^o^^ 
 
 J^ 
 
. ESSAYS IN POLITICS 
 
 SOME OF THE POLITICAL QUESTIONS 
 
 OF THE DAY ARE REVIEWED 
 
 FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL AND HISTORICAL 
 
 STANDPOINT 
 
 C. B. ROYLANCE KENT, M.A. 
 
 LATE EXHIBITIONER OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD, AND LEE PRIZEMAN OF 
 gray's inn, BARRISTER-AT-LAW 
 
 [TJBIVBB.SIT7; 
 
 LONDON 
 
 KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Lt?. 
 
 1891 
 
3^'^'^^ 
 
 J/^^H 
 
 ( Tht rights of triiTislaticn and of reproduction are reserved ) 
 
PREFACE 
 
 The word " Politics " may be used in two senses. It 
 may be used in the wide, or what I may call the 
 Aristotelian sense, as including all those questions 
 which affect the life of men, as members of society ; 
 or it may be used in the narrower and somewhat 
 debased sense, as includiDg only those questions which 
 happen for the moment to agitate the different parties 
 in the state. It is in the former sense that I have 
 used the word in the title of this volume. My aim, 
 however, has been practical. I have attempted to 
 consider some of the more important questions of 
 modern politics from a constitutional and historical 
 standpoint, and to give them their due place in the 
 larger sphere or area of the political science to which 
 they belong. "No perfect discovery," says Lord 
 Bacon, " can be made upon a flat or a level ; neither 
 is it possible to discover the more remote and deeper 
 parts of any science, if you stand upon the level of 
 the science, and ascend not to a higher science." And 
 
 a 3 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 SO in practical politics, in order to come to any riglil 
 conclusion whatever, it is necessary to leave the flal 
 or level of party controversy, and ascend to. a highei 
 standpoint. Never at any time was this more 
 necessary than at the present moment. Some of th6 
 questions that the electors are now called upon, oi 
 will soon be called upon to decide at the polls, are o; 
 the higliest importance, and go directly to questions 
 of principle. Some, such as Irish Home Rule anc 
 Imperial Federation, are constitutional questions 
 which can only be rightly considered when looked ai 
 as parts of the great subjects of sovereignty anc 
 federal government. Others involve the consideratioi 
 of such weighty matters as the sphere and duties o: 
 government. Such is the now important question o 
 the hours of labour. Others, again, involve a con 
 sideration of the nature and logical consequences o: 
 democracy. There must be many who, having beei 
 compelled ** to embark into a troubled sea of noisei 
 and hoarse disputes, put from beholding the brighi 
 countenance of truth in the quiet and still air o: 
 delightful studies," will be called upon to form ar 
 opinion on these questions. These will have neithei 
 the time, nor perhaps the inclination, to seek fo] 
 themselves facts and authorities, which are widely 
 scattered and not easily accessible. It is for thes( 
 at least, I hope, that the facts and arguments whicb 
 I have collected, and which I have decked in as fai] 
 a literary dress as the subject and my own powen 
 
PEEFACE. Vll 
 
 have permitted, may prove of some use. I can make 
 little or no claim for originality ; indeed, in many 
 cases I have been careful to name my authority. My 
 aim has been throughout rather to state cases than to 
 take sides. Lord Houghton is said to have remarked 
 of Mr. Gladstone that his method of impartiality was 
 being furiously in earnest on both sides of a question. 
 I have tried to be impartial, but my way has been 
 rather to state facts and arguments on both sides, and 
 to draw only the most obvious inferences without 
 prejudice and without passion. 
 
 In conclusion, I must thank the Editor of the 
 Westminster Review for kindly permitting me to 
 reprint the essay on the Progress of the "Masses" 
 which appeared in November, 1887, and to rewrite an 
 article on Federal Government which appeared in 
 ^[ay, 1888, and which forms the basis of the essay on 
 Federal Government in this volume. 
 
 C. B. K. KENT. 
 
 Liverpool, 
 
 MarcK 1891. 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 witii funding from 
 
 Microsoft Corporation 
 
 littp://www.arcliive.org/details/essaysinpoliticsOOkentricli 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 ESSAY I. 
 
 SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 
 
 PAGK 
 
 Historical retrospect of the treatment of questions of sovereignty 
 by political writers from Aristotle to Austin — Austin's defini- 
 tion of sovereignty — Sovereignty in rigid and flexible con- 
 stitutions — Sovereignty in England, France, and the United ^ 
 States — Two attributes of sovereignty and their importance in 
 the British Constitution — Sovereignty in abeyance — Sove- 
 reignty in Oriental communities— Customary law in the East 
 and West — Legislation the mark of sovereignty in Western 
 communities — The growth of legislative activity — Its growth 
 in England — The relations of the legislature to the Executive — 
 The tendency of the legislature to encroach on the Executive 
 — The division of sovereignty into three parts— The conflict of 
 the legislature with the Executive — The conflict and its issue 
 in England — The paradox of the British Constitution — The 
 relation of the legislature and the Executive in the United 
 States Constitution— A contrast with the British Constitution 
 — Congress and the President — The tendency to excessive- 
 legislation — The dislike of change in the mass of society — 
 The injuriousness of hasty legislation — Legal and political 
 sovereignty — The growth of democracy — Democracy a modern 
 institution — How the legal and political sovereigns can be 
 made to harmonize — Constitutional conventions — The preroga- 
 tive — Examples of its use — The Referendum — Can it be in- 
 ktroduced into England ? — The Royal prerogative of veto — Its 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 ESSAY II. 
 
 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The rapid development of federal institutions in modern times — 
 What has already been accomplished — Tendencies to federa- 
 tion observable — South African, Australian, and Australasian 
 federation — Imperial federation and Irish Home Kule — Theo- 
 retical interest of federal institutions— Distinction from other 
 kinds of union — The origin of federal unions in external 
 pressure-f-The United Netherlands, the United States, Ger- 
 many, Switzerland, and CanadaV Other unions of a different 
 origin — The problem implied by a federal union — Its solution 
 in the United States — Distribution of powers in the United 
 States and Canada — The nature of the central government in 
 the United States, Switzerland, Germany, and Canada — The 
 tendency to secession a cause of weakness — Examples in the 
 United States and Switzerland — The failures of federal unions 
 — The division of powers a cause of weakness — Sovereignty 
 in a federal union — The judicial authority — The weakness of 
 a federal Executive internally considered — How this is met in 
 the United States and Switzerland — The advantages and dis- 
 advantages of federation — Some peculiarities involved in a 
 federal union 37-75 
 
 ESSAY III. 
 
 THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 
 
 The Federal Union — Switzerland the most democratic country — 
 The nature of the Referendum, and how it works— Analogous 
 institutions in other countries — The Initiative — The Landes- 
 genieinder and their ancient prototypes — The payment of 
 members of the legislature— Politics as a profession in Swit- 
 zerland — Economy in Swiss administration — The Federal 
 Assembly compared with other legislatures — The Federal 
 Council compared with other Executives — Merits of the 
 Swiss Constitution — The position of the President— The 
 unique character of the Federal Council 76-100 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 ESSAY IV. 
 
 THE PROGRESS OF THE " MASSES." 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The distribution of wealth the great social question — Political 
 liberty more valued in the past than personal liberty — 
 Slavery in the ancient world — The serfs and villeins of later 
 times — The Statute of Labourers — The Statute of Apprentices 
 — The regulation of wages by statute— The changes caused 
 by the introduction of machinery — The wretchedness of the 
 working classes at the beginning of the present century — 
 Legislation to assist the working classes — Co-operation — 
 Trades-unions — Savings-banks — The history of wagts and 
 prices from the thirteenth century to the present time ... 101-125 
 
 ESSAY V. 
 
 SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION IN ANGLO-SAXON COMMUNITIES. 
 
 Indefiniteness of the word " socialism " — Definitions given — What 
 is socialistic legislation ? — Socialistic legislation in the United 
 States — Illustrations of it — Eeasons for thinking that social- 
 istic legislation will not go so far in England— Industrial 
 pecularities of the United States — The character of the 
 American State legislatures — Socialistic legislation in Canada 
 — Illustrations of it — Socialistic legislation in Australia 
 and New Zealand — Illustrations of it — Keasons for supposing 
 that socialistic legislation will not go so far in England — The 
 character of tiie British working classes — Their character 
 compared with that of like classes on the Continent — Their 
 repugnance to socialistic theories — The good elements of 
 legislative interference — The moral element — The philan- 
 thropic element — Examples of legislative interference not 
 deemed socialistic — The relation of legislative interference to 
 democracy — Democratic government not "paternal" ... 12(j-154: 
 
 ESSAY VI. 
 
 SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 
 
 Tlic political importance of scientific discoveries — The relation of 
 scientific discoveries to the size and stability of states — The 
 substitution of large for small states in modern times — Means 
 
Xll CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 of rapid communication indispensable for large states — The 
 relation of scientific discoveries to federation — The influence 
 of railways in the United States and Canada — The relation 
 of scientific discoveries to democracy — Democracy formerly 
 only possible in small states — Representation and democracy 
 — Tyrannies now impossible — The relation of scientific dis- 
 coveries to "war— Tlie relation of. scientific discoveries to 
 industry — The great increase of productive power — Material 
 resources and political theories 155-182 
 
[UHIVERSITT] 
 ESSAYS IN POLITICS, 
 
 I. 
 
 SOME QUESTIONS OF ^SOVEREIGNTY. 
 
 " Theee is also a doubt as to what is to be the supreme 
 power in the state. Is it the multitude? or the 
 wealthy ? or the good ? or the one best man ? or a 
 tyrant?" This suggestive and far-reaching question' 
 was asked long ago by Aristotle, and, in asking it, 
 he opened up one of those interesting fields of inquiry 
 which have justly earned for him the name of the 
 father of the Science of Politics. The question here 
 raised is one of capital importance in political science, 
 and one which from the time of Aristotle to our own, 
 has been the source of much discussion, and which 
 even now cannot be said to be finally settled. It is 
 nothing less than the question of sovereignty. What 
 is the sovereign body ? And where is it to be found 
 in any given political community ? These are the 
 two branches into which the inquiry divides itself. 
 No question probably has more occupied the minds 
 of political philosophers. At all periods of history, 
 
^ [ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 when any literature in political science has been pro- 
 duced at all, this question has been alniost always 
 discussed. In the Middle Ages, indeed, writers were 
 either like Thomas Aquinas or Dante, too much 
 occupied with arguing the claims of the temporal or 
 spiritual powers, or like Machiavelli, too much involved 
 in working out the details of practical statecraft, to 
 give much attention to it. But afterwards it was 
 always given a prominent place. Jean Bodin, a French 
 lawyer of the sixteenth century, was the first to give 
 anything like an adequate definition of a sovereign 
 body, when he wrote that it is limited neither by a 
 greater power, nor by any laws, nor by time, and that 
 the prince and people in whom sovereignty resides 
 are not answerable for their acts to any one except 
 immortal God. Sir Thomas Smith, who wrote shortly 
 after Bodin, defined sovereignty in a very similar 
 manner, but he differs from him in fixing its place in 
 Parliament. " And to be short," he says, " all that 
 even the people of Kome might do, either Centuriatis 
 Comitiis or Tributis, the same may be done by the 
 Parliament of England, which representeth and hath 
 the power of the whole realm, both the head and body." 
 Next it is very fully treated by Hobbes, who has the 
 great merit of being the first to distinguish policy 
 from legality, that is to say, what is expedient from 
 what is legally allowed. Closely connected with this 
 is the distinction between legal and political sove- 
 reignty, of which more will be said hereafter — a dis- 
 tinction which is of great importance, and which, if 
 not properly grasped, is fruitful in confusion and 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 3 
 
 misunderstanding. Even Hobbes himself is too much 
 impressed with legal sovereignty to always keep it 
 distinct. He sometimes himself falls into the mistake 
 which he has pointed out to others. But nothing can 
 be clearer than his conception of a legally sovereign 
 body. He imagined, without any warrant it must be 
 confessed, the existence of a person or body of persons 
 invested by contract with the power of the whole 
 community, and then he went on to say that " he that 
 carrieth this person is called sovereign, and hath 
 sovereign power, and every one besides is his subject." 
 These are words of luminous clearness for that age, 
 though in these days they seem simple enough. The 
 next writer of importance after Hobbes is Locke. But 
 just as Hobbes gave too prominent a place to legality, 
 so on the other hand Locke gave too prominent a place 
 to policy. But how clear his ideas of sovereignty were 
 may be judged from the following sentence, where he 
 said that " whilst the government subsists, the legis- 
 lative is the supreme power, for what can give laws 
 to another must needs be superior to him." Next in 
 point of time comes Rousseau, who was so blinded by 
 his inflated notions of the sovereignty of the people as 
 to declare that there is no sovereign body in the state 
 at all. After such insensate ebullitions as this, it is 
 refreshing to turn toBlackstone, who defined sovereignty 
 with all the precision of a lawyer. In all forms of 
 government, he said, " there is and must be a superior, 
 irresistible, absolute, uncontrolled authority, in which 
 the jura summa imperii, or the rights of sovereignty, 
 reside." The existence of a sovereign body, which 
 
4 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Kousseau denied altogether, he makes the very corner- 
 stone of all political societies. Benthani, again, un- 
 sparing though he was in his criticism of Blackstone, 
 agreed with him in seeing the necessity of forming a 
 clear conception of sovereignty. But this occupied a 
 quite secondary place in his work, which was to 
 demonstrate the purposes for which government exists, 
 and the methods by which it might best attain its 
 ends. Lastly, Austin, in his ** Province of Juris- 
 prudence Determined," has defined sovereignty in a 
 manner that has laid for all time a sure foundation 
 for the science of positive law. 
 
 This short historical sketch will be enough to 
 show how large a space questions of sovereignty have 
 occupied in the writings of political philosophers, and 
 how important a branch of the science of politics it is. 
 So important is it, that it is impossible to avoid 
 confusions and escape inaccuracies without having 
 first obtained a clear idea of its nature. And even 
 when a satisfactory definition has been reached, it will 
 be found that this is not all, but that many questions 
 arise in connection with it, although it may well have 
 been thought that all questions of sovereignty had 
 been by this time finally settled. But this is very 
 far from being the case, and it is some of these 
 unsettled questions of internal sovereignty, apart from 
 those questions of external sovereignty belonging to 
 the sphere of International Law, which it is proposed 
 to treat of here. 
 
 One of the first questions that arise is, Does there 
 ^ really exist, in certain political communities, any 
 
^ SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 5 
 
 sovereign body at all ? It will be found that there 
 are certain political communities where it is very 
 difficult to say whether there is really any actually 
 existing sovereign body, and, further, when it has been 
 found to exist, whereabouts in the community it lies. 
 In order to determine these questions correctly, it is 
 absolutely necessary to bear well in mind a clear 
 definition of sovereignty. The best definition is 
 Austin's ; it is so good that no better could probably 
 be framed. He says, '^ If a determinate human superior, 
 not in the habit of obedience to a like superior, receive 
 habitual obedience from the bulk of a given society, 
 that determinate superior is sovereign in that society, 
 and the society, including the superior, is a society 
 political and independent ; " and further, " to that 
 determinate superior the other members of the society 
 are subject, or on that determinate superior the other 
 members of the society are dependent. The position 
 of its other members towards that determinate superior 
 is a state of subjection or a state of dependence. The 
 mutual relation which subsists between that superior 
 and them may be styled the relation of sovereign and 
 subject, or the relation of sovereignty and subjection." 
 The most practically important class of political 
 communities, in which it is difficult to say that a 
 sovereign body, in the strictly legal or Austinian 
 sense of the term, exists, is that which is marked by 
 the possession of what are most conveniently called 
 rigid constitutions. By a rigid constitution is meant 
 one which is written, and which marks out in clearly 
 defined terms the powers of the different organs of 
 
6 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 government, powers which cannot be altered by any 
 legislative body. Such are the constitutions of France 
 and the United States of America. They stand in 
 sharp contrast with the British constitution, which is 
 conveniently said to be of the flexible type ; that is 
 to say, it is not strictly set out in any document, but 
 can be altered at will by the Legislature. In England 
 the constitution can be amended or altered to any 
 extent by an ordinary Act of Parliament; a federal 
 constitution for the British Empire could, for instance, 
 be enacted in this way. But in France or the United 
 States the constitution cannot be altered a hair's 
 breadth by ordinary proceedings in the Legislature. 
 This could only be done in some cumbrous or round- 
 about fashion laid down by the constitution itself. 
 A curious result of this is that, in England, alterations 
 in the constitution, amounting in fact to revolutions, 
 have worked their way, almost unobserved, with slow 
 and silent insinuations. Such a real revolution is the 
 system of cabinet government ; and yet no one can 
 assign any date for its creation. In France, on the 
 other hand, a change of a much less sweeping kind 
 plunges the whole nation into the throes of a civil 
 disturbance. And, somewhat unfairly, France has won 
 the reputation of a most revolutionary country. What- 
 ever its defects, a flexible constitution has at least the 
 merits of rendering change possible without revolution. 
 Now, in the British constitution there is no difficulty 
 at all in saying where sovereignty lies. That it lies 
 in Parliament, which consists of the Crown and the 
 House of Lords and the House of Commons, may be 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 7 
 
 affirmed without hesitation. Austin, indeed, for want 
 of seeing the distinction between legal and political 
 sovereignty, went out of his way to say that in England 
 sovereignty lies in the Crown, the House of Lords, and 
 the House of Commons, or electors. He imagined that 
 members of the House of Commons represented the 
 electors merely as delegates, and that the electors were 
 actually, through the medium of their representatives, 
 a part of Parliament. There is a partial truth i^ this, 
 for there is a growing tendency for members of the 
 House of Commons to be returned with cut-and-dried 
 instructions from their constituencies. But it is very 
 far from being the whole truth. Parliament is in fact, 
 as well as in theory, so far sovereign that it can, if it 
 wishes, override the wishes of the people. The manner 
 in which the Septennial Act was passed is enough to 
 put the true sovereignty of Parliament beyond all 
 reasonable doubt. The Parliament that passed that 
 Act was elected for three years only, but it prolonged 
 its own life for seven years, and in all probability 
 prolonged it in the teeth of a hostile people, who 
 would never have elected a Parliament with a mandate 
 to pass such an Act. There can be no doubt, then, 
 where sovereignty lies in the British constitution. 
 And it may fairly be said of any other flexible* con- 
 stitution, that it would be easy to put one's finger on 
 thS sovereign body with an unerring certainty. But 
 when We come to examine rigid constitutions, it is 
 ndt always apparent which is the sovereign body and 
 where it lies. In the case of France, and other similar 
 constitutions of a non-composite character, not much 
 
8 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 difficulty is presented. In France we have already- 
 seen that the Legislature is not sovereign, because its 
 powers are limited by the constitution. But behind 
 the Legislature slumbers a body invested with powers 
 which the Legislature does not possess. This is the 
 sovereign body. In France this body is the National 
 Assembly, which consists of the Chamber of Deputies 
 and the Senate sitting together. But in federal con- 
 stitutions, like that of the United States of America 
 or Switzerland, the question becomes much more 
 difficult. In America the federal and the state 
 Legislatures are certainly not sovereign ; neither is 
 the Supreme Court oi' the President. Some eminent 
 American lawyers are of opinion that there is no 
 legally sovereign body in the United States, and 
 Professor Dicey says that he sees no absurdity in such 
 a supposition. If there is a sovereign body in the 
 Uoited States it must be the body invested by the 
 constitution, with the power of altering that consti- 
 tution. Article V. of the United States constitution 
 provides that Congress, whenever two-thirds of both 
 Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amend- 
 ments to the constitution, or, on the application of the 
 Legislatures of two- thirds of the several states, shall 
 call a convention for proposing amendments, which in 
 either case shall be valid to all intents and purposes 
 as part of the constitution when ratified by the Legis- 
 latures of three-fourths of the several states or by 
 conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the 
 other mode of ratification may be proposed by the 
 Congress. And then follows a proviso, making it illegal 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 9 
 
 to amend certain portions of Article I. prior to the 
 year 1808. So that up to the year 1808, at least, 
 there was no absolutely sovereign body in the United 
 States. Moreover, there is a further proviso that 
 " no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its 
 equal suffrage in the Senate." So that here there is 
 a check upon the action of the majority of three- 
 fourths of the states necessary to carry an amendment, 
 which to this extent derogates from their sovereign 
 powers, if their powers can be called sovereign. So 
 that whether there is even now a sovereign body in 
 the United States may well be doubted ; but if there 
 is a sovereign body, it must be a body consisting of 
 a majority of three-fourths of the several States at any 
 time belonging to the union. 
 
 There are two remarkable consequences that flow 
 from sovereignty which should be particularly noted 
 in connection with federal constitutions. One such 
 consequence is that, whereas a sovereign body may 
 delegate its powers of legislation, a non-sovereign 
 body may not. The maxim, '' Delegata potestas non de- 
 legatur," is here applicable. The powers of the British 
 Parliament differ greatly from those of the American 
 Congress or an American State Legislature. The 
 British Parliament may, in virtue of its inherent 
 original authority, delegate powers to anybody it 
 pleases. It might confer direct legislative powers 
 upon the whole body of the electors, if it chose ; as 
 a fact, it has conferred such powers upon the Crown in 
 Council. The American Congress, or an American 
 State Legislature, has no such power as this. They 
 
10 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 have, indeed, claimed such power, but the American 
 Courts have decided against them, and they have been 
 compelled to give up such pretensions. Another con- 
 sequence is that no sovereign body can limit its own 
 powers. It is of the essence of sovereignty that there 
 should be unlimited powers. If powers are limited, 
 then ipso facto sovereignty vanishes. Any attempt of 
 a sovereign body to limit its ow^n powers must ulti- 
 mately faiL Some of the Greek republics attempted 
 to render some laws immutable by enacting the death 
 penalty for any one who proposed to repeal them. 
 Just as though it was not obviously easy to first of all 
 propose the repeal of the law enacting the death 
 penalty. The British Parliament is not likely to be 
 suspected of any wish to limit its own powers. Like 
 all other legislatures, it has an insatiable appetite for 
 authority. Yet an instance of such a wish of the 
 British Parliament has been pointed out by Professor 
 Bryce. In the Act of Union with Ireland it was pro- 
 vided that the maintenance of the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church as an Established Church in Ireland should be 
 "deemed an essential and fundamental part of the 
 Union." In 1869 that proviso was cast to the winds ; 
 the Protestant Episcopal Church was disestablished 
 without any qualms of conscience whatever. 
 
 These two attributes of sovereignty, the one positive, 
 the other negative, should be very fully weighed by 
 those who advocate imperial federation, or would 
 throw our constitution into the melting-pot, and recast 
 it as a brand-new federation of the four several parts 
 of the United Kingdom. For it seems to follow that^ 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 11 
 
 if the British Parliament were to create a federation, 
 being a sovereign body, it could not only delegate 
 its powers to any extent, which the other provincial 
 Parliaments could not, but also (which is far more 
 important), as the possessor of unlimited powers, which 
 it could not cut down, it could at any time withdraw 
 from or break up the federal union. It would occupy 
 a superior position to the legislative bodies of the 
 other members of the union. Such a position would 
 contain within itself the seeds of conflict. It would, 
 however, be quite possible for the British people to 
 iSrst anniliilate their Parliament, and then to proceed 
 to form a federation, in which a newly created Par- 
 liament at Westminster would only have equal powers 
 with those of the other provincial legislatures. 
 
 There is one event which might happen to any con- 
 stitution, whether flexible or rigid, and which, if it did 
 happen, would make it difficult to say that any sovereign 
 body existed. This is the event of civil war or revolu- 
 tion, when the sovereign power is for the time being 
 thrown into abeyance. When, for instance, Charles I. 
 was engaged in fighting his Parliament, it would 
 be impossible to say that any truly sovereign body 
 then existed. The sovereign power is, in fact, the 
 subject of contention, and anarchy for the instant pre- 
 vails. And Sir James Stephen is of opinion that even 
 where there is no civil war, there may be what he calls 
 dormant anarchy, as was the case in the United States 
 before the war of secession. It was like the sultriness 
 of the air before the bursting of the storm. 
 
 Another case of difficulty in saying whether sove- 
 
12 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 reignty exists has been suggested by Sir H. S. Maine. 
 He refers to the cases of oriental communities, both 
 ancient and modern. The oriental community of 
 to-day bears a strong likeness to what we know of 
 similar communities of antiquity. So conservative are 
 the peoples of the East, and so bound are they in the 
 swaddling clothes of custom, that many things of a vast 
 antiquity are to this day preserved amongst them. In 
 looking to-day on a Hindoo village community, we see 
 much preserved in a full vitality which existed when 
 Homer sang, and when the seven hills of Eome were 
 still untenanted. It is with regard to these oriental 
 communities, where custom is all-powerful and all-per- 
 vading, that Sir H. S. Maine has raised difficulties and 
 opened up a field of inquiry of very great interest ; he 
 has pointed out that sovereignty, as defined by Austin, 
 is in many ways inapplicable to oriental communities. 
 It is an essential part of the Austinian conception of 
 a sovereign body that it should be the source of 
 positive law, or, in other words, that it should legislate. 
 Now, it has been shown by Sir H. S. Maine that in 
 oriental empires there is no sovereign body in this 
 sense of the term. In these empires anything in the 
 nature of law has no connection with the sovereign 
 body. The case of Runjeet Singh, the conqueror and 
 ruler of the Sikhs, in the Punjaub, is an admirable 
 instance. How can he be said to have been sovereign 
 in the Austinian sense of the term ? He doubtless 
 issued particular commands in abundance, and was 
 implicitly obeyed. He raised taxes and levied armies 
 and punished the disobedient with death. But he 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 13 
 
 never legislated. The saying, " Kex les loquens, lex rex 
 loquens," was the reverse of applicable to him. The 
 case of the vassalage of the Jews to Persia is another 
 instance. The Jews continued to live under their own 
 laws, but the Great King never legislated for them. 
 He raised taxes and levied troops, and having done 
 this, he was content to leave them to live pretty much 
 as they pleased. Another instance, which is not 
 oriental, is that of the Athenian republic, which raised 
 taxes from its dependencies, but never legislated for 
 them. In such communities as these, the rules, whether 
 they be called customs or laws, under which men live 
 their lives from day to day, did not have their source 
 ia the sovereign body, nor did they receive any sanc- 
 tion from it. They had their source in religion and 
 custom, and their sanction in public opinion and an 
 awe-inspiring superstition. Such works as the Koran 
 and the Institutes of Menu are really the statute- 
 books of the East. But anything in the nature of 
 legislation, or law sanctioned by the sovereign body, 
 there is not. In such matters the sovereign is gene- 
 rally passive. Absolute legislative inactivity is the 
 mark or note of oriental sovereignty. The law of the 
 Medes and Persians that altereth not is the prevailing 
 type of law in the East. 
 
 The maxim that "what the sovereign permits, he 
 commands " has been invoked for the purpose of show- 
 ing that such oriental sovereign bodies as we have 
 described do really legislate. There is, however, a vast 
 difference between the customary law of England, for 
 instance, and that of the East. In England the sove- 
 
14 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 reign body would, if it thought fit, change, and as 
 a matter of fact often does change, the existing 
 common law by statutory enactment. The Married 
 Women's Property Acts, for instance, revolutionized 
 the common law that regulated the relations of husband 
 and wife. But in the East the sovereign body would ' 
 not dream of doing any such thing. To meddle with 
 the customary law would be deemed a species of im- 
 piety. So that, whilst the English sovereign body 
 clearly regards the customary law as coming within 
 the range of its interference, the oriental sovereign 
 body just as clearly regards it as being outside that 
 raiige. Professor Holland has endeavoured, in his 
 Jurisprudence, to meet the difficulty by suggesting 
 that only those customs are laws which would in case 
 of necessity be enforced by the sovereign body, whereas 
 those which might be habitually disobeyed with im- 
 punity are not really laws at all. There is some truth 
 in this, but it presents a difficulty, inasmuch as it would 
 be impossible to say whether a particular custom was 
 a law or not, until it was put to the practical test of 
 being habitually disobeyed with impunity. However ^ 
 that may be, it still remains the fact that the sove- i 
 reign bodies of the East are non-legislative bodies, I 
 while, on the other hand, in the West legislation has ) 
 become to be considered the pre-eminent mark of 
 sovereignty. Legislation is part of its connotation. > 
 The two ideas are inseparable. Something will J?e 
 said of the United States later on, but it may here be 
 noted that the United States in one way resembles an 
 oriental empire. In the latter the sovereign body 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 15 
 
 does not legislate ; in the former the sovereign body 
 (if it exists) does not legislate either, but delegates its 
 legislative powers to subordinate bodies. Moreover, 
 in both cases, as we bave seen, it is doubtful whether 
 there really exists any truly sovereign body, though 
 the grounds of doubt are in each case different. 
 
 How it came about that legislative activity became 
 to be the most important mark of sovereignty is a 
 curious and interesting inquiry. Sir H. S. Maine 
 thinks that the process began with the Roman Empire, 
 which was the first great empire to legislate. With 
 the fall of the empire the Western World once more 
 relapsed into the old state of things, which was im- 
 mutable and monotonous. It was only by slow degrees 
 and faltering steps that legislation grew into an im- 
 portant part of sovereignty. It is the most notable 
 thing in the history of its development. The British 
 Parliament is an instance in point. It seems to have 
 been summoned by the kings in early times to impose 
 taxes in order to raise money to supply the king's 
 wants and provide for carrying on war. But legislation 
 (other than money Bills) was very scanty. Even the 
 Great Charter was deemed to be no enactment of new 
 laws, but only a declaration or reassertion of old laws 
 that had fallen into disuse. Gradually legislation 
 became more abundant, but it was not until the time 
 of Bentham that it received any great impetus. 
 Bentham had, however, very decided notions of the 
 purposes for which Government exists. In his opinion 
 the protection of life and property, and the carrying 
 on of the ordinary administrative business of the 
 
16 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 nation, was very far from being the whole function of 
 Government. That function was, he thought, the 
 promotion of the greatest happiness of the greatest 
 number. The present century has been remarkable 
 for the legislative activity of our Parliament, and it is 
 not too much to say that it is largely due to his 
 influence. Probably no writer ever lived whose pen 
 has so altered the course of history. 
 • Since legislation has been so elevated as to have 
 J become almost the chief function of Government and 
 (the most important mark of sovereignty, it is an 
 interesting inquiry in what manner modern states 
 have made provision for the exercise of the legislative 
 function, and what are the relations borne by the 
 executive to the legislature. We have seen that in 
 oriental empires legislation is commonly thrown into 
 the background. The executive functions are every- 
 thing, and the legislative nothing. Kunjeet Singh 
 and his advisers (if he had any) formed an admirable 
 executive within the comparatively narrow sphere of 
 action to which they confined their energies. He formed 
 a most efficient Clianc^llor of the Exchequer, War Sec- 
 retary, and Commander-in-Chief. He was as successful 
 in raising funds as he was in levying troops. But here 
 his functions ended ; while as to legislation, he never 
 attempted it. A sovereign body, therefore, on its 
 executive side, resembles an oriental sovereignty; 
 whilst, on its legislative side, it is of the nature of 
 sovereignty in its modern and European sense. The 
 executive and the legislature are, putting the judiciary 
 aside, the two great elements of sovereignty — the 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 17 
 
 former coming down from a hoar antiquity, and still 
 lingering on in the East in a masterful exclusiveness ; 
 the latter of more modern origin, but growing from 
 strength to strength, and, by its encroachments on the 
 former, winning for itself an equal, if not the first, place 
 in the state. It is remarkable, indeed, how constantly 
 the legislature tends to encroach on the executive. It 
 seems to have been thought by political philosophers 
 that the three great elements of sovereignty, the 
 legislature, the executive and the judicial, or at least 
 the two former, should be kept entirely distinct and 
 independent of one another. Aristotle led the way. 
 "All states have three elements, and the good law- 
 giver has to regard what is expedient for each state. 
 When they are well ordered, the state is well ordered, 
 and as they differ from one another, constitutions 
 differ. What is the element, first, which deliberates 
 about public affairs ; secondly, which is concerned with 
 the magistrates, and determines what they should be, 
 over whom they should exercise authority, and what 
 should be the mode of electing them; and, thirdly, 
 which has judicial power?" Locke says "that the 
 legislative and executive powers are in distinct hands 
 in all moderated monarchies and well-framed govern- 
 ments." Montesquieu was the first to make the theory 
 a generally accepted one amongst political thinkers, 
 and Blackstone follows him in laying down that 
 " whenever the power of making and that of enforcing 
 laws are united together, there can be no public 
 liberty. Where the legislative and executive authority 
 are in distinct hands, the former will take care not to 
 
 c 
 
18 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 trust the latter with so large a power as may tend to 
 the subversion of its own independence, and therewith 
 of the liberty of the subject." This distribution of 
 powers into separate hands was regarded by the 
 architects of the American constitution as a political 
 maxim, and that constitution was avowedly founded 
 upon it. Yet the practice by no means squares with 
 the theory. The twin organs of Government are in 
 reality too interdependent to be kept apart, and where 
 the executive has, in the opinion of the legislature, 
 arrogated too much to itself, the latter has generally, 
 at least in the Western world, wrestled with it for 
 supremacy and has prevailed. It has, indeed, done 
 more than prevail ; it has grappled with its adversary, 
 and has subdued it utterly to its will. The gradual 
 encroachment of the legislature on the executive can 
 be noticed in very early times. In the old Greek 
 Kepublics, the assembly of the citizens not only passed 
 laws, but performed" executive acts, such as making 
 peace or declaring war, with equal facility. They 
 gave executive orders, or ^7}(f>i(TiuiaTa, with the same ease 
 as they passed laws, or v6^ol. The Koraan Comitia 
 constantly did the same thing. In England the con- 
 flict between the executive and the legislature forms 
 a great part of the history of the country. The Crown 
 and its ministers formed the executive, and originally 
 they formed an executive of a very independent 
 character. But the legislature wrestled with it and 
 gradually encroached on its powers, and finally suc- 
 ceeded in bending them to its will. As a result we 
 now find that the Cabinet ministers, who form the real 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 19 
 
 executive (the Crown being reduced to a merely- 
 nominal possession of power), not only form part of 
 the legislature, but the most important part of it. It 
 is not only considered essential that a Cabinet minister 
 should sit in Parliament, but the Cabinet is regarded 
 as a sort of committee of a party majority for fram- 
 ing legislative proposals. It is now almost the sole 
 source of law-making. So long ago as 1848, Lord 
 John Eussell, in a speech in the House of Commons, 
 remarked upon the change that had taken place. He 
 said, " There have been, in the course of the last thirty 
 years, very great changes in the mode of conducting 
 the business of the House. When I first entered 
 Parliament, it was not usual for Government to under- 
 take generally all subjects of legislation ; . . . since 
 the passing of the Keform Bill, it has been thought 
 convenient, on every subject on which an alteration in 
 the law is required, that the Government should under- 
 take the responsibility of proposing it to Parliament." 
 Cabinets are judged much more by their success or 
 failure in carrying through legislation than by their 
 executive acts. The present Cabinet gained more dis- 
 credit by failing to carry through the Irish Land Bill 
 and the Tithes Bill than it gained eclat by successfully 
 negotiating treaties about Africa with Germany and 
 France. As Professor Bryce says, "They are not 
 merely executive agents, but also legislative leaders." 
 And, as Sir H. S. Maine says, the British constitution 
 is paradoxical. "While the House of Commons has 
 assumed the supervision of the whole executive 
 government, it has turned over to the executive the 
 
20 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 most important of the business of legislation." The 
 legislature now executes, while the executive legislates. 
 To such an extent are the legislature and executive 
 now interwoven. It is true, indeed, that in foreign 
 affairs the executive still retains a good idea of 
 independence and freedom from legislative control, 
 because promptitude and secrecy are here indispensable, 
 though even here the approval of Parliament must be 
 virtually obtained for such important matters as 
 declaring war or concluding treaties. In all other 
 departments legislative control is complete. A vast 
 change indeed from the time when the executive was 
 the dominant power. As might have been expected, 
 it proved restive under the attempts of the legislature 
 to curb it. As the saying is, there was no love lost 
 between them, and the executive minced no words in 
 denouncing its enemy. Strafford described the House 
 of Commons as a "cunning and malicious hydra;" 
 and Charles I. characteristically remarked that " Par- 
 liaments are of the nature of cats that ever grow 
 curst with age ; so that if he will have good of them, 
 put them off handsomely when they come to any age ; 
 for young ones are ever the most tractable." But the 
 executive finally succumbed, and, instead of quarrelling 
 with the legislature, it has become, not only part and 
 parcel of it, but the most important part of it. They 
 are equal yoke-fellows under the orders of the great 
 British public that lies behind them. The British 
 sovereign body has in short lost, in a large degree, 
 what may be called its purely ancient and oriental 
 features, or rather it has assumed those legislative 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 21 
 
 features which are the mark of modern and Western 
 sovereignty. It is not that it has lost its executive 
 powers, for they are still almost as vigorously exercised 
 as ever. But such is its activity as a law-maker, that 
 its work as an administrator, which is carried on un- 
 ceasingly from day to day and hour to hour, is, com- 
 paratively speaking, allowed to drop out of notice. 
 The details of administration are, for the most part, 
 too commonplace to attract attention. 
 
