming more 
 apparent that the community, to save itself from the misuse 
 of Unionist power, must steadfastly guard the liberties of 
 the Non-union men. But the idea that strikes can, to an 
 unlimited, or, even, to a great extent raise wages, seems 
 unfounded. The screw may be put upon the master, but it 
 cannot be put upon the community; and it is the community, 
 not the master, that is the real employer. The community 
 
24 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 which buys the goods ultimately settles the price, and, thereby, 
 finally detennines the wages of the producers, notwithstanding 
 any momentary extortion ; nor can it be constrained, by strik- 
 ing, in the end to give more than it thinks tit and can afford. 
 The workman who strikes himself buys everything as cheap 
 as he can, and in so doing he is keeping down the wages 
 of those whose labour produces the article to the lowest point 
 in his power. By strikes, carried beyond a certain point, 
 capital may be driven away, and the trade may be ruined, as 
 trades have been ruined, but the rate of Avages will not be 
 raised. The master, though he is the immediate employer, 
 is the agent through wliom the community pays the workmen. 
 To the men, his commercial relation is at bottom that of a 
 partner, taking out of the earnings of the business the sliare 
 which is due for capital, risk, and guidance. IVfasters are 
 beginning to mark this fact in a kindly way, by giving shares 
 in the concern or premiums to tlie men, while they retain the 
 guidance in their own hands. 
 
 Strikers should never forget that they are themselves buyers 
 as well as producers, and, therefore, employers as well as 
 employed ; so that if they can strike against the rest of the 
 community, the other trades can strike against them, aiul 
 wages being thus raised all rouiul, nobody will gain anything. 
 They ought also to remember that they are parts of an indus- 
 trial organism, on the well-being of which as a whole that of 
 all its members depends, and which is deranged as a whole by 
 the disturbance of any portion of it. A strike in one section 
 of a trade throws out of Avork hundreds of men, Avomen, and 
 children, in the other sections. A strike in certain dei)art- 
 ments, such as that of raihvays, Avill stop the wheels of com- 
 merce and industry ; in >,hers, it will cause incalculable loss 
 and suffering. Suppose, when an artisan had been hurt by 
 the machinery, the surgeons were to put their heads out of the 
 AvindoAv and say they Avere on strike. 
 
 Artisans are in the habit of speaking of themselves exclu- 
 sively as Avorkingmen. Everybody Avho is not idle is a Avork- 
 ingraan, Avhether he works with his brain or Avith his hands, 
 
SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL KKVOLl'I'IOX. 
 
 [, thereby, 
 hstauding 
 , by strik- 
 !an att'orcl. 
 
 as cheap 
 the wages 
 west point 
 aiii point, 
 
 ruined, as 
 all not be 
 
 employer, 
 I workmen. 
 
 that of a 
 5 the share 
 [asters are 
 ving shares 
 I retain the 
 
 Ives buyers 
 as well as 
 rest of the 
 them, and 
 \ anything. 
 »f an indus- 
 lole tliat of 
 a whole by 
 one section 
 kvomen, and 
 iiiu depart- 
 els of com- 
 ulable loss 
 en hurt by 
 3 out of the 
 
 ?lves exclu- 
 is a work- 
 his hands, 
 
 1111(1 wluitcvcr part he may play in the service of a varied and 
 complex civilisation. 
 
 We may relegate political economy to Saturn but we shall 
 Hud that it will return. ^laltlius will return ; not the im- 
 iiionil ogre paiuU'il by fancy, hut the perfectly moral and 
 l)enevolent observer, who pointiul out a most im[)ortant fact, 
 though he })artly overlooked the limitations. If the number 
 of guests at the tabh; of life is intn-eased without limit, each 
 Hum's share of the feast must bi! diminished or some must go 
 unfed. If by the growth of the artisan population the labour 
 market is overcrowded, strike as often as you will, there can- 
 not he emphnMuent with good wages for all. The idea that 
 niulti|»lication of lid)ourers, without increase of the natural 
 means of ju'oduction, will increase the produce seems to possess 
 some minds, hut it scarcely needs confutation. 
 
 It cannot be doubted that these unhapi)y wars between 
 employer and em])l()ve(l have given birth to a set of men who 
 sul)sist by industrial war. In tln^ journals and speeches of 
 tliese men nothing is said about the improvement which 
 the artisan might make in his own condition by thrift, 
 tenii)erau(!e, and husbandry of his means; he is told only of 
 the advantage which he might gain by industrial revolution. 
 Nor is anything said about the efforts which undeniably are 
 being made by the employer and by society at large to raise 
 the lot of the artisan. Before the men themselves the hope of 
 rising into a higher grade of industry is not set. They are 
 led to regard themselves as destined to the end of their days 
 to be members of a union of wage-earners always doing battle 
 with their masters. The artisan is always the " toiler," the 
 other classes are "spoilers," and the drift of the preaching 
 is that tlie spoilers ought to be made to disgorge, and are lucky 
 :if they escape condign punishment. The underlying notion 
 .seems to be that ca])italists and the wealthy class, Avhatever 
 I may be done to them, will always be in existence and will 
 present themselves like sheep for an annual shearing. But 
 these sheep, once sheared, will grow no more wool. Men will 
 mot earn and save wealth for the despoiler. 
 
«I«IU.I^I J.PJI 
 
 20 
 
 Ql'KsriONS OF THK DAV. 
 
 Then there is tlio hope of vastly increasing the wealth of 
 the world in general, and that of the poorer class in partic- 
 ular, by means of an inconvertible Paper Currency. Of this 
 illusion, it may be truly said, that not the wildest dreams of 
 the alchemist, or ol' those adventurers who sailed in quest 
 of an Eldorado, were a more extraordinary instance of the 
 human power of self-deception. Among the champions of 
 pa])er currency there are, no doubt, many who know too well 
 what they are about, and whose aim is to defraud the creditor, 
 public and private, by paying off the debt with depreciated 
 paper, an ()j)eration the sweetness of which, in the United 
 States, umhu- the Legal Tender Act, has been already tasted, 
 liut there are also honest enthusiasts, not a few, who sincerely 
 believe that a commercdal millennium could be opened by 
 merely issuing a flood of pioiaissory notes and refusing pay- 
 ment. This prodigious fallacy has its origin simply in the 
 equivocal use of a word. We have got into the habit of 
 applying the name nu)ney to paper bank-notes as well as to 
 coin. The paper being current as well as the coin, we fancy 
 that with both alike we buy goods. But the truth is that 
 we buy only with the coin, to which, alone, the name money 
 ought to be apjdied. The bank-note is an instrument of 
 credit, like a checpu^ ; not money itself, but an order and 
 a security for a sum of money, which, the note being payable 
 on demand, can be drawn by the holder from the bank, or the 
 government, when he ])leases. When a man receives a bank- 
 note, he has virtually so much coin as the note represents put 
 to his account at the bank by which the note is issued. The 
 note is a promissory note, and the bank in increasing the 
 number of its notes, like a trader who increases the number 
 of his promissory notes, adds, not to its wealth, but to its 
 liabilities. In the slip of paper there is no value or purchasing 
 power ; nor can any legislature put value or purchasing power 
 into it. Greenbackers point to the case of postage stamps, 
 into whi(di, they say, value has been put by legislation. But 
 a postage stamp is simply a receipt for a certain sum paid to 
 the government in coin, and, in consideration of which, the 
 
 M 
 
SOCIAL AND INDlSTItlAL KKVOLLTION. 
 
 wealth of 
 in pai'tic- 
 . Of this 
 dreams of 
 I in quest 
 lice of the 
 anpions of 
 w too well 
 le creditor, 
 Aepreciated 
 the United 
 ■ady tasted. 
 \o siueerely 
 opened hy 
 d'using pay- 
 iply in the 
 he habit of 
 3 well as to 
 in, we fancy 
 •nth is that 
 lame money 
 itriiment of 
 1 order and 
 ing payable 
 bank, or the 
 lives a bank- 
 presents put 
 ssued. The 
 n-easing the 
 the number 
 but to its 
 r purchasing 
 lasing power 
 bage stamps, 
 dation. But 
 sum paid to 
 f which, the 
 
 government luulertakes to carry the letter to which the receipt 
 is affixed. 
 
 Xo paper money, it is believed, has ever yet been issued 
 excei)t in the promissory form, pledging the issuer to p;iy in 
 coin, upon demand, so that each note, hitherto, has borne upon 
 the face of it a fiat denial and abjuration of tlu; Grccidjack 
 theory. Suppose the promissory form to be discarded, and the 
 bill to be simply inscribed " one dollar," as the Fiat-nujuey 
 men propose, what wouhl "doUar" nu'an ';' It would mean, 
 say the Greenbackers, a certain proportion of the wealth of 
 the country, upon which, as an aggregate, tlu^ currency would 
 I be based. What })roportion ? Let us know what we havt) in 
 our purse, and what we can get in exchange for the paper 
 dollar on presentation ; otherwise commerce cannot go on. 
 This, however, is not the most serious difficulty. The most 
 serious difficulty is that while the coin, wlilch a convertible 
 bank-note represents, is the property of the bank of issue, the 
 aggregate wealth of the country is not the property of the 
 government, but of a multitude of private owners. The gov- 
 ernment is the possessor of nothing except the public domain 
 and a taxing power, the exercise of which it is bound to con- 
 fiiu^ to the actual necessities of the State. In issuing an order 
 for a loaf of bread, a coat, or a leg of mutton, to be taken from 
 the possessions of the community at large, it would be simply 
 signing a ticket of spoliation. 
 
 Ask the Fiat-money men whether they are prepared to take 
 their own money for taxes, and you will get an ambiguous 
 reply. Some of them have an inkling of the fatal truth, and 
 answer that the taxes must be paid in gold. The faith of 
 others is more robust. But it has been reasonably inquired 
 why the government, if it can with a printing machine coin 
 money at its will, should pester citizens for taxes at all. 
 
 That the foreigner will take the national Fiat-money, nobody 
 seems to pretend. Yet, if there is real value in it, why should 
 he not ? All the better, say the Greenbackers; if he will not 
 take our money, he will have to take our goods. Then you 
 will have to take his goods, and the commercial world will be 
 
 :** 
 
88 CiUKSTlUNS OK TIIK DAY. 
 
 rediircil iii^jiiin to barter without ii coiiimoM uicasurc of valuo, 
 which would not be a f,'r('at advance in conveniciu'e or in civi- 
 lisation. r.csi(h's, tra(h^ is not merely ii, direct inttM-ciian<fe ol' 
 commodities between two countries ; it is circuhition of thiMu 
 anu)n}f ;dl countries, th(! Tnitcd States sendinjL; cotton to 
 En,L,dand, Kughmd calico to ('hina, and Cliina tea to th(; 
 United States, which, without a common standard of value, 
 would be next to impossilile. 
 
 Ill one sense, of course, <j;overnment (^an, by its fiat, put 
 value into i)a|»er. It can make the )>ai)er legal tender for 
 debts; in other words, it (3an issue lic^enses of repudiation, and 
 th«'se licenses will retain a value till iill existing debts have 
 been repudiated, and all existing creditors cheated; but from 
 that tiint? their value will (H'iise, since everybody, from the 
 moment of their issue, will refuse to advance money, or sell 
 on credit. 
 
 in all the cases known to economical history in which gov- 
 ernments have issued inconvertible i)aper, depreciation has 
 ensued, and such value as the ])aper has retained has been 
 exactly in proportion to the h()i)0 of resumption. When cash 
 ])ayments were suspended in England, at the crisis of the 
 French war, the depreciation was comj)aratively small. sim])ly 
 because the hope of resum[)tion was strong. The guilhjtine 
 Avas plied in vain to arrest the rapid fall of French Assignats, 
 though these were not absolutely iiat-money, but bonds secured 
 on the national dojuains, which were good security for the 
 original issue. Confederate pa))er mom\v, with the defeat of 
 the Confederacy, lost the whole of its value, or retained a 
 shadow of it only through stock-jobbing tricks. In San 
 Domingo a gentleu?an, having tendered a silver American 
 dollar in payment {(>r his coffee, re(;eived from the surprised 
 and delighted ke( per of the coffee-house an armful of paper 
 change. Washington, while he was saving his country, was 
 being robbed through the operation of inconvertible paper 
 currency of part of his private estate ; and the effects, moral 
 and political, as well as commercial, of the system, during the 
 Revolutionary AVar, Avere such that Tom Paine, no timid or 
 
SnCIAI- AM) INDl'SllUAl, IM! V< >M"ri( >N. 
 
 S9 
 
 iro of viihio, 
 (> or in civi- 
 tcn^hanj^e ol' 
 ion of tlnMu 
 i>f cotton to 
 tea to the 
 irtl of value, 
 
 its fiat, put 
 1 tender for 
 udiation, and 
 r debts have 
 ed; bnt from 
 ily, from the 
 iioney, or sell 
 
 in whieh gov- 
 reciation has 
 led has been 
 Wlien casli 
 crisis of the 
 small, simply 
 'he guillotine 
 eh Assignats, 
 )on(ls secured 
 urity for the 
 ;he defeat of 
 )r retained a 
 vS. In San 
 or American 
 the surprised 
 iful of paper 
 country, was 
 ertible paper 
 effects, moral 
 n, during the 
 no timid or 
 
 SMueamish })ublicist, rccommcndfd that death shouhl be made 
 the jK'nalty of any pro[)osal to renew it. In all cases where 
 specie jKiyment has been resunied, th'e State, in addition to tlu» 
 loss incurred through disturbance and demoralisation of com- 
 merce, has paid heavily for the temporary suspension, because 
 its credit has been suspended at the same time, aiMl it has had 
 to borrow on terms wors(! than those which it conld have 
 ol)tained in the money market, had its integrity bcjui pre- 
 served. 
 
 'I'lie value is in the gold. It is in excluingo for the gold 
 that, wheiu'ver a sah^ taki's place, thi^ commodity is given. 
 Trade was originally barter, and, in the sense of being always 
 an interchange of things deemed really e(juivalent in value, it 
 is barter still. I give a <'ow for three sheep, and then give 
 the three sheep for a plough, whieh it is my idtimate object to 
 purchase. What the three sheep here do in a single transac- 
 tion, is done in transactions generally by g<dd. This funda- 
 im'utal and vital fact is obscured by the language even of 
 some economists who are sound in i)rinciple, but who speak of 
 the precious metals as though their value were conventional, 
 and like that of symbols or counters. It is nothing of the 
 kind. The first man who gave anything in ex(duuig»! for gold 
 or silver, must have done so because he deemed gold or silver 
 really valuable ; so does the last. The precious metals, prob- 
 ably, attracted at first by their beauty, their rarity, and their 
 natural cpialities ; then, they were felt to have S]>ecial advan- 
 tages as mediums of exchange and universal standards of 
 value, on accomit of their durability, tlu^r uniformity, their 
 ])ortability, their capability of receiving a stamp, of being 
 divided with exactness, and of being fused again with ease. 
 Thus they, and, in the upshot, gold, displaced all the other 
 articles, such as copper, iron, leather, shells, whieh, in ])rimi- 
 tive times, or under pressure of circumstances, were adopted 
 as mediums of exchange and standards of value. As was said 
 in the time of Edward VI. in a ])rotest against the debasement 
 of the currency, " By the whole consent of the world gold and 
 silver have gotten the estimation above all other metals, as 
 
■.-iWffi 
 
 -mmm^i^smrw* 
 
 M 
 
 ;)o 
 
 QrESriONS OF TllK DAY. 
 
 inetest to uuike nionoy iiiid be conserved as a treasure : which 
 estimation cannot be altered by a part or little corner of the 
 world, though the estimation were had but on a fanciful opin- 
 ion, where indeed it is grounded upon good reason, according 
 to the gifts that nature hath wrought in those metals whereby 
 they be metest to use for exchange, and to be kei)t for a treas- 
 ure : so as in that kind they have gotten the sovereignty, like 
 as for other jmrposes other metals do excel." ' IJut the prec- 
 ious metals have now the additional value derived from im- 
 memorial and immutable prescription, which would render it 
 practically impossible to oust them, even if a substance prom- 
 ising greater advantages for the pur})Ose could be found. The 
 French Kepublicans tried to change the era, and make chro- 
 nology begin with tlu? first year of the Kepublic, instead of 
 beginning with the birth of Christ. But they ibund that they 
 were pulling at a tree, the roots of which were too completely 
 entwined with all existing customs and ideas to be torn up. 
 It would not be less difficult to alter the medium of exchange 
 and standard of value over the whole commercial world. A 
 value which is moral, or dependent on opinion, is not the less 
 real ; the value of diamonds, as symbols of wealth and rank, 
 may be dependent, not only on oi)ini()n, but on fancy, yet it is 
 real so long as it lasts. An enormous find of gold would, of 
 course, by putting an end to its rarity, destroy its value ; this 
 is a risk which commerce runs, but it does not seem to be 
 great. Any inconvenience that might arise from the bulk and 
 weight of the precious metals, is indefinitely diminished, while 
 in iiod they are vastly, and in an increasing degree, economised 
 by the employment of bank-notes and other paper securities, 
 for gold, which are currency, though money they are not. 
 
 There ought surely to be no such thing as Legal Tender, 
 even in the case of convertible i)aper currency, either on the 
 [)art of the government or on the part of private banks. 
 It is plain injustice to comi^el us to take anybody's paper 
 as gold. If the governnuMit is solvent and its security is 
 
 1 See Mr. Richard Buuk-y's Tirhin<l niiilei- the Tiulors, Vol. T., p. ;571. 
 
SOCIAL AND INDUSTKIAL UKVOLl'TION. 
 
 31 
 
 lire : which 
 Ji'iier of the 
 iiciful opin- 
 1, according 
 lis whereby 
 for a treas- 
 •eigiity, like 
 lit the prec- 
 h1 from im- 
 1(1 render it 
 :ance proiu- 
 ound. The 
 make chro- 
 , instead of 
 id that they 
 
 completely 
 be torn up. 
 of exchange 
 
 world. A 
 not the less 
 1 and rank, 
 cy, yet it is 
 d Avould, of 
 value ; this 
 seem to be 
 le bulk and 
 shed, while 
 economised 
 r securities, 
 [•e not. 
 ^al Tender, 
 ther on the 
 rate banks. 
 )dy's paper 
 
 security is 
 
 I., p. a71. 
 
 good, the paper is sure to be taken in preference to carrying 
 about a weight of specie. Legal Tender confuses the ideas 
 of the peoj)le, shakes commercial morality, and prepares the 
 way for the attempts of the Fiat-money man, and for all the 
 mischief which they breed. 
 
 Of JUmetallism we must speak with respect, since it has such 
 ail advocate as ]Mr. Grenfell. Yet thi^ answer to the cpiestion 
 Keems to have been given with characteristic force and imn- 
 genoy by Lowe : " I congratulate you on the discovery of 
 the ])hilosopher's stone. If saying that one metal shall be 
 e(jual in value to another can make it e<pial, yoii are fairly 
 entitled to claim to have discovertMl the secret of boundless 
 riches. But why bimetallism only '.' Why not trimetallismor 
 (piadrimetallism? It is as easy to say that cojjper is equal 
 to goh! as silver." (xold and silver are two commodities, each 
 of whi( h has its value settled by (pialities and circumstances 
 over wh eh legislatures have no control. Kelative or propor- 
 tional ' .line can no more be legislated into a commodity than 
 can absolute value. By the act of a government or a combi- 
 nation of governments, silver or any other metal may authori- 
 tatively be made legal tender in a certain proportion to gold, so 
 far as the power of that government or combination of govern- 
 ments extends. This may be done Avith greater ease if 
 the community or communities are not in ;. tive commercial 
 intercourse with the rest of the world. To have two stand- 
 ards is to have none. It has been said that it matters not 
 whether cloth is bought by the yard or by the ell. It mat- 
 ters, however, whether vou li.ive one yard measure or two, 
 one of three feet and the other of three feet and a quarter. 
 It was proposed, the other day. in America, to keep up the 
 price of silver by malung all the servants of the government 
 wear silver buttons, it was askeil in reply whether the 
 servants were to pay for the buttcns, or the public; as, in 
 the first case it would be a tax on the servants, in the second, 
 ' !• .he public, for the benefit of tiie Silver mi , and the 
 money might as well have been handed to them at once. I5ut 
 we should also have been told why the public was interested 
 
'la^mm'^'wmmmmtmmmimim 
 
 32 
 
 QFESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 ill keeping up the price of silver ;uiy more than the price of 
 salt. It was mainly the influence of tlie Silver men, not the 
 prevalence of the bimetallic the»ny that carried the Silver 
 Bill. The market is flooded with silver, and if silver were 
 monetised there would be a deluge. It is mournful that an 
 industry should be de])ressed, but of all ways of relieving 
 it the most costly is derangement of the currenc3% If the 
 tobacco interest is depressed, are we to remonetise tobacco ? 
 Cond)ined with the silver interest in the agitation was the 
 recrudescence of Greenbackism and the desire of the debtor 
 class, especially the heavily mortgaged, for an easy mode of 
 paying their debts. Xor w^as the South unwilling to see a 
 partial repudiation of the Federal war debt. The struggle 
 against Greenbackism after the war was severe, though hon- 
 esty and a regard for national credit prevailed. In the Silver 
 laAV and its consecpu'uees we see one more proof of the for- 
 midable influence of sectional interests in party government 
 when parties are nearly balanced. With the movement of 
 tlie Silver men and Greenbackers in the United States con- 
 curred that of the Civil Servants in India, and a great point 
 was nuide by llinietallists of this concurrence. But in regard 
 to su(di a (piestion as a change in the world's currency, the 
 pressure of two great special interests was surely a warning 
 to be cautious. The intin-osts themselves are part of tlie 
 commercial world, and will lose in the end by derangement 
 of the (jurrency, tliough they may gain by a bonus for a time. 
 Aiilierence to the gold standard does not preclude the " free 
 coinage" of silver to any exttMit for auxiliary use, the range 
 of which each country may determine for itself. 
 
 AVith l)elief in I^'iat-money are often combined fancies about 
 the tyranny of banks, and a desire to wreck and plunder them 
 by an exercise of t\w legislative ))ower, or to seize the business 
 and its proiits. and ])lace them in the hands of the government. 
 Especially it is ])roposed to take away the circulation of bank- 
 notes, and th(^ profits belonging to it. I^anks are vital organs 
 of a eonniuM'cial community, which, in seeking their destruc- 
 tion, would show as much wisdom as a man would show in 
 
 i 
 
 -p?, 
 
mt 
 
 i«F 
 
 SOCIAL AND INDUSTIUAL KEVOH'TTOX. 
 
 83 
 
 le price of 
 11, not the 
 the Silver 
 Ivcr were 
 il that iui 
 
 relieving 
 r. If the 
 
 tobacco ? 
 1 was the 
 he debtor 
 y mode of 
 f to see a 
 i struggle 
 ough hon- 
 the Silver 
 f the for- 
 )vernment 
 cement of 
 tates con- 
 feat point 
 
 in regard 
 reiicy, the 
 a warning 
 rt of the 
 angement 
 or a time, 
 the " free 
 the range 
 
 cies about 
 ider tlicm 
 3 business 
 vernment. 
 J of bank- 
 tal organs 
 r destruc- 
 l show in 
 
 ¥v 
 
 seeking the destruction of his own heart or lungs. They per- 
 form for us three indispensal)le functions, of which tlui first is 
 the safe-keeping of our money, which, otherwise, we should 
 have to keep in our houses at our own risk, as was the practice 
 of jNIr. Pepys in the reign of Charles II., and as is still the 
 practice of the Frencli peasant, who hides his hoard in a hole 
 in the wall. The second function is that of economising gold, 
 and at the same time sparing us the inconvenience of carrying 
 about a mass of specie, by issuing bank-notes, which, being 
 secured upon the whole estate of a chartered corporation, may, 
 in general, be accepted without scrutiny, and thus form a paper 
 currency, though it can never be too often repeated that they 
 are not money. It is hard that those who are always declaim- 
 ing against metallic money for its cuml)rousness, and because, 
 as they say, it lies dead and inert, should fail to acknowledge 
 the service rendered by the banks of issue, in thus giving tlie 
 metal wings, and making it do its work for commerce in a 
 thousand jdaces, while it is locally laid up in one. The third 
 t'uiu'tion, which is the offspring of comijaratively modern times, 
 is that of enabling us to trade on credit. This the banks do 
 by discounting paper for the trader, Avliose resonrces they 
 liave satisfactorily examined, and whose eommereial character 
 they ap})rove. In this way, they both substantiate and regu- 
 late credit, neither of wliit-h could be done witliout their 
 agi'Mcy, by the mere representations of the trader him,' H", or 
 in I viva'e inquiry into his means. To stop the action c. the 
 i.anii,^ in this department would be to stoj) trading on credit. 
 <'rrd;r ilso is becoming a monster, and if there were no trust- 
 V'(»:'llr. means of measuring, regulating, and restricting it, a 
 i.ioii;,'". it would be. 
 
 The financial destructive grudges the banks the profits of 
 their circulation, and wishes to transfer them to that which he 
 calls the State, but which, it is necessary always to bear in 
 mind, is in fact simply the men who compose the government. 
 Why not grudge the banks the profits of the discount business, 
 and [)ropose to transfer that to government in the same way ';' 
 Why not do the same with all other trades by which profit, 
 
. JJ*' 
 
 84 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 and often unfair jirotit, is made ? Why not make the issuing 
 of bills of exchange or j)r<)missory notes, why not make the 
 supplying of the community with clothes or shoes, a monoijoly 
 in the hands of the government ? What is there about the 
 money trade in i)artioular to make us desire that it should be 
 put into the pow^er of the politicians ? Judging by experience, 
 it would be al)out the last branch of commerce on which we 
 should wish them to lay their grasp. 
 
 It is the business of government to put its stamp on the 
 coin, in order to assure the comnmnity that the coin is of 
 the right weight and fineness. This public authorities alone 
 can satisfav '.il" do, and they may now be trusted to do it, 
 
 though, in foi'' 
 
 iUies. kintis were in the habit of defrauding 
 
 the subject b;, dc -uug the coin. But here the duty and the 
 asefulness of government in regard to the currency seem to 
 end. The volume of bank-notes issued ought to be regulated, 
 like that of all other commercial paper, by the requirements 
 of the day, that is, by the number and amount of the transac- 
 tions ; and it will be so regulated while it is in the hands of 
 the banks, which will not fail to issue all the bills for which 
 there is real need, while, if they issue more than are needed, 
 the bills will begin to come bav)k upon their hands. But govern- 
 ment can no more decide what amount of notes is required 
 than it can decide how many promissory notes or bills of 
 exchange or dock warrants ought, at any given moment, to be 
 afloat. Setting government to settle the circulation of paper 
 is having the barometer regulated by superior wisdom Avithout 
 reference to atmosi)lu'ric ])ressure. 
 
 The J^ank Charter Act of Peel and Overstone was the off- 
 s[)ring of the alarm caused by the failure of a number of 
 private banks of issue. With deference to such high authori- 
 ties, some would say that it might have been better to adopt 
 proper safeguards in the way of inspection and other precau- 
 tionary regulations. The Act has gone into operation only to 
 a limitial extent, having ]nit an end to the existence of a fe\y 
 only of the ])rivate banks of issue, all of which it was intended 
 gradually to extinguish. It has been thrice suspended at 
 
SOCIAL AND INDISTIUAL RKVOH'TION. 
 
 35 
 
 e issuing 
 iiake the 
 uonojjoly 
 bout tlic 
 hould be 
 perience, 
 vhich we 
 
 p on the 
 3in is of 
 ies alone 
 to do it, 
 it'rauding 
 
 and the 
 
 seem to 
 egulated, 
 lirements 
 
 transac- 
 
 hands of 
 
 'or which 
 
 ? needed, 
 
 it goveni- 
 
 required 
 
 ' bills of 
 
 ent, to be 
 
 of paper 
 
 1 without 
 
 3 the off- 
 iimber of 
 
 I authori- 
 to adopt 
 r prorau- 
 
 II only to 
 of a few 
 intended 
 
 anded at 
 
 a commercial crisis, cacli suspension being attended with all 
 the inconvenience and injustice of arbitrary intervention ; and 
 its general elfect, whenever tightness is felt, appears to be to 
 produce a sort of nervous contraction, which itself tends to 
 the aificeleration of a crisis. 
 
 Ordinary banks, being private institutions, are amenable to 
 the law ; in truth, there is nothing of which the politicians 
 are fonder than harassing them with logishition. But a party 
 government, supported by a majority, is its own law, and can 
 do whptever its need or its cupidity inspires, witliout regard 
 to the interests of commerce. Even the most commercial of 
 such governments, when in want of money, does not shrink 
 from issuing legal tender currency, without reference to the 
 state of the money market. The American Silver I^ill, again, 
 shows what we might liave to expect of the power to which 
 it is demanded that the functions of the banks should be 
 transferred. Would commerce have an hour of security, or 
 be ab^e to conduct any of her operations in i)eace and confi- 
 dence, it 111? hand of demagogism were all the time upon her 
 heartstrings ? 
 
 Bank-notes, though not legal tender, cannot, in the ordinary 
 course of trade, be refused, unless there is some ])ublic reason 
 for mistrusting the solvency of the bank. This is the ground 
 for subjecting this particular class of commercial conij)anies 
 to special legislation ; and it is the sole ground ; there would, 
 otherwise, be no justification for an interference with the 
 trade in money more than with any other trade. Nor has 
 a government the slightest right to comi)el the banks to take 
 its bonds, as the condition of permitting them to pursue an 
 honest and indispensable traffic, or to levy tribute u})()n them 
 in any other way. On the other liaiid, the stockhoiih-rs of 
 banks must not suppose that they, of all investors in com- 
 merci: enterprises, are entitled to the intervention of govern- 
 ment when their affairs are mismanaged by directors of their 
 own clioosing. If they invoke such aid, they will once more 
 practi(!ally point the moral of the fable of the horse and the 
 stay. 
 

 S6 
 
 QrKSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 Tlic notion tluit society is an orgiinisni or s^a-owth must not 
 be cairifd too tar; we have an individuality and a power of 
 acting on the general frame, which the parts of an organism 
 liave not. But this view is, at least, nearer the truth tlian 
 the idea which underlies all Socialism, that society can be 
 juetamorphosed by the action of the State, an imaginary power 
 outside all personalities, superior to all special interests, and 
 free from all class passions. Nothing, indeed, can be less 
 free from class passions than the movements which have been 
 here passed in review. Social hatred is a bad reformer, and 
 the struggles to which it has given birth have almost always 
 brought to the community, and even to the most suffering 
 members of it, far more loss than gain. 
 
 To speak of Protection would be opening a wide subject, 
 and one which jjcrhaps scarcely falls within the scope of this 
 paper. There are men, sensible in other things, who imagine 
 that they can jucrease the wealth of a country by taxation. 
 So long as governments and armaments are maintained on the 
 present scale of expenditure, every country will need import 
 duties, and must have its tariff. The only alternative, at all 
 events, is direct taxation. Absolute free trade, therefore, 
 is at present out of the question, and the different tariffs 
 must be regulated a(!cording to the cdrcumstances and the 
 special iiulustries of each community. Every nation will, 
 claim this right. England, who has her tariff like the rest, 
 wisely lets in free the raw materials of her special industries 
 and the food of her innumerable workmen, while she taxes 
 finished artu'les of luxury, such as tea, wine, and tobacco. 
 Free traders, British free traders, especially, have left this too 
 much out of sight, and have compromised their theory by that 
 error, J>ut that taxation can add to wealth, that governments 
 can increase production by forcing capital and labour out of 
 their natural channels, that the interest of the peo])le Avill be 
 promoted by forbidding them to buy the best and cheapest 
 article wherever it can be found, are notions which, if reason 
 did not sufficiently confute them, have been confuted by expe- 
 
SOCIAL AND INDlsriJlAL UHVULUTlUN. 
 
 37 
 
 luu.st not 
 IMJWor of 
 organism 
 uth tlian 
 y can be 
 ly power 
 ests, and 
 be less 
 ave been 
 nier, and 
 t always 
 suffering 
 
 subject, 
 ? of this 
 
 imagine 
 ;axation. 
 Id on the 
 I import 
 ^'e, at all 
 lierefore, 
 t tariffs 
 and the 
 ion will, 
 the rest, 
 idustries 
 le taxes 
 tobacco. 
 
 tliis too 
 
 by that 
 rnments 
 :• out of 
 ! will be 
 ;lieapest 
 f reason 
 L»y expe- 
 
 rience. Under the free system the industries of England have 
 been developed, and her wealth has increased o\it of all pro- 
 portion to the growth of her })()pulation, and to an extent per- 
 I'ectly unrivalled. The verdict of economical history through 
 all the ages is the same. Nobody ])roposes to draw Customs 
 lines across the tm-ritory of any nation, anil the conunert-ial 
 advantages of freedom of exchangi; know no i)olitit'al limit, 
 though in passing from nation to nation fiscal necessity intrr- 
 v(>nes. AVhat is the proper commercial area of Protection, 
 I'rotectionists have omitted to exjilain. The workman does 
 not gain by I'rotection; he is only transferred to an artificial 
 industry from a natural industry, which would otherwise 
 develop itself, and in whi(di, as it would be nujre remuner- 
 ative, emitloyment would be more abundiint. The master 
 iiianufaeturer is the oyly man who gains; to him the comnm- 
 nity, under the Protective system, i)ays tribute ; accordingly, 
 ill roimtries where the system prevails, he is giuiei-ally a Pro- 
 tectionist, and uses iu)t argunu'ut alone, but tlie Lobby, and 
 influences 'if all sorts, to keep uj) the tariff; lu^ will even do 
 liis \itmost to en(!<)urage expenditure, rather tlian that the 
 scale of duties should go down. Xor can he be much blanu'd, 
 when the government has induced him to put his (capital into 
 the favoured trade, and stake his future on the continuance of 
 the favoux". Political or social nu)tives there may (Minceivably 
 be for Protection, as well as for any other sacrifice of (ionnner- 
 cial interest, such as war itself; l)ut tlie commercial sacrifice 
 is a fact which (lainiot be denied. To foster by protective 
 duties or bomises infant industries, Avhich may afterwards 
 sustain themselves, and ])erhai)S draw emigration to a new 
 country, in itself might be a rational and legitimate ])olicy, if 
 the nation could really keep the expei'inuMit in its own hands. 
 Hut artificial interests are created, a King is formed, and the 
 nation loses control over its tariff. Such, at least, is the case 
 with connnunities governed as are those of the American 
 continent. The field of ])()litical economy, as a region not in 
 the air but on the earth, and the tendencies, capabilities, and 
 forces of society with which the economical legislator deals, 
 
^m^mv^t 
 
 ;jK 
 
 lil KSriONS OK TllK DAY 
 
 must be treated as they really are. The coiiuection of political 
 economy with politics is a blank page in the treatises of the 
 great writers. 
 
 Steady industry, aided by the ever-growing powers of practi- 
 cal science, is rapidly augmenting wealth. Thrift and increased 
 facilities for saving and for the employment of small capitals 
 will promote the e(piality of distribution. Let governments 
 see that labour is allowed to enjoy its full earnings, untaxed 
 by war, waste, or protective tariffs. The best of all taxes, it 
 has been truly said, is the least. With equal truth it may 
 be said that the best of all governments is that which has least 
 occasion to trovern. 
 
 'Among other signs of the social and industrial unrest of the 
 age has been the production of a number of Utopias such as 
 " The Coming Kace," " Xews from Nowhere,'' " Cffisar's Col- 
 umn," and " Looking Backward," the last named being the 
 most widely circulated and popular of all. As the rainbow in 
 the spray of iS'iagara marks a cataract in the river, the appear- 
 ance of Utopias, has marked cataracts in the stream of history. 
 Tliat of More, from whi(di the general name is taken, ami that 
 of Kabelais, marked tlu; fall of the stream from the Middle Ages 
 into modern times. I'lato's " Republic " marked the catastro- 
 phe of Greek republicanism, though it is not a mere " Utopia" 
 but a great treatise on morality, and even as a political specu- 
 lation not Avholly beyond the pale of what a Greek citizen 
 might have regarded as practical reform, since it is in its main 
 features an idealisation of Sparta. Visions of reform her- 
 alded the outbreak of Lollardism and the Insurrection of the 
 Serfs. The fancies of Kousseau and Bernardin de St. Pierre 
 heralded the Revolution. Rousseau's reveries, be it observed, 
 lot only failed of reUisation, but gave hardly any sign of that 
 which was really coming. The Jacobins canted in his phrase, 
 
 1 The substance of this paper appeared in the Forum under the title of 
 "Prophets of Unrest." 
 
s(k;ial and industrial ki: volution. 
 
 but they returned to the state of luitun^ only in personal tiltlii- 
 ness, in brutality of manners, and in guillotining Lavoisier 
 because tlie Kepublic had no need of chemists. 
 
 There is a general feeling abroad that the stream is drawing 
 near a cataract now, and there are apparent grcninds for the 
 surmise. There is everywhere in the social frame an outward 
 unrest, which as usual is tlie sign of fundamental change 
 within. Old creeds have given way. The masses, the artisans 
 especially, have ceased to believe that the existing order of 
 society, with its grades of rank and wealth, is a divine ordi- 
 nance against which it is vain to rebel. They have ceased to 
 believe in a future state, in which Dives and Lazarus are to 
 change places. Of labour joiirnals secularism is the creed. 
 Social scier e, if it is to take the place of religion as a conser- 
 vative force, has not yet developed itself or got firm hold of 
 the popular mind. The rivalry of parties for popular favour 
 has made suffrage almost universal. The poor are freshly 
 possessed of political poAver, and have conceived vague notions 
 of the changes which, by exercising it, they may make in their 
 own favour. They are just in that twilight of education in 
 which chimeras stalk. This concurrence of social and eco- 
 nomical with political and religious revolution has always been 
 fraught with danger. The governing classes, unnerved by 
 scepticism, have lost faith in the order which they represent, 
 and are inclined to timorous and hasty abdication. Some 
 members of them, partly from genuine philanthropy, partly 
 from ambition, partly perhaps from fear, are, like the aristoc- 
 racy of the salons in France in the last century, dallying with 
 revolution. The sight of accumulated wealth has stimulated 
 envy to a dangerous ])itch. This is not the place to cast 
 the horoscope of society. We may, after all, be exaggerating 
 the gravity of the crisis. The First of May hitherto has 
 passed without bringing forth anything more portentous than 
 an epidemic of strikes, which, though very disastrous, as 
 they sharpen and embitter class antagonisms, are not in 
 themselves attempts to subvert society. A writer who has 
 surveyed all the democracies, says that the only country on 
 
40 
 
 QlKSriONS OK TllK DAY. 
 
 wlii(!h revolutionary Socialism lias taken hold is Kn,<,'laucl. 
 (xerniaii Socialism aj)i)oars, as was said before, to be largely 
 impatience of tiixation and conscription. ■>rn(',li is called 
 Socialism and taken as ominous of revolution which is mere.y 
 the extension of the action of government, wisely or unwisely, 
 over new [tortious of its present field, and perhaps doiis not 
 deserve the dreadcul name so much as our familiar Sunday 
 law. The crash, if it come, may not be universal. Things 
 may not everywhere take the sann^ course. Wealth in some 
 countries, when seriously alarmed, nuiy convert itself into 
 military ])ower, of which the artisans hav(! little, and may turn 
 the scale in its own favour. Though social science is as yet 
 undeveloped, intelligence has more organs and an increasing 
 hold. The efforts which good mendj(!rs of the employer or 
 wealthy class an^ making to improve social and industrial rela- 
 tions, though little rcc^ognised l)y labour journals, can hardly 
 prove altogetlun- vain. The present nuiy after all glide more 
 calndy than we think into the future. Still there is a crisis. 
 We have had tht^ Parisian Ooinmuiu', the Spanish Intransi- 
 gentes. Nihilism, Anarchism. It is not a time for playing with 
 wild-lire. Though Rousseau's scheme of regeneration by a 
 return to nature came to nothing, his deinuudations of society 
 told with a vengeance, and consigncul thousands to death by 
 the guillotine, hundreds of thousands to death by distress, and 
 millions to death by the sword or by the havoc and pestilence 
 which follow in the train of war. 
 
 The writer of an " \ito])ia," however, in trying to make his 
 fancy attractive by contrast, is naturally tempted to overpaint 
 the evils of the existing state of things. " Looking Back- 
 ward " opens with a very vivid and telling picture of society 
 as it is : 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 " Hy way of attempting to civc the reader some general impression of 
 tlie way people lived tojiether in those days, and especially of the rela- 
 tions of the rich and poor to one another, perhaps I cannot do hctter 
 than to compare society as it then was to a prodigious coach, which the 
 masses of humanity were harnessed to and dragged toilsomely along a 
 very hilly and sandy road. The ilriver was hungry, and pernutted no 
 
S(^CIAL AND INDUSTRIAL KKVOLITION. 
 
 n 
 
 lagging, though the pace was iiccossarily very slow. Dospitc the (lilViculty 
 of drawing the coach at all along so hard a road, tlic top was <iiv('rt'd 
 with passengers, who never got down, even at the steepest ascent. These 
 .seats were very breezy and comfortable. Well ni) out of the dust, their 
 occupants could enjoy the .scenery at their leisure, (»r critically discuss 
 the merits of the straining team. Naturally such places were in great 
 demand, and tlie competition for them was keen, every one .seeking as 
 the tir.st end in life to secure a seat on the coach for himself and to leave 
 it to his child after him. IJy the rule of the coach, a man could leave his 
 .seat to whom he wished; but on the other hand, there were many acci- 
 dents by which it might at any time be wholly lost. For all that they 
 were .so easy, the seats were very insecure, and at every sudden jolt of 
 the coach pei'sons were slipping out of them and falling to the groiuid, 
 where they were instantly compelled to take hold of the rope and help to 
 drag the coach on which they hail before ridden so pleasantly. It was 
 naturally regarded as a terrible nusfortune to lo.se one's .seat, and the 
 apprehension that this might happen to them or their friends was a con- 
 stant cloud \ipon the happiness of those who rode." 
 
 And what are tlu; feelings of the i)USS(Migev.s toward the 
 liapless toilers who drag the coach'.' llavt^ they lu) compas- 
 sion for the sufferings of the fellow-beings from whom fortune 
 oidy has distinguished them '.' 
 
 " oh, yes ; conuniseration was freijuently expressed by those who rode 
 for those who had to pull the coach, especially when the vehicle came to 
 a bad place in the road, as it was constantly doing, or to a particularly 
 steep hill. At such times the desperate straining of the team, their 
 agonised leaping and plunging under the pitiless lashing of hunger, the 
 many who fainted at the rope and were trampled in the mire, made a 
 very distressing spectacle, which often called forth highly creditable dis- 
 plays of feeling on the top of the coach. At such times the pas.sengers 
 would call down encimragingly to the toilers at the rope, exhorting them 
 to patience, and holding out hopes of po.ssible compen.sation in another 
 world for the hardness of their lot, while others contributed to buy salves 
 and liniments for the crippled and injured. Tt was agreed that it was a 
 great pity that the coach should be so hard to pull, and there was a sense 
 of general relief when the specially bad piece of road was gotten over. 
 This relief was not, indeed, wholly on account of the team >>■ there was 
 always some danger at these bad places of a general overtUi., .:; which all 
 would lose their seats." 
 
 These passages have their counterparts in '' News from 
 Nowhere," and "Ciesar's Column," the latter of which, inspired 
 
42 
 
 (ilKsrioNS (»!• I'lIK DAY. 
 
 apparently by IVnr oT tlic \';iiul('rl)ilts ami Aslors, delects New 
 \'ork as iiiiscrahly nislav('(l Ity a l)l()at('(l «»li!:;ai'('liy of million- 
 aires, with its (lemon fleet of ten tlioiisaml air sliijis. 'I'liey 
 will sink deep into the hearts of m;iny who will [lay little 
 attention to the speeulativ(! plans of ri'construction which 
 follow. For one reader of '• l'ro<,'ress and Poverty " who \v;is 
 at th(^ pains to follow the economical nsasonint;. the "ere 
 prohably thonsands who drank in the invectives ..nst 
 wealth and tlu; sn,%'estions of confiscation. JJut is the de- 
 scrijjtion hei-e jfiven trne or anythinj,' like the trnth '.' Are 
 tho masses toiling like the horses of a coach, not for their 
 own hentifit, l)ut oidy for that of the passeni,'ers whom they 
 draw ".' Are they not toiling to make tlieir own 1 tread, and to 
 produce by their joint lalioui' the things necessary for their 
 common sul)sistence ';' yVs t(j the vast majority of them, can it 
 be said that they are leaping and ])lunging in agony under the 
 pitiless lash of hunger, fainting at the rope and trami)led in 
 the mire? Are they not with their families living in t(derable 
 comfort, with bread enough and not without enjoyment? 
 Has it not been proved beyond doubt that their w;i' have 
 risen greatly and are still rising? Have not the -ing 
 
 (dasses, unlike the horses, votes ? fs there really any such 
 sharp division as is here assumed to exist between labour and 
 wealth ? Are not numy who have more or less of wealth and 
 who could have seats on the top of any social coa(di, labourers 
 and producers of the most effective kiiul ? Such a writer can 
 hardly be the dujjC of tlu' fallacy that those only labour who 
 work with the hands. What is tlie aniouut of the hereditary 
 l)roperty held by idlers in s\udi a country as the United States, 
 compared with that of the general wealth ? Do the holders 
 even of that projjerty really add by their existem-e to the 
 strain on the workers as the passengers by their presence add 
 to the strain on the horses ? Sup[)osing they and their riches 
 were annihilated, would the workers feel any relief? Would 
 they not rather lose a fund upon whiidi they draw to some 
 extent at need ? The hereditary wealth which is here taken 
 to be the monster inicpiity and evil, what is it but the savings 
 
HOCIAI- AM) l\|)l sriilAI, l{K\(U.i:'iI(»N. 
 
 4;: 
 
 of pnst ^'(Micnitioiis ? Iliid tli(»sc wliu luiidc it spcMit it. iiistcid 
 of Icaviiij,' it to tlicii' cliildrt'ii, slunild we l)r hotti-r ol'f .' 'I'lifii, 
 as to the f('(dillJ,^s of tlic rich toward the poor: can a l>ostt>iiiaii, 
 as this writer is, h)ok round liis own city and fail li» s(H! that 
 hoarth^ss inditfc'rcncc has its scat only in the souls of a few 
 sybarites, and that seutinu'uts at all events of [)hilanthro[)y 
 and charity are the rule '/ 
 
 It is in these utopias that we see most distinirtly embodied 
 the b(di(d" that equal justice is the natural law of the world, 
 and that nothiu<^ ket'[)s us out of it but the barrier of artiti- 
 eial arran<,'ements sot up by tlu; jiowci-, and in the interest, 
 of a class. Ih'eak down that barrier by revolutionary lej,'isla- 
 tion, aiul the kingdom of e([ual justi(!e, it is thout,dit, will 
 (lonw. Would that it were so ! Who would be so selHsh aud 
 so ififuoraut of the deepest souret^ of happiness as not to vote 
 for the change, whatever his wealth or his place on the so(ual 
 coach might be ? Hut ecjual justice is not the natural law, as 
 the world is at present, toward whatever goal we may be 
 moving. Health, strength, beauty, intellect, offs])ring, length 
 of days, are distributed with no more regard for justice than 
 are the powers of making and saving wealth. ( )ne man is born 
 in an age of barbarism, another in an age of civilisation; one 
 nuiu in the time of the Thirty Vears' War or the Eeign of 
 Terror, another in an era of peace and comparative ha])piness. 
 No justice can now be done to the myriads who have suffered 
 and died. Equal justice is far indeed from being the law of 
 the animal kingdom. Why is one animal the Ixnist of i)rey, 
 another the victim ',' Why does an ele])hant live for a cen- 
 tury and an ephemeral insect for a few hours ? Tf you come 
 to that, why should one sentient creature be a worm and 
 another a man ? In earth and skies, so far as our ken reaches, 
 imperfection reigns. He who in ''Looking r)ack\vard" wakes 
 from a magnetic slumber to find the lots of all nu'u nuule 
 just and equal, might almost as well have awakened to find 
 all human frames made ])erfect. disease and accident banished, 
 the animals all in a state like that of Eden, the Arctic regions 
 bearing harvests, 8;duira moistened with fertilising rain, the 
 
u 
 
 C^>' KSTIONS OF illK J)AY, 
 
 moon provided with an atmosphere^ and the sohir system 
 synunetrically comphited. All this is no bar to the rational 
 effort by which society is gradually improved. But it shuts 
 out the hope of sudden transformation. The social organism, 
 like the bodily frame, is imperfect ; you may help and benefi- 
 cially direct its growth, but you canjiot transform it. To 
 revolutionary violence the author of '• Looking Backward " 
 is himself wholly averse. He uses only the magic wand. 
 
 With private proj)erty, with which it is the dream of Uto- 
 pian writers to do away, go, as everybody knows, many evils ; 
 among otliers that of inordinate aceunuilation, of which there 
 may be instances in New Vork, though it is a mistake to think 
 that accumulation is a matter of modern growth, or that the 
 community was not just as much overtopped by the Medici 
 and the Fuggers of the jMiddle Ages, the great feudal land- 
 owners, and the Koman magnates, as it is by the Vanderbilts 
 and Astors ; while the restraints of public opinion were noth- 
 ing like so strong in those days as they are in ours. On the 
 other hand, it is hard to see how without private property we 
 could have the home and all that it enshrines. But let the 
 evils be whatever they may, no mf)tive power of production, 
 at least of any production beyond that necessary to stay 
 hunger, except the desire of ])roperty, is at present known. 
 A score or more of experiments in Communism have been 
 made upon the American continent by visionaries of different 
 kinds, from the founders of Brook Farm to those of the 
 Oneida Community and the Shakers. They have, as has 
 already been said, failed utterly, except in the cases where 
 the rule of celibacy has been enforced, atid the members, 
 having no wives or children to maintain, and being themselves 
 of a specially industrious and frugal class, have made enotigli 
 and more than enough for their r.vn support. Collectively, 
 the community has owned private ])roperty like other coni- 
 ])anies or corporations. Tlie Oneida Community, the most 
 ]U'osperous of all, owned three factories, in which the work- 
 men were employed on the ordinary terms. Barrack life, 
 without the home, has also been a general condition of suct'ess. 
 
w 
 
 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL REVULUTIOX. 
 
 m 
 
 So it is with regard to competition, that other social lieiid 
 of this and all Utopians. ^S'obody will deny that cumpetition 
 has its ugly side. Ikit no other way at present is '';,>...-. to 
 us of sustaining the progress of industry and seci iii.^ die 
 best and cheapest products. It is surely a stretidi of i)essi- 
 mistic fancy to describe the industrial world under the com- 
 petitive system as a horde of wild beasts rending each other, 
 or as a Black Hole of Calcutta " with its press of maddened 
 men tearing and trampling one another in the struggle to win 
 a place at the breathing holes." It is surely going beyond the 
 mark to say that all producers are "praying by night and 
 working by day for the frustration of each other's enter- 
 prises," and that they are as much bent on spoiling their 
 neighbours' crops as on saving their own. Do two tailors or 
 grocers, even when their business is in the same street, rend 
 each other when they meet ? Is there not rather a certain 
 fellowship between members of the same trade? Does not 
 each think a good deal more, both in his prayers and in his 
 practical transactions, of doing well himself than of prevent- 
 ing the other from doing well. 
 
 The writer of " Looking Backward " himself says that ''as 
 men grow more civilised, and as the subdivision of occupations 
 and services is carried out, a complex mutual dependence 
 becomes the universal rule." AVhat is this com])lex mutual 
 dependence but co-operation? 
 
 As a normal picture of our i)resent civilisation, the table of 
 contents of a newspaper is presented to us. It is a mere cata- 
 logue of calamities and horrors; wars, burglaries, strikes, 
 failures in business, coruerings, boodlings, murders, suicides, 
 embezzlements, and cases of cruelty, lunacy, or destitution. 
 No doubt a real table of contents would give a picture, though 
 not so terrible and heartrending as this, yet ri(di in catastro- 
 phes. But it is forgotten that the catastrophes or the exce^)- 
 tional events alone are recorded by newspapers, especially in 
 the tables of contents, which are intended to catch the eye. 
 No newspaper gives us a picture of the ordinary course of life. 
 No newspai>er speaks of the countries Avhich are enjoying 
 
m 
 
 QlKSriONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 secure peace, of the i)eoi)Ie wlio are making a fair livelihood 
 by honest industry, of the families which are living in comfort 
 and the enjoyment of affection. IJiiyers would hardly be 
 found for a sheet which should tell you by way of news that 
 brend was being regularly delivered by the baker and that the 
 milkman was going his round. 
 
 Centuries unnumbered, according to recent palteontologists, 
 huma'- society has taken in climbing to what is here described 
 as the level of a vast den of wild beasts or a lUack Hole of 
 Calcutta. Yet in one century or a little more it is to become 
 a paradise on earth. Not Massacluisetts or Amer' only 
 but the whole civilised world will have been regt. orated 
 and have entered into the economical Eden. So the writer of 
 *' Looking Backward " dreams ; and to show that be does not 
 regard this as a mere dream, he cites historical precedents of 
 changes which he thinks equally miraculous, the sudden and 
 unexpected success, as it appears to him to have b'ien, of 
 the American Revolution, of German and Italian uni; cation, 
 of the agitation against slavery. In two of these c: ses at 
 least, those of German and Italian unity, the wonder Av,^s not 
 that the event came at last, but that it was delayed .so long. 
 In no one of the cases, surely, is anything like a precedent for 
 so wide and universal a leap into the future to be found. From 
 Dr. Leete, who is the showman of the new heavens and new 
 earth in " Looking Bacikward," the reader learns that society, 
 in the year 2000, has undergone not only a radical change, but 
 a complete transfornuition, Boston, of course, leading the way, 
 as Paris leads in the regeneration proclaimed by Comte, and 
 all the most civilised communities dul}- following in her train. 
 Society has become entirely industrial, war being completely 
 eliminated. No fear is entertained lest when the civilised 
 world has been turned into a vast factory of defenceless 
 AV^ealth, the uncivilised world nuiy be tempted to loot it. Yet 
 this danger is not imaginary if there is any truth in what we 
 are told about the military force lying latent in China, to say 
 nothing of the ]KH)ple of South America, who, tlumgh politi- 
 cally unsuccessful, are always showing that they can fight. 
 
SOCIAL AM) TNDT'STHIAL KKVOLUTIOX. 
 
 m 
 
 The Stiit(! luis In'coiiu! the soh^ ciiitit.alist and the liiiiversal 
 eiiii)h)yer. Huw ilid all the capital pass IrcMii the hands of 
 individuals or private eoni[)anies into tliose of the State '' Was 
 it by a voluntary and universal surrender "/ Were all the capi- 
 talists and all the stockholders suddenly convinced of the 
 blessings of self-spoliation '.' Or did the government by a 
 sweei)ing act of confiscation seize all the capital ? In that 
 case, was there not a struggle ? Was not the entrance into 
 Paradise effected through a social war '.' A mere "recognition 
 of evolution'' by thinkers, the only means suggested, wouhl 
 hardly go far with cai)italists or joint-stock companies, nor 
 would they bo likely to allow themselves to be stripped by a 
 "political party" so h)ng as they had the nunins of resistance 
 in their hands. The seer was in his nuignetic trance when the 
 transfer took place, and he has not the curiosity to ask Dr. 
 Leete exactly how it was effected. For us, therefore, the 
 problem reuuiins unsolved. 
 
 The inducement to the change, we are told, was a sense 
 of the economic advantages produced by the aggregation of 
 industries under co-operative syndicates and trusts, which 
 suggested that by a complete unitication of all iiulustries 
 under the State uiuneasured beneiits might be obtained. 
 " The epoch of trusts ended in the great trust." This implies 
 a practical approval of that tendency to industrial aggrega- 
 tion, which is a most momentous feature of the economical 
 situation, and Avhich in most quarters is viewed with extreme 
 aversion and alarm. But these corporations, syndicates, and 
 trusts, on however large a scale they nuiy l)e, are still man- 
 aged each of them by a set of persons devoted to that partic- 
 ular business, and they depend for their success on personal 
 aptitude and experience. IJetween such aggregations and a 
 unification of all the industries in the hands of a government 
 there is a gulf, and we do not see how the gulf is to be passed. 
 The tendency of industry apjyears, it is true, to be toward large 
 establislnuents, the advantages of which over a multitude of 
 petty and starveling concerns, both as regards those engaged 
 in the trade and the consumer, are obvious. l>ut the larger 
 
mmmi 
 
 "* 
 
 48 
 
 QUKSTION'S OF THK DAY. 
 
 producing e.sti'.blishiucnt.s are still special, and the advantages 
 of combining iron works with cotton works are not obvious 
 at all. 
 
 To the objection that the task of managing all the indus- 
 tries of a country and its foreign commerce (for foreign com- 
 merce there is still to be) would be difftcult for any government, 
 the simple and satisfactory answer is that in Utopia there 
 could be no difficulty at .all. The government of a purely 
 industrial commonwealth is itself industrial. It consists of 
 veterans of labour chosen on account of their merit as 
 workers, the identity of which with administrative capacity 
 and power of command, as it is not likely to be tested, may 
 be assumed without fear of disproof. To banish any mis- 
 givings which we might have as lo the practicability of such 
 a government, the seer points to the ])art taken by alumni 
 in the government of universities ; surely as subtle an analogy 
 as the acutest intelligence ever discerned. The government 
 is to be "responsible" in all that it does. J^)ut how in the 
 last resort is responsibility to be enforced and usurpation to 
 be repressed by a community of industrial shee]) '' 
 
 The new organisation of labour has been followed by such 
 a flood of wealth that everybody lives, not oidy in jdenty, but 
 in luxury and refinement before unknown. Everybody is able 
 to give up work at forty-five, that being fixed as the procrus- 
 tean limit for all constitutions, and to pass the rest of his 
 days in ease and enjoyment. "No man any more has any 
 care for to-morrow, either for himself or his children, for tiie 
 nation guarantees the nurture, education, and comfortable 
 maintenance of tn-ery citizen from the cradle to the grave." 
 All the world dresses for dinner, dines well, and has wine and 
 cigars after dinner. Under all this lurks, it is to be feared, 
 the same fallacy whicli underlies the theory of Mr. Henry 
 George, who fancies that an increase of population, being an 
 increase of the luimber of labourers, will necessarily augment 
 production, and consequently that the fears of Malthus and 
 all who dread over-population are baseless. It is assumed 
 that everything is produced by labour, liut the fact is that 
 
" 
 
 SOCIAL AND INDl'STHIAL HKVOUTION'. 
 
 labour only jn'odiiccs the fonii or directs tho nutural forces. 
 Tlie material is produced by Nature, and slie will not supply 
 more than a given (piantity within a given area and under 
 given conditions. Even in Massachusetts, therefore, which is 
 supposed to be the primal scene of human regeneration, the 
 l)eople, however skilled their labour, and however Utopian 
 their industruil organisation might l)e, mdess their number 
 were limited or their territory enlarged, would starve. This 
 is a serious question for i. State whi(di "guarantees to every 
 one nurture, education, and comfortable maintenance from 
 the cradle to the grave." As the guarantee extends to the 
 citizen's wife and child as well as to himself, and they are 
 made independent of his labour, the last restraint of prudence 
 on marriage and giving birth to children would be removed. 
 The people would then probably multiply at a rate which 
 would leave Irish or French-Canadian philoprogenitiveness 
 behind, and without remedial action a vast scene of squalid 
 misery would ensue. 
 
 There is no more private proi)erty. In its place comes a 
 sense of public duty urging each num to labour. Of the 
 sufficient strength of this we are positively assured, notwith- 
 standing the result of all the experiments hitherto tried. 
 Kcality peeps out when we are told that those wlio refuse 
 to work will be ])ut into (jonfinement on bread and water. 
 This is something like a reversion, is it not, to the coach and 
 horses, with the "lash of hunger '' '' The occasional necessity 
 of a "draft" is another intinuition that Nature, though you 
 thrust her out, Avill resume her seat. 
 
 T'le stimulus of duty to the man's family would exist no more, 
 when the maintenance of his wife and children was taken off 
 his hands by the State. For the lower natures, though not 
 for the higher, there is to be emulation, which, it is taken for 
 granted, will act on them with undiminished effect when all 
 the substantial prizes have been removed. An apjjcal is also 
 made to a semi-military sense of honour, and the community 
 is organised as an army, with military titles, ap])arently for 
 that purpose. But it has been shown, in answer to other 
 
m 
 
 QI'KSI'IONS OF Till". DAY. 
 
 tliet.rists who luivc poiiittid to military lioiKnir as a .substitute 
 tor tlic ordinary uiolivcs to industry, that military duty is 
 enl'orci'd by a code oi' t'.xcM'ptioual severity. >.'()r will the mili- 
 tary forms and names have much meaning or be likely to 
 animate and ins[)irit when war, with all its i)ride, p(Mni), and 
 eireumstanee, has been banished from the earth. 
 
 All are to be paid alike, on the i)rinci|)le that so long as you 
 do your best your (h'serts are the same as those of others, 
 though your power may not be so great as theirs. Your deserts 
 in the eye of Heaven, no tloubt, are the same if you do your 
 best, and Heaven has tlu; nuMus of ascertaining that your best 
 is being done. l>ut if it is asked what means a board of indus- 
 trial veterans or their li<nitenants, supposing them to be ever 
 so excellent eraftsm':'n themselves, have of aseiu'taining that 
 every man is doing his best, the answer, we suspect, must be 
 that in Utopia such (juestions are not to be raised. In the pres- 
 ent evil world most men do their best, or something like their 
 best, because they have to make their own living and that of 
 their wives and children. Some men, under the voluntary and 
 competitive system, put forth those extraordinary efforts which 
 make the world move on. JUit the State, though it might com- 
 mand the daily amount of labour by threat of solitary confine- 
 ment on bread-and-water, could not command improvement or 
 invention. Invention, or discovery, it seems to us, would be 
 little encouraged under the Utopian system, since no man is to 
 be allov/ed to shirk labour on pretence of being a student, a 
 regulation which might have borne hard on Archimedes, Ni'W- 
 ton, or even Watt. Newton would at all events have had, in 
 obedience to an inexorable rule, to pass three years as a com- 
 mon labourer, and his labour during those three years would 
 have cost the world uncommonly dear. Even the employment 
 of Dr. Leete, the good ])hysician of this piece, for some years as 
 waiter in a restaurant was rather a waste of his, or, to speak 
 more i)roperly, of the Statt''s time. 
 
 INFoney as "a root of evil" has been totally discarded. Its 
 place is taken by credit cards, entitling the bi'ar<>r, by virtue 
 of his mere humanity, to a share of the national produce. 
 
"■ 
 
 SOCIAL AND IN'DUSTIUAT. RK VOLUTION. 
 
 61 
 
 Wages are a tiling of the past, 'llie eertiticates ar*^ to be i)rc- 
 suiited at tlu; govenuiient store, for gov(!riimeiit is the univer- 
 sal supplier as well as the universal employer of labour. 
 Money, it is said, may have been frauilulently or improperly 
 obtained, ))ut with labour eertiticates this cannot be the case. 
 We hardly see how a government store-keeper at New Orleans 
 is to tell that the certitieate was not fraudulently obtained at 
 Boston. How could the title to it be verified in foreign coun- 
 tries where, we are told, by international arrangenu-nt it is to 
 be current ? J'robably in this as in other communistic schemes 
 there is a lurking assumption that the members of the brother- 
 hood would ahvays renuiin in the same place, and that life will 
 thus become stationai'V as w(dl as devoid of individual aim. 
 Hut the weak part of the arrangement betrays itself in the 
 necessity of continuing to use the terms dollars and cents. 
 They are used only, we are told, as "algebraic syndwls." 
 Surely the most obvious and the safest course would have been 
 to discard the terms altogether, pregnant as they were with 
 evil associations and likely as they would be to perjietuate the 
 vicious desires and habits of the past. Let another set of alge- 
 braic symbols be devised, and let us see how it will work, (n 
 the case of the transition from the use of money to that of 
 labour certificates, .as in that of the transition from private 
 commerce to commerce concentrated in the hands of govern- 
 ment, "we should have liked to be present when the leap was 
 taken, or at least to have had some account of the process, 
 especially as it must have taken place at once over the whole 
 civilised worhl. For commerce, we have seen, there is still to 
 be ; the Utopian of Boston could not get his wine and cigars 
 without it. 
 
 Law as a profession has ceased to exist. Of course Avhere 
 there is no property there can be no chancery suits. As nine- 
 teen twentieths of crime arise from the desire of money — 
 not from drink, as the prohibitionists pretend — it follows that 
 in getting rid of money society has almost entirely got rid of 
 crime. Of crime, in the present sense of the term, indeed, it 
 has got rid altogether. A few victims of "at:ivism" are left 
 
 'f: 
 
 V 
 
 Mil 
 
 ffiigii 
 
52 
 
 QIESTIONS OK THE DAY. 
 
 MS a sort of tril)ut(( to rcjility, but tlicy goiu'rally siiv(^ the judi- 
 ciary trouble by pleading guilty, so liigli has the regard for 
 veracity become even in the minds of kleptomaniacs. 
 
 In the i)resent imperfect state of things, the distribution of 
 employments, it must be owned, tlumgh partly a matter of 
 choice, is largely a matter of chance and circumstance, the 
 intellectual callings going to those who have the means of a 
 high education. In utojtia it will be entirely a matter of 
 (dioice, after elaborat(^ testing of aptitudes ami tastes under 
 the guidance of a ])aternal governnunit. It is assumed that all 
 employments will attract, since some men, after deliberate 
 survey of all the walks of life, will conveniently (dioose to be 
 miners, hod-men, ''odourless excavators," brakesmen, stokers, 
 or sailors on the north Atlantic passage. Danger is even 
 attractive. Such is tlie «>xuberance of public spirit that the 
 government has <mly to declare an emi)loyment extra hazard- 
 ous and a rush of chivalrous candidates to it ensues. A rush 
 might rather have been apprehended into the lighter callings, 
 especially that of poet. Any repugnance to a particular kind 
 of labour which there might be, will be conjured away by say- 
 ing that all kinds of labour are equally honourable. Do we 
 not say this now ? Do we not feel this now much more than 
 the pessimist admits? Does any one worthy of the name of a 
 gentleman increase the burden which he imposes on his house- 
 hold "by adding to it ('ontemi)t" ? 
 
 Everybody is to l)e highly educated and thoroughly refined. 
 This in utopia will not interfere with the disposition for 
 manual labour, nor will it take away too much of the la- 
 bourer's time. One question, however, occurs to us. The 
 ])oi)ulation cannot have been highly educated when the system 
 was first introduced. How were the ignorant and unqualified 
 masses brought to take part in its introduction, and how was 
 its operation managed before they had been educated up to 
 the proper mark ? This is another problem of the transition, 
 the solution of which remains buried in the seer's magnetic 
 sleep. 
 
 The relations between the sexes and the constitution of the 
 
SOCIAI. AND INDlSriMAI, HEVOIA TloN. 
 
 68 
 
 family are, of course, to be revolutionised, and the revolution 
 lias so far an element of i)rol)al)ility that it follows what are 
 supposed to be Bostonian lines. The women are to be organ- 
 ised apart from the men as a distinct interest, under a ''general " 
 of their own who has a seat in the cabinet. They would do 
 quite enough for society, they are gallantly told, if they occu- 
 pied themselves only in the cultivation of their own charms 
 and gra(^es; women without any spechil charms and graces but 
 those -which belong to the perfornuince of their womanly duties 
 as wives and mothers being creatures unknown in utoi)ia. 
 However, for the sake of their health and to satisfy their feel- 
 ings of independence, they are to do a very moderate amount 
 of work. They have in fact little else to do. They have 
 no household cares, as the State is universal cook, housemaid, 
 laundress, seamstress, and nurse ; and " a husband is not a 
 baby that he should be cared for." ^laternity, though recog- 
 nised, is thrown into the background. It is an interlude in 
 the wonum's industrial and social life, and as soon as it is 
 over the mother returns to her " comrades," leaving her child, 
 apparently, to that universal providence, the State. Hitherto, 
 it seems, men, like ''cruel robbers," have "seized to them- 
 selves the whole product of the world and left women to beg 
 and wheedle for their share." By whose labour the world has 
 been made to yield its products for the benetit of both sexes, 
 we are not told. However, "that any i)erson should be de- 
 pendent for the means of support upon another would l)e 
 shocking to the moral sense as well as indefensible on any 
 rational social theory." Women in utopia, therefore, are no 
 longer left in " galling dependence " upon their husbands f(n- 
 the means of life, or children upon their parents. Both wif(^ 
 and child are maintained by the agency of the State, so that 
 the wife no longer owes anything to her husband, and the 
 child is at liberty, as reason and nature dictate, to snap its 
 fingers in its parents' face. Does the State give suck, and is 
 the baby no longej- ignominiously beholden to its mother for 
 milk ? Is not the government composed of persons ? Why 
 is dependence upon the persons installed at Washington less 
 
w 
 
 H 
 
 Ql'KSTlONS OF TllK DAV. 
 
 ignominious tliiin (lependcMioe ui»(Mi ;i Imslcmd, ;i latiier, or :i 
 niotluT ? To some, depeudiMiee ou the govt'rnniL'ut might 
 s('(Mii till' most gulling of all. 
 
 Falsi! delicacy is put out of the way, and the women are 
 allowed to i)roi»ose. They "sit aloft" on the toj) of the coach, 
 giving the ])ri/es for the industrial race, and select only the 
 best and noblest nu'U for their husbands. Ill-favoured men of 
 inferior type, and laggards, will l)e condemned to celibacy. 
 From them the '* radiant faces " will be averted. These ha]v 
 less persons are treated with a marked absence, to say the 
 least, of the philanthropy which overflows upon criminals and 
 lunatics, though it seems that the jdea of atavism should not 
 be ler>s valid in their case. Has Dr. Leete, when he denies 
 them marriage, found a way of extinguishing their passions ? 
 If he has not, what moral results does he exj)ect? He will 
 answer perhaps by an appeal to what may be called the occult 
 **we," that mysterious power whii^h, in an Utopia, is present 
 throughout to solve all difficulties and banish every doubt. 
 Nothing can be nu)re divine than the picture which Dr. Leete 
 presents to us ; but we look .'it it with a secret misgiving that 
 his community would be in some danger of being thrust out of 
 existence by some barbarous horde, which honoured virtue and 
 admired excellence in both sexes without giving itself over to 
 a slavish and fatuous worship of either, held men and women 
 alike to their natural duties, and obeyed the laws of Nature. 
 
 The government is tlu' universal publisher, and is bound to 
 publish everything brought to it, but on condition that the 
 author pay the first cost out of his "credit." How the author, 
 while preparing himself to write " Faradise Lost," or the 
 " Principia," is to earn a labour credit, we hardly see. The 
 literature of iitopia is of course divine. To read oiie of Ber- 
 rian's novels or one of Oates's poems is worth a year of one's 
 life. Would that we had a specimen of either! We should 
 then be able to see how far it transcended Shakespeare or 
 Scott. For love stories, we are told, there will be material in 
 plenty and of a much higher (piality than there was in the 
 days of coarse and stormy passion. T'he actual love affair 
 
SOCIAL AND INDISrUIAL I{KV( >M "I'lON. 
 
 61^ 
 
 that tiikt's pliice in "Lookinj,' Uuckwiirii "' ccrtiiiiil}' docs not 
 remind us of " Jlonieo and Juliet.'' Ol' the jiulpit eUxpu'nee 
 we have a specimen, and it is startlingly like that ol' our own 
 century. One ^reat imi)rovement, however, there is; the 
 preaching is by telephone and you can shut it off. 
 
 The physical arran^'ements are carried to niillenarian per- 
 fection. Instead of a multitude of seiiarate uml)rellas, one 
 common uml)rella is ])ut up by the State over i'xjston when it 
 rains. The whoh* community is converted into one vast 
 Whiteley's or Wanamaker's establislr.uent. These visions of 
 a material heaven on earth naturally arise as the h()[)e of a 
 spiritual heaven fades away. A material heaven on earth it 
 is. The arrangements for shopping, like everything (dse, are 
 divine. I'ublic banch^ are playing seraphic music through the 
 whole twenty-four hours, and you turn on the i)iece you like 
 by telephone. Public buildings are palaces, and their equiji- 
 ment is a paragon of luxury. We only wonder how the un- 
 speakable privileges of the city can be extended to the country, 
 and who will be contented to stay in the country if they are 
 not. The American dream is of city life. I*)Ut let the material 
 happiness be as brilliant as it will, supposing every shadow of 
 economical evil to have vanished, there is one shadow that will 
 not away. It is signified that at a man's decease the State 
 allows a fixed sum for his funeral expenses. This is the only 
 intimation that over the material Paradise hovers Death. 
 
 A vista of illimitable progress, progress so glorious that 
 it dazzles the prophetic eye, is said all the time to be opened. 
 But how can there be progress beyond perfection ? Finality 
 is the trap into which all Utopians fall. Comte, after tracing 
 the movement of humanity through all the ages down to his 
 own time, undertakes by his supreme intelligence to furnish 
 a creed and a set of institutions which are to serve forever. 
 Progress, however, we do not doubt there would be with a 
 vengeance. The monotony, the constraint, the procrusteanisin, 
 the dulness, the despotism of the system woxdd soon give birth 
 to general revolt, which would dash the whole structure to 
 pieces. 
 
T>^ 
 
 tilKSTlONS OK 11 IK DAV 
 
 It may sfciii that we aic guilty of a platitude in seriously 
 eriticising a coniijositiou tlie author of \vhi(;h hin'stjlt' [icrhaiis 
 was hardly serious in what lit! wrote. lUit the destructive 
 passages, we repeat, tell, while the constructive part, as soon 
 as it is touched by the linger of criticism, vanishes into the 
 inune. 
 
sly 
 
 ive 
 oil 
 ;he 
 
 THE QUESTION OF DISESTABLISHMENT. 
 
f- 
 
 ■ 
 
■ 
 
 mB 
 
 THE QUESTION OF DISESTABLISHMENT. 
 
 DisESTAHLi.sHMKXT of the Cliurcli in England and Scot- 
 land is a question evidently at hand. It is a subject to be 
 approached not only by every religious man, but by every 
 statesman, with tenderness and care. The village church in 
 Avhich " the kneeling hamlet drains the vintage of the grapes 
 of God," with its altar at which the people of the parish have 
 been married, the font at whicih they were christened, and its 
 churchyard in which their forefathers sleep, has been the 
 great feature not only of rural landscape but of rural life. 
 The Kectory, if its occupant did its duty, has been tlie centre 
 of rural civilisation, education, and benevolence. It lias done 
 more in this way than the Hall. The religious sentiment and 
 poetry of the nation have had their centre in the Cathedral. 
 In Scotland, if tlie aspect of the Established Church is less 
 picturesque, the attachment of the people to it and the con- 
 nection of their spiritual life with it, in spite of disruption, 
 are still stronger. It will be a great misfortune if the pro- 
 blem were left to be settled by faction, and political gamblers 
 were allowed to use disestablishment as the means of loading 
 their dice. 
 
 That there is a current almost througliout the civilised 
 world setting towards disestablishment can hardly be denied. 
 It is true that, as we have been bidden to observe, in every 
 monarchical country of Europe the Church is still established 
 and endowed, while in some, as in Austria and in Russia, it 
 is still in a high degree endowed, even monasteries witli their 
 estates remaining undisturbed. Almost everywhere there are 
 Ministries of VnhYu: Worship. Even repul)lican France has 
 her Established Church, sidjsidised by the State. This is true, 
 
 60 
 
iT 
 
 ()0 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 and it is true that in repulilican Switzerland there is still 
 a Cantonal, though not a Federal, eonnection of the State 
 with the Church. But on what sort of footing is the Church 
 in the more advanced countries now established and endowed, 
 compared with the footing on which she was established and 
 endowed in the old Catholic days '/ No longer half mistress 
 of the realm, or forming a great estate of it, she has sinik into 
 a })ensiouer, and a not very beloved or honoured pensioner, of 
 the government. In France, once the realm of her eldest son, 
 where a century and a half ago she could put men to death 
 for offences against her, she now shares her dole, not only 
 with heretics but with Jews, while in the French province of 
 Algeria she shares it with iMussulmans. In the land of Philip 
 the Second, though almost the whole population still professes 
 his creed, her position is hardly higher or more secure than 
 in the land of Louis the Fourteenth. There, too, instead of 
 dominating, she is a creature of the government, her enormous 
 property has been secularised, and she has become a paid ser- 
 vant of the State. Education, the key of social character and 
 influence, has been generally wrested out of her hands. Mar- 
 riage, also, has been generally transferred from her domain 
 to that of the magistrate. To take an instance from the 
 Protestant side, how great is the change in the relation of the 
 Church in general to the State since the days in which Calvin 
 was dictator ! If in Austria and Russia the process is not so 
 far advanced, it is because they are behind the other nations 
 in the general race. The Republics are the last birth of Time, 
 they are the leading shoots of political growth, and in them 
 the connection between Church and State is weakest. All the 
 footprints i)oint the same way. The only a]>i)arent exception 
 is the restoration of the Established Church of France by 
 Napoleon. The violence of the extreme revolutionary party 
 had for the time outrun pojuilar conviction, and thus a reac- 
 tionary despot was enabled to take a step backward, and by 
 his fiat reinstate an institution of the past. But how altered 
 was that institution in its estate and in its relation to the 
 government fr»»m t\w Established Church of the Bourbons! 
 
T 
 
 THE QUESTION OF DISESTABLISHMENT. 
 
 Gl 
 
 Even Ministries of Pnblic Worship, where they exist, are signs 
 that the Church has become a subordinate department of the 
 State, losing her independence and a part of her sanctity 
 with it. 
 
 The Papacy itself, once the supremely established and 
 imperially endowed Church of Catholic Europe, has it not 
 been both disestablished and disendowed ? Its chief is now 
 the "prisoner of the Vatican," subsisting on the alms of the 
 faithful and hoi)elessly ])rotesting against the abolition of his 
 temporal power. It is true his spiritual power over the people 
 has been increased by becoming purely spiritual, and by the 
 concentration upon him of the allegiance of the Catholic 
 Churches which, having lost the supjjort of the national gov- 
 ernments, now look to their ecclesiasti(!al chief alone. This 
 is a fact suggestive of caution to the statesman, whih; it is 
 reassuring to the churchman ; but it does not affect our esti- 
 mate of the situation. 
 
 Supporters of establislur^nt bid us observe that in all 
 the South American Kepublics except Mexico there is still an 
 established Church. To JVlexico nuist now be added Brazil, 
 which, since it has cast off monarchy, lias separated the Church 
 from the State and placed all religions on a footing of e(piality. 
 Mexico is a striking exception. So late as 1815 there was an 
 auto da fe where now no religious procession can take place, 
 no priest even can appear i)ubli(dy in his priestly garments. 
 In the other Keimblics, however, the connection between 
 Church and State, though it subsists, is greatly altered, and 
 the position of the Church is far different both in regard to 
 establishnient and in regard to endowment, from wliat it was 
 in Spanish times. The priest has hist his political hold. 
 Such hold as he still has he owes, not to the tendency of 
 modern civilisation, but to the lingering influence of the relig- 
 ious despotism of old Spain. 
 
 In all the countries there is likely to be a halt and a breath- 
 ing time after a great change. The union of Cliurch and 
 State is naturally followed by a period of half establishment, 
 with reduced revenues, and tolcraiion of all creeds, perhaps 
 
■ 
 
 62 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 endowment of all of them alike, and Ministries of Public Wor- 
 ship. But the shadow will go hack on the dial when the 
 movement from religious privilege towards religious equality 
 is reversed. What is the severance of the Church from the 
 State whereby government declares its entire neutrality in 
 matters of opinion, but the recognition of that freedom of 
 in([uiry which, while other results of political revolution are 
 still doubtful or chequered, is the clear and inestimable gain 
 of our modern civilisation ? Free, opinion is not while one 
 set of opinions is hedged about with artificial reverence and 
 propagated at the expense of the rest. Disestablishment, if 
 right in itself, will be not merely the destruction of an exist- 
 ing institution, it will give free play to the constructive agency 
 of truth, which we trust will build the mansion of the future. 
 
 They are mistaken who tell us that in the communities of 
 North America there never was a connection between Church 
 and State, and therefore there can be no tendency to its de- 
 struction. The truth is that in most of the old colonies there 
 formerly was a coiniection. In Virginia the Church of Eng- 
 land was established, till religious equality, championed by 
 Jefferson and Madison, followed in the wake of political revo- 
 lution. In Massachusetts and Connecticut the connection was 
 close, as in Massachusetts the (^uaktu's foinul to their cost. 
 Nor was it dissolved without a struggle. In Massachusetts, 
 the law provided for the maintenance of ininisters as well as 
 of schools, and for the punishment of religious offences, such 
 as profanity and disregard of the Sabbath. For a long time 
 the political franchise was confined to those who were in close 
 communion. In Connecticut, no church could be founded 
 without iH'rmission from the general court, and every citizen 
 was obliged to pay according to his means towards the support 
 of the minister of the geograjthical parish of his residence. 
 Ministers Avere exempt from taxation of everything. The 
 Blue Laws, so far as they had any real existence, were legis- 
 lation against sin, whiidi implies an identification of the civil 
 with the ecclesiastical power. Nothing of the connection now 
 remains except the Sunday law, of which some agnostics com- 
 
THE QUESTION OF DISESTABLISHMENT. 
 
 m 
 
 plain as theocratic ; restraints on blasphemous publications, 
 which are as much dictated by regard for decency and lor the 
 public peace as by regard for religion ; the exemption of 
 Churches from municipal taxation ; and a very slight religious 
 element in tlie teaching of the public schools, not so much 
 enforced by the State as generally demanded by pid)lic feeling. 
 The exemption of Cliurch property from taxation extends to 
 the property of all Churches alike, nor is it probable that it 
 continue long. 
 
 The Congress of the United States is expressly forbidden by 
 the first amendment of the Constitution to establish any re- 
 ligion. There are some who would like to insert into the 
 Constitution a recognition of the Deity, but tliis proposal 
 makes no way. Congress has a Chaplain and is opened witli 
 prayer, but the chaplaincy is not confined to any i)articular 
 Church. The President of the United States annually pro- 
 claims a "national thanksgiving day," and has sometimes 
 proclaimed a fast, in compliance, however, with national sen- 
 timent, and without power of enforcement. This is mani- 
 festly an ancient system attenuated to vanishing point. 
 
 In French Canada, the Roman Catholic Church retains its 
 revenues in virtue of an article in the treaty of cession, but it 
 levies tithes only on its own members. The autliority vested 
 in the bishops for the regulation of parishes draws with it, 
 though indirectly, a certain amount of legal power in munici- 
 pal affairs. lUit the political influence which makes it more 
 powerful in the province than any establishment could be, is 
 entirely beyond the law. 
 
 In British Canada, the Church was originally estal)lished ; 
 reserves of land were set apart for its ministers, the university 
 was confined to its members, and its bishop had a seat in the 
 Council. l>ut as soon as the colony obtained self-government. 
 Disestablishment ensued; the clergy reserves were secularised, 
 and the university was thrown open to students of all reli- 
 gions, while the higli Anglicans seceded and f(mnded a se])arate 
 university of their own. A. faint odour of departed jnivih-ge 
 still clings to what was once the State Churcli, clergynuMi of 
 

 G4 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TlIK DAY. 
 
 which now and then allow it to be felt that they regard the 
 members of other Churches as Dissenters, while the bishops, 
 unlike those in the United States, retain the title of "lord." 
 Of the endowments, there remain about forty rectories which 
 were carved out of the clergy reserves before secularisation. 
 Otherwise there are no traces of the connection between 
 Church and State in nominally monarchical Canada, saving 
 those which have their counterparts in the American llepublic. 
 
 Not only does religious equality in all material respects pre- 
 vail in the United States and in British Canada, but it is 
 thoroughly accepted by everybody, and by the immense ma- 
 jority prized and lauded as an organic principle of New World 
 civilisation. In British Canada, a few Anglicans may perhaps 
 look back wistfully to the days of the clergy reserves. The 
 Roman Catholic priest in the New World as Avell as in the 
 Old World has in his pocket the Encyclical Avhich declares 
 that his Church ought everywhere to be established, and that 
 government ought to use its power for her support. But, in 
 the New World, the pocket is very deep, and there seems no 
 disposition to draw forth the missive. In fact, we hear that 
 some of the chiefs of the Koman Catholic Church avow a pref- 
 erence for the free system. In Ontario, and in jManitoba, the 
 Roman Catholics have hitherto retained the privilege of sep- 
 arate schools, which, however, tliey owe, not to Canadian, but 
 to Imperial legislation. In jManitoba they have come, and 
 in Ontario they are likely to come, into collision with the 
 commonwealth on this (piestion. But the privilege, though 
 a State favour, is in the line, not of connection, but of se})ara- 
 tion. The tribute in the shape of public subsidies, which the 
 Roman Catholic Church extorts by her political influence in 
 the States of the Union where there is a large Irish vote, is 
 paid, not in the name of religion, but in that of charity. 
 There is now a strong reaction against any such sectarian use 
 of public funds. 
 
 The property of the American Churches, and the legal rights 
 attached to membership of them or to their officers, are, of 
 course, in the keeping of the civil law. This has been adduced 
 
^ 
 
 THE QUKSTIOX OF DISKS TABLISIIMKNT. 
 
 05 
 
 as proof of the present existence in Aineriou of a connection 
 between the State and the Church. But the same reasoninij 
 would establish the existence of a connection between the 
 State and the Society of Freemasons or the Jockey Club. 
 
 The case in favour of Disestablishment in Ireland was par- 
 ticularly strong, and the cause of the State Church was 
 weighted with a painful history. Yet tiit- defence was able 
 to show tliat tlie general principle was involved, and tliat the 
 shafts of the assailants glanced logically from the Irish to 
 the English Establishment, while they almost struck full on 
 the Establishment in AVales. Let it be observed, too, that 
 nobody thought of transferring the privilege and the endow- 
 ment from tlie Ciiurch of the minority to that of the majority; 
 while concurrent endowment, though it had much to recom- 
 mend it from a i)olitical point of view, was proposed, oidy to 
 be decisively rejected. 
 
 What proof of the drift of things can be stronger than the 
 career of Mr. Gladstone? He who bestowed on Ireland 
 religious equality, had once seceded from a government 
 because it broke the princijde of a State religi by proposing 
 a small additional grant to Maynooth. He who is now aj)par- 
 ently ready to put tlie question of J^stablisliment to the vote, 
 once wrote a treatise on the relation between Church and 
 State in which, scaring above the ordinary arguments derived 
 from the usefulness of religion to the commonwealth in pro- 
 moting public morality, he maintained that the nation, like 
 the individual, had a conscience which bound it to choose, 
 support, and propagate the true faith. Nobody was to liold 
 civil office or exercise political i)ower who did not belong to 
 the State Church. The members of the government were to be 
 " worshii)ping men," and Avere to sanctify their administrative 
 acts by prayer and praise. 
 
 Macaulay, in his review of Mr. Gladstone's essay, had no 
 difficulty in showing that governments are meant to govern, 
 not to settle theological questions, and that if no power was 
 to be exercised except upon Church jjrinciplcs, much incon- 
 venience, to which he miglit liave added much hypocrisy, 
 
' 
 
 1 J 
 
 m 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY'. 
 
 ■r 1| 
 
 would en.siio. He had no difficulty in dissolving the ingenious, 
 but unhistoi'icul, hypothesis of a restrictive treaty by which 
 the essayist tried to escape the awkward consecjuenees of au 
 application cf his principles to the Indian Em[)ire. He had 
 no difficulty in showing that such half-measures of persecu- 
 tion as the application of civil disabilities were at once un- 
 just and futile. He might almost have contented himself 
 with saying that only a person could have a conscience, and 
 that the personality of the nation was a figment. l>ut when 
 he comes, as an orthodox Whig, to propound his own defence 
 of a Church Establishment, saying that he will give Mr. Glad- 
 stone his revenge, he does give JVlr. Gladstone his revenge 
 indeed. His own theory is, in reality, as untenable as that 
 over which he has been enjoying an easy though brilliant 
 triumi)h. An institution, he says, besides the i)rimary ol)ject 
 for which it is intended, may serve a secondary object, just 
 as a hospital intended for the accommodation of the sick may 
 also serve, by its architectural beauty, as an ornament to the 
 public street. Government is meant to take care of our tem- 
 poral interests, and is properly fitted for that purpose alone ; 
 but if that is not employment enough for it, it may, as a sort 
 of by-play, take to providing for our spiritual interests as well. 
 A singular sort of by-pla}', surely, it woidd be. The appear- 
 ance of a building belongs to .architecture as properly as its 
 arrangement. The encouragement of art by a political gov- 
 ernment, which Macaulay adduces as another illustration, is 
 not less beside the mark, since it is art in general that govern- 
 ment encourages, not a ])articular school of artists. The civil 
 ruler in establishing a religion need not, ]\Iacaulay says, decide 
 which religion is true, but oidy which is best for his practical 
 purposes ; he will give the Scotch Presbyterianism, though he 
 may himself be an Anglican, because Presbyterianism, though 
 not the most true, may be most suited for the Hcotch. But 
 what is his criterion ? Is he to assume that the religion of 
 the majority is the best? He helps to secure to the privi- 
 leged religion a majority by establishing it, and thus vitiates 
 his own test. Besides, how is he to measure and provide for 
 
I 
 
 TIIK QUESTION OF DISKSTABLISHMENT 
 
 CI 
 
 •al 
 
 lie 
 
 lilt 
 of 
 vi- 
 tes 
 for 
 
 changes of conviction, sucli as in the course of inquiry may 
 take phice ? Suppose he had been eaUed upon to h'gishiti' in 
 the period of the Keforniati(ni, when the majority was shifting 
 from day to day. Nor do(,'s Macniuhiy wholly escape the 
 charge, which he brings against Mr. Gladstone, of feeble and 
 ineffective persecution. It is a kind of persecution, though 
 a very feeble and ineffective kind, to compel the minority to 
 contribute to the su[)port of a religion wliich they believe 
 to be false, perluqjs destructive of souls, and to degrade their 
 ministers by exclusion from the rank and ])rivilege which 
 those of the Establislied Church enjoy. jNIacaulay is acting 
 as a philosophic politician, on the princii)le that all religions 
 are to the statesman eqiuilly useful, and he forgets that to 
 men of strong religious convictions any religion but their own 
 is dangerous falsehood, to be forced to contribute to the su})- 
 port of which is of all tyrannies the most ropidsive. 
 