 What has been said of British sovereignty may be 
 said also of all British self-governing colonies, and, 
 without much qualification, of all Western European 
 countries. When we come to consider the case of the 
 United States of America, we might reasonably suppose 
 that, in going westward, we should find the same type 
 of government prevailing, only in more marked degree. 
 Yet, on examination, a very great difference is found 
 to exist between the American and British types of 
 government. It is commonly supposed that the 
 American government is like the British, a President 
 being substituted for a monarch, and that it is far 
 more like than the French government. This is the 
 exact opposite of the truth, for the French government 
 is infinitely more like than the American. The differ- 
 ence between the British and American governments 
 consists not merely in the f/q^ that the United States 
 are a eeefederation, though^ this is of capital impor- 
 tance.. There is a radical difference in the constitution 
 of the federal or central government. We have seen 
 that in the British constitution the executive and the 
 legislature are closely united. In the American 
 
22 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 oonstitution an exactly opposite state of things prevails, 
 of which, curiously enough, we may find an example 
 nearer home, in the tiny dependency of the Isle of 
 Man. There the student of politics may study in 
 miniature the American constitution, stripped, of 
 course, of its federal attributes. In America the 
 executive and the legislature are distinct and inde- 
 pendent. They were made so by the architects of the 
 American constitution partly on theoretical and partly 
 on historical grounds, which it would be out of place 
 to discuss here. It must be enough to mark the fact. 
 The executive in America has no place in Congress, 
 and has no legislative authority. The relations of the 
 executive to the legislature are in America the exact 
 antithesis of those relations in England. The difference 
 may be shortly summed up by saying that the British 
 government is a parliamentary government, and the 
 American a non-parliamentary one. In the first case 
 the legislature both legislates and governs ; in the 
 second case, the legislature legislates, but does not 
 govern. We have seen that in America Congress, 
 which is the legislative body, is not sovereign, for its 
 powers are limited by the constitution. Neither is the 
 President, in whom the executive authority is centred, 
 sovereign, for his powers are limited in a like manner. 
 Both Congress and the President possess, not inherent, 
 but delegated power. The sovereign body in America, 
 if it exists, usually slumbers. But if, as we may for 
 all practical purposes, we consider the executive and the 
 legislature as forming two co-ordinate branches of a . 
 sovereign body, it will be seen that, whilst in England 
 
I SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 23 
 
 the legislature has become the supreme part of 
 sovereignty, in America the legislature is not supreme, 
 bat merely co-ordinate. In England the union of the 
 executive and the legislature is now so complete, that 
 both work together harmoniously. In America, on the 
 contrary, there is disunion, and sometimes conflict. 
 The executive and the legislature are like a pair of 
 ill-matched horses, that cause the coach of govern- 
 ment to creak and sway. Congress can thwart the 
 President, but the President can revenge himself by 
 thwarting Congress. But here also, according to the 
 general rule before noticed, the legislature tends to 
 encroach on the executive. It fought with President 
 Andrew Johnson and defeated him. It has devised a 
 method of thwarting the President by tacking on to 
 money Bills provisions that have nothing to do with 
 the financial part of them. In much the same way 
 the French Chambers have discovered a method of 
 overcoming their President by the refusal of any 
 member to take office under any President they dislike. 
 President Grevy was compelled to leave the Elysee, 
 although by law he was fully entitled to remain. But 
 in spite of the tendency of the legislature to encroach, 
 the American executive has much greater powers, 
 which it can exercise independently, than the British 
 executive has. The American President is, during 
 his term of office, a much more powerful person than 
 the British monarch or the French President. He 
 governs as well as reigns. The executive really holds 
 a much more important place in the American than in 
 the British constitution. Not that the British execu- 
 
24 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 tive is weak, but tliat its real power is concealed and 
 swallowed up in the legislature. But in America there 
 is, in a sense, a reversion to the old or oriental type 
 of sovereignty, of which the chief characteristic is the 
 existence of an Executive enjoying absolutely uncon- 
 trolled authority. That there is plenty of legislation 
 in America no one can doubt. There is, indeed, more 
 than is altogether agreeable to the average American 
 citizen, who is apt to grow disgusted with the " log- 
 rolling " and " lobbying " that haunts the legislative 
 chambers. This is more true of the State legislatures 
 than it is of Washington. The Americans distrust 
 their law-makers; they agree with Charles the First, 
 and take care that their Parliaments do not become 
 "curst with age " by giving them a short lease of life, 
 and they try to render them powerless by dividing 
 them into two chambers that are likely to disagree. 
 M. Thiers used to say that a republic was best for 
 France, because it divided Frenchmen least. Con- 
 versely, the Americans think that two chambers are 
 best for them, because it divides their legislators most. 
 They even look to the executive to protect them from 
 the legislature, and admire a President who makes a 
 bold use of the veto. President Cleveland was liked 
 none the worse for vetoing a number of Bills providing 
 pensions for combatants in the War of Secession. But 
 in spite of all this energy expended in legislation or 
 attempted legislation, the fact still remains that in 
 America there stands out a clearly cut and indepen- 
 dent executive, which is in type more oriental than 
 European. 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 25 
 
 We have spoken of the distrust displayed in America 
 for legislative bodies. This distrust is not so widely- 
 felt in England, but signs of it are not wanting. The 
 House of Commons certainly commands less respect 
 than it did. In France, Mr. Hamerton, who is an 
 excellent judge, says that the Senate and Chamber of 
 Deputies command no respect whatever. It is, indeed, 
 quite within the bounds of possibility that means will 
 be devised of putting the activity of legislators under 
 restraint, and that a more purely executive form of 
 sovereignty will be reverted to. The pendulum of 
 sovereignty has swung from a pure executive without 
 legislation to the other extreme of an executive 
 trammelled on all sides with legislation. There are 
 now signs that the pendulum has begun to swing the 
 other way. There is good reason for believing that 
 democracies are not so prone to change as is generally 
 believed. Sir H. S. Maine has eloquently shown that 
 change is not only not desired, but is positively 
 abhorred by a great part of the human race. The 
 experience derived from the use of the Referendum in 
 Switzerland is evidence of the same thing. The Swiss 
 have by their popular vote rejected a surprising 
 number of the measures which they have been asked 
 to pass by the federal chambers. It is an undeniable 
 and unfortunate fact that many Bills are introduced 
 for purely party purposes. Promises are made by 
 candidates on the hustings which have to be redeemed 
 in Parliament. Bills are so much bait to catch 
 popular votes. Moreover, popular leaders may be 
 perfectly sincere and yet hold views far in advance of 
 
 ffiflVBisiTTJ) 
 
26 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 the mass of society. Some of the most prominent 
 of our Australasian public men hold views on land and 
 other questions far in advance of the people at large. 
 In America, as we have said, the State legislatures 
 make experiments that bring on themselves ridicule, 
 if not odium. Laws are not always there what 
 Demosthenes said they were — the gifts of the gods, 
 and the discovery of sages. The law-makers at Albany, 
 in the State of New York, who were responsible for 
 Kremmler's execution by electricity, simply outrai^ed 
 humanity. The feeling is beginning to grow both in 
 Europe and America that the more Bills a legislature 
 kills, the better. A small class of thinkers are 
 beginning to see that legislation is by no means an 
 unmixed blessing. Mr. Herbert Spencer, in his " Man 
 versus the State," quotes from a paper read by Mr. 
 Janson before the Statistical Society in 1873. Mr. 
 Janson states that of the Public Acts passed from the 
 Statute of Merton (20 Henry III.) to the end of 1872, 
 no less than four-fifths had been repealed ; and that in 
 the short space of three years, 1870-73, no less than 
 3532 Public Acts had been repealed wholly or in part 
 or amended, and 2759 had been wholly repealed. Mr. 
 Spencer further states that he has found by his own 
 investigation (in the year 1884) that during the three 
 previous sessions there had beon repealed 650 Acts of 
 the present reign, besides many of preceding reigns. 
 After making due allowance for repeals due to laws 
 becoming obsolete, or being inoperative, or to con- 
 solidation, he concludes that a large residuum must 
 have been repealed because they were found to be 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 27 
 
 injurious. And he goes on to say, and rightly say, 
 "That bad legislation means injury to men's lives." 
 "Judge," he says, " what must be the total amount of 
 mental distress, physical pain, and raised mortality, 
 which these thousands of repealed Acts of Parliament 
 represent ! " On the ground of these considerations, it is 
 not unreasonable to suppose that some means will be 
 sooner or later found for checking legislatures, and 
 for making sovereignty a more purely executive 
 organ. The Americans have made a nearer approach 
 to this than the British have, and some of their best 
 authorities are of opinion that some means will have 
 to be devised by us, and that soon, for rendering it less 
 easy to make changes that affect our constitution. 
 Our practice seems to them dangerously lax. 
 
 The question of legal and political sovereignty has 
 already been mentioned. The distinction between the 
 two is so important that it deserves a very full con- 
 sideration. It has already been said that the British 
 Parliament is sovereign, because it enjoys unlimited 
 powers. But every one knows that there is a great 
 deal which Parliament dare not do, which it might 
 theoretically do. It might declare murder legal, if 
 it dared. It is apparent, then, that though it is 
 legally sovereigns it is not politically sovereign. Its 
 omnipotence is restricted by what Austin calls positive 
 morality. There is a political sovereign behind it, 
 and that political sovereign is the people. Kousseau 
 was in a great degree right when he said that the 
 legislator is the servant of the sovereign people. It 
 may not be true of Eussia or Siam, but is quite true 
 
28 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 of England and France. Burke said that "in all 
 forms of government the people is the trne legislator." 
 That is too general a statement. It is true of many- 
 forms of government, though not of all. It is only 
 another way of asserting the growth of democracy, 
 which is in these days a fact, whether an agreeable 
 one or not. From the time when Plato spoke con- 
 temptuously of " the many-headed " until quite 
 recently, popular rule has been utterly scorned. It 
 may be even asserted that democracy is a perfectly 
 modern institution. Mr. Grote, in his monumental 
 work on the "History of Greece," went to much pains 
 to defend the Athenian democracy. Yet, when it is 
 considered that what are now called the lower classes 
 were represented by slaves in Greece, it may well be 
 doubted whether Athens was a democracy at all. It 
 was a republic, no doubt, but a republic is not neces- 
 sarily a democracy. Democracy is simply the rule of 
 the majority. However that may be (putting ancient 
 history aside), democracy is a modern institution. 
 The mediaeval republics of Italy were probably more 
 oligarchical than democratic. Lord Bacon declared 
 that he hated the word " people." Cardinal Granvelle, 
 the ally of Spain in its conflict with popular liberties 
 in the Netherlands, spoke of the people as " a vile and 
 mischievous animal." Even Pope could write of the 
 aristocracy of his time — 
 
 " So much they scorn the crowd, that if the throng 
 By chance go right, they purposely go wrong." 
 
 But at the present time, in all civilized communities, 
 except Eussia and the East, dvf^bg is king. It is 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 29 
 
 clear, therefore, that there have now arisen two inde- 
 pendent sovereignties in the state — the legal sovereign 
 and the political sovereign. It becomes, therefore, an 
 important question how far these two sovereignties can 
 be made to work in harmony. If no means can be 
 found to secure this harmonious working, there will 
 be civil conflict and strife. There can be no middle 
 course, for the conduct of one can by no means be a 
 matter of indifference to the other. This end is 
 obtained in different ways in different forms of govern- 
 ment; and there are few things more interesting in 
 politics than an examination of what these different 
 ways are. In the British Islands, this end is to some 
 extent reached by the firm hold which the legislature 
 has taken of the executive. It is true that the 
 monarch, who centres in himself the executive, holds 
 an hereditary office. But he is only a formal head, 
 who acts upon the advice of his Prime Minister, who 
 is the real head. Now, as the Prime Minister is de- 
 pendent upon a popularly elected House of Commons, 
 the people obtain, in roundabout fashion, a control 
 over the acts of the hereditary monarch. The same 
 thing may be truly said of all constitutional monarchies, 
 and it is also true of such a President as the French 
 President, who acts upon the advice of the French 
 Prime Minister. In the United States, the President 
 is elected directly by an electoral college and ulti- 
 mately by the people. And though the popular will 
 has been largely ignored under the exigencies of the 
 electoral machines, still the people have a strong hold 
 over the President. A President who defies the popular 
 
30 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 will bids good-bye to all chances of re-election. But 
 this is not all. In England the harmonious co- 
 operation of the legal and political sovereignties is in 
 a great degree secured by what are known as " con- 
 stitutional conventions." Their nature is admirably 
 explained by Professor Dicey in his " Law of the 
 Constitution." "Their object is," he says, "to give 
 effect to the will of the political sovereign ; they are 
 precepts for determining the mode and spirit in which 
 the prerogative is to be exercised." The word pre- 
 rogative is one of which it is not easy to grasp the 
 full meaning. It has a history which is suggestive of 
 despotism, and savours of monarchical irrterference. 
 The popular idea of it was expressed by Lord John 
 Kussell, when he said that if the sword of pre- 
 rogative was drawn, it was time to be prepared with 
 the shield and buckler of popular privileges. The 
 prerogative of the Crown is still much greater than is 
 commonly supposed. Mr. Bagehot wrote of the powers 
 of the Queen as follows : '* Not to mention other things, 
 she could disband the army (by law she cannot engage 
 more than a certain number of men, but she is not 
 obliged to engage any men) ; she could dismiss all the 
 officers, from the general commanding-in-chief down- 
 wards; she could dismiss all the sailors too; she 
 could sell off all our ships of war, and all our naval 
 stores; she could make peace by the sacrifice of 
 Cornwall, and begin a new war for the conquest of 
 Brittany. She could make every citizen in the United 
 Kingdom, male or female, a peer; she could make 
 every parish in the United Kingdom a university ; she 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 31 
 
 could dismiss most of the civil servants ; she could 
 pardon all offenders." It is clear, then, that the pre- 
 rogative is very large ; but in whatever way it was 
 once used, it is now used in such a manner as to ensure 
 the supremacy of the true political sovereign, or the 
 people. It is, in the words of Professor Dicey, 
 "nothing else than the residue of discretionary or 
 arbitrary authority, which at any given time is legally 
 left in the hands of the Crown," and is now always used 
 in the manner indicated. It was long before the Crown 
 acquiesced in this view of the exercise of the pre- 
 rogative, and it was sometimes supported by its ad- 
 visers. Lord Shelburne, for instance, said that "he 
 would never consent that the King of England should 
 be a king of the Mahrattas ; for among the Mahrattas 
 the custom is, it seems, for a certain number of great 
 lords to elect a peishwah, who is thus the creature of 
 the aristocracy, and is vested with the plenitude of 
 power, while their king is, in fact, nothing more than 
 a royal pageant." George the Third strongly objected 
 to being nothing more than a royal pageant, and made 
 strenuous endeavours to govern as well as reign. But 
 the House of Commons put a check upon kingly pre- 
 tensions by affirming, in 1780, Mr. Dunning's resolu- 
 tion, " that the influence of the Crown has increased, is 
 increasing, and ought to be diminished." Perhaps the 
 best example of the way in which the Crown uses its 
 prerogative to ensure harmony between the legal and 
 political sovereigns is that involved in the dissolution 
 of Parliament. In 1784 George the Third dismissed a 
 ministry which had the confidence of the House of 
 
32 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Commons, because he thought that the wishes of the 
 legislature diverged from those of the nation. He 
 was, as the result showed, right in his belief. In 1834 
 William the Fourth dismissed a ministry on the same 
 grounds, though events showed that his action was not 
 justified by the facts. The dissolution of Parliament 
 in 1841, though in less striking degree than the 
 examples already given, is a good example of the use 
 of the prerogative. That Parliament was elected to 
 support the interests of Protection, but it committed 
 itself to the policy of Free Trade. It was chosen to 
 substitute Sir E. Peel for Lord John Russell, but it 
 restored Lord John Russell to the position from which 
 Sir Robert Peel had driven him. It therefore became 
 very apparent that the legislature and the electors 
 might well be at variance, and a dissolution was justly 
 considered necessary. The demand for triennial 
 Parliaments is invariably made, it should be observed, 
 by the party in opposition, on the ground that Parlia- 
 ment has ceased to represent the popular feeling. A 
 very strong use of the prerogative was made in 1871, 
 when Mr. Gladstone failed to get through the Lords a 
 Bill for the abolition of purchase in the array, which 
 had been passed by the Commons. The Queen, on his 
 advice, thereupon abolished the system in virtue of her 
 prerogative. The act was strongly objected to at the 
 time by the late Mr. Fawcett and others, but there can 
 be little doubt it tended to harmonize the legal and 
 political sovereigns. It is somewhat singular that in 
 the last session of Parliament Mr. Gladstone objected 
 that it was an encroachment upon the prerogative to 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 33 
 
 introduce a Bill for the cession of Heligoland, when 
 such a Bill might have been dispensed with. But this 
 really was not the case, as Mr, Gladstone's own action 
 in 1871 shows. In either case the political sovereignty 
 of the people is assured. If the House of Commons is 
 in harmony with the electors, there can be no objection 
 to procedure by Bill ; if they are not in harmony, or if 
 the Lords are obstructive, the prerogative can override 
 them both, and the people will prevail. zi, .^^ /- 
 
 The most direct and the simplest way of ensuring 
 the supremacy of the political sovereign is to be found 
 in Switzerland. The method in operation there is 
 one of the political curiosities of the world. Nowhere 
 else in the world can it be found in a fully developed 
 state. This is a device by which, when the circum- 
 stances provided by the constitution demand it, Bills 
 before the Federal Legislature (or the Canton Legis- 
 lature, as the case may be) are referred to direct 
 popular vote. In addition to this, in some of the 
 cantons the people are enabled to introduce legis- 
 lation by means of the " Initiative." But the Keler- 
 endum is by far the most important of the two. It 
 is obvious that in this way the people of Switzerland 
 get a most complete control over their legislature. 
 Strictly speaking, no doubt, the legislature is not 
 legally sovereign, for, as the Swiss constitution is 
 rigid, it has strictly limited powers. But, for all 
 practical purposes, we may consider it legally sovereign, 
 and if we do so, it will be at once seen, by means of 
 the Keferendum, that the political sovereign of Switzer- 
 land is brought into harmonious relations with the 
 
34 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 legal sovereign. The latter can by no means override 
 the will of the former; on the contrary, if a conflict 
 arises, the latter must automatically, so to speak, give 
 way. 
 
 Whether the Keferendum should be introduced 
 into the British constitution or not, is a question that 
 has given rise to considerable discussion, and much 
 difference of opinion. Professor Bryce thinks that its 
 introduction would be advantageous. It would transfer 
 the power of dissent or the royal prerogative of vetoing 
 legislation from the Crown to the people. This would 
 be beneficial, inasmuch as it would withdraw legis- 
 lation from the absolute control of party political feel- 
 ing, make members of Parliament more independent, 
 and lessen the influence of cliques and sections. Pro- 
 fessor Bryce is, however, fully alive to its difficulties. 
 He sees that it would be difficult of application in a 
 country as large and as populous as the United King- 
 dom. Moreover, it would be difficult to define the 
 particular class of Bills to which it should be applied. 
 Supposing it were to be confined to Bills proposing 
 constitutional changes only, it would sometimes be 
 difficult to say whether certain changes were strictly 
 constitutional or not. Tlien, again, there are certain 
 measures, which are of far greater importance than 
 some constitutional changes, which, upon this sup- 
 position, would not be submitted to the Eeferendum. 
 A difficulty, also, would arise over the means of testing 
 separately English, Scotch, and Irish opinion. Lastly, 
 useful measures, which did not happen to excite general 
 interest, would run great risk of being rejected. This 
 
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 35 
 
 is shown to have actually happened in Switzerland. 
 The amount of political apathy in the country is larger 
 than is commonly supposed. The number of abstainers 
 from voting can only be accounted for in this way. 
 Madame de Stael used to say, " Parler politique, pour 
 moi c'est vivre." The ordinary voter is very far from 
 being in a like case. On the contrary, as Conversation 
 Sharpe said, most men like to have their thinking, like 
 their washing, done out. Professor Dicey, too, makes 
 two far-reaching objections to its introduction. He 
 thinks, first, that it would lower the importance of 
 Parliament ; and, secondly, that it would be an appeal 
 from a higher class to a lower class. It is a remark- 
 able thing, too, that Mr. Grote, the champion of democ- 
 racy, severely condemned the Keferendum when it was 
 first introduced into the constitution of Lucerne. 
 Whether Professor Dicey 's objections are well founded 
 or not is doubtful. It will be answered diflferpntly, 
 according to the estimation in which Parliament is 
 held by different minds. His objections will have no 
 weight with those who despise Parliament, and place 
 the people above their representatives. If, however, 
 the Keferendum should at any time be introduced into 
 the British constitution, it would mark the consum- 
 mation of a tendency that has been long developing. 
 This tendency is the transfer of authority from the 
 Crown to the people. By it the royal prerogative of 
 veto would be transferred to the people. At one time 
 this prerogative of the Crown was a very real power. 
 In the year 1597, Elizabeth is said to have vetoed 
 forty-eight bills out of ninety-three. William III. 
 
36 ESSAYS IN POLITiCS. 
 
 vetoed five bills, and in 1757 it was made use of for 
 the last time by Anne, over a Scotch Militia Bill. 
 This power, has long ceased to be exercised. It is a 
 weapon which the Crown has long feared to use. But 
 by means of the Keferendum it would be transferred 
 to the people, who, having nothing to fear, would use 
 it with the same freedom that the Crown did. In the 
 hands of the people, the weapon that lay unsheathed 
 and rusty in the royal armoury would be bright and 
 burnished. This at least would be a change for the 
 better. 
 
 " How dull it is to pause, to make an end. 
 To rust unburnished, not to shine in use ! " 
 
 Isocrates long ago expressed an opinion that the men 
 of wealth and leisure should be the servants of the 
 people, and that the people should, in his own emphatic 
 words, be a tyrant. The introduction of the Eeferen- 
 dum would still leave the opinion of Isocrates in the 
 realm of ideals, and a counsel of perfection. It would, 
 however, make doubly true the saying that democracy 
 is monarchy inverted. It would ensure, also, the con- 
 tinuance of harmony between the legal and political 
 sovereigns — a harmony that will alone prevent democ- 
 racy from falling into anarchy, and which, if unattained 
 and unattainable, would relegate the rule of the people 
 to the limbo of impracticable ideals. 
 
( 37 ) 
 
 11. 
 
 FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 
 
 We live in an age of union. Individuals now unite 
 and agree to sink their differences for all kinds of 
 purposes, whether for private gain or for propagating 
 views, or attaining ends, in morals, politics, religion, 
 science, or art. It is a time of associations, unions, and 
 leagues. And so it is with states. They are in this 
 respect the man writ large. For one of the most 
 remarkable phenomena in politics of the last hundred 
 years is the impetus that has been given to the develop- 
 ment of federal institutions. There are to-day con- 
 temporaneously existing no less than ten distinct 
 federal governments. First and foremost "is the 
 United States of America, where we have an example 
 of the federal union in the most perfect form yet 
 attained. Then comes Switzerland, of less importance 
 than the United States, but most nearly approaching 
 it in perfection. Again, there is the German Empire, 
 that great factor in European politics, which is a truly 
 federal union, but a cumbrous one, and full ©f anomalies. 
 Next in importance comes the Dominion of Canada, 
 which, except the West Indian Leeward Islands, is 
 the only example of a country forming a federal 
 
38 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 union, and at the same time a colony. Then come 
 the Argentine Kepublic, Mexico, and the states of 
 Colombia and Venezuela. Last in point of time is 
 Brazil, which first dismissed its Emperor, and then 
 proceeded to federate its vast and thinly peopled 
 provinces. It now calls itself the United States of 
 Brazil. 
 
 This is a very remarkable list, when we consider 
 that never before the present century did more than 
 two federal unions ever co-exist, and that very rarely, 
 and that even those unions were far from satisfying 
 the true requirements of federation. Nor is this all. 
 Throughout the last hundred years we can mark a 
 growing tendency in countries that have adopted the 
 federal type of government to perfect that federal 
 type, and make it more truly federal than before. In 
 the United States of America, for instance, the Con- 
 stitution of 1789 was more truly federal than the 
 Confederation, and certainly since <he civil war we 
 hear less of state rights, and more ot union. It has, 
 indeed, been remarked that the citizens of the United 
 States have become fond of applying the words 
 ** nation " and " national " to themselves in a manner 
 formerly unknown. We can mark the same progress 
 in Switzerland. Before 1789 Switzerland formed a 
 very loose system of confederated states. There was 
 then little more than an alliance of Cantons, that 
 received and sent their own embassies. The founders 
 of the American union deliberately rejected it as a 
 model for this very reason. But in 1815 a constitution 
 more truly federal was devised ; in 1848 the federal 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 39 
 
 union was more firmly consolidated ; and, lastly, in 
 1874 such changes were made in the constitution, 
 tliat Switzerland now presents a fairly perfect example 
 of federal government. In Germany we may trace a 
 similar movement. In 1815 the Germanic confede* 
 ration was formed, but it was only a system of con- 
 federated states, or what the Germans call Staatenbund ; 
 but after various changes, amongst others the exclusion 
 of Austria in 1866, it became in 1871 a composite 
 state, or, in German language, a Bundestaat. 
 
 So far we have dealt with accomplished fants. 
 Tendencies in the direction of federation still remain, 
 some of them at present insignificant, and some fraught 
 with great consequences. We will take the minor 
 ones first. In South Africa attempts have been made 
 to federate the South African colonies and states, so 
 far without success. The nearest approach to it is 
 the Customs Union, which exists between Cape Colony 
 and the Orange Free State. It is said, however, to 
 be part of the policy of Mr. Cecil Ehodes, the present 
 Premier at the Cape, to try to carry out federation. 
 And when it is considered that the feelings of antipathy 
 between the Dutch and English residents are sub- 
 siding, that railways are spreading, and that the 
 Transvaal is being rapidly Anglicized, it must be 
 admitted that the dream is not an idle one. It is a 
 long way from South Africa to Central America. But 
 even in backward Central America federation has 
 been in the air, and San Salvador and Guatemala 
 came to blows over this very question quite recently. 
 The federation of the Leeward Islands has already 
 
^0 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 been named, and it is interesting to observe that these 
 islands enjoyed a federal union from the time of 
 William and Mary until the end of last century. 
 The union then fell to pieces, but was reconstituted 
 in Mr. Gladstone's first administration. But the note- 
 worthy point here is the spread of federal ideas in the 
 West Indies. Some sort of union already exists 
 between Jamaica and Turk's Island, Trinidad and 
 Tobago, and amongst the Windward Islands, and there 
 ■is a growing feeling towards federation. Federation 
 >is regarded by some as the destination of the Balkan 
 Principalities, but the idea is at present quite without 
 the range of practical politics. 
 
 There remain some manifestations of tendency 
 towards federation of much greater importance. The 
 first of these is Australian federation. This has been 
 'in a large measure accomplished. In -the year 1886 
 .a Bill passed the Imperial Parliament to permit the 
 formation of an Australasian Council for the purpose 
 of forming the Australasian colonies into a federation. 
 This Council has actually been formed, but so far 
 New South Wales and New Zealand have failed to 
 come in. It is authorized to legislate directly with 
 regard to Australasian interests in the Pacific, Aus- 
 tralasian fisheries, services of process in other colonies, 
 extradition, and the influx of criminals. In other 
 matters, with regard to which the colonies themselves 
 can legislate, action by the Council can only be taken 
 after two colonies have brought the matter before the 
 Council, and even then, any acts passed by the Council 
 affect those colonies only by whose legislatures the 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 41 
 
 matters in question have been referred to it. This 
 Council has met several times, and seems likely to grow 
 in favour and authority. Sir Samuel Griffith, the 
 Premier of Queensland, announced a short time ago, 
 at the opening of his Parliament, that it was intended 
 to divide Queensland into three federal provinces, and 
 he went on to say that he expected that this group of 
 Queensland states would pass under the control of an 
 Australian Federal Parliament. This statement, coming 
 as it did from the Queensland Premier, is a most im- 
 portant one, and clearly shows that Australian federa- 
 tion is sure to come sooner or later. New South Wales 
 at first refused to entertain the idea, but she took part 
 in the Federation Congress held at Melbourne in 
 February, '1890. Sir Henry Parkes, the Premier of 
 New South Wales, is quite enthusiastic over it, and, 
 in advocating it to his Australian fellow-countrymen, 
 he reminded them of the crimson thread of their 
 common kinship. It seems, therefore, almost certain 
 that Australian federation will be accompli-shed. Mr. 
 Brunton Stephens writes the following significant lines 
 in the Australian National Anthem, which he has lately 
 composed:: — 
 
 "■Let us united stand. 
 One great Australian band, 
 Heart to heart, hand in hand." 
 
 Poets are sometimes the first to catfh the rising spirit 
 of the age, and sing the strains of prophecy. It is, 
 indeed, within measurable distance of consummation. 
 Australasian federation, which would unite not only 
 the Australian colonies and Tasmania, but also New 
 
42 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Zealand and Fiji, is less probable, because tbe great 
 distance of New Zealand and Fiji from Australia throw 
 difficulties in the way. 
 
 Australian federation leads to the consideration of 
 another tendency in the direction of federal union. 
 This is the great idea of Imperial Federation. Of this 
 all that can be said at present is that it is under 
 discussion. It presents enormous difficulties, and if 
 it comes at all, it is almost sure to come as a natural 
 growth out of present circumstances. Lastly, we hear 
 of further aspirations for applymg the federal system, 
 as though there were some peculia,r virtue or talismanic 
 effect about it, which rendered it a panacea for all 
 political troubles. Some people think they see a 
 simple solution of the Irish question in the application 
 of federation, particularly the Canadian form of it, to 
 Ireland. 
 
 Federation, therefore, has clearly become a very 
 practical question for the British people, and it is 
 obviously necessary to clearly understand its nature. 
 For no one can possibly speak with any approach to 
 correctness on Imperial or Irish federation, unless he 
 understands the nature of a federal union and its 
 practical results. 
 
 Moreover, quite apart from practical politics, it has 
 a distinct theoretical interest of its own. In the first 
 place, it was until recently, a very rare product of. 
 the human mind. We only know of three well-marked 
 federations which existed prior to the foundation of 
 the United States of America. The first belongs to 
 the ancient world, and to the second and third centuries 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 43 
 
 B.C. — namely, the Achoean League — whicli is interest- 
 ing, if for no other reason than that Hamilton, the 
 master architect of the American constitution, longed 
 to know more about it. The second is Swiss, which, 
 taking its origin as the old league of Upper Germany 
 in the thirteenth century, has lasted in various forms 
 to the present day. The third is the United Nether- 
 lands, wliich arose at the end of the sixteenth century 
 and lasted to the end of the eighteenth. In the next 
 place, federal government is the highest and most 
 complicated of all forms of government, and demands 
 for its successful development some of the highest 
 elements of political morality. It is, therefore, very 
 interesting, when considered in the light of the natural 
 history of political institutions. It is the roof and 
 crown of things political, and forms the concluding 
 member of a series. Beginning with the individual 
 man as the first of the series, we may go through the 
 family, the tribe, the state, in all its varying degrees 
 of development, and finally arrive at that union of 
 states which is known as the federal union. In the 
 language of biology, it may be considered as the full 
 development of what was originally a very simple 
 growth. It is the final result of evolution in institu- 
 tions of government. The complexities of federation 
 are doubtless the reason why it has developed so late 
 in human history, and it is worthy of note that the 
 first example of it we meet with was the creation of 
 the Greeks, a people endowed with a singular genius 
 for politics, both in the abstract and in their practical 
 application. 
 
44 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Again, it is interesting, because in it we are enabled 
 to watch the wlieels of government moving on a large 
 scale. We have no need of a microscopic eye to watch 
 it. There is something grand and titanic ahout it, 
 when it is viewed working on the scale on which it 
 now works in the United States of America. It is not 
 a matter of observing the minutiae of the parish, the 
 township, the county, or any municipal institution, 
 but the more impressive acts of states, sovereign within 
 their own limits, combining to form a united govern- 
 ment. The observance of federal government is, com- 
 pared with the observance of merely municipal and 
 strictly local phenomena, what the observance of the 
 movements of the heavenly bodies, describing their 
 illimitable ellipses and parabolas, is to the observance 
 of the movements of bacilli through the lens of the 
 microscope. 
 
 Both from its practical and theoretical aspect, it is 
 evident, then, that federal government is well worthy 
 of study. And when a thing is made an object of 
 study, it is no unreasonable demand that a definition 
 of it should be given. But definition is at all times 
 difficult, and no wise man ever ventures ,to define 
 unless under some necessity. It is almost a hopeless 
 task, not unlike that imposed on the daughters of 
 Danaus; for it is nearly impossible to fill up the out- 
 line of a definition that will hold water. And the man 
 who defines may consider himself lucky if he meets 
 with no worse fate than that ancient philosopher, who, 
 having defined man as a " featherless biped," was pre- 
 sented with a feathered fowl in proof of the worthless- 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 45 
 
 ness of his assertion. And when an attempt is made 
 to define something intangible and impalpable, the 
 difficulty becomes far greater. It is better, therefore, 
 not to attempt to define federal government, but as 
 accurately as may be, to set forth its most salient 
 characteristics. 
 
 It miist,.in the first place, be kept distinct from other 
 political unions, such as mere alliances of defence and 
 offence, of which the present Triple Alliance is an 
 example on the one hand, and on the other hand such 
 personal unions under the same crown as Norway and 
 Sweden, Belgium and the Congo Free State, and such 
 real unions under one parliament, as the kingdom of 
 Great Britain and Ireland, and even such a union as 
 that of Austria and Hungary, which, to some extent, 
 resembles a federal union. 
 
 A federal union has its origin under very peculiar 
 circumstances, and perhaps the best way of arriving 
 at a clear conception of federal government is to 
 examine the causes that give it creation. " Vere 
 scire est per causas scire," says Lord Bacon ; and this 
 is certainly true here. The people who desire federal 
 union must be placed in peculiar circumstances; it 
 has been put well and shortly in this way — that they 
 must desire union, but not desire unity. And it will 
 generally be found that this state of affairs arises under 
 extreme external pressure. The people who unite to 
 form a federal union find that they cannot stand alone, 
 and in order to preserve their independence, they are 
 compelled in the direction of union ; but though they 
 desire the strength acquired from the putting togeiher 
 
46 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 of common resources, they still desire to retain their 
 independence. The United Netherlands feared Spain. 
 The revolted colonies of North America feared that 
 their independence would fall a sacrifice to British 
 selfishnes?, and it is expressly laid down in the Articles 
 of Confederation that the various states united "for 
 common defence." Switzerland is perhaps the most 
 remarkable example of all. The Helvetic Kepublic 
 is a most notable union of dissimilar elements. One 
 may well ask in amazement what in common has the 
 French-speaking citizen of Geneva with the German- 
 speaking citizen of Zurich and the Italian-speaking 
 citizen of Lugano ? One may well wonder how it is 
 that the Ultramontane of Lucerne and the Calvinist 
 of Zurich ever came to unite at all. We shall see 
 hereafter that, as a matter of fact, the union was only 
 accomplished with difficulty. Then, again, the very 
 geography of the country seems to forbid union. 
 Torn up and divided by giant mountains, Switzerland 
 seems the predestined of nature for separation, and 
 not union. The cause is not far to seek. The Swiss, 
 beyond all others, love freedom and local autonomy. 
 They are surrounded by great and powerful neigh- 
 bours, who even now might proceed to its partition 
 but for the treaty made at the Congress of Vienna in 
 1815, which guarantees perpetual neutrality to Swiss 
 territory. It has been pointed out by a writer in the 
 Bevue des Deux Mondes that Switzerland is hemmed 
 almost on all sides by the members of the Triple 
 Alliance, who would not, in case of need, be over- 
 scrupulous in respecting this neutrality. Union is 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 47 
 
 life to the Swiss, and the very charter of their exist- 
 ence, and this they have fully recognized. The Union 
 first of all consisted only of eight Cantons, but it has 
 gone on increasing, and now numbers twenty-two, and, 
 as we have seen, has become more and more consolidated. 
 The same may be said of the German Empire ; for, 
 though it was in 1871, at the conclusion of a great war, 
 that the present German Constitution was formed, yet it 
 was the trial of the war that made the separate States 
 see how important union was, and made the possible 
 results of disunion stand out in full reh'ef in all their 
 glaring hideousness. The Dominion of Canada has a 
 somewhat different origin. It cannot be said that the 
 federal union of Canada was formed under conditions 
 of great external pressure. It was, however, seen that 
 a federal union might prove a solution for the difficult 
 problem of governing the various Canadian provinces, 
 and it must not be forgotten that Canada has for a 
 neighbour the Colossus of the United States, taking 
 in at a stride a large portion of a continent from ocean 
 to ocean, and that the pressure of the United States 
 on the separate and disunited provinces of Canada 
 might prove irresistible. Indeed, there can be no 
 doubt that the mere presence of the United States 
 did much to create the Canadian union of 1867. 
 Canada seems naturally as ill-adapted for union as 
 Switzerland. It contains two races of different tongues 
 and different creeds that are fiercely opposed. These 
 are the French and British. The census of 1881 
 showed that Canada contained a population of 1,300,000 
 French, of whom 1,000,000 lived in the single province 
 
48 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 of Quebec. The Freuch Koman Catholics of Quebec 
 might well feel ill disposed to union with the Pro- 
 testant British of the other provinces. At that time, 
 too, when there were no railways, the commercial 
 interests of the different provinces were opposed. Such 
 trade as there was l^^y, not between the provinces them- 
 selves, but with the United States. The trade of 
 Quebec was with the New England States, and that 
 of Ontario and Manitoba with the Western States. It 
 became evident, therefore, that a disunited Canada 
 was drifting towards absorption in the United States, 
 and the only safeguard lay in the creation of a federal 
 tie. And, strange though it may appear, the French 
 colonists were even more eager than the British to 
 avoid absorption by the United States. For the 
 French very well knew that their racial idiosyncrasies 
 would receive scant attention if they were once 
 swamped and swallowed up amongst the vast popula- 
 tion of their American neighbours. As it is, they 
 are treated tenderly in the Dominion. French, for 
 instance, can be spoken in the Dominion Parliament, 
 but it may safely be asserted that the American Con- 
 gress would never tolerate that. It should not be 
 forgotten, however, with regard to Canadian federation, 
 that it is not universally deemed to be a success. 
 Professor Goldwin Smith, for instance, has used his 
 great literary powers to demonstrate its failure to the 
 whole world. He has gibbeted Canadian union as a 
 warning beacon to all constitution-makers of the future. 
 This view is, however, held by quite a small minority, 
 and the feeling in favour of federation seems to grow 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 49 
 
 rather than diminish. The result of the blow dealt 
 at Canadian trade by the United States, by what is 
 known as the M*Kinley Act, is that the Canadians 
 begin to think of bringing Newfoundland and the 
 West Indian Islands into their federal union. 
 
 It has been said that a federal union owes its crea- 
 tion to external pressure. There are, however, some 
 instances that do not appear to have originated in this 
 way. Such, for instance, are the Mexican and South 
 American federations, or, again, the Brazilian. The 
 United States of Brazil were certainly not created 
 under pressure. The same may be said of the present 
 tendency to Australian federation. It is conceivable 
 and even probable that, if a serious disagreement arose 
 between the Australian colonies and the mother- 
 country, the colonies would at once unite to present a 
 common front, just as our American colonies did. It 
 is,\however, said, on the other hand, that Australian 
 federation is really a step towards Imperial federation, 
 because the Colonial Office would find it much easier 
 to deal with a united Australia than a number of dis- 
 tinct colonies. However that may be, there do appear 
 to be exceptions, where external pressure has had 
 nothing to do with federation. The fact appears to be 
 that the earliest and greatest of federal unions arose 
 in the manner described, but that in subsequent cases 
 federation w^as adopted as possessing obvious advan- 
 tages inherent in it quite apart from its origin. More- 
 over, it must be remembered that it is possible for a 
 federal union to grow up in a converse way from that 
 which has been usual. It may arise from a wish to 
 
 E 
 
50 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 loosen and not to strengthen a tie. This appears to be 
 the case with Brazil. It has ceased to be a compact and 
 undivided State, and become instead a federal union. 
 
 The first condition, therefore, for a federal union is 
 the desire for union without the desire for unity. The 
 problem is, how to carry out this apparently para- 
 doxical desire. And it must be confessed that it is 
 not an easy problem. Some of the federal unions of 
 the world have been preceded by more or less close 
 alliances between the states desiring union, and then 
 the problem is not quite so difficult, because the ground 
 has been to some extent prepared, and the formation 
 of the strictly federal union is only carrying out to its 
 ultimate result a principle already tacitly adopted. 
 This has been the case in Switzerland and Germany. 
 But when there has been no preceding alliance, the 
 case is far otherwise, and we then witness a very 
 striking scene in the drama of nati(mal life. We see 
 nothing less than the voluntary abdication by sove- 
 reign states of some of the most precious attributes of 
 sovereignty. And this comes about from the very 
 necessity of the problem to be solved. The several 
 sovereign states voluntarily surrender into the hands 
 of another sovereign body that portion of their sove- 
 reignty which for the purposes of union they must of 
 necessity surrender. It is true that this sovereign 
 body is the voluntary creation of the several states, 
 but it is a sovereign body none the less. And that 
 portion of their sovereignty that the separate states do 
 surrender is always, at least, that portion which is 
 concerned with foreign relations ; such as diplomacy. 
 

 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 51 
 
 foreign commerce, questions of peace and war, and 
 naval and military affairs. The separate states desire 
 to present a common external front to foreign powers, 
 so they must of necessity each surrender the conduct 
 of their own foreign relations. What a reluctant sur- 
 render this might be can be imagined from the possible 
 creation of a Balkan federation under the pressure of 
 Kussia. It would be a bitter pill for such proud states 
 as Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro. And after the 
 surrender of the conduct of foreign relations comes 
 sooner or later that of the conduct of internal affairs 
 of common rational interest, such as currency, posts, 
 and telegraphs. But the separate states still remain 
 sovereign in everything else. This is w^ell brought 
 out by Article II. of the Constitution of the United 
 States of America : " Every State retains its sovereignty, 
 freedom, and independence." Sovereignty must here 
 mean sovereignty within the limits of the constitution, 
 and not sovereignty in the sense given to the term in 
 International Law. 
 
 We now see that a federal government implies a 
 union of several bodies, each sovereign within its own 
 sphere. First, there is the federal union, sovereign 
 within its sphere, which includes, at least, the conduct 
 of foreign relations; secondly, there are the several 
 states, eacli sovereign within its own sphere. It will be 
 seen, then, that federal union is a matter of contract, and, 
 further than this, that it is a matter of compromise. 
 The architect of a federal union has before him a variety 
 of conflicting forces, some moving in one way, and some 
 in another. His problem is one of social dynamics. 
 
52 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 How can he compound these conflicting forces and 
 make them all move together ? The mere statement 
 of the problem shows its difficulty. "Every great 
 creation," says M. Eenan, " involves a breach of equili- 
 brium, a violent state of being which draws it forth." 
 And this is quite true of the creation of federal con- 
 stitutions. It is the reason why the Americans look 
 on their Constitution with such pardonable pride, and 
 ascribe heroic, almost divine attributes to the founders- 
 of it. " For myself," said Lord Chatham, " I must 
 declare and avow that in the master states of the world 
 I know not the people or senate who, in such a com- 
 plication of difficult circumstances, can stand before 
 the delegates of America assembled in general congress- 
 in Philadelphia." 
 
 These are high words of praise, and may seem 
 exaggerated, but they are not. The founders of the 
 American Union solved a great problem with almost 
 nothing to guide them, and created a federal govern- 
 ment which will be the model of all federal govern- 
 ments for the future. The task of any one who had to 
 construct a federal government was thenceforth com- 
 paratively easy, for the constitution of the United 
 States of America stood as a model. The Brazilians,, 
 for instance, have adopted that constitution almost en 
 hloc. With the founders of the American Constitution 
 it was far otherwise, for they had few and imperfect 
 models to follow. But they achieved a remarkable 
 success, for, notwithstanding the severe trials it has 
 gone through, the American Constitution still stands- 
 to-day unimpaired. 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 53 
 
 " And like a surly oak, with storms perplexed, 
 Grows still the stronger, strongly vexed." 
 
 The American Constitution has some grave faults, but 
 it is not too much to say that some of the gravest of 
 them are not by any means necessarily incidental to 
 federal institutions. 
 
 We have now seen that the problem is how to adjust 
 aright the claims of conflicting sovereignties. What 
 rights are to be given to the federal union, and what 
 to the separate states ? Evidently it must be a matter 
 of compromise, and will vary with the necessities of 
 each case as it arises. The plan adopted in the United 
 States is thus described in the Federalist : " Tlie 
 powers delegated by the Constitution to the Federal 
 Government are few and defined. Those which are to 
 remain in the State Governments are numerous and in- 
 definite. The former will be exercised principally in 
 •external objects, as war, peace, negotiations, and foreign 
 •commerce. The powers reserved to the several States 
 will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary 
 <;ourse of affairs, concern the internal order and pros- 
 perity of the State." To put it another way, it may 
 be said that the powers not delegated to the Federal 
 Government nor prohibited to the States are reserved 
 to the States. It may seem a superfluity to expressly 
 forbid the Federal Government to do what it is not 
 iiuthorized to do. Nevertheless the Americans, in ex- 
 cess of caution, did so forbid it. It should be observed, 
 too, that the powers permitted to the Federal Govern- 
 ment, but not exercised by it, may be exercised by the 
 States, unless they are expressly forbidden. But these 
 
■54 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 powers cannot be concurrently exercised by both, and 
 the States must always give way to the Federal Govern- 
 ment. The various powers in America seem to have 
 been distributed somewhat in this way; some have 
 been given to the Federal Government, others to the 
 State Governments, and yet a third class to both. 
 
 In the Canadian Union the powers are distributed 
 in quite a contrary way. The Canadian Constitution 
 confers upon the Dominion Government all powers 
 which are not assigned exclusively to the Provinces, 
 so that, while the American Constitution begins by 
 defining the powers of the Federal Government, the 
 Canadian begins by defining the powers of the separate 
 Provinces. There is nothing capricious in this ; on 
 the contrary, it is founded on a sound historical basis. 
 The American colonies were virtually sovereign states 
 coming freely into union, just as the Swiss Cantons 
 were. It was quite natural, therefore, that the semi- 
 sovereign states of America, when they came together, 
 should assign to the Federal Government as few and as 
 well-defined powers as possible. It was natural, too, 
 that they should reserve to themselves as many powers 
 as possible. But the historical growth of the Canadian 
 Union was quite different. The Provinces were not 
 virtually sovereign powers, like the American colonies; 
 they were only divisions of a single colony. Several 
 results flow from thft principles of the Canadian Union. 
 First, the central or federal power is much stronger in 
 Canada than it is in the United States. It is much 
 more like that of Germany. It keeps much more in 
 its own hands. It regulates the criminal law and the 
 
FEDEEAL GOVEKNMENT. 55 
 
 law of marriage, appoints the judges and the lieu- 
 tenant-governors. It controls the militia, and possesses 
 a veto on provincial legislation. Tiie United States 
 Federal Government has none of these powers. Then 
 again it follows that, whilst in the United States the 
 state rights tend to increase, in Canada the federal 
 rights tend to increase, because in the one case the 
 powers of the Federal Government, and, in the other 
 case, the powers of the separate Provinces, are rigidly- 
 laid down. There is a greater recognition of state 
 rights in the United States than there is in Canada^ 
 and what is considered to be an inadequate recognition 
 of state rights is a source of dissatisfaction to some 
 Canadians. The Honourable Oliver Mowat, the 
 Premier of Ontario, some few years ago, gave ex- 
 pression to this feeling. The province of Nova Scotia 
 has a party that threatens cession from the Union 
 altogether. The distribution of powers, however, must 
 be made in either the American or Canadian way, or 
 in some middle course more or less resembling the one 
 or the other. Switzerland in this respect resembles 
 Canada rather than the United States, though the 
 contrary might have been expected. 
 
 This distribution being made, the next problem is 
 what sort of body is the federal government to be, that 
 body to which the separate sovereignties agree to 
 surrender powers so important and so valued as the 
 conduct of foreign affairs, and how^ are the various con- 
 tracting states to participate fairly and equitably in the 
 federal union ? This is accomplished by making the 
 federal government a representative body, the various 
 
")6 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 elements of which are contributed by the different 
 states. The details vary in each particular case. In 
 the United States the Federal Government is divided 
 very distinctly into three separate authorities — the 
 executive, the legislative, and the judicial. The execu- 
 tive power is invested in the President, who is elected 
 by popularly elected " electors " in each State. The 
 legislative power is vested in the Congress, which con- 
 sists of the Senate and the Hoyse of Eepresentatives. 
 The Senate is elected by the Icgislaturoa of the different 
 States, and the House of Eepresentatives by the people 
 in each State. This different mode of election to the 
 Senate and House of Eepresentatives is worthy of 
 note, because in the election to the Senate the prin- 
 ciple of the sovereignty of the State is recognized, 
 whereas in the election to the House of Eepresentatives 
 the principle of the sovereignty of the whole people 
 of the United States as a nation is recognized. Lastly, 
 the judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court of 
 the United States, a most important body, of which 
 more will be said hereafter. In Switzerland we see 
 a constitution something like that of the United States, 
 but the executive, legislative, and judicial authorities 
 are not nearly so carefully divided. There the legis- 
 lative power is vested in a Federal Assembly, consisting 
 of two chambers, a Council of State composed of 
 deputies from each Canton, and a National Council 
 appointed directly by the people. The executive is 
 vested in a Federal Council elected by the Federal 
 Assembly, and presided over by a President. There is 
 also a court which performs some of the functions of 
 
Il FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 57 
 
 the Supreme Court of the United States. The case 
 of the German Empire is peculiar, for it forms at best 
 s, very cumbrous form of federation. This, however, 
 is not to be wondered at, in the application of federal 
 institutions to an old country, where local traditions 
 and customs have taken strong root. The head of the 
 Oerman confederation is the King of Prussia, and 
 the post is of course hereditary. Moreover, many 
 of the separate states are governed by hereditary 
 monarchs. This shows, if proof were needed, that a 
 federal government need not necessarily be republican. 
 This many people are apt hastily to infer from the 
 iact that the United States and Switzerland are re- 
 publican. There is no reason why federal governments 
 should not be monarchical. Another peculiarity about 
 the German Empire is that all the States are not 
 members of the federation on quite an equal footing. 
 The two states of Bavaria and Wurtemberg have their 
 armies under the commands of their respective kings, 
 except in time of peace, when the German Emperor 
 becomes the Commander-in-Chief of the armies of the 
 entire empire. The Bundesrath and Eeichstag, how- 
 ever, are the counterj)arts of the American Senate and 
 House of Kepresentatives. 
 
 The Dominion of Canada is not unlike the United 
 States. The legislative body consists of a Senate, 
 whose members are appointed by the Crown, and a 
 House of Commons elected by popular suffrage. 
 There is a Supreme Court of Canada, which is the 
 •counterpart of the Supreme Court of the United 
 States. But there is an appeal from this court to the 
 
o8 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. 
 The executive power is vested in the Queen of Great 
 Britain and Ireland, and exercised in her name by the 
 Governor-General. The case of Canada resembles 
 Germany, in that its head is an hereditary monarch, 
 but it stands alone (with the exception of the Leeward 
 Islands) as being at the same time a colony and a 
 federal union. 
 
 We have now seen, from the rough sketch just 
 given, what are the essential characteristics of a 
 federal union, and what constitutions the four chief 
 federal unions of the world have provided to meet the 
 special difficulties of this form of government. We 
 are now in a position to note the consequences which 
 flow from it, and its special difficulties and advantages. 
 In the first place, we found that federal unions took 
 their rise for the most part under circumstances of 
 external pressure. It follows from this that as soon 
 as the pressure is relaxed, as in many cases must bo 
 the case sooner or later, difficulties will arise ; for 
 the special conditions to meet which the federal 
 union was formed have vanished. And even in those 
 cases where external pressure was not the original 
 moving cause, circumstances may change, and render 
 union less desirable than it was. Now, it must be 
 remembered that the federal union was a compromise 
 between the state rights and the federal rights, and 
 the probability is that, on the relaxation of pressure^ 
 these rights will come into conflict. One of the 
 consequences, then, of a federal union is the almost 
 certain tendency to disintegration, as soon as the 
 
I 
 
 FEDEKAL GOVEENMENT. 59 
 
 circumstances that gave it birth have ceased to be 
 present. In the language of chemistry, the atoms 
 that make up the federal molecule tend to dissociate. 
 The dissociation may be arrested, but the tendency to 
 it is there nevertheless. This is evidently a dire 
 source of weakness to a federal union. It is nowhere 
 so clearly illustrated as in the history of the United 
 States of America. Even in the time of Washington 
 it was feared that the union would not hold together. 
 Washington himself wrote, "We have probably had 
 too good an opinion of human nature in forming our 
 confederation. Experience has taught us that men 
 will not adopt and carry into execution measures the 
 best calculated for their own good without the inter- 
 vention of coercive power." In making this remark 
 about having too good an opinion of human nature, 
 Washington touched a weak point in federal unions, 
 for it is the selfishness of the separate states, leading 
 them to prefer state rights to the union made for the 
 common good, which usually helps to wreck federal 
 unions. It may be remarked incidentally that this is 
 one point which shows federal governments to require 
 a high political morality, for unselfishness in the 
 separate states is requisite for its success. 
 
 The case of the American union illustrates this. Up 
 to the time of the civil war, there was a continual 
 conflict between state rights and federal rights. Ev^en 
 when not active, the elements of strife were ready at any 
 moment to break out into eruption. So soon after the 
 union as 1786 Massachusetts gave signs of disaffection, 
 and so did Pennsylvania in 1794. In 1812 the States 
 
€0 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 of Connecticut and Massachusetts refused to obey the 
 President, when he ordered the militia to march to 
 the frontiers. In 1832 the Ordinance of Nullification 
 was passed in South Carolina. All these were shadows 
 east before by the coming event of the great civil 
 war. The fact was that each state was selfish for its 
 own ^interests : one wanted slavery abolished, another 
 wished it retained ; one wanted protection, another 
 free trade. 
 
 The case of Switzerland, again, forms a very apt 
 illustration. This is what Mr. Grote says in his 
 letters on Swiss politics, written some forty years ago : 
 " What the Cantons mostly stand chargeable with is 
 the feeling of cantonal selfishness, each being careless 
 of the interests of the other Cantons as compared with 
 its own." We know as a matter of fact that, in the 
 winter of 1846-47, some of the Swiss Cantons would 
 not allow provisions to pass their frontiers, although 
 they knew that, owing to a scarcity of provisions, 
 there was a starving population in the neighbouring 
 Cantons. Each Canton preferred its own interests to 
 that of the common good. M. Druey, the Deputy for 
 Vaud, expressed the feeling very well when he cited 
 in the Federal Council the proverb, '* My shirt is nearer 
 to me than my coat." The shirt of cantonal interests 
 touched the hearts of' the Swiss more nearly than the 
 coat of the federal union. It was even considered 
 a serious accusation to say that a man was aiming at 
 unitary and not cantonal government. However, the 
 result was similar to what occurred in the United 
 States. There was continual strife; only instead of 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 01 
 
 its being a question of slavery or no slavery, protection 
 or no protection, it took the form of religious con- 
 troversy. In 1841 the dispute waxed hot over the 
 right to suppress certain convents in Argau, and the 
 final result was that seven of the Cantons, namely. 
 Lucerne, Fribonrg, Schwytz, Unterwalden, Uri, Zug,and 
 Valais, endeavoured to form themselves into a separate 
 federal union, or Sonderbund. And this is exactly 
 what the southern states of America endeavoured to 
 do. In neither case was success attained, and on both 
 sides of the Atlantic the principle of unitary govern- 
 ment has triumphed. It has come out of the trial even 
 stronger, just as a fractured bone when set is said to 
 gain resisting pov/er. Nevertheless, disintegration i& 
 a danger which has to be reckoned with in every 
 federal union, and there is no good blinding one's eyes 
 to the fact. *' Things," said Bishop Butler, " are what 
 they are, and consequences will be what they will be. 
 Why, then, should we desire to be deceived ? " Unless 
 the union is an agreeable one to all parties, or unless 
 secession is allowed, a conflict must inevitably follow, 
 for there can be no peace where opposing interests 
 clash and refuse to harmonize — 
 
 " The children born of these are fire and sword, 
 Red ruin, and the breaking up of laws." 
 
 In a federal union certain things must happen ; for 
 either the members of the union will prove well-matched 
 yoke-fellows, or they will not. In the first case, the 
 union will, in course of time, become a firmly con- 
 solidated and single state ; in the second case, it will 
 disintegrate into separate states, either by right 
 
62 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 of secession, oi' vi et armis ; or, again, altliougli some 
 of the states may be recalcitrant, yet they may, by the 
 superior power of the other states, be welded into one 
 consolidated mass. In a federal union there are, to 
 use the language of mechanics, two forces at work, 
 a centrifugal force and a centripetal force. The one 
 force tends to make the statf^s fly asunder, the other 
 to drive them together. A federal union may even be 
 said to be a transitory form of government. It lies 
 half-way between complete disunion, and complete 
 consolidation. Disunion will either some day again re- 
 sult, or complete consolidation will be the final develop- 
 ment. A federation may be compared, to use a rather 
 strong metaphor, to Saturn's rings, which seem to be 
 in a transitory state between disruption into number- 
 less satellites or fusion into one solid mass. In America 
 it appeared at one time as though disintegrati<m would 
 gain the day, but now it must be confessed that the 
 tendency is all the other way. Patrick Henry, carried 
 aw^ay by his ardent nature, exclaimed in Congress more 
 than a hundred years ago, *'A11 America is fused 
 into one mass. Where are your landmarks and 
 boundaries of colonies ? They are all thrown down. 
 The distinction between Virginians, Pennsylvanians, 
 New Yorkers, and New Englanders exists no more. I 
 am not a Virginian, but an American ! " Patrick 
 Henry was wrong. All America was very far from 
 being fused into one mass. The landmarks and 
 boundaries of colonies were too firmly fixed and deeply 
 set to be swept away in this easy fashion. But the 
 words, though said prematurely, may some day be truly 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 63 
 
 spoken. They are almost true already. Since the 
 civil war, the right of secession has not only been 
 denied, but it is hardly even claimed. That book is, 
 as far as human foresight can go, for ever closed. The 
 American union is, in the words of Chief Justice 
 Chase, ^' an indestructible union of indestructible 
 states." 
 
 As federal governments take their rise under special 
 conditions, it follows that any attempt to create a 
 federal union where these conditions are wanting must 
 most probably end in failure. It has been even 
 said that the success of federal government does not 
 depend upon its own merits, but upon the merits of the 
 race that adopts it. And this is to some extent borne 
 out by facts. The ill success of the federal unions 
 of Mexico, Central and South America, is to some 
 extent due to the fact that federation was inapplicable 
 to the several countries that adopted it. Federation 
 probably lays more doors open to intrigue and corrup- 
 tion than an ordinary single and undivided govern- 
 ment. This has been conspicuously the case in the 
 Argentine Eepublic. Since the revolution there, an 
 examination of the finances of the provinces has 
 revealed a large amount of reckless waste and corrup- 
 tion, and the central government has been compelled to 
 take over their liabilities and the uncompleted public 
 works, which are the nominal security. At the same 
 time, all the political failures of South America cannot 
 fairly be ascribed to federation only. Probably much 
 is due to the inferior aptitude of the Latin races, as 
 compared with the Anglo-Saxon, for democracy. How- 
 
64 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 ever that may be, federation was probably adopted too 
 rashly in the cases where it has not been altogether 
 successful. It was seen that in the United States 
 federal government worked well, and the American 
 constitution was accordingly copied. Brazil has lately 
 mimicked the United States in the most parrot-like 
 fashion. It elects its President, Senate, and Chamber of 
 Deputies for different periods, it is true, but the only 
 important difference is that the federal district of Kio 
 Janeiro is to be placed exactly on the same footing as 
 any other state or province. This reckless adoption of 
 federal institutions by those for whom it is unsuited, is 
 about as rational a thing as would be the adoption by 
 Morocco of parliamentary government, because parlia- 
 mentary government works well in England. No consti- 
 tution can be a success unless it is a natural growth, 
 and in congruity with the particular conditions of the 
 country which adopts it. If borrowed from other and 
 very different sources, it will, like some delicate exotic, 
 fade away and die. 
 
 We have seen that the essence of a federal union is 
 a division of powers. Now, this is a palpable source of 
 weakness on the face of it. Divided powers imply 
 always a lack of strength. The powers are divided 
 between the federal government and the state govern- 
 ments. The separate states are always afraid of 
 having their state rights encroached upon by the 
 federal government. This has always been the case in 
 the United States. There from the first there were two 
 parties — the party of state rights, and the party of 
 federal rights. The party of state rights were afraid 
 
 I 
 
FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 65 
 
 of the child of their own creation, for, having helped 
 to form the federal government, they dreaded its 
 growing power. 
 
 It has been argued by some that the success of the 
 federal governments of the United States and Switzer- 
 land shows that the fear of weakness arising from a 
 divided sovereignty is a mere chimera. A moment's 
 consideration will show that this is not so. The United 
 States have not yet been seriously threatened by an 
 external foe, and so they have not yet been put to a 
 severe test. Even the war of independence was carried 
 to a successful issue, not so much by the valour of the 
 colonists as by French assistance and by the difficul- 
 ties Great Britain had to meet in opposing a foe 
 separated by three thousand miles of ocean. We have 
 already stated that in 1812 the states of Connecticut 
 and Massachusetts refused to obey the orders of the 
 President, acting as Commander-in-Chief of the militia. 
 Such disobedience could only have happened where 
 there was a weak executive. Neither, again, in the 
 case of the war against Mexico, was the United States 
 seriously put to the test. That conflict was a very un- 
 equal one, and could have no other issue but victory 
 for the United States. With regard to Switzerland, 
 we know that it has a guaranteed perpetual neutrality. 
 So that, as a matter of fact, it is impossible to say that 
 either the United States or Switzerland have proved 
 themselves to possess a strong executive, and there are 
 Birong prima facie reasons for believing that in case of 
 need the executive would be found wanting. It is, 
 perhaps, not too much to say that if the United States 
 
 F 
 
66 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 had the difficulties to contend with which some Euro- 
 pean states — France, for instance — have, its constitution 
 could not last a day scarcely. The happy circum- 
 stances of the United States, and the political aptitude 
 of its citizens, render it a good workable constitution. 
 Nor is a division of powers the only source of weakness 
 to a federal union. For the separate states are not 
 only jealous of the federal government, but they are 
 jealous of one another. No one state wishes to see 
 any other state or states taking the lion's share in the 
 federal government. In Switzerland it is even pro- 
 vided that the different members of the executive 
 must come from different Cantons. It is obvious from 
 this that it might not improbably happen that Swit- 
 zerland would be deprived of the services of its most 
 capable citizens. If, for instance, it happened that 
 three of the most capable citizens of Switzerland all 
 belonged to the canton of Zurich, Switzerland would 
 be deprived of the services of two of them. It would 
 be something like this, if Mr. W. H. Smith and Mr. 
 Goschen were forbidden to form part of the same 
 government, because they are both returned by London 
 constituencies. 
 