 I)Ut are not these mighty oi)i)onents lighting in the clouds ? 
 On earth we have had despots imposing their religions on 
 conquered communities. Ferdinand the Second imposed his 
 Catholicism on Bohemia when it was wrested from Protes- 
 tantism, Ll uis the Fourteenth imposed his Catholicism on a 
 German province when it fell into his hands. Hut has any 
 king or governor ever selected a religion by the light of his 
 own conscience and imposed it on the people ? Has the pro- 
 cess ever been one of speculative reasoning or conviction V 
 For the origin of Establishment we must go back, api)arently, 
 to the days of tribal religion, in which every member of the 
 tribe was, by virtue of his birth, a loyal \vorshii)per of its 
 tutelary divinity. Conversion as well as belief was not per- 
 sonal but tribal, the Saxon or Dane ])assing with the rest of 
 his race, or the portion of it to which he belonged, and under 
 his chief, by treaty or capitulation, to the allegiance of the 
 conquering god. What is styled the conversion of Con- 
 stantine was in all probability hardly a change of mind: it 
 certainly was not a change of life; most likely it was the 
 recognition, by a shrewd and thoroughly worldly })olitician, 
 of the ascendancy which, partly through the manifest failure 
 
■ 
 
 (18 
 
 QI'KSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 of the old <,'()(ls to avi'it publiir disustcr, Christianity had 
 
 gained in the Konian \V(^rM. 
 
 V 
 
 The Christian Churdi inht'i'ited the Establishment of the 
 Pagan Empire. Hut to the primal tradition of allegianee to 
 the national divinity was now added belief in the absolute and 
 final truth of a ndigion guaranteed by supernatural n-velation 
 and by an Infallible Church whose authority excluded impiiry 
 and made dissent treason at once against her and against the 
 State with which she was united. Out of the Chundi Esta- 
 blishment of tlu^ Roman Empire grew, on the one hand, the 
 Byzantine establishment now represented by the national 
 Church of Russia, and on the other haml, the estaldishnu'ut 
 of the group of European nations which framed a religious 
 federation under the ecclesiastical sovereignty of the I'ope. 
 To what the identification of the Church with the kingdcuns 
 of this world and the consequent identification of heresy with 
 treason led, as it could iu)t fail to lead, is written on some of 
 the most terrible pages of history. K^^'ligion has been accused 
 of crimes of which the real source was in the union of the 
 spiritual with the temi)oral authority, ami in the temporal 
 wealth of a State Church. .Mere fanaticism has less to ai'.swer 
 for than Papal tiaras and archbishoprics of Toledo. 
 
 Undoubtiug conviction and perfect unity of belief were 
 througlumt the conditions of the system. When doubt, in- 
 ([uiry, and disagreement came in with the Reformation, the 
 basis of the system was withdrawn. At first, an attemi)t was 
 made, at least by I'rotestant rulers, to fall back on national 
 Establishments, to which it was the aim of statesmen, l)y legal 
 constraint or politic compromise, to make all subjects of the 
 realm conform. The belief that a nation was bound to have 
 a religion, and to support it by legal ])rivilege and endowment, 
 had become thonmghly ingrained: its hold on the mind of the 
 Puritan was strengthened by his uncritical acceptance of the 
 Old Testament; and the Barebone Parliament of Independents 
 wrecked itself partly in an attempt to disendow the Church. 
 But geographical and political boundaries do not coincide with 
 those of s})eculative conviction. Nationality, therefore, in the 
 
TllK QUKSTION (M' DISKS rAlJLlSIlMKMV 
 
 i^ 
 
 absonce of cnorcion, rould be no basis for chuivlmianship. Tho 
 lastexiuMlicnt of tlioso who, naturally ciioiigli, wcro rcliu'tant to 
 see the coimiionwtniltli Hiially divorced Iroiu relij^doii, was to 
 establish the religion of the muiierical majority. lUit the weak- 
 ness of such a prinei[)le has been already shown. Voii falsify 
 your own test when you artiticially draw ])eo[)le into a parti- 
 cular ( liurch by giving it privileges and endowments. The 
 principle was, in fact, renounced wdien endowment was refused 
 to the Church of the majority in Ireland. The best religion, 
 the Voluntary ist will contend, for tlu^ citizen as well as for 
 the man, is that in which he sinceii ly believes; and Ixdief, to 
 be ])erfectly sincere, must be not only unconstrained but 
 unbribed. 
 
 Stress has been laid, in the controversy with regard to the 
 Anglican endowments, on the legal fact that the Church of Eng- 
 land is coUcctively not a corporation, each of her incumbents 
 being a cor])oration sole. She could har(lly bo a corjjoration 
 in tlu^ Papal period, since, though locally Ecdesia AiKjliciUid, 
 she was part of a European, or, as her mend)ers contended, of 
 a universal (liurch, transcending all local jurisdiction and 
 with a hiw of its own transcending all municipal law. She 
 could hardly be a corporation in the national period, because 
 she was then identified with the nation, the king of wdiich was 
 her head. Hut, surely, such considerations, thougli they might 
 be deemed decisive in a lawsuit, (^innot go for much in deter- 
 mining the expediency of a great political and religious change. 
 The same may be said with regard to the question as to the 
 legal character and origin of tithe. As a matter of fact, tithe 
 was in its origin neither an aggregate of voluntary benefactions, 
 nor a tax imposed by the State. The payment was a religious 
 duty, of the obligation to perform which the clergy had con- 
 vinced the [)eoi)le, and whicdi, like other religious duties, was 
 enforced indiscriminately with civil duties by the kings and 
 witenagemotes of those days. Nobody can doubt now that 
 tithe is public property, to be dealt with according to the rules 
 of ])ublic policy and justice, by both of which respect for vested 
 interests is prescribed. 
 
^^m 
 
 70 
 
 QCKSTIONS OK TIIK DAV. 
 
 Arnold's idciil, ;ii)paroiitly, was an Establislu'd (Jhiircli, not 
 only conncctcnl, Imt ich'utical, with the coninionwoalth, embra- 
 cing (yliristians of all doctrinal varieties, and making no distinc- 
 tion between clergy and laity but one of a mertdy official kind. 
 Tins idea evidently was drawn from the commonwealths of 
 ancient Gnu'ce, of tiie history of which Arnold was a i)assionate 
 student. From Arnold it was transmitted to Stanley, who went 
 so far in his love of State Churches and their champions 
 as to show a slight tenderness for " Hluidie Mackenzie." The 
 diftlculties of ai)plication in a country like England, full of 
 religious divisions, incdndiug the iiisurnu)untable division be- 
 tween Protestants and Jtoman Catholics, need no demonstra- 
 tion. How are the different sects to share the edifices and 
 the endowments among tluMu ? How, if they are all to be 
 domiciled under the same roof, is i)eace to be kei)t in such a 
 family? The part of the Minister of Public "NVorship would 
 not be easy. To the Empire, of course, with all its Mahome- 
 tans and Hindoos, such an ecclesiasti(^al polity could not be 
 extended. Hut, above all, what object is to be gained by 
 encountering all these problems and comj)lications which would 
 not be better gained through the self-adjusting sim])licity of 
 the free system ? The function assigned by Arnold to the 
 government seems to be that of ecclesiastical police, the need- 
 lessness of which the experience of Churches in America, 
 where all goes on decently and without disorder, shows. 
 Arnold appears to have forgotten that, in ancient Athens, 
 such spiritual life as there was went on, at least in the time 
 of Socrates, apart from the State religion, and that its pontiff 
 sacrificed to ^l^^sculapius a cock, not his spiritual convictions. 
 The sacrificing of cocks innumerable to .'l^sculapius, with the 
 provisions of stipends for his official ministers, would probably 
 be the chief fruits of the Arnoldian system. 
 
 Arnold's ideal is a Christian commonwealth. This he would 
 have, though he would not have conformity or orthodoxy, if 
 liis nation were made up of Christian Churches whose com- 
 mon princijjles would practically regulate public life and 
 national action. In this sense the American commonwealth 
 
TIIK tilKSTION OF DISKSIAHMSllMKNI 
 
 71 
 
 is Cliristiiiii. It is fur more f'liristiiin than Eiif^limd, or any 
 (MIC of the Europoaii nations with Estaldisliod Chiirclies, was 
 in the hist ccnturv. Ostcnsihly. ol' course, it is not Christian 
 or religious; hut surely it must Ix' the practical, not the osten- 
 sible, character which has a value in the eye of Heaven. 
 
 In native American oonimunities and in Canada, society and 
 life, it may safely be said, are fully as ndij^^ious under the 
 free system, as they are in Enj^dand nniU'r tliat of a State 
 Clnircli. (Inquestionably there is far more respect i'or reli<,Mon 
 there than in France, where the Church is still established, 
 but, in a " Lil)rairie Anti-clei'icale," the most lii(hious bla- 
 sphemy is openly sold. The Ciiurch in America and Canada 
 is, to fully as ^^n^at an extent as in England, the centn^ of 
 philanthropic effort and even of social life. There is fully as 
 much building of churches and as nuich church-going, and the 
 Sunday is as well kept. The very aspect of an American city 
 or village, with its s}»ires and steeples " pointing to heaven," 
 though })erhaps not ''tai)ering" with consummate grace, j)ro- 
 claims the comnnmity religious. American missions to the 
 heathen vie with those of England. If the ]»ublic school 
 admits only a very small element of religion, the Sunday 
 school is a highly cherished and a flourishing institution. Tlie 
 churches are enabled to distribute large sums in (diarity ; 
 some of them in fact do fully as much as is desirable in that 
 way. We hear of a single offertory in the church of a great 
 j)reacher, with a wealthy congregation, of $50,000. While the 
 choice of a religion is absolutely free, while no candidate for 
 office is asked to what Church he belongs, while members 
 of the same family belong to different Churches without do- 
 mestic friction, to be entirely without a religion is to incur, 
 with most people, a shade of social suspicion. In no reputable 
 society would anything ott'ensiv^e to religious feeling be en- 
 dured. All this is spontaneous and has the strength of spon- 
 taneity, while the religion of the peasantry in an English 
 country parish is not so certainly spontaneous. In Xew York 
 or. Chicago, there is a large foreign population, nuich of it 
 drawn from the moral barbarism of Europe. Yet even in 
 
■«> 
 
 mmmm 
 
 72 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 iS'ow Vork and Cliicixt,'<), religion is strong, is well endowed, 
 furnishes the basis of much social effort, and copes vigorously 
 with the adverse forces. 
 
 It is dirticuit to ('onii)are the incomes of the clergy under the 
 two systems, but probably the clergy in the Nortliern States 
 are, on tiie average, as well off as in England, certainly since 
 the reduction of the incomes of English benetices by agricul- 
 tural dej)ressi()n. A tirst-rate prea(;her in a great American 
 city has an income hardly inferior to that of an English bishop, 
 when the bishop's heavy liabilities are taken into account. 
 Clerical incomes might be greatly imi)roved if the Protestant 
 Churches between whose creeds there is no essential difference 
 would, in the rural districts at least, instead of competing, 
 combine, and give a good stipend to one nastor where they now 
 give ])oor stijx'nds to three. Nor does it seem impossible that 
 something of this kind may be brought about. Though there 
 cannot l)e said to be any present likelihood of formal union 
 among the Trotestant Churches, there is a strong tendency to 
 mutual recognition and to interchange of pulpits, from which 
 working union, at all events, may some day result. It is also 
 diftieult to draw a comparison between the social position of 
 the < lergy in the United States nnd their social position in 
 England. There are not in America dignitaries like the English 
 liishopand Dean, enjoying precedence by virtue of their eccle- 
 siastical office, nor is there a set of clergymen like the country 
 rectors of England, cond)ining the resident gentleman with the 
 })ast()r. The balance perhaps is rather in i'avour of the clergy 
 under the free svsteni. No American chM'gvman can be an ob- 
 ject of class-antip;ithy to the people, as it seems the English 
 liarson sometimes is in a coinitry parish. Tliat a clergyman, 
 if he depends on liis congregation forliis ])ay, will become their 
 theological thrall, is, ])erhaps, a natural fear. It certaiidy was 
 strong in the writers of " Tracts for th<> Times," who, in revi- 
 ving the doctrine of Apostolical Snci-ession, avowedly sought a 
 new basis of authority in jtlace of the su))|iort of the State, 
 which seemed to be failing them, in ord(M' that they might save 
 tliemselves from becoming, like Dissenting ministers. (le])end- 
 
THE QLKSTIOX OF DISESTABLISIIMKNT. 
 
 78 
 
 a 
 
 ent on their flocks, and being thereby constraiiie<l to pander 
 to lay appetite in their teaching. Yet a coniphiiiit is not often 
 heard upon this subject, and American congregations liave l)een 
 loyal to the pastors of tlieir choice even when their loyalty has 
 been severely tried. The layman, as a rule, is not a theologian; 
 nor is it his tendency, so long as he gets on well with his ])as- 
 tor generally, to meddle with the teaching of the pul])it. Some- 
 times the stii)end is paid, not by the congregation directly, but 
 through the medium of a central administration. A clergynum 
 of the American Ejiiscopal (Jhurch states that under this ])lan 
 he never lu;ard a pastor complain ( i' the loss of power or inde- 
 pendence, that the tie of affection is as strong as in the nu)st 
 favoured parishes of England, that the congregations show no 
 desire to tune the jmlpit, and that if disputes arise they are 
 easily settled. The clergy, he says, remain in their parishes 
 as long and as securely as do the clergy in Kngland; in his 
 city they have just buried a vector who had been in the same 
 charge over fifty years, one of his own ])redecessors held the 
 cure for forty-six years, and all around him are men who have 
 held their cures for twenty, thirty, or forty years. He knows 
 of no differences between rector and congregation, nor does he 
 b(dieve that amongst their two hundred clergy there is one 
 who wishes the Church to be " by law estaltlished." lie ad- 
 mits that there are clerical failures, but he says that they 
 rarely lind themselves in ])ositions of iin])ortance. iind usually 
 drop out early. In an Established Church they would, as a 
 rule, not diop ^;ut, esi)(>cially if they held family livings. 
 Against any possible evils arising from the restlessness or 
 caprice os" congregations, are to be set the torpor which may 
 be bred by security and the chances of irremovable incapacity 
 or decrepitiule. The parishioners of livings in the gift (d' 
 colleges, when the colleges were close, and the prcs(>ntees had 
 lived many years in Ctnumon Room, would have ha<l some 
 strong evidence to give upon this subject. 
 
 The belief that ndigious extravagance -.vill ensue upon the 
 witlulrawal of State control may, from luu^rican experience, 
 he safely pronounced groundless. Th.' effectual restraint on 
 
■ 
 
 74 
 
 Ql'KSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 extravnfi;ano(' is not State control, Imt pojjular enli<i;litenment. 
 Such works as Mr. Jlepworth Dixon's "New America'' and 
 " Spiritual Wives " have created a false impression. The wild 
 sects which li(i describes are, in the first place, as much social 
 as relit,nous; and. in the second place, the space which they 
 occu])y on the religious map of the United States is insigniti- 
 cant. Tlie <freat mass of the people belong to Churches im- 
 ported from Kurope, and identiiral in all essential resjjects with 
 their lMiroi)ean counterparts. The only new Church of any 
 imjiortance is tlii^ Universalist. whi(^h seems to be a liberal 
 IMetliodism with the doctrine of et(U'nal jjunishment struck out 
 by the Inimanitarianisin of democracy. Things are no longer 
 as they were in the earlier and less settlecl times. A camp- 
 meeting now is little mor.^ than a ndigious picnic lasting 
 through several days. '• Revivals " America has, and so has 
 England. Th(» Salvation Army, if that is to be numbered 
 among extravagances, is an i'Jiglish product. Mormonism is 
 mainly re(!ruiti'd from Kngland. No sei-t is to be fouuil in the 
 New World comparable in wildness to some' of which we read 
 as existing in llussia, where the connection between Church 
 and State, in its closeness, resenddes the Caliphate. It is 
 needi;>ss to say that there is no superstition in the United 
 States so al)ject as that which has prevailed in the south of 
 Italy, in Spain, or in some parts of Ivussia. 
 
 It may be that in America preaching is more cultivated 
 than theology, and that this is |)artly the consetpience of a 
 system whieii makes tlie power of attracting congregations 
 the ])assport to the iiigh places of the clerical profession. It 
 is, however, fully as nniidi a conse(]uence of the rhetorical 
 tendencies of democracy in general. The tastes of the unedu- 
 cated or half-<'dueated are uncritical, atid it is inevitable that 
 there should be, as un(piestional)ly there is, rant in the popular 
 ])ulpit, as Will MS nil the political stum]). Hut there is also 
 ]treacliiiig of the jiighest order, and such as, if good is to be 
 done by preaching at all. must do a great deal of good. It 
 may Ite doultted whether the I'iiiglish pulpit can vie with tluit 
 of tile I'nited States. It has hardly had a greater jummcIicv 
 
THK QUESTION OF DISESTABLISHMENT. 
 
 75 
 
 ions 
 It 
 
 Ileal 
 ".In- 
 tliiit 
 (ular 
 also 
 be 
 It 
 that 
 
 'llOl 
 
 or in a highor style tlian the lamented Phillips Brooks. There 
 is a tendency, perhaps, to overstrain for etfect, but this is an 
 intellectual characteristic of the age. People are no longer 
 content simply to " hear the Word of God ; " they crave for 
 ekxjuence as they crave for ritual, and the result of the 
 attempt to su[)ply it is sometimes overstrain. 
 
 We cannot look far beneath the surface of religious life. 
 Appearances, though strong and uniform, may deceive. Be- 
 neath all this church-building, church-going, mission-sending, 
 and Sunday school-teaching, there may be growing hoUowness 
 and creeping doubts. That i)ossibility is not contined to the 
 Western htMuisphere ; but tlie tide of scepticism is less violent 
 when it has no State Cliurcli against which to beat. The 
 general tendency, even of those who la})se from orthodoxy in 
 America, is not towards Atheism, but towards Theism, with 
 Christian ethics and, perhaps, with Christian ho})es. This, as 
 a break, at all events, in a descent perilous to public morality, 
 though orthodoxy nuiy not value, statesmansliij) may. 
 
 If we turn to the Episcopal Church of tlie United States in 
 particular, it could hardly be expected that the compromise 
 between Catholicism and Prot(^stantism devised by tlie Tudors 
 and their counciHors to meet the circumstances of the English 
 people in the sixteenth ceiiturv, or to satisfy at once tlie ])er- 
 sonal ritualism of (Juccn Elizabeth and her political antago- 
 nism to the Pope, would, when transplanted, strike its roots 
 very deep into the soil of the Xev,' World. It is obvious that 
 for certain classes of men, ^lethodism. Piesbyterianism. and 
 Ixoman Catholicism liav(» attractions with which Anglicanism 
 cannot compete. 'I'lie vVnglican Church is that of many of the 
 rich and reliiied, wliose tastes it suits by its hierarchical ei in- 
 stitution, the dignity of its services, its histori(!al associations, 
 and its indulgent latitude. It also derives some social prestige 
 from its connection with the State Church (u" England, with 
 the (Episcopate and clergy of which its episcopate and elergy 
 are identiti(Ml. Xot that it contains all the rich, or even a 
 majority of them ; many of the rich have risen from the ranks 
 of industry and bi-ought their Methodism, or some other 
 
1 1. 'I 
 
 II 
 
 70 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 poj)ulai' religion, with them. Nor is it Avithout an elemont 
 drawn from the other .social extreme. It counts among its 
 members not a i'ew of the very poor, especially among the new- 
 comers from England, who have never been accustomed to 
 maintain voluntary Churches, and to whom it is often liberal 
 of its alms. We see here probably the position towards which 
 it would gravitate if left to itself without State support in 
 Enghind. It nuist be remembered, however, that it has in 
 En!,dand what it has not in the New World, cathedrals and 
 parish churches, in which the religious life of the nation for 
 ages has centred, together with a traditional hold on the minds 
 of almost the whole of the wealthier classes. The elective 
 episcopate of the United States, if it does not contain any one 
 etpial in learning to Light'oot or Stubbs, is fully tl'p peer of 
 th,- English episco])ate nominated by the Crown in excellence 
 of personal character, in pastoral power, energy, and influence, 
 in administrative capacity, and in the respect and attachment 
 which it commands. The action of the laity when admitted 
 to the Church legislature, which the English clergy dread, has 
 been shown by experience to be conservative ; they once were 
 a check ujwn Evangelical, they are now a check on Ritualistic, 
 innovation. No change of importance has been made in the 
 Prayer I'ook beyond the omission of tli? Athanasian Creed. 
 Of course there is troid)le arising frtiii the JJitualistic move- 
 ment and the opi)Ositi()ii to it; as trouble would arisi^ from any 
 attempt to combine two opposite codes of doctrine and spiritual 
 .systems in the sanu^ Church. P>ut the laity may rejoice that 
 no young incumbent has power, as in Englan<l. to change their 
 worship from I'rotestant to Cotbolic, leaving them no remedy 
 but a scaiulalous, costly, and precarious lawsuit. The election 
 of a bisliop sometimes ends, after a protracted struggle between 
 the ])arties, in an unsatisfactory compromise. This is the 
 inevitable result of the ;,M'neral division of opinion. Other 
 evils there are which inhere, in the. elective system. Against 
 these we have to set the evils which inhere in the system 
 ol' nominations l)y tli(> Crown, under which a Prinu^ Minister, 
 notoriously imliffereiit to religion, may capture the vote of ta 
 religious party by appointing its leaders to bisho])rics. 
 
TIIK QUESTION OF DISESTABLISIIMKXT, 
 
 77 
 
 it mil 
 
 It is true that, tlioiigh severed from the Stute, the Amerioau 
 Churches have not been entirely sevt'rcd from politics. The 
 liaptLsts appear creditably to maintain their traditional jtre- 
 eminence as the pioneers of spiritual freedom, but other 
 Churches are more or less given to using their iuHuiMuje 
 in politics to the detriment alike of Cluirch and State ; t\w. 
 iloman Catholic Churcii, with her control of the Irish vote, 
 being th(f most jiolitical of all. The American Chiirchcs, or 
 too many of them, sorely disc'edited thcmstdves l)y bowing 
 down bid'ore slavery in the evil day of its as(H'ndancy, and 
 repudiating or treating with coldness those who were striving 
 to awaken the slumbering conscnence of the nation; though as 
 soon as the political and social ])ressure was removed the 
 Churches, or such of them as were at heart opposed to slavery, 
 stood erect again and lent the forci; of religious conviction to 
 the nation in the nu)rtal (M)nliict. The foundations of all 
 si)iritual societies of men, as of the s[)iritual man himself, are 
 in the dust; and it is too much to ex[)e<;t that, being comijosed 
 of citizens and members of society, they shall entirely escape 
 the jMjlitical and social influences of the ihiy. The Northern 
 Churches might also plead, in excuse for tlieir tinu)rous atti- 
 tude, the fear of ruptiu-e with their Southern branidies, whi(!h 
 in the case of the liaptists actually occurred. 
 
 Free Churches, if they cannot soar above humanity, have at 
 least the power of self-adaptation and S(df-develo]iinent. To a 
 State Church tliis liberty is denied. It is in vain that clergy- 
 men of the Churcli ot England speak as though in all tiie 
 changes of doctriui' and system it had Ihmmi the Clnircli that 
 moved, liy the will of Henry the Eighth tin- national Cliurch 
 was made Trotestant so far as was re([uired liy the King's 
 ([uarrel with tlu' I'ope and no further; by the will of Edward 
 the Sixth and his Council she was nuide thoroughly Protestant 
 and united to the I'rotestant Churches of th" (.-(Uitinent ; by 
 tlie will of ISliwy she was made Catliolic again and reunit\'d to 
 Konu' ; V)y the will of Elizabeth she was once nune severed 
 fnim the Papacy and settled on the principle oi compnuuise. 
 All this was dcjne without an>v' appaivut evidenci^ of a change 
 
78 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 of conviction on the part of the body of the clergy, which 
 seems to have remained Catholic in sentiment tlirongiiout, to 
 have welcomed the Catholic revolution under Alary, and to 
 have been opjiosed to the Protestant revolution at the accession 
 of Elizabetii, though no regard was paid in any case to its 
 wishes.' James the First acted as a religious autocrat in his 
 ecclesiastical proclamations and his ai)pointment of deputies 
 to the Synod of Dort. When he was at enmity with the 
 Catholics he gave Low Church principles the ascendancy, by 
 nuiking Abbot archbisho[) ; when he veered towards a coiuiec- 
 tion with the Catholic Vowers he gave Higli Church principles 
 the ascendancy, by bringing forward Laud. Cliarles the First 
 again in his reactionary changes acted as an autocrat, through 
 Laud as his ecclesiastical vizier. Little attention ap])ears to 
 have been paid by the I'riniate to the opinions of the clergy, 
 or even to those of the hierandiy at large. It was politi(;al 
 power acting for a political purpose that, nnder the llestora- 
 tion, finally cut off the Church of England from the Protestant 
 (/hurdles on the Continent, and, since the llomans deny her 
 existence as a Church, while the Greeks practically will not 
 recognise her, placed her in the strange position which she 
 ajjparently holds of bi'ing the whole Chundi or no Church at 
 all. In the next century, to use Rallam's scornful phrase, 
 tlie State sprinkled a litth; dust upon the angry insects by 
 depriving the Church altogether of tlie power of legislating 
 for herself. Slie never had the ojjportunity of fairly saying 
 what she would do with tlu^ Methodists, who were finally 
 severed from lier, not by excommunication or secession, but by 
 the necessity of registering tlieir chapels under the* Toleration 
 Act. 'I'iie Kpiscopal lonn of Chureli government w;is evidently 
 perpetuated l)y tin; policy of the Monarcliy. "No IJishop, no 
 King." In Sweden the same influence retained Episeoiiai'y 
 though the religion was Lutheran. In countries such as Scot- 
 land, Switzerland, and Ilnlland, where the religious revolution 
 was \ua(h" by an aristocracy or a democracy, other forms of 
 (.Church governnuMit prevailed. 
 
 ' Hi'i' Dr. Child's Chiiirh ami State umJor the Twlors. 
 
 i 
 

 THE QUESTION OV DISESTABLISHMENT. 
 
 79 
 
 Piirlianient, when it was thrown oix'ii to men of all religions 
 and of none, became glaringly unfit to legislate for the Chureh. 
 The Church thenceforth was condemned to legislative immo- 
 bility. Change there has been and with a vengeaniie ; tlu^ 
 ritual has been turned from a Protestant service into what it 
 is very difficult to distinguish from the Mass, while in other 
 respects the Catholic system in place of the I'rotestant lias 
 been introduced. lUit tliis has been done, not by regular leg- 
 islation, but by the irregular action of individual clergymen, 
 at the expense of unseendy struggles and degrading litigation, 
 sonu^times before a tribunal of " Roman augurs." To give the 
 change the colour of legality, it has been asserted that the 
 Liturgy, not the Articles, is tiie standard of faith. Is it 
 possible to believe that the standard is to be found, not in the 
 original manifesto of which the object was explicitly to set 
 forth doctrine, but in the ritual, the aim of the framers of 
 which evidently was to retain as much as possible of the cus- 
 tomary iind familiar? The Church is the Keeper of all Truth : 
 how came it to })ass that down to the fourth d( cade of the 
 nineteenth century she remained ignorant of this all-important 
 truth respecting herself ? 
 
 Few, surely, can look back with pride on the history of a 
 political (Jhurch — lier servile suljuiission to the will of the 
 sovereign ; her boundless exaltation of thti royal power for the 
 sake of gaiiung royal favour and su^jport; her sinister com- 
 plicity with a political reaction which plunged the nation into 
 a civil war; her alliance with the unholy powers of the Resto- 
 ration for the purpose of crushing the Nonconformists ; her 
 ])reaching of passive obedience when the Crown was on tlie side 
 of the (dergy ; her disn>gard of that doctrine as soon as clerical 
 interests were touched by the tyranny ; her courting of Non- 
 eonformi.sl aid against .);nnes the Second; lier renewed {)erse- 
 cution of the Nonconformists under the leadership of the 
 infidel liolingbroke when the (hmgcr to herself was past; the 
 wretched consi»iracies of her Ja(;obilc clergy against the peace 
 of the country ; the conduct of her clergy ai\d bishops in 
 Ireland, for the calamitous state of whicli they are partly 
 
I 
 
 80 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY 
 
 responsible, and wlieuce by their intoleraiK^e they drove forth 
 Presbytprians, the sinews of Irish industry, to become the 
 sinews of American revolution. For the obstinate violem;e of 
 the government in its dealing with the Americans and the 
 fatal rupture which ensued, clerical Toryism, as we know on 
 the best of evidence, was largely to blame. Even with regard 
 to ipiestions of humanity, such as the abolition of the slave- 
 trade and of slavery, the record of the State Church is inglori- 
 ous, and W(! liiul its bishops voting against the repeal of the 
 law making death the penalty of a petty theft. Was it possible 
 that an institution morally and socially so little beneficent or 
 venerable should e.xercise nnudi religious intluencie on the 
 people';' True, besides her political history the (Miurcii of 
 Hooker, Herbert, Ken, JJutler, Wilson, Fletcher of Madeley 
 and Simeon, has another history on which her friends may 
 look with far greater satisfaction ; but how far was this the 
 fruit of legal establishment aiul State endowment ? 
 
 To such an extent did the Church lose her si)iritual and 
 assume a political character that, as Somers said, absolute 
 power, passiv^e obediejuu', and non-resistance became, with her, 
 doctrines essential to salvation. Tlie good liishoj) Lak(> said 
 on his death-bed that " lu' looked on the great doctrine of 
 passive obedience as the distinguishing character of the Cliurch 
 of England," and liishop Thomas of Worcester expressed the 
 same belief.' In the case of Monmouth, the bishops made the 
 profession of this doctrine a condition of absolution. It is 
 not with mere refusal to ])ro:note or (countenance political 
 innovation, that the State Church stands charged, but with 
 playing an active and even a violent i)art in reaction. The 
 torpor, the time-serving, the jduralism, the non-residence, the 
 Trulliberian sensuality, as well as the scandalous place-hunt- 
 ing and the adulation of profligate ^Ministers and of kings' 
 mistresses, which disgraced the clergy in the last century, are 
 now, happily, things of tlie ])ast. l^ut when did they i)revail ? 
 When the Church was most secure under the i)rot('i'tion of the 
 
 ' See Thf- EugUxh Church in the Eighteenth Centunj, by Abbey and 
 Overton, i. 1J8. 
 

 TIIK QL'KSTION OF DISKSTAHLISHMKN T. 
 
 HI 
 
 State. Wlu'ii (lid tlu'y cease juid give place to a, spirit of rcfonn 
 and duty '.' When that protci-tioJi lt('<,Mii to be w itiidrawii. 
 
 Tlii^ late IWslioj) of Loii(k)ii, .hu^ksoii, is (pioted l»y Jhsui 
 Hole as saying that " when he reeaUed the condition of apathy, 
 indolence, and disobedience into which the Church of Eng- 
 land had fallen, it seemed marvellous to him that it contiinu'd 
 to exist." The Dean himself remembers the days of plurali- 
 ties and non-residence, when tlu^ people of his parish ncvi-r 
 saw or heard of their vicar, the church being served by the 
 curate who lived five miles away, rode ovi-r for one dreary ser- 
 vice on the Sunday, and was no more seen for the rest of the 
 week, being much occajjied with the pursuit of the fox; when 
 a ])luralist who had come in a conscientious mood to visit 
 the living from which he had long been an aV)seutee, being 
 offended by a bad smell, turned back and canu' no more; 
 when the altar was represented by a snniU rickety deal table, 
 "with a scanty covering of faded and ])atched green baize, on 
 which were placed th<! overcoat, hat, and riding-whip of the 
 officiating minister; when the font was tilled with coffin ropes, 
 tinder box, and candle-ends, and was never ns«'d for baptism ; 
 when sparrows twittered and bats floated beneath the rotten 
 timbers of the roof, while moths and beetles found happy 
 homes below.' Since that time, the Dean says, there has been 
 great reftn-m, which he traces to the Oxford Movement. AV'hat 
 was the age of decrepitude and abuse'.' it was the age in 
 which the Church of England felt herself most safely estab- 
 lished. When did the revival begin? When from the pro- 
 gress of Liberalism, civil and religious, the Establishment began 
 to be endangered. What was the Oxford Movement? It 
 was practically a movement of dissent, though reactionary 
 dissent, from the established system, and was at first so 
 regarded and treated by abnost the whole of the clergy of the 
 Established Church. Its jirogrcss has been a ])erpet\ial con- 
 flict with the law and with the hiy tribunals by which the law 
 Avas upheld. 
 
 We have been warned that we nnist be very cautious in 
 
 * See The Memories of Dean Ilnle, CIiiip. xi. 
 
CiUKSTlUNH UF TllK DAY. 
 
 I 
 
 reason ill <; frojii the ease of a new country like America or the 
 British Cohdiies to that of an ohl country like Kn^'hmd, wliere 
 institutions >re oi" ancient j^rowtli, and their tiltres have 
 become entwined with tht; wlioh; political and social I'ramo. 
 It is a warning most true and most necessary to be observed, 
 as is its ccmverse, whii-h I'orbids, lor exami)le, the; attem])t, 
 apparently not yet abandoned, to propagate aristocracy in the 
 Colonies. Yet it ha])pens, (Uiriously enough, that, just w lien 
 this principle of relativity in [lolitics is for the tirst tinu' dis- 
 tinctly ap})relicnde(l, it is beginning to lose somewhat of its 
 force. jMankind is being unilied by the increase of inter- 
 course among the nations, and conscious intelligence is gain- 
 ing the ascen(hincy over unconscious evolution. Of this, 
 Japan, taking the most cautious estimate of her achicivements, 
 is a i»r(»of. America is brought close to Europe, ami the suc- 
 cess or failur<! of political and social exj)eriments there already 
 reacts ujuju the Old World. 
 
 The activity jirochicetl anujug the clergy by the effects of the 
 Oxford Movenu'ut, and shown notably and most laudably in 
 their ministrations anu)ng the ])uov, s<'ems to have strength- 
 ened the hohl of the Anglican Cliurch up(tn the people in the 
 cities. Anu)ng the people of the country, on the other hand, 
 the (Muirch ai)pears to be h)sing gromul, the reason jirobably 
 being that the (dergy are objects of suspicion to the peasantry 
 from their connection with the squire. I'erhap.s also the ])ar- 
 son sometimes is felt to mcMldle and dictate too much. 'I'o the 
 attractions of Ritualism, while the minds of the jteople in the 
 cities are sometimes (tpen, those of tlie peasantry are com- 
 pletely closed. They lack the cultivated sensibility, they are 
 utterly devoid of any historic^ link to the Middle Ages; their 
 life is hard, and what they seek in ndigion is i)ractical comfort, 
 not the gratilication of fancy and taste. 
 
 In Scotland, the I'^stablishment is more strongly rooted than 
 it is in Kngland, as the last Midlothian election showed. It 
 is nu)re strongly rooted because having been founded, not by 
 the (>rown. but by the religious leaders of the Conunons, it is 
 more popular and democratic. For the same reason it is more 
 
THE QUKSTION OV DlSKSTAMLISUMKM'. 
 
 y 111 
 
 tlif 
 111(1, 
 
 'ly 
 
 itry 
 );ir- 
 tlic 
 the 
 om- 
 
 illH' 
 
 lu'ir 
 ort, 
 
 oi'tliodux, its creed bein^' in the kecpinj,', not of u elerical order, 
 but of tiio i>eoi)le iit large, wiio identify themselves willi its 
 doetrines and are littlr reaeiicd by sceptical speculation. 
 
 The policy of usinj,' a State (derj,'y as a black police is, surcdy, 
 not less shallow than it is insulting; to the elerj^y who are to 
 be so used. Let the ])eo[)le oncHi understand that the pastor 
 is a black policeman, and tlic iidlueiice on which this jjolicy 
 relies will be gone. A government gets fully as much sup[>ort 
 from free Churches in the maintenance of soirial order and for 
 all moral (objects as it does fi-om any State ''hurch. The 
 American government got the most strenuous and effective aid 
 from the I'rotestant Churches a.s organs of the poi)ular con- 
 scdence during the Civil War. On the (jther hand, that govern- 
 "^ ment escai)es what, added to the storms of political faction, 
 would certainly wreck it, entanglement with religious quarnds 
 and with a chronic struggle between a j)rivileged Chundi and 
 her rivals. It has no Ilamixlen Case, no Ecclesiastical Titles 
 liill, no Bills *' for putting down Kitualisni." Nor is it ex[K)sed 
 to the chronic rebellion of a great body of Nonconformists 
 irritated by social disi»aragcnient perhaps even more than by 
 their religious grievance. An English Nonconformist ndnister 
 is not, as such, disposed to revolution; he is not the natural 
 ally of Jacobins; nor is there anything in his vocation which 
 should lead him to desire the dismemberment of the United 
 Kingdom, lie is a Radical and a Home Kuler because it is 
 from that itarty that he hoi)es to get religious equality. 
 
 None would be less disj)osed to hand over Ireland to the 
 dominion of the Koman Catholic priesthood than the Widsh 
 Methodists, if they were not tempted by the offer of Dises- 
 tablishment for Wales. Church establishment in Wales is a 
 stone hanging round the neck of a government swimming for 
 life, and the integrity of the nation is imperilled in no slight 
 degree by the obstinate determination to force on the Welsh 
 Celt against his nature the fiat religion of Elizabeth Tudor. 
 Angli(!anism in Wales is the ndigion of the gentry, who are 
 largely English. That of the Celtic peasantry it has not been 
 and cannot be. The Celtic peasant may be a fervent Catholic, 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 m Ilia 
 
 12.5 
 
 f iitt |||||Z2 
 
 I.I 
 
 i^ 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 
 1.25 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 ^ 6" _ 
 
 
 ► 
 
 VQ 
 
 <? 
 
 /2 
 
 e". 
 
 ^A 
 
 v^ <». 
 
 ci- 
 
 m j>: 
 
 9. 
 
 eM o> 
 
 A 
 
 o 
 
 / 
 
 /A 
 
 PhotogiBpliic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
<° €P. 
 
 WJ- 
 
 s 
 
 W.- 
 
 W., 
 
 i 
 
 \ 
 
,^1" ' . "-;; r« 'p" » pBff»--t'-'y"»-~' •-c'~v: 
 
 !'if! 
 
 84 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 as he is in Ireland and Brittany, a fervent Presbyterian as he 
 is in the Highhuids, or a fervent Methodist as he is in Wales, 
 a staid and decorous Anglican never. The overwhelming 
 Gladstonian majority in Wales at the last election was a 
 majority for disestablishment. The Anglican clergy of AVales 
 are clergymen of the Established Church of England, and the 
 interests of the Established Church of England are theirs. 
 Are they wise in asking it to light the decisive battle for its 
 existence on a field so unfavourable to its cause as Wales ? 
 
 AVhatever is seditious and dangerous in the Irish priesthood 
 arises not from its being unestablished, but from its being 
 Irish, and Irish of the peasant class. It is also rendered anti- 
 national by its allegiance to a foreign head ; but this it would 
 be in any case. 
 
 Some politicians have regarded religion as a disturbing 
 force, for which legal establishment under State control pro- 
 vided salutary fetters. If religion is false, if the enthusiasm 
 to Avhich it gives birth is a kind of madness, and if the vices 
 of its ministers are less dangerous than their virtues, the more 
 it is kept under the control of statesmanship the better. But, 
 then, why foster it at all ? If it is true, and spiritual life 
 is not a figment, that surely alone is genuine statesmanship 
 which leaves conscience and worship entirely free. When 
 one looks back over the history of religion, including the reli- 
 gious wars, persecutions, and massacres, one cannot help won- 
 dering, if all this has happened under the beneficent regulation 
 of statesmanship, what worse things could have happened in 
 the absence of such regulation. 
 
 There is looming up from the clerical quarter a danger of 
 another kind, with which statesmanshij) may hereafter have 
 to deal. If the subversion of religious belief by science and 
 criticism goes on, it will by degrees withdraw that on which 
 the ministers of religion rest for their influence, their posi- 
 tion, and their bread. Their distress or their apprehensions 
 may become a disturbing element in society. Such a body 
 of men as the celibate clergy of the Church of Rome, striving 
 to make up by social leadership for the loss of spiritual 
 
THE QUErSTION OF DISESTARLTSHMENT. 
 
 8G 
 
 authority in an age of Socialistic agitation, might be a for- 
 midable addition to the sources of trouble ; nor have symp- 
 toms of su(di a tendency been wanting. But this is a liability 
 against which, if it exists, no policy of Establishment can 
 guard. On the contrary. Establishment aggravates the dan- 
 ger by keeping a standing army of clergy in its pay irre- 
 spectively of the popular desire for their ministrations, and thus 
 preparing for a great crash, when otherwise the reduction 
 might be gradual and no large body of men might be threat- 
 ened at the same time with the loss of their livelihood and 
 position. 
 
 Less coarse than the " black police " theory, yet not less 
 objectionable or in reality less insulting to the ministers of 
 religion, is the theory of certain illuminati, who would have a 
 State Church of popular superstition for the vulgar, while the 
 cultivated sit apart on their thrones of light. This implies 
 that a number of men, presumably superior in moral qualities 
 and highly educated, are to be set apart for the purpose of 
 teaching useful falsehood. Suppose any of them become illu- 
 minated, are they still to remain in their profession ? What 
 but moral corruption of the profoundest kind can be the 
 fruit of such a policy? Yet such a thing has been experienced 
 as the erection of an Anglican Church by an unbeliever in 
 Christianity in pursuance of some such view. It may be sus- 
 pected that Establishment has even drawn some equivocal 
 recruits of late from the scepticism which prevails widely and 
 is often combined Avith Conservatism in politics, while the 
 Churches which rest only on free conviction have been losing 
 ground. It is time to bethink ourselves that a Church, estab- 
 lished or unestablished, must be either an organ of truth or an 
 engine of evil. Apparentl}^, no small portion of the educated 
 world in England has come to the conclusion that the evi- 
 dences of supernatural religion have failed. If they have, to 
 keep on foot an institution the function of which is to preach 
 and propagate supernatural religion can surely be neither wise 
 nor right. When evidences of religion fail, religion must go, 
 and we must look out for some other account of the universe 
 
86 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 and some other rule of life. Let us have no politic figment 
 or organised self-delusion, because, on any hypothesis, theistic 
 or atheistic, they can only lead us to destruction. We have 
 no chance of moving in unison with the counsels of the Power, 
 whatever it be, which rules this world, or of prospering accord- 
 ingly, except by keeping in the allegiance of the truth. 
 
 On the whole, it would seem that a statesman, looking at 
 the matter from his own point of view, would be likely to 
 prepare for a change, and consider how the change can be made 
 with least shock to the spiritual life of the people and with 
 least hardship to the clergy. It would seem that a wise 
 Churchman would be likely to think twice before he rejected 
 a compromise, on the general lines of Irish Disestablishment, 
 which, taking from him the tithe, now reduced in value, 
 as well as the representation of the Church in the House of 
 Lords, would leave him the cathedrals, the parish churches, 
 the rectories, the glebes, the recent benefactions, and give him 
 a freedom of legislation, by the wise use of which he might, 
 supposing Christianity to retain its hold, recover, by the adap- 
 tation of institutions and formularies to the times, a part of 
 the ground which, during the suspension of her legislative life, 
 his Church has lost. Democracy is marching on, and the 
 opportunity of compromise may never return. It has been 
 said in answer to such a proposal that the clergy are trustees, 
 and that however desirable the compromise might be, they can 
 surrender nothing of their trust. Trustees, however, can with 
 the sanction of a court of law, and still more with that of the 
 Legislature, consent to anything which is for the benefit of 
 the estate. No power not acting under authority manifestly 
 divine is qualified to say non possumus. Those who do say it 
 can only mean that they are determined to go by the board. 
 State religion perhaps had its day. Whatever had its day is 
 absolved by history, who nevertheless says to it. Vale in pace. 
 
 There is, it is true, another course, besides Disestablishment, 
 which may present itself to a statesman desirous of dealing 
 cautiously with this question and avoiding a shock to natural 
 religion, the policy of comprehension. This was embraced by 
 
 
THE QUESTION OF DISESTABLISIIMExXT. 87 
 
 Cromwell, and was the most liberal course possible in his day 
 when the opinion that a nation was bound to profess and sun' 
 port a religion remained firmly rooted in men's minds, as the 
 wreck of Barebone's Parliament on the rock of Disestablish- 
 ment shows. Cromwell-s commissioners, to use Baxter's 
 words "put in able and serious preachers who lived a godly 
 ife, of what tolerable opinions soever they were, so that many 
 thousands of souls blessed God." It is certain that before tlie 
 Act of Uniforniity, Episcopal ordination was not necessary for 
 mduction to an English living, nor had the State Church of 
 England severed the connection with the Protestant Churches 
 on the Continent. If ever an act was tainted in its origin it 
 was the Act of Uniformity, and to repeal it in the present 
 state of opinion would probably be easy. But the practical 
 elfect of the repeal would most likely be defeated by the sen- 
 timents of the High Church cle^ ■., now the dominant party, 
 and who believe in apostolical snc..ssion and in an episcopally 
 ordained priesthood as alone competent to perform the sacra- 
 mental rites which are necessary to salvation. 
 
 In such a case, as indeed in regard to all great and organic 
 ques ions, every true patriot must wish that the party struggle 
 which IS tearing the nation to pieces could be suspended, and 
 that the solution couhl be committed to the hands of some 
 impartial, enlightened, ana open-minded statesman, whose 
 award would be framed in the interest, and would command 
 the confidence, of the nation at large. We might as well wish 
 tor the descent of an angel from heaven ! 
 

 p^^v -X_-. .»«■?=»(-• 
 
 I 
 
 it 
 
THE POLITICAL CRISIS IN ENGLAND. 
 

 T^B^fmHmmm 
 
 i! 
 I 
 
 .'t 
 
 i 
 
 .1 
 
 ^■e-Lsi':xMl.'k:itJSi •Ji'^'rt'il 
 
THE POLITICAL CRISIS IN ENGLAND. 
 
 
 In the political crisis through which Great Britain is pass- 
 ing there are some things peculiar to Great r)ritain. There 
 are other things interesting to all nations organised or about 
 to be organised on the IJritish model, to all nations, indeed, 
 of which the governments are elective. The api)arent cata- 
 strophe of the party system appears to afford as much food 
 for reflection to an American as to an Englishman. 
 
 Under the belief that she lias a monarchical government and 
 an hereditary upper chamber, whi(!li assure her stability and 
 safety, England lias plunged into a democracy more unbridled 
 than that of the United States under conditions far more dan- 
 gerous. The people of the Unitcnl States have a written con- 
 stitution which emanated from themselves, and is the object 
 of their profound reverence. Tliey liave a Supreme Court to 
 guard that constitution. They have a President whose veto is 
 a salutary reality, and whose authority is being signally dis- 
 played at the present juncture. They have a Senate, elected 
 on a principle comparatively conservative, and really co- 
 ordinate as a legislative body with the popular house, whose 
 Bills it amends or throws out without fear. The federal 
 structure of tlieir commonwealth, like tliat of a ship in com- 
 partments, is a safeguard against any sudden flood of revolu- 
 tion. In their constitution is an article forbidding legislation 
 which would impair the faitli of contracts. The conditions 
 in their case are less dangerous because they have greater 
 abundance of land, a far larger number of freeholders, less 
 pressure on the means of subsistence, little Socialism, what 
 they have being mainly imported, and, notwithstanding the 
 Homestead business, comparatively little, on the whole, of 
 
 91 
 
1*2 
 
 til'KSTFONS OK THK DAY. 
 
 iiuhistriiil war, tlio native Amcricjaii wui'kiuau as a rule not 
 being given to conspiracy and striking. Nor is there in Amer- 
 ica any economical crisis like agricniltural depression with its 
 social consequences in England, for the i)resent storm in the 
 stock market is financial, and does not touch the substantial 
 elements of prosperity. The American people are compara- 
 tively free from class division and jealousy. They are emi- 
 nently law-abiding, and are on tlie side of government, regard- 
 ing it as their own; while the masses in England, the artisans 
 especially, have learnt to think of government as a power 
 ai)art from them, if not as their natural enemy. Nor does 
 tlie scepticism, which in England is unsettling society and 
 sliaking the nerve of authority, prevail so much or produce 
 such effects in a nation whi(;]i lias no State Church to be as- 
 sailed, the religion of Avhich is voluntary, and which is given 
 more to industry than speculation. There is happily much in 
 the state of England now unlike the state of France on the eve 
 of the Revolution. Above all, England has in her upper 
 classes a reserve of moral and political force which France 
 had not, and which extremity may call forth. She is also 
 comparatively free from the financial difficulty which in France 
 brought on the crash, though a large public debt, with power 
 in the hands of the multitude, is always dangerous, anel the 
 fiscal system of England is not free from peril since it is 
 totally inelastic, and the disuse of any one of the great arti- 
 cles of consumption on which the revenue is raised would 
 produce a great deficit, while experience has shown that the 
 people will not bear a new tax, and that the income tax with 
 its political liabilities is the only resort. 
 
 In America, there can be no amendment of the constitution 
 without tlie distinct announcement of the specific amendment 
 to be made, or without the consent of three-fourths of the peo- 
 ple, signified through the State Legislatures or Conventions. 
 So conservative is the process that there was no amendment 
 during sixty years. What takes place in England? Not an 
 amendment of the (lonstitution, but a fuTidamental change of 
 it, involving a legislative dismemberment of the United 
 
TUK I'OJ.ITKAI. CKISIS IN KN(iLANl). 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 Iviuydoin, and probably entail inj; I'urtlicr rcvolutinn of tlio 
 same kind, is (ionccrtod by a l)ai'ty leader with liis Irish con- 
 ft'derates behind tlie l)a('k of the nation, and forced npon the 
 country by an uns('rni)ulons use of the i)arty machine. Not 
 only was a distin(!t kiunvh^lge of the measure withheld frt)ni 
 the people at the last geiuu'al election, but with ref,Mrd to its 
 principal feature, retention of tlu^ Irish me]nl)ers, the ])eople 
 were totally misled, the framer having jdedged liimself tiiat 
 nothing would induce him to Ije a party to ;in arrangennnit 
 such as that which he now proposes. The issue, instead of 
 being submitted distinctly to tlie people, is mixed uj) with 
 a dozen other issues, some of them i)urposely i-aised to obscure 
 and prejudice it. The measure is then forciul upon the House 
 of Commons, most of its jjrovisions without any fair discussion, 
 by the closure, applied at the will of a party leader, whose 
 real majority, s\ibtracting tlu^ twenty-two Irish votes to which 
 Ireland by his own admission has no title, is twelve. Nor is 
 there anything to prevent any other revolutionary measure 
 from being carried by the same means as the repeal of the 
 union Avith Ireland. 
 
 For a few years under the commonwealth England had a 
 written constitution. Otherwise she lias had nothing but cer- 
 tain fundamental statutes, such as the Great Charter, with 
 its confirmations, the Petition of Right, the Habeas Coi'pus 
 Act, and the Bill of Rights, all of which are restraints on the 
 tyranny of the Crown, not on the excesses of the people. Not 
 only has England had no written constitution, paradoxical as 
 the statement may seem, ghe has had no constitution at all, if 
 by constitution is meant a settled system Avith fixed relations 
 among the component powers. She has had nothing but a 
 balance of forces which, oscillating more or less through her 
 history, has now been finally upset, the Crown having been 
 divested of all authority, the House of Lords of all but a sus- 
 pensive veto, while supreme power is vested in the House of 
 Commons or in the electoral caucus to which the House of 
 Commons has itself in turn become a slave. What is com- 
 placently styled constitutional development has in fact been a 
 secular revolution. 
 
04 
 
 gi'KsrioNs OF riiK day. 
 
 Tho hallowed Wold "constitutioiiiil " lias Immmi used as it' it 
 r('])r('sciit('(l soiiK'thiiiL,' roal iiiid I'lipablo of ludii},' asccrtaiia'd, 
 tlioii<,'h I'litlitT occult, some supicinc tlioui^di soiiicwliat mysti- 
 (^al standard \>y wiiicli all j.vjiitical (daims could he tried and 
 all |tolitical excesses could l)e restraiutid. This was almost 
 (!onu(!ally ai)[)arcnt on the oeeasion ol the repeal ol' the paper 
 duty in l.SfJO, whi(di made way for a cheap press. The Com- 
 mons ])asse(l i'e])eal, the Lords thnnv it out. Then arose the 
 (picstion whether the Lords, who (!ould lutt (Constitutionally 
 initiate or amend a taxinij; Uill, could constitutionally throw 
 out a Hill repeal intj; a tax, thus continuing the imi)ost which 
 the Commons had voted away. A grand display of i)oliti(!al 
 meta[)hysics ensued. .Mi'. Denison, then SjH'aker of the House 
 of Commons, was asked what he thought. "Why," said 
 he, "they talk .about constitutional ])rin(i[de; hut the whole 
 matter is this, the Lords caiuiot initiate a money ]^)ill be- 
 cause the Commons would throw it out; they cannot amend a 
 money J>ill because the Commons Avould disagree to the amend- 
 ment; but they can throw out this liill repealing a tax, because 
 there is an end, and the Commons have no more to say." 
 
 The theory was government by a King and legislation by 
 two Houses of Parliament, one hereditary and aristocratic, the 
 other elective and po[)ular, the two being coequal in autho- 
 rity, except that the )>opular House hail the power of the purse, 
 which it gradually improved into supremacy. Tn the reign 
 of Edward L, the magnanimous [)erpetuator of a revolutionary 
 creation, the fact may have tallied with the theory. The gov- 
 ernment was b^ ^he King, and the Commons, though in them- 
 selves weaken- than the Lords, nuiy have been strengthened by 
 alliance with the C'rown. Under Edward's feeble successor 
 the balance was turned in favour of the aristocracy. It was 
 redressed in favour of the Crown by the glories of Edward IT!., 
 though tli(^ Commons at the same time, as holders of the purse, 
 gained by the King's need of supplies for his wars; and Ilich- 
 ard II., in spite of the miserable end of his father's reign, 
 succeeded to authority, which his folly and that of his favour- 
 ites thrcAV aAvay. Henry IV., with a doubtful title and a 
 
J 
 
 riiK roi.nicAi- ckisis in i;N(ii,AM). 
 
 05 
 
 i 
 
 iniitinous nobility, was thrown for sujiport on the Coinnions, 
 and on the Clmrcli. which was still a j^M'cat power in the State. 
 A^'incourt restoj'ed i.) the Crown an authority whieii was attain 
 I'oifeited l)y tlie loss of l-'rance, th(^ iinlu'cility ol' Henry \'l., 
 and the misrule oi' those who had him in their hands. 'I'iie 
 suicide oi' ai'isto(M*acy in the Wars of the Koses hdt the (."rown 
 almost desl)oti(^ and its despotism was enhanced hy the ec(de- 
 siastical revolution under Henry V'lll., after which tiie 
 Church ceased to l)e a political power, and its inHuence was 
 transferred to the Crown. W'luit the Tudors had ludd the 
 Stuarts lost, while tliey tried to extend it in altered times and 
 against the de(dsive t( iidencies of tln^ nation. Tlie English 
 Revolution in the tinn f (Jliarles 1., lik(^ the Anu'rican Revo- 
 lution and tho French lievolution, (deared the gro\ind i'or a 
 new edifice. A written constitn^ion became ne(;essar\'. A 
 writtt :t constituti i was frani'-ii under the name of the Instru- 
 ment of (fovernnient, wibh a I'rotector for life, a stiinding 
 CouiK-.il of State, in Lie a])pointment of which the Protector 
 and Varliament went sliares, and a single House of Parliament, 
 with a property qualification high enough to be a test of n^- 
 sponsibility and intelligence, yet not higher than industry and 
 frugality might generally hope to attain. Had the Common- 
 wealth of England, Ireland, and Scotland such a constitution 
 now, it would be in little d;iiiger of dismemberment by the 
 Irish C(dts. Republican jiialousy and the death of the Pro- 
 tector just when his system was taking root, prevented a fair 
 trial of the exi)eriment. (.'romwell himself had been driven 
 by the stress of his conflict with irreconcilable republicans in 
 the Commons to have recourse to the revival of the Up[)ir 
 House in a nominative form. This failed, as otiu'r nomina- 
 tive Senates have failed, and by withdrawing the strength of 
 government from the popular chamber, aggravated the diffi- 
 culty Avhich it was intended to remove. The Kestoration, 
 however, was a reaction, not against the Protectorate, but 
 against the military anarchy by which the Protectorate was 
 followed. ]>uring the reign of Charles II., there was some- 
 thing like equilibrium, though uneasy and unsteady, the C.own 
 
L-a- -I jiaoi 
 
 *^!!I1PW 
 
 ■W 
 
 mm 
 
 ms 
 
 i 11 
 
 06 
 
 QUFilSTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 ■t 'I 
 
 t* 
 
 ( !! 
 
 • i 
 
 iit th(i time of tlu* I'opish I'lot Ijein^i; swept Ix't'oro the i)opular 
 st.jnu, -svliile the close of the reign being almost despotic, tliongh 
 tyranny was exercised under strictly legal forms. James TI. 
 repeated the mistake of Ciiarles 1. in an aggravated shape, 
 the Jesuit taking the place ol Laud. AVith him the mon- 
 archy fell as a constitutional power, its fall being only broken 
 by the personal ascendancy of William III., who to the last 
 was his own foreign minister. Tlien jjower passed to the 
 Peers, who besides tlieir own House largely (xnitrolled the 
 House of Commons through their nomination borouglis and 
 their local influence in elections, while they liad thoroughly 
 perfected the system of holding togetlier the economical basis 
 of their ascendancy by the entail of tlieir family estates. At 
 its back, and as its constituency, the Peerage had the landed 
 gentry, the class completely dominant at this time. The 
 principal checks to aristDcratic ascendancy were the rivalries 
 and cabals among the families tliemselves. These, and the 
 odium created by aristocratic selfishness and corruption, ena- 
 bled (leorge III. to recover a large measure, not of constitu- 
 tional, but of backstairs autliority. He was able to put a 
 backstairs veto on Fox's India Bill. Once more there was 
 a sort of e(iuilibrium amongst the three powers in the State, 
 the government being largely in the King or in the Minister 
 of his personal choice, while each of the Houses had its share 
 of power, the balance between them being dressed by the 
 ParliamiMitary patronage in the hands of the Peers and the 
 manifest inadequacy of the unreformed House of Commons 
 as a representation of the people. But the equilibrium was 
 totally and forever destroyed by the current of liberalism 
 which set in when the Avar with Xapoleon was over, over- 
 turning the Bourbon monarchy and the British aristocracy at 
 tlie same time. Whfu the Peers succumbed to the Reform 
 Bill, supreme power passed definitively to the House of Com- 
 mons, leaving nothing to the Peers on any great question but 
 a suspensive veto. The last faint exercise of personal power 
 by the King Avas the dismissal of the Whig Ministry by Wil- 
 liam IV. in 18.'H. Henceforth the Ministers who formed tlie 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
THE rOLITlCAL CRISIS IN ENGLAND. 
 
 07 
 
 oxiMMitivo govcrninciit wcw aijpointed and dismissed, and tlio 
 wliolo i)()licy of tlic kingdom \vas dotermined l)y tlie majority in 
 the House of Commons. Still the |)hantom wore the crown. 
 Still the nation fully believed itself to be a monarchy, and 
 prayed every Sunday that ] Leaven, which is supposed to enter 
 kindly into the illusion, would dispose the King's heart to 
 govern aright. A party leader bringing in a party ]>ill for the 
 extension of the suffrage could say, and i)erhai)s persuaded 
 himself, that the effect of his measure would be to "unite the 
 whole people in a solid body round their ancient throne." 
 The same politician now points out the House of Lords to pop- 
 ular vengeance, as "a jiower not upon or behind the throne, 
 but between the throne and the people, stopping altogether 
 the action of the constitutional macliine." Could self-delusion 
 or constitutional hypocrisy further go? The House of Lords 
 has still been taken for a co-ordinate branch of the legislature. 
 European nations in quest of a constitution have continued to 
 imitate the IJritish model as they found it described in Black- 
 stone or l)e Lolme, and a strange dance some of them have 
 been led. 
 
 Still the House of Commons was a government. It had a 
 tolerable measure of independence, of authority, and of dignity 
 as a national council. Its electorate, after the settlennnit of 
 1S,32, was still tolerably responsible and intelligent. Nor was 
 it by the fated advance of democra(^y or by any occult force, 
 that the settlement of 18'}2 was broken up, though the current 
 of European opinion was setting in a democratic direction. 
 The settlement was broken up by the personal ambition of 
 party leaders, who invoked the gale of popularity to fill their 
 flagging sails. There was at tlie time little popular demand 
 for the measure, and when, after its first announcement, 
 its author had to withdraw it, nobody wept ex(;ei)t himstdf. 
 lint he had set revolution going again. After that came a 
 Dutch auction, in which Liberal and Conservative bid against 
 each other, and the prize was tinally knocked down to the 
 Conservative party, then under a leader who, as Carlyle said, 
 treated England as his milch cow, and who had found for him- 
 
psp^^^sm 
 
 sun 
 
 I 
 
 08 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 self ;i patron ami a partner in a magnate instinct in politics with 
 the si)irit of the Turf. There is no reason to doubt, there is 
 reason to believe, that the intelligent artisans would have ac- 
 quiesced in an educational (pialitication; but the Tory leader 
 liad been advised by his election agents that ignorance would be 
 on his side, and he had no S(H'uple in acthig on that advice. 
 Qualifications of any real value have been swept away. Such 
 as are left will presently go, and before long perhaps even that 
 of sex will be abolished by the help of Conservatives wdio 
 fancy that the women will vote upon their side. Of those 
 who now possess the franchise, an immense number must 
 be ignorant of all questions of State, liable to be misled 
 by the grossest illusions, hurried away by the blindest pas- 
 sions, cozened by the lowest charlatans. It was generally, 
 and not without reason, believed tiiat the Tichborne claim- 
 ant would have been sent to I'arl lament with immense majori- 
 ties, could he have been a candidate at the time of the trial. 
 l)ut the constituencies are a sovereign power, unrestrained, 
 and can, through their subservient representatives, at any time 
 pass measures which would shake society to its foundation, 
 and might bring ruin on themselves. Tliey are sovereign not 
 only over their own country but also over a vast empire. 
 The British artisan who is shouting One man, one vote, for- 
 gets that he is the lord of two hiuidred and eighty millions of 
 Hindus who hav(» no vot(> at all, and if they had votes might 
 some day vote him and his cottons out of Hindustan. The 
 American democracy, in spite of strong temptation, both mate- 
 rial and sentimental, shrank froni the annexation of Hawaii 
 because it felt its unfitness for the government of dependen- 
 cies even on so small a scale. Yet a demo(u-acy far less regu- 
 lated, and on the whole far less intelligent than that of 
 America, is taking on itself the government of vast dependen- 
 cies all over the world. 
 
 Another scene has now opened. The House of Commons, 
 after putting under its feet the Ch-own and the House of Lords, 
 has in its turn been put under the feet of the caucus. Its 
 independence, its authority, its dignity, and its self-respect are 
 
TllK rOLlTIOAL OKISIS IX KMiLANl). 
 
 '.»!) 
 
 departing, \^y the (closure it is roduced to a voting miichino of 
 which the caucus turns the crank. Its members, instead of 
 regarding themselves as free counsellors of the nntion, re- 
 gard themselves as delegates of the caucus, pledged to do its 
 bidding, and, if their conscience rebels, to resign. The other 
 day a (rladstonian, seeing the deception wliich h;id been prac- 
 tised upon the country by the framers of tlie Honu^ Kule JJill 
 in the retention of the Irish nu'uibers and the infaiuy "wliicli 
 was in store for Great Uritain, found liinisidf unable to digest 
 the Bill. His duty to the country was to vote against it. \>\\t 
 the wretched law of his Parliamentary being compelled him 
 to decline that duty and place his resignation in the hands of 
 the caucus under tlie form of accei)ting tlie Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. No one doul)ts tliat many a (iladstonian has voted for 
 the Home Rule Bill under tli(^ sanu; influence and against 
 his sense of duty to the country. An imperi(ms idol of the 
 caucus and im[)ersonation of its tyranny can indulge his 
 autocratic temper by trampling on the liberty and majesty 
 of what was once the foremost assembly in tlie world. It 
 does not appear that the Conservative members feel them- 
 selves much more independent than the Radicals. If they did, 
 their leader would hardly have failed to nudce use of a majority 
 of a hundred for the purjwse of redressing the balance of 
 the constitution and providing safeguards against revolu- 
 tionary violence. Xor Avould he and his colleagues have been 
 fain to bid against their antagonists for popularity by paying 
 tribute to socialistic Radicalism, wlii(!h tliey did with the usual 
 effect of blackmail. 
 
 The Septennial Act still preserves to ]Mend)ers of the House 
 of Commons a small measure of inde[)endcnce for the first year 
 or two of the Septennial term. It is to l)e repealed, the dura- 
 tion of Tarliaments is to be reduced, and the last S])ark of a 
 legislative independence offensive to the caucus is to be extin- 
 guished. A faint remnant of the j)rinciple that taxation and 
 rei)resentation go together is left in the i)lurality of votes. 
 This is to be swept away, and one man. one vote, is to be the rule. 
 
 Hut the nu)st effective institution of a conservati\'t' kind vet 
 
mmmsmmmmm^mmmm 
 
 100 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 left is tlic iioii-payineiit oi' meiubers. Tliis also is marked for 
 abolition, and the liill which abolislics it will probably receive 
 the inv(diintary votes of IVrembers of Pai'liaiueiit who abhor it 
 in their hearts, knowing well tliat it will tlirust them from 
 their seats. In theory, the system of payment enables ^owly 
 merit to take the place to which the public voice calls it, but 
 which poverty prevents it from taking; in fact, it is a direct 
 incentive to men by no means of merit to engage in/politics, 
 tiie noblest of all callings Imt the vilest of all trades. The 
 country will presently be in the hands of professional politi- 
 cians, drawn from a class wliich prefers living upon the public 
 to honest labour. These men, giving tlieir lives to their 
 trade, will oust men of ])i'iuciple, Avho, having no personal 
 objects to gain, will grow weary of the incessant struggle while 
 they will be disgusted with the task of tiattering crowds and 
 with the debasing tyranny of the "machine." Statesmanship 
 already shows the influence of the stump, the incessant exac- 
 tions of which leave a ])ublic man no leisure for rest or thought, 
 and force him to be always committing himself, probably be- 
 yond his convictions, in his efforts to excite the crowd. Peel 
 as Avell as I'itt would liave been petrified by an invitation to 
 speak at any election but his own. Pitt is believed to have 
 made only two political speeclies out of Parliament in his life, 
 and one of these Avas a single sentence. A minister could then 
 spend his vacations in maturing his measures, and he could 
 keep his own counsels till the time came for disclosing them 
 to Parliament. All public men had time for study and reflec- 
 tion. AVith the enlargement of the constituencies and the 
 extension of the popular element in government, the change 
 became to some extent inevitable. It has its consequences all 
 the same. 
 
 The falling off in the character of the House of Commons is 
 apparent to all. A deliberative assembly, in the proper sense 
 of the term, it can hardly be said ever to have been; for it has 
 always been at once too partisan and too large. On any party 
 question a debate has hardly been more worthy of the name of 
 a deliberation than the exchange of fire between two regiments 
 
THE rOLlTlCAL CUISIS IN KNULAND. 
 
 101 
 
 lions IS 
 sense 
 
 ■ it lias 
 party 
 
 ime of 
 
 iments 
 
 
 I 
 
 -;i 
 
 in a battle. But now the House has lost, with independence, 
 order and dignity. Language, which half a century ago would 
 have been utterly fatal to the man who used it, or could have 
 been prevented from being fatal to him only by the most com- 
 plete apology, is now used with impunity; and if the Speaker 
 compels its withdrawal, is withdrawn in a style which amounts 
 to a repetition of the outrage. Irish manners are uncontrolled. 
 
 It is strange to see a society intellectual, refined, luxurious 
 even to excess, and ever inventing new retinements and new 
 luxuries, yet all the time sedulously removing the barriers 
 whicdi protect it from a political deluge. Talleyrand said that 
 the great motive power in the French Kevolution was vanity. 
 Vanity is at work here too. Vanity it is that makes M. Jour- 
 dain play the demagogue. Hut the chief element of disturb- 
 ance is the madness of the party game, which that of the gam- 
 bling-table itself does not surpass. Party politics, in fact, 
 partake very much of the excitement of the Turf and are 
 sustained a good deal by the same spirit, Paley thought that 
 the money which he paid in taxes for the support of Parlia- 
 mentary government with its lively scenes could not have 
 been spent in any way which woiild have afforded him more 
 fun. If it were only money that this sport cost! 
 
 The elective system has revealed its fatal weakness. The 
 theory is that the electors choose, and that tluiy will choose 
 the best man to the measure of their lights. There miarht be 
 some agreement between the theory and the fact when the 
 electors met in tlie county court or in the town hall, he' "i., it 
 may be supposed, some sort of a conference, and voted under 
 the guidance of their local leaders, whose influence probably 
 was healthy upon the whole. Put now, there is no meeting, 
 there can be no conference, no personal communication or con- 
 certed action of any sort among the electors in a large constit- 
 usncy. These particles of political power are ;is the grains in a 
 sand-heap, Avhich cannot combine or co-operate, though they 
 may be blown in tlie same direction by the wind. What is to 
 bring them together? What is to designate the candidates 
 for them when they cannot designate for themselves? What 
 
102 
 
 QUKSTiONS OF TllK DAV. 
 
 is tu coiisolidiite the votes of u suttieient number of them to 
 oonstitiite a majority and form a basis for agovernnient? The 
 in-actical answer is, organised ])arty. So inevitable does this 
 exi)edient appear, and so tlioroughly are we inured to it, that 
 some political philosophers have begun to represent the divi- 
 sion into two parties as seated in human nature, every child 
 being, as the comic opera lias it, " born a little Conservative 
 or a little Liberal." One writer, assuming party to be an ordi- 
 nance of nature, fancies that he has dis(!Overed its law, which 
 is that of alternate ascendancy, with a (diange at each general 
 election ; so that at each election the i)arty whose turn it is in 
 the course of nature to be beaten will have, for the mainte- 
 nance of the system, knowingly to tight a. hopeless battle. 
 These philosophers do not observe that ycni might as well try to 
 bisect a wave as humanity, tliat the shades of temperament are 
 numberless, that the same man is (u.)nservative on some sub- 
 jects, liberal on others, that political temperament varies with 
 age, old men being generally conservative, but also varies with 
 circumstance, your young aristocrat being the most violent 
 conservative of all. Nor do they observe that this system, 
 Avhich they su[)pose to be a universal necessity of hunmn nature, 
 is in truth a recent product of Hritisli politics or of the poli- 
 tics of nations which have followed the leading of England. 
 Factions of course there were, with the usual consequences of 
 faction, at Atliens, in Rome, and in the Italian Kepublics. 
 But this system of government by two parties, perpetually 
 contending for tlie oflftces of State, and each trying to nuike 
 government by the other impossible is a modern British insti- 
 tution. By the hypothesis both parties are necessary to the 
 system. Why, then, should each of them be always denounc- 
 ing and trying to exterminate the other? Party may be moral, 
 and a good citizen may to a certain extent be a ])artisan, so 
 long as there is an organic question of sutficient importance 
 to dwarf all other questions and justify submission to party 
 discipline till the paramount object is attained. But when 
 there is no organic question, what is tliere to make party 
 moral? What is to hold a party together, no principle being 
 
THE rOLlTlCAL CK18IS IN ENGLAND. 
 
 103 
 
 oi'tance 
 party 
 when 
 party 
 
 at .stake ? It can hardly be expected tliat merely for the 
 purpose of keeping up a system the members of the commu- 
 nity, when there is nothing really to divide them, will range 
 themselves artiticially into two political armies carrying on 
 an objectless and senseless yet venomous war with each, other. 
 The answer is, the jNEachine; and this must have workers 
 and payment for workers, in other words, entail corruption 
 in some form, and must bring with it a [political morality 
 notoriously, almost avowedly, inferior to the morality of ordi- 
 nary life, so that you will have the lowest principles of action 
 in the highest sphere. ]iut party is now everywhere in a state 
 of disintegration, brought on by the increased restlessness of 
 intelligence, the multiplication of political sects, the clash of 
 special interests, and the enhanced activity of individual am- 
 bition, for which there are not enough prizes or bribes. Ju 
 Germany, in France, in every Parliamentary country, there 
 is now a multiplicity of parties which is making party govern- 
 ment impossible. Even in the In-itish Parliament there are 
 now five parties, the Conservatives, the Liberal-Unionists, 
 the Gladstonian Liberals, the Radicals, and the Irish, while 
 the Irish party is internally split into Parnellites and anti- 
 Parnellites. P>ismarck made Parliamentary government pos- 
 sible in Germany by his personal ascendancy, and by accept- 
 ing or buying support wherever he could find it. In France, 
 the instability has been alariuing. In Italy, disintegration 
 went to such a length that tlie leaders of adverse parties had 
 to come to an understanding, and make an arrangement for 
 the purpose of averting Parhamentary anarchy. In Austra- 
 lia, governments have been ephemeral to a comical degree. 
 In England, the newly enfranchised and ignorant masses being 
 led by a name, the only thing they can understand, there is 
 just now a strong demagogic leadership, which, however, to 
 sustain it requires largesses of destruction. In Canada, there 
 is a stability of corruption. Put these are accidents. The 
 general tendency is towards the dissolution of party and ol' 
 the government that rests on it. Foresight and contiiuiity 
 of policy are impossible under these conditions. At the same 
 
104 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 I ;!!^ 
 
 time a fatal facility is giv^eu to t'veiy selH.sli interest and every 
 fanatical sect of compassing its pet object by playing upon the 
 balance of party and thus forcing the nation to do its will. 
 Of this tlie Silver I Jill, forced upon Congress by the votes of 
 the Silver States, is one example; another is the anti-national 
 and degrading homage paid to the Irish vote. 
 
 The truth is that the system of party and (cabinet govern- 
 ment, with all the political philosophy Avhi(;h it has generated, 
 is the peculiar growth of the political situation in England 
 consequent upon the lie volution of 1G88. Even in tlie time 
 of Charles II., though there were Tories and Whigs, there 
 does not seem to have been party organisation; what was a 
 cabinet in germ was dubbed as a cabal.- The parties for a 
 time were dynastic, the struggle between the Stuart and Han- 
 overian lines having been transferred from the field of battle 
 to the political field, and thus each of them had a bond, moral 
 after its fashion, or at all events superseding the ordinary 
 obligation to follow conviction on particular questions. After- 
 wards, when the dynastic struggle had subsided, the parties, 
 especially that of the great Whig houses, were closely identi- 
 fied with family connection, and with the struggles of different 
 sections of the aristocracy for power and place. Tlie players 
 in the game were all born members of a political and social 
 circle, owing allegiance to its interests and traditions. The 
 popular element was very small and the scope for demagog- 
 ism very narrow. Cabal and corruption there might be, and 
 there were on a scandalous scale, but there was not the slight- 
 est danger of Parliamentary anarchy or of revolution. The 
 country Avas in the hands of a single class, that of the landed 
 aristocracy and gentry. 
 
 Let the upholders of party government trace the course of 
 this Trisli Question. Let them trace the process by which a 
 proud and mighty nation has been compelled to surrender to a 
 contemptible conspiracy, and dragged to the brink, not only 
 of disniemberment, but of self-degradation so deep as that of 
 allowing Ireland with a Parliament of her oAvn to send eighty 
 members to the British Parliament as a garrison of coercion 
 
 I 
 
 'A 
 
 H 
 
 I 
 I 
 

 Ill evi'i'y 
 ipon the 
 its will, 
 votes oi' 
 •national 
 
 govern- 
 Mievated, 
 England 
 the time 
 gs, there 
 I at was a 
 ies for a 
 md Han- 
 of battle 
 id, moral 
 ordinary 
 . After- 
 ) parties, 
 y identi- 
 d iff e rent 
 e players 
 nd social 
 ns. The 
 lemagog- 
 be, and 
 le slight- 
 )n. The 
 le landed 
 
 oiirse of 
 which a 
 ader to a 
 not only 
 s that of 
 eighty 
 coercion 
 
 IllK I'OM'IICAI. CRISIS IN KNfiLANl). 
 
 lOil 
 
 for tiie ])urpose of combating IJritish i)olicy in the Irish inter- 
 est and keeping the subservient allies of the Irish in power. 
 
 A petty rebellion broke out in Ireland, the last of a series 
 since the Union all ecpially weak. Had it taken the field, it 
 would have endeil like that of Smitli O'Brien, in a cabbage 
 garden. Instead of taking the field, it chose Parliament as the 
 scene of its operations, used votes in place of pikes, and tried 
 to wreck the House of Commons by obstruction, while its 
 agrarian wing, whicli alone was strong, entered on a campaign 
 of organised outrage in Ireland. Had the House of Commons 
 not been faction-stricken and caucus-ridden, the attempt to 
 wreck it by obstruction would have been at once put down, if 
 necessary by the expulsion of the conspirators. The Liberal 
 government did its duty as far as a party government can. It 
 procured the necessary powers for the Irish executiv'e, and 
 had it been ])atriotically supported, or even treated with for- 
 bearance, it would in time have suppressed rebellion, leaving 
 such agrarian cp;estions as needed settlement to be settled by 
 remedial legislation. But the Conservative party, then in op- 
 position, had for many years been led on the principle enun- 
 ciated in an article entitled " Elijah's Mantle," which appeared 
 in the Fortnightltj Review on tlie occasion of the unveiling of 
 a statue of Lord IJeaconsfield : 
 
 " Po.ssibly the character of Lord lieaconsfield was also, to some extent, 
 imperfectly appreciated by Lord Salisbm-y, to whom, for some reason or 
 other, an unknown master of the ceremonies had reserved the very 
 secondary function of moving a vote of thanks to Sir Stafford Northcote 
 for having unveiled the statue. Speaking to the delegates of the various 
 Conservative associations on the eve of the ceremony. Lord Salisbury 
 condemned in forcible language ' the temptation ' which, he said, ' was 
 strong to many politicians to attempt to gain the victory by bringing into 
 the lobby men whose principles were divergent, and whose combined 
 forces therefore could not lead to any wholesome victory.' Excellent 
 moralizing, very suitable to the digestions of the country delegates, but 
 one of tliose puritanical theories which party leaders are prone to preach 
 on a platform, which has never guided for any length of time the action 
 of politicians in the Ilou.se of Connnons, and which, whenever apparently 
 piU, into practice. Invariably results in weak and inane proceedings. 
 Discriminations between wholesome and unwholesome victories are idle 
 
106 
 
 (iUESTIONS UF THE J)AY. 
 
 i!' 
 
 and unpractical. Obtain tiii' victory, know how to follow it up, leave the 
 whok'sonieness or unwliolesonicness to critics. Lord Salisbury, wlicii he 
 used the words quoted above, must have for<^otten that a few liours later 
 he was ^^oing to take part in unveiling the statue of a statesman whose 
 whole political life was absolutely at variance with Lord Salisbury's 
 maxim. The condemnation of a particular method of gaining political 
 victories was in reality a condemnation of the political career of the Earl 
 of Beaconstield." Fortnujhtln Review, May, 188.3.1 
 
 The conscious heir of Elijah's mantle had a precedent, at 
 once exact and memorable, tor the design whicli he now formed 
 and induced his party to adopt, in the very nuuncuvre by which 
 Elijah himself had originally climbed to ])ower. In 1840 the 
 Ministry of Robert Peel was thrown out, his party was broken 
 up, and tlie way was cleared for the rise of Mr. Disraeli to 
 leadership by a coalition of the Protectionist Conservatives 
 with the Whigs, lladicals, and Irish against an Irish Coercion 
 Bill. By this, and a series of applications of the same strat- 
 egy, continued for thirty years, the character of the Conserva- 
 tive party, once the party at all events of honour, had been 
 reconstructed on strategical principles, and was ready for 
 Elisha's manipulation. As in 1846, the Conservatives virtually 
 coalesced with the rebel Irisli, and by the united vote the Lib- 
 eral government was thrown out, the author of the scheme, 
 when the division was announced, jumping upon the benches 
 and waving his handkerchief in frantic joy. Of the Conserva- 
 tive party, the head was a marquess with everything to lift him 
 above the vile and vulgar influences of faction. Yet he was 
 too much under the yoke of party to say, when he was ap- 
 proached Avith a strategical proposal, that while he was a 
 Conservative and would gladly see power in Conservative 
 hands, he was above all things an English nobleman, and 
 would never sanction an attenipt to overthrow the Queen's 
 Government Avhen it Avas struggling Avith rebellion. Then 
 followed the abandonment of the Act for the protection of life 
 and property in Ireland, and the Maamtrasna debate with the 
 speeches of Lord Randoph Churchill and Sir Michael Hieks- 
 
 1 See Lord Malmesbury's Memoirs, i., 424. 
 
cave the 
 when ho 
 urs hitor 
 II whoso 
 lisbiiry's 
 political 
 the Karl 
 
 cleiit, at 
 t'onnod 
 y which 
 840 the 
 I broken 
 iraeli to 
 rvatives 
 Coercion 
 lie strat- 
 onserva- 
 lacl been 
 patly for 
 rirtually 
 le Lib- 
 soheme, 
 jenches 
 onserva- 
 ift him 
 he was 
 was ap- 
 was a 
 ervative 
 kan, and 
 Queen's 
 Then 
 n of life 
 tvith the 
 Hicks- 
 
 TJIK rOMTICAL CIMSIS IN KNtlLAND. 
 
 107 
 
 lieach, condemned even by tlic most honotirahlc organs of 
 their own par^v Let us be just and rememher the sliare 
 which the Conservative party as well as tlu' Ghidstonian 
 l)arty has had in bringing all this disaster and disgrace on the 
 country. 
 
 A dissolution of Parliament ensued. Ui» to this time the; 
 Liberal leader liad treated the Irish movenuMit as rebellion, 
 had denounced its leader as "wading through rapine to dis- 
 membernumt," had himself aniu)unced the arrest of I'arnell to 
 an applauding multitude at Guild Hall, had imprisomnl him 
 aiul scores of his followers without trial umh-r tlu' Crimes Act, 
 had been willing to part with three nunnbers of the Cabinet 
 rather than that the Crimes Act sliould not be renewed. He 
 went to the country asking for a nuijority which would en.able 
 him to settle the Irish questicm independently of Air. Parnell 
 and his followers. This the Irish prevented by voting with 
 the Conservatives, exemplifying thereby the fell power of 
 unscrupulous minorities under the party system. Finding 
 then that he had lost power, and that lie could only regain 
 it by aid of the Irish vote, the Liberal leader at one*' threw 
 himself into the arms of the rebels. He who had been half 
 a century in public life, liad been often as Cabinet Minister 
 resi)onsible for Irish measures, and had himself disestab- 
 lished the Irish Church, pretended that up to this time he had 
 been ignorant of the Irish question, ignorant of the leading 
 facts of Irish history, and that a new liglit had now dawned 
 upon his mind. He declared that when lu; threw Parnell and 
 his followers into gaol he had not understood what Mr. Par- 
 nell's objects were. He put forth for the edification of the 
 faithful a history of the previous workings of his own mind, 
 showing that it had long been tending towards Home Rule; 
 an avowal which implied that he had been all the time commit- 
 ting the nation, and allowing his Home Secretary to rise at 
 his side night after night to pledge himself, to a policy which 
 in his heart he at least suspected to be wrong. In concert 
 with the rebel leaders, now transformed from inmates of his 
 gaols into his privy counsellors and his masters, he framed a 
 
KtM 
 
 <irKSTI()NS OF rilK DAY. 
 
 1,1 I' 
 
 iiu'iisiin' virtually lor the repeal of tlio Union; that Union of 
 whicli lie luul het'n wont to s])eak as the grand aehievenient of 
 Pitt, the on(^ effectual guarantee of peuee between religio\is 
 factions in Ireland, hut whieh he now denounced as a niaster- 
 l»iec(^ of fraud and ini(iuity, using in his transports of rhetori- 
 cal fury even coarser terms. That the new light whlcdi dawned 
 upon the leader's mind at the moment when he found the 
 I'ariudlite vott; indis[)ensal)le to him should have dawned at 
 the same moment on the minds of his followers passes ordi- 
 nary belief. Uright, who did not s[)eak at random, averred 
 that there were not twenty^ members of the liiberal party out- 
 side the Irish section really in favour of their leader's JJill, 
 which Avas as much as to say that the nuiss vt)ted under the 
 lash of party against their (H)nseienees tor that whieh tliey 
 nuist have known was ruinous to their country. So miudi for 
 the aphorism that i»arty is a kind of patriotism. Heaten by 
 the vote of the independent section of his followers, and mad- 
 dened by defeat, the Liberal leader now broke all bounds and 
 gave the restraints of ])atriotisni to the Avinds. He who owed 
 all to culture and the support of the cultivated, ajjpealed to 
 the lowest and the worst passions of the multitude, the jealous 
 hatred of the "masses" for the "classes," of the ignorant lor 
 those better educated than themselves. He recklessly falsitiec: 
 history to prove that intelligence had always been the enemy 
 of justice. He fanned the cold ashes of provincial antipathy 
 in Scotland and Wales as Avell as in Ireland. To inflame 
 Irish rebellion, he revived and e.xaggerated the evil memories 
 of Irish ^' 'story. He abetted resistance to law in Ireland, 
 bidding an excitable and savage race " remember ^litcliels- 
 town." Because England had voted against him, he, the son 
 of a Liverpool merchant, bred at Eton and Oxford, having sat 
 almost all his life for English constituencies, renounced the 
 name of Englishman, traduced England in a foreign press, wel- 
 comed the calumnies of her foreign assailants. He allied him- 
 self morally Avith declared enemies of the realm, the Fenians 
 of the United States. A Conservative more than half his 
 life, who, if the place had been open, might, as some thought, 
 
 1 
 
TiiK I'oi.iricAi- cinsis i\ knoland. 
 
 11)1) 
 
 J 11 ion of 
 
 llU'llt of 
 
 •cli^'ioiis 
 iiuistcr- 
 rlu'tori- 
 (lawiied 
 lUiul the 
 wucd at 
 jes oi'cli- 
 iivcrrod 
 irty out- 
 I's J'.ill, 
 nder tlie 
 ieli tliey 
 mudi for 
 I'atou by 
 uid mad- 
 inds and 
 :lio owed 
 )ealed to 
 jealous 
 orant tor 
 falsitiei: 
 le enemy 
 ntipathy 
 inflame 
 iiomories 
 I reland, 
 Uitchels- 
 the son 
 iving sat 
 need the 
 ess, wel- 
 ied him- 
 Fenians 
 half his 
 thought, 
 
 have heen Iciiding the Conservative paity. he put, hiniscK at 
 the lu!ad of revolutionary radieaiisui and dallied with all the 
 spirits of contiscatiou and destru('ti<tn. lie who had uitheld 
 (!huroh estahlisiiment on the hijuhest principles, held out dis- 
 establishment as a l)rib(! to get votes for his Irish |)oliey. At 
 last, after solemnly pledging himself never to eonseut to the 
 retention of an Irish representation in the Uritish I'arliaiiieut 
 when Ireland had a Parliament of her own, lu^ eoueeited with 
 his Irish eon federates a seluMue for tlu; retention of eighty 
 Irish members in their joint interest. The Lords iiaving 
 rejeeted a Jiill from a leading provision of which members of 
 the Cabin<;t in that House allowed it to l>e seen in debate that 
 they dissented, he now threatens them with destruction. Ihit 
 as he knows that an appeal from their verdict to the nation on 
 the simjih! issn(^ of Home Ilule would I'csult in his defeat, he 
 jjuts off his appeal till he shall have had time to inflame and 
 confuse the mind of the people by a number of revolutionary 
 proposals, hoj)ing thus to force through his Irish measure on 
 false issues. This policy is in effe(!t avowed by his i)artisans 
 without shame. How much of this treatment do the upholders 
 of party government think that any (!ounti'y can bear? 
 
 Tlu! pi-esent situation also betrays the tendem-y to demagogic 
 despotism inherent in the system of universal suffrage with 
 large and ignorant masses. Incapable of self-guidance, the 
 masses blindly follow a leader about whom many of them 
 know nothing but his name, Imt who they havi^ been taught to 
 believe is the man of the peoi)le. The result is a state of 
 things far from identieal with genuine liberty. "Old Hick- 
 ory," the idol of the American ])oi)ula(u', iu the hour of his 
 ascendancy was enabltMl to tramph; on real freedom in the 
 United States mueh as a " G. (). M." is now enabled to trample 
 on real freedom in Great liritain. Ameriean admirers of Mr. 
 Gladstone, looking on at the scene, admit that he has hardly 
 any supporters among the upper or middle classes, that is, in 
 the classes of intelligence, the influence of which it thus ap- 
 pears may be eliminated from government when the unin- 
 formed multitude fliids a man after its heart. 
 

 110 
 
 QUESTIONS OK THE DAY. 
 
 i ' 
 
 ?ii ' 
 
 As it is in national, so it is in municipal affairs. Here, also, 
 for large (lonstituencies, tlie elective system seems to break 
 clown. In former ages the city was a social and political 
 unit; the citizens knew each other, they met in the town hall 
 or in tlieir guilds; tlie great merchants, who now live apart in 
 suburban villas, lived within the walls in daily intercourse 
 with their fellow-citizens, exercised their natural leadership, 
 sought and held municipal ottice. A city now lias no unity. 
 It is merely a densely [jcophnl district requiring a special ad- 
 ministration. There is no nuitiud intelligiqice. A man does 
 not know his next-door neiglibour. Sometimes in London lie 
 does not know his next-door neighbour's name. Conference 
 for tlie purpose of an elective choice is no longer possible. In 
 the case of sucli a city as London or New York, the very idea 
 of it is absurd. Some one there must be, as in tlie case of a 
 political constituency, to d(!signate the candidates and com- 
 bine the votes. Who is it to be? The answer is, the ward 
 politician, who designates himself, or is designated by Tam- 
 many as the candidate, and organises the constituency or has 
 Tammany to organise; it for him. He, like the professional 
 politician of the lai-ger sphere, into whom in fact he will pres- 
 ently develop, devotes himself to the calling in which he 
 finds his interest, an interest too often like that which was 
 found in the munici[)al affairs of New York by William 
 Tweed. He has his organisation always on foot. If in an 
 access of municipal patriotism you Jittempt to oust him, re- 
 sponding to the cry which everlastingly goes up for the election 
 of better men, you iind yourself an amateur opposed to a ju'o- 
 fessional, a casual interloper contending with the regular 
 master of the field. He knows all about the constituency, 
 especially the more (corruptible or gullible i)art of it, while 
 you know nothing. His forces are always on foot. Yours 
 have to be set on foot with infinite trouble and no small cost. 
 It is hardly possible even to start a movement for the improve- 
 ment of elections. The great merchants will have nothing to 
 do with munioipal reform; they cannot afford to leave their 
 business, they utterly refuse themsidves to hold the otliee.s, 
 
TIIK VOLITICAL CIUSIS IX KN(iLANI). 
 
 Ill 
 
 re, also, 
 o break 
 political 
 i\vu hall 
 apart in 
 srcourse 
 ;lership, 
 3 unity, 
 cial ad- 
 lan does 
 ndon he 
 [iference 
 l)le. In 
 erv idea 
 ase of a 
 ud com- 
 ;he ward 
 by 1\uu- 
 y or has 
 "essional 
 ill pres- 
 hicli he 
 licli was 
 William 
 f in an 
 lim, re- 
 eleetion 
 ;o a i)ro- 
 regular 
 ituency, 
 t, while 
 Yours 
 ill cost, 
 niprove- 
 thing to 
 ve tlieir 
 ottiees. 
 
 they shrink with aversion from an acrimonious and often dirty 
 struggle. When tlie (!orru[)tion or misgov'^ernmeut becomes 
 insufferable, as it did at >«'ew York in the time of Tweed, 
 there is a spasm of reform. This passes away, you slide 
 back into the old hands, and city government runs once more 
 in its groove. \Ye see wliat has happened in New York, 
 wliere, not many years after the exposure and overthrow of 
 Tweed, there wiu"e scandals of tin; same kind, thougli in magni- 
 tude less portentous. Men of tlie class of ward politicians, if 
 they are not paid, will find some way of paying tliemselves. 
 If tliere is not peculation there will be jobbery. Always 
 there will be waste arising from want of skill, foresight, or 
 system, and from the general character of the government, 
 wliich is political, wlien for municipalities it ought to be scien- 
 tific. The first object of aldermen or city councillors is to 
 secure their own re-election. In the Middle Ages municipal 
 government had to do witli franchises, witli trade rules, witli 
 the defence of city liberties against royal or feudal rapacity. 
 It had little or nothing to do with sanitary matters or educa- 
 tion, and not much to do with police. The department of 
 eilucation, if it is a municipal affair, Avill be found to lapse 
 into the same hands as the rest. Hence philosophic observers 
 of American institutions tell you, pjhI every one on the conti- 
 nent repeats, that the great problem is city government. 
 American and Canadian cities are wtdl governed in proportion 
 as the administration is not elective, but has by the good sense 
 of the people been made over to skilled officers or standing 
 commissions. The best governed (lity of all is AVashington, 
 which, being in a Federal district, is in the hands of three com- 
 missioners appointed, like other Federal officers, by the Presi- 
 dent of the United States with the consent of the Senate. 
 There is a city de))t, the bequest of a former regime. But 
 it is being reduced, and everybody seems satisfied with the 
 administration; indeed, this is one of the attractions to resi- 
 dence at Washington. In face of all this experieiu'e and of 
 the nu)r;il to Avhich it points, the British I'arliament bestows 
 on London, a province of brick and nu)rtar without the slight- 
 
T 
 
 112 
 
 liUESTIONS 0¥ THE DAY. 
 
 est unity or power of eollective choice, an elective govern- 
 ment. Already the London Council seems to be highly dei)ui- 
 gogic, and likely to repel residence as much as Washington 
 attracts it. Already it seems to be a paradise of municipal 
 agitators ; the city will be lucky if it does not presently become 
 a paradise of Tweeds, lleally good men may come forward 
 and be elected at first, but experience shows that they will 
 tire and that the future belongs to the ward politician. 
 
 The upshot is that if by government is meant anything pos- 
 sessed of authority or controlling power. Great Britain and 
 the Empire are likely to be Avithout a governnunit. This is a 
 case in which the politician most averse to speculative arclii- 
 tecture and with least in him of Sieves must admit that it is 
 time to look over the building and see wliat repairs it needs. 
 If the late Conservative government could have relied u])on its 
 men, this is what it might liave done. But the task was re- 
 nounced when tlie l*rime JMinister took tlie Foreign Office, 
 and instead of giving his mind to political reconstruction 
 gave it to diplomatic mysteries. AVhat do the masses, wliose 
 votes decide the fate of an empire, care for diplonuicy? 
 What do they care even for finance? The chief effect of Mr. 
 Goschen's brilliant achievements as Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer in the mortal struggle which followed, was probably to 
 turn ag;)inst INlr. Goschen's cause a number of people with 
 small incomes, whose dividends he had reduced by his con- 
 version of the funds. 
 
 There are those who think no autliority necessary. Anar- 
 chists, of course, think this, though it may be i)resumed that 
 an anarchist, if you broke his head or stole his purse, would, 
 provisionally, and all chimeras reserved, ap])eal to the poliee. 
 But the extreme theory of self-government comes pretty nearly 
 to the same thing. Its practical issue, as we have seen, is the 
 government of the caucus, the "boss," and William Tweed, 
 its tendency is to clironic revolution. Let government be so 
 ordered, if possible, that our increased enlightenment, our 
 advances in civilisation, our quickened sense of public interests, 
 the elevation of our aims and hopes, all, in short, that makes 
 
THE POLITICAL CRISIS IX KN(iLAxM). 
 
 ii;) 
 
 US more "worthy oi' the name of a community than were nations 
 in the earlier stage of evohition, may tell on its character; 
 without a government we can hardly do. The aim of the mod- 
 erate Liberal is a government with real authority, national, 
 not partisan, raised abov(^ the passions and delusions of tlie 
 hour, stable enough to produce confidence, yet responsible and 
 o])en to the inliiience of opinion, the free expression of which 
 is the one clear gain of all these revolutions, (Government of 
 the people, Lincoln said, was never to perish from the earth. 
 It was perishing when Lincoln spoke, and the government of 
 the " boss " was taking its place. 
 
 What is this "jjeople," the worship of which has succeeded 
 to the worshi[» of kings, and is too often not less abject or 
 sid)versive of political virtue? On the lips of demagogues it 
 means tlie masses without the classes, that is, without the edu- 
 cation and intelligence. In the minds of the Jacobins it was 
 a deity: they called it tlie divine people. In the minds of 
 most of us it is a vague impersonation of the community ab- 
 stracted from individual follies, cupidities, and infirmities. 
 Nothing answers to this fancy. Let us have done with fig- 
 ments in which we can no longer afford to indulge. Ignorance 
 a million times multiplied does not make knowledge, nor are 
 politics so different from other subjects that without knowl- 
 edge, and under the influence of passion, political questions 
 are likely to be settled aright. A man no more forfeits free- 
 dom by availing himself of the guidance of statesmanship than 
 he does by consulting a physician or engineer. 
 
 Few, even if they desire it, would deem it possible to restore 
 hereditary monarchy as a political power. All things serve 
 their purjjose and have their day. Hereditary monarchy 
 served a purpose which nothing else could ser/v>; and appar- 
 ently it has had its day. The new world, the leading shoot 
 and the index of tendency, rejects it. In Europe, it can hardly 
 be said to live otherwise than in form and name except in 
 Russia, and in Germany, where, owing to the circumstaiu'cs of 
 federation, the part ])layed in it by the monarch ])ersonally 
 and the military character of the Empire, the Emperor retains 
 
T 
 
 I 
 
 II* 
 
 QUKSriONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 i 'i 
 
 power. France, once its grandest seat, has to all appearances 
 (letinitively abandoned it. In Spain, formerly so intensely 
 loyal, it was for a time overthrown, and appears now to be 
 regarded as a stop gap and a respite. In England, though it 
 has lost all power, even the power of naming its own house- 
 hold, wliieli was denied it by the h)yal Peel, it has not lost 
 hold on sentiment, particularly in the rural districts. A man 
 of ability, courage, and commanding cliaracter on the throne, 
 coming forward at a crisis like the present, might appeal with 
 etfect to the heart of a nation. But there is no use in looking 
 for such qualities in kings at the present day. Kings in the 
 Middle Ages had to exert themselves in order to keep their 
 crowns upon their heads, and Avere trained more or less in 
 the school of practical duty, in spite of wliich tliey often suc- 
 cumbed to the temptations of a Court. ]>ut a modern king is 
 nursed in luxury and flattery, without the former correctives, 
 responsibility, and need of exertion. He is protected by an 
 invisible fence from contact with rude realities. Knowing 
 that he will not be allowed to govern, but only to hold levees 
 and lay first stones, he has no inducement to fit himself for 
 government. Public duty can be little more than a name to 
 him. You have no right to expect of him more than that he 
 will be a respectable and harmless sybarite, and you have not 
 much reason to complain if he is a George IV. Ask a Minis- 
 ter of any Court how often lie has found tlie Court willing to 
 sacrifice its personal convenience or even its fancies to the 
 public service. ■ Think how, during the last two centuries, Brit- 
 ish royalty has discharged the very easy, gracious, and useful 
 duty of visiting Ireland. Not one man in twenty, or perhaps 
 in a hundred, will work hard or practise self-denial unless he 
 is compelled. 
 
 The House of Lords is now the only hereditary chamber 
 left in Europe, though in some others there lingers an heredi- 
 tary element. It is the last leaf on that tree, and it has hung 
 so long because its power has been so small and its Order, 
 having no social privileges so offensive as those of the French 
 Noblesse, has, compared with the French Noblesse, given 
 
Tin-: POLITICAL CHISIS IN KX(iLAXI). 
 
 IB 
 
 little umbmgo. At this juncture destiny has been kind to it. 
 It has the honour of standing between the nation and disnieui- 
 berment, and it will receive the sup^jort of wise friends of 
 union, whatever they may think of it as an institution for the 
 future. Nor does freedom suffer more disparagement from 
 the interposition of an hereditary Peerage than from the un- 
 controlled conviction of a dictator. The despot of the Closure 
 has received a check. Law in its resistance! to lawless vio- 
 lence has found for tlie moment a bulwark in the House of 
 Lords. It is pleasant, too, while the House of Commons is 
 cringing to the caucus and its idol, to see something like inde- 
 pendence elsewhere. Yet few, looking at the course which 
 things have been taking in Europe, can believe that a privi- 
 leged order is destined to be the sheet anchor of the State in 
 the future, or even that it will long be allowed to exist. What 
 has been said of hereditary kingship is true also of an heredi- 
 tary Peerage. It is not an object of rational hatred; .c may 
 be an object of historical gratitude. It was an organising 
 force, perhaps the only available force of the kind, at a time 
 Avhen, there being no central administration strong enough to 
 hold society together, the only mode of iireserving ord(;r was 
 territorial delegation. Nor could anything else well have 
 curbed the lawless aggrandisement of kings. In those days 
 the l^aron was local ruler, judge, and captain. His life was 
 one of exertion and of peril. Historians even think that the 
 lives of the nobility were shortened by their troubles as well 
 as l)y the sword. IJut there is nothing now to prevent an 
 hereditary Peer from sinking into sybaritism, and into sybarit- 
 ism, for the most part decient and qualified, but sometinu^s 
 unqualified and scandalous, hereditary Peers sink. Thev 
 cannot be got even to attend in their own house. The 
 number of Peers present at important debates hardly ecpuils 
 that of a dinner-party, though during the session, which 
 is also the season, there must be hundreds of them in 
 town. Their wise leaders have always been lecturing tluMu 
 on this subject; but in vain. Nor can it be denicMl that 
 the. House of Lords, besides representing a. i)rivileged Order 
 
1 I 
 
 In 
 
 M 
 
 116 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 in an age when privilege i.s condemned, represents too ex- 
 clusively a special interest, that of the pro]>rietor.s of land. 
 This disqualifies it from acting as an impartial court of 
 legislative revision. In fact it has never played that part, 
 but always the part of an organ of the landed interest indis- 
 criminately op])osed to change. Delay, by whatever opposi- 
 tion caused, always affords time for reconsideration; but in 
 no other sense can it be said that the House of Lords has given 
 expression to the sober second thought of the nation. It can- 
 not claim and it does not possess the national confidence on 
 that ground. INIoreover, the authority of the Peers rests on 
 their entailed estates ; a landless Peerage would be weak 
 indeed ; and entailed estates are visibly threatened by the 
 adv.ance of social and economical democracy. That the House 
 of Lords will have to be mended or ended is the general con- 
 viction, alike of those who look forward to the revolution with 
 glee, and of those who tremble f^t the thought of being left 
 with a caucus-ridden and faction-stricken House of Commons. 
 Is the bi-cameral system to be retained? Its existence is an 
 accident of British history, arising out of the division of the 
 Barons into the greater, Avho sat in the Great Council, and the 
 lesser Barons, Avho did not, and who formed a gentry which 
 cast in its lot with the Commons, while the Clergy drew apart 
 to their own Convocation, preferring to be taxed there. In 
 the French States-General and in other jNIeditBval Parliaments, 
 there was a chamber for each (3rder. Chance, hoAvever, often 
 chooses well. The weakest point of the bi-cameral system is 
 that, to form the Senate, it is necessary to take the experience 
 and the mature wisdom out of the jiopular house, which 
 needs their control, and to put them into a house by them- 
 selves where they are in danger of being discredited as the 
 experience and wisdom of greybeards who are behind the age, 
 and estranged from the feelings and wishes of the people. 
 We have seen the rock upon which Cromwell's experiment 
 split. Again, there is always danger of a dead-lock. In the 
 L^nited States, where the Senate is really co-ordinate with 
 the House of Representatives, as often as the majorities of the 
 
 m 
 
■ 
 
 ■■MVHHHI 
 
 nts too ex- 
 n-s of land, 
 il court of 
 i that part, 
 erest indis- 
 ver opposi- 
 ion; but ill 
 Is has given 
 )n. It can- 
 iifidence on 
 rs rests on 
 d be weak 
 lied by tlie 
 ; the House 
 eneral con- 
 lution witli 
 being left 
 Commons, 
 fence is an 
 iion of the 
 3il, and the 
 iitry which 
 drew apart 
 there. In 
 irliaments, 
 ever, often 
 I system is 
 experience 
 ise, which 
 ! by them- 
 ted as the 
 id the age, 
 lie people, 
 xperiment 
 f:. In the 
 nate with 
 ties of the 
 
 TIIK POLITICAL CIUSlS IN ENGLAND. 
 
 two Houses belong to different parties, dead-lock ensues, 
 and legislation on important matters is in abeyance. Tliere is 
 also danger of diminishing the sense of responsibility in the 
 loAver House, members of which will give a popular vote for 
 a measure which they disapprove, trusting tliat the measure 
 Avill be thrown out by the Senate. Tliis has notoriously hap- 
 pened in the United States, and is happening now in England, 
 where it is known that not a few of those who voted for Mv. 
 Gladstone's Bill condemned it in private, and would scarcely 
 have been able to stifle conscience had they not felt sure 
 that the measure would be thrown out by the House of 
 Lords. It would be easy, Avitliout a second chamber, to pro- 
 vide safeguards against legislative precipitancy by regulating 
 the procedure, or by giving a suspensive veto to a certain 
 proportion of the House. But the bi-cameral system is in 
 possession. It is in possession not only of all the constitu- 
 tional laAVs and forms, and of tlie Palace at Westminster, but 
 of the national mind, and Lincoln's advice not to swap horses 
 when crossing a stream has double force when the stream is so 
 heady. 
 
 How to reorganise the House of Lords, however, is a (pies- 
 tion the solution of which must be left to those who, believino- 
 in the bi-cameral system, have deeply studied the problem of 
 construction. A partition between tlie hereditary and tlie life 
 principle does not seem likely to be successful, even if public 
 opinion were to allow the hereditary principle to be retained. 
 The new cloth would fret the old garment. Tlie two elements 
 would hardly amalgamate, and there would be a continual and 
 dangerous contrast between their votes. As often as a popu- 
 lar measure Avas thrown out by heredit;iry vot(>s, the cry of 
 hereditary legislation would again be raised. What is wanted 
 is a settlement in which the mind of the nation may repose, 
 not a mere rectihcation of collisions. There might be some- 
 thing to be said for election by the House of Commons, or, to 
 put it in constitutional phrase, designation by the vote of the 
 House of Commons for appointment by tlie Crown. This 
 would be likely to keep the two Houses in tolerable harmony. 
 
:| i 
 
 118 
 
 qi:ksti<)ns of thk day 
 
 I't!' 
 
 i li 
 
 « 
 
 It mij^lit 1)0 combined witli lupiiibersliii) of riglit tor Ministers 
 or PX-iMinisters of State, and others lioldiiig or having held 
 higli posts or commands. There would of course be provi- 
 sions for removal in case of intirmity or non-attendanc'. But 
 the problem, it must be repeated, is one for the bi-ca.neralist 
 to solve. 
 
 Another problem to be solved is that of getting the Com- 
 mons to consent to any reform of the House of Lords. The 
 Commons -would feel, evidently they do feel, that in reform- 
 ing and tluu'i'by strengthening the House of Lords they were 
 ])arting with i;ower. It wcnild be difficult to devise a Bill 
 which in their present mood they would pass. The question 
 arises whether the House of Lords can possibly do anything 
 to reform itself by resolution, as it abolished proxies; or by 
 understanding, without formal resolution, as it excludes its lay 
 members from voting on legal questions, which in the O'Con- 
 nell case some of them were inclined, and, it must be said, had 
 great tem})tation to do. Could they, not legally, yet by moral 
 force reduce themselves practically to something like a Senate 
 Avhich would command the respect at least of the anti-revolu- 
 tionary portion of the country, or, at all events, rid themselves 
 of scandals ? 
 
 Still, if we take institutions as they are, and look in this 
 spirit at the case of the House of Commons, the objects in 
 view will be to redeem it from the condition of a voting 
 nnudiine worked by the caucus, to })revent it from becoming, 
 as viohmt men try to make it, a mere organ of revolution, and 
 to restore to it the character of a council of the nation. The 
 only guarantee for independence, saving witli heroic souls, is 
 a certain security of tenure. Let each member hold for the 
 term of seven ye^rs certain, or whatever the term is to be, from 
 the day of his election, unless he takes office under the Crown; 
 in Avhich case, perhaps, a sentiment rooted, though rather obso- 
 lete, would still require him to go to his constituents for re- 
 election. It would be found that the House, to which many 
 men are elected late in life, changed fully as fast as national 
 opinion, especially if the killing length of the sessions and the 
 
Till-: POLITICAL CRISIS IN EN(iLANI). 
 
 119 
 
 nie 
 
 killing lateness of the hours are maintained. IJut lu would 
 always have in it a certain number of men tolerably free to 
 vote according to tlieir convictions. Its existence would be 
 continuous, and there would not l)e, as there now is, an anoma- 
 lous interval between dissolution and re-election, when, the 
 supreme power being now vested in the House of Commons, 
 that ])ower is for a time in abeyance. 
 
 Such a change would involve the abandonnuMit of the pre- 
 rogative, vested nominally in the (Jrown, really in tlu; party 
 leader, of penal dissolution. This is the relic of a time when 
 government was really in the Crown and Parliament was called 
 to advise the Crown and grant taxes. It became irrational 
 when supreme power vested in Parliament. Still it was till 
 lately exercised with some mt^asure and in accordance with 
 some principle lodged in the breasts of hereditary or trained 
 statesmen. It is now iised as a card in the hands of a 
 leader of faction, who dissolves Parliament to bring on an 
 election, when his local Avire-pullers tell him that the chances 
 are in his favour. Thus the tenure of a mend)er of Parlia- 
 ment is not for a legal term, but during the pleasure of a leader 
 of a dominant faction, and he votes always under peril of dis- 
 solution as well as under the dictation of the caucus. The 
 abuse of this prerogative in the colonies, where politicians are 
 totally unrestrained by unwritten princi})le or tradition, shows 
 what may be expected in England. On the last occasion in 
 Canada, the Dominion Parliament was dissolved on a false 
 })retext which was exposed upon the spot, simply because the 
 j)arty leader thought that the wind at that moment was in his 
 favour. A middle course woi;ld be to leave the prerogative of 
 dissolution, but provide that it shall be exercised only on the 
 advice of the Privy Council, a body the composition of which, 
 by the way, pretty well fulfils the ideal of a Senate. 
 
 There would lie an end also of general elections. These, 
 again, are a survival, and in surviving have totally changed 
 their nature. They were originally a summons to the people 
 to send up representatives of their counties and boroughs to 
 inform the Crown about local needs, and vote the subsidies. 
 
! I 
 
 120 
 
 QUESTIONS OK TIIK DAY. 
 
 i:i I 
 
 
 Eacli of tlioiu is now an eiiorinoiis t'iictioii tight, the prizes of 
 wliich are tho otticjt's of State and tlie control of the national 
 policy. Ea(!h of them is a civil war without arms, and excites 
 the same anti-social and anti-national })assions which civil 
 war itself cxcitt!s, sometimes witli results hardly less grave. 
 A false and dangerous stimulus is given to innovation, he- 
 cause each of the parties, esi)ecially the party of movement, 
 has to allure support by promises Avhich in the excitement of 
 the game beconm reckless, as well as by denunciation of its 
 opponent. The Newcastle programme, drawn up to gain 
 votes, raises issues whiedi together would be enough to bring 
 on revolution. In America, civil war ensued upon a presi- 
 dential election, which corresponds to a general election in 
 England, and was its natui'al result. 'No country can bear 
 forever these convulsions, wliich grow more violent as the 
 suffrage is exteiuled, and more frequent as the exercise of 
 the prerogative of dissohition becomes more unrestrained. 
 
 The plebiscite, where it can be used, as it well might be in 
 the case of any amendment to the constitution, has the im- 
 mense advantage of submitting a single and definite question 
 to the vote, clear of all alien issues, and as clear as possible 
 of personal and local influence, it might be that the people 
 would decide in favour of woman suffrage; but they could not 
 be worried or coaxed into voting for it as some individual 
 members of a legislature are; nor would they, like party 
 leaders, succumb to the fear of offending and estranging a 
 coming vote. 
 
 A parliament which is sovereign, having uidimited power of 
 legislation on all subjects, has over a ])arliament bound by a 
 written constitution, like the American Congress, the advaJi- 
 tage of a greater freedom of adaptation and national develop- 
 ment; though it would not be necessary to copy the extreme 
 rigidity of the American safeguards. IJut the present course 
 of events in England seems to indicate that in a democratic 
 republic a written constitution may be indispensable. With- 
 out it there may be a perpetual danger of a revolutionary exer- 
 cise of the legislative power by any ephemeral faction in the 
 
TIIK roLITICAL CRISIS IN KNCJLAM). 
 
 121 
 
 iiioiiit'iit of its ascendancy. For sonu'tliiiiijf of tlu^ kind the 
 radical "biiglo" is now being scunded, and if this [)rosi)t'ct is 
 ph'asant for politi'jal sportsmen evt-ry man of sense will know 
 what is in store for the nation. 
 
 To reaseend the slope of democratic concession is not less 
 ditticult, under tin; elective system with the parties bidding 
 against each other for votes, than the descent is easy. To 
 very extended male snffrage yon have already come. To uni- 
 versal male suffrage, with one man, one vote, you are visi- 
 bly coming. To universal suffrage, male and female, you are 
 very likcdy to come. Witli universal suffrage, male and 
 female, and without a written constitution, or any check 
 whatever except the "throne," upon the exercise of sovereign 
 power by the " will " of such a " people," you may look forward 
 to interesting times. In the end, perhaps, by a convulsive 
 effort of society to escape from confusion, the truncheon may 
 revert to the Protector's hand. lUit in the meantime what 
 may happen to a highly commercial nation, most sensitively 
 organised, in which a moment of confusion means widespread 
 distress? It is surely irrational to assert that any man has a 
 right to a vote, that is, to a share of political power, whether he 
 is capable or whether he is incapable of using it for the general 
 good and his own. It has been truly said that if such a right 
 exists, it must exist in every human being, in the Hottentot as 
 well as in the civilised man. To fix a standard of age is to fix 
 a standard of fitness, and to fix a standard of fitness is to bar 
 ignorance and irresponsibility as well as nonage. The right 
 which every one has is that of qualifying himself for the exercise 
 of political power, if he can. Audiences of workingmen, how- 
 ever democratic, seemed never to resent the assertion that 
 political power was a trust, and that a man ought to qualify 
 himself and give the State some guarantee for its exercise. A 
 property qualification as evidence of a stake in the country may 
 be obsolete, or at least pi-actically no longer feasible, though 
 there is surely still some sense in the axiom that representa- 
 tion and taxation should go together, while the experience of 
 American and colonial democracy at least seems to show that 
 
it ! 
 
 122 
 
 QUKS'I'T(>NS OF TlIK DAY. 
 
 m I 
 
 , ,, i 
 
 unless ropirsontiitioii and taxation do go togftlier, expenditure 
 is lilcely to be live. lUit idoperty (uialificatiou as a test of 
 industry, I'rugality, and responsibility (um never be obsolett; 
 till eoninumisni reigns and property is no more. Still less 
 can it be said by any one but a Jaeobin that an edueational 
 (pialitieation is obsolete, or that while on every subject but 
 [xtlities, ignorance is fatal, a man is tit to decide by his vote 
 till- (piestion ol Home liule who hardly knows on which side 
 of England Ireland lies. If it is our duty to educate our nuis- 
 ters, it is the duty of our masters to get themselves educated, 
 and to give proof that they have had schooling suflicient to 
 be capable of umlerstanding at least what the political ques- 
 tions mean. Xor is there any reason, except the tyrannical 
 exigencies of i)arty, why the suffrage should be thrust by a 
 self-acting system of registration upon the man who does not 
 care enough for it or for public (pu'stions to take the trouble 
 of putting himself u])on the Register. An educational qualifi- 
 cation, which there are simple methods of ascertaining, and 
 personal application for the vote as a guarantee for a spark of 
 civic duty are surely no more than the connnonwealth has a 
 right to refjuire. 
 
 After all, what is a vote? That is a question which socialis- 
 tic radicalism, if it goes to the length of dismemberment and 
 rapine, may force people to ask themselv(>s in earnest. Is 
 the right of nuijorities divine? Are people bound in con- 
 science to allow themselves to be voted to perdition when the 
 real force is on their side and they might save themselves, if 
 they chose, by the strong hand? Xobody pretends to believe 
 that a majdi'ity is infallible; or even that it is a very strong 
 giuiraiitee for wisdom, truth, and justice. If any one did, the 
 history ./i' opinion would rise up in judgment against him. 
 By agreeing to count heads, men avoided decision by force, the 
 only arbitrator in that primitive state of things of which 
 the Polish Uberum veto was a relic. Counting heads was not 
 as weighing brains; still it was an invaluable invention, 
 and communities owe it, if not invariable wisdom, unbroken 
 peace, freedom at least from physical violence. Decision by 
 
 ■ 
 

 THK POLrnCAL CUISIS IN i:N(iLAMJ. 
 
 128 
 
 (!Ount of heads is an institution as worthy of profonnil ros[)eot, 
 us sacred, if you will, as utility can make it. lUit utility 
 cannot <,nvc a tith^ higiier than its(df, and if in nine hinidrt'd 
 and ninety-nine cases out of a thousand it is right for tliose 
 who think they have the real force ui)on their side to yield for 
 the sak(! of peace and order t(j Llie more numerous yet weaker 
 party, in the tlumsandth (tase it may not he ri.nht. A vote is, 
 in a vast number of instances, an artifiiual jjower which strenj^fth 
 conceiles to weakness, and which places weiikiu^ss politically 
 on a level with strength. If \veakni!ss al)uses the artificial 
 ])o\ver beyond a certain limit, strength would a])[)ear to be 
 morally at liberty to assert itself. People are not bound to 
 f(dd their arms in tanu^ submission when they can prevent the 
 cruel indulgence of class hatred, public; ra[)ine, or the dismem- 
 berment of tlu; nation, any more than they are bound to foh 
 their arms in tame submission when the tyi'anny of a desi)ot 
 becomes insufferable. There are international situations, 
 though few, out of which the (mlv exit is war. There are 
 domestic situations, far fewer still, out of whicdi, as Mirabeau 
 saw, the only exit is civil war or the dis])la,y of a determina- 
 tion to face civil war rather than suffer the extremity of 
 wrong. A majority, conscious that its power is artificial, and 
 that the real strength is on the other side, will almost always 
 decline the conflict and refrain from further aggression. If 
 it does not, the national destiny at all events will be decided, 
 not by demagogic apjieals to passion and the love of plunder, 
 or by the craft of Old Parliamentary Hands, but by the genu- 
 ine force and manhood of the nation. 
 
■ Mumit.TT-TW^FK^mim 
 
 ^i^""!i^^"ff 
 
 if .1- . 
 
% 
 ^ 
 
 THE EMPIRE. 
 
!U 
 
 . i » 
 
 li 
 
 w 
 
THE EMPIRE. 
 
 The name Empire stirs in the British heart a sentiment of 
 pride which the writer tliorouglily shares, but which, unless it 
 is kept within the bounds of fact and policy, may be the pre- 
 cursor of a fall. When the House of Commons has passed a bill 
 for the severance of the British Islands from each other, to 
 discuss the advantages and disadvantages of remote dependen- 
 cies can hardly be deemed an insult to the national honour. 
 
 Freeman did us a service in making us think what we meant 
 by "Empire." The vague use of the name is practically 
 delusive and perilous. British Empire in India is empire in 
 thi true sense of the term, since Hindustan is governed with 
 imperial sway. So, in their way, are the military dependen- 
 cies such as Malta and Gibraltar. But the self-governed colo- 
 nies are not empire at all. The reasons for retaining the three 
 classes of possessions are totally different, as are the rules of 
 dealing with them. The West India Islands, again, a set of 
 extinct slave jilantations, are a co "" by themselves. Xo plan 
 or systematic policy has governed t .is motley accumulation of 
 possessions. England has had no Will of Beter the Great. 
 The only pervading agency, besides the aggressive energy of 
 the race, fruitful of splendid ndventurers, has been the nuiri- 
 time superiority which enabled and induced England, while she 
 had not the means of putting a great land force on European 
 battle-fields, to extend her acquisitions by sea at the expense 
 of less maritime rivals. Cases essentially diftVrcMit, common 
 sense requires to be differently treated, and as to all cases, com- 
 mon sense says that change of circumstance ought to be taken 
 into account. But in approaching the (iiu^stion of Emjjire 
 from a rational ]>oint of view, and essaying to test the value 
 
 127 
 
128 
 
 QUKSTIONH OF THE DAY. 
 
 Ml 
 
 
 of its several elenieuts, we are met at once by the cry of 
 ''prestige." Give up anything, we are told, and you ruin the 
 prestige of that Empire on which the sun never sets. What is 
 prestige? Etymologically, a conjuring trick. Actually, a 
 sham force. Is it possible that there can be anything really 
 valuable in a sham ? Will not your enemy see through it as 
 well as yourself ? Wooden guns may be of use till it is found 
 out that they are wooden, after wiiich they are hardly worth 
 tlefending. Dependencies widely scattered which you have 
 no ade(|uate force to guard must be military weakness, of 
 which your enemy cannot fail to be aware. Your enemy, in 
 fact, is aware of it, and acts in all his dealings with you upon 
 : ■ I knowledge that you are vulnerable in all parts of the globe. 
 Li' ' deems herself the luippy nation that has no frontier. 
 She i, a frontier in India of vast extent, menaced, as is sup- 
 posed, by the greatest military power in the world, to say 
 nothing of the neighbourhood, on the other side, of China, 
 Avhich may some day become military. In Canada she has 
 a frontier of three thousand miles perfectly open to the attack 
 of a nation of sixty-five millions, which the other day had a 
 million of men in arms, and can at my moment throw an irre- 
 sistibh; force across the line. Tiie primacy of the sea remains 
 to her. Supremacy is no longer hers, as it was at the time 
 Avhen the navies of France and Spain had fallen into decrepi- 
 tude and that of Russia was but just born; or again, Avhen 
 Duncan had crushed the navy of Holland at Camperdown, and 
 when Nelson had crushed the navies of France and Spain at 
 Ti-afalgar. Steam, too, has changed the aspect of naval affairs. 
 Hoche would now be sure of his landing in ]^antry Bay. Nor, 
 till the fearful experiment of a naval war with ironclads has 
 been tried, can we tell how far the pre-eminence of the British 
 sailor will be affected l\y the change from the Victory to the 
 turret and the ram. A Frenchman, though inferior to a Briton 
 in close action or in boarding, may behind his iron wall show 
 as much intelligence in handling a machine. 
 
 There is surely no disparagement in saying that England's 
 real strength was always in herself. Jt was in her race 
 
TlIK E^1PII{E. 
 
 129 
 
 
 of men, her position good for commerce witli botli liemi- 
 spheres, her coal and iron, the spirit of her free institutions. 
 Opponents of territorial aggrandisement are always taxed 
 with insularity. What is it that makes British puUcy insu- 
 lar ? Cromwell's policy was not insular, nor was that of the 
 statesmen of Elizabeth. AVhat compelled England to stand 
 aloof, lending no help but protocols, while Italy was strug- 
 gling for independence ? What would compel her to stand 
 aloof if Eussia and France should set ou (lermany and over- 
 turn the balance of power in Europe witli the ultimate humili- 
 ation of Great Britain herself in view? What but those 
 dispersed possessions -.hich she knows herself to be unable 
 to defend ? 
 
 Thirty years ago the question arose of ceding the Ionian 
 Islands to Greece. They were useless to England as posses- 
 sions. Their people, though well treated, were fractious, and 
 were always giving troubl.'. Not only did they bring no 
 strength, but in case of wai' with a Mediterranean Power, 
 either they must have been abandoned with disgrace, or a force 
 which could not have been spared must have been shut up in 
 them and would ])robably have b(;en lust. Yet the (;ry was 
 raised at once tliat cession would be a betrayal of weakness, 
 and would be fatal to Imperial prestige. The Islands Avere 
 ceded, nevertheless, and by Lord Talmerston, the Minister of 
 aggrandisement, whoso ambition it was to make the name of 
 Englishman as formidable as that of Koman had been of old. 
 Did Great Britain thereby lose a particle of real strength or 
 of genuine reputation? Did she not rid herself of weakness 
 and gain reputation for wisdom? Of tlie ].rescnt generation, 
 perluips few are conscious that I'highuid was ever possessed of 
 the Ionian Islands, any more than they know that the King 
 of England was once King of Corsica, and for good reasons 
 resigned that Crown. 
 
 Spanish historians begin the reign of Philip TI. with the 
 resounding roll of the kingdoms, provinces, colonies, and for- 
 tresses of whi(!h he was lord in all i)arts of the globe. "He 
 possessed in I'hu'ope the kingdoins of Castile, Aragon, and 
 
ino 
 
 (QUESTIONS OK THE DAY, 
 
 iii!' 
 
 Navarre, those of Naples and Sicily, Milan, Sardinia, Koussil- 
 lo'i, the Balearic Islands, the Low Countries, and Franche 
 Comte ; on the western coast of Africa he held the Canaries, 
 ( 'ape Yerd, Oran, and Tunis ; in Asia he held the Philippines 
 and a part of the ^loluccas ; in the New World he held the 
 innnense kingdoms of Mexico, Peru, and Chili, and the pro- 
 vinces conquered in the last years of Charles V., besides Cuba, 
 llispaniola, and other islands and possessions. His marriage 
 with the Queen of England had placed in his hands the power 
 and resources of that kingdom. So that it might well be said 
 that the sun never set in the dominions of the King of Spain, 
 and that at the least movement of tliat nation the whole world 
 trembled." ^Ve now know what relation all these possessions 
 and titles bore to real strength and to the sources of a genuine 
 prosperity. How does the refusal to examine rationally the 
 Imperial policy of (ireat Uritain on the ground that you detract 
 from her prestige, differ from the blind pride that went before 
 t^ o fall of Spain '.' Suppose some bold man at the Council 
 Board cf Philip II. had said that Spain in grasjjing the globe 
 was losing Spain, would he not have forfeited Iiis head ? Yet 
 would not his voice have been that of true patriotism and real 
 greatness ? Spain was at the height of her '• prestige " when 
 Drake, seeing her impotence, went into Cadiz and singed the 
 Spaniard's beard. The policy of real strength must be the 
 patriotic policy; the policy of real weakness, however colossal, 
 must l)e that which a true patriot would discard. This will 
 not be a mere truism till it is accepted as the truth. 
 
 The British Empire in India is an Empire in the true sense 
 of the word, and the nobles: the world has seen, though the 
 Koman Empire had the honour of being the mould in which 
 modern Europe Avas cast. Never had there been such an 
 attempt to make conquest the servant of civilisation. About 
 keei)ing India there is no question. England has a real duty 
 there, she has undertaken a great work and stands pledged 
 before the world to perform it. She has vast interests and in- 
 vestments. Her departure would consign Hindustan to the 
 
THE KMIMRE. 
 
 m 
 
 sanguinary and plundering anarchy from Avliicli her advent 
 rescued it. Tlie Hindu and the MaJioniedan, between wliom 
 slie with ditiiculty keeps the p.nice, would again grapple in 
 murderous strife, while Mahrattas and Pindarees would re- 
 commence their raids. The ''cultivated ))aboo/' who, owing 
 his being to the Em])ire, sometimes rails . gainst it, would be 
 the first to perish, crushed like an egg-shell amidst the war- 
 ring elements which its withdrawal would let loose. 
 
 Xo moral compunction need be felt in retaining this con- 
 quest. It is a monument not of British rapacity but of British 
 superiority, especially at sea. England was only one of four 
 competitors for the prize. Portugal came first, but she was 
 too small to retain so distant an Empire, and at the critical 
 moment she fell into the paralysing grasp oi Spai„. Holland 
 had, as has l)een remarked, the advantage of undivided devotion 
 to the aims of commerce, while Eiigland was divided between 
 those of commerce and those of territorial aristocracy ; but she, 
 again, was too small, and she also was crippled at "the critical 
 moment, being attacked by France, who thus unwittingly 
 played the game of England. France iierself Avas tlie most 
 formidable rival, and by the hand of Dupleix slie hud all but 
 grasped the prize. But being less maritime than England, she 
 was less capable of securing the sea base essential to the ten- 
 ure of an Empire formed, unlike i)receding Empires, unless we 
 except the Carthaginian and Spanish, by extension not from a 
 territorial centre, but from a sea base. The navy of France 
 once overpowered, her access by sea once barred, her military 
 force was useless. Her government also was corrupt, was 
 swayed by harlots, was weak yet despotic, and meddled mis- 
 chievously with the French East India Company while the 
 British East India Company had political power to back it and 
 a comparatively free hand.^ The British had also the great 
 advantage over Catholic powers of religious toleration. The 
 Portuguese brought the Inquisition with them to Goa and 
 proclaimed a Avar of extermination against paganism. The 
 
 1 See Sir Alfred Lyall's The Rise of the British Dominion in India. 
 
mm 
 
 mmmmm^^mmmmi^^mmmm 
 
 
 132 
 
 QUKSTIOXS OK rilK DAY 
 
 religion of tlie Eiisflishmau was political. If he persecuted 
 Papists or Dissenters, it was on ])olitical grounds. He was 
 willing, like the Konian, to respect the religions or supersti- 
 tions of other races so long as they did not rebel against his 
 rule. He carried this so far as to own Juggernaut and swear 
 by the sun, moon, and earth to the observance of a treaty. Far 
 from seeking to convert the heathen by force, he looked, in 
 the early days of the Empire, with little complacency even on 
 voluntary conversion. AVhen to these advantages are added 
 the qualities of the race, the schooling of its institutions, and 
 the appearance on the scene of such men as Clive, Hastings, 
 and W(dlesley, British dominion in India is seen to be no 
 accident. 
 
 Still less can the Empire be said to be the fruit of a settled 
 policy of aggrandisement. An act of Parliament in 1703 de- 
 clared that "to pursue schemes of conquest and extension of 
 dominion in India an; measures reimgnant to the wish, the 
 honour, and the policy of this nation." Both on the part of 
 the government and on that of the Company there was a desire 
 to restrain extension and keep out of native embroilments 
 which sometimes went the length of pusillanimity and de- 
 sertion of allies. The pioneers of British lordship over India 
 were Clive and Hastings. But the idea of lordship dates 
 only from the proconsulate of AVellesley, who, after his Impe- 
 rial achievements, wrote to his chief in England that he did not 
 know whether he would be i)raised or hanged for what h^, had 
 done. The invasion of Scinde by the hot-headed Xapier was 
 an aggression, and was generally condemned. Against the 
 annexation of Oude protests were raised, but it was justified 
 by the necessity of putting an end to the misgovernment of 
 the native dynasty, which became insufferable and the responsi- 
 bility for which rested on the protecting power. With these 
 exceptions, it may be said that from the repulse of Surajah 
 Dowlan's attack on Calcutta to the repulse of the Sikh inva- 
 sion, which was totally iniprovoked, British Empire in India 
 has been acquired by defensive war. By no moderate or timo- 
 rous counsels could the march of destiny be stayed. Threat- 
 
TlIK EMl'IllE. 
 
 i;}3 
 
 ened by the French and Dutch as well as by th(> anav(!hy 
 around it, the Company could not helj) taking arms. In the 
 chaos of devastation, plunder, and massacre which followed 
 the fall of the Mogul Emi)ire, a power at once of force and of 
 order could not help gaining ground. The fragments of the 
 shattered structure were sure to gravitate towards the only 
 centre of reorganisation. No other power was left save those 
 of the Mahrattas, not rulers, but raiders, with the fell Pin- 
 darees in their train, of the Sultans of Mysore, mere barbaric 
 conquerors, and of the militant sect of Sikhs beyond the 
 Sutlej, who wo'ild have waged against the Mahomedans a war 
 of extermination. Our title has been force, but it has not been 
 rapine, which was the chief title of the chief native dynasties 
 and powers. 
 
 No national feeling has been trampled on. Hindustan has 
 never been a nation. It is a vast expanse of social tissue of 
 which the cell is the village community, while the pervading 
 influences are religion and caste. The great movements have 
 been religious and not political: Buddhism, which asserted 
 spiritual equality against caste, Vislinuism, a liberal and 
 philanthropic reform of Hinduism and Sikhism, a Hindu 
 schism which gave birth to a military sect. Government had 
 always been sheer despotism. For centuries it had been the 
 despotism of conquerors who descended from the mountains of 
 the north upon the languid po})ulation of the plains, and would 
 probably have repeated their inroads if the British had not 
 come ui)on the scene. Conquest might also have resumed its 
 desolating march from the mountain home of the Mahratta, 
 who was already levying his bhu^kmail far and Avide, or from 
 the table-land of Mysore. The ]\toguls were foreigners as well 
 as the British. Their court and government were foreign, 
 they were the heads of a dominant race, alien to the Hindu 
 in blood and religion, and sometimes persecuting, for though 
 Akbar might be tolerant, not so v/as Aurungzebe. Caste itself 
 was probably the result of the conquest in remote antiquity 
 by an Aryan race of the pre-Aryan races, whose remains are 
 found under various names — Bheels, Kols, Sonds, Meenas — 
 
134 
 
 tiUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 I I 
 
 ill the corners and crannies of Hindustan, ;vnd wlio have no 
 connection or t'cUowship with cither Hindu or Mahoniedan, 
 wiiile the IJritish have brought them hiw, h.inuinity, and tlio 
 rudiments ol' civilisation. AVliat domination can be more 
 oppressive tlian caste ? Wliat insolence of the haughtiest oi 
 coiupierors can match the self-exaltation of the lirahmin in the 
 sacred books of the Hindus ? ^Vhat degradation of the most 
 despised of subject races can match the degradation of the 
 Sudra? 
 
 Between the second and third visits of Clive to India, 
 there was a period of scandalous intrigue and corruption, 
 attended with lobbery and oppression of the natives. At 
 that time the Company's servants, being very poorly paid, 
 were tempted to pay themselves by foul means, while the 
 political power, which by force of circumstances they had irregu- 
 larly acquired, being yet unrecognised, was not cou})led with 
 responsi])ility. Clive a})plied the sure antidote to corruption 
 by giving good and regular pay. He cou])led responsibility 
 with power by obtaining a legal grant of the province from 
 the Emperor at Delhi. The memorable proconsulate of War- 
 ren Hastings, though beneficent, and felt by the natives to be 
 beneficent, on the whole, as well as marked by consummate 
 genius for government and diidomacy, was not untainted by 
 contact with oriental statecraft, or l)y the cravings of a com- 
 mercial comi)any for gain which Hastings was compelled to 
 satisfy. But the crimes ascribed to Hastings and Impey 
 are the ravings of Burke, inspired by generous but riotous 
 fancy, combined with the malignity of Francis. Thanks to 
 Sir James Ste])hen,' we kiunv that the judicial murder of 
 Xuncomar is a fiction. Thanks to Sir John Strachey,- we know 
 that the Rohilla charge was far less grave than it was believed 
 to be ; that the Ilohillas, instead of being an agricultural peo- 
 ple with a tinge of poetry, were a body of Afghan freebooters 
 with no calling but that of arms \vho had imposed their yoke 
 
 1 The Story of yiincomar and the Impeachment of Sir Elijah Impey. 
 By Sir James Fltzjames Stephen, K. C. S. I., 2 vols. 
 
 ^ Hastings and the liuhilla War. By Sir John Strachey, G. C. S. I. 
 
TIIK EMl'IHK. 
 
 188 
 
 on tho Hindu population, that they wore not exterminated, and 
 that llastm-s reproved inste;id of encouraging the atrocities of 
 lus native ally. It is scandalous that such a tissue of false- 
 hoods as Maeaulay's -Essay on Hastings " should be still in 
 everybody's hand, should be read in India, and be use.l in 
 scliools. That he flung the head of Hastings to his enemies 
 probably under the sinister influence of Dundas, is one of the 
 worst blots on tlie character of Pitt. From the time when the 
 Company ceased to be commercial, and as a political power 
 was brought under luiperial control, crime ceased, though 
 from Ignorance of the lan.l and people, blunders, notably hi 
 land settlements and in tJu^ judicial department, continued to 
 be made. 
 
 The conquest of India was no accident, yet was it most 
 marvellous. The native armies enormously outnumbered the 
 British ; Plassey was won l)y four thousand men against sixty 
 thousand; the arms were equal; the natives had sometimes 
 been trained ])y European olHcers ; the P,ritish soldier had to 
 flght and march, sometimes to make forced marches in pur- 
 suit of a nimble enemy, beneath the Indian sun, without the 
 palliatives which he has now. Most Englishmen still know 
 little of the achievements or the heroes. They have heard 
 the names of Clive and Lake, Wellington and Havelock, but 
 not those of Pattinson and Pottinger. That story remains yet 
 to be worthily told. The grandest scene perhaps is the last 
 the struggle with the Sikhs. Nothing can appeal to the 
 imagination more than the night of Ferozeshah, with Lord 
 Hardmge, who, nobly loyal to duty, had sunk the Governor- 
 General 111 the soldier, moving over the field to brace his 
 troops for the renewal of the mortal conflict on the mor- 
 row. A striking part of the history is the devotion of the 
 Sepoys, which seems to sh^- ^imt the Englishman is not so 
 utterly incapable, as is supposed, of winning the hearts of 
 other races. Sikhs and Goorkhas received, after a tou-h con- 
 flict with them, as worthy brethren in arms, became the most 
 faithful soldiers of the Empire, and helped to save it in the 
 Mutiny. 
 
.1 
 
 
 h\ 
 
 I'M 
 
 QUESTIONS OK THE DAY. 
 
 m\ 
 
 Grout have been the feuts of war ; fully as fifreat have heen 
 the feats of eivilisatioii, siuih as were pert'ormcd aiiioug the 
 lUieels by Outrain, amoii,^' the ]\Iairs by Dixuii, iinioiig the 
 Khoiids, steej)ed in liuinaii saoriiice, by Mael'herson ; above 
 all, by John Lawrence in the Funjaub. The devout b(dief of 
 sueli a man as John Lawrence in tlie goodness of his work, 
 was strong proof that the work was \ He could hardly 
 have thought as he did tliat the ±^..i^nve was uplield and 
 blessed by God, if it had been a kingdom of the devil. In 
 Lawrence, too, and in his compeers, we have a type with 
 which the world can hardly afford to part, of the public ser- 
 vant whose character has been formed by duty, not by party 
 or quest of votes. We might prize the Indian civil service, if 
 it were for this alone. 
 
 To the conqnered the Empire lias given peace, peace un- 
 broken, saving by the Mutiny, for forty years, under wliich 
 populatioTi has so increased that the Empire is in some districts 
 oppressed by the results of its own beneficence. It has given 
 vast growth of trade. It has giver railways, canals, and 
 bridges, the fruits of a public expend' not less liberal than 
 that of the Mogul Emperors, and ui. .d by tlie pride and 
 folly which built a nuiusoleum over a tooth. It has given 
 facilities of distribution whieli mitigate famine. It has given 
 education, which, if not widely diffused, is diffused enough 
 to open the leading Hindu minds to western civilisation, and 
 of a stationary to make, in prospect at least, a progressive 
 race. It has given medical science and some notion of sanitary 
 reform. It has given redemi)tion from suttee, human sacrifice, 
 female infanticide, slavery ; the hope of redemption from infant 
 marriage, if philanthropy will be circumspect; and perhaps the 
 hope of ultimate redemption from caste, which seems to be 
 yielding in some measure to the railway. It has given release 
 from the cruelty, the corruption, and the extortion of oriental 
 despotism. It has given a system of taxation regular, not 
 predatory, and moderate compared Avith that of the Mogul or 
 witli the ]\rahratta blackmail. It has given good faith as the 
 rule of statesmanship in i)lace of eastern perfidy. It has given, 
 
TIIK KMriUE. 
 
 i;J7 
 
 abovo all, in i)lace of lawless power, law, tlio realm ol' which 
 advances with the British Ha;,', with the Anj,'lo-Saxon race. 
 That cannot be an Empire of mere force whieli in a population 
 of two hundred and eighty millions rests on a Uritish army of 
 seventy thousand men. .Metternich, who said that you could 
 do anything with bayonets but sit n\Mn tlitnn, would lind here 
 no exception to his nde. Ut' the civil administration it may 
 safely be said that, whether it is the cheapest or not, the most 
 beneticcnt or not, it is the purest in the world. Its purity is 
 secured by good pay, and by the bracing exigencies o*:' a servi(!e 
 always arduous and seldom free from \)rv\\. Since the estidj- 
 lishment of the Empire there has been no rising against British 
 rule except in the wake of mutiny. 
 
 What is the condition of the Hindu peasant? Some re- 
 formers say that he is the most miserable of mankind. On 
 the other hand, Dr. Bird wood, a high authority, says, "for 
 leagues and leagues round the cities of I'oona and Sattara 
 there stretch t ue cultivated fields. . . . Glad with the dawn, 
 the men come forth to their work, and glad in their work they 
 stand all through the noontide, singing at the well, or shout- 
 ing as they reap or plough ; and when the stillness and the 
 dew of evening fall upon the land like the blessing and the 
 peace of God, the merry-hearted men gather with their cattle, 
 in long winding lanes to their villages again. . . . Thus day 
 follows day and the year is crowned with gladness."' In some 
 districts, evidently, the check of war being removed, population, 
 in spite of child-marriage and hlth, has increased too fast, and 
 the unwelcome discovery of Malthus is once more confirmed. 
 Everywhere the Hindu peasant has little. In his climate he 
 can do with little, perhaps hardly cares for more. As he does 
 not and cannot work hard, his production cannot be large. 
 His harvest, whatever it is, he reaps. It is not reaped, nor 
 is he butchered or tortured, by Mahrattas or Pindarees. 
 Nothing can be taken from him or be done to him except by 
 course of law. » 
 
 ' Industrial Arts of India. Quoted by Sir R. Templo in his India in 
 1880, p. 10.3. 
 
Jl I • ■■■ 
 
 ^iff!" 
 
 ^aa^mmmm 
 
 138 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 Of the progress of Christianity in India, it is difficult to 
 speak. The government of tlie Company feared to en(^ourage 
 tlie missionary, and ahnost disavowed Christianity. The 
 Queen's government is bohler. It has discovered tliat the 
 Brahmin is not an enemy of theological discussion, though he 
 is jealously tenacious of caste. It is Christian Avhih, it is 
 stri(!th' tolerant. .Fohn Lawrence was emphatically both. It 
 would seem that 'oome impression has been made on the Hin- 
 dus, on the ]\lahomedans none. The great obstacle to the 
 spread of Christianity in India is the failure of belief in it at 
 liome. Strange to say, the West is now receiving a faith from 
 the East ; for the mind of philosophic Europe, perplexed with 
 theological doubt, seems inclined to accept something like 
 Buddhism as an anodine, if not as a creed. 
 
 It is said, and it would not be hard to believe, that the 
 natives prefer native rule with all its evils to that of the 
 stranger. One answer is that, if they did, there would proba- 
 bly be more migration to the native States, which still cover 
 nearly half a million of square miles, with a population of 
 fifty-five millions, proving by their existence that the rapacity 
 of the conqueror is iiot boundless. The rulers of all these 
 trust, and, since the recognition of ado])tion and the restora- 
 tion of ]\Iysore to its native dynasty, have had the best reason 
 to trust, the good faith of the Empire. When Russian inva- 
 sion threatens, they all come forward with offers of aid. Their 
 subjects perhaps may have some reason to question the benefi- 
 cence of a protectorate which guarantees misgovernment, till 
 it passes all bounds, against the rough eastern remedy of dy- 
 nastic revolution. Still the average may be an improvement, 
 since eastern misgovernment did not seldom ])ass all bounds. 
 
 The press, native as well as European, is free; free enough, 
 at all events, to criticise even with violence the acts of govern- 
 ment. Lord Hastings, as Crovernor-General, declared freedom 
 of publication " the natural right of his fellf)w-subjects, to be 
 narrowed only by. urgent cause assigned," affirming that "it was 
 salutary for supreme authority, even when most pure, to look 
 to the control of public opinion." The Hindu who in an 
 
 ; 
 
THE EMPIRE. 
 
 139 
 
 \ 
 
 American periodical denounces the tyranny of tlie Rritisli in 
 India, shows by that very act and by the freedom of his 
 hinguage that the tyranny is iv' cxat-ie.^ 
 
 We must not gdoss over the hitieous ]\Iutiny or its still 
 more hideous repression. A mutiny, it seems, it was, and 
 nothing more, liaving its sources in the insolence of a pam- 
 pered soldiery, paucity of European officers, consequent laxity 
 of discipline, and, at last, that suspicion of an assault on caste 
 wliich had caused the Vellore and other mutinies before it. 
 Its horrors cancelled many a glorious page of the liistory, 
 while it added sucli pages as those of the defence of Lucknow 
 and the capture of the vast and strongly walled Delhi by an 
 army of three thousand men. The fiendish passions of a 
 dominant race, rage mingling with panic, were excited to the 
 highest pitch. Lord Elgin was there ; in his diary lie says: 
 
 " Tt is a terrible business, however, this living amongst inferior races. 
 I have seldom from man or woman, since I came to the East, heard a 
 sentence which was reconcilable with the liypothesis that Christianity 
 liad ever come into the world. Detestation, contempt, ferocity, ven- 
 geance, whether Chinamen or Indians be the object. There are some 
 three or four hundred servants in this house. When one first passes by 
 their sahiamiixj, one feels a little awkward. Hut the feeling soon wears 
 off, and one moves among them with perfect indifference, treating them 
 not as dogs, because in that case one would whistle to them and pat them, 
 but as macliines witli wiiicii one can havo no communion or sympathy. 
 Of course, tiiose who can speak the language are somewhat more en raj> 
 port with the natives, but very slightly so, I take it. When tiie passions 
 of fear and hatred are engrafti'd on tl.is indifference, the result is fright- 
 ful ; an absolute callousness as to the sufferings of the objects of those 
 passions, which nuist be witnessed to be understood and believed." 
 
 The next entry is : 
 
 "... tells me that yesterday at dinner the fact that government had 
 removed some commissioners, wlio, not content with hanging all the 
 rebels they could lay their hands on, had been insulting tiiem by destroy- 
 ing their caste, telling them thai after death they should be cast to the 
 
 1 See "English Rule in India," by Ann-ita Lai Roy, in tlie X„i-th Anwri- 
 can lievieio, April, 1880. 
 
«npn 
 
 pi 
 
 140 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 dogs to be devoured, etc., was mentioned. A reverend gentleman could 
 not understand the conduct of government ; could not see that there was 
 any impropriety in torturing men's souls ; seemed to think that a good 
 deal might be said in favour of bodily torture as well ! These are your 
 
 teachers, O Israel ! 
 ing ! " 1 
 
 Imagine what the pupils become under such lead- 
 
 But the terrorism of this clergyman and his compeers, as well 
 as that of sentimentalists in England, and the atrocities of 
 butchers like Hodson of Hodson's Horse, were in some 
 measure redeemed by the mixture of clemency with firmness 
 in Canning and Lord Lawrence. 
 
 Of Lord Elgin's words, part Avas ue only of the period of 
 the Mutiny; part remains true. British dominion in India is 
 and ever must be that of the stranger. Between the ruling 
 and the subject race a great gulf is fixed. The Moguls came 
 from abroad, but they made India their home. The English- 
 man, incapable of acclimatisation, can only be a sojourner. 
 He is more so than ever, since he is no longer severed by a 
 six months' voyage from his own coi ntry. His rule is feared, 
 respected, perhaps regarded with gn titude ; but it can never 
 be loved. Nothing, says a writer oi; India, is sooner forgotten 
 than a Britiali triumph, or longer remembered than a British 
 reverse. It is implied that what the people remember longest 
 is that which pleased them most. Association in government 
 and the judiciary has probably been carried nearly as far as it 
 can be without abdication. There it must stop. Social fusion 
 there appears to be none. It would be barred by caste on the 
 one side, as Avell as by pride on the other. Professor jVEonier 
 Williams wondered why certain Bandits always called on him 
 very early in the morning. He found that they wanted time 
 for purification after contact with the unclean. Nor can it be 
 expected that the demeanour of the lower members, at all 
 events, of the dominant race towards the subject race should 
 be free from haughtiness. It has probably not improved 
 since the personal connection of the European with India has 
 
 1 iMters: and Journals of James, Eighth Earl of Elgin. 
 Theodore Walrond, pp. 199, 200. 
 
 Edited by 
 
THE EMrillE. 
 
 141 
 
 i 
 
 been loosened. Ottieials of the old school whose time had 
 been passed in India, hoAvever strong their prejudices, never 
 spoke of the natives, at least of those of the higher class, 
 with disrespect. Nor can we suppose that an iniportetl civili- 
 sation will equal in value or vitality one of natural growth. 
 Whatever there was of peculiarly native excellence could 
 hardly fail to suffer in the process. Manchester goods there 
 may be in plenty ; but where these fill the market there will 
 no longer be the products, some of them marvellous, of native 
 taste and skill; there will no longer be the joy of the native 
 workman over his exquisite work. IJuildings there may be 
 of utility, better than mosques or mausoleums ; but there will 
 be no Pearl Mos(pie or Taj Mahal. Perhaps to the Oriental, 
 the pageantry of his native dynasty made up in some measure 
 for oppression. 
 
 The process of lifting a race not more than half civilised 
 to a high plane of civilisation, is costly as well as difficidt. 
 India, though g(»rgeous, is poor. She is poor because the 
 power of work and the rate of production are low. Yet the 
 administration is expected to come up to the standard and 
 fulfil the ideals of the wealthiest of European nations. How 
 can it disi)euse with the salt tax, which no doubt is oppres- 
 sive, or with the opium duty, which scandalises, though per- 
 haps it is only the spirit duty of Hindustan? Hard, too, it 
 must be to infuse the western spirit of justice and probity into 
 native policemen and ofiicials of the low class. Home opinion 
 exacts of the Indian government an administration up to a 
 mark higher than has been reached by half the countries of 
 Europe, while home philantliropy demands of it the abandon- 
 ment of its revenue from opium. 
 
 As soon as the Company became military and political, it 
 was of necessity brought under the control of the Home (lov- 
 ernment. An empire could not be left outside the Enq)ire 
 witli separate powers of peace and war. Tliis was the first 
 step. The second was to divest the Company entirely of the 
 commercial character which vitiated and enfeebled political 
 action. The Mutiny brought the end of the Company's rule. 
 
QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 m\ 
 
 I 
 
 ^ 
 
 The army on which its authority rested had gone to pieces 
 and the Empire passed to the Crown. Yet the incorporation 
 of a vast and despotic Empire with a free commonwealth Avas 
 regarded witii misgiving botli by some who feared tlie influ- 
 ence of the Empire on tlie commonwealth, and by some who 
 feared the influence of the commonwealth on the Empire. 
 
 The Comi)any discouraged the settlement of Europeans in 
 India. By the Queen's government it is encouraged. Besides 
 being an Empire, India is now a considerable British colony, 
 though the settlers are birds of passage. It will be more 
 clearly seen in time how the presence of a European commu- 
 nity with its Magna Charta will consist with the administration 
 of an Empire necessarily autocratic. Community of danger is 
 a strong curb on «lissention, yet it may not always prevail. 
 
 Wliat does the Indian Emi)ire bring to Great Britain ? Xot 
 tribute, except in tlie shape of the pensions and savings of the 
 civil servants. It brings a large trade, though no monopoly, 
 England having opened the ports of India to the world. Of 
 military force it brings so much as is indicated by that some- 
 what theatrical appearance of a Sikh corps in the jMediterra- 
 nean which bespoke lack of British troops rather than the 
 availability of Sepoys for European wars ; and by the employ- 
 ment the other day of a Sikh corps in Egypt. No one supposes 
 that the Sepoys generally could be used on western fields. A 
 British army of seventy thousand is maintained by India, but 
 in case of war could not be withdrawn. The material value of 
 the possession is, after all, secondary to its moral value as a 
 field of achievement, which, though the days of romantic 
 enterprise as well as those of fabulous gains are over, is still, 
 for a young man of capacity and courage, about the finest in 
 the world. The comi)etitive system has thrown it open to all, 
 not Avithout some risk, perhaps, to the nerve and muscle as 
 Avell as to the corporate unity of the service, yet, it seems, with 
 good results ; so at least thought John Lawrence. The place 
 of family or social connection as a bond of corporate unity has 
 perhaps been supplied by })artnership in responsibility and 
 possible peril. On the debit side of the material account 
 
 ■1 
 
THE EMPIRE. 
 
 141! 
 
 , 
 
 
 must be set clown the danger and difficulty of maintaining so 
 distant a jjossession in time of maritime war; enmity with 
 llussia and the Crimean war ; the necessity of occupying 
 Egypt at the risk of end)roilment with France; the general 
 effect of this vast liability on British diplomacy, and on the 
 influence of England in her own circle of nations. AVliat is 
 the real danger on the side of llussia, apart from mere guard- 
 room talk, it is for those who have read the genuini^ AVill of 
 Peter the Great to say. In the game of Empire, liussia has 
 the great advantage of keeping her own counsels. The exten- 
 sion of her Asiatic dominions has been as natural as the 
 extension of our own ; and there seems no reason wliy, each 
 Empire having reached its limit, the two should not rest ami- 
 cably side by side. From subduing and annexing barbarous 
 tribes, it is a wide step to invading a civilised power. Our fatal 
 expedition to Afghanistan in 1840 is a warning against rushing 
 to meet inuiginary danger. Russia will be unfriendly and will 
 no doubt menace the Indian Empire by way of diversion as 
 long as England persists in barring her way to an open sea. 
 But why should England persist in barring Russia's way to an 
 open sea ? Why should Russia be more dangerous to Englaml 
 in the Mediterranean than the other ^Mediterranean powers '.' 
 Why should she not rather, if England can keep on good terms 
 with her, help to balance those powers ? It is for statesmen, 
 not for a student, to say. 
 
 What may be fermenting in the dark depths of the Hindu 
 mind, few, it seems, pretend to tell. At times there is a ruf- 
 fling of the surface which bespeaks some agitation below. Yet 
 danger of a serious kind from internal insurrection thert; 
 appears to be none so long as the army is faithful and while 
 the people remain so intersected by differences of race, reli- 
 gion, and language, so totally disunited, and so incapable of 
 organising rebellion as they are. The uniting influence of the 
 Empire itself is, perhaps, so far as things on the S[)ot are con- 
 cerned, the greatest, though a very remote danger. There is 
 now no dynasty or standard of any kind round which insur- 
 rection on a large scale could rally, and the government will 
 
144 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 111 ' 
 
 Jl 
 
 IS! 
 
 h 
 
 
 take care never to tread on caste ; if it is left alone, it will 
 take care to keep rash hands off the Zenana. The Mahonie- 
 dans, whom we thrust from power, no doubt are sullen ; but 
 they are a small minority ; they are hated, as constant broils 
 show, by the Hindu ; and sullenness is not insurrection. The 
 cloud of Wahabi fanaticism seems to have passed away. 
 
 A greater danger, and one far more imminent than Ilussian 
 invasion or Hindu insurrection, is lU'itish democracy, if it 
 meddles with Indian government, as meddle with Indian 
 government it almost certainly Avill, indeed is already begin- 
 ning to do; while Hindu politicians are joining hands with it 
 by presenting themselves as candidates for Itadical constitu- 
 encies in England. The shadow cast some years ago by 
 demagogic Vice-Koyalty has been lingering since. That a 
 dependent Empire should be governed on demagogic princi- 
 ples is impossible, and tlie impossibility cannot fail soon to 
 appear. A conquest, however clement and beneficent the con- 
 queror, is a conquest, and if it is to be held at all, it must be 
 held as it was Avon. 
 
 " There are, of course," says Sir Edwin Arnold, in pleading 
 for the retention of India, " many collateral considerations 
 which ought to move the popular mind ; such as commercial 
 benefit, colonial advantage, and national prestige ; but these 
 are weak in comparison with the force which ought to be 
 exercised upon the general imagination by the sublime duty 
 laid upon Great Britain, if ever any duty was sublime, by the 
 visible decree of Providence itself." The clearest of the 
 inducements to retain India, perhaps, is the duty. 
 
 »> 
 
 Egypt, occui)ied by Great liritain, may be regarded as an 
 annex to India, to which Egypt controls, or is thought to con- 
 trol, the present access. As a })ossession in itself, its value is 
 partly a tradition of the past, like that of Kome, once the capi- 
 tal of a Mediterranean Empire rather than of Italy, that 
 of Constantinople, once the link between the Empires of the 
 east and west, or that of Cyprus, once in a peo])led angle of 
 those waters. In the infancy of agriculture, the mud of the 
 
THK KMriUK. 
 
 im 
 
 Nile, whi'^h pvoducod without liuman effort, was priceless. 
 Egypt, however, like niiulustun, is a field not only of ambi- 
 tion or profit, but of beneficent aehieveiuent. Ijnpartial 
 Americans have borne the strongest testimony to tlie improve- 
 ment made by liritish rule in the condition of the Egyptian 
 people. For the first time since the Pharaohs, the Fellalieen 
 see the face of Justice. Tlie price is the jealous enmity of 
 France, who, for some reason, imagines that Egypt is hers. 
 
 British Emi)ire has been won by the great adventurers of 
 whom Clive was a type. Nor is the breed extinct. Gordon 
 was a specimen of it, as luuler a religious guise and in the 
 missionary sphere was Livingstone. Unlil^e the Spanish 
 adventurers, who concjuered and wasted JNIexico and l*eru, 
 these men are organisers and pioneers of civilisation, owing 
 their ascendancy not to the arquebus, but to character and 
 mind. There may be fresh fields for them in Africa, and pos- 
 sibly, when the Turkish Empire conies to its end, in the pro- 
 vinces now subject to its rule. They may redeem by their 
 exploits in distant oceans the reign of political degeneracy 
 which seems to have set in at home. But they will do well to 
 remember Khartoum, and trust to themselves alone. 
 
 the 
 
 of 
 
 the 
 
 As to the military dependencies, such as Malta and Gib- 
 raltar, all that a civilian can have to say is that their occupa- 
 tion and retention ought surely to be regulated by sound 
 military reasons and not by empty pride. A general would 
 not be thought great who persisted in holding a useless and 
 untenable post because he had once occupied it. The coaling 
 stations are necessary in an age of steam, but they were not 
 necessary before the age of steam, and it would be folly to 
 cling to them if steam were superseded by some new motor. 
 Weakness can never be shown by wisdom. Nor can the mem- 
 ory of any glorious exploit be cancelled or dimmed by abandon- 
 ment of the spot which lia[)pened to be its scene. We are 
 not the less proud, or proud with a less reason, of the defence 
 of Torres Vedras or of Hougoumont because the lines of 
 
im 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 W I 
 
 
 Torres Vedras and the farm of Hougoiiniout are no longer in 
 our hands. Elliot's defence of Gibraltar would not be the less 
 memorable or the less inspiring if policy had led the British 
 government under the treaty wliich followed to restore 
 Gibraltar to Spain. 
 
 Is it the policy of Great Britain, as once it was, to dominate 
 in the jNIediterrauean ? Is such a policy any longer possi- 
 ble, since the growth of other Mediterranean navies, French, 
 Spanish, and Italian, since the change which steam has made 
 in naval warfare, and since the unitication of French power 
 effected by the railway and the telegraph between Brest and 
 Toulon ? In case of war with France and Kussia condnned, 
 would there be naval forces disposable for command of the 
 Mediterranean ? What is the practical object of this policy ? 
 Is it safe access to the Suez Canal ? Could that route be 
 used in time of war ? Would not international law close the 
 Canal against belligerents ? Would not the Canal itself be 
 easily obstructed by an enemy ? Could convoy be afforded 
 for trade through the IVIediterranean ? AVould not it be 
 necessary to resort to the route by the Cape of Good Hope ? 
 In that case, would not military expenditure be wiser at the 
 Cape of Good Hope ? If Great Britain means permanently 
 to hold Egypt, there is conclusive reason for the retention of 
 her rule over the Mediterranean. But does she intend perma- 
 nently to hold Egypt, or merely to accomplish her mission of 
 reform and then depart ? 
 
 If command of the Mediterranean is to be retained, no 
 question will arise about the retention of ^Malta. INIalta, it 
 seems, Avitli the requisite works and with a sufficient garrison, 
 is deemed by military men impregnable, while as it belongs 
 by nature to nobody, geographically or ethnologically, it is 
 an invidious possession, and by its occupation no enmity 
 is incurred. Far different is the case of Gibraltar, the price 
 of retaining which is the perpetual enmity of Spain. The 
 parallel of a Spanish flag flying on the Isle of Portland is 
 hackneyed, but it is just. Great Britain poured out blood and 
 money to rescue Spain from Napoleon. Yet the feeling of the 
 
THK EMPIRE. 
 
 147 
 
 it 
 
 '. 
 
 Spaniards now is better towards France than towards (Jreat 
 Britain. When Cobden expressed to a Spanish friend his 
 surprise at this, tlie Si»aniard's answer was, " We have got rid 
 of tlie French, of you we have not got rid.'' Tlie sight of a 
 foreign flag on his fortress can hardly be made more agreeable 
 to the Spaniard by the recollection that England took Gib- 
 raltar, not in international war, but when she was acting as the 
 ally of her candidate for the Crown of Spaiii. Again and 
 again in the days of her decrepitude, Spain, passionately 
 desiring to recover h^r great fortress, dragged her half-par- 
 alysed lindjs to the attack. Nothing else led her to join the 
 league against Great Britain at the time of the American war; 
 for the colonists were her enemies in America, and she was as far 
 as possible from seeking their aggrandisement or sympathising 
 with their republican aspirations. Gibraltar alone it was that 
 sent the Spanish fleet to join the combined arnuunent by which 
 the British flag was chased down the Channel. Up to the last 
 and greatest of the three sieges, the cession of Gibraltar as a 
 post more dangerous than profitable was always in the thoughts 
 of British statesmen. It was contemplated by Stanhope, by 
 Shelburne, even by Chatham. But Elliot's famous defence, 
 coming as it did with Rodney's victory to redeem the humili- 
 ation of defeat in America, gave the rock such a hold on Eng- 
 lish sentiment that thenceforth those who talked of ceding it 
 spoke with a halter round their necks. Shelburne mooted 
 the question in negotiating for peace with America; but 
 he at once drew upon him the denunciation of Fox, who 
 on that single occasion acted the i)art of patriot. A recital of 
 Fox's arguments and those of Burke, who followed in the 
 same strain, is enough to show how circumstances and the 
 objects of policy have changed. "A sagacious ^linistry," 
 said Fox, "Avould always cmjdoy Gibraltar in dividing France 
 from France, Spain from Spain, and the one nation from the 
 other." This possession it was, according to Fox, which gave 
 us respect in the eyes of nations, and the means of obliging 
 them by protection. "If we gave it up to Spain, the ^Nledi- 
 terranean would become a pool which they could navigate at 
 
J! 
 
 148 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 tlu'ii' plcasuro and witliout control. As the States of Europe 
 bordering on the Mediterranean wouhl no longer lo(jk to Eng- 
 land for the free navigation of the sea, it would no longer be 
 in her power to be useful, and we could expect no alliances." 
 It is due to Fox and Ikuke to remember that Gibraltar, if it 
 was not the sole title of England to the respect of nations, or 
 her only hope of obtaining allies, was the only 13ritish 
 stronghold in the Mediterranean, Minorca having been lost, 
 and Malta being not yet ours. The (piestion was again 
 mooted thirty years ago, when the change in the military 
 value of Gibraltar, owing to steam and the improvements 
 of artillery, was just beginning to appear, and when the 
 cession would have thoroughly Avon the heart of Spain. 
 But discussion was still branded as treason. Now a naval 
 Avriter in the Fortnighthj Review proclaims the military deca- 
 dence of the fortress, Avhich he says can no longer shelter 
 a fleet lying under it; while as a mere post by itself it Avonld 
 be Avorthless, and its garrison woiild be wasted, since it does 
 not, as most Englishmen fondly believe, command the strait. 
 Nor does it any longer retain its equivocal value as a depot 
 of contraband trade. Ai)parently it does nothing which is 
 not better done by IMalta without offence to anybody's feelings 
 or flag. When it comes to a question of bargain with Spain, 
 we have to remember that during the last quarter of a century 
 the post has been losing strength and value, and that of this 
 the Spaniards must be aware. We are told that they have a 
 plan of siege ready, and are confident of success. An ex- 
 change for Ceuta is proposed and seems natural. But Ceuta 
 Avould be of use, like Malta, only for the purpose of command- 
 ing the Mediterranean. Another suggestion is that Spain 
 should cede to England the Canaries as a field for emigration. 
 That England is becoming over-crowded, and needs an outlet 
 for i)opulation fully as much as a fortress, is too certain. But 
 after all the greatest object, not merely of sentiment but of 
 policy, is the friendship of Spain, who is now taking her place 
 again anujng the nations. 
 
 Heligoland has been ceded at last. The retention of it 
 

 THE EMPTTIE. 
 
 140 
 
 after the fall of the Napoleonic Emi)ii'(! and the continental 
 system on which its value as a post depended, was an instance 
 of the tcMideney to eling to everything on whicli the Hag lias 
 once been set up, however useh'ss it may have l)econi(>. Fortu- 
 nately tlu' power to which Heligoland belonged was friendly, 
 or cession miglit have been attended with disgrace. 
 
 To come to the colonial (lei)endencies. It is of colonial 
 de[)en(lencies that .. e speak, not of colonies, the value of which 
 no man contests any more than the necessity of migration. 
 Greece had colonies which were not dependencies and were 
 bound to the mother country only by a filial ti(^ England 
 herself was a colony of Friesland or some district of North 
 Clermaiiy, though she was not under the I'^risian Colonial ()tU(!e. 
 The founders of New England and other British colonies were 
 as lit for independent self-government as any Greek, and iiule- 
 pendent they would have been from the beginning, had it not 
 been for the twin superstitions : Discovery wliicli made a 
 European king sovereign over every sliore discovered by his 
 subjects; and Personal Allegiance whi(t]i made the emigrant 
 indefeasibly a subject of the realm in whi(!]i he had been born. 
 To these beliefs is traceable the relation of colonial dependence 
 with its natural consequences, incessant friction, rupture 
 when the colony grew strong, and the American Revolution. 
 There is nothing of which an Englishman has nu)re reason to 
 be proud than the colonies; there are few things of which 
 he has less reason to be proud than the Colonial Office. 
 
 To the colonial dependencies so large a measure of self- 
 government has, after a long course of altercation, ending in 
 Canada with a rebellion, been conceded, and to such a shadow 
 has the supremacy of the Imperial Kingdom over them been 
 reduced, that the other day a colonial govfn'uor, to pay a com- 
 pliment to his cohmy, denied that it was a dei)endency at all. 
 But a conununity which receives a governor from an Impe- 
 rial country, whose constitution is imposed upon it by the 
 Act of an Imperial Parliament, which has not the power of 
 amending its constitution, which has not the power of peace 
 
160 
 
 QLKSTIONS OF TllK DAY. 
 
 iii 
 
 and war, of making trcatios, o: jf supivnio justice, play with 
 language as you will, is a dependency. It has and can have 
 no })la('e among the nations. 
 
 Of what use, then, are colonial dependencies now to tlie 
 Imperial country? This is a tlistinct and reasonable (pu'stion 
 a^iart from the qiu^stion of sentiment, which nobody would 
 wish to disregard. Fiscally, the colonies have gone out of the 
 Empire. They have asserted and have freely used the power 
 of levying not only duties, but protective duties, on liritish 
 goods. A Canadian politician, who poses as the organ of 
 Canadian loyalty in England, in Canada receives credit as the 
 autlior of a protective <luty for the exclusion of liritish iron. 
 Then^ is sometliing almost humiliating in the position of Great 
 Britain, bound as she is to protect the trade of colonies which 
 are waging a tariff war against her. If they were inde- 
 pendent she might negotiate commercial treaties with them, 
 or supposing she thought tit to ado})t that policy, force tlieir 
 ports oi)en by retaliation. Formerly the colonies were prized 
 for the monopoly of their trade and markets, the right of the 
 motlier country to which was, as we knoAv, asserted by Chat- 
 ham in emphatic terms. Trade, we are still told, follows the 
 flag. Trade follows profit wherever it is to be found. Colo- 
 nies, before they have manufactures, import from the mother 
 country, not because she is their mother, but because she makes 
 the articles they want. How can trade follow tlie flag when 
 the flag no longer makes it free? When colonists propose an 
 Imperial zollverein, the answer is, that tlie colonial trade 
 which the zollverein would foster is small compared with the 
 foreign and Indian trade Avhich it would impair. The returns 
 show that for the five years 18.SO-00 England's imports from 
 foreign countries rveraged 77.1 p"r eei * of her total imports, 
 whilst her imports from the li es ineluding India averaged 
 22.9 per cent. Her exp( ,.ii-eign cor'itries amounted to 
 
 70.5 per cent of her who i-xport trade, aud her exports to 
 the colonies to 29.5. It is n^ t tr' as often alleged, that her 
 trade with the colonies is advancing very much faster than 
 her trade with foreign countries. For the five yeai 1850-60 
 
 
 1 
 
 P 
 
TiiK EMriinc. 
 
 151 
 
 her imports from .'iiid rxports to rorcij^Mi oouiitrics iivcragfd 
 77. ~» and 77.1. per cent rcspi'ctivtdy of lu-r total import and 
 export trade; and her imports from and exi)ortb to the colonies 
 L'L'.o and -S.*.) respectively. Nor, in spite of the security 
 ap[iarently afforded by Imperial jurisdiction, does British 
 capital seem to Hnd a ii(dd for iuvestuu'ut more in the colonies 
 than in ton ign countries. Whether investors under the flag 
 are exempt from hjss, the stockholders of Australian banks, 
 and of Canadian railways, those of the Chignecto Kail way 
 among others, can tell. The Chignecto case is notable because 
 political connection was probably part of the inducement. 
 
 J>ut the colonies, we are told, though they lay protective 
 duties on the mother c(mntry's goods, do not discriminate 
 against her. That there was to be no discrimination against 
 the mother country was the cry raised by Canadian Pro- 
 tectionists when they wished to stave off Commercial Union 
 with the United States. Commercial Union would have done 
 Great Britain no harm. It wouhl have added to the value of 
 her .f()r>0,00(),000of investments nmcli more than it took away 
 from the amount of her exports. But the fact seems to be 
 that Canada does discriminate against the mother country in 
 favour of the United States by her tariff as a whole, if not on 
 specific articles, to the amount of at least 4 per cent in the 
 aggregate.^ 
 
 ' The Toronto GJnho gives <a table compiled from the official returns, 
 which discloses the actual ad valorem paid in 1802, in cases where specitie 
 or mixed specific and ad valorem duties are imposed. It appears that 
 specific duties are aimed at cheap goods, to which the protected Canadian 
 industries are most hostile, and, British goods being cheap, they suffer. 
 
 Iron rivets or bolts from Ori'at Uritiiiri CA 
 
 Iron rivots or bolts from I'nitod Stiitcs 4'2 
 
 Sew iM»r niiicliint's from ( Jrcat Britain ... 40 
 
 Scwini.' macliines from Vnitod States. . . SSJ 
 
 Nails and spikes, averaire 4(1 
 
 l.'ailway ilsli jilates, (ireat liritaiii 41 
 
 Kailway tish plates. I'nited States :i(ij 
 
 IioUed iron or steel anpK's, Great IJritaln 4.')J 
 
 Itolled iron or steel anfrles, I'nited States 'iltj 
 
 Iron or steel .serews, (ireat H"itain tU 
 
 Iron or steel serews, I'nited States :}7 
 
 Skates from Great Britain and United 
 
 States 48 
 
 Skates from Germnnv 02 
 
 Bar iron fi'om Great Hritain ;(>3 
 
 Bar iron from I'Mited States '274 
 
 Boiler iron from Great Britain 41 
 
 Boiler iron fron\ I'nited States 'iMj 
 
 Cast iron vessels from Great Britain . .. H2 
 
 Cast iron vessels from I'nited Slates. . . iiO 
 
 ('ah iron jiipe from (!reat Britain Tfl 
 
 Cast iron pipe from I'nited siaies 4!?| 
 
 Cut taeks an<l brads from (ireat Britain 1:W| 
 
 C'nt tacks an<l luads from I'nited States 3it 
 Cut taeks and brads, over 1(1 oz. per M, 
 
 (ireat Britain 4.3J 
 
 Cut taeks and brads, over Ifi oz. per M, 
 
 I'nited States SOJ 
 
-S^fSPWI 
 
 ■H«PI 
 
 152 
 
 QUKsrioxs iiv Till-: day. 
 
 That the colonies are sourcos of militaiy strength, or coiihl 
 lu'lp Knghuul in time of war, few would maintain. They are 
 always being exhorted to arm themselves, which they will not 
 do so long as they feel that they have a claim npon Great 
 IJritain for protection. Australia sent a regiment to Suakini, 
 but it seems she will not do the like again. Canada dis- 
 tinctly declined to follow the example. Conservative journals 
 being most em[)hatie in protesting, to avert suspicion, that 
 there was no intention r f the kind. She sent a party of Voya- 
 
 Wniii;,'lit iniii tutn'S, (Jivat Hritiiin aiul 
 
 I'nitcil Stall's T)!! 
 
 Wile I'l'iii'iiif,' (l)ai-lH'(l) from iircat Britain 40 
 
 Wire fi'iii-iiifr (liarlicilltViiiufiiiti'il States 4s 
 Wire t'fiiciiif,' ^lliicktliorii) t'roiu I'liiliMl 
 
 States :'.! 
 
 Wire lelicilif' (H<><'l^tl>*»'») *■'""" *''''"" 
 
 many ir> 
 
 Wnii irlit iri)ii or steel nuts, bolts, (ireat 
 
 I'.ritain M 
 
 Wriniirlit iron or steel nnts, tiolts, 
 
 riiilcil States 41 
 
 Steelinyiits, slalis, etc., (ireal liritain.. :il» 
 
 Steel inu'ols, slal)S, etc., I'nileil States •.'."> 
 
 ('lioiipintr axes •!■' 
 
 Picks, sledL'cs, etc., (ireat IJrilaiii Jii'i 
 
 Picks. sleili.'es. I'tc, I'nilcd Slates lis 
 
 Stcrcdtvpe lilales, avi'rafre rate IV.> 
 
 I'laleil (Mitlerv from (ireat I'.ritain Thi', 
 
 Plated cntlerV from Tniti-d Slates 4:ig 
 
 Lead pipe from (ireat liritain 4tl 
 
 Lead pipe from rnited Slates "Js 
 
 1,1'ad shot from (iriat I'.ritain 40 | 
 
 l-ead shot from I'nitcd States '-".J j 
 
 Show cases from < ireat I'.ritain "•' i 
 
 Show cases from Tniteil States Wi 
 
 (.'otton shirts, from (treat ISritain (per 
 
 cent) J'' 
 
 Colloli shirts from Cnitecl States 44 
 
 Colloii sliirls from otlu'r eonntrio II 
 
 Cotton stockiiiL's from (ireat l.rii in... il 
 
 Ciitton sliM'kiiiL's fmm I'nited Stai •> .. 41 
 
 Cotton stockimrs from other ciiniilies 4:i 
 
 Winceys from (ireat Kritain ;<*J i Statt 
 
 CniVs from (iri'at I'.ritain Cr.'-i i K 
 
 Cnlfs from rnited States 4-1 W 
 
 < nil's tiom other eoiintrii's (i'.ij i \V 
 
 I.liien sliirts 41 ! Ci 
 
 (ilass hollies ;i-.i ; Cc 
 
 Waterproid' eliilhiiiL' ''4 SI 
 
 '.' aiiil :l pront'i'd forks 4."i,\ SI 
 
 4 and li proiiL'i'd forks, (Ireat Kritain... M^ U 
 
 4 and li pronL''eil forks. Iniled Stales. . . .V.' , II 
 
 Hoes from (ireat liritain W , .\l 
 
 I Iocs from I'ldted States ^7 .\1 
 
 (iardeii rakes ri0.i \V 
 
 Scvthes from (ireat liritain 4!i.i \V 
 
 Scylhes IVom rnited Slates 4'.? \V 
 
 Spadi's and shovel from (inat liritain III \ 
 Spades and shovels I'nim I'ldled Slates I'-.J \ 
 
 A \les from (ireat Urilain CI \ 
 
 .\.\les from I'nited Statos 441 
 
 Kire ciiirines. average 
 
 Kor;:inL's id' iron and steel, (ireat l.ritai 
 Koruin^rsof ircni and steel. rnite<l State 
 Hoop (II' hand iron from (ireat l.ril.ain. 
 Hoop (ir hand iron from I'nileil State 
 Iron in slahs. Mooms. etc.. (Ireat liiitai 
 Iron in slahs. Iilimms. etc.. rnited State 
 
 Iron hridires from (ireat liritain 
 
 Inui hridj^'es from riiiled Slates 
 
 Pi;.'' ami scrap Iron, (ireat liritain 
 
 I'iL' and scrap iron, rnited Stales 
 
 lilalikets from (inat liritain 
 
 lilaiikets from fnllcd Slates 
 
 lilankets from other connlries 
 
 Cashmeres from (ireat l.rilain 
 
 Cashmeres from I'nited Slates 
 
 ( lollis from (Ireat liritain 
 
 ( lotlis from rnllcd Slates 
 
 ( loths from ( ii'i'Miany 
 
 (dallnu's from (Ireat lii'it.'dn 
 
 CoallliL's fi'olii I'liited Stales 
 
 Coalings frnm iillier eoiinlrles 
 
 .Meltiiiis from Cleat P.rilain 
 
 Tweeds. (Ileal lii'llaiii and rnited State 
 
 Kelt eliilh from Cleat lirit.'dn 
 
 I-'ilt cliilh from rnited Stales 
 
 Horse ciillar elolli. (ireat liritain 
 
 Klannels from (Ileal liritain 
 
 Flannels from rnited Slates 
 
 W'mijlen sucks fi'iini (Inat liiilain . ... 
 Woollen socks from I'liileil Males. . . . 
 