 A further consequence of a division of powers is a 
 tendency of a federal government to split up into co- 
 ordinate and independent authorities, and therefore 
 there is an uncertainty as to what is the ultimate 
 sovereign body. Something about this has been said 
 in a previous essay, so it must be enough here to note 
 the salient points of the matter. In the United King- 
 dom of Great Britain and Ireland we know where the 
 
r 
 
 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 6' 
 
 ultimate sovereignty is. It is the Imperial Parliament. 
 But in the United States it is not so easy to point out 
 where the ultimate sovereignty really is. It is cer- 
 tainly not in the state legislatures, and it is not in 
 Congress. For Congress may pass a Bill which the 
 Supreme Court may afterwards decide to be ultra vires 
 and illegal. The Acts of Congress are legally exactly 
 like bye-laws passed by a local authority. Congress 
 and the Supreme Court are independent and co-or- 
 dinate authorities. It is provided by Article Y. of the 
 American Constitution, that the Constitution may be 
 amended by the joint action of three-fourths of the 
 States belonging to the union, and ultimate sovereignty 
 must be here if anywhere. In the Canadian Constitu- 
 tion the ultimate sovereignty lies, if anywhere, in the 
 British Crown. These ultimate depositories of sove- 
 reign power usually slumber, and are hardly ever 
 invoked. But whether they be the ultimate sovereign 
 powers or not, there can be no doubt of the tendency 
 of sovereign power in federal governments to divide 
 itself into co-ordinate and independent authorities, and 
 this is a source of weakness. 
 
 The mention of the Supreme Court brings us to the 
 consideration of another very important consequence 
 of a federal union, and that is the necessity for a strong 
 judicial body. Where powers are divided amongst 
 different bodies, each sovereign within its own limits, 
 it is clear that occasions must arise when the legality 
 of the acts of these different bodies will be called ia 
 question. It is also clear that there must be some 
 third independent authority to decide whether the 
 
^8 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 acts called in question are legal or not, and that this 
 body must be a judicial body. This body is, in the 
 United States, the Supreme Court, and a very remark- 
 able court it is, far it is probably the first institution 
 of its kind that history has to show. The Dominion of 
 Canada has a similar court in its Supreme Court, and 
 Switzerland has something like it in its Bandesgericht. 
 But in Switzerland judicial and executive functions 
 are not clearly distinguished, for some points of law 
 are reserved for the consideration of the Federal Coun- 
 cil. In no country, except perhaps England, is the 
 judiciary kept so independent of and distinct from the 
 executive and legislature as in the United States. 
 Both in France and Switzerland the legislature claims 
 the right of taking its own view of the constitution, 
 and the Swiss Federal Court is bound to enforce every 
 law of the federal legislature, even though it may con- 
 sider the law unconstitutional. But quite an opposite 
 state of things exists in the United States. The 
 Supreme Court will declare an Act of Congress ultra 
 vires with as little compunction as the High Court in 
 England would in the case of a bye-law passed by 
 some insignificant town council. There is a certain 
 splendour about the Supreme Court of the United 
 States. At its bar we see pleading semi-sovereign and 
 independent states, for it is the function of the Supreme 
 Court to decide questions of the legality or illegality 
 of the acts of bodies sovereign within the limits allowed 
 by the constitution. In this way it comes about that 
 the constitution cannot be understood by a mere 
 perusal of the xirticles of the constitution. For the 
 
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 69 
 
 constitution lies as much in the Law Reports of the 
 United States as it lies in the Articles. The United 
 States had the good fortune to have its Supreme Court 
 early presided over by a Chief Justice of pre-eminent 
 strength, and the result is that the name of Chief Justice 
 Marshall must rank along with the names of Hamilton 
 and others as one of the founders of the constitution. 
 
 The weakness resulting from a division of powers 
 has already been referred to. But it has been treated, 
 80 far, rather from its external than from its internal 
 aspect. There is, however, an internal weakness. 
 Suppose, for instance, a citizen of the United States 
 refused to obey a decree of the Supreme Court. What 
 happens? This is no theoretical difficulty, for it 
 has actually arisen. " John Marshall," said Jackson, 
 " has delivered his judgment ; let him now execute it, 
 if he can." This difficulty has been got over largely 
 in the United States by a provision in the constitution 
 that the decrees of the Supreme Court shall affect the 
 individuals that come under the decree personally, not 
 as citizens of this State or that State, but as citizens of 
 the United States, and that the carrying out of the 
 decrees shall be left to the Federal Government, and not 
 to the State governments. A decree of the ^Supreme 
 Court will run against a man in exactly the same 
 manner in any state whatsoever he may happen to 
 reside. But this is not the whole difficulty, for some- 
 times a State may support one of its citizens in an 
 attempt to evade a decree of the Supreme Court, or it 
 may itself endeavour to evade such a decree. The 
 only answer to this is that a State acting in this way 
 
70 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 would be openly in a state of rebellion. No State could 
 venture to act in this way and continue to profess alle- 
 giance to the Union. So that whilst on the one hand 
 no individual would dare to defy the whole force of the 
 Union, on the other hand a State would pause long 
 before it committed an act of open rebellion. And in 
 this way the difficulty is rather a theoretical than a 
 practical one. It is worth noticing, however, that in 
 Switzerland the relation of the Federal Government to 
 a rebellious Canton is theoretically different from the 
 relation of the American Federal Government to a re- 
 bellious State. The Swiss constitution allows the 
 Federal Government to proceed against the rebellious 
 Canton as a Canton. The American Constitution only 
 allows the Federal Government to proceed against the 
 citizens of a rebellious State as individuals, and not 
 against the State as a State. The State is not considered 
 to be rebellious, but its citizens are. But in both 
 countries the Federal Government is allowed to employ 
 federal troops to suppress disturbances in the various 
 States or Cantons. The Swiss Federal Government 
 lately employed federal troops to suppress a revolution 
 in Ticino. 
 
 The advantages and disadvantages of the American 
 federal union have been fully described by Mr. 
 Bryce in his great work on the American Common- 
 wealth; and much of what he says is applicable to 
 federations generally. Some of the disadvantages 
 have already been referred to, namely, the tendencies 
 to weakness in the conduct of foreign affairs and in 
 internal control. One source of weakness in foreiga 
 
FEDEEAL GOVEKNMENT. 71 
 
 affairs arises from the fact that what may be of vital 
 iaterest to one member of the union may be of no 
 interest whatever to the other members. A fishery 
 dispute with Great Britain might be of vital impor- 
 tance to a New England State, but of no importance 
 whatever to Nevada or California. Another source 
 of weakness arises from a tendency for states having 
 like interests to combine together. This has actually 
 happened in the case of the New England States, and 
 that of South Carolina and the Gulf States, and it 
 has also happened in Switzerland in the case of the 
 Sonderbund. Such combinations may prove extremely 
 dangerous in cases of war, and they may often lead to 
 secession. A number of states might combine to 
 secede, where a single one would shrink from doing 
 so. A less important disadvantage is the want of 
 uniformity in the law of the component states. No 
 doubt it is disagreeable to be legally married in one 
 state, but to be not legally married when you cross 
 into a neighbouring state. But on the whole the 
 disadvantage is not so great as might be supposed, 
 and it replaces a dull uniformity with a variety 
 which may be both refreshing and instructive. Lastly, 
 there is the trouble, expense, and delay arising from 
 the dual system of government. An American or a 
 Swiss owes a double allegiance to the Federal Govern- 
 ment, and to his own particular State or Canton. This 
 is a difficulty, no doubt, but it is not found to be 
 practically important. 
 
 On the other hand, federation presents several 
 advantages. First and foremost, it allows of union 
 
72 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 without unity. It is, indeed, the only institution that 
 can by any means render such a thing possible. 
 Secondly, it gives great facilities for the development 
 of vast territories. Federations need not, it is true, 
 embrace great areas, for Switzerland embraces a very 
 small area. But when applied to great areas it is 
 particularly advantageous. Nothing can be better 
 than the way in which the territories of Western 
 America have been developed and rendered gradually 
 fit to receive self-government. Their example is of 
 happy augury for the future of Australia, should 
 federation there become an accomplished fact. Thirdly, 
 it prevents the growth of central despotic power, and 
 gives opportunities for local self-government. This 
 is an advantage very closely connected with the 
 second. It is clear that where powers are divided 
 between a central government and state governments, 
 the checks put upon the central government at the 
 same time prevent its assuming a despotic position, 
 and leave much freedom of action to the states. And 
 in close connection with this again are the oppor- 
 tunities for legislative experiments. This may of 
 course become an evil if carried to exces?, and it is 
 sure to arouse opposition from many. But then, as 
 Luttrell said to Samuel Rogers, "If some very sensible 
 men had been attended to, we should still have been 
 eating acorns." It is one of the advantages of a 
 federal union that it is possible to introduce a novelty 
 in legislation which, if it turns out to be evil, can do 
 no harm outside the limits of one particular state, and 
 which can be easily withdrawn. 
 
FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 73 
 
 There are some peculiarities inherent to a federal 
 constitution which should be noted in conclusion. It 
 should be remembered that a federal union is essen- 
 tially a contract. Now, it is an elementary proposition 
 of law that a contract should be clearly defined, and 
 have its terms clearly set out. This, of course, can 
 only be done by carefully committing its terms to 
 writing. But anything committed to writing is 
 necessarily rigid. And so it follows that federal 
 constitutions are intensely rigid and conservative. 
 Where there is no written constitution, as is the case 
 in the British Empire, it is far otherwise; all is 
 elasticity. The consequence is that when a change, 
 however small, has to be made in a federal consti- 
 tution, it can only be done in special ways, and 
 becomes an event of extraordinary importance from 
 the attention it necessarily attracts. But this is not 
 the case where there is no written constitution. 
 Nothing is more extraordinary than the way in which 
 vast constitutional changes have taken place in 
 England almost unawares. Such, for instance, is 
 cabinet government and the present position of the 
 Crown. But in America the constitution cannot be 
 altered a hair's breadth without setting in motion the 
 whole cumbrous machinery for making constitutional 
 changes. Then, again, the fact that a central govern- 
 ment and state governments exist side by side prevents 
 the existence of a single capital of the whole union. 
 There is no capital in America, in the same sense that 
 London is capital of England and Paris, of France. 
 Washington is only the seat of Congress, but not the 
 
 OF THE '' >^=v\ 
 
74 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 capital. New York has in some respects more claim 
 to be called the capital than Washington, but then it 
 is not the seat of Congress. So again in Switzerland, 
 Berne is the seat of the national government, but it 
 is no more the capital than Zurich or Geneva. This 
 absence of a capital operates to prevent the best men 
 from entering the national legislature, because there 
 are none of the advantages offered to them that are 
 presented by residence in a capital city. This is 
 particularly the case in a vast territory like America, 
 Avhere a legislator has to travel enormous distances to 
 attend Congress. Moreover, the co-existence of a 
 central legislature and state legislatures causes a 
 diffusion of political interests. Neither legislature 
 can attract in the way the British Parliament, for 
 instance, attracts. A great sphere of activity and 
 influence is withdrawn from the cognizance and juris- 
 diction of the federal legislature. And similarly a 
 great sphere is withdrawn from the cognizance and 
 jurisdiction of the state legislatures. And so both are 
 rendered in a large degree uninteresting. This also 
 operates to prevent the best men from entering politics. 
 Then, again, the fact that the entry to the federal 
 legislature lies through the states produces a like 
 tendency. In a large and populous state there may 
 be plenty of men willing and able to represent their 
 state, but they cannot all represent their state at the 
 same time, and they cannot represent any other state. 
 And so it happens that the peculiarities of a federation 
 tend to put political life on a somewhat lower level 
 than in other countries. That this need not be an 
 
p 
 
 FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 75 
 
 overmastering necessity is, however, proved by the 
 example of Canada, where the best men do not shrink 
 from politics as they do in the United States. But 
 whatever may be the gains and losses of a federal 
 union, it is clear that they are eminently worthy of 
 attention. At no time in the world's history has 
 federation taken so prominent a place in political 
 institutiojis as it does at present. It is destined in the 
 future, for good or for ill, to affect multitudes of men. 
 
76 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 III. 
 
 THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF 
 SWITZERLAND. 
 
 It is said of the inhabitants of Arabia that they are 
 so profoundly ignorant of European affairs that they 
 imagine that all Europeans are of the same race, and 
 that their affairs are arranged by a governing com- 
 mittee of seven kings, who meet together in conference 
 by permission of the Sultan of -Turkey. Some of 
 them even innocently inquire of travellers whether 
 any Christians are now living. Englishmen are not 
 quite in so bad a case with regard to Switzerland, 
 because so many of them go there in search of health 
 or amusement. But it is surprising how little interest 
 those who do go there take in the people amongst 
 whom they sojourn, and how indifferent they are to 
 any inquiry into their political or social institutions. 
 The great majority of tourists, after spending some 
 months or weeks there, come away with more or less 
 vivid mental pictures of the physical features of the 
 country, but of the conditions of the life of its people 
 they know absolutely nothing. They may thoroughly 
 well know, if they are fortunate in the weather, the 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 77 
 
 views from the Kigi or the Gorner-Grat, but they have 
 not the least idea of what takes place in the Parliament 
 House at Berne. This is unfortunate, because there 
 is something picturesque in Swiss politics, just as 
 there is in Swiss mountains and valleys. The political 
 institutions of Switzerland are indeed peculiarly in- 
 teresting, and it cannot be doubted but that a know- 
 ledge of them would lend some additional flavour 
 and charm to the delights of a visitor to that pleasant 
 land. 
 
 It is hardly even recognized by many that Switzer- 
 land is a federation. Yet it is a fact that, though less 
 than Ireland both in area and population, it is a union 
 of no less than twenty-two semi-independent Cantons. 
 These Cantons, small as they are, are absolutely inde- 
 pendent within the limits of the powers granted them 
 by the constitution, and these powers are considerable. 
 They have their own legislatures, and make their own 
 laws. The tiny Canton of Uri occupies a precisely 
 similar position to the State of New York in America 
 with its five millions of inhabitants, or to the State of 
 Texas with its great area of 262,290 square miles. 
 This may seem extraordinary, but it is true. More- 
 over, the Swiss federation is really the most ancient 
 federal union there is. It took its origin in the year 
 1291, when the men of Uri, Schwyz, and of the Lower 
 Valley (part of what is now called Unterwalden) com- 
 bined together to defend themselves against the agents 
 or bailiffs of the German princes, who held a kind of 
 feudal sway over Switzerland. This union received 
 accretions from time to time, the number of Cantons 
 
78 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 being made eight in 1353, thirteen in 1513, nineteen 
 in 1803, and finally twenty-two in 1815. The present 
 constitution, which underwent revision in 1874, dates 
 from the year 1848, and, after the United States of 
 America, forms the most perfect of all federal unions. 
 It is true that between 1798 and 1803 Switzerland 
 ceased to be confederation, and was known as the 
 Helvetic Eepublic. But this was a violent disruption 
 of the natural state of things, and if we leave out of 
 account this short period, as we may well do, we shall 
 see that the Swiss federation has attained the patri- 
 archial age of over six hundred years. It may, there- 
 fore, well claim our reverence. But old as it is, it has 
 not despised the modern. On the contrary, it has 
 adopted and assimilated the newest fashions in politics. 
 It has been so thoroughly recast on modern lines that 
 it ranks second to the United States in the logical 
 precision and completeness of its details. Like the 
 British constitution, it has gone on broadening down 
 from precedent to precedent, throwing off the useless 
 and adapting itself to the life of the present. It 
 commands both our reverence and respect, for it 
 combines the dignity of age with the freshness and 
 elasticity of youth. 
 
 So much has been said in a previous essay on federal 
 institutions generally, that it would involve much 
 repetition to discuss here the federal union of Switzer- 
 land in particular, so that we must pass on to consider 
 some other points in Swiss politics which are no less 
 interesting. 
 
 It is not generally known that Switzerland may 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 79 
 
 fairly claim to be the most democratic country in the 
 world. We are accustomed to think of the United 
 States of America as being the most democratic, but 
 on reflection it must be admitted that this place must 
 be conceded to Switzerland. And this is the more 
 strange because, as a rule, politics in" Switzerland 
 pursue the even tenor of their way so quietly that they 
 hardly ever attract outside attention. We sometimes 
 hear of the expulsion of an anarchist or the imprison- 
 ment of some imprudent member of the Salvation 
 Army. Quite lately, indeed, a revolution in Ticino 
 has caused a considerable stir, but little more is likely 
 to be heard of it. As a rule we may say of Switzerland, 
 " Happy is the country that has no history; " or, if 
 inclined to be cynical, we might apply to it a remark 
 of Lord Westbury on somebody, that the monotony of 
 his character was unbroken by a single vice. Demo- 
 cracies are generally noisy and blatant. It has been 
 said that while monarchies whisper, democracies bellow. 
 The uproar that the French democracy is capable of 
 creating is only too well known. The French people 
 in a revolutionary humour will raise a clamour loud 
 enough to reverberate over Europe, and set every 
 throne and institution trembling. Again, when any- 
 thing happens to agitate the people of the United 
 States, we seem to hear the distant rumble of the 
 conflict across the ocean. When, for instance, the 
 American people proceed to elect a President, what 
 a disturbance there is for months beforehand ! How 
 much we hear of the rival claims of this or that 
 candidate ! Or should by some mischance an English 
 
80 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Minister at Washington be led into an indiscretion not 
 to the taste of the American people, what an uproar is 
 raised ! How in the eyes of the whole world does the 
 great democracy of the West delight in what it is 
 pleased to call " twisting the lion's tail ! " But in 
 Switzerland it is far otherwise. Everything there is 
 done so quietly that hardly any one out of the country 
 knows that they are being done at all. In Switzerland 
 they elect a President annually, instead of every four 
 years as in the United States. Yet we hear infinitely 
 more of American presidential elections than we do of 
 Swiss ones. Yet, in spite of all this quietness, Switzer- 
 land is the only country in the world where we see 
 democracy carried to its extreme and logical results. 
 It is the only country in the world where representa- 
 tive government is backed up and reinforced by an 
 appeal to the people. In other democratic countries, 
 t is only by some elaborate system of checks and, 
 balances that it is ensured that a representative 
 government shall truly and really represent the 
 opinion of the majority, and be a reality and not a 
 sham. In England this is done by means of what are 
 called " constitutional conventions." But in Switzer- 
 land the whole people can on occasion give their votes 
 individually on some question before the country. 
 This appeal to the people is known as the Referendum. 
 It forms pai-t of the federal constitution, and of most 
 of the constitutions of the several cantons. It is the 
 Referendum which gives the Swiss form of government 
 its extreme democratic chai'acter, and, being unique, 
 it is well worth consideration. It is of two kinds — 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 81 
 
 optional and compulsory. Both kinds have a place in 
 the Federal Constitution. It is compulsory when a 
 question of a revision of the Constitution is before the 
 country. The way in which a revision of the Constitu- - 
 tion is introduced and carried out in Switzerland is 
 very remarkable. It is provided that when one of the 
 two chambers of the Federal Assembly, or when fifty 
 thousand voters demand it, then it must be referred to 
 the whole body of voters to say whether the question 
 of revision should be entertained or not. If the voters 
 by a majority affirm the demand, then a Bill for the 
 revision is brought before the Federal Assembly, and 
 this Bill must be referred to the voters again for 
 acceptance. It must be accepted by a majority of 
 the voters and of the Cantons before it becomes law. 
 The Keferendum is optional when any Bill or resolu- 
 tion of a general character, not declared to be urgent, 
 is before the Federal Assembly. Then, if thirty thou- 
 sand citizens or eight Cantons demand it, the proposed 
 Bill or resolution must be referred to the whole body 
 of voters, and it does not become law unless a majority 
 of them accept it. The voters are the electors ; and 
 every Swiss who has attained the age of twenty-one 
 years, and who has not been deprived of civil rights, 
 possesses the franchise. From this it will be seen how 
 intensely democratic the Swiss Federal Constitution is. 
 Suppose, for instance, that a poll of the whole British 
 nation — every man of full age having a vote — was taken 
 on the Home Eule question ; if we can imagine this 
 being done, it will afford us some idea of the Refe- 
 rendum in Switzerland. It has a place, also, in most of 
 
S2 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 the Cantonal Constitutions. It is compulsory in Ziiricli, 
 Bern, Solothurn, Grisons, Aargau, Thurgau, Yalais, 
 and one of the half-cantons of Basle. It is optional 
 only in Lucerne, Zug, Schaffhausen, St. Gallen, Ticino, 
 Neuchatel, Geneva, and the other half-canton of Basle. 
 The late revolution in Ticino seems to have arisen from 
 the refusal of the Cantonal Council to submit a ques- 
 tion of the revision of the constitution to the Eefe- 
 reudum after they had been petitioned to do so by ten 
 thousand voters. The Eeferendum has a very curious 
 effect on Swiss politics. The people know very well 
 that they have in their hands an unfailing weapon and 
 a last resource in the Eeferendum. The result is that 
 they exhibit a certain apathy and indifference to 
 politics. Moreover, as the law-making lies ultimately 
 in their own hands, they do not mind very much who 
 represents them in the Federal Assembly. So long as 
 the representative is considered a good man of business, 
 they are not much inclined to scrutinize too closely his 
 political colour. It happened some few years ago that, 
 time after time, the people rejected the Bills of the 
 Federal Assembly. They rejected, amongst other 
 things, an Electoral Bill, a Bill on Currency, and a Bill 
 creating a Department of Justice, all of which must 
 have been considered useful measures by the Federal 
 Council. It was naturally thought that the majority 
 in the Federal Assembly did not represent the 
 majority of the people. But at the general election 
 a majority of the same party were returned again. 
 It turned out that the people liked their representa- 
 tives well enough, but they did not like the Bills that 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 83 
 
 they had brought in. Another result of the Kefe- 
 rendum is that it acts as a sort of sedative on popular 
 feeling. When once the Keferendum on a particular 
 question has been taken, it is accepted as final, at least 
 for a time, and the decision of the majority is loyally 
 submitted to. The Keferendum is very quietly carried 
 out, and it is generally considered by the Swiss that 
 the compulsory kind is better than the optional, 
 because, when it is optional, there is often considerable 
 agitation in debating whether the option should be 
 made use of or not. 
 
 The Keferendum is so remarkable an institution that 
 it is worth inquiring whether there is anything in 
 other countries at all like it. In England the nearest 
 approach to it is that provision by which the vote of 
 the ratepayers of a parish may be taken on the ques- 
 tion whether a rate for creating a free library shall be 
 levied or not. Local option for granting licences 
 would, if adopted, be another instance of the same 
 sort. But this is only the taking of a popular vote for 
 the purpose of deciding whether a particular Act shall 
 be put in operation over a particular area, and not for 
 confirming the passing of the Act itself. In Canada 
 a popular vote is sometimes taken on the question 
 whether a municipality shall financially assist the 
 construction of railways. In the United States of 
 America some of the State Constitutions provide that 
 certain questions shall be submitted to popular vote. 
 Wisconsin, for instance, provides that it shall be 
 referred to the voters to decide whether or not banks 
 shall be chartered. In many local governments of the 
 
84 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 United States specific questions are frequently referredl 
 to the popular vote. But all these are like the voting^ 
 for a free-library rate in England rather than the 
 Swiss Referendum. The use that has been made of 
 the Plebiscite in France has been thought by some to 
 be the same as the Referendum. But this is not really 
 so, because the Plebiscite has always been really a 
 fraud on the French people. They had really mo 
 option but to vote for a particular regime that had 
 been forced upon them. So that the Swiss Referendum 
 may be fairly said to enjoy the honour of being 
 a unique institution. 
 
 Nor is the Referendum the only powerful weapon of 
 democracy in Switzerland. In some of the Cantons 
 there is in operation what is known as the Initiative. 
 The Initiative is the right of initiating legislation. 
 This right belongs to the people when a sufiScient 
 number of voters, as fixed by the cantonal constitution, 
 demands it. The legislative body of the Canton is 
 bound to introduce legislation when a Bill on a par- 
 ticular subject is demanded by means of the Initiative. 
 It is found in operation in Solothurn, Grisoiis, Aargau, 
 Thurgau, the two half-cantons of Basle, Zug, Schaff- 
 hausen, and Neuchatel. 
 
 Although the Referendum and the Initiative may 
 well seem to be the utmost limits of democratic rule, 
 yet there is a still more democratic institution than 
 either to be found in Switzerland. This is what is 
 known as the Landesgemeinden, or the popular assem- 
 blies. They are to be found in Uri, the Upper and 
 Lower Unterwalden, Appenzel, and Glarus. In these- 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 85 
 
 •Cantons there is no Referendum, and for a very good 
 reason. It is unnecessary where there is a still more 
 democratic institution already in existence. In the 
 Cantons which we have named, the people do not elect 
 representatives to a governing body, but they meet 
 together themselves in an assembly to conduct their 
 own affairs and make their own laws. This is surely 
 the ne i^lus ultra of democracy, beyond which the most 
 ardent advocate of popular rights could not well go. 
 The Swiss popular assemblies are * probably the most 
 ancient political institutions in Europe. It is really a 
 modern instance of that direct legislation by the people 
 which was common enough in antiquity, but which is 
 now excessively rare. Such assemblies are said still 
 to be found in the tiny republics of Andorra and San 
 Marino. They resemble greatly the 'E/dcXrjo-ia of Hellas 
 or the Comitia of Rome. There are, indeed, few things 
 in politics more interesting than the Swiss Landesge- 
 meinden. They are more than merely interesting ; 
 they are positively heart-stirring and soul-inspiring. 
 For, as Professor Freeman says, in them we look face 
 to face with freedom in its purest and most ancient 
 form. Sir F. 0. Adams and Mr. Cunningham, in their 
 admirable volume on the Swiss Confederation, give a 
 most picturesque and graphic description of the Lan- 
 desgemeinden of Uri. It is impossible to refrain from 
 giving the following short extract : — 
 
 " Uri may be taken as an example. There on the 
 first Sunday in May the people assemble in a meadow 
 ai Bozlingen an der Card, not far from Altdorf. The 
 Landamman, after having duly attended mass in the 
 
S6 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 village church, proceeds in procession to the place of 
 meeting. He is accompanied by ushers in antique 
 costumes of black and yellow, the colours of the canton. 
 There is an ancient banner, with the arms of Uri (a 
 bull's head on a yellow ground), and there are old wild 
 bull's horns which year after year are borne upon poles 
 by men in front. The Landamman seats himself at a 
 table in the centre of the meadow, with another official 
 (Landschreiber), and the people, standing or sittings 
 range themselves around him as in an amphitheatre. 
 The Landamman makes his opening speech, and reviews 
 the events, domestic and foreign, of the previous year. 
 Then there is silence over the whole assembly, every 
 one offering up a prayer, and after that the real busi- 
 ness commences. Every man speaks his mind when 
 and for as long as he pleases. Every subject is dis- 
 cussed with decorum, and finally, when all other matters 
 have been settled, the officials for the following year 
 are chosen. The outgoing Landamman (who may be, 
 and generally is, re-elected for another year), delivers 
 up his charge with an affirmation that he has in- 
 jured no one voluntarily, and he asks pardon of any 
 citizen who may think himself aggrieved. The new 
 Landamman takes the prescribed oath, and the whole 
 people swear to obey him, to serve their country, and 
 respect the laws. Other officials are then elected by a 
 show of hands, and the meeting is over." 
 
 These popular assemblies irresistibly remind one of 
 the old Homeric dyopa. It is true that in the Homeric 
 dyopa the people came together to listen, and not to 
 debate themselves. They did, however, indirectly 
 
I 
 
 HE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 87 
 
 affect the course of the proceedings by their applause 
 or by keeping a sullen and ominous silence. Mr. Glad- 
 stone, in his " Homeric Studies," compares the ayopu 
 to an English county political meeting. Nevertheless 
 the fact of the dyopa being an open-air meeting puts 
 it on much the same footing with the Landesgemein- 
 den. The external characteristics are common to 
 both. Then, again, the executive council of the Lan- 
 desgemeinden stands in much the same relation to 
 those assemblies as the (3ov\ri did to the djopd, Mr. 
 Gladstone, in his " Homeric Studies," says that " upon 
 the whole the /BouX?) seems to have been a most im- 
 portant auxiliary element of government, sometimes 
 preparing materials for the more public deliberations 
 of the assembly, sometimes entrusted as a kind of 
 executive committee with its confidence." This de- 
 scription makes the SouXtj not altogether unlike the 
 executive council that conducts the business of those 
 Cantons which have Landesgemeinden. We are 
 tempted to think, too, of the old German assemblies 
 that met together to consider the more important 
 matters, for Tacitus says of the Germans, " de mino- 
 ribus rebus principes consultant, de majoribus omnes." 
 And so well conducted and orderly are the Swiss that 
 the words applied by Tacitus to the Germans might 
 fairly be applied to them also : " plusque ibi boni mores 
 valent quam alibi bonse leges." Before leaving the 
 subject of Landesgemeinden, one curious modern in- 
 stance of a popular assembly should be noted. This 
 is to be found in Norfolk Island, which is a British 
 possession, and is a dependency of New South Wales. 
 
S8 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 There once annually all male citizens of the age of 
 twenty-five and upwards meet together for the purpose 
 of transacting public business. 
 
 When we consider all these elements of democracy, 
 the widely extended franchise, the Keferendum, the 
 Initiative, the Landesgemeinden, it will, we think, be 
 admitted that Switzerland is without exception the 
 most democratic country in the world. Kousseau is said 
 to have remarked that a republican form of govern- 
 ment is suitable to small states only. Whatever we 
 may think of large states, and whatever aspirations we 
 may have for the future of republican government in 
 large states, it seems clear that there is one conspicuous 
 example of a small state for which a republic has 
 proved itself eminently fitted, and that state is Swit- 
 zerland. It stands as a reproach to France, and de- 
 mands at least the respectful regard of the United 
 States. 
 
 There is another point in Swiss politics which must 
 be regarded as very democratic, because it is constantly 
 demanded by the Eadical party in England, and that 
 is that members of the Federal Assembly are paid for 
 their services. The system must be regarded as demo- 
 cratic because it is found in operation in other demo- 
 cratic countries. In the United States, both senators 
 and representatives receive dBlOOO per annum, together 
 with tenpence a mile for travelling expenses, and £25 
 a year for stationery. In Canada and the Australian 
 colonies, the members sometimes of both houses, some- 
 times of one only, receive payment. In Victoria, mem- 
 bers of the Lower House receive £300 a year. In 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 89 
 
 South Australia, members of both Houses receive £200 
 a year. In France and a few of the German states 
 members are also paid, but in Italy they are only 
 allowed to travel on the railway free. But the envy 
 •of English Radicals would probably be damped if they 
 knew how slender the remuneration of a Swiss member 
 is. Each member receives about sixteen shillings a 
 •day for every day he attends during the session, and 
 also about twopence-halfpenny for travelling expenses. 
 Moreover, he does not earn his pay unless he is present 
 when the list of names is called over at the beginning 
 of a sitting, unless he can give some reasonable excuse 
 for his absence. Further, as there are only two sessions 
 a year of about three weeks each, it is tolerably clear 
 that no member can hope to make a living out of 
 political life. Indeed, there is probably no country 
 where so little pecuniary profit can be hoped for from 
 a political career as Switzerland. The Swiss are a very 
 frugal race, and the salaries they offer to their political 
 •officers would in this country be considered meagre in 
 the extreme. The President of the Confederation only 
 gets £540 a year, and the Vice-President £480 a year. 
 The Chancellor of the Confederation is rewarded witli 
 £440 a year and a house, while the President of the 
 Federal Tribunal, who occupies a similar position to 
 i^he Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, only gets £440 a year, and his colleagues on 
 the bench only £400 a year. The length to which 
 economy in administration is carried in Switzerland 
 •can be realized when we consider that only a few years 
 •ago the people by the Referendum rejected two Bills 
 
90 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 of the Federal Assembly for establishing with small 
 salaries two officials, one in the Chancellor's depart-^ 
 ment, and the other in the Swiss Legation at Washing- 
 ton. As these posts must have been considered neces- 
 sary by the Federal Assembly and the Federal Council^ 
 it does appear the very extreme of economy for the 
 people to refuse them. Still, the British Government 
 Departments might learn a lesson from the Swiss in 
 this direction, as there appears to be little doubt but 
 that there is considerable room for saving money in 
 many of our public ofiSces. There is something salutary,, 
 too, in the arrangements for the sittings of the Swis& 
 Federal Assembly, which might perhaps be profitably 
 considered by our members of Parliament. Instead of 
 meeting in the evening and sitting until the small 
 hours of the morning, they meet at eight or nine 
 o'clock a.m., according to the season, and rise at about 
 one or two o'clock. On Mondays, however, they do 
 not meet until three in the afternoon, for a reason that 
 gives us an insight into Swiss homeliness of character. 
 This hour is fixed in order to allow deputies to return, 
 home after spending their Sundays in their domestic- 
 circles. 
 