 Woollen siic'.s from (•■■rii any 
 
 Kiiillinv"- yarn. (Iveal ." ' ainandrnite 
 
 nitliiiL,'- yarn from (iermany 
 
 oolleii cloaks from (.real liritain 
 
 oolieii cloaks from rnited Slates .... 
 lilts. Vests, etc., from (Ireat liritain .. 
 lilts, vests, etc.. from I'nileil Slates., 
 ilrts, drawers, etc.. from ( Ireat liritain 
 lirls, draweis, etc.. from rnited Mates 
 orse clothiim'. shaped. (Inal liritain.. 
 orsc clolhllii:, shaped, rnited Slates.. 
 
 11 olher cliilhliii.'. (Ireat liritain 
 
 II olher I'lolhinir. rnited Sti.les 
 
 oollell carpets, (ileal lil'llalll 
 
 oolleii carpels, rnited Slates 
 
 I'oollen carpels, olher countries 
 
 Iiii't'ar from ( ileal liritain 
 
 iiu'irar from I' niled States 
 
 ;iie(.'ar from 1'' ranee 
 
 Hi) 
 «T 
 
 ■i' 
 
 4'.' 
 42 
 87 
 :{4 
 '2.'4 
 
 87 
 31 
 ;t4 
 2(1 
 88 
 
 2N 
 
 82 
 8ii 
 27 
 2!t 
 8s 
 82 
 80 
 2!) 
 41 
 84 
 81 
 8'.l 
 8s 
 41 
 
 88 
 
 :ir<. 
 »^ 
 
 29 
 84 
 
 80 
 
 8s 
 82 
 42 
 88 
 82 
 •Jl» 
 87 
 88 
 ■24 
 
 m 
 
 61 
 81 
 
 
i 
 
 II . . -11 
 tcs '2>4 
 
 itt'S 4'.' 
 
 ... 4-> 
 
 ... «T 
 
 ... iU 
 
 ... '>ih 
 
 . . . .V. 
 
 ... «; 
 , . . . «i 
 
 . . . . !)4 
 
 . . . . w 
 
 ;v.' 
 mi 
 
 '27 
 
 8S 
 tos «'2 
 HO 
 !i9 
 41 
 !U 
 
 ;n 
 
 41 
 
 ■d 
 
 8:t 
 
 af) 
 
 S'-i 
 '.'9 
 ;i4 
 , ;iO 
 aiii 8H 
 llrs :V2 
 . 42 
 
 . na 
 
 . 32 
 . ■i'i 
 . 37 
 
 . 24 
 
 . fi5 
 
 . 07 
 
 . 81 
 
 I 
 
 TIIK KMPi {K. 
 
 153 
 
 geiir.s at British cost. Her arming a<jfaiust France would be 
 vetoed by the French Canadians wlio control her legislature, 
 and wliose hearts would \h\ on the l-'rcnch side. The French 
 would in fact refus<i to pay for any British armaments what- 
 ever. To defend tlie tlii'ee thousand miles of open frontier, 
 including a chain of great lakes, the colony iias an army of 
 four companies of regular infantry, two S([uadrons of regu- 
 hir cavalry, a snuill force of artillery, and a militia number- 
 ing about .'!<S,000, of which about half arc drilled for a fort- 
 night in each year. 
 
 Emigration returns which show IT)!*, 000 to the Cnited States 
 against 27,000 to the North American colonies are a conclusive 
 answer to any allegation that the colonial dependencies are 
 necessary as new homes. That politit'al connection may some- 
 times misdirect emigration, those; who have seen the Skye 
 Crofter settlements in ^[anitoba will be iiudined to suspect. 
 There are now nearly a million of Canadians in tlu; United 
 States. The object of tlie emigrant in leaving his home is to 
 better his condition, and he goes wliert; this will most surely 
 be done. If he feeds any otlicr attracrtion, it is to the place 
 whither his friends and relatives have gone before him. 
 
 To the colony, wliat is the use of dependence? Does it 
 really give militar}- protection'.' Could (rreat liritain, in case 
 of war Avith a maritime ])i>\ver, afford fleets and armies for her 
 distant possessions? From Canada, we are told plaiidy, she 
 would have at once to withdraw. So says Lord Sherbrooke, 
 who tells us that Lord Fabuerston agreed with him; and it is 
 understtiod that the War Office is of much the same mind. 
 Yet protection nuiy fairly be (h'luainhvl, since it is through 
 the connection witli (Jreat Britain, and tin' liability to ho. 
 involved as dependencies in her quarnds, that the colonies are 
 in danger of attack. Australia and Canada the other day 
 might have been involved in a war Itetween Great liritain and 
 Fnince abont Siam. They may any day be inv(dvcd in a 
 qmirrtd abont Afghanistan, Egypt, or some African territory 
 in whicli they have not the renu)test interest. Their trade 
 may be cut u]), possibly they may be exposed to invasion. 
 
^ 
 
 154 
 
 QUESTKJNS OF lllK DAY. 
 
 VMl 
 
 m 
 
 
 which, us militia never stand 'lyain.st icguhivs, they would 
 hardly be prepared to meet. The sole danger of Canada arises 
 from the connection. Since the extinction of slavery the 
 people of the United States have had no thought of territorial 
 aggrandisement; they havi' shrunk even from natural exten- 
 sion. Canada, were she indei)eiulent, might sleep in perfect 
 safety ''luider the gigantic; shadow of her rai)acious neigh- 
 bour." Nobody can doubt tliis wlio knows the American 
 people. AVhile Canada is exposed to (hmger by the connei;- 
 tion, (Jreat l')ritain hardly dares to stand erect when she deals 
 with the Anu'rican Kepublic, l)ecause her North Anun'ican 
 dependencies are a jdedge in the adversary's hands. In abnost 
 all negotiations the im[)otence of (Jreat IJritain on the Anu'ri- 
 can continent has been felt. Tn eacdi dispute aboJit boundaries, 
 Canada has been obliged to give Avay. She has complained, 
 but what else could she expect? IJritish diplomacy has done 
 its best, but diplonmcy is little Avithout cannon. 
 
 Conuuercially the colonies nuiy be thought to have an 
 advantage in a special facility of borrowing, though Spain, 
 Turkey, ^Mexico, the Argentine; l{<'public, have been able to 
 borrow from Knglaml on a liberal scale, liut it may be 
 doid)ted whether facility of borrowing, if it is apparently a 
 blessing, is not really a curse in disguise. 
 
 Is any i)()litical advantage derived by the colonies from 
 dependence? Is it possible that a salutary tutela{./3 should be 
 exercised by a democracy in I'^uroiie over a democu-acy in 
 America or at the antipodes, its eipial in intelligence, its ecpial 
 in power of stdf-goveruiuent, and placed in circumstances 
 widely different? The idea is ludicrous. What does one 
 Knglishman in ten thousand know or care about Australian 
 affairs; what does rarlitiinent know or care about them? Does 
 not a colonial question clear the House? The Constitution 
 imposed by Parlianuuit on Cauiida twenty years ago has dis- 
 closed serious defe(;ts. The Senate, especially, has proved a 
 dead failure or worse. Vet the Constitution is ])ractically 
 riveted on the Colony because Varliament (!ould never be got to 
 attend to anuMubuents. Thus the political development of the 
 
 I 
 
TIIK KMPJKE. 
 
 155 
 
 n 
 
 Colony, instead of being aided li)y the supposed tutelage, is 
 impeded in the most imi)oitant respeet. All the nuichineiy 
 of liritish rarliamentary government the colonies in common 
 with many independent nations have. The si>irit of liritish 
 statesmanship you cannot impart, unless you send out IJritish 
 statesmen instinct with it in virtue of their peculiar training 
 and traditions. The game of colonial faction will not give birth 
 to it; perhaps its life may not be long in the mother country 
 herself. Whether the standard of political morality in a colony 
 is raised by tlu^ connection, recent disclosures in Canada too 
 clearly show, thougli the government having barred the door 
 against inquiry, only a part, probably, of the truth has come 
 to light. Any one of those discilosures would have been the 
 ruin of a politician in the United Statt's. Mr. Edward Jilake 
 complains of "lowered standards of jjublic virtue, deathlike 
 apathy of public opinion, debaiuihed constituencies, and 
 increased dependence on the public chest." Government has 
 been unblushingly corrui)t. Subsidies to railways and local 
 Avorks luive been notoriously used for the purpose of influ- 
 encing elections. No I'resident of the United States, as a 
 candidate for re-election, would have dared to assend)le the 
 protected manufa(!turers in the parlour of a hotel, assess them 
 to his election fund, aiul i)ledge to them the fiscal ])olicy of 
 the country. 
 
 A Governor is now politically a cipher, lie holds a petty 
 court, and bids chami)agne flow under his roof, receives 
 civic addresses, and makes flattering replies; but he has lost 
 all power, not only of initiation, but of salutary control. His 
 name serves only to cloak and dignify the acts of colonial 
 politicians. It makes the people put up with things against 
 which public stdf-respect even at a low ebb might revolt. Tarli- 
 anu'ut in Canada was dissolved the other day for the conve- 
 nience of the Minister, who wanted to snai) a verdict, on the 
 pretence that a i)opular mandate was re(piired for negotiations 
 respecting the tariff which were on foot with the goverinuent 
 of the United States. The preteu(H* was false, and the false- 
 hood was at oncH' exposed by the American Secretary of State, 
 
l.-)() 
 
 QUESTION'S OF 'I'HK DAV. 
 
 wlio declared tliivt no negotiations whatever were on foot. In 
 the fraud thus })raetised on the i)eo})le, the representative of 
 the Crown, wlio can liardly liave faiksd to know the trutli, 
 was constrained constitutionally to bear a part. In the noted 
 case of the raeilie Railway scandals, while public morality 
 was struggling, perhaps for the last time, with corruption, 
 the weight of the Governor-General's authority was actually 
 (tast into the wrong scale. J>y the advice of the accused Min- 
 ister:5, wliich he deemed it his constitutional duty to take, he 
 transferred the iu(iuiry fi'om Parliament, which was seised of 
 it, to a Hoyal Commission a[)pointe(l by the ]\[inisters them- 
 selves, whose object manifestly was to ev'ade justice, as they 
 would ])robably have succeeded in doing had not public in ''g- 
 nation been too strong. 
 
 Xor does the political connection form anything in the way 
 of social character which a man of sense would value, or from 
 which a man of sense would not turn away. There is no need 
 of using harsh words in order to suggest to what colonial 
 worship of a coronet must lead. The tendency at present is to 
 revive the system of colonial titles. Anybody can guess what 
 titles and title-hunting in colonial so(!ietv must beget. The 
 .accolade does not confer (ihivalry. In the I'acitic Ivailway 
 scandal, out of four men im])li('ated, three were knights at the 
 time, the fourth was afterwards knighted, and as a knight got 
 into other scrapes of the same kind. \ knight pays with a 
 place in a government de{)artnu'nt a jjrinter who has stolen 
 proofs from his office for the use of the party at an election. 
 A baronet employs without shame, for a political purpose, 
 private letters, the pro])erty of other persons, which he cannot 
 have obtained in an honourable way. Few can believe it })os- 
 sible to plant aristocracy in the New World. Pitt tried it and 
 utterly failed. An hereditary ])eerage is (dearly impossible 
 without entailed estates; you would have a marcpu'ss black- 
 ing shoes. Even a baronetcy is a temptation to provide an 
 estat<> for its heirs at the public cost. 'I'he tendency of the 
 whole system is to breed subjects for a ct)lonial Tlwu^keray. 
 l>y the good sense of the Canadian people it is regarded with 
 
 
TIIK KMPIUK. 
 
 1 
 
 aversion, and if it depended on tlieir vote, it would come to an 
 end. As to any intiueiu^e ol' titles ov of the ))olitieal connec- 
 tion generally on social manners, all that iieed be said is that 
 the manners of honest industry are good enough if they are 
 let alone, and that tlie character of thi^ English gentleman is 
 highly susceptible of inntatit)n on its bad side. 
 
 Xationality exalts and saves. To the s(df-respect of a nation 
 api)eals are siddom made wholly in vain. Appeals are not made 
 in vain to the stdf-respect of tlie peo[)le of tlie United States. 
 Ameri(tans outside the political ring are and)itious of being 
 great citizens; for that name they will work iiard, and, if they 
 have wealth, spend it freely. The natiiral ambition of a col- 
 onist who lias made a fortune is to get a title, go to Court, luive 
 his wife presented, and gain a footing in th(> aristocratic society 
 of the Imperial countiy. His affections and aspirations do not 
 centre in the colony. Not seldom he leaves it during a great 
 part of tlie year, sometimes wholly, for London. He nuist, if 
 he is made a Teer. In public muniticence, the de])endency, 
 even when allowance is made for tlie difference of wealth, 
 will not bear comparison with the nation. Deadlift v'iforts 
 may be made to cultivate national spirit in de[)endencies. 
 Like all efforts to cultivate artificial sentiment, they will be 
 made in vain. If England is to be the mother of fret; nations, 
 the nations must be free. 
 
 To repeat the words of an old and long forgotten work, 
 "The great migrations by whicli the earth has been jx'opled 
 have at the same time lui folded the great s(!enes of history, 
 and carried man through the suec!essive ])hases dl' sociiil and 
 political existence. Old England has failed to shake off feu- 
 dalism; but the founders of New England left it behind, and 
 planted a realm beyond its sway. The kntdl of privilege 
 tolled Avhen they, at the foundation of their State, bound 
 themselves in a voluntary covenant to ' reivder due obedience 
 to just and equal laws framed for the general good.' They 
 from the iirst renounced the Norman law of primogeniture in 
 succession to hind, and returned to the old Saxon law of just 
 division, under the nanu' of gavelkind. When hereditary 
 
158 
 
 QUK.STKJNS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 M' 
 
 iiristucraoy offcu'ed itself in the person of certain Puritan 
 J'eors, who wished to retain tlieir privilege in New England, 
 they calmly but firmly put it away. From the State Church 
 they were lumted and persecuted exiles; and if they did not 
 reach at a bound tiie doctrine, then unknown, of perfect reli- 
 gious liberty, they readied it, and then embraced it without 
 reserve, while intolerance still reigned at home. By the 
 issue of their enteri)rise, victorious though chequered, man 
 has undoubtedly been taught that lie may not only exist, but 
 prosper, without many things which at home it would be 
 treason to think unnecessary to his existence. It is a change, 
 and a great change; one to b<' regarded neither with child- 
 ish exultation nor with childish, fear, but witli manly rev- 
 erence and solicitude, as the (.pening of a new page in the 
 book of Providemie, full of mighty import to mankind. Hut 
 what, in the course of time, has not changed, except that 
 essence of religion and morality for whicli all the rest was 
 made? The grandest forms of history have waxed old and 
 passed away. The Englisli aristocracy has been grand and 
 beneficent in its hour, but why should it think that it is the 
 expiring effort of creative power, and the last birth of time? 
 We bear, and may long bear, from motives higher perhajis 
 than the public good, the decreiiitude of feudalism here; but 
 why are we bound, or how can we hope, to propagate it in a 
 free world?'' * 
 
 The case of Canada is not to be confounded with those of 
 Australia and South Africa. Australia lies in an ocean of 
 her own, without great neighbours nearer than China, or fear 
 of collision, save possibly with European interlopers in her 
 sphere. South Africa has no neighbours except the Poersand 
 the savages. The Canadian Dominion, as a glance at the map 
 — the physical and economical, not the political map — will 
 sliow, is tlie northern rim, broken by three wide gaps, of a 
 continent of Avhicli the inhabitants are a people of the same 
 race, language, religion, and institutions, with whom its peo- 
 
 4 
 
 The Empire. 18(j;5, pp. 143-4. 
 
TIIK KMIMUK. 
 
 m 
 
 but 
 
 pic, severed only by an obsolete quarrel, are rapidly blend- 
 ing, and would unite if nature had her way. In the United 
 States is Canada's natural market for buying as well as selling, 
 the market which her productions are always struggling to 
 enter through every opening in the tariff wall, for exclusion 
 from which no distant market either in Kiigland or (dsewhere 
 can compensate her, the want of which brings on her coinmer- 
 (!ial atrophy and drives the flower of her youth by thousands 
 and tens of thousands over the liiu'. Her own market, as a 
 whole, is not large, and it is broken into four, between which 
 there is hardl}' any natural trade, and little has been forced 
 even by the most stringent system of protection. The demand 
 for aid for settlement may have awakened England to the 
 fact that the Canadian Xorth-West remains unpeopled. It 
 remains unpeopled while the neighbouring States of the Union 
 are peopled, because it is cut off from the continent to which 
 it belongs by a fiscal and ])()liti(^al line. 
 
 There is an especial danger in the retention of Canada, both 
 to the Imperial country and to the colony. Canada, British 
 Canada at least (and Eng.ind cannot be too often reminded 
 that there is a French Canada as well as a British), with her 
 Governor-General's Court and her mimic aristocracy of Baro- 
 nets and Knights, presents herself as a political outpost of 
 monarchical and aristocratic England on the territory of 
 American democracy. In this spirit her fervent loyalists act, 
 all the more because they cannot help feeling that nature 
 is drawing together tlie two sections of the English race on 
 the continent, and that only by cultivating antagonism can 
 the attraction be countervailed. Safe, as they think, under the 
 shield of England, and not being called upon even to pay the 
 expense of their own diplomacy, they indulge in a spirited 
 bearing towards the United States. Thus are bred disputes, 
 of one of which arbitration may fail to disjjose. At the last 
 election the government distinctly ajipealed to anti-Ameri- 
 can feeling, and its headers made anti-American speeches 
 which they afterwards tried to soften, but which had been 
 faithfully taken down; while their less res})onsible followers. 
 
¥\ 
 
 ■VI 
 
 I*)', 
 
 m 
 
 \ ' 
 \ 
 
 IrtO 
 
 qUKSTIONS OF 'PI IK DAY. 
 
 going greater lengths, insulted the American name and Hag. 
 Suppose, to us(! the illustration once more, Scotland were an 
 American possession and an outpost of American Anglophobia. 
 A reunion of the Anglo-Saxon race in a political or diplo- 
 matic sense there can hardly be. The race is too widely 
 scattered, the circumstances of its members differ too widely, 
 some of them are too nuu'h mixed with other races, for any 
 cond)ination of that kind. How could Great IJritain confede- 
 rate, even in the loosest way, with the United States? Where 
 would the centre of suidi a union be, and what would be its 
 objects? If the object were merely to keej) the jjcace among 
 the members of the confederacy, that might be done in a 
 simpler way; if to impose the will of tlie confederac^y upon 
 the world, tlie world would rise against the confederacy. This 
 is a day-dream. lUit there is nothing visionary in the hope of 
 a moral reunion of the race, in which would be buried the old 
 quarrel with all its miserable traces, including that subservi- 
 ency to a people alien to the Anglo-Saxon mission of law, into 
 which partly by their dissensions both sections have been 
 brought. England was bound, after the American Kevolution, 
 to keep her Hag Hying over the loyalists who had settled in 
 Canada as well as over the French Catholics who had taken 
 her side. This duty has been done ; and if Canada, situated 
 as she is commercially as well as geographically, and with a 
 solid French nationality in the midst of her, is capable of being 
 and desires to be an independent nation, from American aggres- 
 sion, once more, she has nothing to fear. The Americans have 
 territory enough ; though they cannot fail to see tlie advantages 
 of a united continent, they are too wise to incorporate dis- 
 affection. They know" tliat if they wish to put pressure on 
 Canada, they might do it without giving England a pretext for 
 drawing her sword by stopping the bonding system, depriving 
 Canada of winter ports, excluding her ))roducts from their mar- 
 kets, and laying a hostile hand upon her railways, including 
 the Canadian I'acific, wdiich, though Englishmen seem to be 
 unaware of the fact, runs through the State of Maine. Let 
 England, then, fairly weigh the advantages and disadvantages 
 
TllK KMl'lKK. 
 
 101 
 
 of this possession l)()tli to licrsi^lt' and to the dependency, and 
 let her not be beguiled by otti(dal rei)orts or by those of (iov- 
 ernors-General who do not live in the castle of trnth. It was 
 to such sources tliat ICnglaud and her government continued 
 to trust for infornuition while the current of events was draw- 
 ing them towards the American Kevolution. 
 
 Sentiment, apart from utility, nobody would disparage; but 
 apart from utility it cannot long subsist. Nor is loyalty, 
 however loud, or even sincere, worth much unless it is attested 
 by self-sacritice. A Canadian Parliament, a Conservative 
 Minister leading the way, voted sympathy witli Home Rule. 
 This was done, as a leading ('onservative confessed on the 
 platform the other day, because, an election being near, it 
 was necessary to capture the Irish Catholic vote. Judge 
 whether these men are likely to pour out their blood without 
 stint for Jiritish connection; see at least, first, whether they 
 are ready to [)oar out a little money or to reduce tlieir duties 
 on your goods. " Loyalty," said Cobden, "is an ironical term 
 to apply to people wlio neither pay our taxes nor obey our laws, 
 nor hold themselves liable to light our battles, who would 
 repudiate our right to the sovereignty over an acre of their 
 territory, and who claim the right of im[)()sing their own 
 customs duties even to the exclusion of our nuinufactures." ^ 
 
 1 Cobden visited Canada and the United States more than once, and 
 when the Confederation Act was on tlie stocks wrote as follows to a 
 friend: " I cannot see what substantial interest the British people have 
 in the connection to compensate them for guaranteeini; three or four 
 millions of North Americans living in Canada against another conunu- 
 nity of Americans living in their neigliborhood. We are told indeed of 
 the loyalty of the Canadians, but this is an ironical term to ajjply to 
 people who neither pay our taxes, nor obey our laws, nor hold themselves 
 liable to fight our battles, who would repudiate our right to the sover- 
 eignty over an acre of their territory, and who claim the right of impos- 
 ing their own customs duties even to the exclusion of our nuumfactures. 
 We are two peoples to all intents and purposes, anil it is a perilous delu- 
 sion to both parties to attempt to keep up a sham connection and depen- 
 dence, which will snap asunder if it should ever be put to the strain of 
 stern reality. It is all very well for our (\ickney newspapers to talk of 
 
1*52 
 
 QIKSTIOXS OK THI-; DAY 
 
 Xotliiiig can lie inoro kindly tliiiii tlic feel inj,' of ordinary Cana- 
 dians, who seek no titles and liav*' no railways to vend, towards 
 the niotlun' oonntry; hut it does not prevent them from think- 
 ing,' of their own interest first, or from freely exehanging the 
 British for tin; American flag whenever tln'ir interest calls 
 them to the other side of the line. Kvery one who has lived 
 in the United States knows that then^ is many an American 
 of tlui better class whosi; heart has turncMl to Old England. 
 The affection of tlu'se men is nndeniahly genuine, and would 
 perhaps stand as severe a test as the loyalty of the dei)en- 
 denoy. That the love of colonists other than those whose 
 special interests or aspirations are bound u[) with the present 
 system would be loosened by the dissolution of the political 
 tie, there is not the slightest reason for believing. It has not 
 been lessened by the reduction of the ti(i to a mere thread; 
 why should it be loosened by the dissolution? Race, history, 
 literature, depend not on [lolitical connection. The CJovernor- 
 (reneralship as a channel of British influence on the Canadian 
 mind would be well exchanged for the free importation of 
 British books. 
 This question of the relation of the colonies cannot be set 
 
 defending; Canada at all hazards. It would be just as po.ssible for the 
 United States to sustain Yorkshire in a war with Kn<^land as for us to 
 enable Canada to contend aj^ainst the I'nited States. It is simply an 
 impossibility. Nor must we forjiet that the only serious danger of a 
 ([uarn^l between the two neighbors arises from the connection of Canada 
 with this country. In my opinion, it is for the interest of both that we 
 should, as speedily as possible, sever the political thread by which we are 
 a.s conununities connected, and leave the individuals on both sides to 
 cultivate the relations of conunerce and friendly intercourse as with other 
 nations. I have felt an interest in this Confederation scheme because I 
 tliought it was a step in the direction of an amicable separation. I am 
 afraid from the last telegrams that thei'c may be a difficulty either in your 
 ])r(wince or in Lower Canada in carrying out the project. Whatever may 
 be the wish of the colonies will meet with the concurrence of our Gov- 
 ernment and Parliament. We have recognized their right to control 
 their own fate even to the point of asserting their independence when- 
 ever they think lit, and which we know to be only a question of time." — 
 Morley's Life of Cohden. Vol. II., pp. 47(», 471. 
 
 I 
 
TlIK KMl'IUK. 
 
 aside as unpractical. It may at any mnniont present itself in 
 the most practical form; for a maritime war would at once 
 reveal the inability of Knj;land to protect her distant depen- 
 dencies and the inability of the dependencies to defend their 
 own trade. At some time it must come, for nobody believes 
 that Australia and Canada can forever remain in a static of 
 dependence. Nobody imagines that the Aniciican (colonies 
 which are now the United States, even if there had been no 
 quarrel with (ieorge 111., could have remained to the present 
 day dependencies of * ireat IJritain. "There is a period," said 
 Lord lilatchford, " in the life of distant nations, however (doso 
 their original connection, at which each must i)ursue its own 
 course, whether in domestic or foreign ])olitics, unembarrassed 
 by the other's leading. And the arrival of that period de- 
 pends upon growth. Every increase of colonial wealth, or 
 number, or intelligence, or organisation, is in one sense a step 
 towards disintegration. The Confederation of Canada was 
 therefore such a step." The opinion of Sir G. Cornewall 
 Lewis in his "Government of Dependencies," though, like all 
 his opinions, cautiously worded, is easy to read. Even Lord 
 Beaconstield told Lord Malniesbury in confidence that the 
 colonies would be independent in a few years, nor did he 
 shrink from saying that they were a millstone round the neck 
 of England in the meantime.' If the question must come, then, 
 why not face it? Because British governments are ephemeral, 
 and in the perpetual faction tight liave enough to do to-day 
 without thinking of to-morrow. Probably, therefore, the end 
 will come in the form of a crash or shock of some kind. But 
 discussion will at least teach statesnumship to interpret the 
 event and deal wisely with it when it comes. 
 
 The West India Islands are lovely, romantic, steeped in 
 historic memories. But as a British possession they are almost 
 penal. Profit or strength from them Great Britain derives no 
 more. In case of a maritime war, they would be a real burden 
 to her. But she is bound to sustain what remains of a white 
 
 1 See Lord Mahiiesbiny's Memnirs of nn Ex-Minister. Vol. I., p. 344. 
 
m 
 
 
 \(U 
 
 (2i:i:srioNs of tiik day. 
 
 i I 
 
 nice, aiitl to keep ])eiU'(' iM'tween the nict's, so that thorc may 
 l)c no inort' .lamaica niassacivs. This penalty slie pays for 
 her .share in the gains ol' shivery, gains wlii(!h themselves were 
 losses, for the West Indian slave-owners eornipted her society 
 anil her polities. I'eace, it is to be feared, can be kept between 
 wliites and blacks only by a power superior t(t both of them, 
 and it would be probably better for the Islands if they were 
 dependencies outright, and ruled by Imperial governors, jiro- 
 vided the governors were strong men and impartial, not 
 febrile partisans like (Jovernor Kyre. Xegro democracy, after 
 a i)retty long trial in Haiti, seems to be a total failure, even 
 when due allowance is nuide for the inauspicious circum- 
 stances of its birth. The Americans do not want to incorpor- 
 ate barl)arous populations which would send corrupt elements 
 to Congress, nor do they want to annex islands for the defence 
 of which they would have to keep a large fleet. 
 
 There is an imi)ressi()n that th^' cpu'stion of the colonial 
 system and of the Km]»ire generally was mooted some time ago 
 by the Manchester school, and that the mercenary ideas of 
 the school i)revailed for a time, but were presently discarded, 
 Avhile Imperialism resunu'd its generous sway. Opinion is a 
 plant not only of slow, but of fitful growth. The Manchester 
 movement, as it is styled, swept away military occupation. 
 Before that time there had been large bodies of British troops 
 in the colonies, and, as a consequence, a series of INIaori and 
 Kaffir wars. The movement got rid of the useless and trouble- 
 some protectorate of the Ionian Islands. It gave a gene- 
 ral impulse to colonial emancipation, Avliich has constantly 
 advanced since that time. Almost every question has been de- 
 termined in favour of colonial self-government, till at last the 
 colonies stand upon the brink of independence. Canada is 
 now even claiming diph»matic independence in the matter of 
 commercial treaties, Avhich she proposes to make for herself 
 under the name and on the responsibility of the British For- 
 eign Office. She has half emancipated herself judicially from 
 the Privy Council by the creation of her own Supreme (!ourt. 
 
TIIK KMIMUK. 
 
 m 
 
 Sho hof^iiis to be rather 'cstlc'ss under the military eonimaiKl of 
 f,'onerals sent from Kn^^huid. At this point there is a natural 
 reeoil, as tln-re is sure to \»' at any partiui^, however inevita- 
 ble, at the hreakiuji,' of any tie, familiar, tlioii<,'h it may he 
 ()l)solete. iMoreover, there are classes whose interests and 
 aspirations uro hound n\\ with the system. TImmm^ are the 
 circle of Clolonial (rovernors and the camlidates for Imperial 
 titles. Another reactionary influence of a subtle kind is i'elt. 
 Home Rulers find in fervent Im])erialism a set-otT aijainst their 
 se|)aratism at home. They ]»romise themselves and their 
 (country an ampler union as compensation for dismemberment. 
 Hence the movement in favour of Itnperial Federation. On 
 this stibject the writer can only repeat what he has .said in 
 another work, whicli, being on a s])ecial (juestion, may not 
 have met the eye of the njader of this book.' 
 
 " It was probably the sight of the tie visibly weakening .and 
 of the appronch of colonial indejjendence that gave birth, 
 by a recoil, to Imperial Federation. Hut the movement has 
 been strangely reinforced from another source. Home Kuh^rs, 
 who under that specious name would surrender Ireland to 
 the Parnellites, think to salve their own patriotism and recon- 
 cile the nation to their policy by saying that in breaking uj) 
 the United Kingdom they are but providing raw materials for 
 a far ampler and grander union. In the case of the late Mv. 
 Forster, the only statesman who has very seriously embraced 
 the project, something might be due to the Nemesis of imagi- 
 nati(m in the breast of a Quaker. 
 
 "The Imperial Federationists refuse to tell us their plan. 
 They bid o\ir bosoms dilate with trustful enthusiasm for 
 arrangements which are yet to be revealed. They say it is not 
 yet time for the disclosure. Not yet time, when the last strand 
 of political conni'ction is worn almost to the last thread, and 
 when every day the sentiment o])i)osed to (ientralisation is 
 implanting itself more deeply in colonial hearts! While we 
 are bidden to wait patiently for the tide, the tide is running 
 
 ' Canada and the Canadian (^ui'stion, pp. '21X5-309. 
 
 Hi 
 
1(50 
 
 QUKSTKJNS OF THK DAY. 
 
 r ' I 
 
 ' I 
 
 stroiif^ly tli«' other way. Now Xowfoundland elaiins tlie right 
 of makiii.t,' her own coinnicrcial aj^reements with the Unityd 
 States iiulo|)oii(h'iitly of other colonies. Disintegration, surely, 
 is on the ])oint of being eoniiilete. 
 
 ''At least we inny be told of whom the Confederation is to 
 (ionsist. Art' the negroes of tlie West Indies to be included? 
 Is Quashee to vote on Iini)erial j)olicy? liut above all, what 
 is to be done witli India? Is it, as a Colonial Federationist of 
 thoroughgoing deuKU'ratic tendencies demanded the other day, 
 to be taken into Federation and enfranchised? If it is, the 
 Hindu will outvote us five to one, and what he will do with 
 us only tliose wlio have fatbomed tlie Oriental mystery can 
 pretend to say. Is it to remain a dependency? Jf it is, to 
 whom is it to belong. To a Federation of democratic commu- 
 nities scattered over the globe, some of which, like Canada, 
 have no interest in it whatever? Its fate as an Empire would 
 then be sealed, if it is not sealed already by the progress of 
 democracy in Great Britain. Or is it to belong to England 
 alone? In that case one member of the Confederacy will have 
 an Empire apart live times as large os the rest of the Confed- 
 eration, retpiiring separate armaments and a diplomacy of its 
 own. How would the American Confederation work if one 
 State held South America as an Empin^? Some have sug- 
 gested that Ilindustiin should be represented by the British 
 residents in India aloiu'. If it were, woe to the Hindu! 
 
 "Again, the object of tiu' Association surely must l)e known. 
 Every Association of a practical kind must hav(» a definite 
 object to hold it together. The objects which naturiilly sug- 
 gest themselves are common armaments and a common tariff. 
 Hut Caiuidii, ;is we have seen, refuses to contrilnite to common 
 armaments, and Australia, tiioiigh she sent a reginuuit to tlie 
 Soudan, now apparently repents of having done it. (ireat 
 Britain is a war power; the colonists. lik<' the Americans, 
 are essentially unmilitarv. and hei-e would b(^ the l)eginning 
 of troubles. .\s to tlie tariff, the ('anadian Brote(ttionists, 
 who make use of Imperial Federation as a stalking-liorse in 
 their struggle against free trade with the United States, are 
 
 
mm^M.^-JJerrsKz 
 
 TIIK KMl'IRK. 
 
 ir,7 
 
 always oarolul to say that they do not mean to resign their 
 right of hiying protective duties on Uritish goods. Victoria 
 also seems wedded to Jier Troteetive system. AVliat rejuains 
 but improvement of postal communication and a Colonial 
 Exhibition, neitluM- of which surely calls for a political com- 
 bination un])recedented in history'.' 
 
 *' Unprecedented in history tlie combination would be. The 
 Jvoman Empire, the thouglit of which and of its Ciris liovia- 
 viis sum, is always hovering before our minds, was vast, but it 
 was all in a ring-fence. Moreover, it had its worhl to itself, 
 no rival power? being interposed Itetwcen Itome and her Prov- 
 ince's. It wa.s .ui lCnipir(> in the jn'oiier sense of the term. 
 its members were all alike in strict subordination to its 
 head. The head determined the ])<)licy Avithout ([uestion. 
 and danger to unity from divided counsels there was none. 
 We confuse our minds, as was said bel'ore, by an improper use 
 of the term Empire. The name apjdics to India, but to noth- 
 ii»g els(^ (connected with (Jreat liritain unless it be the for- 
 tresses and (Jrown Colonies. Our self-governed colonies are 
 not members of an Em})irc, but free communities virtually 
 independent of the mother country, wliich for the purpose 
 of Confederation would b(! called u[)ou to resign a portion of 
 their independence. i)i the Spanish Kmpire it is needless to 
 speak. Its name is an omen of disaster and a warning against 
 the blind ambition wliich mistakes cond)ination lor union and 
 colossal weakness i'or power. Afttn- all, the iJoman Empire 
 itsidf fell, anil partly because the life was drawn from the 
 members to tlie head. 
 
 " 'I'lu^ Acduean League, the Swiss IJund, the I'uioii of the 
 Netherlands, the American Union, all were perfectly natural 
 combinations, not only suggeste<l but commanded by a common 
 ])eril. In three out of the lour cases the communities which 
 entered into the compact were kindred in all respectii; in the 
 case of the Swiss Hund they were eipial. In the c.ise of the 
 Confederation now proposed, they would l>e neitht r kindred 
 nori-qual; and faste* .In- people ol the Uritish Islands, those 
 of self-governed c(»lunies, the Hindu, the African, and the 
 
I' 
 
 T" 
 
 J 
 
 Iv 
 
 lfi8 
 
 QlKsriUNS (tF Till-; DAY. 
 
 Ivattir tdj^ctluT with \vli;it Icgisljitivc cjlamps you will, you 
 cannot produce the unity of political (iharacter and scntiintuit 
 which is essential to community of counsels, much more; to 
 national union. 
 
 "Steam and teh-.i^raph, we are told, have annihilated dis- 
 tance. They have not annihilated the ]»arish steei)l.'. 'I'hey 
 have not carried the thou.Ljlits of the ordinary (utizen beyond 
 the circle of his own life and work. They iiave not ([ualitied 
 a connnon farmer, ; radesman, ploughman, or artisan to direct 
 the ])olitics of a world-wide State. How much does an ordi- 
 nary Canadian kiu)W or care al)out Australia, an ordinary .Aus- 
 tralian about Canada, or an ordinary Kn_i,'lishman, Scotchnum, 
 or Irishman about eitlier? The tetdint;- of all the colonists 
 towards the motlier country, when you appeal to it, is thor- 
 oughly kind, as is that of the mother country towards the 
 colonies. 15ut Canadian notions of British p'olitics are hazy, 
 and still nu»re hazy are Hritish notions of the [lolitics of 
 ('anada. When .lohn Sandiield Macilonald, the F'ip^e Minis- 
 ter of Ontario, died, his death was chronicded sfv British 
 jo\irniils as tiiat of Sir .John A. Macdonald, the Prime Min- 
 i.ster of tlie Dominion. 
 
 "The different IM-ovince.s of Canada cannot be made to sink 
 their local interests in that of the Dominion. How much less 
 could all the colonies be made to sink their local interests in 
 that of the Imperial I"\'derati(m! 
 
 "About India Knglishnmn know more, because their inter- 
 est in it is so great; but Canadians know nothing. The 
 framers of these vast political schemes, having their own eyes 
 tixed on the [lolitical firmament, forget that the eyes of men 
 in general are ti.xed on the patli tiiey tread. The suffrage of 
 the Federation ought to be limite(l to far-reaching and imagi- 
 native minds. 
 
 " \ grand idea may be at the same time practical. The idea 
 of a Cnited Continent of Xorth America, securing free trade 
 and intercourse over a vast area, with external safety and 
 interni'.l peace, is no less practical than it is grand. The 
 benefits of such a union would be always present to the mind 
 
TllK KMl'lUK. 
 
 1«)!» 
 
 of the least instructed citizen. The sentiment connected with 
 it would he a foundiitiou un which the political aichitect could 
 build. Iniperuil Federation, to the mass of the peojjle com- 
 prised in it, would be a mere name conveyin>,' with it no 
 definite sense of benetit on which anything could be built. 
 
 "To press this receding vision a little closer, what would be 
 the relation of the Federal (iovernnuMit to the British mon- 
 archy? Would the same Queen be sovereign of both? Would 
 she have two sets of advisers? Sui)pos(^ they should advise 
 her different ways! W(nild slie appoint, as she does now, the 
 heads of all tlie other nuMubers of tht; Federation? It would 
 hardly do to let the President of the IJnited States appoint 
 all the State (lovernors. How would the Suiireme Court be 
 constituted? Sucli an authority would certainly be needed to 
 inter]»ret the ( Constitution, and the British monarcliy would 
 have to l)e ;i suitor before it. How would the decrees of the 
 Federal CJovernnuMit be enforced, say, in ease of refusal to send 
 the war contingent? How. again, wcnild the riq)resentation 
 in the Federal I'arliiiinent be apportioned? If by population, 
 tiie representation of the iJritish Islands would so outnumber 
 the rest that the rest would deem their representation practi- 
 call}' a nullity, and jealousy and cabals would at once arise. 
 Tlu' very numl)er, too. would be a ditliculty. If Great Britain 
 Iiad memliers in proi)ortion to St. Ihdena and I'Mji, tlie Parlia- 
 ment would hav(! to meet on Salisl)ury Plain. These are not 
 (luestions of detail, nor do they attacli only to a particular 
 scheme; they are fundamental, and attach to every scheme that 
 can be conceived, 
 
 "Tlu^ Parliament of (Jreat IWitain nuist eea.se to be a Sove- 
 reign Power. The Impeiial Congress its(df would not l)e a 
 Sovereign Power. Like tlie Congress of the United States, 
 it would be subject to the l-'eih-ral (.'onstitution, and would 
 have so nuich authority oidy as that Constitution assigiu'd it. 
 The Sovendgn Power would be the ])eople of the Empire at 
 large, and ;v curious Sovereign they would be. 
 
 "The same person could not be the licad at once of a Federa- 
 ^\i)U and of one of the communities included in it, any more 
 
' 
 
 170 
 
 • ilK^TlONS Ol-' rilK DAV. 
 
 ' I 
 
 tluiu the same i)eiv>oii could be President of the United States 
 and Governor of the State of New York. Her Majesty would 
 have to choose between the British and the ran-lJritannic 
 Crown. 
 
 "Canada is a (Jon federation in herself. Movements are on 
 foot for a Confederation of tln^ Australian Colonies and of 
 those of South Africa. A Confederation of tlie West India 
 Islands has also been jjroposed. We should tlnis have a strik- 
 ing ncjvelty in i)olitical architecture in the shape of a Confed- 
 eration of ConftMlerations. l^)Ut it seems certain that New 
 Zealand would not, and tliat some isolated colonies could not, 
 join any Fedci-ation, in which case the membei's of tjic Central 
 Tarliament would represent i)artly iM'dcrations, [tartly single 
 conimunities. Strange, apparently, would be the complication 
 of fealties, obligations, and sentiments which would hence 
 arise. 
 
 "This Union, so complex in its machinery, with its mem- 
 bers scattered over the world, and distracted by interests as 
 wide apart as the shores of its members, Home l'\ilers tliink 
 they could maintain, while; tliey bid us despair of maintaining 
 the I'arlianu'iitary Union of Ireland with (Jreat Britain. 
 
 " Even to assemble tlie Constituent (Convention would be no 
 easy task. The governments, liritisli and (Johjnial, are all 
 party governments ai •' all liable to constant cliange. The 
 delegate trusted by one party would not have the confidence 
 of the other, and before the (Convention could proceed to busi- 
 ness somelujdy's credentials would be witlidrawn. We have 
 seen in the case of Canadian Confederation how Nova Scotia, 
 New Jirunswick. and Triiice Kdward Island Hew off from the 
 agreement at v'.iiich their delegates had arrived. In truth 
 there would probably be a general falling away as soon as 
 })ayment for Imperial armaments came into view. 
 
 "Tiic f'edendion would be notliing if not diplomatic. lUit 
 whose diplomacy is to prevail'.' That of (ireat lU'itain, a 
 I'iUropean I'ower and at the same time .Mistress of Inilia? 
 Tiiat of .Australia, with her Eastern rehitions and her Chinese 
 question'.' ' m- that of (Canada, bound u[i with the American 
 
 
' 
 
 TMK KMPIHK. 
 
 171 
 
 
 Continent, indifferent to everything' in l-'urope or Asi;i. and 
 (concerned only with hi-r rehition to the United States? Aus- 
 tralia, we have been told, already betrays her intention of 
 breaking away from Kngland should Uritish policy ever take 
 a line adverse to her speeial interests in the East, and such a 
 line British [xiliey must take if the special interests of Aus- 
 tralia are ever to lead her into a (conflict with the Chinese. 
 
 "Switzerland, the Xetherlands, and the United States, all 
 federated under the pressure of ne(!essity, whi(^h, stern and 
 manifest as it was, had yet scarcely the })ower to overcome the 
 centralised forces. To do the work of that necessity there 
 ought at least to be an etpially strong desire. l!ut wiiat proof 
 have we of tin; existence of suc^h a desire".' .Vustralia, far 
 from being eager, seems to be adverse; in some of her cities 
 the missionary of Imperial Federati(»n can scarcidy lind ;ni 
 aiulience. Vnnn South Africui comes no audibh; resjionse. In 
 British Canada the movement has no ajjparent strength exce]»t 
 what it derives from an alliance with I'roteetionisni, whicdi, 
 as has already been said, I'cpudiates a commercial union of the 
 Kmiiire and insists on maintaining its separate tariff. To the 
 French Nationalists of (^)uel»ec anything that would bind tlieir 
 country closer to (Jreat IJritain is odious, and they were re- 
 cently dis[)osed to rtjceive a. (Iovernor-(r(Mieral coldly because 
 they suspected him of favouring such a policy, in (Jreat 
 liritain itself the movement shows no sign (»f stri'ngth. I'^or 
 several years, under Lord Beacoustitdd, Imperialism had eveiy- 
 thing its own way, yet not a ste[t was taken towards Icdera- 
 tion. This was the grand opportunity; l)ut Federationists 
 failed to gras}» it by the forelock. Nothing has been done to 
 this hour beyond holding a meeting of colonists, alisolutely 
 without authority, whieli dined, wined, and talked about 
 postal eomnumieations. all power of dealing with the gi<'at 
 question having been exiu'cssly withheld. Lord Ueaconstitdd's 
 successor in the Tory leadership has plaiidy de(dined to commit 
 himself to the project, We seem to be a hmg way from a 
 spontaneous ,hu<1 overwhelming' vote, nothing short of which 
 would suffive. 
 
11:1 
 
 172 
 
 (.ii;Ksri(>Ns OK riiK day 
 
 "Tlu' approiuli to ccntriilisatioii at once sets all the WMitri- 
 fugal t'onu's in action; it did this rvcii in tlie American Fed- 
 eration. s(» tliat the projcctt narrowly es(;ai)ed wreck; and 
 miscarriage would hcget, instead of tdoser union, discord, 
 estrangement, and perhaps rupture. Let us lu-ar in mind the 
 warning exam[)l(! of the rupture with the Ameiicau colonies. 
 
 *• What is the real motive for encountering all the ditti- 
 culties and perils of this more than gigantic uncU-rtaking, for 
 running laboriously (counter to tlie recent course of colonial 
 history, as well as to the natural tendencies of <nir race, and 
 for taking the political heart and brain, as it were, out of each 
 of these free comnuuiities and transferring them to London? 
 "NVe are told tluit the Federal Kmpirc would impose peace 
 upon the world. This assunu's that dispersion is strength, 
 and that (ireat IJritaiu would be nuule more formidable in war 
 by being bound u[i with un warlike communities, liut su]>- 
 pose it true; surely the appearance of a world-wide power, 
 grasping all the waterways and all tin; points of maritinu; van- 
 tage, instead of propagating ]>eace, would, like an alarm gun, 
 call the nations to l)attle? The way to make peac^e on earth 
 is to promote the coming not of an excdusive military league 
 but of the Tarlianuuit of Man, the moral Parliament of Man 
 at least, by enlarging tlu; action of international law and 
 repressing the and)itious passions to whi(di, however phihiu- 
 tliropic may be our professions, Imperialism really appeals. 
 
 "if no distinct object can be assigned, if no detinitf^ plan 
 can l)e produced, if the jjntjectors are eonstuous that there is 
 no practical step on which they can ventiire. surely the j)ro- 
 jeet ought to be frankly laid aside and no longer allowed to 
 darken counsel, hide from us the real facts of the sitmition, 
 and prevent the colonies from advancing on tlu? true i)ath. 
 
 "Then; is a fe(!erali(tn which is feaMlble, and, to those who 
 do not UKMSure grandeur Uy physical force or extension, at 
 least as grand as that of whicli the Imperialist dreams. Ft is 
 the nuiral federation <d' the whole Mnglish-speaking race 
 throughout the world, including all those millions of men 
 speaking the English language in the Tuited States, and 
 
 
IIIK KMriKK. 
 
 |)arte(l from tlio vost only ii cciitiiry iii,'o l)y ;i wrt'tclicd (iu;ir- 
 rel, wlioin ImiK'rial iM'dcratioii would Iciivc out of its pule. 
 Nothing is nccdt'd to lu'ing this about hut the voluntary re- 
 tirement of Knglaud as a ]iolitical powfr from ;i shadowy 
 Dominion in a sphei-c which is not hers. 
 
 " Unless all present appearances on the })olitieal horizon are 
 delusive, tlie time is at hand when the u])heaval of the labour 
 world, and the social problems which arc coming' into view, 
 will give politicians more serious and substantial matter tor 
 thought than the airy fabric of Imperial i-'etleration. 
 
 "The old project of giving tin; colonics rcin'rsentation in 
 the hnperial Parliament ai)i)ears to have licen laid aside. 'IMie 
 objections urged against it by IJurke on the ground of distanct^ 
 have been to a great extent removed by steam, thougli it might 
 even now be ditlicult to call together a world-wide Parlia- 
 ment in time of maritime war. Ihit the ol)jection still deci- 
 sive is th;;t the colonies would not put their affairs into tlie 
 hands of an Asseml)ly in which their rcpi-csciitatioii would be 
 overwhelmingly outnund)ered. Nor could they trust repre- 
 sentatives domiciled in London wlio. under the influence oi 
 liondon society, would be apt to become more Ibitish than the 
 Uritish themselves. These lunv c(niutrics. which have such 
 difficulty in liuding suital)lc men for tlicii' own legislatures, 
 would have difficulty in finding men to represent them at 
 Westminster at all. They might have to fall back on expa- 
 triated men of wealth, in whom, as re|ireseiitative.s of colo- 
 nial sentiment, very little eonlidenct> could bc' placed. Sup- 
 ])Osing that the members for the colonies remained colonial, 
 .and tried to make \\\) for their lack of numbers at Westminster 
 by combining among tliemselves and log-rolling, they might 
 be('.oin<r a serious addition to the distractions of the IJritish 
 Parliament, which assuredly need no increase. 
 
 " liPt it be taken as certain and irreversible that the colonies 
 will not part with aii\ portion of their self-goveniment. 
 If a scheme can be d«'vised by which they can be governed by 
 an Assembly at Westminstei- without any loss to thein of s(df- 
 government it may. supposing it be presented to them in an 
 
iff 
 
 m 
 
 174 
 
 (iUKSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 1'^ 
 
 r. 
 
 ( 
 ' I 
 
 int('llii,nl)l»' iind [)racti('iil foi'iii, stand a cluinci' of eonsideni- 
 tion at their liaiids. 
 
 "A criiinl) of conitort lias just t'alli'ii to the advocates of 
 Iinjtevial Federation in the sha[»e of a peera^'e conferred on a 
 colonist. 'I'his is liaih-d as representation of the colonies in 
 the Uritisli I'arliaiuent. The munher of such I'eers must 
 always he very small, while tlie House in wliich they sit is 
 not that of ])ower l)ut tiiat from which jjower lias departtMl. 
 But who can less represent colonial sentinuMit than a million- 
 naire transplanted to ^layfair? A niillionnaire, to be made a 
 I'eer a man must he, and to have made money out of the 
 (!olouy rather than to have done service in it will he tli«,' 
 indispensable (pialitication for thi^ honour. In [jarticular 
 cases the two (pialiHcations may no doul)t be combined; but 
 the general fruits of the ])ractice are likely to bo false ambi- 
 tion and enhanced desire of gain, 
 
 "The Imperial Kederationists seem now to be; splitting into 
 sections with different policies and organs. Apart from the 
 advocates of an Imperial I'arlianu'nt, Avhos(> contidence seems 
 to be failing, stand the advocates of a military league on one 
 liaml and of a fiscal league on the otiier, or, if the (Jerman 
 words are preferred, of u Kriegsverein and a Zollverein. 
 The a(lv<j<'ates of a Ivriegsverein iiavo had their answer, 
 so far as Canada is concerned, from the Canadian Commis- 
 sioner, who tells them that liberty of transit over Canadian 
 roads, at the regular rates, will be Canada's contribution. 
 Tliey are now confronti'd by fact. The advocates of a Zollve- 
 rein will find themselves confronted by fact as soon as they 
 choose to put to th(^ jirotected manufacturer of Canada the 
 question whether he is willing, in consideration of Inijierial 
 -iscrimination in her favour, to reduce tlu^ import duties on 
 Ib'itish goods. Had the apostle of fiscal lmi)erialism, who 
 fan(U(^s that he has all Canada in his favour, mooted that point 
 before^ an aiulicnce at Toronto or Montreal, a chill would at 
 once liav*' come over the assembly. 
 
 "The latest scheme is that proposed by the Cana(lian Com- 
 missioner, who sugg«'sts that tti cement the Iiujierial fabric he 
 
I'HH KM I' I in:. 
 
 17") 
 
 and his twd fellow (!()imiiissi()n('i's tVoiii Aiist nilia and Sontli 
 Alrica shotild !«' niadi' I'rivy Cniincilldrs and nu'nd)t'i's at onct; 
 of the lni]i('ri;il and tins Ccdoniid Cahinct. He at the same 
 tinu? lauds the practice of inaUinL;' (Jolonial I't'crs. It is to be 
 feared that Mnioni; tlu'se (Joniniissioners only one would lie 
 found eapahle «>f thus mentally In-striding tiie ocean and shar- 
 ing at one«! the councils »tf two ('al)inets, perhiips htdonging to 
 oi)posit<> parties and liaving different ends in view. 'I'lie 
 scheme has found as yet hut one adh<M'ont." 
 
 As war is the peril of Empire, a. papei' on tlu^ subject of the 
 Emi)ire is, hardly com])lete without a word ;is to the probabili- 
 ties of war. Is tlu! tendency to war deidining".' Are tlu; hoj)es 
 of the IVact; Soc-iety on the eve or neiir the eve of being ful- 
 filled? More men ar(! under arms in Europe than ever were 
 under arms before. Then! can l)e no doul)t tliat in the course 
 of history the war spirit has on the whole grown weaker. 
 It plainly recedes before the advance of civilisation. An 
 Assyrian or Persian king made his annual war as regularly as 
 a king of i-'rance his annual hunt; and the same was the habit 
 of the Turkish Sultans while their Em])irt! was strong. War 
 in the eyes of a Clreek or Jvoman was the highest of occui)a- 
 tions, and Tlato's ideal citizi'us an- warriors. Industry was 
 the lot and badge of the .^^lave. Wai- is now not nornuil but 
 exce])tional. Of late there has In'eii a distinct growth of 
 moral sentiment against the use cd' the sword. (Miarhvs V. 
 told a young soldier who pined for a<'tion that he loved peace 
 no more tiian the youth liims(df. At a nnudi later day Chat- 
 ham avowed himstdf "a lover of honourable war;" and in 
 the Avritings of lUirke will l)e found a general recognition of 
 sm^cess in war as a test of national ha])piness and gi'eatness. 
 Peace sentiment is of course confined to the domain of moral 
 civilisation; it does not prevail among the Turks, or among 
 the pet)ple of South Anundca ; nor does it prevail in its 
 uuiral form among the Chinese, though tliey have an industrial 
 anti])athy to arms and the military profession. It can scarccdy 
 
 

 ■ 
 
 176 
 
 (ilKsriONS (H- llir, DAY. 
 
 III-. 
 
 
 ho said that r('li«,'i(iii has doiio inuch to (nicll tho spirit of war. 
 The I'olythi'istic rcli^noii ol' the aiicit'iits t'licoiiraH^t'd it l)y 
 i(U'iitiryiiig tho }j;od with the victory and ajjruiaiidisciiicnt of 
 the triho. Th(! hooks wliicii iMnhody tho trihal ndigion of tlio 
 Jew incited him tit waj^o intornooino war with tho noigh- 
 honring trihes, and (christian holiovors in tho authority of tho 
 Old Tostaniont have thono(f h'arnod to tight the hatth's of the 
 Lord. The CJospol is in i»rin(d|do against war, yet (h)os not 
 ex])rossly oonihMun it; l»ut, on tho contrary, recognises tlio 
 .sohlior's calling as lawful, and hy likening the Christian's 
 tight to that of tho warrior seems to imp'.y that there is noth- 
 ing in the warrior's tight roitugnant to Christian sentiment. 
 It is needless to say that (Miristianity has not jtorsuaded 
 nations to turn the other cheek to the smitor. Natioiuil 
 ehurehes have lapsi'd into something very like trihalism in 
 this respect. They have assumed that tiu' L(U'd of Jlosts 
 wont forth with tho national army to battle. They have sung 
 Tc Denm, luuig up troi)hies in their (dairches, and blessed 
 standards, to say nothing of the part played by the clergy 
 as trumi)etevs of ndigious war. 
 
 Tho tendency of democracy appears to be against war. 
 Home, though a Jloi>ublic, was not a denu)cracy, but an aris- 
 tocracy ending in an lCmi)ire. Athens, which has boon often 
 cited as an example of military and)ition in a democracy, was 
 a slave-owning State. Tho Italian l{e])\d»lics were boin into 
 a world of feudal war; but they presently showed their 
 tendency by hiring mercenaries to do the fighting on their be- 
 lialf. If the motive ])OWor here was industry rather than 
 democracy, tho two eomuionly go together, and it is only 
 under democracy that industry rules the State. The case of 
 revolutionary I''ran(!(; was manifestly abnormal. I'^ven under 
 the Convention she was a J>ictatorate rather than a demo- 
 cracy, and the forces which her nuisters wiiddod were inherited 
 by them from tho military monarchy, while the supplies were 
 raised by confiscation. Among tiie South American States 
 ther(> has boon constant fighting; but they are democratic in 
 form only, in I'cality they are dictatoratos, ]tower passing 
 
■ 
 
 llir. KMI'IUK. 
 
 usually l»y violi'iic- Innii liiind to liiind. 'riic Aiiicricaii dc- 
 inocracy made liu- greatest war since (liose ol Naiioleoii. 15iit. 
 this was a war (d stdl'-pn'seiviit ion, and no dispositicjii was 
 shown to make use ol' tlu; vast afmameiits on toot at its 
 cl()S(\ The Aiuenean aiiiiy was rapidly reduced to its res^ular 
 number, which was tweiity-tive thousand, lor a total commu- 
 nity of sixty-live millions, haivly suHicient to iij,dit the Indi- 
 ans aiul secure domestit; order; while of tiie navy, an Amer- 
 ican wit has said that it could be run down l»y a coal barge. 
 Tiu! strongest case on tlu; other side is that of France, where 
 universal suffrage has so far not made the government less 
 military or led to reduction of armaments; though it might 
 have been suspeeted that tin; peasantry who have groaned 
 under the conscription would at oiu'i; have voU'.d it down. I»ut 
 the lionapartes, lollowing the I'lourbous, have so iilled I'^rance 
 witli military spii'it, and olx-dience to military command is so 
 ingi'aiued, that a change was liUcdy to take time. Democracy 
 is liumane, as its criminal code proves; for no one would set 
 down the French Keign of Terror as demo(!ratie. its human- 
 ity is connected with its (Mpiality, whi(di makes all lives of the 
 sauu' value, and forbids the common people to bo treated as 
 food for i)ow(ler. With a military despot like Napoleon, or a 
 high and cold aristocracy, the slaughter of peasants goes for 
 nothing. For the same reason democrati(! wars are expen- 
 sive, popular sentiment requiring that good provision shall be 
 made not only for the general but for all alike. The Ameri- 
 ca n War of Secession was enormously expensive to the demo- 
 cratic North, which sup])lied its armies lavishly, gave large 
 Ixaiiities for enlistment, and is now paying in pensions an 
 annual sum e(]ual to tlu> tot;il cost of a great European army. 
 The slave-owning aristocracy of the South could raise its 
 forces by sheer eonscriiition, and force them to tight without 
 pay and sometimes without food. 
 
 Of the old (Muses of war, some may be said to have died out 
 so far as the civilised world is concerned. No civilised gov- 
 ernment would now set out, like Sennacherib or Xerxes, on 
 an unprovokeil career of territorial conquest. No (dvilised 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 I 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 ■a IIIIM ill 2.5 
 
 2.0 
 
 ilM mil 2.2 
 
 m 
 m 
 
 1.8 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 ^ 6" - 
 
 
 ► 
 
 ^ 
 
 "/} 
 
 ^ 
 
 /} 
 
 A^. 
 
 /. 
 
 ^3 
 
 ^ 
 
 ■^^ e-l 
 
 
 '^a 
 
 ■' I'S- 
 
 O 
 
 7 
 
 € 
 
 m 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 iV 
 
 «■ 
 
 ^ 
 
 '^ 
 
 O 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^\ ^^ 
 
 
 
 ^3 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
V 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 ^ 
 
 j^ Wig: A 
 
 
 
 S'k 
 
 i^.r 
 
 i/x 
 
 fA 
 
 J 
 
r 
 
 17H 
 
 QrivSTIOXS OF THE DAV. 
 
 P 
 
 
 governineiit, or govoniment ;)ret('U(liMg to be ('ivilised, oxcept 
 perlKi[).s tliat ol a IJoniiparte, would even coinnut sueh terri- 
 toriul aggression as was committed by Louis XIV. Frederick 
 the Great, at all events, set up a legal claim to Silesia. The 
 last great excei)tion to this improvement of sentiment, a tre- 
 mendous exception certainly, were the conqu 'sts of Napoleon, 
 especially his piratical invasion of S[)ain. Napoleon was not 
 a child of moral civilisation; he was a child of Corsicin bri- 
 gandage and barbarism, whose military genius, called into play 
 by the wars of the Revolution, made him for a time almost 
 master of the civilised world. His influence did not enil with 
 his fall. He had evoked a spirit of militarism which, like his 
 ascendancy, may be regarded as an accident of history and 
 destined to pass away. Russia, among other characteristics 
 of a backward civilisation, may still be capable of a war of 
 sheer conquest. Rut her ambition points in one direction, that 
 of Constantinople, and seeks at least to reconcile itself with 
 morality by pleading the decadence of Turkey and the duty 
 of rescuing from oppression the Slav and Christian subjects 
 of the Porte. The fear, real or affected, of Russian ambition 
 it was which, by bringing on the Crimean war, broke the spell, 
 which Europe had begun to hope would be lasting, of the 
 forty years' peace. Of the religious wars which desolated 
 Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries we shall 
 hear no more. Faith is now too weak for Catliolic leagues as 
 for crusades. Ry the middle of the seventeenth century the 
 conflict had lost much of its religious character and become 
 political or territorial. Presently we have the Pope himself 
 as an Italian Prince on the same side with l*rotestant I'owers. 
 Dynastic wars nuiy also be considered as numbered with the 
 past. So may the commercial wars which owed their origin 
 to the monopolist fallacies of the last century. On the other 
 hand, we have recently had wars of national revival and recon- 
 struction : the war between Austria and Germany, which 
 attended the restoration of German unity, and the war be- 
 tween Germany and France, which the French jealousy of the 
 restored unity of Germany entailed. There may yet be more 
 
THK EMPIRE. 
 
 ITS 
 
 ti'oublo of this kind in tlie Austrian I'jiipiro, in the Turkish 
 Knipire, and possibly in Scandinavia, in I'okind, and the 
 Baltic I'rovinfes of Russia. The thirst of France for glory 
 seems still unslaked, and to it has l)eeu added a thirst for 
 revenge. The break-up of the Turkish Empire and a scramble 
 for its spoils are always in prospect. A new set of dis- 
 putes is also arising out of rival (dainis to fields for colonisa- 
 tion in Africa. Similar disputes may arise about other waste 
 places of the earth, as Europe becomes overcrowded and the 
 need of outlets grows. Though religious revolution as a 
 source of war has lost its force, it seems not impossible that 
 social revolution may take its place. The wars to w)\ich social 
 revolution would lead would be likely, it is true, to be civil 
 rather than international. Hut it is conceivable that some 
 military power born of social revolution, like the Spanish 
 Intransigentes or the French Comnnniists, may get hold of a 
 government and imitate the crusading fury of the Jaco\)ins. 
 Nor, while we scan the horizon of the civilised world, ought 
 it to be forgotten tliat there is a world outside, of which 
 China is the greatest power, still uncivilised, which may give 
 birth to military force, and arm itself with the weapons of 
 civilisation. This would be a sufficient reason against univer- 
 sal disarmament, such as the Peace Society preaclies, even 
 if we could dispense with the soldier as an upholder of order 
 and an example of discipline amidst a general dissolution of 
 authority. 
 
 The enormous armaments which the European Powers now 
 have on foot appear to make war at some time certain, since 
 it would seem that the tension must at last become insuffera- 
 ble, and that somebody must break. On tlie other hand, the 
 very apprehension of contiict with forces so vast and engines 
 of wav so destructive acts -.is a strong deterrent and may pre- 
 vail over international hatred and other incentives to war till 
 financial deficit enforces rediuition. The change in the mode 
 of warfare from embattled hosts to long-range projectiles, 
 and from fleets such as fought at Trafalgar to turrets antl 
 rams, is jirobably in favour of peace; not only because it 
 
N. 
 
 180 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY 
 
 
 inakos war more dreadful by increasing its destructiveness 
 (whicli may be doubted), but because by taking away the 
 pomp, pride, and cinuimstanee of tlie battle-field, it robs war 
 and the soldier's trade of nuu'h of their hold upon tl?,e inuigi- 
 nation. Waterloo or Trafalgar must have been a superb and 
 enthralling sight. Cannae and Actium must have been still 
 more so. But Sedan, as painted by Zola, has nothing in it 
 superb or enthralling. It is a prosaic scene of scientific 
 butchery. As to the " plumed troop " of Life Guards, it is 
 now of no more use than ;;he Beefeaters, and is probably 
 maintained upon the same grounds. 
 
 By the introduction of the new and long-range Aveapons a 
 ne V advantage has apparently been given to the defence over 
 the attack. Tliis is in favour of the invaded, and against the 
 invader. It does not seem, however, that the change of 
 weapons has diminished the ascendancy of discipline; fighting 
 as a skirmisher needing even more discipline than fighting in 
 line or in column. The hope of political enthusiasts, that 
 long-range rifles will be the death of standing armies is, there- 
 fore, not likely to be fulfilled. 
 
 Arbitration has now been so often employed and with so 
 much success, as to raise very liigh the hopes of its advocates. 
 Yet apparently there are still limits to its operation. Reso- 
 lute ambition or fierce passion would hardly yield to it. Nor 
 (!an it be expected that the strong will always forego its pre- 
 rogative and allow every question to be settled by a tribunal 
 before which they would stand on a level with the weak. 
 
 ;■ I. 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
•^"mmmmmm 
 
 wmmtmm. 
 
 mn 
 
 I'- i I 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 It is not necessary, in entering upon this question, to dilate 
 on its sentimental side. Nothing can add force or tenih'rness 
 to the names of wife and home. Suffice it to say, that man 
 cannot Avithhold from woman anything that is good foi' her, 
 or give her anything that is bad for her, without injuring 
 himself and their children in the same measure. 
 
 Shall man make over to woman half of the sovereign power 
 which has hitherto been his, and which, if he chooses, he can 
 keep? This is the question broadly stated. Woman, in mak- 
 ing the demand, shows confidence in man's affection. The 
 rule by which the question is to be settled is the joint interest 
 whicli the two sexes have in good government, not any abstract 
 claim of right. For an abstract claim of right tliere appears 
 to be no foundation. Power which is natural carries with it 
 right, though it is subject to the restraints of (!onscience. 
 AVeakness cannot be said to have a right to artificial power, 
 though the concession of sucli power within reasonable limits 
 may be not only kind l)ut wise, just, and beneficial to humanity 
 and civilisation. That to Avhich every member of a commu- 
 nity, whether man, woman, or child, whether white or 
 black, whether abov^ or below the age of twenty-one, has a 
 right, is the largest attainable measure of good government. 
 If this or any other political change would be conducive to 
 good government, the whole community has a right to it; if 
 it would not, the whole community, including the women, or 
 those, whoever they may be, wliom it is proposed to enfran- 
 chise, have a right to a refusal of the cliange. The number of 
 women who have spontaneously asked for the change ap])ears 
 to be small; and its smallness is ii, portant as an index of 
 
 183 
 
184 
 
 (21 KS'I'IONS OF TIIK DAV. 
 
 1(1' 
 
 >A:\- 
 
 
 woman's t'et'liug respecting her own interest, lint were? the 
 nnmber larger, it wonhl still be inennibent on the present 
 holders of power before abdicating to consider whether in the 
 common interest their abdication was to be desired. 
 
 As to the ecj^nality of tht^ sexes, no question is necessarily 
 raised; they may be perfectly e(|ual thougli their spheres are 
 different, that of the man being public life, that of the woman 
 the home. Xor is there any occasion for pitting male or 
 female gifts or qualities together. Supposing woman even 
 to be superior, it does not follow that the field of her superi- 
 ority is public life. 
 
 That the tendency of civilisation has been to elevate woman 
 is true. But elevation is a different thing from assimilation to 
 man. We are told, not so much by women, perhaps, as by 
 their champions, that the time for protection and chivalry has 
 past and the time for justice has come, liut it is not made 
 evident that bare justice, wiiich regulates the relations between 
 man and man, would suit the relation between man and woman, 
 or that chivalry and protection on the one side, with the corre- 
 sponding recognition of tlier<i on the other, do not in this 
 case constitute justice. 
 
 The movement in favour of woman suffrage is part of a 
 general attempt to change the relations between the sexes, to 
 set Avoman free from what hitherto have been considered 
 the limitations of her sex, and make her the competitor 
 instead of the helpmate of man. Women are making their 
 way into the male professions, including that of law, into the 
 dissecting-room, in company Avith the male students, into male 
 places of education, and even into the smoking-room. 8onie 
 of them have taken to riding astride.^ The Kevolt of woman, 
 as one of the leaders called it, is part of the ferment of a 
 revolutionary age in which the foundations of authority are 
 shaken by the decay of the old beliefs on Avhicli public order 
 as Avell as personal morality has hitherto rested, and by the 
 political disturbance which has accompanied the final deca- 
 
 1 See Mrs. E. Lynn Linton, on women as social insurgents, in the 
 Nineteenth Century of October, 1891. 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGK. 
 
 185 
 
 dence of the hereditary principle of government and the 
 advent of democracy. 
 
 One of the features of a revohitionary era, is the prevalence 
 of a feeble facility of abdication. The holders of power, 
 however natural and legitimate it may be, are too r(>ady to 
 resign it on the first demand. Tliey do not take time to con- 
 sider whether their power is rightful or not, whether it has 
 or has not on the whole been used for good, whether, if in 
 any case it has not been used for good, they cannot amend 
 their course, or whether it is likely to be better employed by 
 those to whom they are called upon to transfer it. The nerves 
 of authority are shaken by the failure of conviction. It is an 
 inevitable consequence of the demagogic system that every 
 demand for the suffrage, reasonable or unreasonable, should 
 prevail as soon as it shows strength, because the politician is 
 afraid by opposition to make an enemy of the coming vote. 
 
 It is evident that sexual revolution must have its limita- 
 tions if the human race is to continue. There are some land- 
 marks of nature which cannot be removed, and the females of 
 every species must be the organs of its peri)etuation. Women 
 must bear and nurse children; and if they do this, it is 
 impossible that they should compete with men in occupations 
 which demand complete devotion as well as superior strength 
 of muscle or brain. There appears to be a tendency among 
 the leaders of the Revolt of woman to disparage matrimony 
 as a bondage, and the rearing of children as an aim too low 
 for an intellectual being. Such ideas are not likely to spread 
 widely, or they would threaten the life of the race. They 
 prevail chiefly in the highly educated and sentimental classes, 
 not in the homes of labour. If it is a question of right, 
 children have their rights as well as women. They have not 
 less right to motherly care than they and their mother have 
 to being fed by the husband's labour. 
 
 At present the demand in England is only for the enfran- 
 chisement of spinsters and widows. But this limitation, 
 while it betrays a consciousness that there would be danger 
 to the peace and order of the family, is understood to be merely 
 
186 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 ■ fl 
 
 h: I 
 
 
 ^,1 
 
 I :, 'I 
 
 a strctki! of tiictics. Widow luid s]»iiistor suffrage is tiie thin 
 edge of the wedge. From the political point of view there 
 would be manifest absurdity and wrong in making marriage 
 politieally penal, and exeluding from the franehise the very 
 women Avho are eommonly htdd to be best disc^harging the 
 duties of their sex, and would be likely to be its fairest 
 rejtresentatives. Already the tlioroughgoing section of the 
 party re[m(liates the limitation. The spinster and widow vote 
 would b(! an irresistil)le lever whenever ])olitieal })arties were 
 nearly balanced. When the suffrage had been conceded to 
 all women, as the women slightly outnumber the men, and 
 many of the men, sailors, for example, or men employed on 
 railways, or in itinerant callings, could not go to the poll, 
 the woman's vote would preponderate, and government, if it 
 was in unison with the votes, would be more female than male. 
 Nor is it by the leaders and chief authors of the movement 
 intended that we should stop lun-e. The woman of the politi- 
 cal i^latform does not limit her ambition to a vote. She wants 
 to sit in Parliament or in Congress. When she gains her 
 first point she will have practically established her claim to 
 the next; those who are qualilied to give a mandate, she will 
 say, are qualified to bear it; those who are qualified to decide 
 principles of legislation are qualified to legislate; those who 
 are qualified to dictate a policy are qualified to carry it into 
 effect. It might shock our prejudices at first to see a woman 
 taking pav": in Parliamentary debate. It shocks our preju- 
 dices at first to see her taking part in a faction fight, mount- 
 ing the ]iulpit, or thundering from a platform, as well as 
 to see her in half male attire, or riding in man's fashion. 
 Established sentiment and old ideas of delicacy have been 
 already set aside. The female aspirant to a seat in Parlia- 
 ment or Congress, and to a place in the Cabinet will have, 
 therefore, little difficulty in proving her claim. She will 
 have no difficulty whatever in enforcing it. That, the Avoman's 
 vote w^ill do for her. A tenth part of the AVoman's vote Avould 
 do it for her if the parties were nearly balanced and the poli- 
 ticians Avere alarmed. I'olitics under the party system are 
 
WOMAN si:ffua(;k. 
 
 1S7 
 
 one ileinaj^ogie auetion, and an inovitable slide down liill. 
 In the L'nited States, where all (inaliHcations for the suffrage 
 otl'er than tliat of simple citizensliip have heen abolished or 
 practically nullified, female suffrage, like male suffrage, would 
 no doul)t be universal. That the change thus presents itself 
 at_ once in its full extent may partly account for the general 
 conservatism of the American peo})le on this subje(!t. J>ut 
 there is also the safeguard of the s^jceial process whi(^h is 
 re([uired in the States as well as in the Federation for amend- 
 ments of the Constitution, and which enforces the submission 
 of the question to a constituency beyond the range of the arts 
 and influences to which individual legislators are apt to yicdd. 
 Political power has hitherto been exercised by the male 
 sex; not because man has been a tyrannical usurper and has 
 brutally thrust his weaker partner out of her rights, but in the 
 course of nature, because man alom; could uphold government 
 and enforce the law. Let the edifice of law be as moral and 
 as intellectual as you will, its foundation is the force of tlie 
 community, and the force of the community is male. Women 
 have not yet thought of claiming the employment of police- 
 men, soldiers, or any function for which force is required. 
 This fundamental fact may be hidden from sight for the 
 moment by the clouds of emotional rhetoric, but it will assert 
 itself in the end. Laws passed by the woman's vote will be 
 felt to have no force behind them. Women are the great 
 prohibitionists, having only too strong inducements, many 
 of them, to support any supposed antidote to drunkenness, and 
 not seeing that the taste of a man engaged in heavy labour 
 and exposed to the weather for the stimulus of wine or beer 
 may be as natural as the taste of his home-keeping partner 
 for tea. With wonuin suffrage we should certainl}' have pro- 
 hibition. Prohibitionists advocate woman suffrage on that 
 account. Behind prohibition of strong drinks begins to 
 loom prohibition of tobacco. We have had proposals from 
 Avomen to extend capital punishment to eases of o\itrage on 
 their sex. Would the stronger sex obey such laws when it 
 was known that they were enacted by the weak? Would it 
 
1 ' ' 
 
 188 
 
 QUKSTFONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 II ^ 
 
 r 
 
 obey any laws inauilostly carried hy tlit! tVmaln vote in the 
 intiTi'st oi' tlu! women against that of the men? If it would 
 not, the result would be contempt lor the law and anarchy, 
 which would not l)e likely to enure to the advantage of the 
 weak. ^lan would l)e tempted to resist woman's government 
 when it galled him, not only by the consciousness of his 
 strength, but l)y his pride, which would make itself heard in 
 tlie end, thougli its voice lor a time might be stilled by senti- 
 mental declamation. " In muscle," says the lleport of .Mr. 
 lUair's Committee of the United States Senate in 1889, 
 "wonum is inferior to man. IJut muscle has nothing to do 
 with legislation or •government. In intellect she is man's 
 efpuil, in character she is, by his own admission, his superior 
 and constitutes the ang(dic portion of humanity." We have 
 seen reason for thinking that nuiscle has something to do, if 
 not with the acts of legislatures or governments, with that 
 which gives those acts their force. 
 
 In Dahomey there are female warriors. There may have 
 been Amazons in primitive times. But in tiie civilised world 
 the duty of defending the country in war falls on the male 
 sex alone, and it would seem that there ought to be some 
 connection between that duty and political power. To tliis it is 
 answered that not all men perform the duty, and that women 
 as well as men contribute as taxpayers to the support of the 
 army. In some countries, as in Germany, all men of military 
 rge are, and in every country they ought to be, liable to mili- 
 tary service. But everywhere the responsibility rests on the 
 men, who would have to meet the necessity if it aro^e. That 
 some nn'U are old or disqualitied for arms signifies nothing; 
 political rules must be general and disregard exceptional 
 eases. That the women, or such of them as have property 
 of their own, contribute to the expense of the army, is an 
 argument hardly in point unless it is used to found a claim for 
 exemption from contribution, any more than the argument 
 which has also been used that they give their husbands and 
 sons t(» the military service of the State. The question is 
 about the cpuilities of the sex. At the same time it would be 
 
 I 
 
WOMAN Sl'FFUA(JK. 
 
 I Si) 
 
 a mistako to think that lemale iiilors have hccii avi'r.sL' Iroia 
 war, ami that il' the i)o\ver wore in rcmali! hands war wuuhl 
 bo no more. Women are apt to be warlike because their 
 responsibility is less. In tlie South(>rn States at the time of 
 Secession no partisans of the war were tiereer than tla; women. 
 Few male rulers have been more bellicose than Catherine of 
 liussia, Elizabetli (.^ueen of Spain (the 'I'ernuigant, as she was 
 called), Maria Theresa of Austria, Madame de I'ompadour, 
 and the Empress Eug'enie. Nor is it unlikely that female 
 sentiment might be in favour of some war when male senti- 
 ment or prudence was against it. French wonu-n might have 
 voted for a crusade in aid of the Pope. English women might 
 have voted for armed intervention in favour of the Queen (f 
 ^»u})les, whose heroism touched their inuiginations at the time. 
 AVoiild tlie men obey? Would they shoulder their nuisket ■; 
 and march or bid the army march';' They would not, md 
 here again law and govvnment would break down. 
 
 Besides, the transfer of ))o>ver from th(^ militaiy to tl:e 
 unmilitary S( involves a change in the character of a nation. 
 It involves, in short, national emasculation. What would 
 be the fate of a comnuiuity in some dire extremity if it were 
 largely ruled by its women? Philanthropy, theosoi)hy, and 
 utopianism have not yet triumphed. This is the age of IHs- 
 nuirck, of the Franco-Prussian war, of the War of Secession. 
 How would the North have fared in its conflict with the South 
 if, at each turn of the wavering and desperate struggle, it had 
 been swayed by the emotions of its Avonum? One of the 
 ladies Avhose evidence was taken before ^Iv. Blair's Committee, 
 admitted that, in the days of force, when women needed the 
 protection of man, nuile government may have been justih- 
 able; but these, she said, were piping times of peace. Pip- 
 ing times of peace, when America is paying the pension list 
 of an enormous war and Europe has millions of men in arms! 
 Woman does not in civilised countries need the protection of 
 the individual man except as policeman or escort. But she 
 does need, or may at any time need, the armed protection of 
 the male sex as a whole. 
 
 * 
 
m 
 
 11)0 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 W;'i 
 
 h ■ ' 
 
 We have liacl succossiv^e exten: Ions of tluit which is called 
 liberty, but ouylit, if we would think clearly, to be called politi- 
 cal power; for a man may have liberty without a vote and a 
 vote without liberty. But hitherto the changes, though some 
 of them have been blind and dangerous enough, have im- 
 perilled only the State. The change now projjoscd vitally 
 affects the family, which, until the Socialists have their way, 
 will be of fully as nmch consequence to us as the State. It is 
 easy to draw ideal pictures of husband and wife agreeing to 
 differ on political questions, going at elections to o[)posite 
 committee-rooms, perhaps speaking on op])osite platforms, 
 voting on opposite sides, and then returning to a blissful 
 heartli, witli harniony and affection unimpaired. This ideal 
 might be realised in the case of such a couple as ^Ir. and ^Irs. 
 John Stuart jMill. But what are the effects of a faction tight 
 on the tempers of ordinary humanity? AVould unbroken 
 harmony now prevail between a Unionist husband and a 
 Gladstonian wife? Hitherto the family has been a unit 
 represented in the State by its head, and whatever storms 
 may have raged in the commonwealth, the peace and order of 
 the home have remained usually undisturbed. A change which 
 throws the family into the political caldron calls surely for 
 sjjecial consideration. In political and economical discussion 
 our attention is commonly turned to wealtli, education, or 
 some factor of our being which is increased or diminished by 
 government or legislation. We seldom think so distinctly as 
 we ought how large a measure of hap])iness as well as of 
 excellence depends upon affection. A man who prized his 
 home would probably say that if it was thought lit that his 
 wife should have the vote instead of himself, she might have 
 it, but that he protested against any proposal to givo the 
 family more tluui one vote. 
 
 Caution is the more necessary since it is clear that party has 
 laid hold of this question. Each party, or a section of each 
 party in England, fancies that it would gain by the change. 
 Some Conservatives believe that the nature of woman is 
 conservative, and that she would vote under the influence of 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGK. 
 
 191 
 
 traditional sentiment, perliaps also under that ot" hei priest. 
 The late leader of the Conservatives in England was in favour 
 of enfranchising the women, as he was in favour of enfranchis- 
 ing the proletariat, with the same expectation of vt)tes. But 
 Conservatives who play this game should remember that the 
 conservative woman as a rule is prol)ahly feminine and likely 
 to stay at home, while the radical woman is pretty sure to go 
 forth rejoicing to the fray. Nor would the clerical influence 
 be all on one side. Every Catholic Irishwoman would be 
 brought to the poll by the priest. Assuredly the female 
 character is not unsusceptible of revolutionary violence. 
 France saw the Maenads of the llevolution, and has had her 
 Louise Michel. In New York a female enthusiast has just 
 been inciting the destitute to armed violence and public 
 rapine. However this may be, when party lays its hand on 
 the home, those who care for the home more than for party 
 receive a warning to be on tlieir guard. 
 
 Previous extensions of the suffrage have been to an unrepre- 
 sented class, and a class which might plead that its special 
 interest would suffer by want of representation, though possi- 
 bly in some cases those interests were likely to suffer as inuch 
 by the influence of enfranchised ignorance on government as 
 by any class bias. But women are not a class, they are a sex. 
 Their class interests throughout the scale are identical with 
 those of the man, and effectually represented by the nude vote. 
 It would probably be imi)ossilde to devise a case in which a 
 legislature dealing with female interests in regard to property, 
 taxation, or any other subject, coidd be mishMl by motives 
 of class. If property held by Avomen is taxed without being 
 represented, so is that htdd by men, in the United States aljso- 
 lutely, and in England, saving only the trifling amount of 
 property still required as a qualification for tlie suffrage. 
 
 Have women as a sex any wrt)ngs which male legislatures 
 cannot be expected to redress, so that in order to obtain redress 
 it is necessary that there shall be an abdication by num of 
 the sovereign power? If there ar-^ whether in England or 
 the United States, let them l)c nanu'd. Named liitherto they 
 
r 
 
 mmmmmmmmmm 
 
 V 1 ! 
 11 : I ; 
 
 is 
 
 
 
 
 It'T 
 
 192 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAV. 
 
 have not been. The law regarding the property of married 
 women has been so far reformed in the interests of the wife, 
 that, instead of being unduly favourable to the husband, it 
 seems ratlier inspired by mistrust of him. The practice is 
 still more so. It is becoming the custom to tie up a woman's 
 projierty, on marriage, so that she shall not be able, even if she 
 is so inclined, to make provision for her husbaiul, in case he 
 survives her, in old age, and save him from the necessity of 
 receiving alms from his own children. The lawyers natu- 
 rally are active in the work whicli nmltiplies legal relations 
 and interests. About everything has been done which civil 
 legislation could do to impress the wife with the belief that 
 her interest and that of her husband are not only separate but 
 adverse; that she does not leave her father's home Avhen she 
 is married; tliat her husband is not one flesh with her; and 
 that all her relations by blood are nearer to her, in interest at 
 all events, than the man on whose breast slie lays her head. 
 Matrimonial superstition has been effectually rebuked by 
 enabling husband and wife to sue each other. The laws of 
 jVlassaehusetts discriminate in favour of womcR by exemi)ting 
 umuarried women of small estate from taxation; by allowing 
 Avomen and not men to acquire a settlement without paying 
 a tax; by compelling husbands to support their wives, but 
 exempting the wife, even wlien rich, from supporting an indi- 
 gent husband; by making men liable for debts of wives, and 
 not vice versa. ^ Legal reformers are able to boast that they have 
 "emancipated woman from the domination of her husband." 
 They must not forget that the domination carries with it main- 
 tenance and protection wliieliAvill not be given without return. 
 Make the marriage contract too onerous to one party, and that 
 l)arty will some day begin to think of emancipation. If he 
 does he is the stronger, Xotliing can alter that fact or its 
 practical significance in the long run. Of this the leaders of 
 the Kevolt of Woman Avill do well to take note. That the 
 administration of the law has been unfavourable to women, few 
 
 1 See Minoritii licport of Mr. lilair's Committee of the Senate of the 
 United States, Febiiuiry, 1880, p. 14. 
 
WOMAN SUKFTIAGK. 
 
 103 
 
 ( 
 
 of the 
 
 Avill contend. In jury cases, at least, the tlitRculty is not lor 
 women to get justice against men, but for men to get justice 
 against women. It is doubtful wlietlier tlic introduction of 
 women into the jury-box, for which woman-suffragists con- 
 tend, could make juries more partial to women than tlioy are. 
 If it did, the failure of justice would be monstrous indeed. 
 In criminal cases mercy has been shown to women. " Since 
 I have been in Parliament," said John l^right, ''I think 1 
 could specify nearly a score of instances in which the lives of 
 women Avould be spared where the lives of men would be 
 taken." Can it be believed that the efforts which have been 
 made to save Mrs. Maybrick from punishment would have 
 been made in favour of a husband convicted of the murder of 
 his wife? There is no reason for this partiality except one, 
 which implies a radical difference between the sexes and the 
 Avillingness of the weaker sex to accept the protection of the 
 stronger. 
 
 Does the grievance consist in any bar to the competition of 
 women Avith men in tlie professions or trades? Such bars 
 have by male legislation been largely removed. We have 
 female doctors of medicine everywhere, and if their practice 
 is limited, it is because women themselves in the graver cases 
 seem still to put more confidence in men. Women are being 
 admitted to tlie law. To their addressing themselves to the 
 feelings of juries tliere seems to be an objection apart from 
 d(dicacy, if justice is the object of courts. They have been 
 admitted into male universities, avc shall presently see with 
 Avhat effect on tlie masculine cliaracter of the system, while, in 
 spite of the principle on whi"li coeducation is based, female 
 colleges are not yet tlirown cpen to men. They have got the 
 school-teacherships largely into their hands; with doubtful 
 benefit, whatever theorists may say, to tlie characters and 
 manners of the boys, (lovernment clerkships and offices of 
 all kinds are now filled with women, wlio are thus made inde- 
 peiulent of marriage, though this cannot be done without at 
 the same time Avithdrawing employment from men Avho might 
 have maintained women as their Avives. It is complained 
 
^^H 
 
 mmmm 
 
 mmm 
 
 104 
 
 QlESriONS OV TlIK DAY. 
 
 i 
 
 l< ' ; I 
 
 that fomalo workers are underpaid, and female claimants of 
 the fran(^hise say tliat if tliey had power, they would legislate 
 so as to raise woman's wages. Legislation of this kind would 
 require supplementary enaetments forbidding employers and 
 capital to go out of the trade. But are women underpaid? 
 Are they paid less than the men when their work is of equal 
 value? It may be that in some cases custom has been unjust 
 to them, as it often is to male Avorkers also. This time 
 will redress. It is only the ligliter trades that Avomen can 
 ply, and a needlewoman can hardly expect to be paid like 
 an engine-driver or a stevedore. In some trades certain con- 
 tinuance is an element of value, and certain continuance is 
 impossible for woman unless she renounces marriage. Fash- 
 ionable dressmakers, female artists, singers, and actresses are 
 not underpaid. The gains of prima donnas are enormous; 
 their rapacity is notorious, and they stint without compunc- 
 tion the inferior performers of their own sex. 
 
 A proof of man's injustice to woman commonly cited was 
 the difference made in the treatment of the two sexes in 
 regard to infidelity. The law can hardly now be said to be 
 unjust; tliat the social penalty should be the same in both 
 cases is not to be expected, for the simple reason that the 
 offence is not the same. Tiie sin of tlie woman is a sin not 
 only against her partner, but against the family, into which 
 she brings an adulterine child. A pointsman and the man 
 who tends a furna(!e may alike fall asleep at their posts with- 
 out any difference in their moral guilt, but one lets a fire go 
 out, the other wrecks a train. All the legislation and all the 
 language on the subject of seduction assume that the blame 
 rests entirely on the man, though there are cases in Avhich he 
 is more the seduced than the seducer, and in no case where 
 the woman is grown up and is consenting can the guilt be 
 wholly on one side. 
 
 Mr. Blair's Report indeed proclaims that "Avithout the 
 exercise of the natural and inalienable right of suffrage neither 
 life, liberty, nor property can be secured." If by liberty is 
 meant the exercise of political poAver, that part of the allega- 
 
WOMAX SrFFHA(;K. 
 
 l'J5 
 
 tion is undeniably ti'ut!. To say tliat ncitlior life nor property 
 can be secure without the sutfragi; would be to 'say that no 
 security for life or property has existed in any country in 
 Europe till within the last century, except in Switzerland and 
 England, nor for the great majority of the people in England. 
 To the ordinary observer it appears not only that the lives, 
 liberties, and properties of American women are secure, but 
 that they are more secure, if anything, than those of the men; 
 and that the attitude of men in the United States toward 
 women is rather that of subjection than tliat of domination. 
 " Actual and practical slavery," which one of the ladies who 
 gives evidence declares to be the condition of woman without 
 the ballot, has certainly in the case of the American slave 
 disguised itself in very deceptive forms. "Xo one," says 
 another lady, " has denied to women the right of burial, and 
 in that one sad necessity of human life they stand on an equal 
 footing with men." Such language seems to mock our under- 
 standings. Comparisons of the condition of woman denied 
 the suffrage with that of the Negro in the South, have often 
 been made, and in tiiis report we are told that the exclusion 
 of women from a convention " constituted the startling reve- 
 lation of a real subjection of woman to man world-wide and 
 in many respects as complete and galling, when analysed and 
 duly considered by its victims, as that of tlie Xegro to his 
 master." Tlie Xegro, nevertheless, would not have been sorry 
 to change conditions. The papers the other day gave an 
 account of a raid made upon a place where liquor was sold, by 
 a party of women in masks, who beat the proprietor with 
 clubs. Several such acts of violence on the part of women 
 have been recorded; but they are committed {i])parently not 
 only with impunity but with general approbation. Kesistance 
 to them appears to be proscribed. American women, also, 
 seem to use the cowhide whenever they think lit to avenge 
 their personal wrongs. These are not practices in which the 
 Negro was allowed to indulge toward his master before eman- 
 cipation, or in which he has even been allowed to indulge 
 since. If the men of the United States were called to account 
 
i 
 
 (1 
 
 i. 
 