 And this brings us to consider the Federal As- 
 sembly, or what we should call the Houses of Parlia- 
 ment. As in England, there are two houses — tlie 
 National Council, which may be said to correspond to 
 the House of Commons, and the Council of States,. 
 which may be said roughly to correspond to the House 
 of Lords. A much better comparison is with the 
 American Congress, which consists of the House of 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 91 
 
 Kepresentatives and the Senate, corresponding respec- 
 tively to the National Council and the Council of 
 States. The National Council represents the people, 
 and the Council of States represents the Cantons. 
 There are several points of interest in these two 
 chambers. It is curious, for instance, that while the 
 deputies to the National Council are elected for three 
 years, which is the full term of the existence of any 
 one Federal Assembly, the deputies to the Council of 
 States are elected for no fixed period during that term. 
 They may be elected for the whole of the term or for 
 any portion of it. So that, in a sense, it is the con- 
 verse of our House of Lords, the members of which sit 
 by hereditary right in each Parliament during its 
 whole existence. Whilst a peer sits for life, a deputy 
 to the Council of States sits only for a short period, 
 sometimes not even during the whole life of the 
 Federal Assembly. Again, the Council of States 
 appears a less important body than the American 
 Senate, for a senator sits for a whole period of six 
 years, for which the Senate is elected, while the 
 House of Eepresentatives is elected for two years only. 
 But although the Council of States differs from the 
 House of Lords and the Senate in these important 
 I particulars, it resembles them in others. For instance, 
 I there are fewer members of the Council of States than 
 there are of the National Council, just as there are 
 fewer members of the Senate than there are of the 
 House of Eepresentatives. And though the members 
 of the House of Commons are more numerous than the 
 t Lords, yet the Lords are in practice usually much the 
 
92 • ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 smaller assembly of the two. Again, the debates 
 the Council of States are carried on more temperat( 
 and dispassionately than in the National Council, 
 the former the members address the House sittin, 
 and not standing up, and the debates are carried a 
 more in the manner of a family discussion. T] 
 functions of the two chambers, when considered rel- 
 tively to one another, perhaps more nearly resem] 
 the relative functions of our Houses of Parliam* 
 than the two American Chambers. They are ab^ 
 lately co-ordinate, whereas the American Senate h; 
 functions which do not belong to the House of Repr- 
 sentatives. For instance, it is the duty of the Senat, 
 and not of the other chamber, to confirm treaties ail 
 official appointments made by the President. It mr 
 be added that the National Council is, in popular esl 
 mation, the more important chamber, because i 
 members sit for a full period of three years, and ih 
 for a period that may possibly be less. In this supeijU 
 importance it resembles our House of Commons. 
 
 The Federal Council is one of the most curious 
 interesting things in Swiss political institutions, 
 stands in singular contrast with the British Cabin 
 It is, at the same time, like the Cabinet, and yet 
 unlike it. It is a kind of executive committee, 
 the beginning of every new Federal Assembly, 
 elected by the two chambers for the period of the thre 
 years of their own existence. Its President and V 
 President are elected by them annually ; so that i' 
 evidently the creature of the Federal Assembly. ] 
 this respect it is lorima facie very unlike the Britie 
 
 )lDi 
 
 11 
 
THE rOLITIOAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 93^ 
 
 Cabinet, which is selected by the Prime Minister, who 
 is requested, in his turn, by the Crown to undertake 
 the formation of a ministry. But this unlikeness is 
 not really so great as it appears, because, in practice, 
 the Crown always selects for its advisers those who 
 command a majority in the House of Commons. The 
 Federal Council consists of seven ministers, who take up 
 different departments of government just as the mem- 
 bers of the Cabinet do. But the strange thing about 
 it is that the seven ministers need not be, and in fact 
 never are, of the same political party. They may be, 
 and sometimes are, of diametrically opposite opinions. 
 They form a sort of coalition ministry, a thing which 
 Lord Beaconsfield declared the English detested. More-^ 
 over, the Federal Council often contains a majority of 
 a party which is not the same party majority as that in 
 the Federal Assembly. This can best be realized by 
 imagining the Houses of Parliament, containing a 
 Tory majority, electing a cabinet consisting of three 
 Radicals, two Liberals, and two Tories. And what 
 appears stranger still is, that the members of the 
 Federal Council are generally re-elected over and over 
 again, until they resign or die. In this continuity of 
 office they more nearly resemble the English perma- 
 nent under-secretaries than the Cabinet ministers. 
 The Swiss democracy, at any rate, cannot be accused of 
 fickleness. It seems clear that, in Switzerland, there 
 cannot be much party bitterness, for otherwise such 
 an arrangement as we have described would be im- 
 possible. It would be absolutely impossible in France. 
 A ministry composed of Eepublicans, Royalists, and 
 
94 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Bonapartists would rend itself to pieces. There must 
 also be in Switzerland a considerable amount of feeling 
 of fair play and mutual confidence amongst parties, 
 which politiciansof other countries might usefully ponder 
 over. For when a vacancy arises, it is filled up with 
 a due regard that all parties shall be fairly represented. 
 The vacant post does not become a bone of contention, 
 which is immediately fastened on by the pj^rty that 
 happens to be in a majority. There is no cry of " the 
 spoils to the victors." When we consider the vehe- 
 mence of party conflict and the almost delirium of 
 avarice for place that actuates political parties in 
 England and the United States, it is refreshing to turn 
 to Switzerland and see, in actual fact, and as a matter 
 of practice and tradition, the best interests of the 
 country placed before party feeling. Another very 
 peculiar thing about the Federal Council is that its 
 members are not allowed to sit as deputies, or to vote 
 in either chamber of the Federal Assembly. But 
 though they cannot vote, they are allowed to speak. 
 In this respect they are very unlike the British Cabinet 
 ministers. So important is it in England that a 
 Cabinet minister should have a seat in Parliament, 
 that it is considered by his party nothing short of 
 a disaster that he should be defeated at the poll. It 
 would seem strange indeed if our Cabinet ministers 
 were without seats in Parliament, and could not vote 
 there. The Swiss Federal Council, to some extent, 
 resembles the American Secretaries of State, for they 
 have no seats in Congress. But, on the other hand, 
 the American State Secretaries are appointed by the 
 President, and cannot speak or vote in Congress. 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OP SWITZERLAND. 95 
 
 There are very considerable merits in the Swiss 
 system of government. It partakes of some of the 
 merits of the American and British systems, and, at the 
 same time, is without some of their defects. In Eng- 
 land and France there is a parliamentary government, 
 or government by an executive forming part of the 
 legislature. In America and Prussia there is non- 
 I parliamentary government, or government by an 
 •executive distinct from the legislature. In the first 
 case, the executive enjoys no independence whatever. 
 It is the creature of the legislature, and lives in its 
 breath. It must either act in harmony with it or 
 perish. In the second case, the executive has inde- 
 pendence, indeed, but then it is often in conflict with 
 the legislature. But in Switzerland the executive has 
 independence, and yet is never in conflict with the 
 legislature. In England, the executive, if it runs 
 counter to the majority of the House of Commons, 
 must resign — unless, indeed, believing the country to 
 be at its back, it advises the Crown to dissolve Parlia- 
 ment. In America, Congress may come into bitter 
 conflict with the President, as it did with Andrew 
 Johnson. It cannot get rid of its President. He is 
 elected for four years, and is taken for better or worse. 
 Whatever he does, he will remain in office for that 
 time, unless he commits acts which render him liable 
 to impeachment. But in Switzerland the Federal 
 -Council does not resign, if the Federal Assembly does 
 not agree with its policy. Neither does it come into 
 conflict with the Federal Assembly, because it is 
 elected by that body, and represents all shades of 
 
96 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 opinion. In short, the executive is at once indepen- 
 dent and in harmonious relations with the legislature. 
 Nor is this the only merit of the Swiss constitution. 
 It has stability, both constitutional and administrative. 
 It is not every state that has stability of both kinds.. 
 The United States, for instance, enjoys constitutional 
 stability in the highest degree. Its constitution is 
 of cast-iron rigidity, and is exceedingly difficult to 
 change. On the other hand, partly owing to th& 
 strongly marked separation between the executive- 
 and the legislature, and partly owing to a certain 
 dissipation of authority inherent in a federal system,, 
 the administration is weak. The troubles in South 
 Carolina, in 1832, and in Kansas, 1855-6, put the 
 executive severely to the test. In France, that labo- 
 ratory of political experiments, the constitution, 
 though of the rigid type, cannot be called stable. It 
 nearly fell a victim to the machinations of that 
 feeblest of would-be heroes, Greneral Boulanger. It 
 is also administratively weak. It is unusual for a 
 French Cabinet to last for more than a year. But the 
 Swiss constitution is stable, and its administration is- 
 independent, fearless, and firm. It suppressed the 
 revolt in Ticino with an admirable promptness. 
 
 The position occupied by the President in the 
 federal constitution is interesting. The position of 
 the President of the Swiss confederation probably 
 carries with it less distinction than that of any other 
 head of a state. It is idle to compare him with 
 crowned heads, but it is not uninteresting to contrast 
 his position with that of the presidents of other im-^ 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 97 
 
 portant republics. The contrast between him and the 
 President of the United States is the most startling 
 of all. There are probably few men who possess such 
 immense powers as the American President. He may 
 not be as powerful as autocratic monarchs, but he is 
 less trammelled than a constitutional monar<-h. He 
 chooses his own ministers, and can dismiss them at 
 pleasure. He has the patronage of an immense 
 number of appointments, and has the whole of the 
 executive in his hands. He has a veto over the Bills 
 passed by Congress; he appoints the judges of the 
 Supreme Court, and is Commander-in-Chief of the 
 army. Quite lately he has been invested with quite 
 extraordinary powers under the McKinley Tariff Act. 
 He is empowered to forbid all imports from countries 
 who refuse to admit American cattle after inspection 
 by American inspectors. On the other hand, the 
 Swiss President is little more than a chairman of an 
 executive board. He is only elected for a year. He 
 is even a less important person than the French 
 President, to whom belongs the privilege of neither 
 reigning nor governing. Most educated people could 
 probably in a moment name the French or American 
 Presidents, but how few there are who could give off- 
 hand the name of the Swiss President ! This is a very 
 fair test of his insignificance in the eyes of the world. 
 But, though holding this modest position, he occupies 
 an important place in the executive, and does a great 
 amount of very useful work. 
 
 The Swiss Federal Council is the only example of a 
 plural executive, or an executive council. When the 
 
 H 
 
98 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 architects of the American constitution were discussing 
 the form their executive was to take, they considered 
 the Swiss plan of the executive council. As a con- 
 stitutional king was for them out of the question, they 
 had the alternative of creating a president or a council. 
 The latter plan they deliberately rejected, thinking 
 that party differences in the council might paralyze 
 the executive authority. Whether or not this would 
 have been the case in ximerica must always remain 
 doubtful. But they were probably right. But it is 
 remarkable that in Switzerland no such paralysis has 
 ever occurred. In other countries the executive is 
 really or nominally placed in the hands of one man. 
 In constitutional monarchies it is placed nominally in 
 the crown, but really in a popularly elected prime 
 minister. The monarch reigns, but does not govern. 
 In the United States it is placed really as well as 
 nominally in the President. He governs, but does not 
 reign. In Fiance it is placed nominally in the 
 President, but really in a popularly elected prime 
 minister. The French President neither reigns nor 
 governs. In autocracies it is placed really and 
 nominally in the monarch, who both reigns and 
 governs. There are, indeed, other conceivable forms 
 of the executive. The King of Sweden, for instance, 
 has partly the position of a constitutional monarch, 
 and partly the position of a president of the American 
 type. The old elective Kings of Poland and the 
 Doges of Venice had a somewhat similar position. 
 But they were rather monarchs than presidents. In 
 Switzerland alone do we find the executive, so tc 
 
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZEKLAND. 99 
 
 speak, placed in commission. The Federal Council 
 (and not its President) occupies the position of a 
 monarch or a president in other countries. The Swiss 
 constitution, therefore, offers but little scope for the 
 abilities of its President. It provides no room for a 
 Washington or a Lincoln. Neither, on the other hand, 
 does the mode of election lead to the choice of such 
 mediocrities as a Polk or a Pierce. Both in America 
 and Prance it is often dangerous to elect the best 
 man. As was long ago said by Swift, the quality of 
 being the fittest is fatal to any candidate. The best 
 ma,n is often the worst candidate. In the last French 
 presidential election M. Carnot was elected. He was 
 not, however, nearly so well known as M. Freycinet, 
 M. Jules Ferry, or M. Floquet. But he divided 
 partiesJeasL The Swiss President is almost sure to 
 be the best man for the post, but the best man for the 
 Swiss presidency is not the brilliant orator or forger of 
 great ideas in policy, but merely one who can best 
 carry on the ordinary affairs of government in a 
 business-like way. 
 
 The political institutions of Switzerland are well 
 worth studying. They are in many ways interesting, 
 and at least in one point, the Keferendum, unique. 
 Then, again, what is there in modern political life at 
 all comparable for picturesque colouring and dramatic 
 action with the Landesgemeinden ? The Federal 
 Council again, both in its constituent elements and its 
 relations to the Federal Assembly, presents many 
 interesting points, and stands in remarkable contrast 
 with the British Cabinet system. Swiss political life, 
 
100 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 too, has in some ways readied an almost ideal rectitude 
 and loftiness, and must stand as an example and a 
 model to other countries. There is probably no 
 country where party feeling is so much subordinated 
 to patriotism, or where there is less political bitterness. 
 There are few statesmen who do so much hard and 
 honest work for so little reward as the men who form 
 the Swiss executive. Altogether the impression left 
 upon the mind of the student is that the Swiss deserve 
 well of fate, and that there is a purity and loftiness in 
 their life and character which harmonizes well with 
 the eternal snows of the mountains, the limpid streams 
 and lucid lakes, amongst which they live. 
 
( 101 ) 
 
 ly. 
 
 THE PKOGKESS OF THE "MASSES." 
 
 Nothing so much exercises the mind of many at the 
 present time as the social questions arising from the 
 unequal distribution of wealth. The causes to which 
 this fact may be ascribed are mixed, and it is difficult 
 to say which has been the most powerful. First, there 
 is the extension of tlie franchise, and the consequent 
 increased power of the people to make their voices 
 heard ; secondly, and closely connected with this, is 
 the readiness of political agitators to find out real 
 grievances or invent imaginary ones for the newly- 
 enfranphised — the mob service, in short, of the cour- 
 tiers of the people; thirdly, there is the growth of 
 education, which, as a great writer has said, "is not 
 the equalizer, but the discerner of men ; " and directly 
 consequent upon education is the quickening of the 
 imaginative faculty, that " mighty priest and prophet 
 to lead us heavenward, or magician and wizard to lead 
 us hellward." And directly consequent upon the 
 larger imaginative faculty (and through it upon educa- 
 tion) is the increased power of sympathy, "the uni- 
 
102 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 versal solvent" that eats away the barriers dividing 
 man from man and class from class. 
 
 Whatever the causes, the facts are patent, and it 
 would be easy to indicate, did space allow, the extent 
 to which social questions are "in the air," producing 
 in some that pessimistic spirit which wrung from the 
 lips of the great Lord Shaftesbury, shortly before his 
 death, the saddening remark that he did not like to 
 leave the world with so much misery in it. Yet there 
 are many hopeful signs in the situation which any one 
 who will admit the cogency of facts and figures must 
 be compelled to admit. 
 
 And first of all, a rapid glance at the history of the 
 labour question will teach us that the labouring classes 
 have only recently emerged from a state of slavery. 
 
 The very word " servant " suggests slave by its de- 
 rivation. "It is familiar," says Mr. W. 0. Holmes in 
 his treatise on the Common Law, " that the status of 
 a servant maintains many marks of the time when he 
 was a slave. The liability of the master for his torts 
 is one instance." 
 
 We hear much of liberty in this country ; we boast 
 of it ; our historians laud it, and tell in impassioned 
 words by what manner of men and by what efforts and 
 self-sacrifices it was won ; our philosophers write 
 treatises upon it, and our poets dedicate odes and 
 sonnets in its honour. Yet this much-glorified liberty, 
 valuable though it is, is liberty in the political sense 
 only ; and as, in the words of Hobbes, political liberty 
 is political power, the liberty we praise is the power 
 to participate in government, and the struggles by 
 
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 103 
 
 which that power was gained were the struggles made 
 in removing the restraints that forbade men to grasp 
 it. Yet all this time liberty, in the fuller and truer 
 sense of the word — that is to say, liberty of the person 
 — was comparatively neglected. This liberty of the 
 person has been classed by philosophers and jurists 
 among "primordial" or "natural" rights. Yet from 
 the way in which it has been regarded one would 
 rather be inclined to say that, so far from being 
 " primordial," it was one of the last rights to be 
 granted to suffering humanity. It is a remarkable 
 thing how men have fought and suffered for political 
 liberty, while they have only lightly estimated 
 personal and individual liberty. The Athenians, who 
 commemorated in song Harinodius and Aristogeiton, 
 exhibited a callous indifference to the great slave 
 population bowed down beneath their yoke. Brutus, 
 in his love of political liberty, stayed not his hand 
 from the murder of Caesar, but raised not a finger to 
 relieve the numberless slaves that formed so large a 
 part of Eoman society. When Thrasea Poetus opened 
 his veins, and as the blood flowed cried, "1 pour a 
 libation to Jupiter the Deliverer," he had in his mind 
 the deliverer from political tyranny rather than the 
 deliverer from the tyranny of the slave-master. In- 
 deed, we cannot help saying with Hallam, that "we 
 lose a good deal of sympathy with the spirit of freedom 
 in Greece and Rome when the importunate recollec- 
 tion occurs to us of the tasks and the punishments 
 which might be inflicted, without control either of law 
 or opinion, by the keenest patriot of the Comitia or 
 
104 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 the Council of the Five Thousand." When Rousseau 
 said that man was born free, but was everywhere in 
 chains, he was thinking chiefly of the reign of the few, 
 for which he wished to substitute the rule of the 
 people, The descendants of those Catholics who, 
 flying persecution at home, sought religious liberty 
 in another clime, and founded the States of Maryland 
 and Virginia, did not hesitate to impose on the negro 
 a yoke of slavery far more cruel than any oppression 
 their ancestors had suffered. Nay, more; during the 
 Civil War in America a large number of Englishmen 
 were found to express their sympathies with the slave- 
 holding states of the South. Of them J. S. Mill re- 
 marked that their action disclosed "a mental state in 
 the leading portion of our higher and middle classes 
 which it is melancholy to see, and will be a lasting 
 blot in English history." It is indeed remarkable 
 that Englishmen who had unbounded admiration for 
 their forefathers, who had done so much in the cause 
 of political and religious liberty, should have looked 
 with sympathy on those who were endeavouring to 
 perpetuate an institution which denied the boon of 
 personal liberty. But we revere the memories of Pym 
 and Hampden more than those of Clarkson and Wilber- 
 force. 
 
 We have remarked that it is only comparatively 
 recently that the condition of the labourer has approxi- 
 mated to freedom. It is indeed too true that slavery 
 has been the almost universal custom of the human 
 race. That all the ancient civilizations were slave- 
 holding states is notorious; the flight of the slaves 
 
THE PROGKESS OF THE "MASSES." 105 
 
 from Athens during the Peloponnesian war, the cruel 
 murder of the Helots in Sparta, and the cold and 
 callous way in which the Greek philosopher spoke of 
 the slave as a living tool, testify to the extent of 
 slavery in Greece. The ruinous system of " ergastula," 
 the provisions of the Roman law, whicli hardly raised 
 the slave above the position of the domestic animal 
 (for it was not until the reign of Antoninus Pius that 
 it became homicide to kill a slave), the Servile War, 
 are a few examples out of many that show the magni- 
 tude of slavery as a Roman institution. The pyramids 
 raised by the bloody sweat of tens of thousands beneath 
 the lash are an everlasting monument of Egyptian 
 bondage; and we need scarcely be reminded of the 
 Israelites, whose lives the Pharaohs made " bitter with 
 hard bondage in mortar and in brick, and in all 
 manner of service in the field." These examples, 
 taken at random out of many, must suffice to show 
 how widespread and terrible was the curse of slavery 
 in the Old World states. Well might St. Paul divide 
 men into bond and free ! 
 
 In the Dark and Middle Ages things were scarcely 
 better. The Roman Empire has been described by 
 Mr. John Morley as a vast imperial state with slavery 
 for a base. The word " slave " is a bit of fossil history. 
 It tells us that the Slavs were reduced to the condition 
 suggested by the word "slave." Christianity, it is true, 
 by inculcating the duty of manumission, did some- 
 thing to ameliorate the hard lot of the slave, but so 
 late as the seventh century Pope Gregory the Great 
 was constrained by his sympathies to do what he could 
 
106 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 to wipe out an institution so incompatible with llie 
 precepts of his faith. Mrs. Jameson, in her work on 
 the Monastic Orders, relates a beautiful story of St. 
 Baron and his enfranchised slave. That the lowest 
 ignominy, the lash, and the prison, were the lot of the 
 slave in the seventh century it eloquently and pathe- 
 tically testifies. "Throughout these age^," says 
 Hallam, "servitude under somewhat different modes 
 was extremely common." Besides slavery ia its most 
 absolute form, there were various degrees of serfdom 
 and villeinage. In England, in the reign of Henry the 
 Second, there was a class of villeins who could hold 
 no property and were destitute of all means of redress ; 
 and so late as the reign of Elizabeth predial servitude 
 undoubtedly existed. In France predial servitude 
 existed down to the very days of the Eevolution ; and 
 La Bruyere, in glowing and impassioned words, speaks 
 of " certain wild animals, male and female, scattered 
 over the fields, black, livid, all burnt by the sun, 
 bound to the earth that they did till with unconquer- 
 able pertinacity ; they have a sort of articulate voice, 
 and when they rise ou their feet they show a human 
 face, and are in fact men." 
 
 Confining our attention to England, we find that 
 by degrees serfs and villeins developed into hired 
 labourers, but that the legislators did what they could 
 to render their freedom a mockery. This is well 
 shown by what happened after the dreadful pestilence 
 of 1348, which greatly reduced the number of 
 labourers, and consequently enhanced the price of 
 labour. What happened was the passing of the 
 
THE PKOGKESS OF THE "MASSES." 107 
 
 famous Statute of Labourers, which J. S. Mill justly 
 says was intended to prevent the labouring classes 
 from taking advantage of diminished competition to 
 obtain higher wages. " Such laws," he says, *' exhibit 
 the infernal spirit of the slave-master, when to retain 
 the working classes in avowed slavery has ceased to 
 be practicable," By this statute, passed in the year 
 1350, it was exacted that every man in England, of 
 whatever condition, bond or free, of able body and 
 within sixty years of age, not living of his own or by 
 any trade, should be obliged when required to serve 
 any master who was willing to hire him at such wages 
 as were usually paid three years before. The price of 
 labour was actually fixed, and no more than the old 
 wages was allowed to be given or asked for. The 
 labourer, too, was forbidden to leave the parish in 
 which he lived in search of better-paid employment. 
 A law more oppressive to the labourer can hardly be 
 imagined. That it ended in the great Peasant Eevolt 
 cannot be wondered at. We can well understand in 
 what spiiit the burning words of John Ball, the mad 
 priest of Kent, would be received — words in which he 
 contrasted the lives of the employer and the employed : 
 "They are clothed in velvet, and warm in their furs 
 and ermine ; while we are covered with rags. They 
 have wine and spices and fair bread ; and we oat-cake 
 and straw, and water to drink. They have leisure and 
 fine houses ; and we have pain and labour, the rain 
 and the wind in the fields. And yet it is of us and of 
 our toil that these men hold their state." They might 
 well have echoed the despairing words of the Hebrew 
 
108 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 preacher, that there was no profit in their labour 
 under the sun. Nor was this the only statute enacted 
 in order to restrict the freedom of the labourer. By 
 a statute passed in the twelfth year of the reign of 
 Richard the Second, no servant or labourer could 
 depart, even at the expiration of his service, from the 
 hundred in which he lived, without permission under 
 the King's seal ; nor might any one who bad been 
 bred to husbandry up to the age of twelve years 
 exercise any other calling. By a statute passed in 
 the seventh year of the reign of Henry the Fourth, any 
 one who did not possess a certain property qualifica- 
 tion was forbidden to put his son or daughter as an 
 apprentice to any trade in a borough, and the House 
 of Commons about the same time unsuccessfully 
 attempted to prevent villeins sending their children 
 to school. So beneficent was the rule of a Government 
 of employers ! They had yet to learn the truth of the 
 inscription on the tomb of Bahran-gor : " The hand of 
 Liberality is stronger than the arm of Power." These 
 statutes affected chiefly the agricultural labourer ; but 
 the artisan of the town fared but little better. In the 
 fifth year of the reign of Elizabeth was passed the- 
 famous Statute of Apprentices, which almost equals 
 the Statute of Labourers in its oppressive restraints. 
 By this statute justices of the peace were enabled to 
 fix the rate of wages; artisans were compelled to 
 remain in the same trade in which they were appren- 
 ticed, and were only allowed to leave the place in 
 which they lived under certain conditions; a fixed 
 number (a minimum, not a maximum) of hours for 
 
THE PKOGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 109 
 
 work was imposed; women might be compelled to 
 enter into service. These were some of the provisions 
 of the Act. Fortunately for this country it was 
 judiciously decided that its provisions only applied to 
 trades actually existing at the time of the passing of 
 the Act, and uot to newly discovered occupations. So 
 long as agriculture was the staple employment of the 
 people, the sphere of the operation of the statute was 
 comparatively small, but with the growth of this 
 country as a manufacturing and mercantile community 
 it became much more important. From time to time 
 it was supplemented by statutes passed to regulate the 
 rate of wages and hours of labour in particular trades. 
 For instance, in 1720 a statute was passed to regulate 
 journeymen tailors; in 1725 the wool-makers, in 
 1749 the hat-makers, in 1777 the silk-weavers, in 
 1795 the paper-makers, were respectively made the 
 subject of similar legislation. In 1799 a general Act, 
 following similar Acts of the reigns of Edward the 
 Sixth and Charles the Second, was passed to suppress 
 combinations to force an increase in wages. By this 
 time the question of the legality of such combinations 
 had become very important, and in the years 1800, 
 1824, 1825, and 1871, the Legislature made various 
 attempts to deal with it, and it was not until 1875 
 that it was put on a satisfactory footing by the Con- 
 spiracy and Protection of Property Act. It was not 
 until then that the spirit of the old Statute of 
 Apprentices was finally eradicated. 
 
 During the latter part of the last century the 
 invention of the spinning-jenny and the mule and 
 
110 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 that of the steam-engine be^an an industrial revolu- 
 tion that completely altered the condition of the 
 English labourer. With the growth of factories a new 
 class of workmen arose into importance. In two 
 directions the introduction of the spinning factory- 
 worked at first to the disadvantage of the labourer. 
 In the first place, the ao^ricultural labourer suffered ; 
 and in this way : Formerly it was customary for the 
 family of the peasant to eke out their small wages by 
 working at the spinning-loom at home. After the 
 introduction of the spinning factory this form of 
 domestic labour became no longer profitable, and the 
 wages of the peasant remaining as low as before, his 
 condition became more wretched than ever. In the 
 next place, the introduction of the factory system 
 enabled the factory owner to exercise over the opera- 
 tives ip. his employ a power that was often oppressive. 
 The reader of Lord Beaconsfield's "Sybil" will re- 
 member the graphic words in which he described what 
 he felt to be at once a danger and a disgrace. During 
 the early part of this century in England the condition 
 of the working classes was indeed a wretched one. 
 The late Mr. Arnold Toynbee, in one of his lectures 
 delivered in London, in St. Andrew's Hall, Newman 
 Street, in 1883, stated that it is well known by those 
 qualified to judge, that the condition of the workmen 
 in England was one of civilization compared to what 
 it was forty years ago. He tells us to turn to the 
 memoirs of the Chartists, Samuel Lovett and Thomas 
 Cooper, to read of men who clamoured to be sent to 
 prison that they might not starve, and of labourers 
 
THE PROGKESS OF THE '* MASSES." Ill 
 
 who burnt ricks, and asked when the fighting was to 
 begin. The lot of humanity has been tersely described 
 in these words : " They are born ; they are wretched ; 
 they die." And indeed, when we direct the light of 
 history down the corridors of time, and look into the 
 obscure nooks and crannies — when we look beneath 
 the tinsel of courts and princes, and the glamour of 
 wars, that make up so large a part of history, a state 
 of things is disclosed to us that constrains us to believe 
 that this has often been a too accurate description. 
 When one thinks of these things it becomes easy to 
 understand how men of keen sympathies, men like St. 
 Simon, Fourier, and Karl Marx, should have devoted 
 their labour and their genius to devising systems for 
 readjusting and recasting society. 
 
 But with the present century, and more particularly 
 during the last fifty years, a brighter day has dawned 
 for the labourer. The misery indeed that darkened 
 the first part of this century was a shadow thrown by 
 a relentless fate, rather than the offspring of legislative 
 oppression. It was one of those cataclysms like an 
 earthquake, or a plague, that occasionally overwhelm 
 society. The remark of the Persian writer, that the 
 angel who presides over the storehouse of the winds 
 feels no compunction though he extinguishes the old 
 woman's lamp, seems applicfible to a time when the 
 hand of Fate fell heavily on the poor and helpless. 
 If we except only the corn laws, of which Sir E. May 
 says that in order to ensure high rents it was decreed 
 that multitudes should hunger, the misery was engen- 
 dered by causes that were inevitable. The revolution 
 
112 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 ia the methorls of labour that always follows the intro- 
 duction of machinery, combined with a number of bad 
 harvests and the Napoleonic wars on the Continent, 
 and the consequent scarcity of food, to cause all the 
 misery. But for all this, with the beginning of the 
 century the seed of a veritable revolution in the positi<»n 
 of the labourer, at least in England, began to he sown, 
 and since then his condition has steadily improved. 
 This improvement may be traced in a variety of ways. 
 First, let us take the legislative measures passed 
 expressly to assist the labouring-classes. Formerly 
 the legislator only busied himself, if he thought of the 
 working man at all, with devising means of putting 
 restraints on the rights of the workman. The Statute 
 Book was disfigured with such statutes as tlie Statute 
 of Labourers and the Statute of Apprentices. But 
 during the present century the legislator has wearied 
 himself, with an ever-increasing activity, to cram the 
 Statute Book with laws of real or supposed advantage 
 to the labourer. It is as though, smitten by remorse 
 and lashed by the scourge of an avenging conscience, 
 he was impelled to make haste to redress the wrongs 
 of centuries. The statutes passed to regulate labour 
 in factories alone occupy a considerable space. Be- 
 ginning with the year 1802 we have the Health and 
 Morals Act, 42 Geo. III. c. 73. Then we have the 
 following series of Factory Acts : — 59 Geo. III. c. 66 ; 
 6 Geo. ly. c. 63 ; 1 & 2 Will. IV. c. 39 ; 3 & 4 Will. IV. 
 c. 103 ; 5 & 6 Vict. c. 99 ; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 15 ; 13 & 14 
 Vict. c. 54 ; 23 & 24 Vict. c. 78 ; 30 & 31 Vict. c. 103 ; 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 146 ; 37 & 38 Vict. c. 44 ; 41 & 42 Vict. 
 
THE PROGKESS OF THE "MASSES." 113 
 
 c. 16. In the year 1842 an Act was passed prohibiting 
 women and girls from working in mines or collieries. 
 In addition to these Acts we have had many other Acts 
 passed to assist the labourer. There is the Truck Act, 
 1 d: 2 Will. IV. c. 37 ; the Act to secure the payment 
 of wages without stoppages in the hosiery manufacture, 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. 48 ; the Merchant Shipping Payment 
 of Wages Act, 43 & 44 Vict. c. 16. The various Com- 
 bination Laws and the Conspiracy and Protection of 
 Property Act we have already referred to. Then there 
 is the Trades Union Act, 1871, and the Employer and 
 Workmen Bill, 38 & 39 Vict. c. 90 ; the Employers' 
 Liability Act, 43 & 44 Vict. 42, and the alterations in 
 the Law of Partnership made to render Co-operative 
 Societies possible. Then there are the Acts relative 
 to the Housing of the Working-Classes, namely : the 
 Housing of the Poor Act, 1868 ; the Housing of the 
 Poor Act, 1875 ; the Artisans' Dwellings Amendment 
 Act, 1879. The agitation with reference to the hours 
 of labour in shops must be fresh in the minds of every 
 one. Then, again, there are a series of Acts relating 
 more particularly to sailors, namely : the Unseaw^orthy 
 Ships Bills of 1878 and 1882, and the Merchant 
 Shipping Bills of 1871, 1872, and 1876. The Friendly 
 Society Act, 1875, and the Education Act, 1870, may 
 be said to have been passed more particularly for the 
 working classes than any others. Amongst other Acts 
 passed in favour of the labourer may be mentioned the 
 Public Libraries Act, 1866, and the Cheap Trains Act, 
 1883. These Acts, it will have been observed, relate 
 ixlmost, if not entirely, to the artisan and factory 
 
 I 
 
114 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 classes, and not to the agricultural labourer. He hag 
 been neglected in comparison with his brethren in the 
 towns ; but amongst Acts affecting him may be named 
 the Agricultural Gangs Act, 30 <?c 31 Vict. c. 30, and 
 the Agricultural Children Act, 1873. 
 