 ■i 
 
 1 
 
 ! 
 
 ^=mi^^gmmm 
 
 \m 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 'f^; 
 
 (ffi. 
 
 I' 
 
 fur their treatiiient of the Avomen, and the women at the same 
 time for the performance of their special duty to the race, it 
 seems donhtful, at hnist supposing that America • writers on 
 these subjects tell the truth, whether before an impartial 
 tribunal judgment would go against the men. 
 
 Against wife-beating, or cruelty of any sort to wives, which 
 is commonly confined to the dregs of the people, the law 
 s(Mnns now severe enough; if it were more than severe enough 
 it would be in danger of becoming a dead letter. ]Male bru- 
 tality finds vent in bodily outrage, which can be reached by 
 law. The bad wife can make her husband's home misera- 
 ble by vexations wiiich no law can reach. JMany years ago an 
 English clergyman was convicted of the murder of his wife, 
 but his sentence was commuted when it was learned what his 
 life had been. A man in England narrowly escaped impi-is- 
 onment as a felon on a false charge of uttering base coin, cast 
 on him by the machinations of a perfidious wife wlio wanted 
 to live with lier paramour. Law could have done nothing 
 in the first case, practically could do nothing in the second. 
 Children are less able to make their wrongs known tlian are 
 women, yet eases not seldom come to light of cruel ill- 
 treatment of children by women, especially by step-mothers. 
 These cases, like those of wife-beating, are hideous. We 
 punish the criminals Avhen we can. But we do not propose 
 to alter domestic relations. AVe trust, and in the immense 
 majority of cases with reason, to affection, which is stronger 
 than law. That affection is stronger than law is a fact often 
 forgotten in dealing with these questions. It seems to be 
 tliought that the Statute Book is all. Nothing in the Statute 
 I)Ook, it has been truly said, prevents the most courteous of 
 hosts from turning his guests out of his house at midnight in 
 a storm. 
 
 That the man should exercise authority over his household 
 will become unnatural and unjust when he ceases to be held 
 responsible for the household. At present the State casts upon 
 him \]\e undivided responsibility. What the leaders of the 
 woman's rights movement practically seek is, for the woman 
 
 I 
 
 
WOMAN SUFFRACJK. 
 
 197 
 
 power without responsibility, for the man, responsil)ility with- 
 out power. But this is an arrangement in whicli man, though 
 he nuiy be talked into it for the moment, is not likely in the 
 end to acquiesce. 
 
 Is the marriage tie still too tight? ^ Is divorce not easy 
 enough? One would think that divorce was easy enough in 
 America, when in some States you have a divorce for every 
 ten marriages, wnen a judge at Chicago can dissolve eight mar- 
 riages in sixty-two minutes, when wedlock is beginning to be 
 talked of as an experiment which may be terminated if it is 
 not found pleasant to both sides. '■^ Mormonism, if its poly- 
 gamy is denounced, lias matter for a retort. American legisla- 
 tures themselves are beginning to recoil. In Great Britain 
 divorce is not so easy, yet it is surely not too difficult if the 
 marriage tie is to be preserved. The children, who cinnot 
 fail to suffer by tlie wreck of the family, are entitled to con- 
 sideration as well as the parents. Society at large is entitled 
 to consideration. Though marriages are made not in heaven 
 but on efirth, it may safely be said tliat the great majority of 
 them n.re happy; at least tliat the partners are happier imited 
 than they would have been alone. But their success depends, 
 in ordinary cases, on the permanence of tlie bond, which 
 enforces restraint of temper and mutual accommodation. If 
 divorce Avere always open, compatibility would be seldom 
 found ; the bond would be broken l)y the unscrupulous as often 
 as matrimony failed to realise the dreams of courtship. It 
 is easy to paint horrible pictures of unwilling union after 
 mutual disappointment. Such things do happen, and very 
 tragical and deplorable they are. The remedy is caution 
 before marriage, not the virtual overthrow of an institution 
 
 1 See MonaCaird's articles in the Fortniijhthj (Vol. liii) and Wesitminater 
 Rcmcics (Vol. cxxx). See also Mill's The Subjection of Wnmaii, Chap. ii. 
 
 2 It seems that the largest number of divorces are found in the com- 
 munities w!»ere the advocates of female suffrage are most numerous, and 
 where the individuality of woman in relation to her husband, which such 
 a doctrine inculcates, is greatest. The movement, therefore, or at least 
 the tendencies, appear to be connected. See Minority Report, p. 10. 
 
n '•« ' 
 
 ..I 
 
 198 
 
 (QUESTIONS OF TUK DAY. 
 
 on which, so far as we can see, the order, purity, and happi- 
 ness of society depend.' 
 
 Marriage may be (U'scribed from one point of view as a re- 
 straint im])osed upon tht' passions of tlie man for the benelit 
 of tlie woman. Cohl-blooded philosophers clioose to speak of 
 the sexual passion in man as brutal. jVIighty it is; it is no 
 more brutal than any other passion or appetite gratification 
 of which is necessary to the preservation of life and the race. 
 It is the physical basis of sentiments, the most beautiful and 
 refined. At all events it is in most natures imperious. Were 
 it not, man could luirdly be induced to take on him the burden 
 of wife and children. Being imperious, ii, will Ije gratified, 
 if not by marriage, in other ways, and woman would not be 
 the gainer by the change. 
 
 The matrinumial history of Shelley is instructive and full 
 of warning because he was so highly refined, and raised so 
 much above the animal passions of ordinary men. Shelley, 
 as his admiring biographer frankly tells us, finding after 
 some two years or more of nuirriage, that liis Harriet "did 
 not suit him," though slif "had given no cause whatsoever 
 for repudiation by breach or tangible neglect of wifely 
 duty," cast her off in an "abrupt de facto" manner and 
 took Alary to his arms. jMary, of course, was of the same 
 opinion. "Shelley," says the biographer, "was an avowed 
 opponent on principle to the formal and coercive tie of 
 marriage; therefore in ceasing his marital connection with 
 Harriet, and assuming a similar relation to Mary, he did 
 nothing which he regarded as wrong, though as far as any- 
 thing yet published goes, it must distinctly be said that he 
 consulted his own option rather than Harriet's." The bio- 
 grapher asserts that Harriet, after the separation, connected 
 herself with some other protector, a charge which, it is to be 
 
 1 Reference cannot be made to this momentous subject without ac- 
 knowledjfin<!; the p;reat service rendered to society by tlie Rev. Samuel W, 
 Dike, LL.D., Corresponding Secretary of the United States National 
 Divorce Reform League, whose laborious investigations have brought the 
 facts before us. 
 
WOMAN SL'FFHAGE. 
 
 I'jy 
 
 )i- 
 
 presumed, he would not make witlioiit knowing it to be true, 
 and the trutli of which would not in any way mend the case. 
 Legislation on these lines would suit some men better than 
 any woman.* It did not suit poor Harriet. 
 
 It ai)pears that in tlu; series of legislative reforms whieii in 
 the course of a century has been bringing Europe finally out 
 of the feudal system, wirh its quasi-military relations, and 
 with the vestiges of tribalism which lingered in it, into the 
 system of modern society, the interests of both sexes have 
 been embra(;ed, and tiiat of the female sex has had its full 
 share. This, as the legislatures were male, seems to prove 
 not only that nuMi in legislating are unlikely to forget their 
 wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters, but that women with- 
 out votes can exercise great influence on legislation. Tlie 
 press is open to them, it is powerful, and not a few of them 
 make use of it. The platform is open to as many of tliem as 
 do not shrink from its piUdicity. They have access under the 
 most favourable conditions to those by whom the law is made. 
 That they have confidence in the justice and affection of men 
 their present appeal, as has been said before, shows ; for it is 
 from man's free will that they must expect the cession of the 
 suffrage: some of tliem, it is true, threaten society with a 
 terrible vengeance if their petition is not heard, but they 
 are powerless to give effect to their threats. They will 
 renounce their present influence in grasping the vote. Let 
 them appear as a separate interest in the politic^al arena, and 
 they will, like every other separate interest, awaken an 
 antagonism which does not now exist. 
 
 The plain question then presents itself in the joint interest 
 of the two sexes, whether tlu; exercise of politi{!al pov/er by 
 women would be generally conducive to good government. If 
 it would not, the concession, it must be repeated, would be a 
 Avrong done to the whole community. We know very well 
 
 1 See Mr. William Michael Rossetti's Memoir prefixed to his edition of 
 Shelley's Poetical Works, London : Moxon, 1870. I am aware that 
 different versions have been given, but there can be no dispute about the 
 main facts. 
 
200 
 
 CiLlibTlO^b UF THE DAY. 
 
 ■I 
 
 tli.'it in some gifts uiul (qualities woman is superior to man. 
 Suppose she is suian'ior to him on the whole. Suppose, to 
 adojtt the scnnewhat amatory hinguage of Mr, lilair's Com- 
 mittee, she is the angelic portion of humanity. It does not 
 follow that she is politieal any nujre tluin num is nuiternal or 
 adapted for housekeei)ing. >ior is the absence of political 
 qualities a disgrace to her any more than the absence of 
 maternal or housekeeping (qualities is to him. Difference of 
 spheres, the spheres V)eing e(iual in importance, implies no 
 disparagement. As a rule, it is in the affections and graces 
 that wcuuan is strong; and these, the affections at least, though 
 they nuiy be worth more than the practical qualities needed in 
 politics, are not the practical qualities. But the training also 
 is wanting. Tlie political wisdom of men in general, to what- 
 ever it nuiy amount, is formed by daily contact and collision 
 with the world in which they have to gain their bread and 
 Avhich impresses upon tliem in its rough school caution, pru- 
 dence, the necessity of compromise, the limitations of their 
 will. Some of them are flighty enough after all, and the world 
 just now is in no small peril from their ilightiness. But their 
 general tendency as a sex is to be commonplace and practi- 
 cal. Their life usually is more or less public, while that of 
 woman is in the home. jNForeover, they feel as a sex the full 
 measure of responsibility in public action. This is not felt 
 so strongly by their partners. If rash measures get the com- 
 munity into trouble, it is by the men that it must be got out 
 again. To them it will fall to pull the waggon through the 
 slough. The exception taken to female legislators, or Minis- 
 ters of State, or judges, on account of the interruptions of the 
 nursery might be met by appointing only spinsters or widows. 
 But it would be impossible, Avithout total change of sentiment, 
 to hold the female legislator, minister, or judge to the full 
 measure of male responsibility. If they were called to account 
 they would plead their sex. "We are told that ladies in New 
 York objected to the appointment of education commissioners 
 of their own sex on the ground that they Avere exempted from 
 criticism by the gallantry of the men. 
 
WOMAN si:ffha(;k 
 
 m 
 
 » man. 
 ose, to 
 i Com- 
 Des not 
 rnal or 
 olitical 
 nee of 
 .■nee of 
 lies no 
 graces 
 thougli 
 eded in 
 ing also 
 ,0 wliat- 
 ;ollision 
 3ad and 
 on, pru- 
 of their 
 le world 
 [lit their 
 practi- 
 that of 
 he full 
 not felt 
 le corn- 
 got out 
 ugh the 
 r Minis- 
 is of the 
 widows, 
 iitiment, 
 the full 
 account 
 in New 
 issioners 
 ted from 
 
 It is .sup[)os('(l that women would allay the angry strife of 
 faction and rehne its coarseness by imparting their genth-ness, 
 tniKh'rness, and delicacy to i)uhli(! life. Ihit is it not Ix'cause 
 tliey liave been kept out of politics and generally out of the 
 contentious arena that they liave remained gentle, tender, and 
 delicate? ^^'eakness thrown into an exciting struggle usually 
 shows itself, not by su^jcrior gentleness, but by loss of s(df-con- 
 trol. Of this, the crusade against the ('ontagious Diseases 
 Act in England has given some proof. By the use which both 
 the i)olitical parties in England have of late been making of 
 women for electicnieering purposes, they do not seem to have 
 mitigated the fury of the fray. 
 
 "Corruption of male suffrage," says Mr. lilair's Report, "is 
 already a well-nigh fatal disease." AVould it be cured by 
 throwing in the other sex? That women would be likely by 
 taking part in public life to make it pure, that they are less 
 prone than men to favouritism, jobbery, and corruption, is 
 contrary to experience, Avhich shows that they are })rone to 
 these minor vices while they are comparatively seldom guilty 
 of the greater crimes. 
 
 In a paper prejjared at the request of an association of 
 women, which is cited in the IMinority Ileport of the Senate 
 Committee, ^Vv. Francis i*arkman says of the female politician 
 as she is and is likely to be in the United States : 
 
 " It Is not woman's virtues that woukl be prominent or influential in 
 tlie political arena, they woukl shun it by an invincible repulsion ; and 
 the opposite qualities woukl be drawn into it. The Washington lobby 
 has given us some means of judging wliat we may expect from the woman 
 •' inside politics.' If politics are to be purified by artfulness, effrontery, 
 insensibility, a pushing self-assertion, and a glib tongue, then we may 
 look for regeneration ; for the typical female politician will be richly 
 endowed with all these gifts. 
 
 "Thus accoutred for the conflict, she may fairly hope to have the bet- 
 ter of her masculine antagonist. A woman has the inalienable right of 
 attacking without being attacked in return. iShe may strike, but nuist 
 not be struck either literally or figuratively Most women refrain from 
 abusing their privilege of non-comb<atants ; but there are those in whom 
 the sense of impunity breeds the cowardly courage of the virago. 
 

 I 
 
 soi 
 
 (il'ESTTONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 1 
 ■ I 
 
 
 " Tn nokoniiif,' tlic rcsniiroos of the foiujvlo polillciiiiis, tlu-rt' is onfl 
 wliicli (■nil liy ii»> iiu'iiiis 1)1' It'ft out. Noiu! know botlrr tlian woman tlio 
 potency of feminine charms aided by feminine arts. The woman ' inside 
 politics' will lint fail to make use of an iiitliu'uee so subtle and so strong 
 and of wliidi the niauaaement is i)e{'uliariy suited to her talents. If — 
 and the coiitiiii;eii('y is in the higlx-st degree {.injbabh! — she is not gifted 
 with charms of her own, slu; will iiave no diftlculty in finding and using 
 others of he'' sex who avi'. If repoit is to be trusted, Delilah has already 
 spread her snares fur the Congressional Samson; and the power Itefore 
 whieh the wise fail and the mighty fall has been invoked against the sages 
 and heroes of the Capitol. W'iien ' woman' is fairly ' inside polities' the 
 sensation press will reap a harvest of .seaiidals more lucrative to it.self 
 than iirotitable to public mi^rals. And as the zeal of one ela.ss of female 
 reformers has been and no doubt will be largely directed to their grie- 
 vances in matters of sex, we shall have shrill-tongued discussions of sub- 
 jects which had far better be let alone. 
 
 " It may be said tliat the advocates of female .suffrage do not look to 
 political women for the purifying of politics, but to the votes of the sex at 
 large. The two, however, cannot be separated. It should be remembered 
 tiiat the (pu'stiou is not of a limited and select female .suffrage, but of a 
 universal one. To limit would be impossible. It would seek the broad- 
 est areas ami tlu? lowest depths, and spread itself through the marshes 
 and malarious pools of society." i 
 
 That some women are political and many men not, is as 
 true as it is that some men are unmilitaiy and a few women 
 are Amazons. , But this does not alter the general fact; and it 
 is upon general facts that political institutions must be founded. 
 
 Mill, appealing to history, bids us mark that so excellent 
 a judge of practical ability as Charles V. set wojnen to govern 
 the Netherlands. Chvades V. appointed women because he 
 had no males in his family to appoint. It was in fact this 
 failure of mules in dynasties, combined with the super'ti- 
 tion of hereditary right, that led to the introduction oi what 
 John Knox called "the monstrous regiment of women." 
 Cliarles' experiment was not happy, since the result was the 
 revolt of the Netherlands. Blanclie of Castile, is also cited 
 by Mill. She appears to have been a woman of masculine 
 qualities, not to say a virago, to have held her excellent but 
 rather weak-minded son in complete subjection, and to have 
 
 1 Minority Report, p. 24. 
 
 i,l: 
 

 
 1 
 
 'i 
 
 WOMAN srKFKAlii:. 
 
 ffovcriK'd with vij^'oiir iind jii(l,<,Mn<'iit as liis viccj,M'ront; but 
 tlii'i-e are cvidi'iitly two sides to her ciianieter; wliiidi ol' them 
 lirevaih'd on the whoh'. she is too remote ti'om us to (h'eide. 
 
 It' we are to |,'o to iiistory, to history let us <,'o; only reuiem- 
 herinj,' that the examples are those oi' ({ueens I'ej^iiant, or 
 women i>l;iccd hy 1 heir cii'eumstauees in positions ot power, 
 and that tiify att'ord no certain indication of what women 
 would lie when they had (dimbed to power as dema^'ogues 
 after ])assin,!s' through the party mill. 
 
 In I'^ngland, the women who have wielded powf^r legally or 
 jiractically have l)een Matilda, the (da,imant of the crown 
 against Steplien, about whom we know little, but who seems 
 to have injured jier party by her arrogance; Eleanor, the 
 jealous and intriguing Queen of Henry 11., who secured the 
 succession to her favourite ."( Jin, and whose record is not fair; 
 Isabella, the paranu)ur of Mortimer, and with him guilty of 
 the murder of Edward II.; Margaret, the Queen of Henry 
 VI., whose violeu(;e and fav(mritism helped to l)ring on the 
 War of the lioses; Mary, of whom it need only be said that 
 she was probably not a bad woman, but misled by influeiu'es 
 to which her sex is si)ecially exposed; Elizabeth; Henrietta 
 Maria, who by her feminine violence had, like ^Margaret of 
 Anjou, no small share in ]ilunging the country into civil war; 
 and (^ueen Anne, who, under personal influences and at the 
 instigation of a favourite waiting-woman, upset a great minis- 
 try and deprived the country of the fruits of a long war, 
 while, had she lived longer, her fondness for her family would 
 have probably led to an attempt to restore the Stuarts. The 
 star is Elizabeth. But Elizabeth's reputation for anything 
 but the arts of popularity in which she was supreme, has 
 suffered terribly by the researches of Motley and other recent 
 writers. Her deceitfulness, perfidy, and ingratitude to those 
 who had served her and the country best, were pretty well 
 known, as Avere her vanity and her cocjuetry. But her repu- 
 tation for statesmanship is now greatly reduced, and it is 
 clear that the country was saved not by her, but by itself; 
 from the Armada it was saved in her despite. Mr. Fronde, 
 

 mi^ 
 
 ■ 
 
 204 
 
 grESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 If' 1)1 
 
 ,5. 'Mi:: 
 
 I : . i 
 
 
 wlio set out as her fervent admirer, has in the end to say that 
 her conduct in the transaction which preceded the sailing of 
 the Arnuida " would alone suffice to disqualify Elizabeth from 
 being cited as an example of the capacity of fenuile sovereigns." 
 And when the country Avas saved, wliom did the queen select 
 for the honoiir? Whom did she prefer on this and all other 
 occasions above the great servants of the State? The good- 
 looking but worthless Leicester, "infamed," as Burleigh 
 said he was, "by the death of his wife." Her imgrateful 
 persecution of the Puritans in the latter part of her reign 
 sowed the wind from which her unhappy successors reaped the 
 whirlwind. She had the good fortune to be the crowning 
 figure of an heroic age, and her sex threw about her a ronumtic 
 halo, the brightness of whicli was enhanced by the calamities, 
 partly her bequest, which ensued. 
 
 In France the more recent list is Catherine de Medici, 
 whose name sufftces; Anne of Austria, who was in the able 
 hands of jMazarin; Madame de Maintenon, to whose female 
 piety France owed the revocation of the Edict of Xantes, 
 while to her tenderness for the Catholic Stuarts it owed a 
 great war; jNEadame de Pompadour, whose name again suffices; 
 Marie Antoinette, who, besides helping to dismiss Turgot and 
 to complete the ruin of French finances by plunging France 
 into the war of the American llevolution, did so much to bring 
 on the crash of the French llevolution that her misdeeds were 
 scarcely washed out b}^ her tears. The story is closed by the 
 influence, partly .religious, partly dynastic and domestic, 
 which, Frenchmen say, made the Franco-German Avar and 
 finislied the Avork by interfering Avith its conduct in the 
 interest of the dynasty and deterring the Emperor and his 
 army from falling back on Paris. 
 
 Isabella of Castile graced her croAvn and formed a noble 
 queen of chivalry in the Avar against the Moors. As a ruler, 
 she had Ferdinand at her side. That it Avas to her feminine 
 instinct that the genius of Columbus Avas revealed, recent 
 researches have made less certain than it is that her piety 
 established the Inquisition in Castile, and that great numbers 
 of persons were burned by it in her reign. 
 
 I;-.)-. 
 
' 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 ats 
 
 I say that 
 >ailing of 
 jetli from 
 ereigns." 
 sen select 
 all other 
 'lie good- 
 
 Burleigh 
 
 II grateful 
 lier reign 
 ft aped the 
 crowning 
 romantic 
 
 ilamities, 
 
 i Medici, 
 the able 
 ie female 
 Xantes, 
 t owed a 
 1 suffices; 
 urgot and 
 ig France 
 1 to bring 
 3eds w'ere 
 id by the 
 domestic, 
 war and 
 it in the 
 ' and his 
 
 1 a noble 
 5 a ruler, 
 feminine 
 id, recent 
 her piety 
 ; numbers 
 
 Monuments of a female influence over government more cer- 
 tainly benehceiit were tlie crosses which Edward 1. erected 
 in memory of tlie Queen who seems to liave softened his stern- 
 ness with her love, while she displayed the beauty of affection 
 on the throne. England also owes a debt of gratitude to 
 Caroline of Brunswick, by whose unambitious support Wal- 
 pole, the best statesman of an unheroic time, was kept in 
 power. Nothing need be said about queens nominally reg- 
 nant who have reigned but not governed, and whose influence 
 has been happily exertetl in the social sphere which all admit 
 to be the realm of woman. 
 
 Mill has also stated tliat Begums have shone as rulers in 
 India. He was in the India House and his authority is good, 
 though he does not give the names. It is hardly credible 
 that a woman brought up in a Zenana should be a great 
 ruler, but she might be better than a hog or a tiger. Not all 
 Begums have escaped the common influences of the Durbar. 
 We have one, styled a heroine, making away successively with 
 her father-in-law, lier husband, and her son, because they stood 
 in her way, enrolling cut-throats, and practising corruption as 
 freely as any male.^ The difference can hardly be such as to 
 give us much assurance of safety in revokitionising the rela- 
 tions between the sexes. 
 
 The writer of this paper signed, in company with John 
 Bright, John Stuart ^Mill's first petition in favour of suffrage 
 for unmarried women. ]\[r. Bright, as well as the writer, was 
 a good deal influenced by liis respect and regard for Mill. 
 Both of them afterwards changed their minds, and Bright 
 spoke strongly against the measure. The writer found that 
 the women of his acquaintance for whom lie had most respect, 
 and who seemed to him the best representatives of their sex, 
 were opposed to the change, fearing that the position and 
 privileges of women in general would be sacrificed to the 
 ambition of a few. 
 
 Since that time ]\[ill's Autobiography has appeared, and 
 
 1 See C. Forjelt's Ottr lieal Danger in India, p. 39. 
 
i 
 
 1'^ 
 
 200 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 lias revealed the history of his extraordinary and almost 
 portentous education, the singular circumstances of his mar- 
 riage, his hallucination (lor it surely can be called nothing 
 else) as to the surpassing genius of his wife, and peculiari- 
 ties of character and temperament such as could not fail to 
 prevent him from fully appreciating the power of influences 
 which, whatever our philosophy may say, reign and will con- 
 tinue to reign supreme over (questions of this kind. To him 
 marriage was a union of two philosophers in the pursuit of 
 truth, and wedded life was intellectual intercourse. In his 
 work on " The Subjection of Women " not only does he almost 
 leave maternity out of sight, but sex and its influences seem 
 hardly to be present to his mind. Of the distinctive excel- 
 lence and beauty of the female character, or of the conditions 
 essential to its preservation, it does not appear that he had 
 formed any idea, though he dilates on the special qualities of 
 the female understanding. 
 
 Mill has allowed us to see that his opinions as to the 
 political position of women were formed early in his life, 
 probably before he had studied history rationally, perhaps 
 before the rational study of history had even come into exist- 
 ence. The consequence, Avith all deference to his great name 
 be it said, is that his historical presentment of the case is 
 fundamentally unsound. He and his disciples represent the 
 lot of the woman as having always been determined by the 
 will of the man, who, according to them, has willed that she 
 should be the slave, and that he should be her master and 
 tyrant. ''Society, both in this [the case of marriage] and 
 other cases, has preferred to attain its object by foul rather 
 than by fair means; but this is the only case in wliich it has 
 substantially persisted in them even to tlie present day." 
 This is ]\Iill's fundamental assunq)tion; and from it, as 
 every rational student of history is now aware, conclusions 
 utterly erroneous as well as injurious to humanity must flow. 
 The lot of the woman has not been d(>termined by the will of 
 the man, at least in any eonsiih'rable degree. The lot both of 
 the man and of the woman has been determined from age to 
 
 rt 
 
 lif:' T 
 
 iii 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 ao7 
 
 i 
 
 age by circumstances over which the will of neither of them 
 had much control, and which n"ither could be blamed for 
 accepting or failing to reverse. Mill and his disciples 
 assume that the man has always willed that he should him- 
 self enjoy political rights, and that the woman should be his 
 slave; forgetting that it is only in a tew covmtries that man 
 does enjoy political rights, and that, even in those few coun- 
 tries, freedom is the birth almost of yesterday. It may prob- 
 ably be said that the number of men who have really and 
 freely exercised the suffrage up to the present time is not very 
 much greater than the number of those who have in different 
 ages and in various ways laid down their lives or made per- 
 sonal sacrifices of other kinds in bringing elective govern- 
 ment into existence. 
 
 In the early stages of civilisation the family was socially and 
 legally, as well as politically, a unit. Its head represented 
 the whole household before the tribe, the State, and all persons 
 and bodies witliout; while within he exercised absolute power 
 over all the members, male as well as female, over his sons as 
 well as over his wife and daughters. On the death of the 
 head of a family his eldest son stepped into his place, and 
 became the representative and protector of the whole house- 
 hold, including the widow of the deceased chief. This sys- 
 tem, long retained iu conservative Kome, was there the source 
 of the national respect for authority, and, by an expansion of 
 feeling from tlie family to the connnunity, of the patriotism 
 which produced and sustained Koman greatness. But its 
 traces lingered far down in history. It was not male tyranny 
 that authorised a Tudor queen to send nu^mbers of the royal 
 household to the Tower by her personal authority as the mis- 
 tress of tlie family, without regard to the common law against 
 arbitrary imprisonment. Such a coii;,titutiou was essential U) 
 the existence of the family in primitive tim(>s; without it the 
 germs of nations and of liumanity would have perished. To 
 suppose that it was devised l)y the nuile sex for the gratifi- 
 cation of their own tyrannical propensities, would be most 
 absurd. It was at least as much a necessity to the primitive 
 

 
 ■ i 
 
 QUESTIONS OF 'J'HE DAY. 
 
 woman as it was to the primitive man. It is still a necessity 
 tc woman in the conntries Avhere the primitive type of society 
 remains. AVhat would be the fate of a female Bedouin if she 
 were siiddenly invested with Wonum's Eights, and emanci- 
 pated from the protection of her husband? 
 
 That the present relation of women to their husbands liter- 
 ally has its origin in slavery, and is a hideous relic of that 
 system, is a theory which Mill sets forth in language such 
 as, if it could sink into the hearts of those to whom it is ad- 
 dressed, might turn affection to bitterness, and divide every 
 household against itself. Yet tliis theory is witliout historical 
 foundation. It seems indeed like a figure of invective heed- 
 lessly converted into history. Even in the most primitive 
 times, and those in whi(;h the subjection of the woman was 
 most complete, the wife was clearly distinguished from the 
 slave. The lot of Sarah is diiferent from that of Hagar; the 
 authority of Hector over Andromache is absolute, yet no one 
 can confound her position with that of her handmaidens. 
 The Roman matron who sent her slave to be crucified, the 
 Southern matron who was the fierce supporter of slavery, were 
 not themselves slaves. Whatever may now be obsolete in the 
 relations of husband and wife is not a relic of slavery, but 
 of primitive marriage, and may be regarded as at worst an 
 arrangement once indispensable which has survived its hour. 
 Where real slavery has existed, it has extended to both sexes, 
 and it has ceased for both at the same time. Even the Ori- 
 ental seclusion of women, perhaps the Avorst condition in wliich 
 the sex has ever been, has its root not in the slave-owning 
 propensity so much as in jealousy, a passion which, though 
 extravagant and detestable in its excessive manifestation, is 
 not without an element of affection. The most beautiful 
 building in the East is that which Shah Jehan raised as the 
 monument of a beloved Avife. Is it possible that an American 
 lady living in Paris on the fruits of her husband's toil at 
 New York, or looking on Avhile a porter at Saratoga toils 
 beneath her colossal trunk, should deem herself or be deemed 
 a slave? 
 
 r- ^ 
 
 li-i 
 
 ■■M 
 
 
■ 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 %m 
 
 the 
 
 If the calm and philosophic nature of ]\Iill is ever betrayed 
 into violence, it is in his denunciations of the present insti- 
 tution of marriage. He depicts it as a despotism full of 
 mutual degradation, and fruitful of no virtues or affections 
 except the debased virtues and the miserable affections of the 
 master and the slave. The grossest and most degrading terms 
 of Oriental slavery are used to designate the relations of 
 husband and wife throughout the book. A husband who de- 
 sires his Avife's love is only seeking "to have in the woman 
 most nearly connected witli him, ncjt a forced slave, but a 
 willing one; not a slave nu^rely, but a favourite." Husbands 
 have, therefore, "put everything in practice to enslave the 
 minds of their wives." If a wife is intensely attaclied to her 
 husband, "exactly as much may be said of domestic slavery." 
 "It is a part of the irony of life that the strongest feelings of 
 devoted gratitude of which human nature seems tu be suscep- 
 tible are called forth in human beings towards those wlio, 
 having the power entirely to crush their earthly existence, 
 voluntarily refrain from using their power." Even children 
 are only links in the chain of bondage. By the affections of 
 women " are meant the only ones they are allowed to have, 
 those to the men to whom tliey are connected, or to the chil- 
 dren who constitute an additional and indefeasible tie between 
 them and a man." The Jesuit is an object of sympathy be- 
 cause he is tlie enemy of the domestic tyrant, and it is assumed 
 that the husband can have no motive but the love of undivided 
 tyranny for objecting to being superseded by an intriguing 
 interloper in his wife's affections. As though a Avife would 
 regard with complacency, say a female spiritualist, installed 
 beside her hearth! villi's book, written with his usual clear- 
 ness and impressiveness, having been the manifesto, has 
 remained the manual of the movement. It is therefore still 
 necessary to deal witli it, nor can there be anything invidi- 
 ous, as some of his admirers seem to have fancied, in 
 reviewing it by the light of the Autobiography. For what 
 purpose is the life of a philosopher published if it is not to 
 enable us better to understand his works? The book might 
 
[f^ 
 
 m 
 
 210 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 1:1' i 
 
 i I' 
 
 m i 
 
 M\ 
 
 
 1{X 
 
 I I 
 
 I >< 
 
 poison marriage if it were not read with a knowledge of the 
 influence under wliicli it was written. Mill himself seems at 
 last to start from the picture which he has drawn and to be 
 inclined to (qualify it. IJut he does this faintly and too late. 
 
 If, in this most impex'fect world, woman, through the change- 
 ful ages, has, like her partner, had much to undergo, and too 
 often at her partner's hands, she has also had advantages 
 which she would have been sorry to forfeit, and which she 
 would be sorry to forfeit now. She has sat safe in her home 
 while her partner was toiling, hunting, battling with the sea, 
 fighting for her abroad. By her partner's labour and with 
 peril of his life the earth has been subdued for her and made 
 fit for her habitation. When she complains that she has been 
 treated as a toy, does she mean that she has been wronged 
 because man has taken most of the rough and hard work to 
 himself ? War has comparatively spared her ; public justice 
 has been lenient to her ; in a shipwreck she has been put first 
 into the boat, while the slave to whom she now likens her- 
 self has been thrown ^.verboard to save the provisions. In 
 civilised countries she is on all occasions served and con- 
 sidered first; special provisions are made for her comfort and 
 convenience. Is this the lot of a slave, or of one even more 
 miserable than a slave ? - 
 
 Sometimes woman has had man's hard work to do. But this 
 has been mostly under circumstances of special need or of gene- 
 ral barbarism, and the revulsion which any such employment 
 of her causes, denotes her general immunity. The Red Indian 
 used his mate as a beast of burden. But the Red Indian was 
 a barbarian. Even he, however, might have pleaded special 
 need. The hunter, by the product of whose chase the wig- 
 wam was fed, would have been spoiled, his powers of endu- 
 rance would have been reduced, and the keenness of his sense 
 would have been impaired by heavy domestic labour. 
 
 Marriage has risen in character with the general progress of 
 civili,' ion from the primeval contract of force or purchase to 
 a • .i'utract, of a contract generally of love. Primeval 
 pi;U;tu'ij \'ii.s not regulated by the will of those generations, 
 
 lli i. 
 
WOMAN SUFFKAGE. 
 
 mi 
 
 the 
 IS at 
 l)e 
 late, 
 nge- 
 
 too 
 
 but by primeval circumstance, and the improvement of the 
 marriage tie has come, as all other great im^jrovements of 
 human relations have (tome, in the course of secular evolution. 
 It was something when the i)assions of the male were sub- 
 jected to a regular and lasting bond of any kind. If wonuui 
 are now to be made indeixuident of marriage, which appears 
 to be the aim of some of their champions, they would be made 
 indejjendent of that in which the hapi)iness of a creature 
 formed for affection usually consists, although to determine 
 them to embrace it, some natural pressure may be recpured. 
 Perhaps many of them will owe their champions but scanty 
 thanks in their old age. 
 
 The anomalies in the property law affecting married women, 
 to which remedial legislation has recently been directed, are, 
 like whatever is obsolete in the relations between the sexes 
 generally, not deliberate iniquities, but survivals. They are 
 relics of feudalism or of still more primitive institutions in- 
 corporated by feudalism ; and while the system to which they 
 b(donged existed they were indispensable parts of it, and must 
 have been so regarded by both sexes alike. Any one who is 
 tolerably well infornuHl ought to be ashamed to represent them 
 as the contrivances of male injustice. It is not on one sex 
 only that the relics of feudalism have borne hard. 
 
 The exclusion of women from professions is cited as another 
 proof of constant and immemorial injustice, lint what woman 
 asked or wished to be admitted to a profession a hundred 
 or even fifty years ago? AV'hat wonum till cpiite recently 
 Avould have been ready to renounce marriage and nuiternity in 
 order tliat she might devote herself to law, medicine, or 
 commercial pursuits? The demand is probably in some meas- 
 ure connected with an abnormal and possibly transient state 
 of things. The expensiveness of living in a country where 
 the fashion is set by millionnaires, combined with the over- 
 crowded condition of the very callings to which women are 
 demanding admission, has put I'xtraordinary diHioulties in the 
 way of marriage. ]\Eany women are tluis left without an ob- 
 ject in life, and they naturally try to open for themselves some 
 
 I! 
 
i 
 
 ■If 
 
 212 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 1:1 i 
 
 new career. The utmost sympathy is due to them, and every 
 facility ought in justice to be afforded them; though unhap- 
 [)ily the addition of fresh competitors for snbsistence to a 
 crowd in wliich some are already starving will be as far as 
 possible from removing the real root of the evil, to say noth- 
 ing of the risk wliich a woman must run in committing herself 
 irrevocably to a precarious calling, and closing against herself 
 the gate of domestic life. IJut the demand, as has already 
 been said, is of yesterday, and probably in its serious form is 
 as yet confined to the countries in which impediments to early 
 marriage exist. It is not always easy to distinguish the 
 serious demand from a passion for emulating the male sex 
 which has undoubtedly taken jjossession of some women, as it 
 took possession of the women under the Konum Empire, who 
 began to play the gladiator when other excitements were ex- 
 hausted, and which is hardly more respectable in women than 
 the affectation of feminine tastes and habits would be in a man. 
 AVith regard to the profession of law, indeed, so far as it is 
 concerned with the administration of justice, there is, as was 
 said before, and while human emotions retain their force 
 always Avill be, a reason, independent of the question of 
 demand, for excluding Avomen, at least for excluding one of the 
 two sexes. The influence of a pretty advocate appealing to a 
 jury, perhaps in behalf of a client of her own sex, Avould not 
 have seemed to Mill at all dangerous to the integrity of 
 public justice; but most people, and especially those who have 
 seen anything of sentimental causes in the United States, or 
 even in more phlegmatic England, wall probably be of a differ- 
 ent opinion. 
 
 What has been said as to the professions is equally true of 
 the universities, which were schools of the professions. A few 
 years ago, what English girl would have consented to leave her 
 home and mingle with male students? What English girl 
 Avould have thought it possible that she could go through the 
 whole of the medical course with male companions of her 
 studies? I^ven now what is the amount of settled belief in 
 "co-educatiou"? What would be said to a young man who 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 9$t 
 
 applied for admission in the name of tliat principle at the 
 door of any female college? Without arraigning the past, 
 those whose duty it is may consider with the deliberation 
 wliieh they deserve the two distinct (pu'stions, whether it is 
 desirable that tlie ednniition of botli sexes shjill be tlie s;ime, 
 and whciher it is desirable that the young men and the young 
 women of the wealthier (dasses shall be educated together in 
 the same universities. IJencath the first probably lies the 
 still deeper question Avhetlier it is good for humanity that 
 woman, who has hitherto been the helpmate and the comple- 
 ment, should become, as the leaders of the Woman's Ifight 
 movement evidently desire, the rival and competitor of man. 
 Both she cannot be; and it is by no means clear that in decid- 
 ing Avliicli she shall be the aspirations of the leaders of this 
 movement coincide with the interests of the sex. 
 
 If the education of women has hitherto been defective, so 
 has that of men. We are now going to do our best to improve 
 botli. Surely no accomplisliment in the acquisition of which 
 woman has been condemned to spend her time could well be 
 less useful than that of writing Greek or Latin has been to 
 the generality of male students. That the education of 
 wonnm has hitherto been lighter than that of men is no proof 
 that for the purposes of woman's destination it has been 
 worse. Among other things, it is to be considered whether 
 the children would be healthy if the brain of the mother, 
 as well as that of the father, were severely tasked. That 
 the comparative absence of works of creative genius among 
 Avonien is due entirely to the social tyranny which has ex- 
 cluded, or is supposed to have excluded, them from literary or 
 scientific careers, cannot be said to be self-evident. The case 
 of music, often cited, seems to suggest that there is another 
 cause, and that the career of intellectual ambition is in most 
 cases not likely to be happier than that of domestic affection, 
 though this is no reason why the experiment should not be 
 fairly tried. Perhaps the intellectual disabilities under which 
 women have laboured, even in tlie past, have been somewhat 
 overstated. If Shelley was a child to Mrs. Mill, as Mr. ^Nfill 
 

 H 
 
 r; f 
 
 7 ' y. 
 
 \. \' 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 : 1 
 
 
 1 ! 
 
 d|4 QIKSTIOXS OF THE DAY. 
 
 suys, no ''social disiibilities " hindorod Mrs. ]\rill from pub- 
 lishing poi'ius wliich would have eclipsed Shelley. 'JMie 
 Avriter once heard an American lecturer of eminence confidently 
 ascribe the licentiousness of English fiction in the early part 
 of the last century to the exclusion of women from litc'rary 
 life. The lecturer forgot that the most popular novelist of 
 that period, and certainly not the least liiunitious, was Mrs. 
 Aphra IJehn. This lady's name suggests the remark that as 
 the relations of the sexes have been the nu)st intimate con- 
 (ieivable, the action of character has been reciprocal, and the 
 level of moral ideas and sentiments for both pretty nuich the 
 same. 
 
 Mill, seeing that the num is the stronger, seems to assume 
 that the relations betw(>en man and Avoman must always have 
 been regulated bv tlie law of the strongest. Hut strength is 
 not tyranny. The protector must always be stronger than the 
 person under his protection. A mother is overwhelmingly 
 superior in strength to her infant child, and the cliild is com- 
 pletely at her mercy. The very highest conception that 
 humanity has ever formed, whether it be founded in reality or 
 not, is that of power losing itself in affliction. St. Paul (who 
 on any hypothesis as to his inspiration, is an authoritative 
 expositor of the morality Avhich became that of Christendom) 
 affirms with perfect clearness the essential equality of the 
 sexes and their necessary relations to each other as the two 
 halves of humanity. Yet he no less distinctly ratifies the 
 unity of the family, the authority of its head, and the female 
 need of that headship ; a need which, supposing it to be 
 natural, has nothing in it more degrading than the need of 
 protection.^ 
 
 Subjection is a word of sinister import, and Mill, in adopt- 
 ing it, prejudices the (piestion. Subordination, or obedience, 
 where it is necessary, implies no disparagement. Nothing 
 grates on ordinary feelings when Beatrice, in "Much Ado 
 about Nothing," says that she " will tame her wild heart to 
 the hand " of the man whom she is to wed. Not the soldier 
 1 I Cor. xi. 7-12 ; Eph. 22-33 ; Col. iii. 18. 
 
 :ii' ( 
 
 i 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 215 
 
 only, but most of us luivi; some one whom wo arc bound 
 to obey, and whom, it being necessary, we obey .2.vith()ut 
 humiliation. A liead of the family there must be if there is 
 not to be domestic anarchy. Children must know to whom 
 their obedience is due. Mill proposes that the authority shall 
 be divided between the husband and wife in the marriage con- 
 tract, and that the subjects in which each is to be sui)i'eme 
 shall be set out in a scheilule ; but he has not given us a draft 
 of such a contract. In the whole of this movement of sexual 
 revolution the family, though it may not, with any one but a 
 Nihilist, be the ol)ject of intentional or conscious attack, is 
 practically threatened with dissolution. One Utopian reformer, 
 as we have seen, proposes not only that the wife shall be made 
 independent of the husband, but that the children shall be 
 made independent of the parents. 
 
 "Enfranchise women," says Mr. Blair's Report, "or this 
 Republic will steadily advance to the same destruction, the same 
 ignoble and tragic catastrophe, which has engulfed the male 
 republics of history." This seems to imply a new reading of 
 history, according to Avhich republics have owed their fall to 
 their masculine (jharacter. The Greek republics were over- 
 Avhelmeil by the ^Macedonian monarchy, their surrender to which 
 Avas assuredly not due to excess of masculine force. The Roman 
 republic was converted by the vast extension of Roman con- 
 quest into a military empire. The city republicanism of the 
 Middle Ages Avas crushed by the great monarchies. The 
 short-lived CommouAvealth of England OAved its overthrow to 
 causes AA'hich certainly had nothing to do with sex. The 
 Swiss republic, the American republics, the French republic 
 still liA^e, so do several constitutional monarchies, including 
 Great Britain and her colonies, Avhicli are republics in all but 
 name. It is true that these commonAvealths, though, Ave may 
 hope, less directly threatened Avith the Avratli of heaven than 
 the report assumes them to be, are yet not free from peril; 
 but their peril apparently lies in the passions, the giddiness, 
 the anarchical tendencies of the multitude, and Avould hardly 
 be averted by opening another floodgate and letting in all at 
 once the full tide of feminine emotion. 
 
IH 
 
 •210 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 '■-v.. 
 
 m 
 
 < I 
 
 Woniiui, if she becomes ;i iiiiiii, will he ;i, weaker man. Yet 
 she must be prepared to I'j'sign her privileges as a woman. 
 Siie cannot expect to have l)otli privileg(! and erpiality. To 
 don the other sex she must dolf lier own, a [)roeess in which 
 she will run some risk of ceasing to be, or at least to be 
 deemed, the "angeli(; portion of humanity." For the time, 
 perha[)s, the ancient sentiment miglit liiigtM'; but the total 
 changi! of relations would in the end bring a change of feeling. 
 Ciiivalry depends on the acknowledgcul need of protection, and 
 what is accorded to a gentle hidiunate would not be accorded 
 to a rival. Man would not l)e bound nor incdined to treat 
 with t«'nderness and forbearing the being who was jostling 
 with him in all the Avalks of life, wrangling with him in 
 the law courts, wrestling with him on the stumj), manrjcuver- 
 ing against him in elections, haggling with him on 'Change 
 or in Wall Street, encountering him on the race course and 
 in the betting ring. Aphrodite, in her heart, perhaps flat- 
 ters herself that her Cestus will preserve her jjrivilege, Avhile 
 she gains the advantage of equality. So much poetry has 
 been addressed to her that she may well be excused for not 
 forming a prosaic estimate of the probable results. ]Jut the 
 outspoken Schopenhauer has told her that beauty is rarer in 
 her sex than in the other. It takes more to make a beautiful 
 woman than a handsome man. Of this we may be sure, that 
 the attractions of women generally depend upon their being 
 women. Mrs. j\[ill, ])e it observed, remained a woman. If 
 she had put on her wig and gown to go into court and cross- 
 examine witnesses, or had stood against her husband for 
 Westminster, we should have seen the great experiment really 
 tried. That she has had social advantages while sht) ^.as lain 
 under political disabilities, woman, especially in America, 
 can hardly deny; her sex has been an object of rt:'S[iect, some- 
 times of a worship almost fatuous, irrespective of her personal 
 qualities. This is partly traceable to historical accident. 
 Jonathan Oldbuck is a cynic, but lie is not far wrong in say- 
 ing that it was by the fantastic imagination of chivalry that 
 Dulcineas were exalted into despotic goddesses. He might 
 have added that Mariolatry had played its part. 
 
VVOAIAN b^rFFHAGE, 
 
 -'17 
 
 Wyoming' and New Z^niland have niadu tluf cxporinuMit, of 
 Woman's Sut'trajfe. Lcttlii-ni fairly try it, and if the result is 
 good, let the rest of the world follow. In every titdd of aotion, 
 except that of [jolitics, use is niadc^ of ex]terinient. A ne\v 
 engine is tested Itefon; it is \n\t on all the railways or into all 
 the steamships. A nt^w remedy, however promising, is trie<l 
 in one or two cases before it is ap]»lied universally. Tf an air- 
 ship were invented, aeronauts would have to prove its safety 
 before all the world ascended. This precaution would b(! 
 taken, and not to take it would he deenuMl madness, however 
 conclusive in the judgment of science the theoretical argu- 
 ments in favtnir of the invention might he. liut in jiolitics 
 sweeping changes are irrevocably nuide upon the strength of 
 what even an advocate of the change, if he had any fairness 
 of mind, would allow to be a mere balance of argument in its 
 favour. Had extensions of the suffrage, or changes in the 
 form of local government been tried in one or two districts or 
 cities first, a pause of salutary reflection might have ensued. 
 ]i\it political changes, for the most part, are the result of con- 
 flict, not of reasoning ; of the desire of a class for power, not 
 of broad conviction as to the public good. Woman's Suffrage 
 is a change fraught with the most momentous results, not only 
 to the commonwealth, but to the household. Let Wyoming 
 and New Zealand try it, say for ten years. The success of 
 the Wyoming experiment is publicly proclaimed, and the uni- 
 verse is exhorted to do likewise, by Wyoming, whose voice is 
 now that of the female voters. Private accounts are not so 
 favourable, nor have the neighbouring States, which must 
 have the clearest view of the results, been induced to follow 
 the example. To Wyoming, for the pr(!sent. Woman's Suffrage 
 in the United States remains conflned. The New Zealand 
 experiment will be more satisfactory, though Nev/ Zealand, 
 having no warlike neighbours, does not run the same risk in 
 emasculating her government which is run by a European 
 State. If at the end of ten years it ap]iears from the two ex- 
 periments that legislation and government have become wiser, 
 more far-sighted, and more just, without any detriment to the 
 
Mi 
 
 H ■ 
 
 mmmmmmm 
 
 218 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 m « 
 
 
 ■ ! 
 
 peace and order of the home, h't the work! follow the exam- 
 ple, and be grateful to those by whom the tirsi; experiment was 
 made. 
 
 At the present juncture in Europe such an innovation would 
 be especially perilous. Tlie tendency to the personal ascend- 
 ancy of great demagogues which lias shown itself as a result 
 of the enfranchisement of masses ignorant of political princi- 
 ples and questions could not fail to be aggravated by the 
 enfranchisement of all the women, the inclination of the sex 
 being to personal rather than constitutional government. In 
 Fran(^e, with 'Woman Sutt'rage, the Kepublic could hardly live. 
 
 Mr. JUair's Keport ends by saying that men can have no 
 motive for refusing the suffrage to women but the selfish one of 
 unwillingness to part with half of the sovereign power. Selfish- 
 ness in this matter would undoubtrdly be not only wickedness 
 but foll3^ Wliat is good for woman is good in the same 
 measure for man, and ouglit not for a moment to be withheld. 
 One lady in her evidence warns Congress, if it will not give 
 way, that the wild enthusiasm of wonuin can be used for evil 
 as well as good, and threatens in America a re])etition of the 
 scenes of the French Commune. More terrible even than this 
 menace is the fear of doing an injury to man's partner, and 
 thereby a deeper injury to man himself. But the change 
 ought to be proved good. Before man hands over the govern- 
 ment to Avoman, he ouglit to be satisfied that he cannot do 
 what is right himself. In an age of "fiabby " sentiment and 
 servile worship of change, we have had enough of weak and 
 precipitate abdications. To one of them we owe the catastro- 
 phe of tlie French llevolution and the deluge of calamity which 
 has followed. To man, as he alone could enforce the law, the 
 sovereign power came naturally and righteously. Let him see 
 whether he cannot make a just use of it, in tlie interest of his 
 wife and children as well as in his own, before he sends in his 
 resignation. 
 
ttm 
 
 THE JEWISH QUESTION. 
 
I 
 
 '■■,i ' 
 
 -ill- 1 
 
 J] 
 
 3r I 
 
 
THE JEWISH QUESTION. 
 
 Jewish ascendancy and the anti-Semitic movement provoked 
 by it form an important feature of the European situation, and 
 are beginning to excite attention in America. Mr. Arnold 
 White, Baron Hirsch's commissioner, says, in a plea for the 
 Kussian Jews,^ that "almost without exception the press 
 throng liout Europe is in Jewish hands, and is largely pro- 
 due-,; by Jewish brains; " that " international finance is captive 
 to Ji 'ish energy and skill"; that in I'^ngland the fall of the 
 Bai ings has left the house of Rothschild alone in its supre- 
 luacy; and that in every line the Jews are fast becoming our 
 masters. Wind and tide, in a money-loving age, are in favour 
 of the financial race. At the same time the anti-Semitic 
 movement gains ground. From Russia, (jermany, Austria, 
 and the Uanubian Principalities it spreads to the Ionian 
 Islands; it has broken out in France; symptoms of it have 
 appeared even in the United States. Yet there is a persis- 
 tent misa])prchension of the real nature of the agitation. It 
 is assumed that the quarrel is religious. The anti-Semites 
 are siipposed to be a party of fanatics renewing the persecu- 
 tions to v.liich the Jews were exposed on ac^count of their 
 faith in th ■ ui'k ages, and everyone who, handling the ques- 
 tion eriticalJ;.', (ails to show undivided symi)athy with the 
 Israelites io 5ui ,tO\vn as a religious persecutor. The Jews 
 naturally foster this impression, and, as Mr. Arnold W^hite 
 tells us, the press of Europe is in their hands. 
 
 In 1880, anti-Semitic disturbances broke out in Russia. 
 A narrative of them entitled " The Persecution of the Jews in 
 
 1 wf' 'Pi-uth about the Russian Jew," in the Contemporary Review, 
 May, i80v. 
 
 221 
 
M'»' 
 
 n 
 
 222 
 
 (^I'KSriONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 llussia, "* was put I'ortli by the Jowisli coimiumity in England 
 as an appeal to the British hoart. In that narrative the Rus- 
 sian Christians were charged with having committed the most 
 fiendish atrocities on the most enormous scale. A tract of 
 country equal in area to the IJritish Islands and France com- 
 bined had, it was averred, been the scene of horrors there- 
 tofore perpetrated only in times of war. Men had been 
 ruthlessly murdered, tender infants had been dashed to death 
 or roasted alive in their own iiomes, married women had been 
 made the prey of a brutal lust which had in many cases caused 
 tlieir death, and young girls had been violated in sight of 
 their rehitives ^ "^ soldiers wlio should have been guardians 
 of their honour. Whole streets inli ' ' ' ^ by Jews had been 
 razed, and the Jewish quarters of tov; > d been systemati- 
 cally fired; in one placo, Elizabethgrad, .iiirty Jewesses at 
 once had been outraged, two young girls in dread of violation 
 had thrown themselves from the windows, and an old man, 
 who was attempting to save his daughter frouj a fate worse 
 than death, had been liung from the roof, while twenty 
 soldiers proceeded to work their will on the maiden. This 
 was a specimen of atrocities which had been committed over the 
 whole area. Tlie most atrocious charge of all was that against 
 the Christian women of Kussia, who were accused of assisting 
 their friends to violate the Jewesses by holding the victims 
 down, their motive being, as the manifesto suggests, jealousy 
 of the superiority of the Jewesses in dress. The government 
 was charged with criminal sympathy, the local authorities 
 generally with criminal inaction, and some of the troops with 
 active participation. 
 
 The British heart responded to the appeal. Great public 
 meetings were held, at one of which the Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury, with a Roman Cardinal, as the i-epresentative of 
 religious liberty in general, and especially of opposition to 
 Jew-burning, at his side, denounced the persecuting bigotry 
 of the Russian ('hristians. Indignant addresses were largely 
 
 * Persecution of the Jews in liussia, 1881. 
 I'imes. 
 
 Reprinted from The 
 
TIIK JEWISH QlESriON. 
 
 signed, Faissia was accused of rc-onacting the worst crimes 
 of the MiiUlle Ages. It was taken for granted on all sides 
 that religious fanaticism was the cause of the riots. 
 
 Russia, as usual, was silent. ]>ut the IJritish government 
 directed its consuls at the different points to report upon the 
 facts. The reports composed two J^>lue IJooks,' in which, as 
 very few probably took the pains to look into them, the un- 
 popular truth lies buried. Those who did read them learned, 
 in the lirst place, that though the riots were deplorable and 
 criminal, the Jewish account was in most cases exaggenited, 
 and in some to an (^:^Lra\'agant extent. The damage to .Jewish 
 property at Odessa, rated in the,Jewish account at 1,1'^7,.')(S1 
 roubles, or, according to their higher estinuites, o,()()(>,()00 
 roubles, was rated, Consul-General Stanley tells us, by a 
 respectable Jew on the spot at no.OOO rouldes, while the Con- 
 sul-Ueneral himself rates it ;it 20,000. At Klizabethgrad, 
 instead of whole streets being raztil lo the ground, only one 
 hut had been unroofed. It appeared that few Jews, if any, 
 had been intentionally killed, though some died of injuries 
 received in tlie riots. There were conflicts between the Jews 
 who defended their houses and the rioters. The outrages on 
 Avomen, by which public indignation in England had been 
 most tiercely aroused, and of wiiicli, according to the Jewish 
 accounts, there had been a frightful numbiu-, no less than 
 thirty in one place and twenty-five in another, appeared, 
 after careful inquiries by the consuls, to have been very rare. 
 This is the more remarkable because the riots connuonly began 
 with the sacking of the gin shops, which were ke])t by the 
 Jews, so that the passions of the mob must have been inflanu'd 
 l)y drink. The horrible charge brought in the Jewish mani- 
 festo against the Russian wonuui, of having incited men to 
 outrage Jewesses and held the Jewesses down, is found to be 
 utterly baseless. The charge of roasting children alive also 
 falls to the ground. >so does the charge of vicdating a Jew's 
 
 ' Correspondence respectinfj the Trcntment of .lara in Unssia, Xr>s. 1 
 and 2, 1882, 188;). Presented to butli Mouses of rarlianient by Coiiiinand 
 of Her .Majesty. 
 
\l 
 
 ^'mmmm 
 
 mm 
 
 224 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 I.V 
 
 !1. 
 
 ml 
 
 wife and then setting fire to his house. The Jewish manifesto 
 states tliat a Jewish innlvceper was cooped in one of his own 
 barrels and east into the Dnieper. This turns out to be a 
 fable, the village which was the alleged scene of it being ten 
 miles from the Dnieper and near no oth.cr river of conse- 
 quence. The Ivussian peasant, Christian though he may be, 
 is entitled to justice. As a rule, while ignorant and often 
 intemperate, he is good-natured. There Avas much bru- 
 tality in his riot, but fiendish atrocity there was not, and if 
 he stnu'k savagely, perhaps he had suffered long. For the 
 belief that the nu)b was "doing the will of the Tsar," in other 
 words, that the government was at the bottom of the rising, 
 there does not appear to have been a shadow of foundation. 
 The action of the authorities was not in all cases equally 
 prompt. In some cases it was culpably slack. At Warsaw the 
 commandant held back, thougli as Lord Granville, the British 
 ambassador, bears witness, his motive for hesitation was 
 humanity. But many of the rioters were shot down or bay- 
 oneted by the troops, hundreds were flogged, some were im- 
 prisoned, and some were sent to Siberia. That any of the 
 military took part in the riots seems to be a fiction. It Avas not 
 likely that the Eussian government, menaced as it is by 
 revolutionary conspiracy, would encourage insurrection. Peo- 
 ple of the u])per class, wlio fancied that in the agitation they 
 sow the work of Socialists, though they might dislike the 
 J w's, would hardly sympathise Avith the rioters. Efforts 
 Avere made by the government to restore JeAvish property, and 
 handsome sums Avere subscribed for the relief of the sufferers. 
 Yet those Avho, Avliile they heartily condemned outrage, Avere 
 Avilling to accept proof that the Christian men and Avomen of 
 Russia had not behaved like demons, Avere saluted as modern 
 counterparts of Haman by an eminent Rabbi, Avho, if the 
 objects of his strictures had cared to retort, might have been 
 asked Avhether the crucifixion of Haman's ten sons and the 
 slaughter of seventy-five thousand of the enemies of Israel in 
 one dtiy, which, after the lapse of so many centuries, the feast 
 of Purim still joyously commemorates, were not horrors as great 
 
TIIK JKWISII QIESTION. 
 
 225 
 
 / 
 
 as any which hav(^ been shown to liave actually occurred at 
 Odessa or Elizabetligrad. 
 
 The most important part of the evidence given in the con- 
 suls' reports, however, is that which relates to the cause of 
 the troubles. At Warsaw, where the people are Roman 
 Catholics, there ap})ears to have been a certain amount of pas- 
 sive sympathy with the insurgents on religious grounds, lint 
 everywhere else the concurrent testimony of the consuls is that 
 the source of the agitation was economical and social, nt)t 
 religious. Bitterness produced l)y the exactions of the Jew, 
 envy of his wealth, irritation at the display of it in such 
 things as the line dresses of his women, jealous}^ of his ascen- 
 dancy, combined in the lowest of the mob with the love of 
 plunder, were the motives of the people for attacking him, 
 not hatred of his faith. Vice-('onsul AVagstaft', who r-eems to 
 have paid particular attention to the question and made the 
 most careful inquiry, after paying a tribute to the sober, 
 laborious, thrifty character and the superior intelligence of 
 the Jew, and ascribing to these his increasing monopoly of 
 commerce, proceeds : 
 
 "It is chiefly as brokers or luiddleiuen that the Jews are so promi- 
 nent. Seldom a business transaction of any kind takes place without 
 their intervention, and from both sides they receive compensation. To 
 enumerate some of their other occupations, constantly denounced by the 
 public : they are the princip.al dealei-s in spirits ; keepers of ' vodka ' 
 (drinking) shops and lumses of ill-fame ; receivers of stolen goods ; 
 illegal pawnbrokers and usurers. A branch they also succeed in is as 
 government contractors. With their knowledge of handling money, they 
 collude with unscrupulous officials in defrauding the State to vast amounts 
 annually. In fact, the malpractices of some of the Jewish conununity 
 have a bad influence on those whom they come in contact with. It nuist, 
 however, be said that there are many well educated, highly respectable, 
 and honourable Jews in Kussia, but they form a small minority. This 
 class is not treated upon in this paper. They thoroughly condemn the 
 occupations of their lower brethren, and one of the results af the late 
 disturbances is noticed in the movement at present amongst the Jews. 
 They themselves acknowledge the abuses practised by some of tlieir own 
 members, and suggest remedial measures to allay the irritation existing 
 among the working classes. . 
 
I'l 
 
 ■«Ki«HIHm 
 
 ■P 
 
 mmmmmmmmiKm 
 
 220 
 
 QT'ESTTONS OF TIIK DAY 
 
 r:' I 
 
 p^ 
 
 s ; 
 
 I ■ j 
 ■i - 
 
 "Another thing tho Jews avo accused of is that there exists among 
 tlieni a system of boycotliiig ; tiiey use tiieir religion for business pur- 
 poses. This is expressed by tlie words 'koul,' or ' l\agal,' and 'kherim.' 
 For instance, in liessarabia, the i)ro(hic(! of a vineyard is drawn for by 
 lot, and falls, say, to Jacob Levy ; the other Jews of the district cannot 
 compete with Levy, who buys the wine at his own price. In the leasing 
 by auction of government and provincial lands, it is invariably a Jew 
 who outbids the others and afterwards re-lets plots to the peasantry at 
 exorbitant prices. \'ery crying abuses of farming out land have lately 
 come to light and greatly shocked public opinion. Again, where estates 
 are farmed by Jews, it is distressing to see the pitiable condition in 
 which they are handed over on the expiration of the lea.se. Kxperience 
 also shows they are very bad colonists. 
 
 " Their fame as usurei's is well known. Given a Jewi.sh recruit with 
 a few roubles' capital, it can be worked out, matliematically, what time it 
 will take him to become the money-lender of his company or regiment, 
 from the drummer to the colonel. Take the case of a peasant : if he 
 once gets into the hands of this class, he \s irretrievably lost. The pro- 
 prietor, in his turn, from a small loan gradually mortgages and eventually 
 loses his estate. A great deal of landed property in south Russia has of 
 late years passed into the hands of the Israelites, but principally into the 
 hands of intelligent and sober peasants. 
 
 " From first to last, the Jew has his hand in everything. lie advances 
 the seed for sowing, which is generally returned in kind — quarters for 
 bushels. As harvest time comes round, money is required to gather in 
 the crops. This is sometimes advanced on hard conditions ; but the 
 peasant has no choice ; there is no one to lend him money, and it is 
 better to secure something than to lose all. Very often the Jew buys the 
 whole crop as it stands in the field on his own terms. It is thus .seen 
 that they themselves do not raise agricultural products, but they reap tlie 
 benefits of others' labour, and steadily become rich, while proprietors are 
 gradually getting ruined. In their relation to Russia they are compared 
 to parasites that have settled on a plant not vigorous enough to throw 
 them off, and which is being gradually sapped of its vitality." i 
 
 The peasants, the vice-consul tells us, often say, when they 
 look at the property of a Jew, "That is my blood," In con- 
 firmation of his view he cites the list of demands formulated 
 Ity the peasants and laid before a mixed committee of inquiry 
 into the causes of the disorder. These demands are all eco- 
 
 - 1 i 
 
 1 Correspondence respeetiny the Treatment of Jews in R^issia, No, 1, 
 pp. n, 12. 
 
TlIK .IKWrSII (.ilKSTION. 
 
 mi 
 
 noniical or .social, witli the (>X('(']»lion of tlio ooini)liiint that 
 Russian girls in .Icwisli service I'orgt't their religion and with 
 it loso their morals. Everything, in short, seems to bear out 
 the statement oi' tlie Russian Minister of the Interior, in a 
 manifesto given in the iJlue liook, that "the movement had 
 its main cause in circumstances purely economical"; provided 
 that to "economical" we add "social," and include all that is 
 meant by the phrase "hatred of Jewish usiu-pation," used in 
 another document. 
 
 Vice-Oonsul Ifarford, at Sebastopol, is in contact with the 
 Jews of the Crimea, who, he says, are of a superior order, 
 while some of them are not Talmudic Jews, but belong to the 
 mild and Scriptural sect of the Karaites. He says that in 
 his quarter all goes well. 
 
 "The spirit of antagonism that animates the Hussian against the Jew 
 is, in my opinion, in no way to be traced to tlie ditfercnee of creed. In 
 tliis part of Itussia, wiiere we have more denominations of religion than 
 in any other part, I liave never, during a resi(U'nce of fourteen years, 
 observed tlie slightest indication of sectarianism in any class. 'l"he peas- 
 ant, though ignorant and superstitious, is so entirely free from bigotry 
 that even the openly displayed contempt of the fanatical Mohammedan 
 Crim Tartar for the rites and ceremonies of the Russian Church fails 
 to excite in him the slightest feeling of personal animosity ; his own 
 feeling with regard to other religions is perfect indifference ; he enters a 
 mosque or synagogue just as he would enter a theatre, and regards the 
 ceremony in nmch the same maimer that an English peasant would, 
 neither knowing nor caring to know whether they worshijiped (iod or the 
 moon. As it is evident from this that race and creed are to the minds of 
 the peasantry o*: no more conseciuence than they would be to a Zulu, tlie 
 only conclusion is that the antipathy is against the usurer, and as civil- 
 isation can only be expected to influence the rising generation of lUissian 
 peasantry, the remedy rests with the Jew, who, if he will not refrain 
 from speculating (in lawless parts of the empire) on ignorance and 
 drunkenness, must be prepared to defend himself and his iiroperty from 
 the certain and natural result of such a policy."' ■ 
 
 Persecution is not the tendency of the Russian or of the 
 Church to which he belongs. The Eastern Church, while it 
 
 1 Correspondence, respcctinq the Treatment of Jews in Russia, No. 2, 
 p. 17. 
 
mmmmm 
 
 228 
 
 QIKSTTONS i>V THE DAY. 
 
 If!; 
 
 I. i 
 
 has been superstitious aud somewhat t()ij)i(l, lias been tolerant, 
 aiul, ('oiu])ar('(l with otluu- ortlio(h)x ciuircht's, Irco from the 
 stain of persecution. It has not even been jiroselyting, nor 
 lias it ever sent forth erusaders, iniless the name of crusades 
 can be given to the wars with the Turks, tiie main motive for 
 which, thougli the pretext may have been religious, probably 
 has been territorial ambition, and which were certainly not 
 crusades when waged by Catherine, the jjatroness of Diderot 
 and the correspondent of Voltaire. Stanley, in his "Eastern 
 CJhurch," dilates upon this characteristic of the Eastern 
 Christians, lie says tliat "a resj)eetful reverence for every 
 manifestation of religious feeling has witldield them from 
 violent attacks on tlie rights of conscience and led them to 
 extend a kindly patroiuige to forms of faith mo.st removed 
 from their own "; and he notices that the great philosophers 
 of antic^uity are honoured by ])ortraits in one of their churches 
 as heralds of the gospel.* Sir ^Mackenzie Wallace, who is th" 
 best authority, while he admits the inferiority of the Russian 
 priests in culture, testifies strongly to their innocence of per- 
 secution, saying that " if they have less learning, culture, and 
 refinement than the lloman Catholic priesthood, they have 
 at the same time infinitely less fanaticism, less spiritual pride, 
 and less intolerance towards the adherents of other faiths." - 
 The educated classes he represents as generally indifferent to 
 theologi(\'il questions. The peasantry are superstitious and 
 blindly attached to their own faith, whi(di they identify with 
 their nationality; but they tliink it natural and right that a 
 man of a different nationality should have a different religion. 
 In Nijni-Novgorod, the city of the great fair, the Mahome- 
 dan mosque and the Armenian church stand side by side with 
 tlie Orthodox cathedral.^ At one end of a village is the 
 church, at the other the inosque, and the Mahomedan spreads 
 
 ' Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church, 3cl edition, p. 35. By 
 Artlmr renrhyu Stanley, D.l). 
 
 '^ liiissin, pp. 68, 59. By Sir D Mackenzie Wallace, M.A. 
 8 See Hare's Studies in Rnssin, )). 300. 
 
TlIK .IKWISII qUESTlUN. 
 
 By 
 
 liis pniyci'-fiivix't on the dock of a steiiiner full of Orthodox 
 Jvussians. 
 
 T\o ('C(^lt'siastical constitution of Russia is incompatible 
 with religious c([uality. Tiie Tsar is practically, though not 
 theoretically, head of the CUmrch, as well as of the State; the 
 couunander of Holy Russia as a Caliph is the (Jonnuander of 
 the Faithful, In the interest rather of national unity than of 
 religious orthodoxy he restrains dissent. Rut it is against 
 innovation and schism within tlie pale of the State Church 
 rather than against unbelief that his power has been exerted. 
 Some Tsars, sucli as Peter the Great and the Tsarina Cathe- 
 rine TL, Iiave been Liberals, and have patronised merit 
 without regard to creed. Nicholas was full of orthodox sen- 
 timent and in all things a nuirtinet, yet Mackenzie AVallace 
 has a pleasant anecdote of his commending the Jewish sen- 
 tinel at his door who conscientiously refused to respond to the 
 Tsar's customary salutation on Easter 13ay. No Tsar, however 
 bigoted, lias been giiilty of such persecution as IMiilip II. of 
 Spain, Ferdinand of Austria, or Louis XIV. Russia has had 
 no Inquisition. That the Jews have had liberty of worship 
 and education, the existence of 6319 synagogues and of 77 
 Jewish schools sujjported by the State, besides 11G5 private 
 and communal schools, seems clearly to prove. ^ It does not 
 seem to be alleged that any attempt has been made by the 
 government at forcible conversion. Whatever may have been 
 the harshness or even cruelty of the measures which it has 
 taken to confine the Jews to their original districts and 
 prevent their spreading over its dominions, its object aj)pears 
 to have been to protect the peo"i)le against economical oppres- 
 sion and preserve the national character from being sapped 
 by an alien influence, not to suppress the Jewish religion. 
 
 That Christian fanaticism at all events was not the sole 
 source of the unpopularity of the Jews might have been in- 
 ferred from the fact that the relation was no better between 
 the Jew and the heathen races during the period of declining 
 
 1 Statesman's Year-Book, 1891, pp. 854-856. 
 
liUKSTlON.S (»K rilK DAV, 
 
 l)olytli(Msiii, wIk'h rclit^'ioiis iiidifft'i't'iico prevailed and beneath 
 the vast ilonic ol the Komaii lMU[»iie tlie religion;s of many 
 8h'j)t and niouhh-red si(U' by side Cribbon, who is \v(dl 
 qualitied to speak, tor he was liimself a citizen of tiie Konian 
 Empire in sentiment, alter narratin<f tlie massaeres committed 
 by the Jews on the (lentih's in Africa and Cyprns, has ex- 
 pressed in flamboyant phrases tlie liatred of the Roman world 
 for the Jews, wliom he designates as tlic; "implacable enemies, 
 not only of the Koman government Init of linman kind."* 
 Tacitus s])eaks of the .lews as enemies of all races but their 
 own (adrci'siis omnes alios hostile udium).,'' and Juvenal, in 
 a, well-known i»assage, speaks of them as ])eoj)h! who would 
 not show a wayfarer his road or guide the thirsty to a spring 
 if he were not of tlieir own faith. Those who maintain that 
 tliere is notliing in the character, liabits, or disposition of tiie 
 Jew to provoke antipathy have to bring the charge of fanatical 
 prejudice not only against the Russians or against Chris- 
 tendom, but against mankind. 
 
 In Germany, in Austria, in Rounuuiia, in all the countries of 
 Europe where this deploralde contest of races is going on, the 
 cause of qiuirrel appears to be fiuuhuuentally the same. It 
 appears to be economical and social, not religious, or religious 
 only in a secondary degree. j\Ir. Raring-(iould tells us that 
 in (Jermany "there is scarce a village witliout some Jews in 
 it, wdio do not cultivate land tlieniselves, but lie in wait like 
 spiders for the failing Rauer.'"* A German wdio knew the 
 peasantry well said to ]Mr. Gould that " he doubted whether 
 there were a happier set of people under tlie sun." Rut he 
 added, aftei" a p;uise, " so long as they are out of the (dutch of 
 the Jew." * Of the German, as well as of the Russian, it may 
 
 H I I 
 
 1 Decline aud Fall of the Roman Empire, Chap. xvi. " In Cyroiie," 
 Gibbon says, "they massacred 220,000 Greeks; in Cyprus, 240,000," 
 citing Dion Cixssius QI., Ixviii., p. 1145), wliose account, as regards num- 
 bers at all events, must be greatly exaggerated. 
 
 ■^IIist.,y.,v. 
 
 '' Germanij Present and Past, Vol. I., p. 114. By S. Baring-Gould, M.A. 
 
 * lb., p. 127. 
 
THE JKWISII Ql IvSTIUN, 
 
 be said that he is not a religious perst'cutor. If persecution 
 of a sanguinary or atrocious kind has sullied his annals, 
 the arm of it was the house of Austria, with its Sininish con- 
 nection, and tlie head was the world-roving .Jesuit. In the 
 case of Hungary, Mr. Taget, who is a Liberal and advocates 
 a liberal policy towards the Jews, says : " The Jew is no less 
 "r-tive in profiting by the vices and necessities of the i)casant 
 
 .an by those of the noble. As sure as he gains a settlement 
 in a village the peasantry become poor."' "In Austrian 
 I'oland," says a Times reviewer, "the worst of the peasant's 
 sluggish <!ontent is that it has given him over to the exactions 
 of the Jews." "The Jews," he adds, "are in fact the lords of 
 the country." They are lords not less alien to the {)eople than 
 the Norman was to the Saxon, and perha[)s not always more 
 merciful, though in their hands is the writ of ejection instead 
 of the conqueror's sword. 
 
 If we cross the Mediterranean the same thing meets us. In 
 Thomson's "jMorocco," we read : 
 
 "As money-lenders the Jews are as maggots and i)arasites, aggiavating 
 id feeding on the disea.ses of the hind. I do not know, for my part, 
 
 ich exercises tlie greatest tyranny and oppression, the Sultan or tlie 
 ..cw, —the one the embodiment of tlie foulest misgovernment. the other 
 the essence of a dozen Shylocks, demanding, ay, and gettini:, not only 
 his pound of tlesh, but also the blood and nerves. By his outrageous 
 exactions the ISultau drives the Moor into the hands of the Jew, who 
 affords him a temporary relief by lending him the necessary money on 
 incredibly exorbitant terms. (_»nce in the money-lender's eUuches, he 
 rarely escapes till he is squeezed dry, when he is either thrown aside, 
 crushed and ruined, or cast into a dungeon, where, fettered and starved, 
 he is probably left to die a slow and liorrible death. 
 
 "To the position of the Jews in Morocco it would be dittlcult to find 
 a parallel. Here we have a people alien, despised, and hated, actually 
 living in the country under immeasurably better conditions than the 
 dominant race, while they suck, and are assisted to suck, the very life- 
 blood of their hosts. The aim of every Jew is to toll not, neither to 
 spin, save the coils which as money-lenders he may weave for the entan- 
 glement of his necessitous victims." - 
 
 ^ Hungary and Transi/lvania, Vol. I., p. 180. By John Paget. 
 2 Travels in the Atlas and Southern Morocco : A Narrative of Explora- 
 tion, pp. 418, 419. By Joseph Thomson, F.R.G.S. 
 
f!' 
 
 282 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 Even if wo cross the Atlantic we lind the same phenom* non. 
 Mr. Olmsted, in his "Cotton Kingdom," says: 
 
 " A swarm of Jews has within the last ten years settled in nearly 
 every Soutliorn town, many of them men of no charactei", opening cheap 
 clothing and trinket siiops, ruining or driving out of business many of 
 tlie old retailers, and engaging in an unlawful trade with the simple 
 negroes, which is found very profitable." ^ 
 
 And again : 
 
 "If his [the planter's] first crop proves a bad one he must borrow 
 money of the Jews at New Orleans to pay his first note. They will sell 
 him this on the best terms they can, often at not less than twenty-five 
 per cent per annum." - 
 
 Mr. Stevenson says of the Jews in San Francisco : 
 
 "Jew storekeepers have already learned the advantage to be gained 
 from this [unlimited credit] ; they lead on the farmer into irretrievable 
 indebtedness, and keep him ever after as their bond-slave hopelessly 
 grinding in the mill. So the whirligig of time brings in its revenges, and 
 except that the Jew knows better than to foreclose, you may see Ameri- 
 cans bound in the same chains with which they themselves had formerly 
 bound the Mexicans." ^ *■ 
 
 These passages were not intended by the writers, nor are 
 they here cited, as general pictures of the Jews, or as pictures 
 of Jews exclusively, in the last, American sharp practice is 
 included. The passages are cited as indications of the real 
 source of the antagonism, tending to show that it is econom- 
 ical, not religious. 
 
 Light dawned on the writer's mind on this question when 
 he had just been listening with sympathy to speo(hes in the 
 British House of Commons on the anti-Semitic movement in 
 Koumania, where, as in Russia, the number of Jews is partic- 
 
 1 Journeys and Explorations in the Cotton Kingdom, 2d edition, pp. 
 i.'o2. 25;J. liy Frederick Law ( )lmsted. 
 ^ lb., pp. ;}21, 322. 
 ■' Across the Plains, p. 100. By Robert Louis Stevenson. 
 
THE ,J i:\VlS II (ilKSTlUN. 
 
 .>:5:; 
 
 ularly large and the feeling against them is proportionately 
 
 intense. The Jewish member who appealed to the govern- 
 ment on the subject, and the ^Minister who rose in response 
 to the appeal, had both of them assumed that it was a case of 
 religious persecution, and the Ministei- especially had dwelt 
 on the mischievous iniiuence of ecclesiastics; with how 
 little justice, so far as the priests of the Eastern Church are 
 concerned, we have already seen. The debate over, the 
 writer was accosted by his friend, the late Dr. Humphry 
 Sandwith, distinguished for his share in the defence of Kars 
 against the llussians, who knew the Danubian Principalities 
 well. Dr. Sandwith said that the speakers had been entii'ely 
 mistaken; that religion was not the motive of the agitation; 
 that neither the people nor their priests Avere given to perse- 
 cution; that the government had granted aid to a synagogue; 
 but that Jewish usurers got the simi)le-minded peasants into 
 their toils and sold them out of their homesteads till the peas- 
 ants would bear it no longer, and an outbreak ensued. Dr. 
 Sandwith, being a thoroiigh-goiug Liberal, would liave been 
 the last man to palliate religious persecution. 
 
 It is doubtful whether, even in the Middle Ages, the quar- 
 rel was not less religious and more economical oj* social than 
 is supposed. That was the age of religious intolerance; 
 Christian heretics, such as the Albigenses, were persecuted 
 with fully as much cruelty as the Jews. Jews who had ven- 
 tured to settle in the Catholic communities for the sake of 
 gain, braved the same sort of peril which would have been 
 braved by an enterprising trader who had thrust himself into 
 Japan during its close period. But as a rule, though they 
 were hated, they were not persecuted; they were tolerated and 
 allowed to build their synagogues and worship (Jod in their 
 own way. They were regarded, not like heretics, as relig- 
 ious traitors, but as religious aliens. Their religious blind- 
 ness, as well as their jienal homelessness, w;is viewed as the 
 act of God. They were ^jrivileged in misbelief. Aquinas 
 expressly lays it down that they are to be tolerated as a use- 
 ful testimony bcri-ne, though by adversaries, to the truth of 
 
2:i4 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 IIS 
 
 II .'i: 
 
 Cliristianity.' It is not true that the great Doctor of the 
 Middle Ages sanctions the forcible conversion of the chil- 
 dren of Jews. He raises the (question and decides it in the 
 negative.^ An argument stated by him only to be set aside 
 has been taken for his conclusion. In the "Corpus Juris 
 Canonici" it is laid down that "the Jews are not to be 
 baptised against their will or forced to it, nor to be con- 
 demned without jud ,ment, nor to be spoiled of their goods, 
 nor disturbed at tlieir festivals, nor are their cemeteries to be 
 molested or their bodies to be exlmmed."^ 
 
 By the kings, and notably by the Angevin kings of Eng- 
 land, the Jews were protected as the agents of royal extortion, 
 sucking by usury the money from the people which was after- 
 wards sc^ueezed out of the usurer by the king. Of the com- 
 mon i)eople it is not, so far as we can see, the tendency to 
 persecute on account of religion, however superstitious they 
 may be. It is rather by the possessors of ecclesiastical power 
 and wealth, by Archbisho[)s of Toledo and Prince Bishops of 
 Germany, whom dissent threatens with dispossession, or by 
 kings like Philip II. and Louis XIV., under priestly influence, 
 that the engines of persecnition are set at work. At the 
 time of the Crusades, Christian fanaticism being excited to 
 frenzy, there were dreadful massacres of Jews, and forced con- 
 versions, though no reliance can be placed on the figures 
 of mediaeval chroniclers, wlio set down at random twenty 
 thousand victims slain, or two hundred thousand forced con- 
 versions. The Jew at that time was odious not only as a mis- 
 believer in the midst of the Christian (-amp, whose presence 
 would turn from it tlie countenance of God, but as a suspected 
 friend and ally at heart, of the Oriental power. The Jews 
 nnist have foreseen the storm, and might liave escaped by 
 flight, but they were perhaps tempted by the vast harvest 
 afforded them in the general sale of ])ossessions by the Cru- 
 
 ^ Summa Theoloyica, Seciinda Sccitmla', Qiuust. X., Art. xi. 
 '^ lb., Art. xii. 
 
 '^ Quoted by Joseph Jacobs in his The ./pim of Anyevin England, 
 p. 185. 
 
THE JKWISII QUESTION. 
 
 2;jr) 
 
 saders to buy equipiuents, while by that trattio their unpopu- 
 larity was increased. But in ordinary times tlie main causes 
 of the liatred of the Jews among the common people appear 
 to have been usury and a social arrogance, which was particu- 
 larly galling on the part of the alien and the enemy of Christ. 
 In the riots the people made for the place in which the Jew- 
 ish bonds were kept. At York, the scene of the worst anti- 
 Jewish riot in England, the chronicler tells us there were two 
 .lews, Benedict and Joce, who had built in the middle of the 
 city houses like palaces, where they dwelt like princes of their 
 own people and tyrants of the Christians, keeping almost royal 
 state, and exercising harsh tyranny against tliose whona they 
 oppressed with their usuries.' The usury was grinding and 
 rutliiess. In the Chronicle of Jocelin de Brakelond we see 
 liow rapidly a debt of twenty-seven pounds, owed to a Jew, 
 grew to eight hundred and eighty. Jews at Oxford were for- 
 bidden by edict to take more than forty-three per cent. So it 
 was generally. Political economy will say that this was 
 justifiable, in the circumstances perhaps useful, and the pen- 
 alty due to the Christian superstition which made the lend- 
 ing of money at interest an unholy and therefore a perilous 
 trade. Nevertheless, it was hateful, at least sure to engen- 
 der hate. The Lombards and Cahorsins, who, when the Jews 
 were for a time driven from the field, took up the business, 
 incurred the same hatred, though in their case there was no 
 religious or social feeling to aggravate the unpopularity of the 
 trade. A Spanish Cluincellor describes the Jews as the blood- 
 suckers of the afflicted peojde, as men who exact fifty per 
 cent, eighty, a hundred, ;ind. through whom the land is deso- 
 late, their hard hearts being callous to tears and groans, and 
 their ears deaf to jietiticms for delay." Savonarola, the Chris- 
 tian socialist of his day, revived the ^Fonte di Pieta to rescue 
 his people from the fangs of the Jews. 
 
 Tiie law of the Jews themselves, be it observed, proscribes 
 
 ' William of Xi'ii-hunj, ([uoted by J()st'i)li Jacobs, jip. 117, 118. 
 2 Set' The Ilistiiry of the Jews from the War with Home to the Present 
 Time, p. 245. By Rev. II. C. Adani.s, M.A. 
 
w 
 
 w^ 
 
 2.36 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 i'l 
 
 l.:,.i 
 
 usury iu the case of a tril)al l)rotlier, permitting it in the case 
 of a stranger. " Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; 
 usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is 
 lent upon usury : unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury ; 
 but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend \ipon usury: that the 
 Tiord thy God may bless thee iu all that thou settest thine 
 hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it " (l)eut. 
 xxiii. 11), 20). Henee it appears, first, that Christendom was 
 not more superstitious on the subjtnjt of usury than were the 
 Jews themselves; and, secondly, that the Jew regarded and 
 treated the Christians among Avhom he was dwelling as 
 strangers. 
 
 The Jews after all were not so maltreated as to pre- 
 vent them from a«iassing what was for that time enormous 
 Avealth. And of this they ap})ear in those days, as they some- 
 times do iu these, to have made ostentatioiis and, in the eyes 
 of natives and Christians, especially if they had been vic- 
 tims of extortion, offensive use. A Cortes in Portugal, in 
 1481, comi)lained of Jewish luxury and display, of Jews who 
 rode splendidly caparisoned horses, wore silk doublets, carried 
 jewel-liilted swords, and entered churches where they mocked 
 the Avorship. Jewish haughtiness seems sometimes even to 
 have indulged in insults to the popular religion. At Oxford 
 it mocks the miracles of St. Frydeswide before her votaries, 
 assaults a religious procession, and tramples on the cross. At 
 Lynn the Jews attack a church to drag out a convert from 
 Judaism to Christianity, for whose Idood they tliirsted, and 
 the people of the ])lace are half afraid to resist them, knowing 
 that they are protected by the king. Besides their usury, the 
 Jews were suspected of cli|)ping the coin. Their function 
 .as the middlemen of royal rapacity must have been most odi- 
 ous, not least when they handled for the king Church estates 
 which he had wrongfully taken into his hands. In expelling 
 them from England, Edward I., the best of kings, no doid)t 
 tluuight that hi^ was doing a good deed, while his people were 
 unquestionably grateful. The worthy Abbot Samson, of St. 
 Edmondbury, in the same way earned the gratitude of the 
 
as 
 
 I 
 
 THE JKWISII QUK.STION. 
 
 people of that place by riddin-j it of the Jews. The clearest, 
 as well as tl-e most terril)Ie, case of ])ersecuti()ii i)f t\w. Jews 
 for religion Avas in Spain, and tliere, it nuist be remembered, 
 when the Jew was l)unied, the Christian siisijceted of heresy 
 was burned at his sidp. Even in Spain it is not easy 
 to say how much was liatred of religion, how nuich was hatred 
 of race. For centuries the Spanish Christians liad struggled 
 for the land with Islam, and the history of Spain had been 
 one long Crusade. The Jew was identitied with Islam. A 
 Jewish writer, Lady Magnus, in her history of her ra(!e, says : 
 
 " Roth in the East and in the West the rise of Arohainmedanism was, 
 in truth, as the dawn of a new day to tlie despised and dispersed Jews. If 
 we except tliat one bitter (piarrel between the earliest followers of the 
 T'rophet and the Jews of Arabia, —and that, we nnist note, was no organ- 
 ised or systematic persecution, but rather an ebullition of anf,'er from an 
 ardent enthusiast at his first unexpected rebuff,— we shall find that Juda- 
 ism had nuieh reason to rejoice at the rapid spread of Moluunmedanism. 
 Monotheists, like the Jews, abhorring like them all forms of image wor- 
 ship, worshipping in simple fashion their one (Jod Allah, observing die- 
 tary laws like to those of Moses, the Mohanuuedans both in their faith and 
 in their practice natirally found more grounds for agreement witli Jew- 
 ish doctrine than with the Christian dogma of a complex Godhead, or 
 with the undeveloped aspirations of the heathen. And besides some 
 identity of principle and of race between the Mohanuuedan and the Jew 
 there soon discovered itself a certain hardly definable kinship of habit 
 and custom, — a sort of sympathy, in fact, which is often more effectual 
 than even more important causes in promoting friemlly relations either 
 nationally or indlvichially. Then, also, there was the similarity of lan- 
 guage ; for Arabic, like Hebrew, belongs to what is called the Semitic 
 group. . . . Nearly a century of experience of the political and social 
 results of the Monammedan conciuests nuist, inevitably, have made the 
 year 710 stand out to the Jews of that time as the beginning of a grand 
 new era in their history. Centuries of cruelty had made the wise loyal 
 counsel of Jeremiah to 'i)ray for the peace of the land whither ye are 
 led captive ; its peace shall be your peace also,' a hard task for the most 
 loyal of consciences ; and in that early year of the eighth century, when 
 Spain was added to the list of the Mohamnu-dan victories, and the trium- 
 phant flag of the Crescent was hoisted on tower and citadel, the liberty 
 of conscience which it practically proclaimed nuist have been in the 
 widest sense a cause for national rejoicing to the Jews." 1 
 
 1 Ahiitit the Jews siiirc BihJe Times, pp. 105-197. By Lady Magnus. 
 
■in 
 
 238 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 
 i) 
 
 If, 
 
 The kindness of the Mahomedan to the Jew may here be 
 overrated, but the sympathy between Judaism and Ishim 
 3annot be questioned, and it meant common antipathy to 
 Ciu'istendom, which Christendom coukl not fail to reciprocate, 
 especially in its crusading mood. We sit at ease and sneer at 
 the fanaticism of the Crusaders. But some strong motive was 
 needed to make men leave their homes and tlieir wives and go 
 to die as the vanguard of Christendom on Syrian battlefields. 
 Let us not forget that the question whether Christianity and 
 Christian civilisation or Islam, with its despotism and its 
 harem, should reign in Europe came to be decided, not without 
 long and perilous debate, so near the heart of Christendom as 
 the plain of Tours. The Jews of Southern France, like those 
 of Spain, were suspected of inviting the invaders. If they 
 did they were .lot without excuse. But their excuse could 
 hardly be expected to pass muster with Cluirles Martel. 
 
 From religious intolerance in the Dark Ages, or long after 
 the end of the Dark Ages, nobody was free. The Jew was not. 
 He had striven as long as he had a chance, by all means in his 
 power, unscrupulously using the Roman or the Persian as 
 his instruments, to crush Christianity. His own law pun- 
 ished blasphemy with death and bade the worshipper of 
 Jehovah slaughter everything that breathed in a captured city 
 of the heathen. It was hence, iu fact, that the Inquisitor 
 partly drew his inspiration. Mediaeval darkness had passed 
 away when Judaism sought the life of Spinoza and scourged 
 Uriel Acosta in the synagogue. 
 
 Although tlie lot of a Jevv^ in the Middle Ages was hard in 
 itself, it was perhaps not so hard compared witli that of other 
 classes, notably with that of the serf, as the perpetual addition 
 of piteous epithets to his name by common writers might lead 
 us to suppose. "Ivanhoe" is not history; Freeman's works 
 are. Freeman says : 
 
 ' ' III the wake of the conqueror the Jews of Rouen found their w.ay 
 to London, and before long we find settlements of the Hebrew race in 
 the chief cities and boroughs of England : at York, Winchester, Lincoln, 
 Bristol, Oxford, and even at the gate of the Abbot of St. Edmonds and 
 
 I- 
 
THK JKAVISII QIKSTION. 
 
 239 
 
 St. Albans. They came as the king's special men, or more truly as his 
 special chattels, strangers alike to the Chiircii and the commonwealth, 
 but strong in the i)rotection of a master who commonly found it his 
 interest to protect them against all others. Hated, feared, and loathed, 
 but far too deeply feared to be scorned or oppressed, they stalked defi- 
 antly among the people of the land, on whose wants they throve, safe 
 from harm or insult, save now and then, when popular wrath burst all 
 bounds, when their proud mansions and fortitied (juarters could shelter 
 them no longer from raging crowds who were eager to wash out their 
 debts in the blood of their creditors. Tiie romantic picture of the 
 despised, trembling Jew, cringing before every Christian whom he meets, 
 is, in any age of English history, simply a romantic picture." ' 
 
 The Jews found it worth their wliile to buy their way- 
 back again and again into lands from which they had been 
 banished, and their existence in wliich is pictured by histo- 
 rians as a hell. If they were heavily taxed and sometimes 
 pillaged, they were exempted from tlie most grievous of all 
 taxes, service in war. Their badge, thougli a stigma, was also 
 a protection, since it marked them as serfs of the king. Even 
 the Ghetto, where there was one, would be comparatively a 
 small grievance when nationalities, crafts, and family clans 
 had their special quarters in cities. Any immigrant would 
 have been less at home in the closely organised communi- 
 ties of feudalism and Catholicism than in the loose society of 
 the Roman Empire, liut the Jew was there by his own 
 choice. The tenure of land in a feudal realm, being military, 
 land could hardly be held by a Jew. But Jews were not for- 
 bidden by law to hold land in England till late in the reign of 
 Henry III., when it was found they were getting estates into 
 their hands by mortgage, which would have been ruinous to 
 the feudal system. A community has a right to defend its 
 territory and its national integrity against an invader wliether 
 his weapon be the sword or foreclosure. In the territories of 
 the Italian Republics the Jews might, so far as Ave see, have 
 bought land and taken to farming had they pleased. But 
 before this they had thoroughly taken to trade. Under the 
 
 1 The Iteign of William Bufus- and the Accession of Henry the First, 
 Vol. I., p. IfiO. By Edward A. Freeman. 
 
H 
 
 ma^ 
 
 QUESTIUNS OV I'HK DAY. 
 
 IT I' 
 
 falling Empire they were tlie great slave-traders, l)uyiiig cap- 
 tives from bavbarian invaders nmi i)r()l)ably acting as general 
 brokers of spoils at the same time. There was, no doubt, a 
 })crpetual struggle between their craft and the brute force 
 of the feudal populations. Hut what moral prerogative has 
 craft over force? Mr. Arnold \Vhite tells the llussians 
 that if they would let Jewish intelligence have free course, 
 Jews would soon fill all high employments and places of ])ower 
 to the exclusion of the natives, who now hold them. Rus- 
 sians are bidden to acquiesce and rather to rejoice in this 
 by philosophers, who would perhaps not relish the cup if it 
 were commended to their own lips. The law of evolution, it is 
 said, prescribes the survival of tlie fittest. To which the Rus- 
 sian boor may rfeply, that it his force beats the fine intelligence 
 of the Jew the fittest will survive and the law of evolution will 
 be fulfilled. It was force rather than fine intelligence which 
 decided on the field of Zama that the Latin, not the Semite, 
 should rule the ancient and mould the modern world. 
 
 Religious antipathy, no doubt, has always added and con- 
 tinues to add bitterness to the social quarrel. Among igno- 
 rant peasants it still takes grotescpie, sometimes hideous, 
 shapes, such as the cruel fancy that the Jews sacrifice Chris- 
 tian children and spread pestilence. The Jew has always 
 been felt to be a power of evil, and the peasant iinaginatiun 
 lends to the power of evil horns and hoofs. But even the 
 peasant imagination does not lend horns and hoofs to any 
 power which is felt to be harmless, much less to one 
 which has always been beneficent, as we are asked to believe 
 that the Jews have been. The people are not everywhere 
 fools or fiends. Let it be remembered, too, that the Jewish 
 religion is not merely a religion of peculiar opinion. It is a 
 religion of social exclusiveness, of arrogated superiority to 
 Gentiles, and treatment of them as unclean, of the Pentateuch 
 with its Chosen People, and of the feast of l*urim. Milman 
 thinks it possible that in the offensive celebration of the feast 
 of Purim some of the calumnies about the Jews may have had 
 their source. . 
 
TlIK .TKWISH Ql'ESTlON. 
 
 241 
 
 People of a higlicr class, wliom Jewish usury does not touch, 
 object to Judaism on liifj^licr t,n-()unds. They object to it 
 because it is ;it variance with the unity of the nation and 
 threatens to eat out the core of nationality. Admitting,' the 
 keenness of Jewish intelligence, they say that intelligence is 
 not always beneficent, nor is submission to it always a matter 
 of duty, esiHH'ially wlien its ascendancy is gained by such 
 means as the dexterous a])i)ropriati(m of the circuhiting medium, 
 and when it is, as tliey believe, tlie result not of individual 
 effort in a fair field, but of the collective effort of a united, 
 though scattered race, aided by a press in Jewish hands. 
 They demur to Jiaving the liigh places of their community 
 monopolised, as jMr. Arnold White says they might be in 
 llussia, by unsynipatlietic aliens turning the rest of the nation 
 into hcAvers of wood and drawers of water. This feeling, 
 if it is sellish, is natural, and should be cliaritably viewed by 
 tliose who are free from the danger. 8ome of the opposition 
 to Jewish ascendancy arises from dread of materialism, the 
 triumph of which over the spiritual character and aspirations 
 of Christian communities would, it is apprehended, follow the 
 victory of the Jew, an impersonation of the power of 
 wealth. Among the anti-Semites are Christian Socialists 
 seeking the liberation of tlie labouring class from the 
 grasp of usury and the money power. Herr Stoecker belongs, 
 it seems, to this sect, and far from being an enemy of 
 the Jewish people, is a devout believer in the Old Testa- 
 ment. To be opposed on social or patriotic grounds to Juda- 
 ism as a system is not to be a hater of the Jews, any more than 
 to be opposed to Islam or Buddhism as a system is to be a 
 liater of the Mahomedan or the Buddhist. 
 
 The impression prevails that JuiUiism during the Middle 
 Ages was a civilising ])ower, in fact the great civilising power, 
 while its beneticent action was repressed by a barbarous Chris- 
 tendom. The leading shoot of civilisation, both material and 
 intellectual, was republican Italy, where the Jews, though 
 they were not persecuted, never played a leading part. You 
 may read through Sismondi's History almost without being 
 
 I'l 
 
T^r 
 
 242 
 
 QUESTIONS OK THK DAY. 
 
 
 ■I .1 
 
 '■': '* 
 
 ¥h 
 
 i i 
 
 made aware of tlieiv existence. Intellectually superior in a 
 certain sense no doubt they were; their wealth exempted them 
 from manual labour, and gave them an advantage, as it does 
 now, in the race of intelligence. They were also practically 
 exempted from military service. They preserved Hebrew and 
 Oriental learning, and to them Eurojje owed the transmission 
 of the works of Aristotle through Arabic translations. J>ut 
 in their mediaeval roll of celebrated names the great majority 
 are those of Talmudists or Cabbalists. The most illustrious 
 is that of Maimonides, whose influence on the progress of 
 humanity surely was not v(;ry great, albeit he was let and 
 hindered only by the narrow and jealous orthodoxy of his 
 own people. Jews were in request as pliysicians, though they 
 seem to have drawn their knowledge from the Arabians. They 
 had much to do with the foundation of the medical school of 
 Montpellier; the origin of that at Salei'uo was Benedictine. 
 But if they founded a medical science, what became of the 
 medical science which they founded? At the close of the 
 ^Middle Ages there was none. A Jewish physician, no doubt 
 the most eminent of his class, is called in by Innocent VIII. 
 His treatment is transfusion of blood. He kills three boys in 
 the process and tlien runs away. Of the money trade the 
 Jews were generally the masters, though in Italy that, too, 
 was in the hands of native houses, such as the IMedici, Bardi, 
 and Peruzzi, while at a later period the Fuggers of Augsburg 
 were the llothschilds of Germany. But the Jews never were 
 the masters of the grand commerce or of that maritime enter- 
 prise in which the INliddle Ages gloriously closed. Kosseeuw 
 Saint-Hilaire has observed in his history of Spain that 
 their addiction was to petty trade. Showing abundant 
 sympathy for Jewish wrongs, he finds himself compelled to con- 
 trast the *' narrowness and rapacity " of their commerce with 
 the boldness and grandeur of Arab enterprise.^ The slave 
 trade, which in the early Middle Ages was in Jewish hands, 
 was not then the re})roach that it is now, yet it never was a 
 noble or a beneficent trade. Spain is supposed to have owed 
 
 » Histoirc (VEspngnp, Vol. III., p. 147. 
 
Till-: J i: WISH QUESTION. 
 
 243 
 
 her fall to the expulsion of the Jews, but the acme of her 
 greatness came after tlieir fxpulsion; and her fall was due to 
 despotism, civil and religious, to her false eonunercial sys- 
 tem, to the diversion of her energy from industry to gold- 
 seeking and conquest, and not least to the overgrown and 
 heterogeneous euipire which was the supposed foundation of 
 her power. England, in the period between the exjnilsion of 
 the Jews under Edward I. and their readniission under Crom- 
 well, became a eomnuu'cial nation and a famous naval i)ower , 
 and the greatness thus achieved was English, not Gibeonite, 
 as it would have been under Jtjwish ascendancy; it was part 
 of the fulness of national life, and was: i)roliHc not only of 
 Whittingtons and Drakes, but of Shakespeares and Uacons. 
 As financiers it is likely tluit the Jews were useful in ad- 
 vancing money for great works; they also furnished money 
 for enterprises such as Strongbow's expedition to Ireland. 
 But the assertion, often repeated, that they provided the 
 mean::; Tor building the churclies, abbeys, and colleges of 
 England must be qualified in face of the fact that the 
 greater part of those edifices was of dates subsequent to the 
 expulsion of the Jews. Salisl)ury Cathedral was built before 
 the expulsion. But we happen to know that the forty thou- 
 sand marks which it cost were supplied by contributions from 
 the Prebendaries, collections from different dioceses, and 
 grants from Al'cia de Bruere and other benefactors.* Judaism 
 is now the great financial power of Europe, that is, it is the 
 greatest power of all. It is no longer necessary, out of pity 
 for it, to falsify history and traduce Christendom. 
 
 Of the two works on wliich, during the IVFiddle Ages, Jew- 
 ish intellect was chiefly employed, the Cabbala is on all hands 
 allowed to be mystical nonsense. Of the Talmud, Dr. Farrar, 
 assuredly no Jew-baiter, in his Preface to a volume of selec- 
 tions from it, says : 
 
 " Wisdom there is in the Talmud, and eloquence and high morality ; 
 of this the reader may learn something even in the small compass of the 
 
 * See Murray's Handbook to the CalhedniU of England. Southern 
 Divisir.n, Part I., p. S>4. 
 
I'l 
 
 244 
 
 QIKSTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 \' '. 
 
 tollmviiig pases. How cinilil it. bo otliprvvisc wiiou wo boar in iiiiiid tliat 
 tiie 'lalimid lills twolvo laruc fi>ii() voiuiucs, iimi rcprosoiils tho main liter- 
 ature of a nation (luring several Imndrod years '.' Hut yet I venture to 
 say that it would be impossible to find less wisdom, less elocjuence, and 
 le.ss high morality, imbedded in a vaster bulk of what is utterly valuele.ss 
 to maidiind, — to .say nothing of those parts of it which are indelicate 
 and even obscene, — in any other national literature of the same extent. 
 And even of the valuable residuum of true and holy thouglits, I doubt 
 whether there is even one which had not long been anticijtated, and 
 which is not found more nobly set forth in the Scriptures of tlie Old and 
 New Testament." ' 
 
 
 This judgment is fully borne out by the selections which 
 follow, and whicli are made by Mr. Hershon, a known Hebrew 
 scholar, (m an impartial principle. Jt is supported by other 
 independent critics, such as Thirlwall, who spoke of the Tal- 
 mud as an ocean of nonsense. The writer will not presume 
 to speak, thougli he looks back upon the perusal of a Latin 
 translation of the Mishna as one of the least pleasant labours 
 cf a student's life. Dr. Uetitsch's counterfeit presentment, to 
 Avhich Dr. Farrar refers, is a standing caution. In every page 
 of the volume of selections we have such things as this: 
 
 " There were two things which God first tliought of creating on the eve 
 of the Sabbath, which, however, were not created till after the Sabbath 
 had closed. The first was fire, which Adam by <livine suggestion drew 
 forth by .striking together two stones ; and the .second was the mule, pro- 
 duced by the crossing of two different animals." — P'sachim, fol. 54, col. 1. 
 
 "The Kabbis have taught that there are three reasons why a person 
 sliould not enter a ruin: 1. Because he maybe suspected of evil intent; 
 2. Because the walls might tumble upon him ; 3. And because of evil 
 spirits that frecjuent such places." — Bcrachoth, fol. 3, col. 1. 
 
 "The stone which Og, King of Bashan, meant to throw upon Israel is 
 tlio .subject of a tradition delivered on Sinai. ' The camp of Israel I .see,' 
 lie said, ' extends three miles ; I .shall therefore go and root up a mom tain 
 three miles in extent and throw it upon them.' So off he went, and find- 
 ing sucli a mountain, raised it on Ins liead, but the Holy One — blessed be 
 lie! — sent an army of ants against liim, which so bored the mountain 
 over Ids head tliat it slipped down upon his shoulders, from which he 
 
 1 A Tahnmlic Misrellany. Compiled and translated by Paul Isaac 
 Hershon, with introductory preface by Bev. F. W. Farrar, D.D., F.B.S. 
 
 II 
 
iiiiiid that 
 itiiiiii liter- 
 venture to 
 lence, and 
 y valueless 
 indelicate 
 ne extent. 
 s, I doubt 
 )ate(l, and 
 e Old and 
 
 IS which 
 
 by other 
 tlio Tul- 
 prcstiine 
 a Latin 
 t hibotirs 
 :inent, to 
 ery page 
 [S: 
 
 m the eve 
 3 Sabbath 
 tioii drew 
 nule, pro- 
 
 54,cul. 1. 
 
 a person 
 il intent ; 
 ie of evil 
 
 1 Israel is 
 lel I see,' 
 nioui tiiiii 
 and find- 
 )lessed be 
 nountain 
 wliicli he 
 
 lul Isaac 
 F.K.S. 
 
 TIIK .IK WISH C^l KSilON. 
 
 245 
 
 could not lift it, because his teetli, i)rofruding, liad riveted it upon him." 
 — Brrachoth, fol. r)J, col. 2. 
 
 "Three tiiinjJ!s are said respeetinj,' the tiiif^cr-nails : lie who trims his 
 nails and buries tlie pariiif^s is a pious man ; he who burns the.se is a 
 righteous man ; but he who throws them away is a wieked man, for mis- 
 cliance mij^lit follow, should a female step over them." — Mved /ut'Kii, 
 fol. 18, col. 1." 
 
 Abrahaiu'.s height, aceonliiig to the Taliuudists, was that of 
 sevcuty-four men put togetlier. lli.s t'ooil, hi.s dres.s, ami hi.s 
 strength were those of seventy-four men. He bnilt for the 
 abode of liis seventeen children by Ketnrah, an iron city, th(» 
 walls wheri'of were so lofty tliat the sun never penetrated 
 them. He gave them a bowl full of precious stones, the bril- 
 liancy of whi(*h supplied them with light in the abseiuie of the 
 sun. He had a itreeious stone suspended from his neck, upon 
 which every sick jjcrson who gazed was heahid of his disease, 
 and when he died God hung up the stone on the sphere of the 
 sun. liefore his time there was no suijh thing as a beard; 
 but as many mistook Abraham and Isaac for each other, Abra- 
 ham prayed to God for a beard to distinguish him, aiul it was 
 granted him. Every one has a thousand malignant spirits at 
 his left side, and ten thousand at his right. The crowding at 
 the schools is caused by their pushing in. If one would dis- 
 cover traces of their presence, he has only to sift some ashes 
 on the floor at his bedside, and next morning he will see the 
 footmarks as of fowls. If he would see the demons them- 
 selves, he must burn to ashes the afterbirth of a first-born 
 black kitten, the offspring of a first-born black cat, put some 
 of the ashes into liis eyes, and he will not fail to see the 
 demons. The medical and physical apophthegms of the Tal- 
 mud do not give much evidence of sciencte: "dropsy is a sign 
 of «'n, jaundice of hatred without a cause, and rpiinsy of slan- 
 der"; "six things possess medicinal virttie: cabbage, lung- 
 Avort beet-root, water, certain parts of the offal of animals, 
 and, m the opinion of some, little fishes." Mr. Hershon's 
 collection abounds with nonsense on this subject as absurd as 
 
 ' Quoted in IIer.shon'.s Miscellany. 
 
 W 
 
w^ 
 
 r i 
 
 
 'I; t 
 
 246 
 
 (4UKSTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 anything in mediseval quackery. Other featiues of the work 
 are an Oriental indelicacy and a pride of liabbinical learn- 
 ing ■which treats illiteracy as almost criminal, looking down 
 upon the illiterate as an Amoric^an would look down upon the 
 negro. The most superstitious of Christian writings in the 
 Dark Ages could not be more tainted with demonology and 
 witclicraft, nor in any monkish chronicle do we rind fables so 
 gross. Few would set the Talmud, as presented by Mi Her- 
 shon, or the Cabbala above the works of such witers as 
 Anselm, A<piinas, the author of " Imitatio Christi,' or the 
 authors of hymns and liturgical compositions of the Christian 
 Middle Ages. 
 
 We have been speaking, be it observed, of the Talmud as 
 the work and nu)nument of Jewish intelligence and morality 
 in the Dark Ages ; Ave have not been speaking of the intelli- 
 gence or morality of the J aw 6 of the present day. The charge 
 is constantly brouglit against (,'hristendom of having by its 
 barbarous bigotry repressed the beneficent action of Jewish 
 intellect, which would otherwise have enlightened and civil- 
 ised the world. The answer is apparently found in the 
 Cabbala and the Talmud. From a perusal of the Jewish his- 
 torian Graetz, it would seem that liabbinical orthodoxy was 
 not less opposed than Papal orthodoxy to science, philosophy, 
 and cidture. We are led to l^elievi^ that, at last, Talmudic 
 bigotry and obscurantism had i)revailed, when Judaism was 
 rescued by Moses Mendelssohn, who himself owed his emaici- 
 pation to Lessing. Natlian tlie Wise is a philoso})hv^r and 
 philanthropist of the eighteenth century, not a Talnuulic Jew. 
 
 Still more notable, however, than the absurdities are the 
 passages indicative of a tribal nu)rality which jjrescribes one 
 mode of dealing with those who are, and another mode of 
 dealing with those who are not, of the tribe. 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 " If the ox of an Israelite brui.se the ox of a (leiitile, the Israelite is 
 exempt from paying daiiiage.s ; but should the ox of a Gentile bruise the 
 ox of an Israelite, the (lentile is bound to recompense him in full." — 
 Bavu lutinn, fol. ;J8, col. 1. 
 
 "When an Israelite and a Gentih have a lawsuit before thee, if thou 
 
TllK .JEWISH QUESTION. 
 
 Sit 
 
 the work 
 3iil learn- 
 ing down 
 
 upon tlie 
 gs in the 
 )logy and 
 
 fables so 
 Ml Her- 
 ^r' iters as 
 ,' or the 
 Christian 
 
 'almud as 
 
 morality 
 
 le intelli- 
 
 he charge 
 
 ng by its 
 
 >f Jewish 
 
 and civil- 
 
 d in the 
 
 wish his- 
 
 doxy was 
 
 iloso])hy, 
 
 Talmui'.io 
 
 aisni ^v'as 
 
 s enia'.ici- 
 
 ])h.^r and 
 
 idic Jew. 
 
 s are the 
 
 ribes one 
 
 mode of 
 
 Israelite is 
 bruise the 
 n full." — 
 
 canst, acquit the fdrmor apcordiiis to the laws of Israel, and tell the latter 
 such is oitr law ; if thou canst ^vt him off in accordance with tJentile law, 
 do so, and say to the plaintiff such is your law ; but if he cannot be 
 aciiuittcd according to eitlier law, then bring forward adroit pretexts and 
 .secure his ac(iuittal. Tliese arc tiie words of the Kabbi Islnnael. Habbi 
 Akiva .says, ' No ffxlse i)rctext should be brought forward, because, if 
 fouii 1 out, the name of CJod would be blasphemed ; but if there be no 
 fear of that, then it may be adduced.' " — lb., fol. 113, col. 1. 
 
 " If one finds lost property in a locality where a majority are Israelites, 
 he is boiuid to proclaim it ; but he is not bound to do so if the majority 
 be Gentiles." — Bnva Metxia, fol. 24, col. 1. 
 
 " Rabbi Shemuel says advantage may be taken of the mistakes of a 
 Gentile. He once bouglit a gold plate as a copper of a Gentile for four 
 zouzim, and then cheated liim out of one zouz into the bargain. ' av 
 Cahana purchased a hundred and twenty vessels of wine from a Gentile 
 for a hundred zouzim, and swindled \\\n\ in the payment out of one of tlie 
 hundred, and tliat while the Gentile assured him that he confidently 
 trusted to his honesty. Hava once went parts with a Gentile and bought 
 a tree which was cut up into logs. 'I'his done, he bade his servant go and 
 pick him out the largest logs, but to be sure to take no more than tlie 
 proper number, because tiie Gentile knew iiow many tliere were. As 
 l{av Aghi was walking abroad one day he saw some grapes growing in a 
 roadside vineyard, and sent his .servant to see whom they belonged to. 
 ' If they belong to a Gentile,' he said, ' l)ring some here to me ; but if they 
 belong to an Israelite, do not nuHUIle with tlieni.' Tlie owner, who hap- 
 pened to be in the vineyard, overheard the Habbi's order and called out, 
 ' What ! is it lawful to rob a Gentile ?' ' ( )h, no,' .said the Habbi evasively ; 
 'a Gentile might sell, but an Israelite would not.' " — Bava Kama, fol. 
 113, r,>l. 2.1 
 
 The principle which animates these passages appears in a 
 milder form ii- the Hebrew Scriptures, which license perpet- 
 ual bondage aiul the taking of interest in the case of a Gentile, 
 not in tliat of a Hebrew. Uut such a jirinciph , however mildly 
 expressed, was too likely to be extended in practice. Dr. 
 Edersheim, the author of "The l^ife and Times of Jesus the 
 Messiah," is favouralile eiumgh on religious grounds to the 
 .lews; but i i describing their relations to the Gentiles, as 
 regulated b^ the Talnuid, he says : 
 
 ee, if thou 
 
 ' Hershon's MixreUnni' 
 
rs'^Br 
 
 
 Iff '■ 
 
 
 248 
 
 QUESTIONS OF 'PIIE DAY. 
 
 "To begin with, every (Iciitile ciiild, so soon as born, was to be 
 regarded as unclean. Those who actually worshipped mountains, hills, 
 bu.shes, etc. — in short, gross idolaters — should be rut down with the 
 sword. But as it was impossible to exterminate heathenism, Rabbinical 
 legislation kept certain delinite objects in view, which may be thus sum- 
 marised : To prevent Jews from being inadvertently led into idolatry ; 
 to avoid all participation in idolatry ; not to do anything which might 
 aid the heathen in the'r worship ; and, beyond all this, not to give 
 pleasure, or even help, to heathens. The latter involved a most dan- 
 gerous principle, capable of almost indetinite application by fanaticism. 
 Even the Mishna goes so far as to forbid aid to a mother in the hour of 
 her need, or nourishment to her babe, in order not to bring up a child 
 for idolatry ! But this is not all. Heathens were, indeed, not to be 
 precipitated into danger, but yet not to be delivered from it. Indeed, 
 an isolated teacher vei\tures even upon this statement : ' The best among 
 the Gentiles, kill ; the best among serpents, crush its head.' Even more 
 terrible was the fanaticism which directed that heretics, traitors, and 
 those who had left the Jewish faith should be thrown into actual danger, 
 and, if they were in such, all means for their escape removed. No inter- 
 course of any kind was to be had with such, — not even to invoke their 
 medical aid in case of danger to life, since it was deemed that he who 
 had to do with heretics was in imminent peril of becoming one himself, 
 and that, if a heretic returned to the true faith, he should die at once, — 
 partly, probably, to expiate his guilt, and partly from fear of relapse." * 
 
 Not less significant are the Talniu(Ii(3 expressions of tri- 
 bal pride and contempt of common humanity. " All Israel- 
 ites are princes." " All Israelites are iioly." "Happy are ye, 
 Israel, for every on(! of you, from the least even to the 
 greatest, is a great philoso})her." " As it is impossible for the 
 world to be without air, so also is it impossible for the world 
 to be without Israel." "One empire cometli and another 
 passeth away, but Israel abideth for ever." "Tlie world was 
 created only for Isra(d : none are called the children of God 
 but Israel; noiu' are l)eloved before God but Israel." "Ten 
 nunistires of wisdom came down to the world. The land of 
 Israel received nine, the rest of the Avorld but one only." 
 
 Critics of Judaism are accused of bigotry of race, as well as 
 of bigotry of religion. The accusation comes strangely from 
 
 » Vol. I., pp. 00, 91. 
 
THE JEWISH QUESTION. 
 
 249 
 
 <M 
 
 ras to be 
 ins, hills, 
 with the 
 abbinical 
 bus smn- 
 idolatry ; 
 ich might 
 it to give 
 iiost daii- 
 inaticism. 
 e hour of 
 p a child 
 not to be 
 Indeed, 
 ;st among 
 veil more 
 itors, and 
 il danger, 
 No inter- 
 ^oke their 
 it he who 
 3 himself, 
 it once, — 
 lapse." * 
 
 of tri- 
 
 Israel- 
 
 are ye, 
 
 to the 
 
 R for tlie 
 
 le world 
 
 another 
 
 n-ld was 
 
 of God 
 
 " Ten 
 
 hmd of 
 
 only." 
 
 well as 
 
 ly from 
 
 those who style themselves the Chosen People, make race a 
 religion, and treat all races except their own as Gentiles and 
 unclean. 
 
 The notion thnt the Jews are to be maltreated because their 
 ancestors by the hand of Pilate crucified Christ, has long been 
 discarded and derided by all enlightened Christians. But 
 equally baseless is the notion that Christianity owes homage 
 to Judaism, has any particular interest in it, or any particular 
 duty concerning it. To Talmudic Judaism, at all events, it 
 owes nothing. Whether in its origin it owed anything to the 
 liberal school of Hillel, we cannot tell. The Talmud is a vast 
 repertory of legalism, formalism, ceremonialism, and casuis- 
 try. Nothing can be more opposed to the spontaneity of con- 
 science, trust in principle, and preference of the spirit to the 
 letter characteristic of the Gospel, in which even the Ten Com- 
 mandments are superseded by the Two. The pervading inten- 
 tion of the Talmud is, by multiplying ceremonial barriers, to 
 keep the Chosen People separate from tlie Gentiles among 
 whom they lived, in other words, to perpetuate the tribe. 
 Christianity is a religion of humanity. Baptism is a rite of 
 initiation into a universal brotherhood. Circumcision, the 
 Jewish circumcision at all events, is the mark of enrolment 
 in an exclusive tribe. The fundamental antagonism of Juda- 
 ism to Christianity was shown, not only in the murder of 
 Christ, but in the bitter persecution of his followers. Chris- 
 tianity had its antecedents, but it begins with Christ: it has 
 no relation to Talmudic Judaism but those of reaction and 
 secession. 
 
 . We have given up the fancy that the Jew is accursed. We 
 must cease to believe that he is sacred. Israel was the favour- 
 ite people of Jehovah, as every tribe was the favourite of its 
 own god. Tlie belief that the Father of all and the God of 
 justice had a favourite race, made Avith it a covenant sealed 
 witJi the barbarous rite of circumcision, pledged liimself to 
 promote its interest against those of other races, destroyed all 
 the innocent first-born of Egypt to force Phuvaoh to let 
 it go, licensed its aggrandisement by conquest, stopped the 
 
 , ■ 
 
m 
 
 250 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 ■■w \-' 
 
 y M 
 
 sun in heaven to give it time to slaughter people whose lands 
 it had invaded Avitliout a cause, and gratified its malignity by 
 cji joining it when it took one of the cities which Avere given 
 it for its inheritance to save alive nothing that breathed, 
 ought now to be laid aside, with all its corollaries and conse- 
 quences, including the passionate, and, to the Hebrew, some- 
 what offensive effort to convert tliis particular race to Chris- 
 tianity. We have been told from the pulpit that at the 
 last day the world will be judgod by a Jew, and a religious 
 lady once suggested to a Jew who had been converted to 
 Christianity that he should go on circumcising his sons. "We 
 shall have little right to complain of the tribal arrogance of 
 tlie Jew so long as the Old Testament continues to be indis- 
 criminately read in our churches and while Ave persist, by 
 talking of a chosen people, in ascribing favouritism to the 
 Almighty. The belief that "God has made of one blood all 
 nations of men to dwell ou the face of the earth," is the foun- 
 dation of a religion of humanity, and Judaism is its practi- 
 cal denial. 
 
 Jesus called himself the Son of Man. He was a Galilean, 
 that is, in higli Jewish estimation, an inferior Jew, set- 
 ting aside the "endless" or "profitless" genealogies Avliich 
 the writer of the First Epistle to Timotliy classes with fables 
 and bids us not to heed. Born into Judaism, he accepted it 
 and "fulfilled" all its "righteousness," wliile he must have 
 known, as his antagonists did, that his principles would sub- 
 vert it. Because he did this, we have taken upon our under- 
 standings and hearts a belief in the divine authority of the 
 Old Testament, that is, of the Avhole mass of Hebrew litera- 
 ture; Ave have bound ourselves to see inspiration, not only in 
 its more elevated, spiritual, and moral parts, but in those 
 Avhich are not elevated, spiritual, or even moral. We torture 
 our consciences into approval of the spoiling of the Egyptians 
 by a fraud, the slaughter of the Canaanites, the slaying 
 of Sisera, the hcAving of Agag in j)ieces before- the Lord, and 
 David's legacy of A'engeance; our intellects into the accept- 
 ance of the Book of Chronicles as authentic historv, and of 
 
 
THE jp]wiSH qup:stion. 
 
 251 
 
 such miracles as the stopping of the sun, the conversion of 
 Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, the speaking ass of Balaam, 
 the destruction of the children who mocked Eliblia by a bear, 
 and the sojourn of Jonah in the belly of a Avhale. In church 
 we read, with psalms of universal beauty, psalms of Oriental 
 vindictiveness. We constrain ourselves to see divine mean- 
 ing, not only in the sublime passages of Isaiah, but in the ob- 
 scurest and most incoherent utterances of his brother prophets. 
 We read theological mysteries into a love-song because it is a 
 part of the sacred volume. Till this superstition is cast out 
 we shall ill appreciate what is really divine in the Old 
 Testamei't. Not in the darker side of the Puritan character 
 alone are v, ?, evil effects of this idolatry to be traced. 
 
 There was much that was infinitely memorable, but recent 
 criticism forbids us to believe that there was anything miracu- 
 lous, in the history of Israel. Whatever may have been the 
 local origin of the Jews, the race, we may be sure, was 
 cast in the same primeval mould as tlie kindred races. The 
 story of the Patriarchs and the Exodus being in all its parts 
 — the primitive theophanies in the tents of Patriarchs, the 
 supernatural birth of Isaac, the destruction of Hodom and 
 (iomorrah, the transformation of Lot's wife, the wrestling of 
 Jacob Avitli Jehovah, the marvellous story of Joseph, the 
 miraculous multiplication of the Israelites, the competition 
 between the envoys of Jehovah and the Egyptian magicians, 
 the plagues of Egypt, the drying up of the lied Sea, the forty 
 years' wandering in tlie barren Sinaitic desert, the prodigies 
 which there took place, the giants of Canaan, and the stop- 
 ping of the sun — manifestly poetical, it would seem that the 
 narrative as a whole must, in accordance with a well-knoAVii 
 canon of criticism, be dismissed from history and relegated 
 to another domain.^ Of the exact process by which the finer 
 
 1 It seems not unlikely from annlogy that the story of the Exodus may 
 be in part an explanation of the institution of tlie Passover and other Jew- 
 ish rites and customs of whieh the origin was lost. Tlie figures of Jewish 
 captives on Egyptian monuments may be accounted for by Egyptian con- 
 quest. Nothing can be less satisfactory than Henan's attempt to ration- 
 alise tlie story of the Patriarchs and the Exodus. 
 
t I 
 
 I! 
 
 h 
 
 B^ 'i*ti 
 
 m'n 
 
 11 
 
 ■■ i 
 
 252 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 spirits of Israel attained a tribal monotheism, which at last 
 verged on monotheism pure and simple, and carried with it 
 a high morality, while the grosser spirits were always hanker- 
 ing alter the groves and images of their idolatry, no exact 
 account has been, given us, though the prophets, as moral re- 
 formers, clearly played a great part in it. But it involved no 
 miracle, since without miracle Socrates and Plato, Marcus 
 Aurelius and Epictetus could rise to the same level. The 
 doctrine of the immortality of the soul was extraneous to 
 Judaism, and was rejected by one of its sects. The tribal 
 idea of immortality is the perpetuation of the family in the 
 tribe. 
 
 N^or is there anything miraculous, penal, or even mysteri- 
 ous, about Jewish dispersion or its commercial character. 
 The case of Israel is only one, though incomparably the most 
 sharply defined, as well as the most memorable, of a number 
 of cases of parasitism, to borrow that phrase from botany. 
 Other cases are those of the Armenians, the Parsees, the Greeks 
 of the dispersion, ancient and modern, and humblest of all, 
 the Gipsies, by the disappearance of whose wandering camp 
 with its swarthy brood from the country wayside, a feature 
 more dear than respectable has been taken from the landscape 
 of rural life in England. The Italians, when their country 
 was in the hands of foreign powers, showed a tendency of the 
 same kind. The dispersion of the Jews was anterior to the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, for Paul found Jewish settlements, 
 mercantile, no doubt, wherever he went. It may have be- 
 gun with the transplantation to Babylon, and have been ex- 
 tended l)y the transplantation to Egypt under the Ptolemies. 
 But its principal cause probably was the narrowness of the 
 ilewish territory, combined with the love of gain in the Jew. 
 The Hebrew was the near kinsman of the Phcenician, who by 
 the narrowness of his territory and his love of gain was like- 
 wise impelled to adventure ; and Jewish parasitism is the coun- 
 ter[)art, under another form, of that Phoenician colonisation 
 wlii(^h, unlike the colonisation of the Greek, was strictly 
 mercantile in its aim. The land of the Jew was not so mari- 
 
 
THE JEWISH QUESTION. 
 
 253 
 
 time as that of the IMioenician, it had not siicli harbours, such 
 store of timber for ship-buiUIing close to the water, or such 
 sites for seaboard cities like Tyre and Sidon. ^Moreover when 
 the Jewish character was being formed, the Philijline held the 
 coast. Apparently, there was a religious party in .Judea which 
 wished to make the people simple and pious tillers of the soil, 
 and from which emanated the ideal of that polity of husband- 
 men Avith hereditary lots and a year of jubilee, ascribed by its 
 framers to the great lawgiver of the race. Hut the trading 
 instinct was too strong. In the stories of the patriarch who 
 bought the birthright of his Iningry brother, of the Jewish 
 vizier who taught Pharaoh how to obtain the surrender of all 
 the freeholds of his people by taking advantage of the famine, 
 and of the Hebrews who spoiled the Egyptians by pretending 
 to borrow jewels which they meant never to return, we see 
 the gleamings of a character which was not likely to be con- 
 tent with the moderate gains of a small farming community. 
 Jewish parasitism, still to use the botanic metaphor, could 
 not fail to be confirmed by the fall of Jerusalem, which de- 
 prived the dispersed nationality of its centre, though the hoi}'' 
 city even in its desolation remained the ISIecca of Judaism. 
 Renan thinks that in tlie period which followed, Israel took 
 up extraneous elements by conversion, so that the sui)posetl 
 purity of race is imaginary, and the identity of feature is only 
 the imprint of a common dwelUng-place and mode of life; in 
 which case the rhapsodies of "Daniel Deronda '" have little 
 meaning. There is a passage in the Talmud wliich suggests 
 that the putative descent of a Gentile from the ten lost tribes 
 might legalise intermarriage with him.^ But nationality was 
 preserved by the Mosaic law, the Talmud, and circumcis- 
 ion, the last being probably the strongest bond of all. "Tliat 
 the Jews," says Spinoza, "have maintained themselves so long 
 in spite of their disorganised or dispersed condition, is not at 
 all to be wondered at when it is considered how they separated 
 themselves from all other nationalities in such a wav as to 
 
 1 See Yevamoth, fol. 16, col. 2, quoted in Ilerslion's Tahnndic Miscel- 
 lany, p. 134. 
 
■ 
 
 254 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 If ) 
 
 
 ■ I, 
 
 U 
 
 bring upon themselves the hatred of all, and that, not only by 
 external rites contrary to those of other nations, but also by 
 the sign of circumcision, which they retain most religiously." 
 
 Any other race of strong vitality with the same bonds 
 and barriers might have retained their nationality equally 
 well. The Parsees, though a much weaker community in 
 their origin, have retained their separate existence for eleven 
 centuries. The Gipsies appear to have retained their sepa- 
 rate existence for five centuries. There is therefore notliing 
 miraculous about the wandering Jew, nor need we suppose 
 that he is the special object either of the Avrath or the favour 
 of heaven. 
 
 Circumcision, deemed by Spinoza the bond of Judaism, is a 
 practice which, if Jews are to be citizens, and citizens are 
 to be patriots, owing the community not bare obedience but 
 the allegiance of the heart, governments would seem entitled 
 to restrain. It has nothing to do with religious opinion, nor, 
 in repressing it, would religious liberty be infringed. It is 
 a barbarous tribal rite, the object of Avhicli is to cut off the 
 members of the tribe from the rest of mankind, and wliich per- 
 formed on an infant dedicates him for life, without his own 
 consenc, to a social antagonism not less contrary to his proper 
 relations with his fellow citizens than it is obsolete and sense- 
 less. That Jewish circumcision was really tribal, the account 
 of its origin^ seems to prove. That it has served the pur- 
 pose of tribal isolation since the dispersion of the Jews is 
 certain. Nor could a more effective badge or barrier have 
 been devised. 
 
 Israel thenceforth definitely became Avhat it has always 
 remained, a tribe scattered yet united, sojourning in all com- 
 munities, blending with none, and forming a nation within 
 each nation. The natural tendency of a race without a 
 country was not to agriculture but to such trades as the Jew 
 has plied, especially the money trade. The insecurity and 
 uncertainty of his residence would deter him from owning 
 property which could not easily be removed. Habit became 
 
 ' Exod. iv. 12. 
 
sepa- 
 
 THE JEWISH QUESTION. 
 
 255 
 
 ingrained and the attempts to form agricultural colonies ot 
 the Jews at the present day appear to be uniformly unsu(!- 
 cessful. Laurence Oliphant was interested in these experi- 
 ments, feeling that "the great fault and weakness of the Jews 
 was their inability for handiwork; and to train even a few 
 into that and into a co-operative manner of life would be a 
 great gain." ^ But the trading instinct seems to liave bmui too 
 inveterate even when Jews have been carried back to tlunr own 
 land. The Jew has thus worn everywhere the unjjopular aspect 
 of an intruder, who by his financial skill was absorbing the 
 wealth of the community without adding to it. Not to pro- 
 duce but to make a market of everything has been his general 
 tendency and forte. Among other things he has made a 
 market of war. He bought Christian captives and si)oils of 
 the barbariaii invaders of the Roman Empire. He bought 
 up at forced sales the property of those who were departing 
 for the Crusades. He has constantly followed in the Avake 
 of armies, making his profit out of the havoc and out of the 
 recklessness of the soldier. General Grant found it necessary 
 to banish Jews from his camp. On the field of Austerlitz 
 Marshal Lannes bids one who accosts him to wait till he has 
 stopped the depredations of the Jews. 
 
 That the Jew clings not only to his religion but to his 
 nationality, and that the two are blended together, or rather 
 are identical, can hardly be doubted when Ave find in a Jewish 
 Catechism such a passage as this: 
 
 " Q. What other ordinances has God made to prevent our falling into 
 sin ? 
 
 " A. Those wliich forbid our associating with bad men or intermarry- 
 ing with wicked and idolatrous nations. 
 
 " ' Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.' — Exod. xxiii. 2. 
 " ' Neither shalt thou make marriage with them (the nations) , thy 
 daughter thou shalt not give to his son, nor his daughter 
 shalt thou take unto thy son.' — Deut. vii. 3. 
 " §. Is this latter command important? 
 
 * Memoirs of the Life of Laurence Oliphant, Vol. II., p. 231. By 
 Margaret Oliphant W. Oliphant. 
 
1 
 
 H' 
 
 256 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 M 
 
 'k;^! 
 
 
 " A. Yes, it is of the greatest moment, aud the experience of the past 
 has shown its importance. 
 " Q. In what manner ? 
 
 " A. Wlicnever our people have intermarried with other nations, they 
 liave fallen into tiii'ir idolatries. 
 
 " ' But they were mingled among the heathen and learned their 
 works ; and they served their idols which were a snare unto 
 them.' — I's. evi. ;5t, .'J5. 
 " Q. Does the law lay much stress upon this precept ? 
 " A. Yes, we are repeatedly enjoined to keep from admixture of race, 
 and many of the laws relating to the soil are referable to this subject." 
 
 Again, — 
 
 " §. Are we commanded still to keep ourselves distinct from other 
 nations ? 
 
 "^1. Assuredly ; we may love them as ourselves, help them in their 
 need, and labour with them for the good of our fellow-creatures, but we 
 must not intermarry with them, lest we should be led away from the 
 Law." 1 
 
 The Roman Catholic Church, it is true, discourages mixed 
 marriages on religious grounds. But she does not teach her 
 children that "assuredly they are a nation," and she does 
 try to bring all mankind within her fold. If the Jews, as one 
 of their chief Rabbis seems to intimate, are not a natioii but a 
 church, wliy do they not proselytise? How came it to be said 
 of them, by one of their own race, that they no more desire to 
 make converts than does the House of Lords? However, sup- 
 posing religion to be the bond, it is the religion of Moses. 
 Does not the religion of Moses separate the people of Jehovah 
 from mankind? The Eastern Jew, the Russian or Polish Jew, 
 and the orthodox Jew everywhere, it appears, still hold 
 by the Talmud; jMr. Hershon, at least, says that "to the 
 orthodox Jew the Talmud is like the encircling ocean, — inserts 
 into and makes itself felt in every nook and corner of his 
 existence, like an atmosphere encompasses the whole round of 
 his being, penetrates into all centres of vitality, presses with 
 incumbent weight upon every class irrespective of age or sex 
 
 1 Jewi.sh School Books — No. 1. The Lmc of Moses, a Catechism of the 
 Jewish Religion, new edition, pp. 68, 09. By the Rev. A. 1*. Mendes. 
 
TIIK .IK WISH QlKSriOX. 
 
 967 
 
 or rank, is all-inspiriuff. iill-includiug, and all-controllinf,', 
 covers in the regard of the illuminated the whole Held of life, 
 and with its principles affects, or ought to affect, every 
 thought and every action of every member of the Jewish 
 state." The wealthy and enlightened «Iew of I^ontlon, Paris, 
 or New York, perhaps, is no longer Talmudic ; yet even he 
 keeps himself much apart from the Gentiles, and if he 
 remains a Jew at all he must observe the law of Closes, that 
 is, a separatist law. Those wlio have studied the subject 
 carefully say in fact that alike by the rich Jew of Jiays water 
 and the Middle Class Jew of Highbury the safeguards of tribal- 
 ism are kept as far as possible without actual offence to Gen- 
 tile society. The "Polish" Jew, alike in Poland and in 
 Whitechapel, is still strongly Talmudic. If the Jew keeps 
 Christian servants in his house it is to do for him what he is 
 not permitted to do for himself on the Sabbath. 
 
 That the Jews have, as a rule, observed the laws and per- 
 formed their civic duties in the countries of their sojourn, no 
 one will deny, and it was natural that they should not take 
 more upon them than they could help of public im})osts which 
 to them were unsweetened by patriotism. In countries where 
 military service is part of the duties of a citizen, as it is in 
 Germany, they have not sought to evade it, and it is under- 
 stood that they behaved well as soldiers in the German army, 
 though they do not voluntarily enlist. Wealth has inclined 
 them to conservatism, and the stories about their sinister 
 activities in the French Revolution are fables, though Karl 
 Marx and Lassalle were the founders of Socialism, and Juda- 
 ism is believed to have contributed its quota to Nihil isjn in 
 Russia. When a Jew plays revolutionist, we may generally 
 expect to see him top the part. To top the part is natural 
 when it is played in a spirit of exploitation. Some Jews 
 have been noted as citizens for beneficence not confined to 
 their own tribe. It is likely, too, that in lands where the 
 Jew has been long established, the sentiment of home has 
 grown strong enough to countervail that of tribal nationality 
 in his breast, and to make removal very cruel. Still, he is 
 
268 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF TIIK DAV. 
 
 ''r, 
 
 ■I! 
 
 i.* 
 
 ;i Jew (lw('llin<,' iimont,' G(!ntil«\s. lla is one of the Chosen 
 I'eople. lie has a nationality a[)art, witii Messianii; ho^K's, 
 mure or less definite, of its own, and vague anticijjations of 
 future ascendaney. It seems inijjossible that any n)an should 
 belong in heart to two nationalities and be a patriot of eaeh. 
 lie nuiy be a conforming and dutiful citizen of the community 
 among which he dwells so long as there is no conflict of 
 national interests. But when there is a conflict of national 
 interests his attachment to his own nationality will prevail. 
 Mr, Oliphant, in his "Land of Gilead," dwells more than 
 once on the great advantages which any European government 
 might gain over its rivals by an alliance with the Jews. 
 
 "It is evident," he says, "that the policy which I proposed to the 
 Turkish government [i.e. the restoration of Palestine] niif^ht be adopted 
 witii equal advantage by England or any other Kuropean I'ower. The 
 nation that espoused the cause of the Jews and their restoration to 
 Palestine, would be able to rely on their support in financial operations 
 on the largest scale, upon the powerful influence which they wield in the 
 press of many countries, and upon their political co-operation in tlio.se 
 countries, which would of necessity tend to paralyse the diplomatic and 
 even hostile action of Powers antagonistic to the one with which they 
 were allied. Owing to the financial, political, and conunercial importance 
 to which the Jews have now attained, there is probably no one Power 
 in Europe that would prove so valuable an ally to a nation likely to be 
 engaged in a European war, as this wealthy, powerful, and cosmopolitan 
 race." i 
 
 Perhaps the writer of these words hardly realised the state of 
 things which they present to our minds. We see the govern- 
 ments of Europe bidding against each other for the favour 
 and support of an anti-national money power, which would 
 itself be morally unfettered by any allegiance, "would be ever 
 ready to betray and secretly paralyse for its own objects the 
 governments under the protection of which its members were 
 living, and of course would be always gaining strength and 
 predominance at the expense of a divided and subser\ient 
 world. The allusion to the influence wielded by the Jews 
 
 »■,■ 
 
 ! i 
 
 The Land of Gilead, p. 503. By Laurence Oliphant. 
 
TllK .11; WISH liL'ESTIOX. 
 
 •jr.i) 
 
 in tlio Eui'opcuii i)r('SH li;is ji particularly sinister soinxl. in 
 the social as in tlu' physical sphere new diseasi's are continu- 
 ally making their api»earance. One of the new social diseases 
 of the present day, and certainly not the least deadly, is the 
 perversion of puljlic opinion in the interest of private t)r sec- 
 tional objects, by the clandestine manipulation of the press. 
 
 Su(;h a relation as that in which .Fuihiisni has [ilaccd 
 itself to t\u- peo[)les of each country, forming everywhere a 
 nation within the nation, cherishing the pride of a Chosen 
 I'eople, regarding those among whom it dwelt as (Jentiles and 
 uncdean, shrinking from social intercourse with them, en- 
 grossing their wealth by financial skill, but not adding to it 
 by labour, plying at the same time a trade which, however 
 legitimate, is always unpojmlar and makes many vii'tims, 
 could not possibly fail to lead, as it has led, to nuitual hatred 
 and the troubles which ensue. Certain jis may be the gradual 
 prevalence of good over evil, it is a futile optimism which 
 denies that there have been calamities in history. One of 
 them has been the dispersion of the Jews. As was said 
 before, it is incredible that all the nations should have mis- 
 taken a power of good for a power of evil, or have been 
 unanimous in ingratitude to a power of good. None of them 
 want to hurt the Jew or to interfere with his religious belief; 
 what they all want is that if possible he should go to his own 
 land. As it is, western Europe and the western hemisphere 
 are threatened with a fresh invasion on the largest scale by 
 the departure of Jews from Russia. American politics are 
 already beginning to feel the influence. A party, to catch 
 the Jewisli vote, puts into its platform a denunciation of 
 Kussia, the best friend of the American Republic in its day 
 of trial. 
 
 That the Jew should be de-rabbinised and de-nationalised, 
 in other words that he should renounce the Talmud, the tribal 
 parts of the Mosaic law, and circumcision, is the remedy 
 proposed by M. Leroy-Beaulieu, a Avriter by no means unfav- 
 ourable to Israel. There seems to be no other way of putting 
 an end to a conflict which is gradually enveloping all nations. 
 
 M 
 
ipai 
 
 ■-•I'l 
 
 2(!0 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 II 
 
 3.,-4 I, 
 
 'I 
 
 This being done, whatever gifts iind graces may belong to the 
 race ol' Moses, David, and Isaiah, of the writers of the J*)Ook 
 of Job and of the Psalms, of Judas Maceabieus and Ilillel, will 
 have free course and be glorified. If Israel has any message 
 for humanity, as he seems to think, it will be heard. Jewish 
 merit will no longer be viewed with jealousy and distrust as 
 having a sinister confederation at its bacik; and no man need 
 fear in the present age that in any highly civilised com- 
 munity he will suffer persecution or dis})aragement of any 
 sort on account of his religion. Hut the present relation is 
 untenable. The Jew will have either to return to Jerusalem 
 or to forget it, give his heart to the land of his birth ami 
 mingle with humanity. 
 
 :w;S^ 
 

 fiSS! 
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 h':l 
 
i 1 
 
 r ' il 
 
 111 
 
 
 V '('. 
 
 r ^ i 
 
THE IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 It is proposed that Celtic, and Catholic Ireland shall be made 
 a separate nation with a Parliament of its own, and that into 
 this nation Saxon and I'rotestant Ulster shall, against its 
 will and in spite of its passionate appeals to the honour of 
 the British people, be forced. 
 
 Why are the Celtic and Catholic districts of Ireland, any- 
 more than tlie Celtic and ]\[ethodist districts of AVales, to 
 be severed from the United Kingdom and invested witli a 
 separate nationality? One reason, or rather one motive, 
 ojvrntiiig in a certain quarter presents itrself to view as often 
 at Iroi.t the gallery of the House of Commons we look down 
 upon the group of Irish members, and mark what its demean- 
 our indicates, or read the account of the disputes between its 
 two sections over tiie control of the party fund. If the 
 I Tome Rule liill were passed, these men would, besides com- 
 manding a legislature and a government, enter into the (con- 
 trol of a great revenue and into the possession of a patronage 
 wliicli, as at the outset everything would have to be given 
 away at once, would be dazzling. A fanatical hatred which 
 breaks forth wluMiever it is not restrained by policy, would be 
 gratilicd at the sanu^ time. 
 
 l)Ut another separatist interest b<\sides that of the squadron 
 of Irish politicians is at work for the disnuMuberment of the 
 United Kingdom. On the other side of St. George's Channel 
 stands the Catholic Pri<'sthood, ready as .soon as Ireland is 
 cast adrift by Great Britain to renew its reign. It stands 
 witli the Encycdicnl and Syllabus in its hand, to be ext'cuted 
 wlierever and wlienever it lias tlie power. 
 
 Tiu^sc two iiitiu'csts commantl by organisations, jmlitical or 
 
 2(ia 
 
,,,; , 
 
 ■! 
 
 
 ) 
 
 
 l| 
 
 i ' 
 
 
 i * 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 ii 
 
 s;i(!('nlutal, before wliich the peasant cowers, the people of 
 the Celtic and Catholic districts. The voice wliich we hear, 
 thougli it is called that of Ireland, is theirs. 
 
 There has never been an Irish nation. The savage tribes, 
 perpetually waging intertribal war, in whose occni)ation 
 Strongbow found the island, were not a nation. The Celtic 
 tribes and the Anglo-Saxon Pale, waging i)erpetual war with 
 each other, while the wars between the tribes themselves 
 never ceased, were not a nation. The English or Scotch and 
 Protestant colonies in Leinster and Ulster, encircled by the 
 Celtic and Catholic tribes, with wliich internecine war was 
 still carried on, were not a nation. The dominant race of 
 Grattan's Parliament, and the subject race which was excluded 
 from that Parliament and treated by it as a race of political 
 and social serfs, we.e not a nation. Tyrconnel's Celtic and 
 Caiiiolic Parliament, with its sweeping proscrijjtion of all the 
 Saxoii and Protestants, was not even so much as Grattan's 
 Parliament the Parliament of a nation. Nor would the 
 Parnellite Parliament be the Parliament of a nation when it 
 proceeded, as assuredly and almost avowedly it would, to 
 legislate in the same spirit. 
 
 There are not within the range of the United Kingdom any 
 other two districts between Avliich so strong an antagonism 
 prevails as prevails between Celtic Ireland and Uls*ci, of 
 which it is proposed by Liberals and philosophers to com- 
 pound with the bayonet this Irish nation. 
 
 The populations of the two islands are now intermixed. 
 There is a larg(^ Saxon element in Ireland; then^ are masses 
 of Celtic Irish in Great I^ritain, as the Pritish i^tisan knows 
 to his cost. T'he language of both islands is tlie same; Erse, 
 at least, is on tlie verge of extinction, and Ireland has no 
 literature but the English. She has no political institutions 
 but those which she has derived from England. She iias no 
 history of her own except one of savage wars of race and 
 religion. The Celts have no native dynasty or centre of 
 political unity of any kind, unless it be their religious subjec- 
 tion to a fori'ign priest. 
 
THE TRTSH QUESTION. 
 
 265 
 
 .1 I 
 
 The Channel has been a great obstacle to union, but it 
 is now bridged by steam. If an arm of the sea were 
 always to bo fatal to union, Corsica could not be united to 
 France, Sardinia and Sicily to Italy, ^Majorca and Minorc;i to 
 Spain, the Ionian Islands to Greece, Prince Edward Island 
 to Canada. The central desert of America is a good deal 
 broader than the Irish Channel, yet it does not prevent the 
 union of Pacific Avith Atlantic States. Politicians like Lord 
 Rosebery, wlio propose to unite the ends of the earth under 
 an Imperial Federation, can hardly say that nature forbids 
 the union of the two British islands under one government. 
 The population of the two islands is not so large as that 
 of France, nothing like so large as that of Germany, Kussia, 
 or the United States. Not Kent itself is more thoroughly 
 incorporated with tlie United Kingdom than the North of 
 Ireland. Not Kent itself in being torn from the United 
 Kingdom would feel a greater pang. 
 
 The map sliows at once that the destinies of the two islands 
 are linked together. The two will, in all probability, either 
 be united or be enemies, and if they are enemies, woe to the 
 weaker. The smaller island is cut otf from the continent by 
 the larger and tluis placed under its ])Ower. Economically, tlie 
 two are complements of each otlier, Groat Pritain having 
 the wheat land and the coal, wliile Ireland has the grass. 
 When people wail over the decrease of population in Ireland, 
 they forget the numbers of Irish who find bread in the manu- 
 facturing cities of Great Pritain, and wlio, wliile Ireland 
 remains in the United Kingdom, are as much in their own 
 country as if they Avere at (Jork. 
 
 Territorial rapacity is folly as well as Avickedness. Let 
 every nation be content with that which by nature it has. 
 Rut a nation has a right to maintain its natural boundaries 
 against secession as well as against invasion. This Ameri- 
 cans, at all events, cannot deny. The doctrine of rebellion as 
 a universal right and an object of unlimited sympathy could 
 not survive the first shot of the Civil War. Hy the loss of 
 the sister island. (Jreat Pritain would be redneed to a second- 
 
I 
 
 It 
 
 I'i i 
 
 2()6 
 
 liy i I 
 
 I 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TliE DAY. 
 
 rate power; amidst a circle of militar}- nations she would 
 live ill peril. Her citizens, at least, may be pardoned lor 
 thinking that her fall would be a misfortune not to herself 
 alone, that her influence would be missed by the nations of 
 her hemisphere, and that European progress would lose its 
 moderating power. Italian Liberals are among the best of 
 Liberals. How much sympathy have they shown with Irish 
 secession? 
 
 Irish liistory is a piteous tale. l>ut there is no sailing up 
 the stream of time. We must deal with things as they are 
 now, not immolate present policy to the evil memories of the 
 past. Detestable is the art of the demagogue who rakes up 
 those memories to obtain for his schemes from passion the 
 supi)ort which reason and ])atriotisin would not give. No 
 living man is now responsible for anything done seven cen- 
 turi(>s or a single century ago. He who persists in accusing 
 England of cruelty to Ireland, when the last three or tmir 
 generations of Englislimeu have been as mucli as possible the 
 reverse of cruel, only gives way to his temper and darkens 
 counsel. 
 
 liace character may not be congenital or iniUdible. I Jut 
 there is no disjiuting tliat its influence has been strong and 
 in the case of the Celt is marke(L Mommsen, in a well- 
 known ])assage, ends a review of Celtic eliaraeter, with its 
 graces and weaknesses, by ])ronouncing the race jxditically 
 worthless. He holds, and (h^elares liis judgment in language 
 to(t frank to be gruejously repeated, that the Ci'll politi- 
 cally is only material to be worked up by hlronger races. ^ 
 .Monnnsen lias Misniarckian iron in his blond as In' has the 
 tramp of the (jcrnian armies in his style. IJut lUshop Light- 
 foot has no nisiii. ''ckian iron in his lilood. He says: 
 
 •'Till main tVatiut'.'s nf llii> (iaulisli cliarnoter arc traced witli groat 
 distinctncrtH liy tlie Hoinau writers. Quickness cf ni>prcheiisioii, in-diiipti- 
 tude in action, great Iniiire.Hslhllity, an cagei; craving after knowledge, — 
 tliis ia the brigliter aspect of the fcltic eliaraeter. Ineonstant and qiiar 
 
 ' S( e his UiHtary of limnc, Bk. \., eh. \ii 
 
 II 
 
I'.ut 
 <f and 
 
 iruage 
 
 lO 
 
 liti- 
 
 rniiipti- 
 d iiUlW- 
 
 THE IRISH QUKSTION. 
 
 267 
 
 relsome, treacherous in tlioir (lcalin.i,'s, iiioaimbU' of stistainod effort, easily 
 disliearteiieil by failure, — such they appear when viewed on thfir darker 
 side. It is curious to note the same eai^er, in<iuisitive temper revealinj,' 
 itself under widely different circumstances, at opposite limits both of time 
 and space, in their early barbarism in the Wi si and tiifir wnni-out civili- 
 sation in the Kast. The j^rcat Honian captain relates how the (iauls 
 would gather about any nu'rchant or travilhr who came in their way, 
 iletainiui? him even against his will, and eagerly jn'essing him for news. 
 A late (ireek rhetorician commends the (ialatians as more keen and 
 quicker of apprehension tiiaii the genuine (ireeks, aildiug that the moment 
 they catch sight of a philosopher they cling to the skirts of his cloak as 
 the steel does to the magnet. It is chit Hy, however, on the more forbid- 
 ding features of their character that contemporary writers dwell. Fickle- 
 ness is tlie term u.sed to express their temperament. 'I'his instability of 
 character was the great difficulty against which Ca'sar had to contend in 
 liis dealings with tlu; (Jaul. He comjilains that they all, with scarcely an 
 exception, are imi)elled by the desire of change. Nor did they show 
 more C(»nstancy in the discharge of their religious than of their .social obli- 
 gations. The liearty zeal with which they embraced the Apostle's teach- 
 ing, followed by their rapid apostasy, is only an instance out of many of 
 the reckless facility with which they adojited and discarde<l one religious 
 system after another. To St. Paul, who had had nuich bitter exi)erience 
 of hollow profession and fickle (Hirposes, this extraordinary lev'ty was 
 yet a matter of unfeigned surprise. 'I marvel,' he says, 'that ye are 
 changing so rjuickly.'' He looked upon it as .some strange fascination. 
 'Ye senseless Gauls, who did bewitch you'?' The language in which 
 Hoinan writers speak of the martial courage of the Gauls, impetuou.s at 
 the lirst on.set, but rapidly melting in the heat of the fray, well describes 
 the .short-lived prowess of these converts in the warfare of the Christian 
 Church. 
 
 " K(|ually important in its relation to St. Paul's epistle is the type of 
 religious worship which seems to have pcrv.uli'd the Celtic nations. The 
 (Jauls arc described as a superstitious pcoi)le, given over to ritual observ- 
 ances. ^■or is it, perhaps, a mere accident that the only Asiatic (iaul of 
 whom history affords more than a passing glimpse, Deiotarus, the cli( nt 
 of Cicero, in his extravagant devotion to auuury. bears out the cliaracter 
 a.scril)ed to the parent race." ' 
 
 111 Franco tlio Ct'lt iindorwont Roman and aftorwavds Frank- 
 i.sli ti;iiiiint;. Wliat ho wonld li.tvc IxH'n Avitlioiit tliat training 
 Iirittany,ainiablc but thriftk'.ss, slatternly, priest-ridden, saint- 
 
 1 Thr Epixtlcsnf St. Paul: Epistle to the (;<ihai(}ns,\n\vn(\w\\n\\ \ 1,2. 
 
p, ■. ' 
 
 2(i8 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 '* i ' 
 
 \voi'sliip[)ing, legendary, is left to tell. AV^e know how even 
 the Celt wlio had undergone Roman and Fnuikisli training 
 behaved in the French Ke volution. Nor is it likely that 
 the strongest and most gifted i)art of the race would be that 
 which in the primeval struggle for existence was thrust away 
 to the remotest island of the West. 
 
 The mountains, bogs, rivers, and forests, for forests there 
 then were, of Ireland, like the isolated glens of the Scotch 
 Highlands, helped to per})etuate the tribal divisions with 
 their clannish ways and sentiments, the mould in Avhich the 
 political character of the Irish v,as formed; for the Celtic 
 Irisliman is still not a constitutionalist but a clansman, with 
 clannish attachments, clannish feuds, and clannish love of 
 political spoils. Between the general influence of race and 
 that of the local circumstances of the Irish Celt, a character 
 wns formed whicli is as distinct as that of any individual man, 
 and which it would be as absurd to overlook or to pretend not 
 to see in dealing with the race as it would be to overlook or 
 to pretend not to see personal character in dealing Avith a man. 
 That the Irish Celt has gifts and graces, or that under a good 
 master or commander ho makes a good worker or soldier, 
 nobody wlio knows anything of him denies. Xobody who 
 knows liow Irish emigrants have been assisted by their kins- 
 men in America will deny that the Irishman has strong 
 domestic affections and a generous heart. l)ut nobody who is 
 not angling for his vote will affirm tliat in Cork, in Liverpool 
 or (rlasgow, in New York, or in the Australian colonies, or 
 anywhere, he has as yet become a good citizen under free insti- 
 tutions. Xobody Avho is not angling for his vote will affirm 
 tliat he is by nature law-alnding, or tliat when liis passions 
 are excited, wliether his victims be his agrarian enemies in 
 Ireland or the hapless negroes in New York, he is not capable 
 of dreadful crimes. Tlie Anglo-Saxon, when he takes to 
 rioting, may be brutal; in tlie Lord George Gordon riots he 
 was brutal enough; but he does not card or hough, nor does 
 he cut off the \idders of kine. The Phoenix Park murders 
 were a Celtic', not an Anglo-Saxon, deed. 
 
I'llK lUlSlI QUESTION. 
 
 Lists are given of Irish statesmen and eommanders, sueli as 
 Canning, Castlereagli, Clare, Wellington, Wellesley, (riattan, 
 Plunket, the two Lawrences, Napier, l{ol)erts, and Wolseley. 
 These are Saxon, not Celtic Irish. Even Parnell and IJutt 
 before him were of that intrusive race which it was the object 
 of their movement to expel. Of I'arnell, Mr. T. V O'Connor 
 tells ns tliat his manner was Saxon in its reserve and his 
 speech was still more Saxon in its rigidity. I'arnell jiroba- 
 bly owed largely to the (!ool tenacity of liis Saxon character 
 his despotic ascendancty over his train. There has been no 
 Celtic leader of eminence except U'Connell, wlio was an agita- 
 tor, not a statesman. lUirke had in him a Celtic strain which 
 showed itself in his more declamatory and passionate moods. 
 That the Celt is politically weak, ten centuries of wail with- 
 out achievement are surely proof enougli. 
 
 In the North of Ireland are jjrosjierous industry and com- 
 merce with Protestant liberty of conscience. In the South 
 are unthrift and poverty under the dominion of the priest. 
 The political institutions and the relation to Great liritain 
 are exactly the same in both cases; it seems to follow that 
 the character of the people is not. 
 
 When, beckoned by tribal revenge, the Norman Strnngbow 
 landed in Ireland, he found there no germ of national unity 
 beyond the transient ascendancy of jiowerful chiefs, nor, except 
 in the little Danisli settlements of tlie sea-board, any ele- 
 ments of civilisation, unless we so designate a taste for orna- 
 m'Mit, of which the monuments are in the Celtic Museum at 
 Dublin. Everywhere were tribal divisions and intertribal 
 wars. The brief reign of tlie i)0werful chief, or King, as he 
 is styled, Brian Born, liad served only to sliow by its result 
 the ])revaleu(;e of the centrifugal force. The Brehon Law was 
 common to the tribes, but it was a mere repertory of tribal 
 customs, real or imaginary; the jurisdiction of its courts 
 went not beyond the assessment of damages or the iini)osition 
 of fines; nor was there any authority to enforce it. saving 
 habit and a precarious opinion. There was hardly any 
 agriculture ; cattle were the only wealth. There were no 
 
 l«i 
 
: I t! 
 
 270 
 
 QUEWTIONS OF THE DAY, 
 
 cities ; the Irisli indeed have not founded cities either in their 
 own hind or in America, tliough as hihourers they liave helped 
 to build many. Tiie Churcli, a sur\ iving remnant, like that in 
 Wales, of the Cluireh of the IJritish Celts before Augustine, 
 ruder than that of Kome, but not uu>re J'rotestant, liad for a 
 moment marvellously shone in missionary entt'r])rise, and, if 
 Irish traditions are true, in pursuit of learning. JUit without 
 cities it could not be opulent or imi)osiug. it seems to luive 
 suffered severely at the lumds of the Danes. It was ])resently 
 crushed under the hoofs of tribal barbarism and rapacity, 
 and stretched out its hands to Canterbury for aid. Its chief 
 monunu'uts are those romantic Hound Towers, its refuges 
 }>robably in time of raids. The chief, whose revenge had 
 called in Strongbow, plucked after the battle from a heaj) of 
 heads that of his enemy, and mangled it with his teeth. 
 
 AlarnuHl at the progress of his vassal, Henry II. produced 
 and ])roceeded to execute a Papal Decree, awarding him the 
 lordship of Ireland under the Pope if he would reform the 
 manners of the peoi)le, bring their Church luuler the domin- 
 ion of Rome, and make the island pay Peter's pence. This 
 warrant, a laughing-stock now, was deemed valid in those 
 days. The Anglo-N(U'man conquest of Ireland, falsely called 
 the English con(]Ut'st, was thus a supplement to the conquest 
 of England by a Norman who bore the signet ring of Kome 
 and came to subdiw the national Church of England for the 
 Papacy as well as the Kingdom for himself. The Synod of 
 Cashel at which the Irish Church became the vassal of Kome 
 was the counterpart of the Synod of Winchester at which the 
 English Church bowed her neck to the aiune yoke. Henry 
 received the submission of the chiefs, and though at his de- 
 l)arture they returned to their wilds, they had become his 
 liegemen, and he and his successors might thenceforth deem 
 themselves lawful lords of Ireland. 
 
 Unhapitily, neither Ilenvy II. nor his successors for three 
 centuries uuule good their lordship. The Norman conciuest of 
 
 Englan 
 plete. 
 
 d by 
 It gt 
 
 agi 
 ive 
 
 •eat army, with 
 birth over the 
 
 the Kii 
 whole 
 
 ig at its head, 
 country to a 
 
 was 
 new 
 
 com- 
 order 
 
 k 
 
 
 
 
 
 •* 
 
 
 
 
 
TIIK lUISII QUKSTION. 
 
 871 
 
 of things ;ui(l to an luistocriicy which itiescntly hccanio 
 national, anil at length the ('hanii)ion and tiusU'e of national 
 liberty. But in Ireland once only aftei- Henry II., in the [.er- 
 son of Kiehard II., did the king with the power of thi' king- 
 dom for a moment a[)i)ear on the s(!ene. The centre of the 
 English power was distant, the natural route lay through 
 Welsh mountains, with a wild po[)ulation long unsubdued or 
 half subdued, while the arm of the sea was broad in the days 
 before steam. A idumerical ambition diverttMl the power of 
 the monarchy from its jjroper work of consolidating the island 
 realm to what seenu;d brighter antl richer fields of enterprise 
 in France. Ireland was left to private adventure, which, from 
 its weakiu'ss, its want of unity, the difficulties of a country 
 ill suited for the action of men-at-arms or an-hers, and the 
 mobility of the pastoral tribes, totally failed. There residted 
 an Anglo-Norman Pale, with Dublin and the grave of Strong- 
 bow for its centre, carrying on incessant war with the tribes, 
 which continued to war with each other and to lift each 
 others' cattle at the same time. Some of the Anglo-Xorman 
 Barons, finding tribal even more lawless than feudal anandiy, 
 doffed the hauberk, donned the saffron mantle of Irish tribal- 
 ism, and became chiefs of bastard Sej)ts. Th(> Crown, by 
 enactments which sound like an iidiuman perpetiuition of the 
 estrangement l)etween the races, strove to ])revent this lapse 
 of the Englishry into barbarism, but strove in vain. 
 
 Without a king, the feudal system, introduced into Ireland, 
 lacked its regulative and controlling ))ower. The grantees of 
 great fiefs were counts palatine without a suzerain. When, 
 by the degeneration of the Anglo-Xoruian lords, the chief was 
 blended with the feudal baron, the result seems to have been a 
 mixture of the evils of both systems. The earl-chieftain 
 became the leader of a band of lawless and insolent merce- 
 naries or gallow^glass, who were (quartered, under the name of 
 Coyne and Livery and other titles of extortion, on the haj)less 
 people. The historic threail, if slight, is not invisible which 
 connects these Bosses with the Bosses of Xev,- York. 
 
 The very presence of royalty, as a power superior to all 
 
A 
 
 ^# 
 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 '■::M IIIIIM 
 
 11 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 '^ 6" - 
 
 
 ► 
 
 ^ 
 
 % 
 
 /. 
 
 ^>1 
 
 % 
 
 v^ 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 / 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 
 a 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14S80 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 ^^ 
 
 '^^ 
 
<" €£>.. 
 
 V 
 
 s 
 
 
 (/j 
 
 ro> 
 
1 
 
 ^^ii: 
 
 !l I 
 
 272 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 these anarchies, did good. The sojourn of Li'iiel, Duke of 
 Clarence, son of Edward III., produced a momentary reforma- 
 tion. "Because," says Sir John Davis, "the people of this 
 hind, both English and Irish, out of a natural pride, did ever 
 h)ve and desire to be governed by great persons." If British 
 monarchs could only have seen this and done their duty ! 
 
 Bad was only made worse when Ireland was invaded by 
 Edward Bruce, brother of the Norman adventurer, who had 
 won for himself the throne of Scotland. The campaign was 
 like those of the Bruces and Wallace in their own lands, one of 
 merciless destruction. The death blow was dealt to the ambi- 
 tion of Edward Bruce by the generalship of John de Ber- 
 mingham, which turned the wavering scale in favour of 
 British connection. But Bruce, though he was called in by 
 the Irish chiefs, seems to have experienced the fickleness of 
 Irish alliances. The Irish Annals of Clonmacnoise declare that 
 he was slain " to the great joy and comfort of the whole King- 
 dom in general, for there was not a better deed, that redounded 
 more to the good of the Kingdom since the creation of the 
 world, and since the banishment of the Fine Fomores out of 
 this land, done in Ireland, than the killing of Edward Bruce ; 
 for there reigned scarcity of victuals, breach of promises, ill 
 performance of covenants, and the loss of men and women, 
 throughout the whole Kingdom, for the space of three years 
 and a half that he bore sway ; insomuch that men did com- 
 monly eat one another, for want of sustenance, during his 
 time." 1 
 
 Nothing is more cruel or more hideous than a protracted 
 struggle of semi-civilisation with savagery. A native was to 
 the Englishman as a wolf, and the native skene spared no 
 Englishman. Nothing could prosper. In the little English 
 sea-board towns, petty commonwealths in themselves, there 
 was order and some commerce. Galway preserves in her 
 architecture and her legends the picturesque and romantic 
 
 1 Quoted by A. G. Rlchey, LL.D., in his Short History of the Irish 
 People, pp. 19(3, 197. Edited by K. K. Kane, LL.D. 
 
mwmmmifi^^mmrmmr^wr 
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 273 
 
 traces of her trade with Spain. Elsewhere was nothing but 
 turbulence and havoc. A Parliament there was in the Pale, 
 but it was a scarecrow. Judges there were in the Pale, after 
 the English model, but they had little power to uphold law. 
 The Church was feeble, coarse, and almost worthless as an 
 instrument of civilisation. What there was of it was rather 
 monastic than parochial, the monastery being a fortalice, and, 
 in a general reign of crime, probably drawing endowment from 
 remorse. Only the Friars were zealous in preaching. The 
 Church seems not to have acted as a united body, to have 
 held no synods, and to hav- been intersected, like the peoi)le, 
 by the race line. Ecclesiastics fought like laymen, and appear 
 to have been as little revered. A chieftain pleaded as an 
 excuse for burning down a cathedral that he had thought the 
 Archbishop was in it. In the Celtic distri(!ts the calendar of 
 ecclesiastical crimes, or crimes against ecclesiastics, given by 
 the Four Masters between 1500 and 1535, comprises Barry More, 
 killed by his cousin, the Archdeacon of Cloyne, who was him- 
 self hanged by Thomas Barry ; Donald Kane, Abbot of Macos- 
 quin, hanged by Donald O'Kane, who was himself hanged ; 
 John Burke, killed in the monastery of Jubberpatrick ; Donagh- 
 moyne Church, set on fire by M'Mahon during mass; Nicholas, 
 parson of Devenish, wrongfully driven away by the laity; 
 Hugh Maguinness, Abbot of Newry, killed by the sons of 
 Donald Maguinness ; the Prior of Gallen, murdered by Tur- 
 lough Oge Macloughlin ; O'Quillan, murdered, and the Church 
 of Dunboe burned, by O'Kane.^ 
 
 While England was torn and her government paralysed by 
 the War of the Roses, the Pale was reduced to a district com- 
 prising parts of four counties, and defended by a ditch. Had 
 there been among the Celts any national unity or power of 
 organisation, here was their chance of winning back their 
 lands. But they were fighting among themselves just as 
 fiercely as they fought with the Pale. As Richey says, 
 patriotism did not exist ; there was no sentiment broader than 
 
 J Richey, p. 284. 
 
Ir: I 
 
 274 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY 
 
 that of the clan, nor was the rival clan less an object of enmity 
 than the Englishry. 
 
 Soon the chance of the Celts was lost. Out of the wreck of 
 the aristocracy in the civil war rose the powerful monarchy 
 of the Tudors. In Ireland conquest resumed its march. 
 Henry VII. brought the Irish Parliament under the control of 
 the Privy Council by Poyning's Law. Henry VIII. crowned 
 himself King of Ireland, instead of being only Lord under the 
 Tope. The policy first tried was that of ruling Ireland through 
 great native chiefs. This failing, dominion was advanced by 
 arms. Could the full force of the monarchy have been thrown 
 on Ireland, there would have been a merciful end of the strug- 
 gle. But the greater part of that force was engaged upon the 
 continent, lirst by the vanity of Henry VIII., or the schemes 
 of his minister, and afterwards by the dire exigencies of the 
 conflict with the Catholic powers. Here, as elsewhere, the 
 unwise parsimony of Elizabeth starved the service. Instead 
 of systematic subjugation, there were hostings or military 
 raids, and the soldiers, being luipaid, lived by rapine. The 
 conquest was very slow, and forms an exceptionally cruel 
 page even in the cruel history of the conflict between the half- 
 civilised and the savage. As the Ked Indian is to the A.meri- 
 can frontiersman, so was the Irishman under the Tudors to 
 the Englishman in Ireland. The gentle Spenser, in speaking 
 of him, forgets the language of humanity. Spenser, like 
 Raleigh, was one of a body of adventurers who took part in 
 the conquest and were paid by sweeping confiscations of 
 native land. Xothing can be more horrible or heartrending 
 than the pictures of the state of the island and its people, 
 drawn by the conquerors themselves. 
 
 That the Irish at this time were uncivilised is clear. Cuellar, 
 a Spaniard, who had been thrown among them, says : 
 
 "The habit of those savages Is to live like brutes in the mountains, 
 whicli are very rugged in the part of Ireland where we were lost. They 
 dwell in thatched cabins. The men are well made, with good features, 
 and as active as deer. They eat but one meal and that late at night, oat- 
 cake and butter being their usual food. They drink sour milk because 
 
THE IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 275 
 
 they liave nothing else, tor they use no water, though they have tlie best 
 in the world. At feasts it is their custom to eat lialt'-cooiced meat without 
 bread or salt. Their dress matciies themselves — tiglit breeches and 
 short, loose jackets of very coarse texture ; over all they wear blankets, 
 and their hair comes over their eyes. They are great walkers, and stand 
 much work, and by continually fighting they keep the Queen's English 
 soldiers out of their country, which is nothing but bogs forty miles either 
 way. Their great delight is robbing one another, so that no day passes 
 without f.ghting ; for whenever the people of one hamlet know that 
 those of another possess cattle or other goods, they immediately make 
 a night attack and kill each other. When the English garrisons find out 
 who lias lifted the most cattle, they come down on them, and they liave 
 but to retire to the mountains with their wive^^ and herds, having no 
 houses or furniture to lose. They sleep on the ground upon rushes full 
 of water and ice. Most of the women are very pretty I)ut badly got u}), 
 for they wear but a shift and a mantle, and a great linen cloth on the 
 head rolled over the brow. They are great workers and housewives in 
 their way. These people call themselves Christians and say mass. They 
 follow the rule of the Roman Church, but most of their churches, mo" 
 asteries, and hermitages are dismantled by the Engli.sh soldiers and o> 
 their local partisans, who are as bad as themselves. In short, there is no 
 order nor justice in the country, and every one does that which is right 
 in his own eyes. The savages are well affected to us Spaniards, because 
 they realise that we are attacking the heretics and 'are their great 
 enenues. If it was not for those natives who kept us as if belonging to 
 themselves, not one <jf our people would have escaped. We owe them a 
 good turn for that, though they were the first to rob and strip us when 
 we were cast on shore, from whom and from the three ships whi ii con- 
 tained so many men of importance tiiose savages reaped a rich harvest of 
 money and jewels." i 
 
 The Lord Deputy Sidney wrote in 1567 of the people of 
 Munster and Connaught : 
 
 " Surely, there was never people tliat lived in more misery than they 
 do, nor as it should seem of worse minds, for matrimony among them is 
 no more regarded in effect than conjunction between unreasonable beasts. 
 Finally, I cannot find that they make any conscience of shi, and I doubt 
 whether they christen their children or no ; for neither find I place where 
 it should be done, nor any person able to instruct them in the rules of a 
 
 ' Duro's Ainnctcla InvoncJhlo, Vol. 11., pp, SaS-TiO. Quoted by Mr. 
 Richard Bagwell in his Ireland under the Tudurs, Vol, III., pp. 185, IHO. 
 
i, 
 
 II 
 
 Iv ' 
 , ■ 1 
 
 1 , 
 
 1 
 
 Pt!i 
 
 ' 
 
 %f \ \ 
 
 
 270 
 
 QrESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 ('hristian ; or if they were tuuglit, I see no grace iu them to follow it ; and 
 when they die, I cannot see they make any account of the world to come." i 
 
 Sidney may have been an adverse witness, but lie was a 
 man of high character, and in describing that which was 
 before his eyes we may believe that he spoke the truth. 
 
 The wars of the Irish chiefs among themselves did not 
 (;ease and were hardly less cruel than that waged upon the 
 natives by the invaders. "It is but fair," says the learned 
 and impartial llicjhey, "to judge the Celtic tribes by their 
 own historians, not by the reports of English statesmen con- 
 cerning them. The Annals of the Four Masters are thoroughly 
 imbued with the Irish spirit of this period. Although 
 detailed as to the annals of the Ulster and Connaught clans, 
 they pass by without notice many of the transactions of 
 Leinster and Munster, and the events they record do not com- 
 prise the entire history of the period; yet the analysis of the 
 annals from 1500 to 1534: gives the following results: Bat- 
 tles, plundering, etc., exclusive of those in which the English 
 government Avas engaged, IIG; Irish gentlemen of family 
 killed in battle, 102; murdered, 1(58, — many of them Avith 
 circumstances of great atrocity; and during this period, on 
 the other hand, there is no allusion to the enactment of any 
 law, the judicial decision of any controversy, the founding of 
 any tow^n monastery, or church; and all this is recorded by 
 the annalist without the slightest expression of regret or 
 astonishment, and as if such Avere the ordinary course of life 
 in a Christian nation." '^ 
 
 Another and a terrible element of evil had now come in. 
 To the enmity of race that of religion had been added. The 
 history of Ireland must henceforth be read not by itself but in 
 connection with the great European struggle between Catholi- 
 cism and Protestantism, in which to its ruin the island was 
 involved. England and the Pale had become Protestant, at 
 least, had revolted from the Pope. This was enough to make 
 
 1 Quoted by Mr. Bagwell, II., 113. 
 a Pp. 247, 248. 
 
THE IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 277 
 
 ding of 
 
 the native Irishman more Papal than before. Moreover, the 
 form in wliich the new faith was presented to the Irish was 
 most unliappy. Anglicanism, sober, decorous, and genteel, 
 has never suited tlie hot and entlmsiastic Celt. The dissolu- 
 tion of the monasteries bore hard on Ireland, where the 
 Church was eminently monastic; so did iconoclasm, the 
 images and relics being dear to the Irish heart. Disaffected 
 Ireland presented itself to tlie Catholic powers as the point 
 for a diversion against England. Spanish and Italian troops 
 landed, and the tragedy of Smerwick, where a body of Italian 
 troops Avas put to the sword after surrender by the Lord 
 Deputy Grey, might be compared to the atrocities perpe- 
 trated by the Eoman Catholic soldiery of Alva and Parma, or 
 afterwards by that of Tilly. Tlie alliance did not prevent the 
 savage Irish from stripping and murdering the crews of the 
 Armada cast upon their coast. But Catholic Ireland had 
 become the feeble satellite of the Catholic powerc, of whose 
 acts she was deemed the accomplice, and another vial of wrath 
 was thus poured out. 
 
 By the beginning of the reign of James I. the conquest had 
 been completed .t Iter a fashion; the last great chief had been 
 dispossessed; the last tribe iiad been broken up; Ireland had 
 been carved into English shires; English institutions and 
 English law, the land-law of England among the rest, osten- 
 sibly prevailed. James I. was weak, but he was cultured and 
 he liad P.acon at his ear. He tried to endow Ireland with 
 Englisli civilisation. He called a Parliament for all Ireland. 
 When it met there was a division on the Speakership. While 
 tlie majority was out, the minority seated its man in the chair. 
 The majority, when it returned, seated its man in the other 
 man's lap. Under James, however, was founded tlie Scotch 
 colony in the north of Ireland, the beginning of Ulster, the 
 hope of industry, commerce, and civilisation. 
 
 It seems pretty clear that for the people the change from 
 the tribal to the manorial system in itself would have been a 
 blessing. Whatever the fanfv about clan brotherhood might 
 be, the fact, according to the best authority, appears to have 
 
 \H\: 
 
I 
 
 
 i 
 
 U 
 1.1 1 
 
 Vi|: 
 
 
 in 
 
 278 
 
 QUESTIONS (^F TIIK DAY 
 
 been that tlie huniblo clansnuiu was more degraded, more 
 trampled on, more plundered by the coshering chief, with his 
 brigand tail of gallowglass, than ever Avas tenant or peasant 
 under the lord of a manor. The owners and lenders of cattle, 
 Avhich constituted wealth and v.'as the indis[)ensable means 
 of livelihood in a grass country, a^tpear to have been not less 
 tyrannical than are owners of land. The law might not be 
 rational or suitable; but the people, at all events, were 
 brought under the domain of law, with the hope that the code 
 would become rational and be administered Avith justice. 
 Unhappily, the lord of the jnanor was a stranger by race and 
 by religion, while to the chief there had been an hereditary 
 tie which had partly reconciled his clansmen to liis oi)pres- 
 sion. The land, confiscated by James I. as the property of 
 the rebel chiefs, was, in theory at least, the property not of 
 the chief but of the tribe, tliough the chief being a local 
 despot, this may have been a distinction rather tlian a differ- 
 ence. How deep the sense of the Avrong thus done sank into 
 the heart of the people, and how far the recollection has liven 
 and helped to sustain agrarian war, are questions about 
 which autliorities are not agreed. The sequel proves clearly 
 enough that the Celts bitterly resented the transfer of the land 
 to the stranger. 
 
 Nothing can keep the peace between hostile races on the 
 same soil but an authority superior to them both and wielded 
 by an impartial hand. Strafford Avas born to rule, and his 
 despotism in Ireland would have been beneficent had he not 
 been under the necessity of providing a force to supjiort 
 absolutist and High Church reaction in England. This drove 
 him into sweeping confiscations of land under form of law. 
 At the same time, by the policy which made Ireland a lever of 
 Stuart conspiracy against English liberty and religion, yet 
 another vial of wrath was poured out. 
 
 By the quarrel between Charles and the Parliament an 
 opportunity was once more given to the Celts. They em- 
 braced it by either murdering outright, or casting out to perish 
 of destitution and nakedness all the I*rotestants on whom they 
 

 THE IKISII QUESTION. 
 