 Two series of measures which perhaps more than 
 anything else have ameliorated the condition of the 
 poor remain to be mentioned ; first, the Acts repealing 
 the import duties on corn and other articles of food ; 
 and, secondly, the Acts extending the franchise. 
 The first have bestowed cheap food, and the second 
 increased Parliamentary representation ; and, taken 
 alone, they mark a great advance. 
 
 It was the great mission of Sir Eobert Peel to in- 
 augurate freedom of trade. Between 1842 and 1846- 
 he repealed altogether the duties on about five or six 
 hundred articles, and reduced them on a good many 
 articles besides. Then came the repeal of the Corn 
 Laws, and with it the certainty of cheap bread. In 
 1853 Mr. Gladstone repealed many duties, including 
 that on soap, and reduced those on many other articles,, 
 including tea and fruits, and in 1861 that on paper; 
 and this policy he continued, so that, whereas in 1842 
 there were 1052 articles subject to import duty, by 
 the Budget of 1860 the number of such articles was 
 finally reduced to forty-eight. And though it may be 
 said that all classes have benefited by the consequent 
 lowering of prices, yet the poor undoubtedly have 
 benefited the most by a fall in price of the necessaries 
 of life. Of the extension of the franchise it will be 
 enousrh to note its initiation in 1832, and its final 
 sta2:e reached in 1884. 
 
TflE PROGKESS OF THE "MASSES." 115 
 
 We have seen in what a variety of ways the Legis^ 
 lature has within the present century been active to 
 remove the grievances of the working-classes. This 
 agency of the Legislature may be classed as one work- 
 ing from without. Let us now turn our attention to 
 one of a more spontaneous character, for it surely 
 must be deemed a step in advance that the working- 
 classes have learnt to take an independent standpoint. 
 
 The agencies of this character may be described as 
 regulated self-help. The working-classes have undeni- 
 ably combined together to help themselves, and have 
 succeeded in some respects in a remarkable degree. 
 It is true that they have received some Government 
 assistance in the alterations of the law, which have 
 rendered trades unions, co-operation, and the invest- 
 ment of savings possible. Still, the broad fact remains, 
 that the working-classes have done much to aid them- 
 selves ; and this they have done chiefly in the three 
 ways already briefly indicated — namely, by the creation 
 of trades unions, of co-operative societies, and the 
 investments of savings. And of these three, co-opera- 
 tion has been by far the most successful, and merits 
 special attention. 
 
 Co-operation has had a remarkable history in Eng- 
 land. So far back as the year 1777 we hear of a 
 co-operative workshop of tailors at Birmingham, and 
 we know that Barrington, the Bishop of Durham, in 
 1795 set up co-operative stores at Mongewell, in 
 Oxfordshire. In 1816 the " Economical Society " was 
 formed at Sheerness. During the early part of the 
 centurv, too, Owen established the principle of co- 
 
116 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 operation amongst liis workmen at Lanark with muck 
 success. By the time the year 1830 was reached as 
 many as over 300 co-operative stores were set up in 
 different parts of the country ; but, owing to the then 
 state of the law relating to limited liability and defec- 
 tive management, many of them failed. In 1844 the 
 Society of Rochdale Pioneers came into being, and 
 from small beginnings it has developed to remarkable 
 proportions, and given an impetus to co-operation all 
 over the country. In the first year of its existence its 
 members numbered 28, and no profits were made ; 
 whilst in 1876 they numbered 8892, and the profits 
 amounted to £50,000. Eochdale took the lead, but 
 other towns soon followed. The co-operative stores at 
 Leeds, for instance, had in 1886 no less than 23,000 
 members, and in that year made profits of £59,000 ; 
 while the two co-operative societies at Oldham in 1886 
 had between them about 23,000 members, and made 
 a profit to the amount of £90,000. These are some of 
 the largest and most successful of co-operative societies, 
 but the extent to which the movement has spread 
 amongst the labouring population can only be esti- 
 mated by looking at it in the aggregate all over the 
 country. Taking England first, we find Lancashire 
 leading with 196 societies, and Yorkshire second with 
 187 ; the total number in England is 591, with 674,602 
 members, making profits to the amount of £2,331,055. 
 Taking Scotland next, we find that Lanark leads with 
 64 societies, the total number in Scotland being 305, 
 making profits to the amount of £523,823. Next 
 comes Wales with 23 societies, making profits to the 
 
THE PEOGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 117 
 
 extent of £26,580. And lastly, Ireland, with nine 
 societies, making profits to the amount of £2008. 
 Altogether, co-operative stores in Great Britain and 
 Ireland number about 12,000, with 900,000 members, 
 receiving a total profit of £2,500,000. Such are the 
 figures returned for the year 1886, and no one can 
 deny that they exhibit a capacity for self-help and for 
 union, a self-reliance and a thriftiness, which mark 
 a distinct advance in the condition of the masses. 
 They are no longer, one and all, isolated and helpless 
 units, as they were a hundred years ago, but many of 
 them form a strong phalanx, united both in heart 
 and mind, and sustained by considerable pecuniary 
 resources. 
 
 The next form of regulated self-help that claims our 
 attention is trades unionism. Here again we can mark 
 a great improvement in the condition of the masses. 
 It is true that trades unions, by ill-judged strikes and 
 by indefensible actions, have at times hindered rather 
 than advanced their cause. Yet on the whole they 
 have enabled the labourer to be no longer at the 
 mercy of the employer, and in so far as they take the 
 form of provident societies they have stimulated thrift 
 and self-dependence. 
 
 Another form of regulated self-help is the saving of 
 money by investments in the savings-banks. Invest- 
 ment of savings is not merely in itself an advance, but 
 it indicates an advance by showing that the amount of 
 wages received is large enough to allow a surplus 
 beyond what is spent in obtaining a bare subsistence. 
 It must not be forgotten, too, that a saving of money 
 
118 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 must have been made in order to support trades unions 
 and co-operative societies. But here we are particu- 
 larly concerned with savings-banks. Government 
 assistance must also here be recognized. It was in 
 the year 1817 when saving-banks first received Govern- 
 ment recognition, and in 1827 and 1828 they re- 
 ceived further Government assistance. The amount 
 of money saved, and the rapidly increasing way in 
 which it has been saved, will be made apparent by 
 a glance at the following figures, which are given on 
 the authority of Professor Leone Levi: In the year 
 1831 the capital of savings-banks in England amounted 
 to £13,719,495 ; in 1841 to £24,475,000; in the year 
 1850 to £28,931,000 ; and in 1878, taking into account 
 the sums deposited in Post Office Savings-Banks, to 
 £74,705,000. These figures speak for themselves. 
 
 We have now spoken of legislation and regulated 
 self-help. There yet remains a third way of estimating 
 the progress of the people, and that is by estimating 
 and comparing the amount of wages received formerly 
 and now, and by estimating and comparing the effec- 
 tive or purchasing power of those wages; that is to 
 say, their real, and not merely their money value. 
 This can be done only by examining the history of 
 prices side by side with the history of wages. This it 
 is possible to do with more or less accuracy at various 
 periods in English history ; and though statistics are 
 often repellant, here at least tliey will repay perusal. 
 
 Professor Kogers has investigated carefully the wages 
 and prices prevailing in our earlier times, and he has 
 arrived at the following figures for the thirteenth 
 
THE PROGEESS OF THE "MASSES." 119 
 
 •century. Taking agricultural labourers first, he finds 
 that the average wage for a man was 2d. per day ; for 
 a woman, Id, per day ; and for a boy, ^d. per day. 
 Allowing for deductions for Sundays and holidays, the 
 total wages for a man is estimated at £2 lis. Sd. per 
 year. But during harvest-time wages were doubled, 
 so that the total wages for a man may be put down at 
 £2 15s. a year. Sometimes a hind was hired for a 
 whole year, and paid by receiving a quarter of corn 
 (valued at 4s.) every eight weeks, and Qs. in money. 
 This would amount to £1 12s. a year ; and if ho was 
 boarded, as was sometimes the case at harvest and 
 exceptionally busy times, reckoning the cost of board 
 at l\d. a day for six weeks, the total wages would 
 ^imount to £1 15s. Sd. a year. The wages of artisans 
 for the same period next claims our attention. Taking 
 carpenters, for example, we find that on the average 
 they received from 3d to 3JcZ. a day, and that a pair of 
 sawyers received Id. a day, and sometimes more. At 
 the building of Newgate Gaol, in 1281, the carpenters 
 received 4tL to 5 JcZ. a day ; the sawyers, 9 J(^. a day ; 
 a.nd the masons, ^d. a day. Professor Eogers estimates 
 the average wages of artisans in the thirteenth century 
 at £4 7s. ^d. a year in the provinces ; and in London, 
 where wages were higher, at £6 17s. Qd. a year. Then 
 as to prices, in order to avoid the burden of figures, it 
 will be enough to quote Professor Kogers, who says 
 tliat '•' all necessaries in life in ordinary years, when 
 there was no dearth, were abundant and cheap," and 
 to note that the average price of wheat from 1261 to 
 1310 was ^s. ll\d. a quarter, ranging from 2s. lO^d. to 
 
120 ESSAYS IX POLITICS. 
 
 16s. a quarter. In ordinary years tlie price ranged 
 from 4s. 6d. to 6s. 6d. a quarter. 
 
 Let us next take the period from the year 1400 to 
 1545, which Professor Eogers calls " the golden age "" 
 for the English labourer. He says that at this period 
 an ordinary artisan would get 6d, a day, and an agri- 
 cultural labourer 4r7. a day ; and in the year 1495 he 
 calculates that an agricultural labourer could earn at 
 the then prices three quarters of wheat, three quarters 
 of malt, and two quarters of oatmeal by fifteen weeks' 
 work, and that the artisan could earn the same by ten 
 weeks' work. From this time onward prices began to 
 rise, so that in the year 1564 Professor Eogers calcu- 
 lates that it would take the agricultural labourer forty 
 weeks, and the artisan thirty-two weeks, to earn the 
 same quantities as they did in 1495, while in 1593 not 
 a whole year's labour would suffice. 
 
 In 1597 and 1610 things were much worse even than 
 this. We have the authority of Sir W. Petty for a state- 
 ment of the rate of wages for the seventeenth century. 
 He puts down the wages of the agricultural labourer 
 at 4cZ. a day with food, and 6d. a day without food. 
 During the latter half of this century we find the 
 justices of Warwickshire fixing the rate of wages at 
 4s. a week without food, except from September to 
 March, when it was 3s. 6d. In 1682 the justices of 
 Suffolk fixed them at 5s. a week without food in winter,, 
 and 6s. without food in summer; and in 1661 the 
 justices of Essex fixed them at 6s. a week without food 
 in winter, and 7s. without food in summer. At this 
 time, too, the workmen employed in manufactures- 
 
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 121 
 
 received not more than Is. a day, and often only Gd. 
 a day. When we consider that the average price of 
 corn fiom 1673 to 1685 was 50s. a quarter, it will be 
 apparent that the wages of the labourer had much les& 
 purchasing power than they once had. 
 
 For the latter part of the eighteenth century we are 
 indebted for some valuable figures to Arthur Young. 
 ►Speaking of about the year 1767, he put the wages of 
 agricultural labourers at the rate of £18 per annum in 
 Hertfordshire, and £17 in Northamptonshire and 
 Derbyshire ; whilst with regard to artisans, taking 
 various trades, he puts the wages of colliers at 15s» 
 a week ; of ironworkers, at 13s. 6d. a week ; of porce- 
 lain-makers, at 9s. 6d. a week; of weavers, at 10s. 
 a week ; of wool-combers, at 12s. a week ; of carpet- 
 makers, at 12s. a week ; of pen-makers, at 15s. a week ; 
 of steel-polishers (at Woodstock), at 42s. a week; and 
 of blanket-makers, at 12s. a week. Then as to prices : 
 he puts bread at l^d. a pound, butter at 6|cZ., cheese at 
 S^d., and meat at 3|cZ. a pound. But after the year 
 1780 wheat was hardly ever below 50s. a quarter, 
 and in 1795 it was double that price. 
 
 Coming now to the present century, we know very 
 well that during the early part of it the condition of 
 the agricultural labourer was miserable — how miserable 
 we may infer from the statement of Mr. Giffen, that 
 the agricultural labourer's wages have risen 60 per 
 cent, since the period before the corn laws. A con- 
 siderable rise in his wages has taken place since 1860, 
 for in that year they were (according to Professor 
 Leone Levi) Ss. Sd. sl week in Kent and 15s. in Cumber- 
 
 f^ 
 
122 ESSAYS IX POLITICS. 
 
 iand ; wliile in 1872 tliey were 26s. in Kent and 20s. in 
 Cumberland. Nor was the condition of the factory hand 
 ■any better, if we may judge from the wages of the 
 weavers, who, though in 1802 they received as much 
 as 13s. a week, in 1817 only received 4s. d^d. a week. 
 It must be borne in mind, too, that during the early 
 part of this century the price of wheat was abnormally 
 high. In the year 1801 it touched the enormous price 
 ^f 156s. 2d. a quarter, and from 1800 to 1820 it averaged 
 98s. 6d. the quarter. 
 
 During the last fifty years there has been a contem- 
 poraneous increase of wages and decrease of the prices 
 of commodities. In the case of carpenters, bricklayers, 
 masons, miners, weavers, and spinners, Mr. Giffen esti- 
 mates the rise since 1826 at over 50 per cent, in most 
 <jases and at over 100 per cent, in some. In the case 
 of seamen's wages, he estimates the rise since 1850 at 
 60 per cent., and in the case of agricultural labourers, 
 since the time preceding the repeal of the corn laws, 
 ^t 60 per cent. Taking particular trades, we find, on 
 the authority of Professor Leone Levi, that hands in 
 cotton factories who in 1839 received 7s. and 16s. a 
 week respectively, in 1877 received 17s. 6d. and 36s. ; 
 that hands in woollen factories, who in 1837 received 
 12s. and 21s. a week respectively, in 1877 received 35s. 
 and 28s. ; that whilst in the linen trade in 1855 some 
 hands received only 10c?. and 4s. a week respectively, 
 the same class in 1877 received Ss. and 33s. ; that in the 
 earthenware trade, between 1857 and 1877 there was a 
 rise from 3s. 6d. a week to 33s. a week ; that whilst in 
 ihe building trade wages were 5s, a day of ten hours. 
 
THE ITtOGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 123 
 
 in 1877 they were 9c?. an hour ; and that seamen's 
 wages have risen from 40s. and 55s. a month in 1848, 
 to 70s. and 80s. in 1878, In addition to this increase 
 of wages, Mr. GifFen believes that there has been a 
 considerable shortening of the hours of labour, amount- 
 ing to 20 per cent, in the textile, engineering, and 
 building trades. 
 
 Then as to prices, we find that, whilst wheat averaged 
 dSs. Id. a quarter between 1837 and, 1846, it averaged 
 only 48s. M, a quarter between 1876 and 1886. Then 
 in most other things there has been a considerable fall. 
 For example, in 1840 sugar cost 68s. 8c?. per cwt. ; in 
 1886 it cost only 21s. ^d. In 1840 cotton cloth cost 
 SfcZ.per yard ; in 1886 it cost 3Jc/. per yard. But the 
 most remarkable results are obtained by comparing 
 the amount of foods consumed per head of the popu- 
 lation. Professor Leone Levi finds that in 1820 sugar 
 was consumed to the amount of eighteen pounds per 
 head, and tea to the amount of one pound three 
 ounces ; whilst in 1870, of sugar forty-one pounds, and 
 of tea three pounds were consumed per head. Mr. 
 sGiffen gives some remarkable figures, and from them 
 we may infer that between the years 1840 and 1881 
 the consumption per head of bacon and ham has in- 
 creased thirteen times, of butter six times, of cheese 
 five times, of eggs seven times, of potatoes twelve times, 
 of rice twelve times, of sugar four times, and of wheat 
 five times. It is true that meat has gone up in price, 
 but then meat was during the early part of the century 
 hardly eaten at all by the poor. House rent, too, has 
 increased — according to Mr. Giffen, 150 per cent. ; but 
 
124 ESSAYS IN rOLITICS. 
 
 (putting aside an improvement in the houses in many 
 eases) the increase of rent would not by any means 
 swallow up the gain obtained in other ways. 
 
 Looking at the history of wages and prices general hv 
 we may infer that, in the thirteenth century, and 
 during the period which Professor Kogers calls the 
 " golden age," though wages were excessively low, yet 
 this was more than compensated for by the exceeding 
 cheapness of food. Again, there can be no doubt that 
 since that time, until within the last fifty years, the 
 condition of the labouring classes has been wretched in* 
 the extreme. In the words of Professor Rogers, th6 
 wages of labour have been a bare subsistence, constantly 
 supplemented by the poor-rate. Professor Rogers is 
 of opinion that the condition of the labouring classes^ 
 during the earlier period compares favourably with 
 their present condition. It is true that food in average- 
 years was cheap; but even Professor Rogers admits 
 that in bad years numbers perished from hunger. It 
 avails little that a man can get food for almost nothing 
 one year, if in the next he must starve. Professor 
 Rogers admits, too, that the food was coarse ; he might 
 have added that it was sadly wanting in variety. 
 Putting aside such things as tea, coifee, and sugar, 
 there were wanting even such simple things as potatoes 
 and cabbages. But whatever view we may take of 
 these early times, we must be forced to admit that, as 
 regards the amount of wages and their purchasing- 
 power, the condition of the labouring classes is now 
 immensely superior to its condition at any time foi*- 
 nearly three hundred years. 
 
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 125 
 
 Note. — Since this essay was written in 1887, a number of Acts have 
 l3een passed to ameliorate the condition of the working-classes. More- 
 over, labour questions seem to engage the attention of Parliament in 
 nn ever-increasing degree. The question of the hours of labour in 
 particular is becoming very important, and even now sways voters at 
 elections as much as the Home Rule question. It should be observed, 
 too, that the increased working expenses of railway and other com- 
 panies point to the tendency of the rate of wages to move upwards. 
 Neither does the cost of necessaries bear more hardly than it did. 
 Rather the contrary. The reduction in the duty on tea, for instance, 
 has made that commodity appreciably cheaper. 
 
126 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 V. 
 
 SOCIALISTIC LEGISLxiTION IN ANGLO^ 
 SAXON COMMLFNITIES. 
 
 Socialism is a subject which at the present moment i» 
 very much in evidence. It is discussed in every re- 
 view, and debated at the meetings of every religious 
 and scientific association. But it is one of those terms- 
 which is apt to be used by different persons in different 
 senses, and to convey different meanings to different 
 minds. It eludes the grasp with a Protean slipperi- 
 ness. Nothing can be more important, however, in dis- 
 cussions of this sort than to see clearly what socialism 
 means, and to pin it down, so to speak, to one particular 
 sense. The word has, however, been used so differently 
 by writers of authority, that it is difficult to do this. 
 Communism and socialism have been inextricably 
 confused. Nevertheless, the socialism of the present 
 day is generally held to be a socialism only to be^ 
 realized through the action of the state. Professor 
 Flint defines it to be "the government of all by all 
 and for ail, with private property largely or Avholly 
 done away, landowners got rid of, capital rendered col- 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 127 
 
 lective, industrial armies formed under the control of 
 the state on co-operative principles, and work assigned 
 to every individual and its value determined for him." 
 SchiifBe, in his " Quintessence of Socialism," says,. 
 " Critically, dogmatically and practically, the cardinal 
 thesis stands out — collective instead of private owner- 
 ship of all instruments of production (land, factories, 
 machines, tools, etc.), * organization of labour by 
 society,' instead of the distracting competition of 
 private capitalists ; that is to say, corporate organiza- 
 tion and management of the process of production in 
 the place of private businesses ; public organization of 
 the labour of all on the basis of collective ownership of 
 all the working materials of social labour ; and, finally,, 
 distribution of the collective output of all kinds of 
 manufacture in proportion to the value and amount of 
 the work done by each worker." Mr. Eae, in the Con- 
 temiJoranj Bevieiv, has described it succinctly somewhat 
 in this way. It is, he says, the progressive nationaliza- 
 tion of industries with the view to the progressive 
 equalization of incomes. These descriptions give a 
 very clear idea of what is meant, at any rate, by state 
 socialism. But socialism itself is often confounded 
 with what are really only tendencies towards it. The 
 alarm is sometimes raised that socialism is, so to speak, 
 thundering at our gates, whereas there really exists- 
 nothing else than a flow or tendency, which would, no 
 doubt, if it burst into a tempestuous flood, carry us 
 into socialism. This tendency is government inter- 
 ference, or legislative interference, or socialistic legis- 
 lation. Socialism is a system, which would exhibit 
 
128 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 government interference in the fullest operation. It 
 is the zenith of that state interference which would 
 make the hand of government felt in every hour and 
 every act of the individual's life. Any legislation, 
 therefore, that extends the power of the government 
 to interfere in private life, is rightly called socialistic. 
 It brings us one step nearer to the goal which is the 
 hope and dream of every socialist. Every Act of Par- 
 liament that gives the government new interfering- 
 powers marks a milestone passed upon the way. It 
 is legislation of this sort which the Liberty and Pro- 
 perty Defence League has been formed to combat, and 
 against which Lord Bramwell and Lord Wemyss so 
 stoutly protest. 
 
 There can be no doubt, indeed, that in the British 
 Islands the tendency of legislation has been for some 
 years past, and still is, in an increasing degree, in the 
 di rection of Government interference. It may be further 
 asserted with some confidence that democracy, in 
 Anglo-Saxon communities at least, the stronger it 
 grows, the more it demands such interference. The 
 more the franchise has been extended in England, the 
 greater has been the demand for interference by the 
 legislature. To demonstrate this would be to go into 
 the history of legislation for the last fifty years or 
 more. But there can be no doubt of the fact, and in 
 order to see how far legislation of this sort is likely to 
 go, it is worth inquiring how far legislation in other 
 countries tends to move in the same direction. An in- 
 quiry of this sort will perhaps throw some light upon 
 the question whether legislative interference at home 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 129 
 
 is likely to recede or advance. It is on the whole, 
 perhaps, better to confine our attention to Anglo-Saxon 
 communities. Arguments drawn from foreign nations, 
 where the whole conditions are different, are often mis- 
 leading. Democracies of the Latin races, for instance, 
 a(^t quite different from Anglo-Saxon democ^racies. 
 The argument from analogy is not safe where condi- 
 tions are very different, and the conditions of Anglo- 
 Saxon communities are much more sure to be like 
 those at home than those of foreign. races. 
 
 The great Anglo-Saxon communities of the world 
 besides the British Islands are the United States of 
 America, and the colonies of Canada and Australia. 
 We will consider the case of the United States first. 
 
 The United States demonstrate even more clearly 
 than England that democracies tend more and more to 
 demand legislative interference. And this is the more 
 remarkable because it is one of the fundamental dogmas 
 of the American people that the less of such interfer- 
 ence the better. The strength of the tendency of the 
 American democracy to demand legislative interference 
 may be estimated by the fact that in America legisla- 
 tion has gone far beyond the limits theoretically im- 
 posed upon it. The practice has prevailed over what 
 is at once philosophic theory and popular maxim. 
 
 A brief examination of the facts of American legis- 
 lation will show this to be so. Professor Bryce, in his 
 " The American Commonwealth," has classified legis- 
 lative interference under the following heads : — 
 
 1. Prohibitions to do acts which are not in the 
 ordinary sense of the word criminal. 
 
 K 
 
130 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 2. Directions to individuals to do things which it 
 is not obviously wrong to omit. 
 
 3. Interferences with the ordinary course of law in 
 order to protect individuals from the consequences of 
 their own acts. 
 
 4. Directions to a public authority to undertake 
 work which might be left to individual action, and the 
 operation of supply and demand. 
 
 Now, " in every one of these kinds of legislative inter- 
 ference," says Mr. Bryce, " the Americans, or at least 
 tlie Western States, seem to have gone farther than the 
 British Parliament." It would be difficult to find a 
 case, where the Britisli Parliament has interfered, where 
 the legislature of some American State has not inter- 
 fered also, and where the latter bodies have interfered, 
 they have generally done so with a heavier and more 
 far-reaching hand. A few illustrations taken from 
 several classes of government interference will suffice 
 to show this. In the first place, the United States are 
 strongly protectionist in policy. They have lately 
 carried protection to an extreme degree by the new tariff 
 provided by the McKinley Act. Protection is really 
 a very gross form of interference with individual 
 liberty, because it is nothing less than compulsion 
 applied to consumers generally to buy at high prices 
 in order to benefit particular manufacturers. This is 
 one broad and general instance, which is common to 
 most other countries besides the United States. Let us 
 consider more particular instances. Under the head of 
 public health, take the case of the manufacture and sale 
 of oleomargarine. The Federal Government has put a 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 131 
 
 heavy tax upon manufacturers of oleomargarine, while 
 the State of Pennsylvania forbids its sale altogether. 
 The State of Georgia compels proprietors of public 
 houses to notify to their guests by public notice or to 
 mention on the bill of fare if oleomargarine is used at 
 their houses. Take, again, the practice of medicine. 
 The State of Illinois has provided that itinerant vendors 
 of any drug or nostrum, and persons publicly professing 
 to cure disease by such means, are to pay a licence of 
 100 dollars per month. Take, again, the question of the 
 regulation of the liquor traffic. Interference here has 
 gone much further than in England. Some States, as 
 Kansas and North and South Dakota, have prohibited 
 the sale of intoxicating liquor altogether. Others have 
 adopted various forms of local option. Other and 
 more novel provisions are to be found in some States. 
 In the State of Illinois, for instance, liquor-dealers are 
 held responsible for damage done by persons who have 
 become intoxicated on liquor sold by them, and the 
 owner or lessee of the premises is also held responsible 
 if he knowingly allowed such sale to take place. In 
 the State of New York, the sale of liquor to an Indian, 
 minor, or habitual drunkard after notice is given, is 
 illegal, and a similar responsibility to that in the State 
 of Illinois is imposed on the owner or lessee. In the 
 State of Georgia, a person taking out a licence must 
 execute a bond conditioned on keeping an orderly 
 house, and not supplying minors without the consent 
 of parents or guardians. 
 
 Turning to another class of cases, we find that banks, 
 insurance companies, benefit societies, and railway 
 
132 ESSAYS IX POLITICS. 
 
 companies are more strictly regulated than in England. 
 In many oases the accounts are subject to inspection by 
 government officials, and returns must be made to tlie 
 government. Then, again, regulations affecting labour 
 are more far-reaching. In England children under ten 
 years of age are not allowed to be employed at all, and 
 those under fourteen years not more than half-time, 
 while minors under eighteen years and women of any 
 age are not to be employed more than ten hours a day. 
 But in Pennsylvania children under thirteen years of 
 age are not allowed to be employed at all, and minors 
 under sixteen years may be employed but nine months 
 in the year, and then only on condition that they 
 attend school during the rest of the year. In the State 
 of New York, children under thirteen years cannot be 
 employed at all. In the State of Georgia, the hours of 
 labour in cotton, woollen, and other manufacturing 
 establishments, and in machine shops, are, for minors 
 under the age of twenty-one years, from sunrise to sun- 
 set, with the customary hours for meals, and contracts 
 with parents for such services for a longer time are 
 void. In the State of California, children may not be 
 employed for more than eight hours a day except in 
 ao-ricultural or domestic work. In the States of Penn- 
 sylvania and Illinois, eight hours constitutes a day's 
 work when no contract exists to the contrary. There 
 are, however, many exceptions to this. In the State of 
 New York, eight hours constitutes a day's work when 
 no contract exists to the contrary, except in farm or 
 domestic labour, and this provision applies to all 
 mechanics, working men, and labourers employed by 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 133 
 
 tlie State or by municipal corporations for the perform- 
 ance of public works. In the State of California a 
 similar law prevails. In the State of Texas, it is pro- 
 vided that where a contractor becomes bankrupt, the 
 labourers employed by him shall have a right of action 
 against the company or person for whose benefit the 
 work on which they were employed was done; while 
 the State of Minnesota enacts that all labour performed 
 by contract upon a building shall be a first lien thereon. 
 Some States have succeeded in establishing boards of 
 arbitration for labour-disputes. Both the States of New 
 York and Massachusetts provide that the Governor 
 shall appoint yearly a board of arbitration consisting 
 of three members. In Massachusetts the board decides 
 disputes directly, but in New York it only hears ap- 
 peals from local boards chosen by the disputing parties 
 and licensed by the county judges. 
 
 There are, moreover, many minor points of legisla- 
 tive interference, which, by their curiosity and novelty, 
 illustrate more pointedly the question under considera- 
 tion. The following examples have been picked out at 
 random. The State of New York, for instance, pro- 
 vides that no guest shall be excluded from any hotel 
 on account of race, creed, or colour. The State of 
 Georgia orders railway companies to put up a bulletin 
 stating how much any train already half an hour late 
 is overdue, while the State of Minnesota prescribes the 
 character of the waiting-rooms to be provided at 
 stations. The State of Maryland has instituted a state 
 Board of Commissioners for practical plumbing, and 
 licences for plumbers. The State of Texas makes it a 
 
134 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 misdemeanour to deal in " futures," or keep a ** bucket- 
 shop " for dealing in " futures." The State of Georgia 
 puts a tax of five liundred dollars a year on dealers in 
 " futures," while the State of Ohio punishes any one 
 who offers to sell options, or quotes the prices of 
 "margins," "futures," or "options." The State of 
 New York punishes any one who shall send a letter 
 with intent to cause annoyance to any other person. 
 The State of Nebraska prohibits the sale of tobacco to 
 minors, and the State of Iowa punishes the giving or 
 selling of pistols to them. Both the States of Ken- 
 tucky and Minnesota have enacted laws which are 
 interesting as embodying provisions somewhat similar 
 to those which have been demanded here with regard 
 to mural advertisements. The State of Kentucky pro- 
 hibits the sale of any book or periodical, the chief 
 feature of which is to record the commission of crimes, 
 or display by cuts or illustrations of crimes committed, 
 or the pictures of criminals, desperadoes, or fugitives 
 from justice, or of men or women influenced by stimu- 
 lants. The State of Minnesota similarly prohibits the 
 sale of books and papers devoted to the publication of 
 and principally made up of criminal news, police 
 reports, or accounts of criminal deeds, or pictures and 
 stories of deeds of bloodshed, lust, or crime. Then, 
 again, many states contain provisions against usury, while 
 some create far-reaching exemptions from attachments 
 and executions. Indeed, to such an extent has this 
 been carried that it has been said that the tendency 
 in America is "to require the repayment of debts only 
 when it can be made out of superfluous accumulated 
 capital." 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 135 
 
 Now, it mnst be admitted that the tendency towards 
 Government interference at first sight seems irre- 
 sistibly strong. It may well be thought that, if such 
 thing's can be done in America, where the people are 
 so energetic and self-reliant, and where it is almost 
 a popular maxim that a man knows his own business 
 best, and should be allowed to do it as he pleases, the 
 prospect of restricting Government interference at 
 home must be faint indeed. But on looking somewhat 
 closer into the matter, it will be found that certain 
 allowances must be made, which somewhat alter the 
 aspect of the matter. It will be found that certain 
 conditions exist in America, which do not exist in this 
 country, and that, in the absence of these conditions, it 
 would be rash to infer that Government interference 
 in England must approximate to such interference in 
 America either in kind or degree. Indeed, it will be 
 found that the opposite is the case. Much as Great 
 Britain and the United States resemble one another, 
 there are well-marked differences between them. Now, 
 one of the great differences is this. In Great Britain 
 the various industries are on the whole tolerably well 
 scattered about in various directions. Manufacturing, 
 mining, and agricultural pursuits are frequently carried 
 on in the same county, and even where a county is 
 devoted to a single industry, this counts for little 
 when counties are, comparatively speaking, so small. 
 But in America it is far otiierwise. There are found 
 not merely whole states, but whole groups of states — 
 that is to say, districts vastly larger than England, 
 devoted to particular industries. There are, for 
 
136 ESSAYS IN POLITICS, 
 
 instance, the corn-growing states, the cattle-raising 
 states, the mining states, the timber-growing states, 
 and so forth. Now, when we come to examine the 
 statute-books of any state which is the home of any- 
 particular industry, we find that it is largely made up 
 • of provisions for the protection and encouragement of 
 that particular industry. Take, for instance, the great 
 corn-growing and agricultural State of Minnesota. 
 There we find a great mass of legislation for the pro^ 
 tection of farmers. The railways have been forced to 
 make all sorts of concessions to the farming industry, 
 loans of grain seed are granted, agricultural bureaus 
 and fairs are .established, lecturers on agriculture are 
 sent round, homesteads are exempted from executions, 
 State Dairy Commissioners are appointed, and the sale 
 and manufacture of oleomargarine narrowly restricted. 
 And so on, mutatis mutandis with the other. states. So 
 that it is evident that a great deal of Government 
 interference is interference with the object of protect- 
 ing and encouraging the particular industries that are 
 centred in the several states. This is, no doubt, at 
 best a questionable policy, and it is a selfish and short- 
 sighted policy where it is detrimental to the practice 
 of other industries. But, whatever its merits or de- 
 merits, the important thing to remember is that such 
 a policy would be impossible for Glreat Britain, with 
 its many and diverse interests, with its various in- 
 dustries scattered in all directions. To put Great 
 .Britain on similar conditions with many of the 
 American states, we should have to imagine Great 
 .Britain a countiy devoted wholly to one particular 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 137 
 
 industry. We should have to suppose it an entirely- 
 agricultural or mining community, just as the State 
 of Minnesota is an agricultural, and the State of 
 Nevada a mining community. But this is very far 
 from being the case. So that clearly the industrial 
 conditions of many of the American states are quite 
 different from those of Great Britain, and one of the 
 causes that impel so many of the American states into 
 legislative interference is found to operate there only 
 by reason of the peculiarity of their conditions, and 
 would be inoperative where the conditions are entirely 
 different. Here, then, is one reason why Government 
 interference is unlikely to go as far in this country as 
 it has done in America, for .we have found to be absent 
 here a cause which is there fertile in consequences. 
 