 270 
 
 yet 
 
 could lay luuuls. Dublin narrowly escaped. To doubt that 
 there was a nuxssacre seems absurd, whether the nuissaere 
 was premeditated or not, and however great the exaggerations 
 may have been. Could Clarendon, with the best possible 
 means of information and no tendency to magnify Puritan 
 wrongs, have said that forty or fifty thousand I'rotestants 
 had been killed if tiiere had been no killing at all? There 
 followed a general insurrection headed by ecclesiastics, with 
 the Jesuit in the background, and a revolutionary government 
 was formed at Kilkenny under the presidency of a Papal 
 Envoy. The English force was not only small, but divided 
 against itself, and might have been easily overcome. But the 
 Celts showed their usual lack of the powers of organisation 
 and self-government. The party whose chief aim was the 
 recovery of the land quarrelled with the party whose chief 
 aim was the restoration of the Church. No one worthy to 
 command appeared. There ensued a murderous, aimless, and 
 bootless civil war, in which fearful atrocities Avere committed 
 on both sides, and quarter was given on neither. The Irish 
 population of Island Magee, though not involved in the rebel- 
 lion, was massacred, man, woman, and child, by the Scotch 
 garrison of Carrickfergus. According to the Protestant liis- 
 torian, Borlase, Sir W. Cole's regiment performed the exploit 
 of starving, of the vulgar sort whose goods were seized on 
 by it, seven thousand. One redeeming incident alone there 
 was. The evangelical virtues of the Protestant Bishop Bedell 
 protected him and those who took refuge with him from the 
 rage of the Catholics. He was made a prisoner, but was 
 treated Avith kindness by his captors, and Avhen he died the 
 Irish army buried him with military honours, and joined over 
 his grave in the prayer that the last of the English might 
 rest in peace. 
 
 At last on the wings of victory came Cromwell, and with 
 one terrible stroke made peace. The great man himself 
 deplored the necessity, in which some of his worshippers now 
 exult. Quarter in those ages was not given to a garrison 
 which after summons had stood a storm. The Catholic and 
 
^'1 
 
 280 
 
 QUESTIONS OK TIIK DAY. 
 
 ^*1 
 
 Impcriul arniios put to tlin sword not only tlie garrison but 
 tlu! iuliabitauts of captunvl cities. Tlu' Irish Catliolics had 
 given no quarter. Kinuccini, tlic Papal Envoy, rejjorts with 
 exultation that after a victory no prisoners were taken; 
 "every one," says the holy man, "slaughtered his adversary, 
 and Sir IMielini O'Neill, who bore himself most bravely, when 
 asked by the colonels for a list of his prisoners, swore that 
 his regiment had not one, as he had ordered his men to kill 
 them all without distinction." ^ 
 
 With the ruthlessness common to all parties in those days, 
 Cromwell deported or sent into exile a good deal of the loose 
 savagery which the civil war had left behind. That he meant 
 to extirpate the Irish people is a fiction, but he did mean to 
 extirpate Irish barbarism, and to plant law, order, and in- 
 dustry in its room. Confiscation of land there was on a terri- 
 ble scale to satisfy the claims of the soldiers, who had been 
 paid in land-scrip. But this struck the Catholic proprietors, 
 who had played their game and* lost, not the peasantry, who, 
 if they chose to work, would probably be under better, cer- 
 tainly under thriftier, masters. Cromwell proclaimed to the 
 Catholics liberty of private conscience. The Mass in those 
 days he could not have tolerated if he would, and when we 
 consider what the Mass is, what it has done, and how soon the 
 common people would have been weaned from it, we may be 
 rather disposed to wink at this departure from religious 
 li^^erty. The Protector treated Ireland as "a clean paper," to 
 use his own expression, for the introduction of legal reforms 
 for which the professional " sons of Zeruiah " were too strong 
 in England. But the greatest of all the benefits conferred by 
 him alike on Ireland and Great Britain was the Union, which 
 he was able to accomplish Avithout buying anybody, by sim- 
 ple exercise of a might which in this case assuredly was 
 right. It is almost heartrending to think that the Irish 
 Question was settled in the right way nearly two centuries and 
 a half ago. 
 
 Of the acts of the Restoration the worst was the dissolution 
 
 77ie Embassy in Ireland, p. 175, Annie Ilutton's translation. 
 
TIIK 1I{IS1I CirKS'i'lON. 
 
 •_>si 
 
 to 
 
 of the Union. Protestant i)roprietarv in froland had interest 
 enongh partly to hold its ground. Hut the .strong rrm of 
 beneficent and civilising [)o\ver was gone, and llie ha[)less 
 country and its people were left to their own courses again. 
 Another eonseipience of the Restoration, big witli evil, \v;is 
 the re-establishment of the Anglican State ('hureh in Ireland. 
 
 James II. renewed the attem[)t of his father against Eng- 
 lish liberty and religion, and in a form more dangerous and 
 hateful than that in which it had been made by his father, 
 a form which threatened with extinction the political and 
 spiritual life of the nation. Once more Ireland had the; mis- 
 fortune to be used as the lever of the Stuart policy. Eng- 
 land saw with disgust and dismay regiments of Irish J'apists 
 moving along he'- highways. Ireland was put into the hands 
 of Tyrconnel, who, though a reckless rutHan, was accepted 
 as the leader of the (!atholic (Udts at that time. ITnder this 
 man's aus])ices a Celtic and Oatholic I'arliament passed an 
 Act of Attainder proscribing at one swoo}), without regard to 
 age or sex, the whole Trotestant proi)rietary of Ireland. It 
 is Tyrconnel's Parliament, a ('eltic and Catholic; Parliament, 
 not Grattan's Parliament, a Parliament of Protestant gentry, 
 which it is now proposed to revive. 
 
 Overwhelmingly outnumbered and driven to bay behind 
 the mouldering walls of Derry, the stronger race showed in 
 extremity a force which in extremity it nuiy show again. 
 The result, as all know, was tlu; victory of that race and the 
 miserable subjection of the (lelt. The most warlike of the 
 Celtic youth went, and for a (century afterwards (;ontiiuied to 
 go, as food for powder and at the same time as the soldiery of 
 reactionary des])otism, into the service of the (/atholic kings. 
 In that service Irish soldiers of fortune won distiiuition, though 
 Brown and AVall are not Celtic names. 
 
 Then followed the era of the ])enal code, cruel and hateful. 
 Mark, however, that the penal code was not intended, like 
 the religious codes of Roman (Catholic countries and the 
 Inquisition, to rack conscience and compel ;ipostasy, but to 
 keep the Celts disarmed, socially and politically as well as 
 

 ' 
 
 u\ 
 
 2H2 
 
 QlKsrioNS (»F TIIK DAY 
 
 pliysicully, uiul prevent tliciii lioiii ic|)t'iitiii^', as, if the powci- 
 had reverted to their hands, they wouhl have repeated, the 
 a(^ts ol' Tyroonmd's Parliament. K«'niendier too what was 
 l)einti; done in countries where Roman Catholicism .eigncd. 
 Ivcniemhcr how in evi'ry lioman Catholic kinj,'doin Protestant- 
 ism was treated as treason; how Louis XI V\ was banishing 
 the Huguenots, l)utchering them, sending their ministers to 
 the galleys; how the auton da fe wen; going on in Spain; 
 how the Jesuit was still busy everywhere with his conspiracy 
 for the extirpation of Protestantism by the ('atholic sword, 
 l^'orty years after this the lioman Catholic Prince liishop of 
 Salzburg expcdled the whole Protestant population from his 
 dominions. Irish history in these times, to be fairly read, 
 must be read, not by its(df, l)Ut in connection with that 
 of the great conflict between Protestantism and Konian Cathol- 
 icism over all Kuro})e. Not a few of the exiled Huguenots 
 settled in Ireland, ocular warnings of the fate which the 
 "Protestants might expect if their enemy were unchained. 
 When danger i)assed away and cruel fear subsided, the penal 
 code was ])ractically relaxed, the growing spirit of religious 
 indifference and free-thinking embodied in Chesterfield's 
 Lord-Lieutenancy helping the jiroccss, and before the autos 
 (ki fe had come to an end the Konian Catholics in Ireland, 
 though politically nnenfranchised, as a Church had become 
 practically free; free, at least, so far as a (.'hurcih could V)e 
 while another Church, and that of the minority, was estab- 
 lished by the State. 
 
 To the High Church bishops of the Au'rUcan establishment, 
 the Ronum Catholics Avere less the objects of persecuting 
 antipathy than the Presbyterians in the north of Ireland, in 
 whom lay the hope of industry, commerce, and civilisation 
 for the rest of the island. Of these, the bishops succeeded in 
 harrying many out of the country, and sending them to fight, 
 with hearts full of the bitterness of Avrong, against Great 
 Britain in the American Colonies. The Anglican Church 
 itself did nothing, and could do nothing, either for religion 
 or for civilisation. Its system was fatally unsuited to the 
 

 rilK lUlMI t^l KSI'loN. 
 
 'J Ho 
 
 ppojile. [t ii(>vor made converts, where tliorough-KoinL,' and 
 fervent Protestantism, if it had only had a. Iree eoiirse, 
 nii;^ht have made many. In J"'raneis Newmr.n's " I'iiases of 
 Faith," there is a roniarkal»h' account of the imi)ression which 
 a Vrotpstant preacher of that type did make. 'I'he Anj^dican 
 Church showed all the worst nuirks of an establisliment. 
 Not only did it not advance or i)ro[)aj,'ate; it sank into miser- 
 able letharj^y, its churches were leit unrepaired, sinecurism 
 and pluralism abonnded in it, half a dozen parishes were 
 clubbed tofijether to make an income for onc^ man. to collect 
 tithes was its chief care, and Irish parsons lived in English 
 cities on pretence tliat there was no parsonage in tlu'ir 
 ])arishes, spending the money whi(!h the tithe-^'-ctor wrung 
 for them from a starving pi-asantry. In addition i<> the usual 
 evils of establishment, the State Church of Ireland had those 
 of a Church alien to the peoi)le; "t had also t1'^ je of a })oli!\'al 
 garrison. Tts heads wen^ political intriguers, some of them, 
 such as Stone, of the worst claos. Swift could say that the 
 licish government appointed pious and learned men to the 
 Irish bishoprics, l)ut they were all waylaid on ilounslow 
 Heath by highwaymen, who robbed them of their letters 
 patent and stole into their sees. 
 
 In the early ])art of the eighteenth century Ireland desired 
 union. Union was withheld. The refusal was, saving the dis- 
 solution of (h'omweli's united Commonwealth, the most 
 calamitous blunder that liritish statesnianship ever made. 
 If the sons could ever deserve to suffer for the sins of the 
 fathers, the England of our generation would deserve to 
 suffer for this misdeed. Commercial jealousy was, in all prob- 
 ability, the main cause. (Jonimerce has served civilisation 
 well; but there is also a heavy account against her for in- 
 human cupidity, monopoly, and commercial war. But in 
 Ireland's expression of desire for union the voice of her true 
 interest had been heard. 
 
 Instead of union, to Poyning's Law, subjecting the legisla- 
 tion of the Irish Parlianrent to the control of the Privy Coun- 
 cil, was added the Act of George I., declaring that the Pjritish 
 
iHI 
 
 QUlvSTlONS (»K TllK DAY. 
 
 ^i 
 
 Parliament had power to legislate lor Iieland. Thus Ireland 
 was placed in the position of a lependenc;}' with a vassal Par- 
 liament; that arrangement manil'estly i)regnant with jealousy, 
 discord, and revolt, to Avhich, alter decisive experience of its 
 results, the sagacity of Britisli statesmen now desires to 
 return. The fetters imposed on Irish trade, particularly on 
 the trade in wool, the Irisli staple, for the sup[)osed benefit 
 of the English trader, bespoke the evil spirit which was uni- 
 versal in those days, and were counterparts of those which 
 were laid cm the trade of the American Colonies, and, fully 
 as much as any stamp or tea tax, were the cause of the Ameri- 
 can revolt. Their ini(piitous pressure, together with the fric- 
 tion inevitablv caused bv the iK)litical ai'rangenuMit, the 
 abust'S of the Irish i)ension list, and the aspirations excited 
 by the possession of a Parliament, gave birth, among the 
 dominant race at least, to a sort of bastard nationality, which 
 began to assume the form of a struggle for independence. A 
 bastard luitionality only it was, since the mass of the people 
 remained political and social serfs. Molyneux sounded the 
 first note in a treatise on the power of the Pritish Pai'l lament 
 to bind Ireland. Swift, though he hated and despised the 
 country to which his character had banished him, out of nuu'e 
 revenge and mischief, played, and of coilrse played veno- 
 mously, a patriot's jiart. 
 
 The manorial system has not a little to say for itself, both 
 economi(^ally aiul socially, so long as the landlord ])ays for 
 improvements, does his duty, resides on the estat(% and main- 
 tains kindly relations with his people. Put of the Irish 
 landlords many were absentees, rack-renting their tenants 
 through merciless middlenuMi. Those who were resident were 
 connnouly aliens in ndigion, and as a class improvident and 
 worthlesj^, though soim^ of them, especially those of old fami- 
 lies, were ))Oj)ular with the [)easantry, not the less on account 
 of the reckless ])r()fusion which often brought them to ruin. 
 !More oppressive aiul insolent thnn the great landlord was 
 the squireen. The landlord rack-rented and yet did not pro- 
 vide improvements. Hence agrarian conspiracy under the 
 
^ 
 
 THE IllISll Ql'KSTIOX. 
 
 iS") 
 
 name of Whiteboyisni, and ontrage \vlii(tli assnnied forms, 
 only too familiar to tlu' cruelly t'X('ital)le Celt, siwh as card- 
 ing, houghing, and nuitilatiou not only of men but of cattle. 
 It was, in fact, a desperate social war for the laml, in which on 
 both sides ferocity reached an almost lieroic pitch. A party 
 of AVHiiteboys entered a house in Avhich were a man, his wife, 
 and their daughter, a little girl. Tlu' three were all together in 
 tlie same room. The ruffians rushed into the room, dragged 
 the man out of tlie house, and there i»roceeded to nuirder him. 
 In the room where the woman and the girl remained, there 
 was a closet with a hole in its door, through which a person 
 placed inside could see into the room. The woman concealed 
 the little girl in this closet, and said to her, "Now, child, 
 they are murdering your father downstairs, and when they 
 have murdered him, they Avill come up here and nmrder me. 
 Take care that while they are doing it you look Avell at them, 
 and mind you swear to them wlien you see them in the court. 
 I will throw turf on the fire the last thing to give you light, 
 and struggle hard that you may have time to tak(^ a good 
 view." The little girl looked on through the hole in the 
 closet door while her mother was lieing murdered. Slie 
 marked the nmrderers well. She swore to them when she 
 saw them in a court of justice; and they were convicted on 
 her evidence. 
 
 Tlie people multii)lied heedlessly, their Clmrch practically 
 encouraging them, as it everywhere does, in imj)rovidence. 
 As the land generally would not well bear grain, even if the 
 holdings had been large enough, the only food by which the 
 swarms could be maintained was tlu' potato. i)recarious from 
 its liability to disease, as well as barbarous, to forc(^ which 
 the soil was recklessly exhausted by burning. The results 
 were peasants living on potiito mixed with seaweed and a 
 reign of misery which Swift grimly characterised by propos- 
 ing in a horrible tract that babies should be used as food. 
 
 Praise and thanks are due to th(i (Catholic priesthood for 
 having been tlie comfort and the guide of the Irish j)easant in 
 liis darkest hour. On tlie other liand. the influence of an anti- 
 
J! 9 r 
 
 28G 
 
 QUESTIONS OF' THK DAY 
 
 fti 
 
 in- 
 T 
 
 economical and obscunuitist Churcli must hi- the same evory- 
 wliere, the same in Ireland as in Spain, Portugal, Southern 
 Italy, r>rittany, and the Yalais. Had Ireland been left wholly 
 in the iiands of a Spanisli or Calabrian priesthood, what 
 would have been its state now? Tlie history of Roman 
 (Catholic society aft'ords us no reason for believing tliat the 
 jn'iest would liave bearded the landlord in the interest of the 
 peasant. It affords all jiossible reason for believing that he 
 would liave compla(!ently shared tiie fruits of rack rent. 
 This, at least, is what he did in Spain, in Italy, and in France 
 down to the time of tlie llevolution. The history of Ireland 
 as it has been is dark enough. What it might liave been 
 witlumt l>ritisli connection we cannot tell. Tiiat it Avould 
 have been bright and hapi)y, there is nothing either in the 
 Irish hor<)Sco])e at the time of the Norman conquest or in any 
 subsequent manifestations to lead us to assume. 
 
 When Great I'ritain was worsted in tiie struggle witli the 
 American Colonies, and liad France, Spain, and Holland, as 
 well as the Colonists, at her throat, the Irish i*rotestant gen- 
 try, Avho after all depended for their ascendancy and almost 
 for their existence as an order on their connection with 
 her, took advanttvge, with(mt any false chivalry, of her distress 
 to extort from her Parliamentary indei)endence. This she 
 was fain to concede; th(nigh, had she not been unnerved by 
 faction as well as depressed by defeat, a few regiments of 
 regular troops would probably have sufficed to quell the; ^'ol- 
 unteers. Urattan, in rhetorical ecstasy, on his knees iidored 
 the newly-risen nation in })resence of a Parliament which 
 traced its pedigree to the Parliament of the Pale, and was 
 holding in social and political bondage three-fourths of the 
 Irisli people. • 
 
 Left to themselves, the two Parliaments \vould have speedily 
 flown asunder. They did, in fact, fly asunder on the (piestion 
 of the Regency, and a rupture of the Kingdom was averted 
 only by the recovery of (xcorge III. (Jenerally they Avere 
 held together in uneasy wedlock by Castle patronage, including 
 all the rich bishoprics and deaneries, and sheer corruption, 
 
TFIK IHISII QrESTION. 
 
 •287 
 
 together witli a large iiuiiil)er of iK^iuiiiation boroughs in the 
 gift of the Crown. JUit there was a slill stronger tliougli 
 hitent bond. Grattan's Tarliament of Protestant [)roprietors 
 knew, amidst all its patriotic declamation against J^ritish 
 tyranny, that with l')ritisli connection its own life was bound 
 up. lEad it brokcMi with I'higland, Tyrconncd's Parliament 
 would have taken its place. It never (hired to grant Cathidic 
 Kmancipation or i'arlianu'iitary reform. Al)out its last meas- 
 ure was an Act of Indemnity for the illegal infliction of tor- 
 ture by the lash on suspected Catholics. It must always 
 have remained what it was, a scion of the Parliament of 
 the Pale. Eloiiutnit speakers it had. Its corruption, its 
 orgies, its duelling, are facts not h^ss certain. The evidence 
 of Sir Jonah Harrington is enougli. 
 
 Pitt, strong in his great majority, and lifted above commer- 
 cial prejudices by the teaching of Adam Smith, projected 
 a liberal measure of commercial union for Ireland. He w'as 
 bafiled as much by Irish jealousy of anything that came from 
 England as by British prejudice or faction. He designed for 
 Ireland political reform, the abolition of corruption and abuses, 
 and a measure of justice to the Catholics. As a harbinger of 
 that policy, Fitzwilliam was sent to Indand. lint Fitzwilliam 
 Avas headlong where he ought to have been most cautious, pre- 
 maturely proclaimed his mission, and l)egan to dismiss power- 
 ful friends of government. Pitt was at the head of a coalition 
 ministry, of which one wing was strongly Tory. The conse- 
 (juence was a break-down of Pitt's liberal policy, and at a 
 moment which unhappily proved to have l)eeu critical. 
 
 Then came the French llevolution, and called into activity 
 the free-thinking republicanism which the intolerant Inshops 
 of the State ('hurch had helped by their vexations to foster 
 at Belfast. Disturbance, once set on foot among the dominant 
 race, spread, as it had done in the time of (Jharles T., to tlie 
 subject race, taking the usual form of agrarian conspii'acy and 
 outrage. The Catliolics having risen, the Protestants turned 
 on them as their immemorial enemies, and there ensued over 
 certain districts a reign of terror carried on by the l*rotestant 
 

 w 
 
 fil 
 
 288 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 I t 
 
 yeomanry, whose practices were floggiiit;'. j)itcli-capi)iiig, picket- 
 ing, and half-hanging, as those of tlie CJatholics were slioot- 
 ing, carding, and lioughing. Of tlie C'atliolic priestliood a 
 few favoured the insurrection, and oiu' afterwards became tlie 
 rebel general ; but most of them shrank from anytliing con- 
 nected with the Frenc'h Kevolution, and not on their order 
 rests any of the resitousibility of this civil war. At this time 
 tliey were generally educated abroad, and identified with the 
 Continental Cimrch whicli the Kevolution was threatening to 
 destroy. Meantime Wolfe Tone, the only real leader whom 
 the Celtic insurrection produced, a brave, gay, clever, and 
 sincere, though light and rather tipsy, man of action, had won 
 the ear of the French Revolutionary government and obtained 
 from it a promise of assistance. In fulfilment of that promise 
 caniG an armament commanded by Hoche, which was only pre- 
 vented from landing by weather, and which had it landed must 
 for a time have overrun Ireland, though it Avould presently 
 have been cut off by tlie l^ritish fleet. Winds and waves 
 saved the Kingdom. Kapoleon, left supreme by Hoche's 
 death, liked not tlie aspect of Irish insurrection and refused 
 to repeat Iloche's attempt. "Ireland," he said to the Direc- 
 tory, "has made a diversion for you; what more do yon want 
 of it?" To the furies of civil war, however, those of invasion 
 had been added. It is useless to recount the infernal history 
 of 179S, the passions of which only the vilest demagogism 
 would wish, for political purposes, to revive. Amidst that 
 murderous chaos the one power of mercy, let the traducers 
 ol' England take it as they will, was the regular army of Great 
 Britain.^ 
 
 1 "The respect and veneration with which I lieard the names of Hunter, 
 Skeret, and Stewart . . . pronounced, and the hi^h encomiums passed on 
 the Scotch and En,i;lisli regiments, under whose protection the misguided 
 partisans of rel)elli(m were enabled to return in safety to their homes, 
 convinces me that the .salvation of the country was as niueli owing to the 
 forbearance, luunanity, and prudence of the regular troops as to their 
 discipline and bravery. Tlie moment the militia, yeomanry, and Orange- 
 men were separated from the army, coniideuce was restored." — Wake- 
 lit'ld's Trohtnd, II. ;572. The answer made to this by those wlio begrudge 
 
' 
 
 TIIK IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 280 
 
 Grattan's ]*arlianioiit and tlio system upon whicii it stood 
 had sunk, with social ordei-, in blood and flame. That Pitt 
 liad contemplated union before is most likely. Union now 
 was evidently the only course. To take both races and reli- 
 gions under the broad a'gis of the Imperial Parliament was 
 the sole chance of ending a civil war of devils between them, 
 and of saving the weaker race from the vengeance which 
 would have been hailed upon it by the stronger. J>est of all 
 would it have been to follov^ the example of Cromwell ; 
 declare Ireland united to Great Britain, and call her represen- 
 tatives to the Imperial Parliament. On this Pitt did not ven- 
 ture. The alternative was to compound with a powerful 
 oligarchy for the loss of its field of ambition and patronage. 
 This was done, and it was dirty work, as Cornwallis bitterly 
 complains. But it Avould not have been done by a man so 
 upright and sensible as Cornwallis, had he not been profoundly 
 convinced of the necessity and righteousness of the measure. 
 That the Union was carried by bribery has been conclusively 
 disproved by Dr. Dunbar Ingram,' whose treatises they oidy 
 refuse to read who do not desire to know the truth. The 
 money which has been mistaken for bribes was compensation 
 for the loss of nomination boroughs given under the authority 
 of Parliament in accordance with the notions of that day, and 
 given without distinction to supporters and opponents of the 
 Union. That the measure Avas not carried by British force 
 is proved by Cornwallis's confidential statement that in July, 
 1799, when the political struggle was at its height, the force 
 remaining in Ireland was sufficient to preserve peace, but 
 totally incompetent to resist foreign invasion. In September, 
 
 honour to the British army is that AVakefielcl was not an official writer, 
 and tliat he wrote fourteen years after tlie event ; as tliou,£:li most liisto- 
 rians were official, ...nd a writer could not remember an important and 
 impressive circumstance for fourteen years. The troops, of which Aber- 
 crombie spoke of as "only formidable to their friends," were mtt the 
 regulars, but the militia. (See Cornwallis's Despatch, Sept. 2r), 1708.) 
 
 1 Two Chapters of Irish Ilistori/, and .1 Hislonj of the LeijisJntim 
 Union of (h'cnt Britain and Irehind. 
 
J^ 
 
 < 
 
 
 m 
 
 200 
 
 Ql'KSTIONS (»F Till-: DAY 
 
 ■I 1: 
 
 1798, ho reckoned his effeetive I'orce of Uritish regulars at 
 four regiments, comprising in all eighteen hundred men, and 
 his total force of all kiiuls did not exceed forty-tive thousand. 
 There was no rising of any im[)ortance against tlie Union even 
 in Dublin, whicli, as the capital, luul most to lose. The leaders 
 of the Catholics are alleged to have been decoyed by a 
 promise of Emancii)ation. No pledge was given by I'itt; to 
 what extent expectations were held out it is (lifii(!ult to decide. 
 But there was a motive for acciuiescing in the measure, which 
 amidst recondite s])eculations and conjectures is too much 
 left out of sight. All who had j)roperty to be plundered or 
 throats to bo cut were likely to embrace the only visible mode 
 of escape from a sanguinary chaos. That there was a con- 
 certed destru(!tion by British statesmen of their papers relat- 
 ing to this period, to conceal their infamy, is an imagination 
 worthy of those who seem to think that there was no honour 
 or beneficence in British statesmen before their own day.' 
 
 Some of the leading opponents of the Union, such as Foster, 
 Ponsonby, and Parnell, ratified the act when it was done by 
 the acceptance of large sums as compensation. Grattan sat 
 in the Imperial Parliament for an English nomination bor- 
 ough and there voted for a Coercion Bill. Plunket likewise 
 sat in the Imperial Parliament. He had said that he would 
 resist Union to the last gasp of his breath and the last drop of 
 his blood, that he would swear his children at the altar to 
 eternal resistance to it. Afterwards as a member of the United 
 Parliament and the great advocate of Catholic Emancipation 
 there, he said: "As an Irishman I opposed that union; as an 
 Irishman I avow that I did so openly and boldly, nor am I now 
 
 1 The solo basis for the stateiueut appears to be a passage, misread by 
 the eyes of prejudice, in Hoss's Preface to the Cornwallis Correspondence ; 
 the existence of which correspondence is itself a confutation of the state- 
 ment. IJoss uses " purposely," in contrast to the neglect by which lie 
 says some of the papers have perished. He does not hint at concert, and, 
 of the papers purposely dtstroyed, some were destroyed at a late date 
 and by persons not implicated in the transactions. He says that all 
 facilities were ijiven to his in vest illations both at the State Paper Office 
 and in Dublin Castle. 
 
 11) 'S 
 
 11' 
 
TIIK HJISII QUKSTTOX. 
 
 2'.n 
 
 
 ashamed of what I then ilid. But thoucfli in my resistance to 
 it T had been prepared to go the h'ngtli of any man, I am now 
 equally prepared to do all in my power to render it close and 
 indissoluble. One of the apprehensions on which my opposi- 
 tion was founded, 1 am haj)py to say, has been disappointed 
 by the event. I had been afraid that the interest of Ireland, 
 on the abolition of her separate legislatui-e. would come to be 
 discussed m a hostile l*arliament. lint I can no.v state — and 
 J wish when I speak that F could be heard by the whole of 
 Ireland — that during the time that 1 have sat in the United 
 Parliament, I have found every question that related to the 
 interests or security of that country entertained with indul- 
 gence, and treated with the most deliberate regard."" ' 
 
 That the Union was [lolitically unfair to Ireland cannot be 
 pretended. She has always had her fair share of the repre- 
 sentation. 8he has now twenty-two members more than she 
 is entitled to have, and thus swells to thirty-four Mr. Glad- 
 stone's majority, which would rightly be only twelve. For 
 some years under the reign of the Whigs, her members held 
 the balance between the parties, and, as we have good reason 
 to know, hold it now. 
 
 To all the offices, honours, and emi)loyments of the Empire, 
 the native of Ireland has been admitted on a perfect equality 
 with the other citizens of the United Kingdom. India has 
 had two Irish Viceroys ; natives of Ireland now command the 
 British armies; the Iiulian Civil Service and the Indian offices 
 at home are full of Irishmen. 
 
 If the Irish representation in the House of Commons has 
 been weak in character and has been disgraced by a series of 
 adventurers of the Sadleir type, this has not been due to any 
 unfairness in the terms of union, nor is it now good reason for 
 giving Ireland over to fucli hands. If Ireland may fairly 
 com])lain that Parliament has sometimes neglected her needs 
 to spend its time in faction tights, England, Wales, and Scot- 
 
 ' PlnnkeVs Life, IT. 104. Quoted by T. Dunbar Iiifjram in his Ilistonj 
 of the Leijishitife Union of (!rp((t Britain itnd Trduml, pp. 98, 04. 
 
X 
 
 Hi 
 
 
 t 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 v- 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 ! \ 
 
 •^1 1 
 
 '1- 
 
 1 
 
 
 I! 
 
 II 
 
 202 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAV. 
 
 land may do the same, and the remedy is the abolition ol' 
 party government, not the erection of another House of i)arty. 
 If Parliament is overburdened with local matters, the remedy 
 is, at all events, to throw off a part of the burden on local 
 assemblies or authorities generally, not to repeal the union 
 with Ireland. Ignorance of Ireland has been pleaded by Mr. 
 Gladstone as an account of his change of mind, and he may 
 extend the plea, it is believed, to Mr. Morley, his reputed 
 partner in the authorship of his Bill. Bui I'arliament, as a 
 body, has not been uninformed ; it has had a hundred Irish 
 members to inform it. To say that British statesmen have 
 not cared for Irish (questions, that the Irish problem has not 
 received their anxious, their painfully rnxious, attention, is 
 most unjust, as every one who has lived among them knows. 
 
 Pledged or unpledged, Pitt desired, and did his best to carry. 
 Catholic Emancipation. That he was insincere and secretly 
 counted on the King's resistance is a vile calumny, for which 
 no shadow of proof has been produced. He was baffled by 
 the intrigue of Wedderburn and the bishops. If he took 
 time, it was only because he wished to get his Cabinet per- 
 fectly united on the question before he approached the King. 
 He paid the debt of honour by resignation. He afterwards 
 returned to power without insisting on Catholic Emancipation. 
 But was he to leave the nation leaderless in extremity, or 
 was lie to depose the King? Pitt, acting in tremendous times, 
 sometimes erred. The contrast between the brightness of the 
 lirst half of his career and the cloud which overhung the 
 second half is one of the saddest things in our history. But 
 he was an upright English gentleman ; he was a sincere lover 
 of his country ; he never left the path of honour, practised 
 deceit, or uttered untiiah. We could as easily imagine him 
 traducing his country in a foreign press as giving a pledge to 
 the Catholics and secretly relying on the King's bigotry for 
 a release. 
 
 Catholic Emancipation, like all domestic reform and im- 
 provement, whether for Ireland or Great Britain, was delayed 
 till the end of the mortal conflict with revolutionary France, 
 
TIIK IIUSII QIKSTIOX. 
 
 203 
 
 ami afterwards witli the Ijrigaiul eiiii)ire to wliieli she had 
 given birth. Tlieii it came with other liberal inr;isures, though 
 not in the best way, and when by postijoncnient it had lost 
 much of its graee. There followed another pause, after whiiih 
 came the disestablishment of the State Church. In respect 
 of religious e([uality, Ireland is now in advance of the other 
 two Kingdoms, verifying in this case CromweU's saying that 
 she offered a clean paper for the trial of reformers. J)ises- 
 tablishment might have come earlier if some of the Irish 
 members in the House of Commons would have devoted their 
 attention to justice for Ireland instead of devoting it to the 
 CJalway Packet Contract, as for more than one session they did. 
 Whatever pledge had been give<i, whatever expectation had 
 been held out to the Catholics at the time of the Union, was 
 now virtually fulfilled. The compact, if compact the deed 
 could be called which was written with the finger of necessity, 
 was now perfectly made good, and the last stain of moral in- 
 validity was removed. 
 
 Ireland also received from the Imperial Parliament a sys- 
 tem of national education which the priests, saving a few 
 Liberals, such as Moriarty, opposed, and which, if Home Rule 
 were granted, the priests would to-morrow overturn. Nor can 
 it be truly alleged that the Irish since the Union have been 
 subject to social disparagement in the slightest degree, what- 
 ever discredit may have been brought u\h)U them in former 
 days by Irish heiress-hunters and adventurers. To say that 
 they have been treated with more studied (!ontumely than the 
 negro in the United States is the very delirium, of calumny. 
 If men behave as Irish members behave in the House of 
 Commons, they will draAv odium on themselves and those who 
 sent them there. Otherwise, the peculiarities of Irish charac- 
 ter, like those of English or Scotch character, may have been 
 objects of harmless jest, objects of hatred they have never 
 been. There are no ])etter mirrors of public sentiment than 
 the public schools and the universities ; let any one who has 
 been at them say whether he ever knew an Irish youth 
 insulted or ill-treated on account of his place of birth. 
 
.WF' 
 
 *■:■» 
 
 ■Jttt 
 
 (ilKSriONS OF TIIK DAV. 
 
 ii:l 
 
 Abo\it thirty years iij,'o the writer, (hirin<^ a summer spent 
 in Irehuul, enjoyed the intimate eonverse oi' some of the best 
 Irisli patriots and Ijiberals. These nuMi were staunch Unionists, 
 and would never liear of iiny palterinj^ witli that question. 
 They saw the necessity of soinal and economic'al reforms, but 
 the only i)olitical tfrievances, so far as the writer rememl)ers, 
 of which tliey (^om[»lained in connection with the Union, were 
 the expense and trouble of going to Westminster for ])rivate 
 bill legislation and for appeals to the House of Ijords. The 
 first grievance might be removed by allowing Irish committees 
 of the two Houses of Parliament for private bills to sit in the 
 vacation at Dublin, and to rejiort to Westminster. The second 
 might be mitigated by tin; institution of a delegate court, 
 though the unity of the Su[)reme Court could not be broken 
 without breaking the unity of law. A cai)ital grievance is 
 now made of the Vice-ltoyalty, or Castle government, as it is 
 styled, which is dubbed an Austrian Satrapy. The Vice- 
 Koyalty is, no doubt, a relic of dependence. In 1850, a bill 
 for its abolition passed the House of Connuons by an over- 
 whelming majority, and was dropped in deference to protests 
 from Ireland. 
 
 Whatever may have been the shortcomings of Parliament 
 in legislating for Ireland between the Union ami this out- 
 break, it may safely be said that the s]urit of legislation 
 has been just. The measures, so far as their intention has 
 been fulfilled, have always made for justice. To treat Ireland 
 Avith kindness and indemnify her for sufferings i)ast, has been 
 the general desire of the English jjcople. Foreign statesmen, 
 as impartial observers, have seen this. Guizot, though an 
 admirer and student of English institutions, was not an Anglo- 
 maniac, and as Prime Minister of France he had quarrelled 
 nu)re than once with British governments. It was about 
 1865, before the disestablishment of the Irish Church, that 
 he was heard to say that the conduct of England towards 
 Ireland for the last thirty years had been admirable. He 
 was reminded that to do Ireland complete justice, disestab- 
 lishment was still required. He assented, but at the same 
 
' 
 
 THK IHISH til'KSTION. 
 
 2W) 
 
 time emphatically repeated his eiifomium. This may he 
 contrasted with the laiiguaj,'e of Amerieau-lrisii ('onventions, 
 which charge the British Parliament with organising famine 
 in Ireland to destroy the people whom it has not been able to 
 extirpate with the sword. 
 
 Coercion liills, alas ! there have been many, but they have 
 been generally agrarian, not political. It cannot be said 
 tliat for agrarian outrage they liave not l)een needful. Gov- 
 ernment cannot abdicate its i)rimary functions, nor van a 
 country be left to savage and murderous hiwlessness. thougli 
 the law may r«!cpiire change. When for giving unj)opular 
 evidence a man and his family of seven were burned alive 
 in their house, and (jutrages of this kind were protected 
 by conspiracy; when a farmer for defending his house against 
 nightly ruffians was shot at the chapel door in the pres- 
 ence of hundretls, who connived at the murder ; strong meas- 
 ures could hardly be avoided if civilisation was to Ije saved, 
 ^lost European governments would have declared martial law. 
 That of Italy, which is liberal enough, represses agrarian 
 conspiracy by armed force. The number of the Coercion lUlls, 
 thougli it sounds api)alling, is really a proof of the constant 
 effort to do without coercion and go back to the ordinary 
 course of law. 
 
 Since the Union, not only has there been no civil war or 
 serious conflict between the races and religions in Ireland, but 
 there has been no i)olitical rebellion or revolutionary move- 
 ment of the slightest force. O'Connell's repeal agitation took 
 no hold, and at last degenerated into a protracted farce or an 
 excuse for levying O'Connell's " rent" from the people. Smith 
 O'Brien's insurrection, in 1S4S, though the air of Europe was 
 charged with revolution, ended in ridicule and a cabbage garden. 
 Other political conspiracies have flashed in the pan. This 
 last, it seems, had its origin, not among Irish })atriots, but 
 among Irishmen of the Anglican Church, who resented dises- 
 tablishment, so that it may be regarded as the last service ren- 
 dered by a State Church to the State. 
 
 The commercial grievances which existed before the Union 
 
 I 
 
^w^ 
 
 \\\ 
 
 2ur. 
 
 QUKsrin.Ns ni' I in; dav 
 
 1 , 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 have been wholly swept iiway. (Jreat Uritaiii has op«'iu'(l for 
 Irish j)ro(lu(!e the best market in tin- world. She has f^ivcii 
 eniployiueiit in her luanufacturiiij,' citifs to hundri'ds oi' thou- 
 sands of Irish who would have starvcrl on their own soil. 
 Her (Mpital would open u|t Irish resources if it were allowed, 
 and were sure of receiving dividends in money, not in bullets. 
 Watever apiu^aranee of stren},'th political disaffecition has 
 shown has been derived from aj,'rarian discontent. This 
 is emphatically true of the present rel)(dlion. It cannot 
 be doubted that the a}.,'rariiin (piestion in Ireland called for 
 legislative interposition, i'^rom causes already nu'utioned, the 
 manorial system had there failed. Absenteeism was only ])art 
 of the evil, and some of the estatt's of absentees were very 
 well and liberally nuinaged, though to the Irishman, of all 
 men, nothing can make \\\> for the absence of his social chief. 
 The root of the mis(diief lay not so nnudi in the system of 
 tenure as in the swarming of the 2)eople, under a Church 
 which practically discourages economy, over a soil unfit 
 for grain, and on which they could be maintained only by the 
 treacherous potato. Rents were raised to an excessive amount 
 by the desperate bidding of the jx'oide against each other for 
 the land which was their only means of subsistence. There 
 would be distress from over-populatit)n in the llonum Catholic 
 Province of Quebec as there is in Roman Catholic Ireland, 
 were there not a ready outlet into the United States. Unless 
 thrift could be given to the Irish peasant with security of 
 tenure, he would soon be in the hands of the money-lender, 
 who neither resides nor remits, and the more money-lenders 
 were shot the higher interest would be xhe Church, too, 
 would probably lay her hands on a large part of that which the 
 landlord had resigned. Those who write most sympathetically 
 on Irish sorrow, if they write at all fairly, do not omit to men- 
 tion the indis])osition of the Irish peasant to steady labour ; 
 and the defect, whether inborn or produced by long discourage- 
 ment, is now too ])robably ingrained and cannot fail to tell. 
 Still, Irish tenure called for reform. I'ossibly, it may have 
 been necessary to provide for the general abolition of the dual 
 
 
nil; IIMMI (ilKSTKjN. 
 
 ownership. Hut this slioulcl iiiivc bi-eii donu by the hand (if 
 (It'libcnite (Mutioii uml iiiiit;irti;il justice, not by lawless vio- 
 lence, cUiss piission, uiid the unseiupulous ni;di<,'nity of faction. 
 As it is, i'aith in contracts, the foundation of < Mnunerce and 
 almost of civilisat' 'n, has been seriously shaken in the process, 
 and pro[)erty has been made j^'enerally insecure. Tundiasers 
 under recent Acts of rarliainent, such as the Kncnmbered 
 Estates Act, purchasers from the State under the Disestab- 
 lishment Act have ])een despoiled or marked for spoliation 
 without comitunction, or rather with insolent delight. The 
 present JMiidsters saw what morality and the national honour 
 required. They showed this by their first proposals on the 
 subject, which recogiused the claim of the landlords of Ireland 
 to protect'on and indemnification. They apju-ar to think that 
 they can :lraw the line of " rapine " at Ireland ; and the 
 factory lords who vote with them seem to thiidc that they 
 can draw the line at property in land. 
 
 In 1.S47 the [)otato bro>ight its jieriodical dearth on the 
 most frightful scale. Great Britain, (dnirged with organising 
 famine to extirpate the Irish, did everything in her power for 
 their relief. To let in food for Ireland, the fiscal system was 
 suspended and the ports were thrown open, which O'Connell 
 had salt' only an Irish Parliament would do. The present 
 leader of the Irish party in the House of Commons has borne 
 witness as a historian to the good-will and generosity shown 
 on that occasion by the English people. 
 
 There was, nevertheless, a vast exodus to America and a 
 proportionate increase of Irish influence, both on the domes- 
 tic politics of the United States and on the relations between 
 the United States and Great IJritain. What Irish influence 
 on American politics and on the iiffairs of American cities is, it 
 is needless to say. The Irish immigrants, for two generations 
 at least, do not become American citizens, but, remain Irish, 
 prosecuting their chm feud. They keep their national or 
 rebel flag, and annually unfurl it in face of American 
 nationality over the City Hall at Xew York. The name it 
 probably was that drew thein into the Democratic party. 
 
I ! 
 
 I t 
 
 298 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY 
 
 Into that [Jtu'ty, iit all events, they went. They almost to a 
 nwm supported slavery, notwithstanding the generous protests 
 of O'Connell. At the time of the Civil War, rising at New 
 York, they abused and butchered negroes, till the Ameri- 
 cans brought up trooi)S, and instead of passing Coercion 
 l)ills proceeded to (pudl murderous lawlessness by summary 
 execution. It may safely be said that on tliat (hiy twenty 
 times as many Irish fell as have suffered for i)olitical offences 
 since the Union. To proclaim indemnity for crime committed 
 on political pretexts would be to ])ut society at the mercy of 
 any brigand who chose to say that his object in filling the 
 country with blood and havoc was not plunder, but anarchy 
 or usurpation. Irish influence upon the relation between the 
 United States and Great P)ritaiu has given rise to acts of 
 political subserviency and breaches of international (H)mity 
 on the part of American legislatures, presidents, and states- 
 men, of which i)atriotic Americans in private own them- 
 selves ashamed. British opponents of Irish domination are, in 
 fact, labouring to redeem the politics of both nations from a 
 noxious and humiliating yoke. American Fenianism lias rein- 
 forced Irish Fenianism witli rhetorical vitriol, and, what is of 
 more consequence, with money, the large contributions of 
 which, being at all events for a sentimental object, would be 
 creditable to the race were it not j)retty certain that they are 
 to a great extent enforced. Hut here the danger from Ameri- 
 can Fenianism ends. To enlist the American people in their 
 own elan feud and drive the Ki^public into war with Great 
 Ih-itain is the constant object of Irish efforts. But the 
 Americans, whatever tlieir politicians may deem it necessary 
 to say, have no intention of being enlisted in any one's cla.n 
 feud, and will never go to war in an Irish quarrel. Nor will 
 they put up with Irish conspiracy beyond a certain point. 
 A strong reacti(m was caused by the nnirder of Dr. Cronin. 
 
 To the sister island, also, there was increased exodus, and 
 the dreadful Irish quarters of Liverjjool and Glasgow became 
 more ei-owded than before. Irish colonisation of Great 
 Britain, while it practically ludps to answer the charge of 
 
Tin-: lUISII i2i;KST10N. 
 
 •M) 
 
 point. 
 
 British cruelty to Ireland, is a serious niatter for England and 
 Scotland in a political, a social, and an industrial point of 
 view. '"There are no Irishmen," says Mr. T. 1'. ()'('ounor, 
 " more fierce or resolute in the national faith than the Irish- 
 men who settle in England or Scotland." *' Tliey are far more 
 extreme in their views," he adds, "than the majority of the 
 Irish in America." He depicts tliem as a caste with a feeling 
 of estrangement from tlu)se around them. In confirmation of 
 his description, it may be said that not all of those who, at 
 the time of the Pha'nix Park murders, were going about in 
 Irish quarters of British cities, saw reason to believe that, 
 as Mr. O'Connor says, the blow struck in the Irish cause was 
 regarded by the whole Irish race with unmixed sorrow. It is 
 by the Irish vote in not a few cases that British constituencies 
 have been turned in favour of Home Rule. 
 
 Such, in general outline, is the story. From what part of 
 it would any reasonable and patriotic num draw the inference 
 that it would be good for Great IJritain and Ireland, or for 
 either of them, to erect Celtic and Catholic Ireland into a 
 separate nation? Whatever unity Ireland has, whatever she 
 has of constitutional government, of free institutions, of 
 civilisation, has come to her from her partner in the Union, 
 though, owing to unhappy circumstances either of nature or 
 of history, it has come to her in a cruel way. The past may 
 be deplored; undone it cannot be; by an unwise policy its 
 evils may be renewed. We see into what hands Ireland 
 Avould pass. There in the House of (Jommons, turning the 
 debate into a brawl, sits the Home Kule l*arliament of Ire- 
 land. In Mr. T. P. O'Connor's lively sketch of the recent 
 history of Irish parties, it is instructive to note the pervad- 
 ing assumjition that the Irish ))()litician who comes within 
 reach of corruption will infallibly be corrupted. Mr. O'Connor 
 describes to us the way in which, under O'Connell the ''Libe- 
 rator," the system Wiis worked. "A profligate landlord, or 
 an aspiring but briefless barrister, was elected for an Irish 
 constituency as a follower of the popular leader of the duy 
 and as the mouthpiece of his princuples. When he entered 
 

 ;50(» 
 
 (ilESriONS OF TllK DAY 
 
 !H 
 
 ij V 
 
 I ■ 
 
 the House of C'omiuons he soon gave it to be understood by 
 the distributors of State patronage that he was open to a bar- 
 gain. The time came wlien in the i)arty divisions his vote 
 was of consequence, and tlie bargain was then struck, the vote 
 from liini and the office from them." Un(U'r the auspices of 
 the Repeal Association there was returned, >rr. T. I*. O'Connor 
 says, " instead of seventy independent and honest Irish repre- 
 sentatives, a moth^y gang of as disreputabk^ and needy adven- 
 turers as ever trafficked in the blood and tears of a nation." 
 As it was in O'Connell's time so, according to the same 
 authority, it continued to be afterwards. " Since the break- 
 up of the Butt party, a number of his most prominent follow- 
 ers have accepted office, and the few that still retain })laces in 
 the House of Commons have, with scarcely an exception, gone 
 over to the Liberal party, and are notoriously as open to em- 
 ployment as tlu^ cabbies in Palace yard." Let him who ac- 
 (iuses us of treating Irish politicians with disrespect see what 
 estinuite is formed of them by their own kin. The O'Shea 
 case gave us a measure of the independence of Irish constitu- 
 encies. What sort of security would there be against tlie 
 api)earance of a series of Sadleirs and Keoughs inaParlianunit 
 at Dublin? These battles of Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites 
 over the money-bag of tlie agitation, do they not show us 
 what is to be expected in the way of disinterestedness as well 
 as of coucord? 
 
 At first the priest will ])robably share the power and the 
 spoil with the patriot. Tluu-e is no use in saying that the 
 Roman (yatholic (Jhurch would not do what it is a necessity of 
 its nature to do, what it tells you plainly in the Syllabus and 
 Encyclical that it claims a right to do, and what it has every- 
 where done to the full extent of its power. It would begin 
 by putting an end to the popular system of education which 
 the United Parliament has establishi'd, or turning the com- 
 mon schools into organs of ecclesiasticism and their teach- 
 ing into a preparation for the first communion, as it has 
 done in Quebec. It would i)roceed formally or informally to 
 establish itself, and in so doing it need fear no opposition from 
 
TllK I WISH QIKSTION. 
 
 801 
 
 (iladstoniau Liberals like Mr. Morley. wiio arc fain to palli- 
 ate its tyrannical action ni the elections and to n[)liold the 
 sinister rule wliicli enables the priest to oversee and dictate 
 the illiterate vote. ]\Ir, >rorley's case is instviictive because 
 he bitterly denounced Mr. \V. E, Forster for apostasy from 
 sound Liberal principles in recognising religious schools. 
 Small, to judge from all experience and from such au analogy 
 as that of priestly rule in Quebec, would be the modicum of 
 political freedom which tlu^ peasant Avould be allowed by 
 his Church to enjoy when the last legal safeguard was with- 
 drawn. In time, perhaps ])retty soon, a rujjture would come 
 between the priest party and th(> revolutionary party, to which 
 the more thorough-going Fenians both in Ireland and America 
 belong, and which is affiliated to the revolutionary party in 
 Europe. The torch of intestine discord would then be kin- 
 dled once more. Between the two islands the relations could 
 not fail to be hostile, when L-eland was a separate nation, owing 
 lier existence to successful rebellion, and setting out with 
 bitter hatred in lier soul. Let people who talk sentimentally 
 about a union of hearts, instead of listening to the voice in 
 Ireland, subdued to the tones of a sucking dove while the 
 work of disunion is being done, listen to the genuine accents 
 of Chicago, or let them look into the gra])hic pages of Mr. 
 T. P. O'Connor, scan the portraits of the Parnellite leaders 
 painted there, and draw their inference as to the direction 
 which such men would give Irish sentiment and policy towards 
 ( Treat Britain when they had an Irish Tarl lament in their 
 liands. 
 
 To a moral certainty, Ireland would become a thorn in the 
 side of Great l^ritain. To sustain herself against her power- 
 ful neighbour, she would attach herself to some foreign enemy 
 of England, as the tribes attached themselves to Spain in the 
 sixteenth century, and as Scotland attached herself to France 
 before the Union. This Great Britain could not and would 
 not endure. Ireland would be recon(piered and the circle of 
 woe would revolve again. 
 
 The effect on Irish prosperity of a patriot and priestl}' 
 
If' 
 
 i !. 
 
 SOS 
 
 QrKSriONS OK THK DAY. 
 
 •government is not hard to foretell. Ca])ital would Hy tlie 
 island; employment would fall off. There woidd be another 
 exodus, and tlie IJritish artisan who votes and shouts for dis- 
 memberment would pay the penalty in an inereased measure 
 of the niost depressing of all eompetition, unless he should 
 insist on immigration laws, in which case misery would 
 abound in Ireland. When this rebellion broke out Ireland 
 was doing well, commerce was improving, the deposits in the 
 savings banks had increased, and pauperism had been greatly 
 diminished. 
 
 There is no reason for believing that the mass of the Irish 
 people want a separate Parliament. Nobody who knew them 
 well ever said that their aspirations were political. It is the 
 land that they want, and they are Home Rulers only because 
 they are told that a Home llule Parliament would give them 
 the land. It is probable that at this moment most of them 
 would be glad to be under a strong and just government, 
 enjoying their improved holdings in peace. Tliey are want- 
 ing in political independence, ami through the whole course 
 of these events have been completely under the control of the 
 terrorist organisations or the priests. If it could be said Avitli 
 regard to the Union that the compact Avas morally invalid 
 because it had been carried by force, fully as much may it be 
 said with regard to Home llule that the compact would be 
 morally invalid as having been passed under lawless coercion. 
 
 \\'itli respect to the case of Ulster, all that need be said more 
 is that we shall only get what we deserve if the noble prov- 
 ince, thrust by us in spite of her passionate appeals to our 
 good faith out of the nationality to which she belongs, and 
 forced to accept the yoke of all that she most abhors, instead 
 of our best and firmest friend should become our bitterest 
 enemy. Nor is this unlikely to be the result. 
 
 It is needless again to discuss Mr. Gladstone's Bill. It 
 was torn to pieces by Lord Selborne in the Lords' debate, 
 while the ministers in charge of it could reply only by vague 
 assertions tliat in s])ite of probabilities all would turn out 
 well, or with an insolent levity, wliich shows in what spirit, 
 
TIIK iniSlI QFESTIOX. 
 
 303 
 
 sure of tlioiv inochanii-al majority, tlicy arc dealing with tlio 
 fundamental institutions ol' tlie country. The measure is a 
 hopeless jumble of the National, Imperial, Federal, and 
 Colonial systems. Nobody inuigines that it could work or 
 that it is in truth anything but a complicated mask for the 
 surrender of Ireland to the rebellion. Mr. Redmond feels 
 sure enough of the subserviency of the government, the life 
 of which is practically in his hands, to proclaim openly that 
 the measure is not final; in other words, that the end is to be 
 complete independence, or, as Mr. Varnell said, " the sever- 
 ance of the last link which binds Ireland to Great Britain." 
 Mr Parnell said this when he chose to speak the truth, and if 
 he afterwards disclaimed the statenuMit, we know from his 
 own lips what his disclaimer was worth.' On the morrow of 
 Home Rule the Union Jack will be hauled down over Ireland, 
 the rebel Green will take its place, and tlie last Lord-Lieuten- 
 ant, if he is a Gladstonian, Avill humbly lend a hand on the 
 occasion. "If any man attempts to haul down the American 
 flag, shoot him on the spot;" so said the Unionist General 
 Dix at the time of Secession. Americans remember the day. 
 Under the Parliamentary system, if there are two Parlia- 
 ments, there are two nations. The Crown is called, ironically 
 as it may be supposed, the golden link. A golden link with 
 a vengeance it was in the days before the Union. P)ut it has 
 now no mass of patronage, no bribery fund, no nomination 
 boroughs in Ireland. Had the government meant to preserve 
 the Union, it would have welcomed, instead of repelling, as it 
 did, amendments distinctly asserting the supremacy of the 
 Imperial over the Irish I'arliament. In order to make sure 
 that the ostensible safeguards shall not be real, and at the 
 same time to keep the British party of surrender in power, Ire- 
 land is, besides a Parliament of her own, to have a garrison 
 of eighty Irish members in the Parliament of Great Britain. 
 The affected indifference of the government about this part of 
 
 ' See the evidence of Mr. Pariiell before tlie .Special Conuni-snion, 
 May 3, 1889: Report of the ProcccdiiKjs hpfovf the Commissioners. 
 Reprinted from 7'fir Times. N'oi. If., pi). 708, 7i>». 
 
r 
 
 i'i 
 
 1 
 
 
 l:t:: 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 '< \i 
 
 ;5(»4 
 
 QUKSTIOXS OV IHK DAY. 
 
 their luoasure only hotrays tlio (le[)tli of tlic design. AVas 
 such a cup of slianie ever put to the li})S of a great nation? If 
 England needs to he disciplined for her rejection of a politi- 
 cal Messiah, this hill does it with a vengeance. Neither in 
 America or elsewhere has she an enemy who does not Avatch 
 its progress with delight. To ha.ve voted for it, if the nation 
 ever recovers its sense and spirit, will be a brand. Notori- 
 ously of those who voted for it many si)oke in private against 
 it. They trusted to the Lords to throw it out. These same 
 men will now court popularity by swelling the cry against 
 the Lords. Then perhaps they will read homilies on the 
 knavery of American i)oliticians. 
 
 It is needless to discuss again the false, and for the 
 most part absurd, analogies which have been adduced to lull 
 the British j)eople into dismend)erment: that of Iceland, a 
 petty community a thousand miles from Denmark; that of 
 Canada, a colony three thousand miles off, and virtu' '!y 
 independent; that of the Scandinavian Kingdoms, whose 
 union is not ]iome rule but federation, and is, moreover, going 
 to pieces before our eyes; that of Germany, which again is a 
 confederation tending probably towards a closer national 
 unity; or the uneasy but co-equal wedlock of Austria and 
 Hungary, which presents no point of real resemblance, his- 
 torical, ethnological, or structural, to the measure proposed for 
 Ireland. These analogies have not much figured in recent 
 debates. Nor can anybody imagine that the position of 
 States in a federation such as the States of the American 
 Union or the Provinces of Canada, each with its own local 
 government on the same footing and till sharing alike in the 
 federal government, bears any resemblance to that of a vassal 
 State such as Ireland would be made by the Home Rule Bill. 
 The only real analogies arc those of vassal Parliaments, and 
 these all point distinctly the same way. Alike in Ireland 
 before the Union, in the American Colonies, and in Canada, 
 the institution of a vassal Parliament, by the aspirations which 
 li; excited and the friction which it induced, gave birth to a 
 struggle for complete independence, which in the case of the 
 
TllK IRISH QrKSTloX. 
 
 305 
 
 American Colonies ended with the Kfvohitioii, ;i,n(l in the case 
 of Canada with a twofold rebellion. The Irish politicians 
 who will be the leaders of tlie I'arliauuMit at Dnblin, liave all, 
 according to an admiring chronicler, l)een distinguished by 
 their hnrning liatred of I^ritish rule, as well as by what he 
 would style the fervour, and otliers might style the veno- 
 mous violence, of their i)atriotism. is it likely that their 
 hatred of Uritish rule would become love or even toleration 
 of British supremacy? 
 
 If there is any other analogy really in point, it is that of ohe 
 Protestant minority under tlic rule of a Roman Catholic 
 majority in the Trovince of (Juebec, from wliich, controlled as 
 the domination by the priesthood there is hy the iuHuenee of a 
 Vrotestant confederation, Ulst«n' may hMrn what her doom 
 under Home Kule would be, and how tlie Exchequer of a 
 Catholic Parliament would be likely to deal with the strong- 
 box of l^elfast. 
 
 It is not Ulster or Protestantism alone that desires the 
 preservation of the Union, but almost the entire wealth and 
 intelligence of Ireland, whether Protestant or Catholic. 
 American enemies of Great Britain, while they abet INIr. Glad- 
 stone's policy, admit that he has hardly a supporter among 
 the classes in which, if education and responsibility are 
 essential :;o political wisdom, the political wisdom of Ireland 
 must reside. 
 
 To turn the United Kingdom into a confederation is possible 
 if you will begin by restoring the divisions of the Heptarchy 
 together with the contemporary divisions of Scotland, Wales, 
 and Ireland. You will then have the material for a confed- 
 eration, which is a large group of tolerably equal States. A 
 federation of England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland would 
 be an everlasting cabal of the three lesser States against the 
 greater. To the reconstruction of the United Kingdom on 
 the federal system the only objection is that the nation, and 
 still more certainly the Empire, would go to pieces in the 
 process. 
 
 The Home Kule Bill was carried tlirough the House of 
 
 r 
 
m 
 
 
 
 i\\ i 
 
 300 QUKSTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 Commons by tlu' help of twenty-two Trisli votes, to which, by 
 the admission of the author of the l>ill itself, Freland had no 
 title. It is now to be palmed upon the country, which is 
 known to be advtu-se to it, by uniting with it a number of 
 incendiary ])roposals, and carrying the whole lump by means 
 of appeals to class passions, local antipathies, and the lure 
 of socialistic confiscation. Civil war is a dreadful thing; 
 but there are things even more dreadful than civil war. Sub- 
 mission to the dismemberment of the nation by the sinister 
 machinations of a morally insane ambition, would in the end 
 work more havoc than the civil sword. "I am prepared," 
 said the constitutional and cautious Peel, '* to make the decla- 
 ration which was made, and nobly made, by my predecessor. 
 Lord Althorp, tliat, deprecating as I do all war, but, above 
 all, civil war, yet there is no alternative which I do not think 
 preferable to the dismemberment of this Empire." 
 
 To that dread arbitrament, liowever, the Irish Question has 
 not yet come. Tlie first object of all British citizens ought 
 to be to insist that this Hill, which is not an ordinary law, or 
 a law at all, but a fundamental change of the national consti- 
 tution, shall be fairly submitted as a single issue to the con- 
 stituencies of the United Kingdom. 
 
 ii 
 
i 
 
 PROHIBITION IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES. 
 
■; ^i 
 
 
 1 
 1 i 
 
 '£ '- tj 
 
 t? 
 
 » 
 
 r 
 
 
 * 
 
 i ' 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
T" 
 
 PROHIBITION IN CANADA AND THE 
 UNITED STATES. 
 
 It is evident that English })olitics ave beginning to be dis- 
 tufbed, like thuse of the United States and Canada, by the 
 formation of a Prohibitionist party. The party usually calls 
 itself that of Temperance. But though we may wish to be 
 courteous, we cainiot concede a name which not only begs the 
 question at issue, but is a standiug libel on those wlio take 
 their glass of wine or beer without being in any rational sense 
 of the term intemperate. Temperance is one thing, total 
 abstinence is another, and coercion, at which these reformers 
 aim, is a third. As Temperance ini[)lies self-restraint, there 
 can be no Temperance, in the proper sense of the term, where 
 there is coercion. 
 
 The " Temperance " people are not usually inclined to 
 listen to anything so rationalistic as the lessons of experi- 
 ence. They tell you that with them it is a matter not of 
 expediency bnt of principle ; that their cause is the cause of 
 Heaven ; yours, if you are an opponent, that of the darker 
 power; and they intimate, with more or less of gentleness 
 and courtesy, what, if you persist in getting in Heaven's way, 
 will be your deserved and inevitable doom. To those, how- 
 ever, who in practical matters regard the dictates of experience 
 as principles, and who wish before committing themselves to 
 a particular kind of legislation to know whether it is likely to 
 do good or harm, the result of Canadian or American experi- 
 ment may not be uninstructive. 
 
 In 1878 the Canadian Parliament passed the Canada Tem- 
 perance Act, more commonly called the Scott Act. The 
 purport of this Act may be described as county and city 
 option. It enables any county or city adopting it by a simple 
 
 309 
 
Ill 
 
 \ 
 
 Ik I ; 
 
 M 
 
 m 
 
 aio 
 
 tiUKSTlON.S OK rilK DAY. 
 
 majority of the ultM^tors to prohibit the sal«' of any li(|Uor 
 within the district for hxuil eonsuniption iiiKh'r penalty (>f a 
 Hue of fifty doHars for tiie first offence, a hundrtid for tht; 
 seeond, and two niontlis' imprisonnient for the third. When 
 a(U>pted, the Act remains in force for three years, after which, 
 upon a i)etition si^'ueil by cue-fourth of the; (deetors, it may 
 again l)e submitted to the vote, and if there is a majority 
 against it, re|)ealed. 
 
 In the Province of Ontario there are forty -two counties and 
 eleven cities. Twenty-eight counties and two cities a(h)i)ted 
 the Act, most of them in 1.S.S4 and hSS"). In 1(S88 ten (!oun- 
 ties, nine of them at once, repealed it; and in the following year 
 the remaining Scott Act counties and cities also returned to 
 license law. The majorities tor repeal v./re overwhelming. 
 In Ontario the Scott Act is generally regarded as imi)ossible 
 of resuscitation, and the advocates of prohibitive legislation 
 are turning their minds to other measures. This is a genuine 
 verdict of the people. The li(iuor-trade had exhausted its 
 power of opposition in the early part of the contest; in fact 
 it hardly appeared in the field without doing mischief to its 
 own cause. 
 
 The general result where the Act was tried appeared to 
 have been the substitution of an nnlicensed and nnregulated 
 for a licensed and regulated trade. The demand for drink 
 remained the same, but it was supplied in illicit ways, it 
 Avas found by those who were engaged in the cami)aigu against 
 the Scott Act that the lowest class of licjuor-dealers were far 
 from zealous in their o[)position to proliil)itive legislation. 
 They foresaw that the result to iJiem would be simply sale of 
 liquor without the license fee. Drunkenness, instead of being 
 diminished, appears to have inr re ised. A memorial signed by 
 three hundred citizens of Woodstock, including nearly all the 
 principal men of business and professional men, but nobody 
 connected with the liquor-trade, said : " The Scott Act in this 
 town has not diminished but has increased drunkenness ; it 
 has almost wholly prevented the use of lager beer, which was 
 becoming an article of common consumption ; it has operated 
 
I'lJolIlMlTKfN IN CANADA AND 'IHK rNTrKD STATKS. nil 
 
 any iKjuor 
 I'lialty (^f ;i 
 ■eel for tlie 
 r<l. Wli.Mi 
 t'tcr wliicli, 
 >i''S, it may 
 ii majority 
 
 unties and 
 ;s a(l()[)te(l 
 ten ooun- 
 )\vingyear 
 ^turnod to 
 \vli('lniin<f. 
 inijwssiblti 
 It'j^islation 
 ii genuine 
 lusted its 
 t; in fact 
 lief to its 
 
 peared to 
 regulated 
 for drink 
 ivays. It 
 n against 
 were far 
 gislation. 
 Y sale of 
 of being 
 igned by 
 y all the 
 '' nobody 
 t in this 
 mess ; it 
 bioh was 
 operated 
 
 to disoonrage the ust> of light beverages, substituting therefor 
 in a large nu'asure ardent spirits, and it has led to the optniing 
 of many drinking-places which did not exist under the li(;ense 
 law, and to the sale of li(|uor being eontiinied till hours alter 
 midnight." "From my own observation," said a leading 
 physician of the sanu' place, "ami the most trustworthy 'ut'or- 
 nuition privately and pui)licly rectnved, L am satisfied that the 
 most extensive illicit trafhc prevails in Woodstock, that the 
 abuse of intoxicating li(piors is greatly on the increase here, 
 and that there is a lamentable increase of drinking among the 
 y')unger men of the community." At Milton, in the county 
 of Ilalton, the effects wen^ found to be the same as at W(jod- 
 stock. Before the adoption of th(» Act there wen^ but live 
 places in which li(iuor was sold; after the adoption of the Act 
 there were no fewer than sixteen, and owing to the perse- 
 cution of the hotels th(! tratiic was thrown into the lowest 
 ami worst hands. Forty-eight men of business, including the 
 Mayor and Chief Constable, signed a declaration that the Act 
 had signally failed to reduce intem[)erance ; that the trade, 
 instead of being in respectable hands, was in those of the 
 bottle-hawkers and keepers of low dens ; that the effect of the 
 Act had been the substitution to a great extent of spirituous 
 liquors for nuilt, wine, or cider as beverages ; that drunken- 
 ness, lawlessness, and perjury were much more prevalent than 
 they had been under license ; and that the Scott Act instead 
 of removing temptation from the young had had the contrary 
 effect, and cases of juvenile drunkenness had become shock- 
 ingly frequent. Scores of petitions were sent to I'arliament 
 from county councils or other municipal bodies declaring the 
 failure of the Act. 
 
 Wine, beer, and cider may or may not be injurious, but at 
 all events they are not so injurious as ardent spirits; they 
 stimulate less to criminal violence, the evil against which in 
 dealing with this subject, society is most concerned to guard. 
 A natural tendency of Prohibition, however, as the evidence 
 cited seems to show, is to substitute ardent spirits, which, con- 
 taining a great amount of alcohol in a small bulk, are more 
 
w 
 
 ■Ifi 
 
 til. 
 
 1 ' ' 
 
 1 
 
 mn 
 
 t 
 
 ! :l 
 
 i 
 
 318 
 
 (iUKSriONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 easily snmygled, for the lighter drinks of which the bulk is 
 greater. It is well that the attention of philanthropy, of 
 practical philanihropy at least, should be specially called 
 to this point. Not only does Prohibition appear practically 
 to encourage the use of ardent si)irits; the spirits which it 
 encourages, being sold by the lowest dealers, are ai)t to be of 
 the most pernicious kind; sometimes they are literally poison. 
 
 It is true that in some places where Prohibition prevails the 
 li(pior-shop no longer invites the passer-by with open doors. 
 But the illicit liquor-seller is probably more active than the 
 licensed publican in thrusting his temptation upon those who are 
 most likely to yield to it, especially on the young. A clandestine 
 drinker is sure to be a deep drinker. He is sure to drink, not 
 with his meals, but in the specially pernicious form of drams. 
 He is sure to drink in bad company. He is sure also to con- 
 tract sneaking habits, and to lose respect for himself as well 
 as respect for the law. 
 
 Witness after witness testiHes to the prevalence of perjury 
 in liquor-cases, and this evidence is supported by that of judges 
 and magistrates in the United States and England. The peo- 
 ple were morally dragooned by a i)owerful organisation and 
 strong ecclesiastical influence into voting for the Act. The 
 pulpit of the Methodist Church, which is very powerful in 
 Canada and has thoroughly identified itself with Prohibition, 
 thundered in favour of the measure, and the ^Methodist farmers 
 obeyed. But no pulpit-thunder will make the people in their 
 hearts believe that to drink or sell a glass of beer is really 
 criminal, or sup[)ort the execnition of the law as if they did. 
 Archdeacon Farrar himself, in his controversy with the late 
 Baron Bramwell, repudiates as uncharitable and absurd the 
 doctrine that there is anything morally wrong in the use of 
 fermented li([uor. He says that he has never preached absti- 
 nence as a matter of duty, even to confirmation classes or to 
 national schools. He admits that moderate drinking is a per- 
 fectly lawful enjoyment, and that multitudes of men indulge 
 in it who are wiser and better than \w is himself. Agreeing 
 at heart with this, the people, though they have vot?d as their 
 
'' 
 
 le bulk is 
 hropy, of 
 ly called 
 tactically 
 which it 
 
 to 1)6 of 
 
 ly poison, 
 avails the 
 en doors, 
 than the 
 e who are 
 andestine 
 Irink, not 
 3f drams. 
 
 to con- 
 f as well 
 
 f perjury 
 of judges 
 The peo- 
 ition and 
 .ct. The 
 v^erful in 
 )hibition, 
 t farmers 
 J in their 
 is really 
 they did. 
 
 the late 
 surd the 
 e use of 
 ed absti- 
 ses or to 
 is a per- 
 
 indulge 
 Agreeing,' 
 
 1 as their 
 
 I'ROHIBITION IN CANADA AND THE UNITED 8TATES. .•.l.] 
 
 preacher bade them, cannot bring themselves to take part in 
 ruining a neighbour, sending him to gaol, and perhaps leaving 
 his wife and children destitute, for that which in their con- 
 science they do not regard as criminal. They refuse to back 
 the ministers of the law. When forced to give evidence they 
 prevaricate and too often commit what is morally perjury. 
 The Bruce Herald declared that the Act in that county, 
 though nominally in force, was "dead as Julius Ciesar," adil- 
 ing that the idea that the law would be sustained by reverence 
 for anthority soon vanished, and that prosecutions failed from 
 the unwillingness of witnesses to give evidence against the 
 hotel-keepers, who had public sympathy on their side, the peo- 
 ple feeling that the Act sought to destroy a business and to 
 confiscate property erected under the sanction of i)revious law. 
 Have we not in the history of the poaching bred by tyraiuiical 
 game-laws and the smuggling bred by excessive customs-duties, 
 abundant proof of the danger of putting the moral sense of the 
 people at variance with the law ? To break the law is always 
 wrong, but it is also wrong to make laws which, as they are 
 unsupported by any moral obligation, the peo[)le are sure to 
 break. 
 
 The testinnny borne by municipal councils in all parts of 
 Ontario to the fact that there was an increase of drunkenness 
 under the Act was not invalidated by the decreas-\ in some 
 counties, of the number of arrests for that offence. Jnder the 
 prohibitive system the lirpior-seller, his trade being illicit, is 
 afraid to call, as the licensed tavern-keeper does, for the inter- 
 vention of the police. He does his best to conceal the drunk- 
 ard whose detection would be <:he betrayal of his own breach 
 of the law. 
 
 The Prohibitionists themselves hardly show confidence in 
 their own moral code. They do not i)ropose to punish a nian 
 for drinking a glass of ale, though the drinking and the sell- 
 ing being parts of the same transaction, l)()th must be criminal 
 or neither. The framers of the Scott Act did not even go so far 
 as to ni . , the manufacture of li(pior a crime. They con- 
 fined themselves to harassing the retail trade, as tbttngh, so 
 
- . w 
 
 mi 
 
 QUESTIONS OK TIIK DAY 
 
 M 
 
 ;■ ( 
 
 !J 
 
 loiiy as the chink wus made, it could fail to find its way 
 through some channel to thirsty lips. 
 
 In the Province of (Quebec the Scott Aet has been adopted 
 by five counties, of which two have rejjealed it. In the 
 French province this (question, like all other jiublic questions, 
 is apt to become one of race. In the Maritinu^ Provinces the 
 Act has been extensively adopted, and only in the cases of 
 two cities or rather large towns and one county luis the Act 
 been repealed. l')Ut the organised ]»ublic opposition, indepen- 
 dent of the li(pior-interest, which in Ontario arrested the pro- 
 gress of the Act and turned back the ti<le, has hitherto been 
 Avanting in the Maritime Provinces. The people of those Prov- 
 inces, moreover, to judge from their behaviour in the political 
 sphere, are peculiarly submissive to pressure of the sort which 
 the Prohil)itionist party and the clergy who supjwrt it bring 
 to bear. Put the Act, though not generally repealed, is 
 described as practii-ally a dead letter by provincial journals, 
 which call for its re})eal on that account. 
 
 The writer was in the Xorth-West Territories, where the law 
 imposed by the central government, uiuler ])ressure of the Tem- 
 perance vote, was Prohibition (pialiHed by a power of giving 
 permits vested in the Lieutenant-G(n'ernor. Me was assured, 
 on what appeared to be the best possible authority, that the 
 law was a disastrous failure, that anybody could get li([uor 
 who wanted it, and that the only fruits of the system were 
 smuggling, perjury, secret drinking, and deterioration of the 
 licjuor. The liipior is sure to be of the worst (piality, because 
 the dealer will thus indemnify himself for the risks of a con- 
 traband trade, while his own character and that of his drink- 
 iug-phu^e will inevitably be low. Attention is once more 
 called to this feature of the (question, and to the tendency 
 of the system which makes the trade contraband to the dis- 
 placement of the lighter drinks by ardent spirits Avhich are 
 easily smuggled. 
 
 In the Territories so bad were the effects of the }>rohibitory 
 law that the Territorial Legislature recently jiassed a License 
 Law, which went into effect in May, 1892. The evidence given 
 
 } 
 
' 
 
 I its way 
 
 1 adopted 
 
 In the 
 
 questions, 
 
 duces the 
 
 cases of 
 1 the Act 
 
 indepen- 
 1 the pro- 
 evto been 
 ose Prov- 
 i political 
 Di't which 
 
 it bring 
 lealed, is 
 journals, 
 
 e the law 
 the Teni- 
 jf giving 
 assured, 
 that the 
 et li(|uor 
 tern were 
 n of the 
 , because 
 of a con- 
 is drink- 
 ce more 
 tendency 
 the dis- 
 hich are 
 
 •hibitory 
 
 License 
 
 ce given 
 
 PHOHIBITION IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES. ;]15 
 
 before the Canadian Prohibition Coiuuiission later in tliat year 
 was generally favourable to it compared with the prohibitory 
 measure. Amongst the witnesses were the chief officers of the 
 North-West jNUounted Police, judges, lawyers, and otliers, and 
 there was conclusive testimony to the large amount of smug- 
 gling and to the manufacture of deleterious liquors. One wit- 
 ness testified that thousands of shipments of liquor were made 
 into the Territory in kegs or packages concealed in other goods, 
 often in a car of bacon or a bag of rice, sugar, or nails. (Jften, 
 too, liquor came in bottles of preserves or pickles, or canned 
 goods or temperance drinks. Sometimes four hundred gallons 
 of liquor at once were conveyed by teams hundreds of miles 
 inland, and evaded the vigilanca of the officers. The; supjjly 
 of liquor was irregular; a consignment was often on its 
 ri-'val surrounded by friends of the consignee, and the whole 
 •JL it was quickly consumed. This led to a great amount of 
 drunkenness, and, in the dearth of liquor which followed, to 
 the consumption of eau de Cologne, pain-killer, Florida water, 
 essences of various kinds, and even red ink. A favourite punch 
 concocted in the Territories was pain-killer, Jamaica ginger, 
 strong tea, sugar, and molasses. These deleterious compounds, 
 witnesses swore, produced a number of deaths. Their effect, 
 as well as that of some whiskeys imported into t]u> Territories 
 or illicitly manufactured there, was stated to be maddening. 
 A jud<ie ^aid that of the only two cases, among forty or fifty 
 criminal cases, due to the abuse of li(pi()r, one, a case ^' 
 murder, ww clearly due to a poisonous comjjound manufactured 
 by an illicit distiller whose only appliances were some lead pipe 
 and .^oin/> bnrley. The comjiound was the fruit of Prohibition. 
 This faiii ■" of Prohibition is notable, for though the cou itry 
 has a long frontier, the risks encountered in carrying li(pior 
 far into the interior were very great, the Mounted Police being 
 numerous and vigilant, while the question had not, as in other 
 cases, become involved with politics. 
 
 P)esides contempt of the hiw and jterjury the coutitry has 
 bee i hiled with ill blood. Nothing is more odious or ])oisons 
 tl'H .icart of the community more than the (Muidoyment of 
 
OIG 
 
 QLKSTIONS OV TlIK DAY. 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 Ij 
 
 
 •:*. 
 
 tyk 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 j 
 
 4 
 
 i 
 
 
 ' 1 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 spies unci infonners, to which it has been necessaiy and will 
 always be necessary for I'rohibitionisiu to resort. Dickens 
 holds up the mirror to nature in his description of the Clay- 
 poles and their trade. Men who liave been imprisoned and 
 ruined for plying a trade which they can hanlly feel to be 
 criminal, as only the otlier day they were holding li(;enses for 
 it from the State, are naturally not grateful for such treat- 
 ment. Their vindictiveness and hatred of the spies has led to 
 several outrages, and once or twice to the use of dynamite. 
 
 To force the sentiment of the people into accordance with 
 the law is the more difficult, since all the time their Church is 
 holding up for their imitation a model of character Avhich is 
 not, -temperate" in the ' • '^ ''^itionist sense of that term. In 
 commenting on the iniracl Oana, Archdeacon Farrar con- 
 
 trasts the "genial inno' enc* ;f Christ's system" with the 
 "crushing af/ceticism of rival systems." IJy way of reconcil- 
 ing this discrepan(!y (h'speratc efl'orts are made to uphold the 
 astonishing theory that the oinoti cf the Gos[)el was not fer- 
 mented wine but syrup. The ndei' of the feast at Cana, it 
 seems, expressed his surprise that the best syrup had not been 
 produced till the guests had well druidc ; the accusers of Chiist 
 in calling Him a winebibber meant only that he was a syrup- 
 drinker : it was on syrup that the Corinthians got drunk at the 
 celebration of the Lord's Supper: Paul advised his friend to 
 take a little .syrup for his stomach's sake ; and the same Apostle 
 enjoined tlie Church in electing deacons not to choose those 
 who were given to excess in .syrup ! To such paltering with 
 what every one educated enough to be a clergyman nuist know 
 to 1)6 th(> truth, we rather prefer the preacher who said boldly 
 that if (!hrist were again to come on earth and persisted in 
 celebrating the Eucharist with wine. He would have to be 
 excluded from His own Church. To drag the Gospel into this 
 discussion on the Prohibitionist side is ho[)eless. There is no 
 more of fanaticism than there is of formalism in that volume. 
 When St. Paul bids us not drink wine if thereby (mr brother 
 IS made to stumble, he couples eating meat with drinking wine, 
 showing that in his opinion both in themselves are innocent. 
 
▼ 
 
 and will 
 
 Dickens 
 the Clay- 
 oned and 
 eel to be 
 senses for 
 ich treat- 
 las led to 
 unite, 
 mce witli 
 Church is 
 which is 
 erm. In 
 rrar con- 
 witli the 
 
 reconcil- 
 )]iold the 
 
 not fer- 
 
 Cana, it 
 not been 
 of Chi'ist 
 a synip- 
 ik at the 
 friend to 
 3 Apostle 
 )se those 
 •ing with 
 List know 
 id boldly 
 sisted in 
 ie to be 
 into this 
 ere is no 
 
 volume. 
 
 brother 
 [ng wine, 
 nnocent. 
 
 PROIIIlirriON IN CANADA AND THK UNITED STATICS. 817 
 
 The Gospel bids us have regard to the Aveakness of our brother ; 
 but it does not bid our brotiier be weak or us to countenance 
 his weakness by unjnst and unwise legislation. 
 
 The effect even of less violent and hazardous measures of 
 coercion in Canada appears to have betMi pretty nuudi the 
 same. The supporters of the Scott Act did not venture to 
 put it to the vote in Toronto, but finding themselves powerful 
 in the City Council, they proceeded to wage a war of extermi- 
 nation on the taverns. At one stroke they cut oft" seventy-live 
 licenses. They were warned that this arbitrary measure, 
 while it might ruin the tavern-keepers, would not diminish the 
 demand for drink; that while there was a demand there would 
 be a supply, and that the tavern-keepers whose licenses were 
 withdrawn would not starve if they could help it, but would 
 ply an illicit trade. The result was a large increase of the 
 number of cases of drunkenness before the magistvate and an 
 unusually drunken Christmas. Nor could the Prohibitionists 
 find any way of parrying the natural inference better than an 
 insinuation that drinking had been promoted by the powers of 
 darkness for the special purpose of discrediting their policy. 
 
 It may be argued with some force that when the .Scott Act 
 was adojjted by some counties and not by others the moral 
 percejttions of the people in the counties that did adopt it 
 would be disturbed by the vicinage of a different code. But 
 even if the Prohibitionist code were imposed on a whole 
 nation the difficulty, if diminished, would not be removed. 
 To make an Eleventh Commandment you must obtain the 
 concurrence of the civilised world, intercourse and communi- 
 cation between all the parts of wliich are now too active for a 
 sectional morality. Put all Canada under Prohibition, and 
 every Canadian who visits a foreign country will be apt to 
 come back a heretic, and to propagate his heresy on his return. 
 Literature, m cover, from Homer to Dickens is full of the 
 other view. 
 
 The results of coercive legislation in the United States, 
 wherever the experiment has been tried, seeiu to tally with 
 those of coercive legislation in Canada. Maine is the "banner- 
 
 i 
 
T 
 
 ;{18 
 
 Ql'KSTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 i: 
 
 
 1 1, 
 
 i* 1' 
 
 u. 
 
 (.1 i;( 
 
 mi 
 
 \ i 
 
 1 
 
 <; 
 
 1 
 
 -! 1 
 
 State " of Prohibition. It luis been trying the system tor over 
 forty years, more than time enough to kill the li(iUor-traftlcj, 
 if the liquor-traffic was to be killed. Vet of Maine, "Gail 
 Hamilton," who must know it well, said in the North Ameri- 
 ,can Memeiv: "The aetual result is that liquor is sold to all 
 who wish to obtain it in nearly every town in the State. En- 
 forcement of the law seems to have little effect. For the past 
 six years the city of Bangor has practically enjoyed free rum. 
 In more than one hundred places liquor is sold and no attempt 
 has been made to enforce the law. In liath, Lewiston, 
 Augusta, and other cities no real difficulty is experienced in 
 procuring liquor. In Portland, enforcement of the law has 
 been faithfully attempted, yet the licpior-traffic flourishes for 
 all classes from the highest to the lowest. ... In a journey 
 last summer for h mdreds of miles through the cities and 
 through the scattered villages and hamlets of Maine, the 
 almost universal tostini' iiy was 'you get liquor enough for 
 bad j)urposes in bad i)laces, bit you cannot get it for good 
 purposes in good places.' " " What works against Prohibi- 
 tion," the writer adds, " is that in the opinion of many of 
 the most earnest total-abstinence men, the original Maine-Law 
 State after thirty years of Prohibition is no more a Temper- 
 ance State than it was before Prohibition was introduced." 
 Tt appears that upwards of 1000 people in the State paid 
 United States retail liquor-tax, though Archdeacon Parrar 
 was informed that the trade had been completely driven out 
 of sight. The INIaine Prison Eeport for 1884 said : " Intoxica- 
 tion is on the increase ; some new legislation must be made 
 if it is to be lessened. In many of our counties Prohil)ition 
 does not seem to affect or prevent it." In the city of Portland 
 (population 84,000) in 1874 the arrests for drunkenness were 
 2318. But drunkenness was not confined to the cities. Every 
 one of the sixteen counties furnished its quota. The number of 
 committals for drunkenness for one year was 1316 for a popu- 
 lation of 048,000, while in Canada, an area at that time not 
 under the Scott Act, with a population of 061,000, and a town 
 population as large as that in Maine, showed only 593 com- 
 
I'liOlIIHITION IX CANADA AM) TIIK INITF;!) STATKS. 319 
 
 lu for over 
 [uor-traffic, 
 ine, "Gail 
 rth Ameri- 
 solcl to all 
 tate. Eii- 
 )v the pa.st 
 . free rum. 
 10 attempt 
 Lewiston, 
 rieu(3ed in 
 e law has 
 rishes for 
 a journey 
 3ities and 
 faine, the 
 lough for 
 
 for good 
 t Prohibi- 
 
 many of 
 Laine-Law 
 L Temper- 
 roduced." 
 tate jiaid 
 n Farrar 
 riven out 
 Intoxica- 
 
 be made 
 •ohil)ition 
 Portland 
 less were 
 . Every 
 lumber of 
 r a popu- 
 time not 
 id a town 
 593 com- 
 
 mittals, less than half the numbei- of those in the model State 
 of Prohibition. (Jeneral Xeal Pew himself, ui)l)raiding his 
 former party for its sliickness in the cause, complained of the 
 number of low drinking-places infesting the cities of Elaine. 
 The New York >>iin after investigation ciirried on through 
 its correspondent, siiid: "The actual state of affairs in Maine 
 is perfectly well understood by every .Maine man with eyes 
 in his head, and by every observant visitor to IMaine. In 
 no part of the world is the spectacle of drunken men reel- 
 ing along the streets more common than in the cities and 
 larger towns of Maine. Nowhere in the world is the aver- 
 age (piality of the liquor sold so bad, and consequently so 
 dangerous to the health of the consumer and the peace of the 
 public. The facilities for obtaining liquor vary in different 
 parts of the State, from the cities where fancy-drinks are 
 openly com))ounded and sold over rosewood bars, to the ))laces 
 where it is dispensed l)y the swig from fiat bottles carried 
 around in the breeches pockets of i)erand)ulating dealers. 
 But liquor, good or bad, can be bought anywhere." Perjury, 
 the Suit correspondent also stated, as usual, was rife. The 
 most recent evidence is to the same effect. In the cities of 
 Maine, though the law has been forty-six times amended to 
 sharpen its teeth, liquor, generally of a bad kind, is freely 
 though clandestinely sold. "Pocket peddling" is rife and 
 presses the temptation on the young. The cit}- of J>angor has 
 openly taken itself out of the law, and established a liquor 
 system of its own. In Portland the city government sells 
 liquor nominally for medicine, but really also as a l)everage, 
 and the agency is a scene of falsehood, jobbery, and corruption. 
 The corruption of city officers is an almost inevitable and a 
 serious consequence of the system. Some of those who have 
 administered the law in jNIaine are among the strongest advo- 
 cates of repeal and of a return to the license system. They 
 tried to give effect to the law. They fine, they imprison, they 
 ])erhaps ruin one set of li(pior dealers, and the only result is 
 that a worse set succeeds. 
 
 Nor has Maine fulfilled the golden promises held out by 
 
li 
 
 (ilKSI'lONS Ol' nil': DAY. 
 
 R; 
 
 r 
 
 !i 
 
 'i 
 
 Proliibition of inmnmity from criiiH' and riiliaiiced pi'os})erity. 
 Though the population of the State has been stationary, the 
 statistics of crime have increased. In l<S7.'i the nrnnber of com- 
 mittals to gaol was ir)4(S ; in 1884 it was o(u2. The pauper rate 
 of the cities was large ('omj)ared with that in other States. More 
 recent statistics seem not much to ajter tlie case. All statistics 
 of this kind may require qualification on account of changes in 
 population or trade. JUit Prohibition at all events cannot be 
 said to have put an end to crime or i)auperism in Maine. If 
 that State has advanced socially, or morally, or economically, 
 it has not advanced farther than other States similar to it in 
 general respects but without a ])rohibitive law. Prohibition has 
 been the platform of one of the jjolitical parties ; otherwise it 
 seems not unlikely that there might have been a repeal of the 
 law and a return to the license system. Entanglement of a 
 social and moral (piestion with the tactics and hypocrisy of 
 a political party is an evil attendant of Prohibition. The 
 integrity even of churches is in some peril. '"The Methodists," 
 said General Neal Dow, "are a very great body of religionists 
 in this country, and always at their conventions they form very 
 grand resolutions against the lifpior trathc. There is hardly 
 any language in the English tongue that they do not use against 
 the li(pior traffic. Nice men they are and educated men too, 
 but after that they go directly round and vote for rum. The 
 Presbyterians all do the same thing, and the Congregationalists 
 will do the same. When 1 have occasion to speak to them I 
 say, * I would rather you would resolve against temperance and 
 pray against temperance, and then vote against rum, rather 
 than you would pray and resolve against intemperance and 
 then go and vote for rum.' " 
 
 Vermont has also l)een trying Prohibition for more than forty 
 years. Here the city population is comparatively small, so 
 that the system has the fairest chance ; while the legislature, 
 luuler the pressure of the " Temperance vote," has piled one 
 repressive enactment upon another, heaped up penalties, and 
 at last given the i)olice power to enter any house without 
 a warrant. The resiilt after thirty years was reported by Mr. 
 
 tii 
 
I'HOllIIUriON IN CANADA AM) TIIK IMTKI) STA lE.S. ,J2l 
 
 pros]){!rity. 
 ^ionaiy, tJie 
 iber of coni- 
 piiuper rate 
 ates. More 
 11 statistics 
 eliaiiges in 
 
 cannot be 
 Maine. If 
 )noniioally, 
 lar to it in 
 ibition has 
 jherwise it 
 peal of the 
 ment of a 
 pocrisy of 
 ion. The 
 ^thodists," 
 eligionists 
 form very 
 
 is hardly 
 se against 
 
 men too, 
 Lun. The 
 tionalists 
 to tliem I 
 "ance and 
 in, rather 
 ance and 
 
 ban forty 
 ^mall, so 
 jislature, 
 )iled one 
 ties, and 
 without 
 i by Mr. 
 
 Kdward Johnson in tli*' Popular Sn'mcr Monthhf for May, 
 18(S4. lie states that " tor all i)ractical pni-poscs the law is 
 an absoluti' dead letter." There were at the time of his 
 writing in the State 440 places where li(pior was sold, and 
 though the population was well-nigh stationary there was a. 
 marked increase in their number. -A large ])roportion of the 
 dram-shops are on the principal streets, and thei-e is no con- 
 cealment of the illegal traffic. Spasmodic attempts to enforce 
 tlie law are nuule in the larger jjlaces, l)ut are utterly futile. 
 Of enforcing the law, as the laws against burglary and larceny 
 are enforced, nobody dreams for a moment." "Sudj," says 
 Mr. Johnson. " is the unsatisfactory result of \'ermont's thirty 
 years' experience of the Trohibitory li(pior-laws." "One 
 might," he adds, '-'go still further and speak of the i)erjury 
 and subornation of i)erjury for which the law is in a sense 
 responsible, of the disregard and contempt of all law which 
 the operation of this law tends to foster and encourage, and 
 of cognate matters which will occur to the reflective reader; 
 but perhaps enough has been said in showing the failure of the 
 law to accomplish the object for which it was enacted." No 
 attempt, so far as we know, has been made to controvert Mr. 
 Johnson's statements, or to refute the conclusion Avhich he 
 draws from them, and which is that men cannot be dragooned 
 into virtue ; that is, not by State interference Avith practices 
 not in themselves criminal, but only by State interference 
 with positive crime. 
 
 Massachusetts also for a series of years tried Prohibition. 
 The result is end)odied in the Report of a joint committee of 
 both Houses of the Legislature (l.SOT), which ought to be in 
 the hands of all those who wish to be guided by experience 
 in this matter. That Report, founded on the best evidence, 
 states that the law, if by its operation it diminishes the num- 
 ber of open places of drinking, does so only to multiply the 
 secret places, that more li(pior and worse litpun- wr-.s drunk, 
 that drunkenness had increased almost in direct ratio to the 
 closing of public places of sale, and that there was more of it 
 in Boston than there had been at any i)revious time in the 
 
Br 
 
 .'I 
 
 
 :V22 
 
 Ql'KS'l'KtXS OF rilK DAY. 
 
 llMi^ 
 
 ,jf5 
 
 liistoj-y ol' tlie (Uty. •'TIk' iiu'i-o I'lict," suys the Report — in 
 words to which we wouhl call special atttMitioii — "the mere 
 fact that the law seeks to prevent them from drinking rouses 
 the determination to drink in many. The fa<?t that the place 
 is secret takes away the restraint which, in more puidic and 
 respectable places, wonld keep them within teinjierate bounds. 
 The fact that the business is contraband and liable to inter- 
 ruption, and that its gains are hazardous, tends to drive honest 
 men from it and to leave it under the control of dishonest 
 men, who will not scruple to poison the community with vile 
 adulteration." In (conclusion, the Report s\d)mits that so long 
 as tliere is a demand for licpior there will be a supply, licensed 
 or illicit, and recommends regulated freedom as the best 
 policy. 
 
 In Fowa again Prohibition has been on its trial. A corre- 
 spond* nt of Harper's Weckh/, recommended as thoroughly 
 trustwortliy by ii journal itself very careful of its statements, 
 rei)orted that Prohibition in the cities of Fowa meant free 
 liquor. A correspondent of the Xew York Nation testi- 
 fied to much the same effect, adding that the local organ of 
 F*rohibition itself admitted the failure. Dr. Dio Lewis, the 
 Cato of dietists, said that he had tomdied at several of the 
 large cities on a toiir to the Rocky Mountains, and among 
 other things had incpiired into the practical benefits reajied 
 from I'rohibition. Fn places where he had been assured that 
 drink could not be had for love or money he had seen drunk- 
 ards reeling in the streets. In Iowa City, where Prohibition 
 Avas supposed to l)e enforced, he saw from seventy-five to a 
 hundred kegs of beer delivered on trucks from a brewery. 
 His j)ractical conclusion was that Prohibition was a wihl 
 theory ; " that as a prev^entative it had not met the claims of 
 its supporters, and as an aid to the cause of Temperance was a 
 failure.'' I)ubu(pie is a city of about .35,000 inhabitants. Its 
 business Directory comprises two breweries, six bottlers, 
 thirty-live hotels, ten wholesale liquor places, and a hundred 
 and eighty-one saloons. The annual expense to the liquor- 
 seller in the way of " license " is small : he pays the United 
 
 m 
 
 [it 
 
 m 
 
tepui't — in 
 "the mere 
 king rouses 
 ,t tlie place 
 public and 
 ite bounds, 
 lie to inter- 
 rive honest 
 
 dishonest 
 Y with vile 
 lat so long 
 y, licensed 
 
 the best 
 
 A corre- 
 lioroughly 
 tateinents, 
 leant free 
 tioii testi- 
 l organ of 
 jewis, the 
 ral of the 
 !id among 
 its reajied 
 ured that 
 Bn drunk- 
 rohibition 
 -five to a 
 brewery. 
 s a wild 
 claims of 
 uce was a 
 -nts. Its 
 bottlers, 
 hundred 
 e liquor- 
 e United 
 
 rHOIIllJlTlUN IN CANADA AND TIIK INI'IKD SIA'IKS. ;!l>;5 
 
 S'tates Government tax oF if? 25, and twice a year is formally 
 prosecuted and fined .5 HO l)y the numicipality. Druggist 
 shops are turned into li(|uor shops witli a few drugs in the 
 window. 
 
 In Kansas, the State of Governor St. .John, the cliosen cliief 
 of rrohibitionism, where the most stringent Trohibition had 
 been enacted, the result, according to Dr. (Jardner, was that 
 the drug-stores were little more than rum-shops, and tliat their 
 luimber was astonishing. In one town of four thousaml 
 people, fifteen of them were counted on the main street. 
 Leavenwortli, with a ])npulation of 2;^>,000, has a Inuuh-ed and 
 seventy-five places where li(pi()r is sold. In Kausas City the 
 police collected in 1.S82 $45,000 in fines for Illegal sale of 
 liquor. There is a general tendency to convert Pi'ohibition, 
 where it prevails, practically into license by taking the fees 
 under the guise of fines. In Tongawoxie, a small town in 
 Kansas where there was no saloon before Prohibition, then* 
 are three or four now. This is against the theory that Trohibi- 
 tion works well in small i)laees though in large cities it works 
 ill. At Topeka in Kansas there are no saloons. l>ut tliere 
 were none when Prohibition was introduced, popular feeling 
 being against them. A proof that it is popular feeling that is 
 strong, not prohibitive law. The Canadian Commission, how- 
 ever, has been making careful inrpiiry in Kansas and the 
 results of its investigations will soon appear. 
 
 It seems tliat experience has always pointed the same way. 
 Under James I. and Charles I. a series of Acts was passed to 
 suppress tippling, the effect of which evidently was only to 
 suppress the respectability of t\\v tavern-keepers, who at last 
 were found to be unable to i)ay fines, so that I\'irliament had 
 to resort to flogging as a penalty. The failure is the more 
 significant because the Executive was so strong, and ■ s sure 
 to be backed in this case by the Puritan Parliament. The 
 Gin Act of George 11. was found to have nuide bad worse, and 
 had to be repealed. Elven in Puritan Connecticut, where the 
 pressure of ecclesiastical authority was tremendous, the his- 
 torian tells ns that " rules against excess in drinking and in 
 
' I 
 
 I t 
 
 Ij I 
 
 iJ i: 
 
 .324 
 
 QiKs'i'ioNs or riM': day. 
 
 Mpparcl were attt'iiiiitcd. with tlic usual want of suciicss." 
 Heaven apjx'ars in no place or tinu; to have prospered what 
 we are told is its o\\ n cause. 
 
 Tiie (litficultv ot even enforcing vaccination in places where it 
 is widely resisted, shows how arduous a task is coercive legisla- 
 tion when it is not backetl by jjopular conviction, whicdi, it it 
 is in favour of the i)rinci])le, will ])ro(luce the effect witl 
 coercive law. 
 
 About ten years ago, a mass meeting of the friends of 
 Tem})erance, connected with the (Muircli Temjjerance So(Mety, 
 was held at Chickering Hall, at New York. The hall was 
 full to overflowing; speeches were made by Mr. Warner Miller, 
 llev. Dr. Greer, the l>ishop of Delaware, Mr. Seth Low, and 
 Father Osborne. The sense of the meeting was evidently 
 in favour of high license, as practically the best safeguard 
 against intemperance. Dr. Gi'eer dwelt on the failure of 
 l'rohibiti(»n in Hhode Island, declaring that ''the State was 
 not less wicked as a Prohibition State than as a low-license 
 State ; that the tactics to which reputable citizens resorted ' 
 evade the law created a s})irit of lawlessness; and that, \v 
 regard to the city of Providence, numerous clubs had sprung 
 up there, where the citizens coidd drink their fill and be shel- 
 tered from ])ublicity or arrest.'' 
 
 By voluntary associations, such as Teetotal societies and the 
 Bands of Hope, and still more by the general advance of 
 morality, of intelligence, and above all of medical science, 
 great improvement has been made in Canada as it has else- 
 where. Old inhabitants tell you that forty or fifty years ago 
 drunkenness was very ccunmon among our farmers, and that 
 many of them regularly went home from market the worse 
 for liquor. Now the Canadian farmers are a very sober race. 
 There is a certain amount of drunkenness, as well as of other 
 vices, in our cities, but a large proportion of the cases are 
 those of recent immigrants. The writer would be inclined to 
 say, judging from outward appearances, that Toronto, com- 
 pared with other cities in which he has lived, is sober as Avell 
 as orderly. It has indeed been proclaimed from the Frohibi- 
 
I'KOIIIHITION IN CANADA AND THK LMTKI) STATKS. ;J20 
 
 f success." 
 IHMvd wllilt 
 
 ;es where it 
 3ive legislu- 
 .vliieli, i( it 
 'C't witl 
 
 friends of 
 ce S()('i(>ty, 
 n hall was 
 ■ner Miller, 
 Low, and 
 evidently 
 safeguard 
 failure of 
 State was 
 ow-lieense 
 •esorted ' 
 that, w 
 lad si)rung 
 id be shel- 
 ls and the 
 clvance of 
 1 science, 
 has else- 
 years ago 
 and that 
 ;he worse 
 )ber race, 
 of other 
 cases are 
 clined to 
 ito, corn- 
 er as well 
 Prohibi- 
 
 tion platform that there are seven, or even tvu, thousand 
 deaths from drinking in tlic Dominion every year. This would 
 be from a third to oiif-iialf of tlie total innnlHT of male adult 
 deaths. About the time when this announcemtMit was made, 
 the Mortuary Statistics gave the total luimbcr (d' deal lis from 
 ah'oholic causes in eight principal cities and towns in (mic 
 month as two. In England likewi.se, the evil iiabit of diiid<- 
 ing lias been greatly reduced, without any restrictive laws 
 or restraint of any kind, mainly by the increasing iuHu- 
 ence of medical science, ami in connection with the general 
 ]u-ogress of hygienic reform. It should be observed that 
 voluntary effort will be weakened by coercive legislation, 
 rrohibition, if universally enforced, would break up Teetotal 
 fraternities and liands of Hope; and unless it was itself 
 successful in extiri)ating the desire for drink, that desire 
 might any day break out again on a large scale, and find no 
 oi'ganisation on foot to resist its sway. 
 
 Before the iJritish Parlianu'ut consents to extreme le<nsla- 
 tion, let it at all events appoint a Commission of Inquiry to 
 report to it on the results of prohibitory legislation in Canada 
 and the United States. The Commissiomu's. will probably 
 find that impartial ojjiuion on the continent jjronounces Pro- 
 hibition a failure, and inclines decidedly in favour of the 
 plan of high licenses with stringent regulation. That strin- 
 gent and exceptional legislation is reipiired for the li(pior- 
 traffic nobody doubts. Nor do the respectable mend)ers of 
 the trade deprecate it; for nothing can be less conducive 
 to their interest than drunkenness and disorder on their 
 premises. It is (piite [)Ossible that a stricter code may be 
 necessary in England than is necessary in the United States 
 or Canada. There is nothing, thank Heaven, on the American 
 continent like the gin-}»alaces of London. 
 
 A license fee as high as a thousaml dollars (200/.) has been 
 proposed, and the prospect of revenue is tempting to the 
 municipalities. But if the system is overstrained its effect 
 will practically be the same as I'rohibition ; it will call into 
 existemse in towns and cities an illicit trade, which of all 
 
Mf^^^^ 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 1 
 
 '( ? 
 
 
 r 
 
 ( 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 i' 
 
 . .1 
 
 
 ^smm 
 
 T 
 
 1 
 
 |i-'5 I 
 
 
 ii'i; 
 
 :{2r) 
 
 QUKSTIONS nV TIIK DAY. 
 
 results is the worst. To cliniiuisli the deniand for liquors by 
 moral agencnes has been shown to be piacticable, both in 
 Canada and among the upper classes in England; to dimiu'sli 
 the supply without diminishing the demand seems to be ini- 
 ])racticable, resort to what expedients you will. 
 
 It is as needless to dilate on the evils of intemperance as it 
 is to dilate on the evils of small-pox. The only (piestion is 
 whether prohibitive legislation cures or rather aggravates and 
 propagates the disease. lUit the advocates of coercion have 
 surely overstated the connection between drinking and crime. 
 From their language it might be sui)posed that if we could 
 only stamp out drinking, crimes of all kinds would cease, our 
 gaols woidd stand empty, aiul we should be at liberty to dis- 
 band the police. If it were so, no measures, provided they 
 were effective, could be too strong. But can we believe that 
 cruelty, lust, covetousness, vindictiveness, malice, and the 
 other evil tendencies of human nature in which crime has its 
 source, are all the offspring of drink, and that with drink they 
 would depart ? Do they not manifest themselves, in germ at 
 least, in children v. hose lips have never touched the glass ? 
 Among the poorer classes seasons of distress are seasons of 
 (trime, though the power of buying liquor is diminished. Is 
 there no crime in Mahomedan countries, which keep the 
 Prophet's law '/ Is there none in Spain, the people of which 
 are remarkable for their teniperance ? It is natural that the 
 criminal classes should also be given to drink, as they are to 
 gross sensuality of other kinds; but it does not follow that 
 their addiction to drink is the sole, or even the jjrincipal, 
 source of their crime. Prisoners, too, are apt to plead drink 
 in extenuation of tlieir offences, especially since they know 
 that philanthropy will hail their plea. A renuirkable arti- 
 cle on diet ai)i)eared in 1885 from the pen of Sir Henry 
 Thompson, in which he avowed his belief that not only the 
 bodily but the moral evil arising from intemi)erance in eating 
 was as great as that arising from intemperance in drink. 
 (Certainly, we should not look lor more malevolence in a 
 drinker of any but the worst whiskey or rum than in cue who. 
 
PKOIIIBITION IN CANADA AND TIIK UNITED STATES. ;527 
 
 liquors by 
 e, both in 
 
 diniin'sli 
 to be iiu- 
 
 rance as it 
 
 question is 
 
 avates and 
 
 reioii have 
 
 and crime. 
 
 ' we couhl 
 
 cease, our 
 
 iity to dis- 
 
 k'ided they 
 
 jlieve that 
 
 I, and the 
 
 ine has its 
 
 drink they 
 
 n germ at 
 
 the ghiss ? 
 
 seasons of 
 
 ished. Is 
 
 keep the 
 
 of which 
 
 1 that the 
 hey are to 
 )lh)W that 
 
 principal, 
 ead drink 
 hey know 
 cable arti- 
 >ir Henry 
 t only the 
 
 in eating 
 
 in drink, 
 ence in a 
 
 one who, 
 
 like too many people in America, over-eats himself daily with 
 fat and ill-boiled pork, or beefsteak cooked in the deadly frying- 
 j)an, as well as with half-baked bread and greasy pie, washiin^, 
 down the whole with eo[)ions draughts of the most abominab-u 
 green tea. The Maine Prison Report for 1884 says : *' Intem- 
 perance is not a cause of crime ; it is a crime more against 
 society and against the family than against the State." The 
 words are a little ambiguous, but they certainly do not mean 
 that intemi)erance is the sole sourct; of crime. The warden of 
 the Maine State prison, reviewing the declarations made of 
 each convict between the years 1880 and 1887, found that 
 of iMi) convicts 194 declared that they used no licpior, IGo 
 that they used some liquor, and 8S that they were intemperate. 
 Whether we or any of us ought entirely to renounce alcohol 
 it is for science to determine. If science pronounces that we 
 ought, there can be little doubt that the growing intelligence 
 of humanity will gradually conform to the decision, as it is 
 already conforming to the decision of science by other changes 
 of habit. But one can hardly help thinking that even with 
 regard to the physical effects of alcohol thei-e has, at all 
 events, been a good deal of exaggeration on the " Tenqjcrance " 
 platform. The sort of spirits to Avliich Prohibition drives 
 people, as we have seen, is poison indeed. P)ut surely it is 
 only in a meta])horical sense that the name can be applied to 
 liquors which a num has druidi through a life of eighty, 
 ninety, even a hundred years. In ^Manitoba tliere are two 
 bodies of Mennonites, of which one drinks spirits or fermented 
 licpiors, while the other abstains ; and a person who has a, 
 great deal to do with the ]\[ennonites, and whose evidence is 
 to be trusted, told the writer that the section which drinks 
 is rather superior in ])r()gressivt' energy to the section of 
 abstainers. No part of our Canadian population is more 
 industrious or worthier than the (Jennans of Waterloo (lounty, 
 Ontario, who, like all Germans, driidc beer. That alcohol does 
 not nourish, supposing it to be true, is not much to the ])ur- 
 pose. If alcohol does not n(mrish. it exhilarates. Tea, whicli 
 some Prohibitionists drink in floods, and on which they spend 
 

 li ! 1 
 
 ■4 ; 
 
 328 
 
 (^IKSTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 SI J 
 
 i 1 ' 
 
 
 M 
 
 ^^ : A 
 
 its much money ;is otliers do in beer, does not nourish, but it 
 soothes. Possibly the exhihirution produced by wine may 
 sometimes have been a necessary antidote to melancholy, which 
 would otherwise prey fatally on the mind. The Psalmist, who 
 praised wine as making glad the heart of man, though he lived 
 before science, nuiy have spoken with the voice of Nature. 
 lUit let medical science decide ; to her, not to the religious 
 or political '^latform, the (question belongs. 
 
 The Temperance platform has also beyond doubt grossly 
 exaggerated the effect of nu)derate drinking in tempting on- 
 ward to excess. To maintain that a nmn who is in the ha' '^ 
 of taking daily a glass of wine or beer must inevitably contr. 
 a craving which will lead to his becoming a drunkard, is ne- 
 cessary, no doubt, for the justification of those who advocate 
 indiscriminate re[)ression ; but nothing can be nu)re flagrantly 
 at variance with obvious facts. An ordinary English gentle- 
 man takes a glass of wine daily at dinner without feeling any 
 more tempted to swallow the Avhole contents of the decant r 
 than he is to swallow the whole contents of tlie nuistard-pr.'". 
 from which he takes a si)Oonful Avith his l)eef. A man may 
 play a game of cribbage with his wife without becoming a 
 gambler. If Johnson found abstinence easier than temper- 
 ance, it was because he had once been intemperate. He knew 
 that his own case was peculiar. To most men, as they require 
 jdiysical enjoyment of some kind, temperance is easier than 
 abstinence. The Spaniards regularly drink wine, yet Croker, 
 in his "■ Travels in Spain," says, " The habitual temperance of 
 these people is really astonishing ; T never saw a Spaniard 
 drink a second glass of wine." Another English tourist says, 
 " In all our wanderings through town and country, along the 
 highways and byways of the land from Bayonne to Gibraltar, 
 we never saw more than four men who were the least intoxi- 
 cated." Mr. Bryant, the American author, has confirmed this 
 account. A clerical advocate of our Scott Act once said 
 that he would no nu)re think of jiutting licpior within reach of 
 the people, than of putting a knife within reach of a baby. 
 Supposing a glass of ale to be a knife, the reverend gentleman's 
 
PROHIBITION IX CANADA AND Tilt: I NIL' ED STATKS. ;}2i) 
 
 isli, but it 
 wine may 
 oly, wliich 
 liuist, who 
 :h he lived 
 •f Nature. 
 i religious 
 
 bt grossly 
 npting on- 
 the lia^'-^ 
 ly contr. . 
 ard, is ne- 
 o advocate 
 flagrantly 
 ish gentle- 
 eeliiig any 
 e decant r 
 lustard-pf.*"! 
 man maj 
 ecoming a 
 n temper- 
 He knew 
 'V require 
 isier than 
 2t Croker, 
 )eraiice of 
 Spaniard 
 iirist says, 
 along the 
 Gibraltar, 
 ist intoxi- 
 rmed this 
 once said 
 1 reach of 
 if a baby, 
 ntleman's 
 
 fellow-citizens are not babies. Among the extreme advocates 
 of coercion are, it is believed, men who have themselves been 
 given to drink, and who cannot understand the existence of 
 self-control. 
 
 From comjnunitics vexed by arbitrary legislation those who 
 rebel against arbitrary legislation, or do not wish to have their 
 tastes and habits regulated I'v a tyrannical majority, will 
 depart. It seems that the Germans, excellent settlers, but 
 unwilling to give up their lager beer, have been driven from 
 Maine. Against lager beer as well as cider and other light 
 drinks Prohibition, as has already been said, discriminates ; 
 their bulk in proportion to the alcohol making them unsuitable 
 for contraband sale. 
 
 The taste for fermented liquors, if not congenital, seems to 
 be immemorial and almost universal. Its traces appear in all 
 the mythologies, Hindu. Hellenic, Roman, and Scandinavian. 
 Probably the use of such liquors is coeval with cookery, which 
 also' has been the source of much evil as well as of much 
 pleasure to mankind. It is very likely that a great change in 
 human diet, as well as in human beliefs and institiitions, is 
 coming ; but it is not likely that this change will come sud- 
 denly, or that diet, being complex, will undergo a revolution 
 in one of its elements without a corresponding revolution in 
 the rest. Vegetarianism has many advo(!ates, and there are 
 symptoms of gradual progress in that direction since the days 
 in which a Homeric hero devoured a whole joint of meat and 
 the bard sang of the work of the shandjles with as much gusto 
 as he sang of the harvest and the vintage. It is certain that 
 most people eat too much meat and are the worse for it, though 
 it has not yet been projwsed on that account to shut up the 
 butchers' shops and send the butchers to gaol. Fermented 
 drinks may be discarded and cookery with them; a refined 
 and intellectual world may be content to sustain its grosser 
 part with bread and water from the spring; and our Christmas 
 cheer may be remembered only as the habit of p.rimeval sav- 
 ages with wonder and disgust. But in (piestions of diet, as 
 has already been said, it is for medical science, not for the 
 
^»:S^ 
 
 r 
 
 1;, , 
 
 ; \ 
 
 > 1 
 
 : ■ \ 
 
 ' 
 
 ' ' 'i 
 
 
 880 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THK DAY. 
 
 sentiment oi the platform or for religions enthusiasm, to 
 decide. 
 
 We have seen how in Vermont, Prohibitionism, exasperated 
 by its inevitable failure, hcajjed u[) })enal enactments, and 
 at last invaded the most sacred liberties of the citizen and the 
 sanctuary of his home. It is the tendency of all tyranny, 
 Avhether it be that of a sultan, a crowd, a sect, or a party of 
 zealots, when it finds itself bathed, to pile on fresh severities 
 instead of reconsidering the wisdom of its own policy. Pro- 
 hibitive legislation in Canada has not failed to betray the same 
 arbitrary spirit. There is a clause in the Scott Act (sec. 12) 
 setting aside the common legal safeguards of innocence. It 
 provides "that it shall not be necessary for the informer to 
 depose to the fact of the sale as within his own personal or 
 certain knowledge, but the magistrate, so soon as it appears 
 to him that the circumstances in evidence sutticiently establish 
 the infraction of the law, shall i)ut the defendant on his de- 
 fence, and in default of his rebuttal of such evidence shall 
 convict him accordingly," — convict him, in short, and send 
 him to prison on hearsay, if in the opinion of the magistrate, 
 who may be a strong ])artisan, he fails to prove his innocence. 
 There is a clause (12U) mpiiring a man when interrogated 
 respecting previous convictions to criminate himself, which 
 seems intended for the very ])urpose of breeding mendacity. 
 There is a clause (iL'.'i) comi)elling husband and wife to give 
 evidence against each other. When the wife has sent the 
 husband to i)rison, what will the wedlock of that pair thence- 
 forth be? Which of the two is the greater sin, to refuse to 
 give evidence under the Scott Act, or to break the marriage 
 vow, whiph bids husband and wife to cherish and protect each 
 other ? There is no ap])eal on the merits from the arbitrary 
 decision of the magistrate, and zealots liave not been ashamed 
 to demand in the j)lainest terms the appointment of partisans 
 to the bench. It never occurs to them to consider whether 
 intemperance itself is a worse vice than injustice. 
 
 The treatment of the hottd aiul tavern keei)ers has also been 
 utterly iniquitous. These men have been earning their bread 
 
PROHIBITION IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES. 331 
 
 isiasm, to 
 
 casperated 
 lents, and 
 m and the 
 
 tyranny, 
 
 a party of 
 
 severities 
 
 icy. Pro- 
 
 ( the same 
 
 (sec. 12) 
 [?ence. It 
 former to 
 3rsonal or 
 t appears 
 ■ establish 
 Dn his de- 
 vice shall 
 and send 
 lagistrate, 
 nnocence. 
 ;errogated 
 (If, which 
 lendacity. 
 'e to give 
 sent the 
 ir thence- 
 refuse to 
 marriage 
 )tect each 
 arbitrary 
 > ashamed 
 partisans 
 • whether 
 
 also been 
 leir bread 
 
 by a trade which, when they entered it, was not only licensed 
 by the State, but deemed by everybody i)erfectly rejjutable ; 
 and therefore when tlieir trade is suddenly suppressed they 
 are apparently entitled to the same compensation which any 
 other trade in the same circumstances would receive. But 
 compensation is inc nvenient and might fatally weight the 
 measure. It is necessary, therefore, to put the tavern-keeper 
 out of the pale of justice ; and to do this pulpit and i)latform 
 vie with each other in kindling popular passion against him. 
 He is represented not only as the agent of a traffic to which it 
 is desirable to put an end, but as a criminal and the worst of 
 criminals, as a poisoner and a murderer, "steeped to the elbow 
 in the blood of civilisation." Yet money made by the poison 
 which he sells is accepted even by the most scrupulous of the 
 Churches for its religious objects, while one Church, at least, 
 which has synodically declared for total Prohibition, counts 
 many dealers in liquor among its members. 
 
 We do not want a selfish and isolated liberty. Milton him- 
 self did not want a selfish and isolated liberty ; at least, he 
 deliberately sacrificed his eyesight rather than decline to serve 
 the State. But after all this struggling against the paternal 
 desi)otism of kings and popes, we do want a reasonable meas- 
 ure of freedom and of self-development. We do want it to be 
 understood, as the general rule, that 
 
 " All restraint, 
 Except what wisdom lays on evil men, 
 Is evil." 
 
 In case oi extremity, such as war or plague, we are of 
 course ready for strong measures, provided they are effectual. 
 Not only war or plague, but any peril of sucli a kind that the 
 State alone can deal with it, warrants tlie intervention of the 
 State. Nobody would desire to set arbitrary and i)edantu! 
 bounds to the common action of the community for tlie preser- 
 vation of the whole. It might be necessary, and therefore 
 lawful, to close the taverns of the nation, were the nation 
 becoming the hopeless slave of drunkenness, as it might be 
 
"'il' 
 
 :^ 
 
 r/'^ 
 
 ll 
 
 I ^ II 
 
 :MI 
 
 saa 
 
 QIKSTIONS OK Till-: DAY. 
 
 necessary, and tlierefore lawful, t(j close the race-courses if 
 the nation were beconiing the hopeless slave of turf-ganibling. 
 Rut in an ordinary way we submit that, whether in the hands 
 of kings or majorities, political power is a trust held for 
 definite jnirposes, which do not include interference with your 
 neighbour's diet, or any of his personal habits, any more than 
 they include the limitation of his industry or the confiscation 
 of his proi)erty. The Prohibitionist thinks that by doing a 
 little injustice he can do a great deal of good, and so probably 
 have thought all tyrants who Avere not absolutely insane. 
 
 If fanaticism in pursuit of the one cherished object tramples 
 on justice and natural affection, how can it show any more 
 regard for the claims of political duty ? A citizen is mani- 
 festly bound in the exercise of his suffrage to (consider all the 
 qnalitications of the candidate and all tlu; interests of the 
 State. But Temperance organisations in Canada have formally 
 resolved to exclude, so far as they can, from all public offices, 
 even from that of a school-trustee, any one who will not 
 pledge himself to the su})port of their i)olicy. There may be 
 other issues before the country of the most vital importance, 
 but they are all to be sacrificed to the one end of the sect. 
 The man may be qualified in every respect to be a legislator : 
 he may even be a total abstainer ; but if he does not believe in 
 prohibitory legislation, a:?d refuses to submit his conscience to 
 that in which he does not believe, he is to be excluded from 
 public life, and the State is to be deprived of his services. 
 On the other hand, the most transparently dishonest submis- 
 sion is accepted as a title to support. A tierce electoral con- 
 test is going on witli forces evenly balanced, and everybody is 
 in doubt about the result. Suddenly it is announced that one 
 of the candidates has consented to take the Prohibition pledge. 
 There is no concealment as to his motive; but he gets the 
 l^rohibitionist vote, and by its help rides in over the head 
 of his more scrupidous rival, while eminent Christians and 
 religious journals applaud a triumph gained over public 
 morality by fraud and lying. It is needless to say that 
 rrohibitionism becomes a marketable commodity among poli- 
 
 lii: 
 
courses it' 
 ■gcainbling. 
 the hands 
 
 held for 
 with your 
 more than 
 )nfiscation 
 y doing a 
 ) probably 
 sane. 
 
 b tramples 
 any more 
 I is manl- 
 ier all the 
 its of the 
 B formally 
 lie offices, 
 I will not 
 re may be 
 iportance, 
 
 the sect, 
 egislator : 
 believe in 
 science to 
 ided from 
 
 services, 
 t submis- 
 toral con- 
 irybody is 
 
 that one 
 )n pledge. 
 
 gets the 
 the head 
 tians and 
 •r public 
 say that 
 long poli- 
 
 PHOHIHITION IN CANADA AND TllH INITED STAPHS. .liW 
 
 ticians, and furnishes the ladder by wh'.di knavery climbs to 
 the mark of its ambition. It is now, perhaps, alter Irish clan- 
 ship, the most noxious of the sectional organisations, the 
 number of whieli is always on the increase, and which are 
 destroying the character of the citizen, and rendering elective 
 government im[)ossil)le by treating the State as an oyster 
 to be opened with the knife of their vote for their own par- 
 ticular end. 
 
 Once more then, and with increased emphasis, let us sug- 
 gest that before the British Parliament commits itself to 
 prohibitive legislation it should send a Commission of Inquiry 
 to the United States and Caiiada, or at least wait for the report 
 of the Canadian Commission which is now investigating the 
 subject, and which embraces in the scope of its inrpiiry not 
 only Canada but the United States. 
 
n- 1 
 
 &' 
 
 ."*• 
 ii. 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
APPEN^DTX: 
 
 COxMMUNISM IN THE UxNITED STATES. 
 

 
 AMI 
 
 li 
 
 
 ff^l 
 
 
 
 
 ii 'li 
 
 if] 
 
 I 
 
 
 •ft: * ! , 
 
 IJii 
 
 III 
 Iff 
 
THE ONEIDA COMMUNITY AND AMERICAN 
 
 SOCIALISM. 
 
 This paper appeared in the Cnnndinn Month!)/ of Noveml)er, 1K74. It was siis- 
 f^ested l)y a visit of two days i)aid by tlie writiT to tlie Oneida Coimmuiity, 
 then under tlie Presidency of Mr. Noyes. Mr. Noyes lias since died, and 
 his death proved irreparable to !iis Coniniuuity. 
 
 In "History of Ameruuin Socialisms," l)y J. Humphrey 
 Noyes, founder and father uf the Oneida Community, we 
 are presented witli an instructive enumeration of the various 
 socialistic experiments made in America, chiefly within tlie 
 last fifty years. ^ This enumeration furiiislies the basis for an 
 induction. That religious communities succeed, wliile the 
 non-religious invariably fail, is the inference drawn by Mr. 
 Noyes, whose own community is religious. "The one fea- 
 ture," he says, "which distinguishes these (the prosperous) 
 communities from the transitory sort, is their religion; which 
 xu every case is of the earnest kind, which comes by recognised 
 afflatus, and controls all external arrangements." " It seems 
 then," he adds, "to be a fair induction from tlie facts before 
 us that earnest religion does in some way modify human 
 depravity, so as to make continuous association possible, and 
 insure to it great material success." 
 
 To the writer the facts suggested a different conclusion; 
 but before embracing it he wished to see the Oneida Com- 
 munity. The Oneida Community is, at all events, not afraid 
 
 ^ Mr. Noyes had embodied in his work the researches of Macdonald, an 
 ex-socialist, who devoted himself to the preparation of materials for a 
 history of the movement, 
 
 337 
 
888 
 
 (Jl KSTIONS OF I'm; DAY. 
 
 II 
 
 1 
 I 
 
 1 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 li 
 
 ■' 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 of l)oiiig sj'i'ii. The writer \v;is oix' of sonui five liundred visi- 
 tors ill the iiioiitli of St'[)ti'iiil)('r iiloiic. Upon ajiplying for 
 tlid rcifpiisitc |)('riiussiou lit' was nfccived with the most courte- 
 ous liospitality, aud uHowed fnudy to satisfy his curiosity, so 
 far as the shortuess of liis visit wouM ju'raiit. He came away 
 confirmed in his prtrvious opinion. 
 
 Comnuuiitics of steady, sober, and inchistrious workers, held 
 together by a religious bond, or by the influence of a venerated 
 chief, will nudce money; if they liave no sejjarate families 
 there will be no family interests to draw them apart; if they 
 are childless, or have few eliildren, their money will accumu- 
 late; their wealth will beeonu' a new bond, Init will at the 
 same time put a stoj) to prose.lytism, so that the extension of 
 the coninmnity will be limited by tlie number of its children, 
 aud if it has no eliildren, it will becouu' extinct. A practi(\'il 
 assurance of this fact, winch might have been taken for 
 granted without any experiment, tlie writer believes to be the 
 net upshot of tlie eighty experinuuits whicdi have been niiade, 
 many of them on a very costly scale. In other words, he 
 l)elieves that the law of success or failure is not a religious 
 law, but an economical law, and one of the most commonplace 
 kind. The utmost that religion oi- stMitiment of any sort has 
 done is to form the original bond of union, and invest the 
 prophet-chief with the necessary i)ower. 
 
 If religion could sustain a communistic association, success 
 would have been assured to Hopedale, founded at Milford, 
 Massachusetts, in 1841, by about thirty ])ersons from different 
 parts of that State, under liev. Adin Ballon. This Commu- 
 nity was, to use Mr. Noyes's own ex[)ression, intensely religious 
 in its ideal. In the words of its founder, it was '• a church 
 of Christ, based on a simple declaration o^ faith in the religion 
 of Jesus Christ, as He taught and exemplified it, aceordi g to 
 the Scriptures of the New Testament, and of ,'" ' Iged 
 
 subjection to all the moral obligations of that n .i." No 
 
 person could be a nunnber of it who did not cordia assen to 
 that declaration. It was "to afford a l)eginning, a spec men 
 and a presage of a new and glorious social Christendom — a 
 
idred visi- 
 [»lying tor 
 jst coiirte- 
 riosity, so 
 laiue away 
 
 kers, lield 
 veiuu'utcd 
 i families 
 t; if they 
 I accuniu- 
 ill at tlie 
 ;ension of 
 
 eliildren, 
 . practi(\ul 
 baken for 
 
 to be the 
 ;en made, 
 vords, lie 
 
 religious 
 monplace 
 i sort has 
 iivest the 
 
 1, success 
 
 Milford, 
 
 different 
 
 Commu- 
 
 religious 
 
 a church 
 
 ^- religiou 
 
 ord' g to 
 
 ilged 
 
 ,u.-' No 
 
 assen' to 
 
 spec men 
 
 idoui — a 
 
 PliiP 
 
 AIM'KNDIX. Mi 
 
 grand confedei'ation of similar communities—;) world ulti- 
 mately regenerated and E(h'nised.'' Nor was a lead«'r wanting, 
 for Mr. Hallon, besides being an ardent enthusiast, was evi- 
 dently in point of ability no ordinary man. He strove hard for 
 success, lie set the example of labour by working, and work- 
 ing vigorously, with his own hands. We are told that lu' would 
 sometimes be found exhausted with hil.our, asleep on tlie 
 sunny side of a haycock, and that tlu; only re(!i'eation he had 
 Avas occasionally to go out into tlie neighbourhood and preach 
 a funeral sermon. The result, however, was a total failure, 
 which Mr. Hallou ascribes to the lack or the; decline of reli- 
 gious enthusiasm, but which, at all events, assumed a decidedly 
 economical form. Mr. Uallou was superseded as Tresident by 
 Mr. l)ra])er, wlio. being a keen business man, and in })artner- 
 ship with a brother outside, sacrificed the interests of the 
 Community to tliose of his firm, got three-fourths of the stock 
 into his own hands, and ultimately (iompelled Mr. Hallou to 
 wind up. 
 
 It was enough to ruin Hopedale that it accei)ted, among 
 other Christian principles, that of "connubiality," which must 
 have created separate interests and have prevented the accu- 
 mulation of money, while industry was probably slackened by 
 want of the full stinuilus of competition and by reliance on 
 the community. Mr. Draper would not have found it so easy 
 to operate on the stock of the Oneida Community or the 
 Rappites. 
 
 There are two great groups of experiments, all failures, 
 which Mr. Noyes characterises respectively as Owenite and 
 Fourierist, the Owenite Utopias being founded on the princi- 
 j)le of Communism, the Fourierist on that of Joint-Stock 
 Association, though the two principles are apt to run into each 
 other, and it is difficult to saj' exactly to which class any par- 
 ticular experiment belongs. Tlu^ two fits of national enthu- 
 siasm, however, seem clearly marked. The first (commenced 
 with the visit of Kobert Owen to the United States, in 1824, 
 the second was brought on twenty years later through the 
 dissemination of Fourierism by Brisbane in Horace (rreeley's 
 paper, the New York Trihniie. 
 
'I i< 
 
 V 'I 
 
 
 :)4() 
 
 QIKSTIONS OF Tlir: DAY. 
 
 ii '1 
 
 IP!! 
 
 If ' 
 
 If! 
 
 "Robert Owen is a rcnuirkable (Oiai-acter. In ypars nearly 
 .seventy-five; in knowledge and experience superabundant; in 
 benevolence of heart transcendental ; in honesty without 
 disguise; in philanthropy unlimited; in I'eligion a sceptic; ni 
 tlu'ology a Pantheist; in metaphysics ii necessarian circum- 
 stantialist; in morals a universal excusionist; in general 
 conduct a philosophic non-resistant; in socialism a Commu- 
 nist; in hope a terrestrial elysianist; in pructi''al business a 
 methodist; in deportment an unequivocal gent)ei»mn." Such 
 is the portrait, drawn by the sympathising ha ul of a fellow 
 visionary, of the great Social liefornitii who v/as to deliver 
 the world from the monstrous trinity of man's oppressors — 
 Private or Individual Pi-opcrty, Irrational Religion, and their 
 concomitant, Marriage. Owen had tried organised i)hilan- 
 thropy in Scotland; but for Communism he sought a more 
 fitting cradle amidst tlu' wild lands and crude ideas of the 
 new world. He was i-eceived with enthusiasm; the Hall of 
 the Representatives at Washington was assigned him as a 
 lecture room, and the President, the President elect, all the 
 Judges of the Supreme Court and a number of the Members 
 of Congress were among his hearers, while the large private 
 fortune which, while he included i)rivate property in the tri- 
 nity of evil, he had not scrupled to retain, furnished him with 
 the means of trying his exi)eriment on the largest a.id most 
 costly scale. He purchased a fine projjcrty of 80,000 acres at 
 Harmony, in Indiana, just vacated by the Rappites, who left 
 behind them good buildings and well cultivated fields, so that 
 ''terrestrial elysianism" here escaped tlu; liar(ishii)s which 
 have proved fatal at once to Utopias founded in tlie wilder- 
 ness. Some 800 people were drawn together by the prospect 
 of uidx)unded happiness. In the course of eighteen months 
 New Harmony had seven successive constitutions. About a 
 year after the foundation, " in consecpience of a variety of 
 troubles and disagrecMuents, chiefly relating to the disposal of 
 the property, a great meeting of the whole population was 
 held, and it was decided to form four separate societies, each 
 signing its own contract for such part of the property as it 
 
 I: ■ ■ I 
 
 Hi 
 
' 
 
 wtmm^^ 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 341 
 
 ears nearly 
 mndiint; in 
 ty without 
 sceptic; ni 
 an oircum- 
 in general 
 a Coniniu- 
 business a 
 m." Such 
 ji' a fellow 
 to deliver 
 pressors — 
 , and their 
 ed philan- 
 ht a more 
 eas of the 
 le Hall of 
 him as a 
 c;t, all the 
 ! Members 
 •ge private 
 in the tri- 
 1 him with 
 a.id most 
 )0 acres at 
 , who left 
 Is, so that 
 ips wliich 
 he wilder- 
 e prospect 
 ■n montlis 
 About a 
 v^ariety of 
 lisposal of 
 ation was 
 sties, each 
 )erty as it 
 
 shall purchase, and each managing its own affairs; but to 
 trade with eacli other by pa])er money." Mr. Owen had not 
 shown sufficient confidence in liis own theory to give up his 
 hold either on the land or on tlie power. We are told that 
 he was now beginning to make sharp bargains witli the inde- 
 pendent Communists. " f [e had lost money, and no doubt he 
 tried to regain some of it, and used such means as he thought 
 would prevent further loss." Yet he chose this time for a 
 solemn re-promulgation of his communistic creed under the 
 title of the Declaration of Mental Independence. 
 
 "Disagreements and jealousies." "Many persons leaving. 
 The Gazette shows how impossible it is for a community of 
 common property to exist, unless the members coinj rising it 
 have acquired the genuine community (diaracter." " Althougli 
 there was an appearance of increased order and happiness, 
 yet matters were drawing to a close. Owen was selling pro- 
 perty to individuals; the greater part of the town was now 
 resolved into individual lots; a grocery was established 
 opposite the tavern; i)ainted sign-boards began to be stuck 
 up on the buildings, pointing out places of manufacture and 
 trade; a sort of wax-figure and pu[)pet-show was opened at 
 one end of the boarding-house; and everything was getting 
 into the old style.' It is useless, as Mr. Xoyes says, to follow 
 this wreck further. The destructive forces of roguery and 
 whisky seem to have mingled with the fundamental impracti- 
 cability of the scheme in bringing on the final catastrophe. 
 Owen complained that he got tlie wrong sf)rt of people, the 
 dishonest, the intemperate, the idle, the apathetic, tlie selfish, 
 instead of the honest, the temperate, the industrious, the 
 active-minded and the stdf-sacriticing. P.ut we sliould say he 
 got the right sort of people for tlie puri-ose of a socnal reformer 
 who undertakes l)y the application of liis regimen to purge 
 human nature of its vices and transform society. The inventor 
 of a patent medicine might as well comphiin that he got the 
 sick r.nd not the healtliy to operate on. One of tlie (puili- 
 fieations prescribed by Owen for the m(Mnbers of his Com- 
 munity was a conviction of the fact that the character of man 
 
^ 
 
 plJi 
 
 
 m 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF rHK DAY. 
 
 is formed for, and not by, liinist'lf. Tlie people of New Har- 
 mony showed practically that they were fully possessed of this 
 (qualification. 
 
 jVIr. Owen afterwards became a Spiritualist and a believer 
 in Special Providence. If he had been so before, Mv. Xoyes 
 seems to think, the result of the experiment at New Harmony 
 wcnild have been different. We will touch on this point here- 
 after. Here it is important to notice that, whatever may 
 liave been his theory, Owen did not attenipt any practical 
 innovation on the subject of marriage; at least he did not 
 attempt to annihilate tlie separate family or to check the propa- 
 gation of children. 
 
 Another great experiment on Mr. Owen's i)rinciples was 
 made at Yellow Springs, in Ohio, tlie present site of Antioch 
 College, the coeducational university, so tliat there seems to 
 be something Radical in the soil. This Commnnity consisted 
 of about a hundred families, and included professional men, 
 teachers, merchants, mechanics, farmers, and a few common 
 labourers. " In the first few weeks all entered into the new 
 system witli a will. Service was the order of tlie day. Men 
 who seldom or never before laboured with their hands, 
 devoted tliemselves to agriculture and the mechanic arts 
 with a zeal which was always commendable, though not 
 always according to knowledge. Ministers of the Gospel 
 guided the plough; called the swine to their corn instead 
 of sinners to repentance; and let patience liave her perfect 
 work over an unruly yoke of oxen. Merchants exchanged 
 the yard-stick tor the rake or i>iti'hfork. All aj)peared 
 to labour cheerfully and for tlie common weal. Among the 
 women there was even more apparent self-sacrifice. Ladies 
 who had seldom seen the inside of their own kitchens went 
 into that of tlie common eating-house (formerly hotel) and 
 made themselves useful among pots and kettles; and refined 
 young ladies, who had all their lives been waited upon, took 
 their turn in waiting ujjou others at the table. And several 
 times a week jtU parties who chose, mingled in the social 
 dance in the great dining-liall." This continued for three 
 
New Har- 
 ised of this 
 
 a believer 
 INIr. Noyes 
 ' Harmony 
 [>oint here- 
 tev^er may 
 r practical 
 le did not 
 the propa- 
 
 3iples was 
 if Antioch 
 } seems to 
 ' consisted 
 ional men, 
 V common 
 ) the new 
 lay. Men 
 ir hands, 
 lanic arts 
 ough not 
 le Gospel 
 •n instead 
 er perfect 
 exchanged 
 appeared 
 mong the 
 Ladies 
 liens went 
 otel) and 
 ad refined 
 pon, took 
 d several 
 ;he social 
 for three 
 
 Ari'EXDIX. 
 
 months. Then — ''tlie industrious, tlie skilful, and the strong 
 saw the products of their labour enjoyed by the ignorant, the 
 unskilled, and tlie imjirovident; and self-love rose against 
 benevolence. A band of musicians insisted that their brassy 
 harmony was as necessary to the common hapi)iiiess as bread 
 and meat; and declined to enter the harvest-tield or the work- 
 shop. A lecturer upon natural science insisted upon talking 
 only while others worked. Mechanics, whose day's labour 
 brought two dollars into the common stock, insisted that they 
 should in justice work only half as long as the agriculturist, 
 whose day's work brought but one." It is strange that these 
 words should have been written by one who is himself a 
 Communist. 
 
 With New Harmony and Yellow Springs, went to "that 
 limbo near the moon '' the ghosts of a number of otlier abor- 
 tive attempts of the Uweuite epoch. The history of the fail- 
 ure in some cases is traced, and it is clear that the result was 
 due to the irresistible action of the economic laws which the 
 projectors had undertaken to supersede; in other cases the end 
 is shrouded in patlietic silence, but we may be sure that the 
 course of events was essentially the same. It is sad to think 
 of the waste of earnest, jierliaps lieroic effort, and of the dis- 
 appointment of generous liojies. Owen liad his qualities, but 
 to call him a genius of the lirst order is preposterous, (jenius 
 in art produces higli works of imagination; but genius in 
 action does not indulge in im])racticable reveries, and cover the 
 world with the wrecks of schemes the failure of which common 
 sense might have foreseen. 
 
 That any one in his senses should liave followed Fourier, 
 has alwjiys seemed to us one of the most curious facts in the 
 history of opinion. This visionary believed that the grand 
 mistake, and the source of all disorder and misery, was the 
 habit of attempting to restrain our passions, and that by let- 
 ting them all loose, and giving free play to every kind of 
 propensity and idiosyn(U"asy, we sliould ])r()(luce complete equi- 
 librium and ]ierfect harmony in society. His pLin of material 
 felicity is hallucination verging upon lunacy. To match tliis 
 
B 
 
 ■■ ^'^ 
 
 B 
 
 
 i 
 
 ' 
 
 1 
 
 1 ' ; 
 
 T 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 i 1 
 
 
 i'; 
 
 i \ ■ ■ 
 
 1 ■ 1 ; 
 
 ■1* 
 
 1 
 
 v.. 
 
 i! 
 
 
 344 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF TIIK DAY, 
 
 he had a philosophy of history tluin which wihler nonsenst'. 
 never was penned, even on that seductive theme. Never- 
 theless, he possessed some sort of electricity wliich called 
 into activity the Utopian tendencies of other men. About 
 twenty years after tlie a[)pearance of Owen, the conditions 
 o^' soil and atmosphere in the United States being then 
 favourable to fungoid growths, a cro[) of Fourierist Phalanxes 
 sprung up like mushrooms, and, like muslirooms, died. The 
 economical reasons of their death are smOi as common sense 
 would at once suggest, and are disclosed witli almost ludicrous 
 distinctness. "The transition," says Mr. Xoyes, always clear- 
 sighted, except with regard to liis (jwn peculiar phase of the 
 illusion, " from the compulsory industry of civilisation to the 
 voluntary, but not yet attractive industry of association, is 
 not favourable to the liighest industrial effects. Men wlio 
 have been accustomed to shirk labour under the feeling that 
 they had poor pay for hard work will not be transformed sud- 
 denly into kings of industry by the atmospliere of a Phalanx. 
 There will be more or less loafing, a good deal of exertion 
 unwisely applied, a certain waste of strength in random and 
 unsystematic eiforts, and a want of the business-like precision 
 and force which makes every blow tell, and tell in the right 
 place. Under these circumstances many will grow uneasy, 
 at length become discouraged, and, perhaps, prove false to 
 their early love." Mv. Xoyes })roceeds to say that these are 
 temporary evils and will pass away. They may be suspended 
 by the strong liand of a chief like Mr. Xoyes, but they will 
 pass away only with human nature. 
 
 The passionate expressions of enthusiasm, the confident 
 belief that under Foiirier, '*the Columbus of social discovery," 
 the caravels of cntfrprise wt're again touching tin; shore of a 
 new world, th«' first cliilling contact with the inexorable real- 
 ity, the struggle, sonu'timns a gallant one, against overmas- 
 tering fate, thi'. inevitable break-u]), the voice of faibh trying 
 to rise triumphant over the wreck of hope, are enough to touch 
 any heart less stern than that of an economical Rhadamanthus. 
 But comedy is mingled with the tragedy. A scene at the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 345 
 
 (ler nonsenso 
 nne. Never- 
 wliich called 
 men. About 
 le conditions 
 1 being then 
 ist Phalanxes 
 s, died. Tlie 
 jninion sense 
 LOst ludicrous 
 always clear- 
 
 pluise of the 
 isation to the 
 ssociation, is 
 I. Men who 
 i feeling tliat 
 sformed sud- 
 •f a Phalanx. 
 1 of exertion 
 
 random and 
 ike precision 
 in the right 
 ;row uneasy, 
 rove false to 
 liat these are 
 be suspended 
 Jut they will 
 
 ihe confident 
 1 discovery," 
 e shore of a 
 xorable real- 
 iist overmas- 
 faith trying 
 lugh to toucli 
 adanianthus. 
 scene at the 
 
 opening of the Clermont Phalanx reminds us of one in " Martin 
 Chuzzlewit. " " There were about one hundred and tliirty of us. 
 The weather was Ijeautiiul, but cold, and the scenery on the 
 river was splendid iu its spring dress. Tlie various parties 
 brought their provisions with them, and toward noon the whole 
 of it was collected and s})read upon tlie table by the waiters, 
 for all to have an equal chance. But alas for ecpiality! On 
 the meal being ready, a rush was made, into the cabin, and iu 
 a few minutes all the seuts were tilled. In a few minutes 
 more the provisions had all disai)peared, and many persons 
 who were not in the first rush had to go hungry. I lost my 
 dinner that day, but improved the opportunity to observe 
 and ci 'cise the ferocity of the Fourierist appetite." At 
 Prairie ilome there was an Englishman named John Wood 
 who was imperfectly Fourierised. John, having blacked his 
 boots, put away the bruslies and blacking. "Out came a 
 Dutchman and looked out for the same utensils. Xot seeing 
 them, he asked the Englishman for the 'pruslies.' So John 
 brings them out and hands them to him, whereupon the Dutch- 
 man marches to the front of the [)orch, and in wrathful style, 
 with the brushes uplifted in his hand, he addresses the assem- 
 bled crowd: 'Hc-iU'! lookee he-ar! Do you call dis commu- 
 nity? Is dis conimou property? See he-ar! I ask him for 
 de prushes to placken mine poots, and he give me de prushes 
 and not give me de pladdng ! ' " Occasionally we catch a 
 glimpse of the form of a speculating Yankee floating like a 
 sliark among the flat fish, with no visionary intentions. The 
 members of the communities generally appear to have been 
 honest and loyal to tlie coiumoii cause, but at the end of the 
 Sodus Bay experiment we are told that "each individual hel[)ed 
 himself to the movable property, and some decamped iu the 
 night, leaving the remains of the Phalanx to be disposed of 
 in any way which the last men might choose." 
 
 Fourierism finally staked its existence on the success of 
 the North American Phalanx, which was planted not in the 
 wilderness but near Xew York CMty. This Community, con- 
 sisting of only a hundred members of both sexes, starting 
 
^ 
 
 346 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 
 with a capital of $28,000, and supported by the dead-lilt 
 efforts of the leaders of the scliool, dragged on its existence 
 for twelve years. But the inevitable did not fail to arrive. 
 "Most of them," says an observer, "are decent sort of people, 
 have few bad qualities and not many good ones, but they are 
 evidently not working for an idea. They make no effort to 
 extend their principles, and do not build, as a general thing, 
 unless a person wanting to join builds for himself. Under 
 such circumstances the progress of the movement must neces- 
 sarily be slow, if ever it progress at all. Latterly the num- 
 ber of members and probationers has decreased. They lind it 
 necessary to employ hired labourers to develop the resources 
 of the land." The powers of talking, directing others, and 
 grumbling, Avere found to be possessed in a high degice by 
 those who had little power of work. At meals the best of the 
 food was taken by those who had stayed at home, while "the 
 swinked liedger," coming late from the field and then having 
 to wash, got the worst. Eighteen hundred Avas Fourier's pet 
 number of members for a Phalanx. The people -were asked 
 what would have happened if the North American Phalanx 
 had consisted of that number : they answered that it would have 
 broken up in two years. 
 
 Brook Farm stands by itself, and Hawthorne's "Blithedale 
 Eomance " has made it sufficiently familiar to the general 
 reader. It would be an injustice to call it "a pic-nic," or to 
 say that "lialf the members worked while the otlier half 
 sketched them from the Avindows." It Avas a little Boston 
 ut()])ia, in Avliich a number of men, afterwards notable in tlie 
 intellectual Avorld, sowed their philosophic Avild oats, and 
 gratified the literary man's fancy for manual labour, sliarpen- 
 ing their Avits no doubt at the same time by intercourse Avith 
 each other. If they seriously believed that men trained to 
 Avork Avith tlie brain could, with advantage to themseh^es or 
 to society, take to Avorking Avith their hands, they Avere the 
 victims of a strange illusion. Tlie effective combination of 
 manual Avith mental labour, as a system, is impracticable. 
 r)otli draw on the samt^ fund of nervous energy, Avhieh, Avhen 
 drained by one sort of hibcmr, is unable to supply the otlier. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 m 
 
 he dead-lii't 
 ts existence 
 il to arrive, 
 rt of people, 
 but they are 
 no effort to 
 neral thing, 
 elf. Under 
 must neces- 
 ly the nuni- 
 They find it 
 he resources 
 others, and 
 1 degice by 
 3 best of the 
 , while "the 
 then having 
 ourier's pet 
 Avere asked 
 an Plialanx 
 would have 
 
 "Blithedale 
 the general 
 -nic," or to 
 
 other half 
 ttle Boston 
 table in the 
 i oats, and 
 tr, sliarpen- 
 course Avith 
 
 trained to 
 jmselves or 
 )y were the 
 bination of 
 practicable, 
 hicli, Avhen 
 r the other. 
 
 Mr. Noyes is of opinion that among the causes of failure in 
 all these cases, was the universal propensity to invest in land 
 and engage in the business of farming. Factories, he thinks, 
 are more suitable for communistic experiments. But surely, 
 if the afflatus is the decisive thing, the investment ought not 
 to be of so much consequence. 
 
 With the principles of common property or associated 
 labour, there mingled in these Utopias all the other chimeras 
 and fanaticisms of the day: — Individual Sovereignty — 
 Labour Exchange — Paper Currency — Transcendentalism — 
 Swedenborgianism — Vegetarianism — Plumerism — Woman's 
 Rights — Anti-domestic-servantism — Spiritualism. Every- 
 thing impracticable, in short, came to find a place for putting 
 itself in practice outside the conditions of existence. Mr. 
 Noyes traces the connection of Socialism with religious revi- 
 vals, and shows that people who were preparing their Ascension 
 robes were the iinconscious harbingers of the Fourierist move- 
 ment. The Skeneateles Community had, as one of the articles 
 of its programme, "a disbelief in the rightful existence of all 
 governments built upon physical force," and proclaimed that 
 they were organised bands of banditti, whose authority was 
 to be disregarded"; that it would not vote under such govern- 
 ments, or petition to them, but " demanded that they should 
 disband"; that it would do no military duty, pay no taxes, 
 sit on no juries, give no testimony in "courts of so-called 
 justice " ; that " it would never appeal to the law for a redress 
 of grievances, but use all peaceful and moral means to secure 
 their complete destruction." The relation between the sexes 
 Avas of course one of the fields for innovation. Eobert Dale 
 OAven carried not only the law separating the property of 
 married Avomen from that of their husbands, V)ut the divorce 
 laAV of Indiana. As a general rule, the mother of all these 
 "notions" Avas Ncav England, Avho Avill have to take care that 
 she does not become as great a source of mischief to this 
 continent as Soutli Carolina, though in a different Avay. 
 
 The failures Ave have seen. Noav Avliat Avere the successes, 
 and Avhat Avas the reason of their success. Was it afflatus, 
 

 ^ 1 1 
 
 ':!■; 
 
 .348 
 
 QUESTIONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 
 or sometliing more commonplace? The list drawn up by Mr. 
 Xoyes in 1870 is as follows : 
 
 BeizeVs Community. — Has lasted one hundred and fifty-six 
 years; was at one time very rich; lias money at interest yet; 
 some of its grand old buildings are still standing. 
 
 Tho Shaker Comnmnitf/. — Has lasted ninety-five years. 
 Consists of eighteen large societies, many of them very 
 wealthy. 
 
 The Zoar Commnnity. — Fifty-tliree years old and wealthy. 
 
 The Snoicherger Community. — Forty-nine years old and 
 "well off." 
 
 The Ehenezer Community. — Twenty-three years old, and 
 said to be the largest and richest Community in the United 
 States. 
 
 The Janson Commnnity. — Twejity-three years old and 
 wealthy. 
 
 The Oneida Community, whicli is also a commercial success, 
 we omit for the present, iindertaking hereafter to show that its 
 case is covered by our induction. 
 
 All the communities enumerated are religious. But they 
 are not the only religious comnninities. Hopedale, as Ave 
 have said, was religious in the highest degree, and its re- 
 ligion was a better one than that of these ignorant and 
 fanatical little sects. Even the spirit-rapping eomnumities 
 might claim to be placed on a level, in the spiritual scale, 
 with the saltatory religion of Shakers. But Hopedale, as 
 we have seen, was strongly Conservative Avith regard to 
 marriage. That which is at once common to all the suc- 
 cessful communities, and peculiar to them, is the rejection of 
 marriage, whereby in the first place they are exemi^ted from 
 the disuniting influence of the separate family: and in the 
 second place, they are enabled to accumulate wealth in a way 
 whicli would be impossible if they had children to maintain. 
 
 The members of Beizel's Connnunity are strict celibates; 
 so are the Shakers; so are the Ka])pites; so are the Snowber- 
 gers. The Ebenezers permit marriage "when their guiding 
 spirit consents to it "; but the parties have to undergo some 
 
AriMONDIX. 
 
 ;54i) 
 
 n up by Mr. 
 
 iind lit'ty-six 
 nterest yet; 
 
 -five years, 
 them very 
 
 nd wealthy, 
 rs old and 
 
 rs old, and 
 the United 
 
 rs old and 
 
 dal success, 
 liow that its 
 
 But they 
 lale, as Ave 
 and its re- 
 tiorant and 
 3niniunities 
 itual scale, 
 opedale, as 
 regard to 
 11 the suc- 
 rejection of 
 npted from 
 and in the 
 bh in a way 
 maintain. 
 \, celibates; 
 3 Snowber- 
 nv guiding 
 lergo some 
 
 I 
 
 public mortilication ; and the (jommunity at its foundation, 
 to meet the diihculties of the stniggh', resolved that for a 
 given number of years there should be no increase of their 
 population by birtlis, which resolution was carried into effect. 
 Among the Zoarites, marriage is now jjermitted. J>ut we 
 are told that at their first oi'ganisatiou it was strictly forbid- 
 den, not from religious scrui)le, but as an indispensable mat- 
 ter of economy; that for years no cihild was seen within their 
 village; and that, though the regulation has been removed, 
 the settlement retains much of its old character in this re- 
 spect. The Jansonists, though they do not forbid marriage, 
 hold that a " life of celibacy is more adapted to develop the 
 life of the inner man." In fact these associations are not 
 so much communistic as monastic, and belong to a class of 
 phenomena already familiar enougli to economical history. 
 
 The liaiipites, ;i set of enthusiasts who expected the sjjcedy 
 advent of the ^Millennium, called their first two setth'uu'nts 
 Harmony. Their tliird, l)y a significant cliange of name, tliey 
 called Economy. Tliey are not only wealthy, but millionnaires 
 of the first order. We are not surprised to learn that they 
 do not proselytise, thougli converts enough might undoubtedly 
 be found to a doctrine even more (>xtravagant than Ilap[)ism, 
 if it were endowed witli twenty millions. The Silver Islet 
 Company would be about as likely to desirii proselytes.^ 
 Those who have visited the Community report that all its 
 members are advanced in years. Tlie end of Rai)p's JNlillen- 
 nium is in fact a tontine, which will terminate in a lia})pite 
 Astor. 
 
 We are far from saying that in these cases the religion liad 
 nothing to do witli the result. It collected and united a body 
 of enthusiasts, whose very fanaticism, being of the coarsest 
 kind, Avas a guarantee for tlieir belonging to a class accus- 
 tomed to manual labour and to submission; it helped to liold 
 them together through tlie first struggh^ for subsistence; and, 
 what was perhaps tlie most important point of all, it led them 
 
 ' When this was written the Silvor Islet on Lake Superior was yielding 
 iumiense riches. 
 
I 
 
 869 
 
 QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 
 ■ i 
 
 1 
 
 IT ! ■. 
 
 «i 
 
 !i ' 
 
 1 
 
 
 !iH« 
 
 to render implicit obedience to a prophet-chief, who, whether 
 fanatic or impostor, was pretty sure to be an able man. The 
 asc(Mi(lan(!y of the prophet-chief is evidcuitly the mainspring 
 of Mornionism, which is also a great material success. But 
 we very much doubt wliether even the strong hand of Brig- 
 ham Young could hold together for a year a Utah combining 
 the separate family and free propagation of children with 
 community of goods. 
 
 The Oneida Community,^ a visit to which suggested the 
 subject of this paper, was founded in 1847, by the liev. John 
 Humphrey Noyos, a man Avhose ability is written on his brow, 
 on tlie pages of his vigorously-written books, and on the work 
 of his organising hands. He was, by his own confession, a 
 religious enthusiast of the wildest and most erratic kind. 
 Libertinism he has not confessed, though by loose and sensa- 
 tional versions of his words, it has been made to appear that 
 he has done so.^ The form of religious enthusiasm in which 
 he ultimately landed was Perfectionism,. Tlie gist of the Per- 
 fectionists' creed, if Ave rightly comprehend it, is that the 
 second coming of Christ took place in the lifetime of St. John; 
 that the reign of Law in every sense then finally g;ive place to 
 that of the Spirit; that now, the believer united with Christ, 
 and "confessing holiness," is above all ordinances, including 
 the ordinance of marriage, and perfectly free from sin. This 
 sounds like Antinomianism, but we are told that it is only 
 "anti-legality." At all events it is not the professed belief of 
 the Perfectionists that one of their number cannot do wrong. 
 There is a series of subordinate articles, some of them highly 
 mystical, while others, introducing Spiritualism, have proba- 
 bly been grafted on the religion since its first promulgation. 
 
 1 Since this was written Mr. Noyes, then at the head of the Community, 
 has died. 
 
 2 An incident, liowever, which is related by Mr. Noyes himself in the 
 Oneida Circular, and which occurred in 1840, indicates plainly enough 
 that a case of elective affinities was the immediate source of his theory 
 about the relations between the sexes, and of his practical application 
 of that theory in the Oneida Community. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 .%! 
 
 10, whether 
 man. The 
 nainspring 
 icess. But 
 d of P,rig- 
 combiniiig 
 dren with 
 
 gested the 
 vev. Jolin 
 
 I liis brow, 
 
 II the work 
 iifession, a 
 atic kind, 
 and sensa- 
 ppoar tliat 
 |i in wiiieh 
 •f the Pei- 
 
 tliat the 
 '. St. John; 
 >"e place to 
 ith Clirist, 
 including 
 iin. This 
 it is only 
 I belief of 
 Jo wrong. 
 m\ highly 
 vc proba- 
 lulgation. 
 
 'omm unity, 
 
 iself in the 
 ily enough 
 his tlieory 
 application 
 
 The Bible is implicitly received, though with Perfectionist 
 interpretations. Scepticism is denounced. Much is made of 
 special interpositions of I'rovidence, and of Providential 
 "signals." Form of worship the Perfectionists have none. 
 They only confess Christ before each other, and coiiuuunicatc! 
 religious thought ih their family gathering. Tlie Sal)bath is 
 not distinguislied from the week except by cessation from 
 work. This religion is proclaimed to be still the bond of 
 union among the members of the Community. They will tell 
 you that they are held together by Father Xoyes' love of 
 Christ, and by their love of Father Noyes. 
 
 The Community at Oneida numbers two hundred. At Wil- 
 low Place, on a detached portion of the same domain, are nine- 
 teen more; and there are forty-live in a branch at Walling- 
 ford, Connecticut. All these are supposed to constitute; one 
 family, with the founder as father. The property is held in 
 common; there are no separate interests, incomes, or allow- 
 ances whatever. The several members of the family are pre- 
 sented with such money as they may require from tinn; to 
 time, just as children are furnished with pocket money by tlieir 
 parents, the only restriction being family duty. The other 
 characteristic feature of the system is one which it is difficult 
 to describe in language at once measured and adequately 
 expressive of the feelings of repugnance with which it nnist 
 be regarded by every one who acknowledges the Christian ruh> 
 of morals. The marriage tie is totally discarded. The male 
 and female members of the Community pair witli each other 
 for a time, and for a time only; not promiscuously, but under 
 the authority of the Community, Avhich appears to be guided 
 in regulating these matters partly by the policy of restraining 
 the increase of its numbers, partly by physical rules connected 
 with wliat is styled the scientific propagation of cliildren. 
 The initiative is assigned to the woman, who makes it known 
 to the authorities when she is willing to become a mother. 
 She is not permanently wedded to one partner, but may have 
 two or three in succession. So that the "permanence" predi- 
 cated of Oneida unions, in the Circular, must have reference 
 
m 
 
 !■" • 
 
 352 
 
 QUKSriONS OF TIIK DAY. 
 
 I !- 
 
 not to the individual [tartics, but to thr family ag^'rfijjate. 
 The parental relation is not ignoi'ed, Init it is niergcnl in the 
 Coniniuiiity, the children beinjj brought up together as brothers 
 and sisters in common nurseries. There are certain supph;- 
 mentary jjortions of the system which its inventor is in the 
 habit of bringing without reserve before the public, but over 
 whi(^h (U'dinary sentinuMit enjoins us to draw a veil. 
 
 During the early years of theComnumity few children were 
 born to it, though of late, and apparently in connection with 
 the growth of its wealth, tiu; number of births has been 
 allow(;d to increase. And thus we have again the two fami- 
 liar and simple conditions of suc<!ess, exemption from the 
 disuniting influence of the separate family, and the facility 
 for the accumulation of wealth attendant on the absence or 
 paucity of children. Comnumism, in fine, can be rendered 
 practicable only by a standing defiance of morality and nature. 
 
 In the case of the Oneida Comnumity the measure of com- 
 mercial success has been large. A strong business head has 
 controlled its financial operations as well as its internal 
 economy. The principle that ajf1ati<s eschews land and 
 delights in factories has l)een carried into effect with the 
 most gratifying result. The Community owns a farm of 650 
 acres, highly cultivated, round its mansion; but its chief 
 investments, and the source of its opulence, are three factories, 
 — one of traps, one of silk goods, and one of canned fruit. 
 The trap factory, whicli seems a singular lino of business 
 to be chosen l)y Perfectionism, is a monument of one of 
 the original members of the Community, who was a trapper 
 and a maker of traps. The canned fruit of Oneida enjoys the 
 highest re])utation, and we do not doubt the truth of the 
 •assertion that the business might be greatly extended if the 
 Community chose to borrow capital. IManual labour, though 
 not repudiated by members of the Community, as the writer 
 can testify, is now chiefly performed by hired hands, of whom 
 there are about 150 in tlie factories, besides some negroes em- 
 ]>loyed in the coarser housework. The inembers of the Com- 
 numity, as a general rule, are now, like other capitalists, the 
 
AIM'FA'DIX. 
 
 im 
 
 ag(ri-f.nratO. 
 
 :('(! ill the 
 IS brothers 
 in supplc- 
 is in the 
 , but over 
 
 tlrcn were 
 'tion with 
 has been 
 two fami- 
 from the 
 e facility 
 bsence or 
 
 rendered 
 id nature. 
 ! of corn- 
 head has 
 ; internal 
 and and 
 with the 
 ni of 050 
 its chief 
 factories, 
 ed fruit. 
 
 business 
 
 one of 
 
 L trajiper 
 
 ijoys the 
 
 1 of the 
 
 d if the 
 ', tliouj»h 
 le writer 
 of whom 
 
 roes em- 
 he Com- 
 
 ists, the 
 
 <'in[)loyers and directors of labour. They are apparently {^ood 
 employers, and, in case of any attemi)t to disturb tiiem on th»' 
 ground of their deHanci! of establislicd morality, they feel 
 secure in the attachnuMit of the people around them, many of 
 Avhoni, we are told, are English immigrants. It is a remark- 
 able proof of the eontidemu' of the rommunity, l)oth in its 
 own cohesiveness and in its ability to facie scriitiny, that it lias 
 vi'utured to send several of its young men to the ScicntilK; 
 Department of Yale College, in order to supply itself with tlie 
 scientific element lequisite for its numufacturing purposes. 
 
 The mansion isasjiacious and handsome range of buildings, 
 fitted up simply, but with every comfort. Its public rooms 
 are a double dining-hall, a large parlour, with a stage for tlu^ 
 gatherings and amusements of the whole family, and other 
 parlours for the meeting of smaller circles. Kound it are 
 well-kept grounds, to which the Community admits neigh- 
 bours and visitors with liberality which must somewhat inter- 
 fere with the ])urposes of its own enjoyment. With the 
 charms of green lawns, shady walks, and gay fiower-beds, are 
 combined views of a valley, which, in its rich cultivation and 
 the soft outlines of the hills surrounding it, reminds the 
 traveller of England. There are croquet grounds, whicli 
 appear to be in constant use. A few miles off, by the side of 
 a lake, the Community has a hunting-box, called Joppa, to 
 which excursions are frequently made. Pleasure evidently 
 has its due place among the objects of existence, and is 
 organised with care and on a liberal scale. Teams in sufH- 
 cient number appeared to be at the service of the brethren. 
 iSFusic is much cultivated, and, by a refinement of humanity, 
 the practising room is a separate building, at some distance 
 from the mansion. Tn winter, intellectual pursuits and self- 
 culture are the order of the day. The writer was told that 
 an old lady had taken up Greek and accjuired the power of 
 reading the New Testament in the original tongue. 
 
 The library is furnished with books of all kinds, and Xew 
 York ])apers are on the tal)le. The Comnnuiity, however, 
 is politically quietist, and its members never vote. I'oliti- 
 
^HP 
 
 tl I 
 
 354 
 
 QUESTION.: OF THE PAY. 
 
 cal divisions might disturb the family, thoujjfU the writer was 
 told that the inembers were all in spirit New Englanders, and 
 would vote witli the liepiiblican party. They escaped the 
 military draft through tlie error of two officials, each of 
 whom supposed the Community to be in the jurisdiction of the 
 other. 
 
 "This reform means trousers," said a female advocate of 
 Woman's Rights the other day in the United States. Tlie 
 ladies of the Oneida Community have adopted tlie ]»lumer 
 costume, though in a mitigated form. Mr. Hepworth Dixon 
 has recorded his opinion that this dress is becoming. He 
 could hardly extend his commendation to the practice of cut- 
 ting the hair short in male fashion, which is also universal 
 among the Oneida ladies; at least, if he dul, we should be 
 unable to agree with him. 
 
 Cookery is not (h'legated to inferior hands, but done by 
 those of the Perfectionists themselves. The fare is simple 
 but most excellent. There appear to be no rigoro\is ordi- 
 nances about diet. As a matka- of habit and taste, meat is 
 sparingly eaten, but vegetarianism is not enjoinc'd. Stimu- 
 lants are banished from the board, but the use of them is not 
 morally proscribed; at least they are offered to a guest. 
 Tobacco is denouncH'd by Father Noyes. One of the brethren 
 was living entirely on brown bread and baked apples, at an 
 expense to the (Community, as he reckoned, of twelve cents a 
 day. But this was voluntary, and the motive was dietetic. 
 While there is no appearance of luxury, asceticism is ecpuilly 
 unknown. 
 
 Among the members of tlio Community are persons of 
 various social grades and degrees of edufiation — ex-clergy nun 
 and ex-lawyers, as well as mechanics; though there must 
 obviously be a limit intellectually to the class disposed to 
 believe in Perfectionism and Father Noyes. If you ask how 
 order and harmony are jjreserved in so lar'j^e and so heteroge- 
 neous a family, the all-sutticing answer is, through the institu- 
 tion of mutual criticism. Every member of the Comnninity, 
 in turn, is compelled thus to submit himself to the organised 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 3i 
 
 )j> 
 
 writer was 
 lulers, and 
 caped the 
 i, each of 
 tioii of the 
 
 Ivocate of 
 ites. Tlie 
 
 I)luiner 
 rth Dixon 
 ling. He 
 ce of cut- 
 universal 
 
 sliould be 
 
 done by 
 is simple 
 I'ous ordi- 
 3, meat is 
 . Htiniu- 
 lem is not 
 
 a guest. 
 5 brethren 
 )les, at an 
 'e cents a 
 
 dietetic. 
 IS equally 
 
 M'Rons of 
 lergynien 
 i'r(^ must 
 ^l)osed to 
 
 1 ask how 
 heteroge- 
 e institu- 
 nmunity, 
 n-gauised 
 
 influence of social opinion, in order tliat he may be warned of 
 his sucial faults and constrained to address himself to tlieir 
 cure. The author of "New America" had the good fortune to 
 witness one of these singular operations, which at that time 
 were performed in the great parlour by the Community at 
 large. But the duty has since been delegated to a Committee 
 of Criticism, which summons before it the person to be criti- 
 cised, together with those wlio are most intimate with liim 
 and best qualified to point out his defects. It is asserted that 
 the system perfectly answers its purpose, and that at the same 
 time it has the effect of banishing from th< I'Jommunity irregu- 
 lar backbiting and malevolent love of srandal. It may be 
 doubted, perhaps, whether this or any other gentle instrument 
 of government would work so well if within the velvet glove 
 were not felt the iron hand of Father Xoyes, tiiough the 
 members of the Con)nuuiity speak with coulidence ol' tlie 
 self-sustaining power of the system, and profess to look 
 forward without fear to a demise of the paternal crown. 
 
 To preserve the unity of the family, all the nunnbers are 
 assembled for an hour (!very evening in the great parlour. 
 Matters of intcn-est to the whole Community are tiu-n brought 
 forward and discussed, correspondence is read, symj)athy is 
 exi)ressed with the sick, professions of religious seutiuu'ut are 
 exclianged. To give tlu? assembly a domestic air, three or 
 four tables were disposed over the room with groujjs of women 
 at Avork around them. lUit it would not do. The assembly 
 was not a family clrjiv'- it was a nuicting, though a meeting 
 of people agreed i'l conviction, and well acquainted with each 
 other. In the \ ery unanimity of opinion and sentiment tlu'r<' 
 was an undomestic ring. In tlie same manner the repasts in the 
 common hall lack tlie character of a family meal. Dinner is 
 a table d'hot(\ at wliich those wlio jiartake of it do n(»t even sit 
 down together, but separately, each wlien he pleases, between 
 certain hours, just as they do in a hottd. And this was the 
 general impression made on the writer by wimt he saw of 
 Oneida. Ht; felt that all the time he was in a ,reat hotel, an 
 hotel where people boarded all the year round, and were on 
 
 ^m^ 
 
1 
 
 i ' ' 
 
 s" 
 
 ■■( 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 1' 
 
 ' 
 
 ' 
 
 \m 
 
 '.ifAi 
 
 QUESTIONS OF Till; DAY. 
 
 friendly terms witli each other, but still an hotel and not a 
 home. ^Mention Ims been already made of the departure from 
 the original institution of family eriti(;ism, and the delegation 
 to a committee of the function, once itcrformed by the Commu- 
 nity at large. This is obviously a symptom of disintegra- 
 tion, while the necessity under which the committee finds 
 itsidf of summoning special witnesses i)roves that within the 
 great circlci of the Comnumity inner social circles are formed. 
 In fact, without some miraculous enlargement of the range of 
 human affections, it is absurd to talk of forming a family of 
 two liundred peoi)le. They may be under the same ])atcriuil 
 despotism, but they can be a family in no otiier sense of the 
 U'rm. To preserve tlu' domestic unity of the tliree establish- 
 ments, Oneida, Willow Place, and Wallingford, will be still 
 nu)re beyond human power. 
 
 The children, as has been already said, are regarded as 
 children of the Community, and an; brought up together on 
 tliat footing. The motlier is allowed to take part in nni'sing 
 th<-m as much as she pleases, Ijiit she is m)t re(|uired to do 
 more. rnilenial)ly they are a fine, healthy-looking, merry 
 set of infant-. Ibit we need \\<A jump from this fact to a 
 conclnsiiMi in i.ivoiir of Scicntitic Propagation, and all its 
 repnlsive ini-idiMits. The Oneida chiMreii are reared under 
 conditions of exceptioniil advantage, wliich could not fail to 
 securr health to the offspring of any l)Ut jiositively diseased 
 l)areiits, whose union no coarse intervi-ntion of anthropological 
 science is needed to forbid. Tiie nurseries, with everything 
 about tiiem, are beautii'ul. Large ])lay-rooms are ju'ovided 
 for exercise in winter. 'I'he nurses are not iiirelings, but 
 niembei's of the Comnnmity who voluntarily undertake the 
 otlice. KveiT lu'erautjon is taki'U against tlie daiigi-r of inl'ec- 
 tion. A simple and wliolesome dietary is enforced, and no 
 mother or grandnu)ther is permitteil to ruin digestion and 
 temper by administering hrst a jioison from the confectioner's 
 and tlien anotiu'r poison from the druggist's. Lessons may 
 [lerhaps lie h'arned frnui the nursei'ies of the Oneida Com- 
 nuuiity, l)ut not the h'sson for whii-Ii the Comnumity cites 
 
 • i 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 357 
 
 and not a 
 rture from 
 delegation 
 e Connuu- 
 lisiutogra- 
 itti'e finds 
 u'ithin the 
 [•e formed, 
 e range of 
 
 family of 
 > paternal 
 ise of the 
 
 establish- 
 11 be still 
 
 u:arded as 
 )gether on 
 II nni'sing 
 red to do 
 ig, Juerry 
 fact to a 
 id all its 
 •('([ under 
 lot fail to 
 ■ diseased 
 •I'olugical 
 tcrvtiiinir 
 
 provided 
 ings, Ijut 
 rtake the 
 
 ol' infec- 
 I. and no 
 tion and 
 ■etioner's 
 ons may 
 da Com- 
 ity cites 
 
 a long roll of the hierophants of science, that it is good in 
 human unions to disregard, or treat as secondary, the selec- 
 tive instinct of affection, and to bnied human beings as we 
 breed horses or swine. 
 
 It is by no means surprising that the Perfectionists should 
 not be anxious to make proselytes to the possession of tlie 
 Oneida estate, and the three flourishing factories upon it, 
 any more than the lva})pites are anxious to make proselytes to 
 their millions. We read in the Circular, under the head of 
 Admissions: 
 
 " These Conunuuit ics are constantly receiving applications for admission 
 which they ha.v(' to rcjoct. It is dirticult to state in any brief way all their 
 reasons for tliiis liinitiiii,^ their minibers ; but some of them are these: 
 1. Tiie parent ('oiiiiiiuuity at ( ineida is full. Its buildings are adapted 
 to a crrtaiu numbir, and it wants no more. 2. The Mranch-C'umnuini- 
 ties. thnuuh they have not attained the normal size, have as many mem- 
 bers as they can well accommodate, and must grow in numbers only as 
 they grow in capital and luiiidings. ,'3. The kind of men and wonn'n wiio 
 ;Hy likely to make the Cumnmnities grow, spiritnaUy and jimincialhj, are 
 :v,u'ce, and have to be sifted out slowly and cautiously. It should be dis- 
 tinctly understood that tliese Conununities are not asylums fm- pleasure- 
 seekers or persons who merely want a home and a living. They will 
 receive only those who are very nnidi in eanu'st in religion. They have 
 already done their full share of labor in criticising and working over raw 
 recruits, and iiUend hereafter to devote themselves to other jobs (aplenty 
 of which they have on liaiid), receiving only such members as seem 
 likely to help and not hinder their work. As candidates for Comnninism 
 multiply, it is obvious that they cannot all settle at Oneida and Walling- 
 ford. OtherCommunifies nmst be formed : and the best way for earnest 
 disciples generally is to work and wail, till the Spirit of J'entecost shall 
 come on their neighbors, and give them conununities right where they 
 are." 
 
 It appears that from a pretty early period regard was had 
 to "thumcial " as well as to "spiritual " qualifications; for the 
 amount of ju-operty brought in l.»y members of the Community 
 and its branches u[» to l.S,"»7 \v;is, according to the ILoidhouk, 
 if! [07,000. This, and cheapness of living in common, must of 
 course be taken into account in estimating the commercial 
 success of tlie Comnuinitv, aud tracinir it to its real source. 
 
358 
 
 QUKSriONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 That the Oneida Community, or any one of tlie group to 
 which it belongs, lias solved any great problem for humanity, 
 or even tried any experiment of general interest, the writer 
 sees not the sliglitest ground for believing. Of course noth- 
 ing which involves celibacy can be extended beyond a few 
 circles of fanatics, such as the monks in former dnys, or the 
 Shakers in ours; and the abolition of the fanuly is, except 
 within the same narrow limit, equally impracticable as well 
 as utterly revolting. In addition to whicli, such a mode of 
 living as that adopted by the Oneida Community, and essential 
 to the application of their princii)les, is wholly at variance 
 with the general conditions of industrial life. Close to the 
 mansion of the Community runs a railroad on which they ship 
 their goods, and which is necessary to their subsistence. 
 Can they imagine it possible to organise the life of the people 
 em})loyed upon that railroad after the model of their own? 
 They send some of their goods across the ocean. Do they 
 think that the sailors who carry these goods can be gathered 
 with their families into a communistic home? 
 
 There is at Brooklin, on the Southern shore of Lake Erie, 
 another community which has attracted notice from number- 
 ing among its members an Englishman of some distinction, 
 l\\v. Laurence Oliphant. About this association little is 
 known,* even among the people at Oneida, who u curiosity it 
 naturally excites. But it ai)i)ears to bo not a counterpart of 
 Oneida, but a small groui) t)f householders living uiuler tlie 
 presidency of Mr. Harris, the ])rophet of a religion akin to 
 Swedenborgianism, and entrusting their property to his hands. 
 So long as that property holds out, the ^'ommunity may of 
 course continue to exist without impugning any of the received 
 laws of i)olitical econoui}, f)r introducing any new principle 
 into the world. 
 
 It is true that there may be points worthy the attention of 
 the social patJKjlogist in connection witli the tendencies which 
 
 ' 'lliis, it will Ix' borno in minti, \va-< writlin in 1871. ' 
 the Lake Kric Cominuiiity lia.s been since revealed. The 
 firms what in said in the tt'Xt. 
 
 I'ho mystery of 
 revelation con- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 350 
 
 e group to 
 liuniiinity, 
 the writer 
 urso iioth- 
 ond a few 
 II ys, or the 
 is, except 
 ble as well 
 a mode of 
 d essential 
 it variance 
 ose to the 
 1 they ship 
 ibsistence. 
 the people 
 iheir own? 
 Do they 
 e gathered 
 
 jakc Erie, 
 1 nuuiber- 
 istinetion, 
 little is 
 uriosity it 
 torpart of 
 under tlie 
 n akin to 
 his liands. 
 ty may of 
 e received 
 principle 
 
 ;ention of 
 ies which 
 
 mystory of 
 ,'latioii cou- 
 
 have called these strange structures into existence, though the 
 subject is too extensive to be discussed at the close of this 
 paix'r. Anujug the impelling motives have evidently been the 
 disijumi'ort and the waste attendant on the domestic economy 
 of our separate households, which advancing civilisation will 
 surely teach us in some degree to mitigate. Another motive 
 is the desire of escaping from the gloom and dulness of exces- 
 sive family isolation into more mixed and more cheerful 
 society. The family is the centre of happiness; but at the 
 same time a man and Avoman can rarely be so gifted as, after 
 the honeymoon, to be absolutely sufficient for each other. 
 The writer of this paper was once the guest of a friend resid- 
 ing in the neighbourhood of Loudon, and in the middle of a 
 district of suburban villas. On his noticing the number of 
 houses bespeaking opulence which was visible on every side, 
 his friend replied, " Yes, and you would suppose there was a 
 great deal of good society here. There is absolutely none. 
 It is impossible to bring these families together for any social 
 purpose whatever. The man goes up to his place of l)usiness 
 in London every morning; stays there till he returns home 
 for dinner, then reads the newspaper the rest of the evening. 
 For two months in each summer the family goes to a water- 
 ing-place where it lives in a private lodging by itself. That 
 is the whole existence of these people." A dr(>ary and a trun- 
 cated sort of existence it is. Unfortunately it is not con- 
 fined to the suburbs of London. We need in Canada, as much 
 as anywhere, to learn the art of })reserving the happiness 
 of tlie family by sup]tlementing it with the enjoyments of 
 more general society in a cheap and reasonable way. 
 
 Communism, in a certain sense, was no doubt the original 
 condition of mankind; at least tribal not private ownershij) 
 ol land is the rule of primeval history: and )>robably this 
 union of interest served an important purpose in the founda- 
 tion of primitive States. A temporary communism has also 
 played a memorable jiart in the commeneem«Mit of great reli- 
 gious or social enterprises. The first i)reaehers of (.'hristinnity 
 for a time had all things in common, ami so had the fouiuKns 
 
Il'' ' 
 
 
 1 
 
 j , 
 
 II • 
 
 I'ill ', 
 
 '/8M 
 
 y I 
 
 , '\l 
 
 300 
 
 QUKSTIONS OF THE DAY. 
 
 of X('\v England. ISronaohism was filso conimunistic, and 
 partly in virtue of its dctachniont from tlie ties and cares of 
 property, it was able to perform a miglity work in the conver- 
 sion of the Barbarians, and the foundation of Christian civi- 
 lisation. Besides these limited instances, extensive though 
 vague manifestations of the communistic sentiment have gen- 
 erally attended the great crises of history, such as the Re- 
 formation, and the English and French Kevolutions. It is 
 difficult to believe that such yearnings of humanity, though 
 prenuiture and abortive, are without any signitican(;e. " Pro- 
 perty has its duties as Avell as its rights," is a sentiment tlie 
 distinct expression of which is comparatively of recient date. 
 It may perhaps gain force and ascendancy till, in the course 
 of ages, the right of property is by a spontaneous process 
 virtually merged in social duty. The saying of the Greek 
 dramatist, as to the Omnipotence of time, has acciuired new 
 meaning from the late revelations of science and historical 
 philosophy. But the attempts of American tSocialists and Com- 
 munists at once to transmute humanity by founding Utopias, 
 have all come to nothing. For the present, the only seat of 
 connuunism, and the proper sphere of the communistic sen- 
 timent, is the family, if the Woman's Kight party will only 
 have the wisdom to let it alone. 
 
istic, and 
 (I cares of 
 lie conver- 
 •jtian eivi- 
 /e tliough 
 luive gt'ii- 
 s the Re- 
 us. It is 
 y, tliough 
 e. " I'ro- 
 iincnt tlie 
 ;eiit date. 
 ;he course 
 us process 
 the Greek 
 lired new 
 historical 
 and Com- 
 ? ntojjias, 
 \y seat of 
 istic sen- 
 will only