 Then, again, another reason why Government inter- 
 ference has gone farther in the American states is to 
 be found in the difference in character between the 
 British Parliament and the average American State 
 Legislature. So long as we have men of the type of 
 the Duke of Argyle and the Earl of Derby in the 
 House of Lords, and Mr. Goschen in the House of 
 Commons, there is not much fear of the British Parlia- 
 ment venturing on legislation like that which is the 
 product of many of the American State Legislatures. 
 Of these latter bodies, Mr. Bryce says that in them the 
 American people *' possess bodies with which it is easy 
 to try legislative experiments, since these bodies, though 
 not of themselves disposed to innovation, are mainly 
 composed of men unskilled in economics, inapt to fore- 
 see any but the nearest consequences of their measures. 
 
138 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 prone to gratify any whim of their constituents, and 
 open to the pressure of any section whose self-interest 
 or impatient philanthro|)y clamours for some departure 
 from the general principles of legislation. For crotchet- 
 mongers as well as for intriguers there is no such 
 paradise as the lobby of a state legislature. No re- 
 sponsible statesman is there to oppose them, no warn- 
 ing voice will be raised by a scientific economist." 
 
 It is obvious, from this description of the American 
 State Legislatures, that they differ widely in character 
 from the British House of Commons, and that they 
 are much more prone to plunge into legislative caprices. 
 What kind of legislation they are capable of may be 
 readily inferred from the illustrations which have 
 already been given. What they might be capable of 
 in the future may be gathered from Bills introduced, 
 but which did not become law. Here are two examples 
 from the state of Minnesota. In that State in 1885 
 a Bill was introduced to prohibit the two sexes from 
 skating at rinks together, and another Bill to license 
 drinkers instead of liquor-sellers! We might almost 
 exclaim with the writer in the An ti- Jacobin — 
 
 " Primordial nonsense springs to life 
 In the wild war of democratic strife." 
 
 Sir H. S. Maine has expressed an opinion that the 
 provif^ion of the United States Constitution (Article I. 
 sec. 10), which prohibits any state from passing a law 
 impairing the obligation of any contract, has operated 
 to check socialistic legislation. This, no doubt, has 
 prevented certain legislation of a kind that has 
 appeared on the British statute-books. It would have 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATIO^r. 139 
 
 rendered impossible the passing of some of the Irish 
 Land Acts, and certain provisions in the Agricultural 
 Holdings Acts, wliich enables a tenant to violate his 
 contract with his landlord. But probably this part of 
 the American Constitution has produced very little 
 effect on the whole. But we may fairly conclude, 
 however, that legislative interference is unlikely to 
 go as far in England as it has done in America, 
 because, as we have se^n, the American State Legisla- 
 tures differ so much from our own, and because, in the 
 next place, the industrial conditions of many American 
 states are peculiar, and differ greatly from those of 
 England. 
 
 Turning from the Anglo-Saxon community of the 
 United* States to the British Colonies, in Canada and 
 Australasia we find that legislative interference has 
 gone further than at home, as it has done in the 
 Uuited States. Take the case of Canada first. It is 
 in the first place protectionist, which, as we have seen, 
 is really a great piece of Government interference. 
 Then, again, the state and municipalities largely assist 
 railways. But it is with regard to the regulations as 
 to the sale of intoxicants that interference has gone 
 farthest. In many parts of Canada the sale of intoxi- 
 cants is forbidden altogether, and in some parts it has 
 been forbidden, but the restriction has subsequently 
 been removed. This is as far as interference can 
 possibly go. It does appear a great interference with 
 liberty of action to be forbidden to purchase wine, 
 beer, or spirits. There is Sunday closing nearly every- 
 where, and in many places it is forbidden to sell liquor 
 
140 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 to minors and Indians. In Ontario there is in opera- 
 tion what is known as the Civil Damages Clause in 
 the United States. It is provided that if a man in 
 a state of intoxication dies through suicide or some 
 misadventure, damages may be obtained against the 
 seller of the liquor by the friends of the deceased. 
 Then there is a provision in some provinces that no 
 liquor is to be supplied to any person whose relatives 
 declare before a magistrate that he is wasting his 
 means or interfering with the happiness of his family 
 by drinking. It is clear that these provisions must, 
 in matters of drinking, tend greatly to restrict indi- 
 vidual liberty. The Factory Acts of Canada are not 
 quite so advanced as in England. In Ontario and 
 Quebec the Acts are not strictly enforced, because 
 they are not the same in both provinces, and each 
 province fears the competition of the other if it puts 
 its own Act in force. Truck, too, prevails to some 
 extent in the maritime provinces and Newfoundland. 
 There is no legal working day, but ten hours is, in 
 practice, the working day, with many exceptions. 
 One curious piece of interference should in conclusion 
 be noticed, and that is, that in Ontario there is some 
 severe local legislation against Sunday excursions. 
 This must surely be where the Scotch colonists pre- 
 dominate. On the whole, therefore, the conclusion 
 seems to be that Canada has gone further than England 
 in Government interference. 
 
 Turning next to the Australian Colonies and New 
 Zealand, we meet with a very striking state of things. 
 Sir Charles Dilke, who can speak with authority, says, 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION^. 141 
 
 in his " Problems of Greater Britain," that " democracy 
 and state socialism have completely triumphed in 
 Victoria," and further, that "indeed, the strongest 
 disposition exists in Victoria, and, though in a less 
 degree, throughout Australia generally, to think that 
 the state is able to influence the prosperity of a country 
 to a larger extent than is believed possible by us in 
 Great Britain, or by our descendants in Canada or the 
 United States." Professor Play fair once remarked 
 that the activity and perseverance of mankind are 
 continually defeating the folly and caprice of their 
 governors. The Australians, on the contrary, seem to 
 think that the folly and caprice of mankind can be 
 checked or rendered innocuous by the wisdom of the 
 state. At any rate, their domestic policy seems to bear 
 out this view. The colonies are all in the first place, 
 except New South Wales, protectionist. Victoria is 
 so most strongly, and even New South Wales now 
 shows an inclination to recede from free trade. The 
 railways in Australia are everywhere in the hands of 
 the state, but New Zealand now allows them to be 
 built by private enterprise, and gives grants of lands 
 in aid. It must be admitted that the results of the 
 state ownership of railways are admirable. Most of 
 the Australian Colonies assist charities and hospitals, 
 and New South Wales has given work to the unem- 
 ployed. Most of them, too, assist elementary educa- 
 tion and the universities. In Victoria elementary 
 education is free. In New South Wales, South 
 Australia, and Tasmania it is not entirely free, but 
 it is compulsory. In Victoria state aid is given to the 
 
142 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 study of botany and astronomy, to schools of mines 
 and designs. State encouragement is also given to 
 mining, and to experimental work in horticulture and 
 agriculture, and prizes are given for fruit and many 
 other products. In Victoria, too, the state helps to 
 construct parks, and assists municipalities in making 
 tramways. Quite lately it has undertaken a great 
 system of irrigation. Victoria, too, curiously enough, 
 prohibits tbe sale of Sunday newspapers. The ques- 
 tion of an eight-honrs working day has attracted much 
 attention in Australia, but the law has nowhere yet 
 interfered to make it compulsory, though it has gone 
 very near doing so. In the Victorian Parliament, an 
 abstract proposition in favour of an eight-hours legal 
 day has been adopted. In Queensland an Eight-Hours 
 Bill was passed in 1889 by the Lower House, but it 
 was rejected by the Upper House ; and the very same 
 thing happened in South Australia. In Victoria, how- 
 ever, an Act was passed in 1885 to make compulsory 
 early closing in shops. The power of putting the law 
 in force was left to municipalities, and was at first a 
 failure ; but public opinion was so strongly in favour 
 of it that it is now completely successful. In Victoria, 
 too, eight hours is the working day fixed for labour on 
 Government works. All the Australian Colonies have 
 excellent factory laws, and laws directed against sweat- 
 ing. Whether the anti-Chinese legislation must be 
 classed as State interference is doubtful, because it 
 is directed against foreigners. But, on the other hand, 
 it might well interfere with the liberty of those who 
 might wish to employ Chinese labour. 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 143 
 
 Turning our attention to State interference as it 
 affects the liquor trade, we find it to be very vigorous — 
 indeed, almost as much so as in Canada. There is a 
 local option law in force in Queensland ; but no com- 
 pensation is allowed to owners of houses that are closed. 
 In Victoria, on the other hand, compensation is allowed. 
 In South Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand, a 
 drunkard may be put under notice before a magistrate, 
 in the same manner as we have seen to be the case in 
 Canada. Sunday closing, too, is common. 
 
 In New Zealand, the state has undertaken functions 
 which have not yet been undertaken by the state in 
 any other country. The most important of these is 
 the Government Life Insurance. This has been extra- 
 ordinarily successful in New Zealand, and private in- 
 surance offices have been left quite behind. The other 
 is the Public Trust Office, which is also successful ; 
 but not so much so as the Life Insurance Office. 
 
 It is clear, then, that State interference has been 
 invoked in the Australasian colonies and Canada much 
 more than it has been at home. And it must be 
 admitted that, unless the conditions prevailing there 
 differ widely from those at home, it is probable that 
 English legislation is likely to tend in the same direc- 
 tion. The only well-marked difference is that the 
 colonies are new countries in process of development, 
 and that they are peopled with a race in the full blush 
 and vigour of youthful life. There can be no doubt 
 that legislation may be proper and necessary in a new 
 country, which would be quite unjustifiable in an old 
 one. So that we need not expect all colonial legisla- 
 
144 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 tion to be acceptable at home. Then, with regard to 
 the character of the colonial legislatures, it is no dis- 
 paragement to them to say that at present they cannot 
 hope to produce as many capable legislators as the old 
 country. Some of their statesmen would, of course, 
 adorn any assembly ; but it is contrary to reason to 
 suppose that a small population can produce as much 
 ripe wisdom as a large one. So that we must expect 
 colonial legislatures to go further than our own House 
 of Commons would think desirable. 
 
 There is another good reason for believing that 
 socialistic legislation is not likely to go far in England, 
 or, at all events, that socialism of a revolutionary type 
 will not be embraced, and that is the character of the 
 British working man, a character which no doubt 
 belongs in some degree to the Anglo-Saxon of America, 
 but which is pre-eminently the mark of the working 
 man in our own islands. The character of the Anglo- 
 Saxon in America must have become largely modified 
 by the enormous influx of population from the Euro- 
 pean continent. But at home it is not so, and there 
 the fact must be at once noted that socialism in any 
 form is utterly alien to the genius of the British work- 
 ing man. He is decidedly TrpaKTiKog and hard-headed, 
 and has plenty of what the Greeks called avrapKua. 
 He is not easily led away by an idea, and possesses 
 that "sullen resistance to innovation," and that "un- 
 alterable perseverance in the wisdom of prejudice," 
 that Burke so admired in his countryman. Socialism 
 never has nor ever will take deep root in England. 
 The great socialistic thinkers have been foreigners, 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 145 
 
 like Marx, Lassalle, St. Simon, and Fourier. Socialism 
 in England has never been more than an ephemeral 
 growth. And this is the more remarkable, when it is 
 considered that in no country in the world has the 
 power of capital been so great as in England. It 
 almost seems to challenge by its very bigness the 
 violent opposition of the wage-earning class. Yet the 
 fact remains that it is in this spirit of independence 
 and self-help that the British labouring-classes differ 
 most from those classes on the Continent. This diffe- 
 rence has lately been brought out with remarkable 
 force and clearness by Dr. Baernreither, in his impor- 
 tant work on " English Associations of Working Men." 
 For it was this difference in character that impressed 
 him more than anything else. In one place he writes, 
 "The free union of individuals for the attainment of 
 a common object is the great psychological fact in 
 the life of this people, its great characteristic feature." 
 Again he writes, " Much that in England can be left 
 to the self-help of the classes concerned, can only be 
 accomplished on the Continent by the more vigorous 
 intervention of the Government. Yet on this very 
 point the study of English institutions should act as 
 an antidote against any exaggerated idea that a Govern- 
 ment, by its mere action, can at once remedy every 
 defect. The consideration of working men's relations 
 in England should convince us that State action 
 should merely resemble a prop which supports a build- 
 ing, so long as it is in course of construction, but which 
 is intended to be removed directly the building is com- 
 pact and complete. The necessity and duty on the 
 
146 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Continent of taking care, "wherever the action of 
 Government must step in, simultaneously and syste- 
 matically to awaken and educate self-reliance and 
 spontaneous activity, this is the great lesson which we 
 should derive from the study of English relations." 
 In another place he remarks that the state on the 
 Continent "is continually developing into something 
 outside of and above the nation, entrusted, nay, over- 
 burdened with the task of supporting the whole com- 
 munity, and acting as the political and economical 
 guardian of the masses ; " and he declares that, while 
 "on the Continent we perceive an enlightened abso- 
 lutism penetrating deeply all relations of society, in 
 England we see a people who, whether in larger or 
 smaller centres of administration, are essentially self- 
 governing," and, further, that under the Continental 
 system " the spontaneous energies of the people must 
 necessarily be stunted." These statements, coming as 
 they do from such an authority as Dr. Baernreither,* 
 carry great weight with them. They are in the highest 
 degree significant, and pregnant with suggestion, and 
 throw a strong light on the character of the British 
 working-classes, their independence, self-help, and 
 associative spirit. A French writer, M. Julian Decraix, 
 has lately remarked on the same thing in an article 
 in the Revue des Deux Mondes. In a description of 
 Liverpool, he is led to dwell on ** the advantages of 
 private initiative, in an age in which it has become 
 
 * This work by Dr. Baernreither has been translated into English, 
 and contains a very appreciative preface by Mr. Ludlow, the chief 
 registrar of friendly societies. 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 147 
 
 the fashion to call at every moment upon the State 
 for intervention, which is generally useless." The 
 English working-classes have, indeed, already become 
 in a large measure their own insurers, through the 
 agency of the different classes of friendly and pro- 
 vident societies, their own protectors in trade dis- 
 putes by means of trades unions, and to some extent, 
 capitalists by means of co-operative societies. In 
 these departments they have greatly surpassed their 
 fellows on the Continent. In Germany quite recently 
 a great scheme of insurance for sick, aged, and infirm 
 workmen has had to be undertaken. Unlike the 
 Frenchmen or the Germans, they do not keep impor- 
 tuning witli useless prayer the legislative idol, nor do 
 they give point to the saying of Polybius, that men, 
 though apparently the wisest of animals, are really the 
 silliest, because they persistently have recourse to 
 devices which have often failed them before. This 
 very spirit of independence, however, tends to bring 
 trouble with it. No one can commend what is called 
 the new trades unionism, with its new-fangled theories, 
 and utter disregard of the different conditions that 
 prevail in the various fields of labour. No one, again, 
 can do anything but condemn the violence shown 
 towards non-unionists, or the inefficiency of the work, 
 which shipowners say exists at the London Docks. 
 
 The working-classes of Canada and Australia must 
 be credited with quite as much self-reliance and power 
 of self-help as their kinsmen at home. Friendly 
 societies and trades unions flourish there exceedingly 
 well. Co-operative societies, however, have not taken 
 
148 ESSAYS IX POLITICS. 
 
 much root, partly, no doubt, owing to the prosperity 
 of the colonists, which makes them indifferent to the 
 small savings to be gained by co-operative distribution. 
 Much as they are inclined to call for State intervention 
 they have not forgotten the value of self-reliance. 
 Nothing, indeed, can be farther from the mind of the 
 colonists than extreme socialistic ideas. Extreme 
 views on the land question, however, have been held 
 by colonial political leaders. Nationalization of the 
 land, which was promulgated as a theory in Victoria 
 long before it was taken up by Mr. Henry George, 
 is advocated by some, but it makes no way amongst 
 the people. 
 
 Then, again, there is one element in much of the 
 Government interference as developed in England and 
 the colonies, and particularly in America, which to 
 some extent renders that interference less objectionable 
 than it otherwise would be. This element is the 
 endeavour to make law and morality more nearly co- 
 incident in their spheres. This endeavour is, at least,^ 
 healthy, though it may, and sometimes does, go beyond 
 what expediency allows. Examples of this sort of 
 interference are common enough in America. Such 
 are the laws of the States of Texas, Georgia, and Ohio,, 
 which are aimed at gambling in stocks and shares, and 
 that of the State of New York, which punishes any 
 person who shall send a letter with intent to cause 
 annoyance to any other person. In England, too, an 
 Act has lately been passed by Parliament, the object of 
 which is to check misrepresentations by promoters and 
 directors of companies. It is, of course, a mere truism 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 149 
 
 to say that men cannot be made moral by Act of 
 Parliament. But in so far as they indicate a determi- 
 nation on the part of the community that men shall 
 be punished for doing what right conscience condemns, 
 such laws are absolutely good. They at least show a 
 healthy feeling to be prevalent in society, and they 
 demonstrate to a possible wrong-doer that public 
 opinion is against him, and that is an opinion which 
 he shrinks from outraging. It is only when law goes 
 so far in advance of practical morality, that it can only 
 be enforced with difficulty or not at all, that the 
 tendency to make law and morals coincident becomes 
 mischievous. This element in Government interference 
 is, then, as far as it goes, a good one, and it makes 
 Government interference wear a less sinister aspect 
 than it otherwise would do. There is one other 
 element in Government interference, which is near 
 akin to what may be called the moral element, and 
 of which much the same may be said. This is what 
 may be justly termed the philanthropic element. A 
 very considerable portion of legislative interference is 
 really due to feelijigs of philanthropy. Men see much 
 suifering about them, and they grow impatient at the 
 sight. They are unwilling to let natural causes pain- 
 fully and slowly work out what is probably the only 
 remedy. Their feelings are outraged by the notion of 
 ^' the struggle for existence," and " the survival of the 
 fittest," operating as causes without restraint in human 
 society. All this is good in itself, and philanthropy 
 only becomes ba,d when, in a fit of irrational im- 
 patience, it adopts a remedy which may be worse than 
 
150 ESSAYS IN POLITICS, 
 
 the disease. Moreover, attempts to invoke the aid of 
 the Government to cure the evils that prevail in 
 society are useful in two ways. They pointedly call 
 attention to evils that might otherwise pass unnoticed 
 by the great mass of society, and they sometimes indi- 
 cate the direction in which the remedy must be sought ; 
 and in so far as they do this, they are far from being 
 useless. And when it is considered that it is the end 
 of all legislation to promote human happiness, it will 
 be at once seen that any step that tends to further this 
 end in any degree, however small, is not without its 
 value. 
 
 It should be remembered, too, that legislation has 
 interfered with individual freedom upon all sorts of 
 grounds, political, moral, and religious, and such 
 interference has been considered natural, and no one 
 ever associated them with socialistic tendencies. 
 Sunday trading has been forbidden on religious 
 grounds, yet it is a gross interference with the liberty 
 of the atheist. It is not permitted to use dogs 
 for drawing light carts, because it is considered cruel. 
 Tobacco can only be grown under stringent regulations. 
 Posts and telegraphs are made a State monopoly. 
 These are a few instances of the many ways in which 
 the State interferes to limit freedom. A man is re- 
 stricted in all sorts of ways, purely on grounds of 
 general convenience. What the difference in principle 
 is between many legal restrictions which are considered 
 reasonable and proper, and some of the modern legis- 
 lative acts, which are condemned as socialistic, it is 
 difficult to see. Legislation within the present century 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 151 
 
 lias increased by leaps and bounds, because it is more 
 and more believed that wherever law can ameliorate 
 the conditions of life, it may be rightly invoked. 
 This is the working theory, if it may be so called, of 
 practical legislation, and though it may have a 
 socialistic tendency in restricting liberty, it certainly 
 is not socialistic in aim. 
 
 Lastly, the feeling of objection that is shown against 
 Government interference arises in a great measure 
 from a radical misconception of the nature of the 
 democratic system of government. So long as govern- 
 ment is in the hands of a few, the great majority of 
 the people having no part therein, then indeed the 
 governors and the governed stand apart ; and when the 
 governed clamour for some sort of legislative inter- 
 ference, they are asking for something from a class 
 standing apart from and above themselves. But in a 
 democracy it is far otherwise. Then the governing 
 body is really the servant or agent of the people, and 
 when the people demand Government interference, 
 they are no longer in the position of suppliants to a 
 superior body, but rather in that of masters command- 
 ing a servant, or principals an agent. Government 
 interference looked at from this point of view wears 
 a very difierent aspect. For when it comes from a 
 superior and separate body in answer to the demands 
 of the people, it is something in the nature of a favour 
 granted; it is, so to speak, the extended hand of 
 protection, and merits the epithet "paternal." But 
 such interference, when it comes from a body popu- 
 larly elected by a majority, is in no sense " paternal," 
 
152 ESSAYS IX POLITICS. 
 
 for it really comes from the people themselves. A 
 whole people cannot any more than an individual 
 exercise a "paternal" government over itself. And 
 this consideration really removes much of the ground 
 of objection to Government interference. It is con- 
 tinually said that such interference is "paternal," is 
 "grandmotherly," and saps the spirit of self-help and 
 self-reliance. But where the Government is popular, 
 it is difficult to see how this can be so. 
 
 It has been already suggested that Government 
 interference tends to grow with the advance of 
 democracy. Now, why this should be so becomes 
 clear when the true nature of democracy is considered. 
 Professor Bryce puts it very well, when he says, 
 "And in some countries, of which England may be 
 taken as the type, the transference of political power 
 from the few to the many has made the many less 
 jealous of Government authority. The Government is 
 now their creature, their instrument — why should they 
 fear to use it ? They may strip it to-morrow of the 
 power with which they have clothed it to-day. They 
 may rest confident that its power will not be used 
 contrary to the wishes of the majority among them- 
 selves." Why indeed, one may well ask, should they 
 hesitate to use the instrument, to obtain which whole 
 nations have suffered the bitter pangs of revolution ? 
 
 And in this way, a democratic form of government 
 may resemble a " paternal " form of government. But 
 it will be a resemblance merely, for the two are in 
 reality very different, though the results may appear 
 much the same. So that Government interference in 
 
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 153 
 
 •democracy may not be so objectionable as is often 
 supposed. For if the majority think fit to apply the 
 sanctions of the law to enforce the carrying out of 
 that which they already approve, why should they not 
 do so ? It is really only a wider application of what 
 is done every day by a trades union, or some other 
 body where the majority impose their will. If it is 
 not objectionable that a trades union should restrict 
 the hours of labour for its members to eight hours a 
 day, why should it be objectionable that a majority in 
 the statQ should restrict the hours of labour to eight 
 hours for all labourers whatever? It cannot be 
 objected that legislative interference would tend to 
 protect the interests of some at the expense of others, 
 'because the legislative interference is invoked in the 
 interests of the majority ; and it is part of the theory 
 of democratic government that the majority must 
 prevail, but that the minority must give way. 
 
 For the reasons, then, which have been indicated, it 
 is unlikely that socialistic legislation will go as far in 
 England as it has done in America and the colonies. 
 For the conditions which are there favourable to its 
 growth are here largely absent. That the law will be 
 called in aid more and more to ameliorate life is, 
 however, very probable. That legislation will some- 
 times fail in its objects, or even prove mischievous, 
 is also in some degree probable. But even legislative 
 failures, injurious as they are, may be forgiven. For 
 legislative interference is often at least healthy in 
 origin. It tends to widen the sphere of morals, and 
 unlock the fountains of philanthropy. Moreover, 
 
hji 
 
 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 when looked at from the point of view of the theory, 
 tliat underlies the rule of the people, it seems to har- 
 monize with and to be the complement of that theory. 
 It may be that sometimes the majority may err in- 
 the means they adopt to gain an end right in itself, 
 and interference based on wrong methods must of 
 course be bad. We can then only say with Cicero, 
 " Male judicavit populus, sed judicavit." But the sort 
 of legislation that is likely to be adopted in England, 
 though it may be rightly called socialistic, is a very 
 different thing from revolutionary socialism. That, 
 indeed, is about the last thing likely to find favour 
 in England. On the continent of Europe it may well 
 be otherwise, because it is customary there to look 
 more upon Government as a sort of deity. It is a 
 Pandora with a box full of gifts for men, and, if that 
 box can be opened, all will be well. In England, on 
 the other hand. Government is rather looked upon sls- 
 an instrument which, if carefully used, may sometimes 
 be employed with advantage. This difference in the- 
 conceptions of Government is at the root of much 
 divergence in legislation. The laws of a country may, 
 indeed, be called its physical expression, like the 
 features and movements on the human face. They 
 tell us something of the character of the people. And 
 just as the laws of England show the love of its people 
 for individual liberty, so the character of the people 
 proves that they will tolerate no law that will deprive- 
 them of that liberty. 
 
( 155 ) 
 
 SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 
 
 It is a commonplace remark that scientific discoveriesv 
 and their practical application to the wants of every- 
 day life, make the present century more remarkable 
 for material and utilitarian progress than any that 
 have preceded it within human memory. Other 
 periods of history have been marked by the rise or 
 fall of empires, great revolutions in political institu- 
 tions, discoveries of unknown continents mysterious 
 with destinies as yet unrevealed, or by a vigorous 
 awakening of art and literature. But when we ask 
 ourselves what it is that in the nineteenth century has 
 most affected human affairs, we at once think of such 
 things as the railway, the steamship, and the electric 
 telegraph. They affect different minds in different 
 ways. To the young, who have been brought up in 
 the midst of them, and to the careless and indifferent, 
 they are hardly more than objects of wonderment, if 
 indeed that. In their minds the express train, and 
 the fast steamers that knit together the outlying parts 
 of great empires, and the globe-girdling wire that 
 
156 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 flashes its messages from continent to continent, the 
 telephone, and the like, excite at best only a bewilder- 
 ing amazement, but strike no deeper note. Their very 
 familiarity breeds, not indeed contempt, but apathy 
 and indifference. To the man of science and the 
 engineer they are fraught with vast interest. They 
 at once testify to the great wealth of fruit already 
 garnered in by past labourers in the field of science, 
 and are rich with promise for the future. They teem 
 with problems as yet unsolved, and with unknown 
 possibilities for future discovery and improvement. 
 In many ways they present ample food for reflection 
 to the mind of the man of science. To the political 
 philosopher and the statesman they have an interest 
 of a kind different indeed, but no less profound. To 
 their minds they are full of pregnant suggestion. 
 While the physicist is thinking of heat-expansion, the 
 mechanical equivalent of heat, conservation and trans- 
 mutation of energy, and other kindred subjects, the 
 political inquirer is impelled to think of the effect of 
 these scientific discoveries upon, and their practical 
 application to, forms of government, federation, the 
 size and growth of states, and other human institutions. 
 Professor Freeman has put forward a doctrine, which 
 he says may seem a paradox. He says "that the 
 great practical discoveries of modern science, the use 
 of steam, electricity, any other natural powers, in the 
 various forms in which we have 'learned to apply 
 them, are above all things valuable for their political 
 results." A paradox indeed it may at first appear. 
 But when it is remembered that man is, as Aristotle 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 157 
 
 said, a political animal, and that liis political relations 
 are, excepting only his religion, the most important 
 thing that concern him, the seeming paradox will 
 vanish. Keligion deals with a man's relations to God ; 
 politics deal with his relations to his fellow-men. And 
 MS the main part of life is concerned with our relations 
 to others, it is clear that scientific discoveries, like 
 literature and the arts, are in truth only important as 
 they affect those relations. The hermit may indeed 
 contemn them, but then, he is only in the world, and 
 not of it ; he communes with God, and not with man. 
 But for the remainder of mankind all that affects 
 human intercourse, all that affects political life in the 
 broadest sense, must of necessity be of great concern. 
 It will be, therefore, useful to see in what manner, and 
 to what extent, scientific discovery and material pro- 
 gress influence politics and society. 
 
 In the first place, it is worth noting the influence of 
 improved means of travel and communication upon 
 the size, stability, and growth of states. One of the 
 lessons of history is that in the earlier ages of man- 
 kind states were often small, sometimes very small 
 indeed, and that when they were large, such states 
 were eminently unstable and liable to decay. The 
 most important examples of small states are of course 
 derived from the history of ancient Greece. This is 
 one of the most striking things that present them- 
 selves to the students of Herodotus and Thucydides. 
 In reading their pages, he becomes aware that the 
 Greek state was little more than a city. The Greek 
 politician was, as the word " politician " implies, strictly 
 
158 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 one who concernpcl himself with the affairs of his city. 
 80, too, it was with Eome for many years. The Koman 
 state for long remained conterminous with the Koman 
 city, and it was only by a process of very gradual 
 expansion that the city became the centre of a widely 
 extended empire. On the other hand, empires of wide 
 area almost always contained within themselves the 
 seeds of dissolution, and were usually transient. The 
 empire of Alexander the Great is an instance in point. 
 When deprived of the guidance of his masterful hand, 
 it fell to pieces at once. It faded like an "insub- 
 stantial j)ageant," leaving " not a rack behind." The 
 Persian Empire is another instance. It is curious 
 what devices the kings of Persia had to resort to, in 
 order to keep together their territory, which, compared 
 with some modern states, was not very large. The 
 outlying portions of the empire had to be entrusted 
 by the central government to provincial governors or 
 satraps. The satraps were an everlasting source of 
 anxiety. Far removed from the control of the home 
 government, and the jealous eye of the king himself, 
 they were apt to arrogate to themselves positions of 
 semi-independence, and sometimes aspired to carve out 
 for themselves kingdoms from the territory of their 
 royal master. In order to check such lofty preten- 
 sions, all sorts of ingenious devices were adopted. The 
 satrap was entrusted with civil powers only, military 
 authority being placed in other hands. He was 
 induced, if possible, to espouse a daughter or some 
 near relative of the king, in order to win his allegiance 
 to the royal house. And so, by devices of this sort 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 159 
 
 the Persian inonarclis were tolerably successful in 
 preventing rebellion and keeping their heritage intact. 
 Kome, again, affords us an example of the difficulty of 
 maintaining the great empires of antiquity. As in 
 the case of Persia, the government of the provinces 
 had to be entrusted to governors. They took advantage 
 of the absence of central control to rule with a high 
 hand, and to extort and oppress, when they did not 
 rebel. But it was in the time: of the Emperors that 
 this absence of control was most fruitful in its results. 
 Then, indeed, legions in the provinces actually pro- 
 ceeded to change dynasties, and to impose some 
 successful general as Emperor upon the helpless citi- 
 zens at the capital. Otho, Galba, Yitellius, and 
 Vespasian alike owed the imperial purple to the 
 allegiance of the provincial soldiers. In a memorable 
 passage the historian Tacitus relates that on one 
 occasion two common soldiers undertook to transfer 
 the crown, and that they succeeded in their under- 
 taking. The Koman emperors were continually appre- 
 hensive of the conduct of their provincial governors. 
 Domitian, for instance, recalled Agricola from Britain, 
 though he was perhaps the most successful commander 
 and explorer of his time, and probably most unjustly 
 suspected. It rarely happened that the relations of 
 the emperor with his governors were as friendly and 
 intimate as the relations between Trajan and the 
 younger Pliny. And finally the great Koman Empire 
 broke up entirely, and Kome herself became, as Byron 
 calls her, " the Niobe of Nations."^ And in compara- 
 tively modern times the tendency for widely extended 
 
160 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 empires to fall to pieces is still noticeable. The- 
 empire of Charles the Fifth, in its full integrity, was 
 not of long duration. France, Holland, Spain, and 
 Portugal have all tried to extend their territory by 
 acquiring colonial possessions, but they have all lost 
 most of what they gained. 
 
 It may be said, then, generally that, until quite 
 recently, the successful states of the world have been 
 the small ones, and not the large ones. It is the small 
 ones that have most influenced the destinies of man- 
 kind. Athens, Judaea, the Italian republics, the- 
 Netherlands, and the British Islands were all small^ 
 but they have made a great mark in the world. 
 Eome may appear an exception, but Kome too had 
 more of the essential parts of greatness before it 
 reached its greatest area. When largest in size it 
 was least in soul. But the great states have had com- 
 paratively small influence. They have not been able 
 even to sustain themselves. China indeed has for 
 centuries maintained a huge empire. But as far as- 
 influence on the world is concerned, it might just as 
 well have been situated in one of the fixed stars. But 
 the last hundred years has seen a reversal of what 
 seemed to be a universal law. States have begun to 
 grow enormously, and they seem destined to retain 
 their bigness. The British Empire is a great example 
 of this. The United States and Eussia, again, are also 
 both examples of vast areas subject to a single power. 
 The United States may by this time have reached its 
 ultimate dimensions, but it has grown enormously by 
 such additions as Florida, Louisiana, Texas, and Alaska. 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 161 
 
 Kussia steadily receives accretions in Central Asia, 
 and looks patiently towards an increase of tenitory in 
 South-Eastern Europe. Though she never hastes, slie 
 never rests. It is impossible to believe that she has 
 yet reached her full limits. There is also a correlative 
 tendency to sink small states in large ones. The 
 Grand Duchies of Tuscany and Parma, the Papal 
 States, the kingdom of the Two Sicilies, have all been 
 merged in the kingdom of Italy. The petty German 
 States have been merged in the German Empire. 
 Poland has been efface'! from the map of Europe. The 
 present century is marked by two streams running 
 side by side in international politics. The one stream 
 tends to suppress and merge small states, the other to 
 create and consolidate large ones. This is to some 
 extent due, no doubt, to the desire to make races and 
 states coincident. But even to this some limit must 
 be put, as Signor Ciispi has had to forcibly remind 
 the Irredendists of Italy. But however that may be, 
 the old order of things is reversed. The future of the 
 world is with the great states, the world-empires, as 
 Professor Seeley calls them. The British Empire, the 
 United States, Eussia, and probably China, are the 
 powers of the future. Tlie days of small states, of 
 even moderately large states, are past. Of this the 
 European countries are fully aware, and hence the 
 feverish avarice of the scramble for Africa. M. Pre- 
 vost Paradol, in his " La France Nouvelle," gave the 
 French an emphatic warning, and strenuously insisted 
 on the French acquisition of a great territory in 
 Northern Africa. It was not out of caprice that M. 
 
 fminvEiisiTT) 
 
162 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 Jules Ferry sent expeditions to Tonquin and Mada- 
 gascar. Neither is it caprice that has sent the Germans 
 and Italians to East Africa. It was plain to French, 
 German, and Italian statesmen that, without acquisition 
 of fresh territory, their countries were doomed to a 
 future of petty insignificance, which was not a thing 
 they could complacently dwell upon. Whether even 
 now these countries will ultimately succeed is doubt- 
 ful, but they are at least alive to the fact that they 
 cannot merely stand and mark time, but that they 
 must either expand or prepare to retire gracefully from 
 the rank of the great Powers. 
 
 Here, then, is a great reversal, a great revolution in 
 human affairs. And the cause of it is not far to seek. 
 It is scientific discovery and its practical application. 
 It is the railway, the steamship, and the telegraph. 
 The want of means of rapid communication between 
 the different parts of wide empires was the real cause 
 of the facility with which in earlier times these 
 empires fell to pieces. It was all but impossible for 
 a central government to keep an efficient control over 
 far distant lands. All manner of untoward events 
 might take place there before the home authorities 
 could become aware of them, much less prevent them. 
 It was little use for a Persian king or Roman emperor 
 to sit in Susa or on the Palatine concocting admini- 
 strative measures, promulgating edicts or fulminating 
 denunciations, when in the far distance his satrap or 
 proconsul, acting on the proverb, " procul a Jove, pro- 
 cul a fulmine," was either setting his authority at 
 defiance or sapping his power. Their commands or 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 163 
 
 rebukes were often hardly more efficacious than a 
 Pope's sentence of excommunication on a British Prime 
 ]\[inister would be. But all this is changed now. 
 Where the railway and the steamship are, there space 
 is practically in part annihilated. A man now can go 
 from London to Canada in about the same time it 
 used to take him to go from London to Edinburgh, 
 and he can reach the Antipodes in a shorter time than 
 he once required for crossing the Atlantic. Even so 
 short a time ago as the time of the American civil war, 
 it took forty days for the British Cabinet to receive 
 an answer to their ultimatum to the United States on 
 the Slidell and Mason incident. It is obvious, there- 
 fore, that it is possible to bring the distant parts of a 
 great empire practically into close contiguity with one 
 another. They become one great neighbourhood, and 
 the whole can be kept well under the control of the 
 central government. The telegraph, too, is of immense 
 importance. A colonial governor has not any longer 
 to wait for weeks or months before he can receive 
 instructions from home. They are flashed out to him 
 almost in a moment of time. And, conversely, his acts 
 are instantly made known at home, and are usually 
 made objects of common knowledge through the dis- 
 seminating power of the press. It is not too much to 
 say that had a fleet of swift steamers been sailing 
 between Liverpool and New York in 1776, the Decla- 
 ration of Independence might perhaps never have been 
 signed. But when it took weeks to cross the ocean, 
 the British colonies in North America were practically 
 much further away than they are now. The delay 
 
164 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 that occurred over the interchange of views between 
 the home and colonial authorities led to all sorts of 
 misunderstandings, and events that were in their in- 
 ception small, by lapse of time became gigantic evils. 
 It was difficult for both sides to come to any accord. 
 And not only was the distance then practically greater, 
 but this distance affected the imagination. It seemed 
 natural that two countries so far apart should be inde- 
 pendent of one another. Nay, it seemed unnatural 
 that they should be yoked together. Why, it was 
 argued by the colonists, unite in irritating bonds coun- 
 tries that the hand of nature has placed apart ? Why 
 })lace together what God has put asunder ? But at the 
 present day it is quite otherwise. Now that far dis- 
 tant countries are brought within easy distance of one 
 another, it does not seem unnatural that they should 
 be united. On the contrary, it is usually thought that 
 such a union would be mutually advantageous. And 
 surely with reason the same causes may be ascribed to 
 the failure of France, Holland, Spain, and Portugal, to 
 keep their important colonies. It lias been fortunate 
 for England that she was able to keep so many of her 
 colonies in hand, until the introduction of the steam- 
 ship and the telegraph. As it was, she lost the 
 United States, and had these scientific discoveries been 
 longer delayed, she might by this time have lost many 
 other of her colonial possessions. Thanks, however, 
 to the practical application of scientific discovery, 
 the British Empire ranks amongst the first in the 
 world. 
 
 Closely connected with this topic is the influence of 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 165 
 
 scientific discovery upon decentralization and local 
 government. The difficulties that were formerly en- 
 countered in making provincial governments adequate 
 and safe have already been referred to. Owing to the 
 lack of home supervision, such governments were either 
 timidly constructed and therefore feeble, or else en- 
 trusted with wide powers which were often abused. 
 But in modern times it is possible to decentralize, and 
 that with impunity, owing to the vastly improved 
 means of communication. Decentralization is a pro- 
 cess continually going on. Most of our colonies are 
 now entrusted with parliamentary institutions, and are 
 hardly at all interfered with by the home government. 
 Quite recently Western Australia has been made a 
 self-governing colony. And within the British Islands 
 decentralization still goes on. The railway has brought 
 all parts of the country so near together that this can 
 now be done with ease and safety. In 1888 an im- 
 portant Local Government Act was passed for the 
 counties of England, and in 1889 one was passed for 
 Scotland. And a great party are anxious to bestow 
 a large measure of self-government upon Ireland. 
 Whether it will ever be obtained or not is for the 
 present uncertain. But if it is ever obtained, it will 
 be because rapid means of communication will have 
 rendered it safe to grant it. 
 
 The relation borne to federation by scientific dis- 
 covery is of great importance. Much has been said in 
 a previous essay upon federations generally, so it must 
 be enough here to note the great development of 
 federal institutions within the present century. It is 
 
166 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 a most remarkable thing that this great developmoDt 
 is contemporaneous with the great practical scientific 
 discoveries. There is surely something here more than 
 mere chance. Then further it is noteworthy that just 
 as large states have supplanted small states, so large 
 federations have supplanted small ones. The Achaean 
 League, the United Netherlands and Switzerland, are 
 pigmies when compared with the giants of the United 
 States, Canada, the Argentine Kepublic, and tlie 
 coming Australian Federation. Switzerland is, indeed, 
 now the only small federation. She is a sort of sur- 
 vival of the past, and may be placed in the museum 
 of political curiosities, and catalogued as the dwarf 
 confederation. When it is considered that a federal 
 government is at bottom a compromise between the 
 conflicting interests of different portions of territory, 
 in order to meet common dangers and necessities, it 
 becomes clear that it is for the most part likely to be 
 adopted ov^er wide areas. For it is over wide areas 
 that conflicting interests are most likely to arise. But 
 without good means of communication such a union of 
 distant territories would be difficult, if not impossible. 
 There can be little doubt that the great network 
 of railways now spread throughout the United States 
 has made the American Federation infinitely easier 
 than it otherwise would have been. There is always, 
 in such countries as the United States, a danger of a 
 dissolution of their constituent parts. It is impossible 
 to think of the history of the United States without 
 seeing that this is so. The great American civil war 
 will stand as an example and a warning for all time. 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 167 
 
 But with the lapse of time and the growth of the rail- 
 way system, the tendency to dissolution tends more and 
 more to a vanishing-point. Never were the United 
 States more united than they are to-day. It is not 
 loni? since they celebrated the centenary of the inaugu- 
 ration of their first President, and so much enthusiasm 
 was shown in all parts of the great republic that it 
 may now be said with some confidence that it has an 
 assured and well-consolidated unity. This beneficent 
 result must surely be ascribed in a large deojree to the 
 railways and the telegraphs. The various states have 
 been brought so near together that their interests are 
 more bound in unison, and are more nearly identical. 
 They are becoming more and more necessary to one 
 another's welfare, and the closer they unite the more 
 advantageous the union becomes. It is the avowed 
 object of the new Tariff Act to make tiie United States 
 one great neighbourhood, self-sufficing and indepen- 
 dent of foreign imports. Bret Harte, in one of his 
 poems, relates what two locomotive engines are fanci- 
 fully supposed to have said on meeting face to face at 
 the opening of the Union Pacific Railway, after travel- 
 lino- from the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards respec- 
 tively. But though they are made to boast of much, 
 yet they pass over in silence the greatest boast of all. 
 They might have boasted how they were rendering 
 the Federal Constitution more and more stable. They 
 might have boasted on the fact that they were cement-, 
 ing the union in indissoluble bonds, relegating the 
 horrors of civil war to a dark and nearly forgotten 
 limbo, and assuring in the future a lengthened pros-. 
 
168 - ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 pect of peace, founded on neighbourly good-will and 
 identity of interests. 
 
 The influence of railways on the neighbouring con- 
 federation of the Dominion of Canada is remarkable. 
 Upon no country have railways had so beneficent effect 
 as upon Canada. For a long time it seemed as though 
 Canada, or at least parts of it, were destined to absorp- 
 tion into the United States. Eefore the introduction 
 of railways, the Canadian north-west provinces were so 
 distant from the eastern provinces that they practically 
 had no connection with one another. Winnipeg was 
 much more closely connected with St. Paul and Min- 
 neapolis than with Montreal and Quebec. British 
 Columbia was much more in communication with 
 California and Oregon than with eastern Canada. 
 Emigration in Canada flowed, not westward, but into 
 New England and New York. But the introduction 
 of railways, particularly the Canadian Pacific Eailway, 
 has altered all this. For the future Vancouver will 
 be as closely connected with Quebec as San Francisco 
 with New York, and the Canadian emigrant will press 
 forward to develop the riches of the north-west instead 
 of crossing over to the already crowded states of New 
 England. And, with regard to Australasian federation, 
 it should here be noticed that it is distance, and dis- 
 tance only, which even fast steamers cannot sufiiciently 
 abridge, that keeps New Zealand from coming into a 
 federal union with the Australian colonies. 
 
 The relation of scientific discovery to democracy is 
 a subject that is full of interest. Kousseau did not 
 hesitate to declare his opinion that democracy was 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. - 169 
 
 incompatible with a large state. He considered that 
 tlie great states of his time were far too big in area, 
 and he wished for a return to the model of the old 
 Greek city. What he would have said to the present 
 British Empire or to the United States it is impossible 
 to say. But if he were alive now, he would have to 
 retract his opinion that democracy can only live in a 
 small state. Montesquieu too seems to have thought 
 tlie same thing, but he had the foresight to see that 
 the difficulty might be got over by federation. And 
 here again it is from the means of communication that 
 we have to note the most important consequences. It 
 will become apparent on reflection that, where com- 
 munication is difficult and the area large, the demo- 
 cratic form of government is by its very nature not 
 easy of application. For what does democracy con- 
 note ? Government by the people, or participation 
 by all in governing. But where distances are great 
 and communication difficult, the obstacles to the par- 
 ticipation of all in governicg become immensely 
 augmented. And so democracies first arose in small 
 states, and we have to go to the small Greek cities 
 for the first examples of this form of government. In 
 the large states like Persia, Assyria, Egypt, we find 
 that the monarchical form of government existed, 
 varying in different degrees from a mild paternal rule 
 to an oppressive and dark despotism. But it was in 
 the small Greek cities that democracy flourished, for 
 there it was possible for each citizen to come to the 
 Assembly and listen to the wild harangues of a Cleon 
 or the flowing eloquence of a Demosthenes, and to 
 
170 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 signify his pleasure as to the policy for his country to 
 adopt. The citizens and the actual administrators of 
 government lived in close propinquity to one another. 
 It is almost as though the whole body of electors to the 
 British House of Commons lived beneath the shadow 
 of Westminster Hall. So that for small states demo- 
 cracy was natural and easy of adoption, and we can 
 understand that ,it was no wild statement of Pericles 
 when he said that the Athenians accounted a man use- 
 less who took no part in public affairs. But in the 
 large states democracy was impossible according to the 
 then known political methods, for representation was 
 a device not then discovered. 
 
 One of the most curious and interesting spectacles 
 in ancient history is the difficulty that Rome met with ' 
 in the later republican period in adjusting her political 
 institutions, which were becoming less and less oligar- 
 chical, and beginning to assume a democratic appear- 
 ance through the widening of the franchise of Roman 
 citizenship. This privilege, which was originally con- 
 fined to the dwellers on the Seven Hills and the 
 immediate neighbourhood, was gradually extended over 
 the Italian peninsula, and finally much further than 
 this. But how to enable the Roman citizen to exercise 
 his powers as a citizen, and so become a factor in the 
 wheels of government at Rome, was a problem that 
 vexed in vain the minds of her most acute statesmen. 
 The possibility of some means of representation either 
 did not occur to them, or, if it did, they did not see 
 their way to putting it into practice. It is only in 
 comparatively modern times that representation has 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 171 
 
 been introduced. It is an almost necessary incident ' 
 of parliamentary government, but until quite recently 
 representation even in small states has been carried 
 out so timidly, and on so limited a scale, that it has 
 been rather oligarchical than democratic in its nature. 
 Until the great Keform Act the British Government 
 was largely aristocratic in character, and certainly 
 oligarchical. But within a period almost coincident 
 with the introduction of a great railway system, it 
 has become democratic. Is this merely a fortuitous 
 circumstance ? Surely not. Kepresentation has be- 
 come easier in consequence of a greatly improved 
 means of communication. The influence of railways on 
 democracy and representative government can hardly 
 be over-estimated. Not that even representation is a 
 fidl equivalent for a democracy in which, every citizen 
 can personally take part. Parliaments do not always 
 faithfully represent the views of the people. More- 
 over, where areas are large, representation becomes 
 correspondingly difficult. It is no light matter for a 
 Member of Congress to travel from iSan Francisco or 
 New Orleans to Washington. It would be quite im- 
 possible for a member of a British Imperial Parliament 
 to attend from New Zealand or Australia. Kepresen- 
 tative government in any case has only become possible 
 on any great scale since the discovery of rapid means 
 of communication, and it is for this reason that the 
 wonderful impulse given to democratic^institutions has 
 accompanied the no less wonderful application of 
 science to the conveniences of life, which is the special 
 glory of the present century. It is clear that demo- 
 
172 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 cracy was at first only possible in small communities, 
 but, thanks to scientific discovery, representation has 
 been made easy. There is now practically no limit to 
 the area over which the democratic form of govern- 
 ment can be successfully applied. The most remark- 
 able instance is the United States. That a people 
 numbering over fifty millions, and scattered over an 
 area of about three million square miles, should be 
 subject to one of the most popular governments in the 
 world is surely an amazing fact, and one worth thinking 
 over. There are few more dramatic incidents in 
 modern affairs than the casting of votes over this vast 
 area by this great people for the election of their 
 President, and that too in a single day. It should not 
 be forgotten, too, that tlie telegraph and the press have 
 in a degree contributed their influence to make repre- 
 sentation easy. Eepresentatives are now subjected to 
 the glare of " the fierce light " of popular gaze, and 
 cannot escape the vigilant criticism of their constituents. 
 The people place the more trust in the representative 
 system, because, knowing as they do, their representa- 
 tives' every word and act, they are well aware that 
 they have them well in hand. In a word, as Professor 
 Freeman says, the great practical discoveries of modern 
 science have " enabled large states to rise to the politi- 
 cal level of small ones." These words are a seeming 
 paradox, but they are profoundly true. It has not 
 been until quile recently that any but small states 
 were capable of sustaining democratic institutions. 
 Large states could not come up to their political level. 
 Now they can do so, for scientific discovery has ren- 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 173 
 
 dered democracy on a great scale possible. And to 
 have done this is as great an achievement as any that 
 the world has yet seen. 
 
 And just as democracy has become more possible, so 
 in a corresponding degree has the tyranny either of a 
 despot or an oligarchy become less possible, putting 
 aside those oriental countries as yet untouched by 
 European influences. The easy methods of travel, and 
 the conveniences afforded by the railway, the post- 
 office, the telegraph, and the newspaper, for the trans- 
 mission and distribution of information, have made 
 tyranny increasingly difficult. Personal inaccessibility 
 and secrecy have always been, and probably still are, 
 necessary for successful tyranny. Surely the notion of 
 "the divinity that doth hedge a king" must have 
 arisen at least in some degree from a certain awe 
 begotten by the withdrawal of the monarch from 
 popular gaze. It was essential that the populace 
 should have little opportunity of witnessing the human 
 frailties of their ruler, or of getting that familiarity 
 that breeds contempt. The story of the Pseudo- 
 Smerdis who succeeded in winning for himself the 
 Persian crown, on the false pretence of royal descent, 
 is full of suggestive meaning. He carried the habit 
 of secrecy to an almost incredible extent. But then 
 it was essential to the maintenance of his position. 
 He kept himself closely confined to his citadel, and 
 his very appearance was unknown to-those about the 
 court. His features were as little known as those of 
 the man with the iron mask. Unluckily for him, his 
 personal aspect one day became divulged by an artful 
 
174 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 contrivance on the part of those who suspected a fraud, 
 and there was soon an end of this adventurer's career 
 as a king. Again, there is a certain grim darkness 
 and mysterious secrecy that seems to shroud the life 
 of the Eoman Emperor Tiberius, in the island of 
 Caprese. And when we read of Philip the Second of 
 Spain, sitting in the Escorial at Madrid, weaving the 
 web of destiny, penning prolix and wearisome de- 
 spatches with an untiring industry, constant only in 
 duplicity, and hurrying to early and mysterious graves 
 a Montigny or an Escovedo, it is impossible to avoid a 
 shudder at the inscrutable gloom that enshrouded him, 
 which a lapse of three centuries has not entirely dis- 
 pelled. It may be safely asserted that the march of 
 western civilization has become too rapid to allow the 
 recurrence of such incidents in human affairs as these, 
 unless, indeed, some step of retrogression is reserved 
 for us. For the present, at any rate, we may be sure 
 that there is little chance of secrecy, hardly of privacy 
 even, reserved for those uneasy heads that wear the 
 crown. And if there is little chance for the tyranny 
 of a single man, there is much less for that of a 
 group of men. The insidious workings of a Venetian 
 oligarchy are vanished, let us hope, for ever. When 
 the railway makes travelling easy for all, and when the 
 telegraph and the newspaper bring information to all 
 who can read, nothing at least that is at all likely to 
 shock popular feeling, or outrage humanity, can be for 
 a moment veiled from popular view. Science is indeed 
 the twin brother of Liberty. 
 
 The bearing of scientific discovery on the conduct 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 175 
 
 of war and prospects of peace is noteworthy. Perhaps 
 the most interesting aspect of this question is the 
 relation of warfare, as modified by our modern inven- 
 tions, to the comparative sizes of states and forms of 
 government. In the first place, it must be remarked 
 that war has become enormously costly, and. is likely 
 to become more and more so in an increasing degree. 
 The military and naval budgets of Continental nations, 
 even in times of peace, have reached appalling dimen- 
 sions. Almost every year sees some addition to them. 
 The cost of a first-class ship of war and its guns may 
 well disquiet the mind of the poor tax-payer. No 
 European country can afford to be without such 
 weapons of offence as torpedoes, colossal guns, and 
 rifles and swords of the newest and most efficient type. 
 But this security is gained at an enormous cost. No 
 wonder that Europeans are beginning to think that 
 their countries are being "run" for the advantage of 
 America. It seems, therefore, a natural consequence 
 that the richest countries are likely to be the most 
 successful in war. Of course this need not necessarily 
 be the case, because a nation may be rich and yet too 
 devoted to the pursuits of peace to give the necessary 
 attention to external dei'ence. Kiches can never quite 
 compensate lor unpreparedness. France was richer 
 than Prussia, but, as it turned out, quite unprepared. 
 And Sir Charles Dilke has expressed his opinion most 
 emphatically on the unpreparedness of Great Britain 
 to meet a sudden attack. In such an event our riches 
 M ould only form a great prize to our conquerors. And, 
 again, it seems to follow that the largest countries, in 
 
176 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 SO far as mere greatness of extent brings them wealth, 
 would be the most successful. But here, again, it is 
 obvious that a wilderness however extensive, or fertile 
 acres however many, if left untilled, fannot profit at 
 all. So that a small state, if rich, could cope on equal 
 or superior terms with a poor but vastly larger state. 
 However that may be, it is certain that mere hardi- 
 hood, endurance, and courage cannot count for as much 
 as they once did. They are valuable still, no doubt, 
 but no amount of courage can stand up against the 
 raking fire of a machine-gun. The Mahdists in the 
 Soudan campaign fought with unsurpassable bravery, 
 but they were cut down like grass. The people who 
 bring into the field the most efficient weapons must 
 win, if they handle them with the necessary skill. 
 The Dutch peasantry in the sixteenth century would 
 sometimes arm themselves with all kinds of impromptu 
 weapons, and would give a good account of themselves 
 against the trained battalions from Spain. But it 
 would be little use for any people to attempt any such 
 daring in these days against the soldiers of a modern 
 state. It would be little use for an Alva or Don John 
 of Austria, with all their skill and intrepidity, to direct 
 insufficiently armed troops against a German battalion. 
 No Drake or Howard could have any chance of success, 
 if he relied on mere daring, in the face of a first-class 
 man-of-war. So that it seems almost certain that the 
 richest country has, if it chooses to take advantage of 
 its wealth, the best chance of success in war under its 
 modern conditions. How far, and in what manner, the 
 relations of the different forms of government to war 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 177 
 
 are affected by modern inventions is a different and 
 more complex question. One thing, however, seems 
 certain, and that is that tyranny is not likely to derive 
 much advantage from the increased costliness of war. 
 It would be strange indeed if a tyrant should be rich 
 enough to supply these costly inventions out of his 
 own private purse for use against his subjects for pur- 
 poses of oppression. And he could hardly expect to 
 deriv^e the necessary money from his subjects by a 
 process of taxation. In former times a tyrant could 
 grind down his subjects by means of a body of troops, 
 small, but attached to his person by self-interest. But 
 that he could hardly do now, at any rate for any length 
 of time. On the other hand, parliamentary govern- 
 ment, and the newspapers too^ether, are inimical to 
 successful war. Secrecy from the enemy is one of the 
 elements of success, but at a time and in a country 
 where every item of news is bandied about from mouth 
 to mouth, secrecy, even on the most vital points, is all 
 but impossible. The power of the press is at all times 
 most remarkable, in both domestic and foreign affairs. 
 Not only does it make secrecy in war difficult, but in 
 times of peace it overrides the efforts of diplomacy. 
 Lord John Russell, in his Speeches and Despatches, has 
 put on record how the English press precipitated war 
 between Denmark and Germany on the Schleswig- 
 Holstein dispute. It seems that the British Cabinet 
 had proposed terms of compromise which the German 
 powers were willing to accept ; *" Denmark,*' says Lord 
 John Russell, "would likewise have accepted them 
 had not a large portion of the English press, including 
 
 N 
 
178 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 the Tiynes and Morning Post, two powerful organs of 
 public opinion friendly to the Government, inflamed 
 the passions of the Danes, and induced them to think 
 that they would be defended by the arms of England 
 against even the most moderate demands of Germany, 
 and against the well-founded complaints of the 
 oppressed inhabitants of Schleswig. Thus excited, 
 they refused the proposed terms." 
 
 One other point remains, and that is the bearing of 
 the application of scientific discovery and invention 
 upon industry and economical questions. And here 
 we are concerned rather with such inventions as the 
 machinery employed in the various kinds of manu- 
 facture rather than with the raihvay or telegraph. 
 Now, the most remarkable and important aspect of 
 this question is the wonderful way in which the power 
 of human labour has been multiplied. The power of 
 producing the means of subsistence has been augmented 
 enormously. Although population increases, produc- 
 tive power increases much more. The Malthusian 
 theory is put largely at a discount. A few illustrations 
 of the multiplication of productive power will do more 
 for the realization of this important fact than anything 
 else. The cotton industry may be taken as an example 
 Sir Lyon Playfair, speaking at the National Liberal 
 Club on this subject, remarked that "the application 
 of machinery in the cultivation, harvesting, and clean- 
 ing of cotton has been so great, that while in 1873 a 
 given amount of labour produced 3^ million bales in 
 America, a much less amount of labour in 1887 turned 
 out 6^ millions of bales. The economies in its manu- 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 179 
 
 factured products are still greater. In 1873 spindles 
 made four thousand revolutions in a minute ; they now 
 make ten thousand. In the last fifteen years the 
 population of the world had increased sixteen per cent., 
 while the production of cotton goods had increased 
 eighty-six per cent." Again, it has been calculated 
 by Professor Leone Levi that if all the yarn which is 
 now spun in England in the course of a year by the 
 machine which spins a thousand threads simultaneously, 
 were to be spun by hand, it would take a hundred 
 millions of men to accomplish the task. Again, it is 
 stated that whereas pig iron can be converted into 
 malleable iron by the Bessemer process in twenty 
 minutes, it formerly took, under the old process, nearly 
 a fortnight to put the iron through the necessary 
 refining and puddling. It becomes apparent, from 
 these instances, that the productive power of human 
 labour has been enormously increased. It seems as 
 though the power of supply had altogether outrun any 
 possible demands. And here, too, the power of rapid 
 locomotion and distribution lend their aid by placing 
 the products of all parts of the world within the reach 
 of all. "A cube of coal," says an American writer, 
 *' which would pass through the rim of a quarter of a 
 dollar will drive a ton of food and its proportion of the 
 steamship two miles upon its way from the producer 
 to the consumer." A marvellous achievement ! And 
 again says the same writer, " The wages for one day's 
 work of an average mechanic in the far East will pay 
 for moving a year's subsistence of bread and meat a 
 thousand miles or more from the distant West." So 
 
180 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 that not only are the products of human labour 
 enormously increased, but the power of bringing those 
 products within the reach of all is enormously increased 
 also. Nor does the influence of the practical applica- 
 tion of science to industry end here. It has brought 
 about a revolution in industrial methods, which has 
 in its turn brought us face to face with social questions 
 of a most pressing kind. The relations of capital and 
 labour, and the life and status of the industrial classes 
 have been altogether changed by it. And, indeed, for 
 the last fifty years the legislators of the world have 
 been endeavouring to cope with this new order of 
 things. The abolition of the corn laws, the intro- 
 duction of free trade, the various Factory Acts, the 
 laws affecting trade combinations, the rise of trades 
 unions, have all had their origin in the difficulties 
 created by the change. Scientific discovery has given 
 birth to an entirely new class of social and political 
 questions, and if it had done nothing else, it would 
 have provided questions of great and increasing 
 interest for the political philosopher and the practical 
 statesman. 
 
 There is a story of an agricultural chemist in South 
 Carolina, who, shortly before the civil war in America, 
 was shown the Ordinance of Secession, and was asked 
 what he thought of it. He replied, " That's not what 
 South Carolina needs ; she needs manure." That 
 chemist expressed by his answer the change that has 
 come over the world. He clearly thought that the 
 practical application of science in South Carolina was 
 much more important than any question of forms of 
 
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 181 
 
 government or political institutions. And he was in 
 a great degree right. It may be said that theories 
 and ideas in politics are now forced into the back- 
 ground. Such notions as " the divine right of kings," 
 "social contracts," "natural rights," *' rights of man," 
 are of small account. Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, and 
 Rousseau are, in a sense, no longer the heroes of 
 political philosophy. We are beginning to set up on 
 the thrones which they have vacated. Watt, Ark- 
 wright, the Stephensons, and Wheatstone. We do not 
 now so much ask whether this notion or that theory or 
 idea is prevalent in a certain country, but rather what 
 railways it has, whether it has the latest mechanical 
 inventions in manufacture, whether it has many news- 
 papers, and a thorough telegraphic communication at 
 home and with foreign countries. In considering the 
 condition and prospects of a nation, we instinctively 
 feel that such inquiries are more important than an 
 investigation into the political ideas of its people. 
 That they should have true and lofty ideas on the 
 great questions that agitate man is well indeed, and 
 likely to redound much to their advantage ; but, with- 
 out the physical and material means to put those ideas 
 into practice, the possession of them is useless, and to 
 talk of them is like the empty tinkling of a cymbal 
 It is not every one who can proudly say — 
 
 " Content with poverty, my sonl I arm, 
 And virtue, though in rags, will keep me warm." 
 
 The want of physical and material means is an ill 
 school for virtue, and promises but poor nourishment 
 for great ideas and noble thoughts. But the intro- 
 
182 ESSAYS IN POLITICS. 
 
 duction of the railway and the telegraph, and all the 
 other marvels of applied science, lends them powerful 
 aid, and often sweeps away the hidden things of dark- 
 ness. In politics science is often as beneficent as it is 
 potent. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Achsean League, 43 
 Adams, Sir F. O., and Cunning- 
 ham, on Swiss Confederation, 85 
 Africa, partition of, 161, 162 
 Agricultural Holdings Act, 139 
 
 labourers, Acts passed to 
 
 relieve, 114 
 
 Andorra, Republic of, 85 
 
 Anne, Queen, her use of the veto, 
 
 36 
 Alexander the Great, empire of, 
 
 158 
 Argentine Republic, federation 
 
 of, 63 
 Aristotle, on sovereignty, 1 
 
 on the elements of sove- 
 reignty, 17 
 
 Athens and its dependencies, 13 
 
 as a democracy, 28, 170 
 
 , influence of, 160 
 
 Austin, John, his definition of 
 
 sovereignty, 5 
 , his idea of sovereignty in 
 
 the British Constitution, 7 
 
 on positive morality, 27 
 
 Australasian Council, 40 
 Australia, legislative interference 
 
 in, 141-144 
 , Western, self-government 
 
 in, 165 
 , protection in, 141 
 
 Australia, co-operation in, 147 
 Australian and Australasian 
 
 Federation, 40, 41 , 49 
 Austria, union with Hungary, 45 
 
 B 
 
 Bacon, Lord, his views of the 
 
 people, 28 
 Bagehot on the prerogative, 30 
 Balkan States, federation in, 40 
 Ball, John, his contrast of rich 
 
 and poor, 107 
 Baernreither, on the English 
 
 working classes, 145 
 on State intervention in 
 
 England and the Continent, 
 
 145 
 Barringtonintroduces co-operative 
 
 societies, 115 
 Bavaria, position of the Gterman 
 
 confederation, 57 
 Beaconsfield, Lord, on coalitions, 
 
 93 
 
 on factory system, 110 
 
 Bessemer process in iron- working , 
 
 179 
 Bentham, on sovereignty, 4 
 , impetus given by him to 
 
 legislation, 15, 16 
 Belgium and the Congo Free 
 
 State, 45 
 
184 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Blackstone on sovereignty, 3 
 
 Blackstone on division of the 
 Executive and legislature, 17 
 
 Bodin, Jean, on sovereignty, 2 
 
 Boulanger, General, 96 
 
 Bret Harte, on Union Pacific Rail- 
 way, 167 
 
 Biitisli Constitution, sovereignty 
 in, 7 
 
 formerly aristocratic, 171 
 
 Bryce, Professor, on the British 
 Cabinet, 19 
 
 on the introduction of the 
 
 Referendum into England, 34 
 
 ■ on federation in the United 
 
 States, 70 
 
 , his classification of instances 
 
 of State interference, 129, 130 
 
 on American State Legisla- 
 tures, 137, 138 
 
 on State interference in 
 
 democracies, 152 
 
 Brazil, United States of, 38, 49, 
 
 50 
 Burke, on popular legislation, 28 
 
 on English Conservatism, 
 
 144 
 
 
 
 Cabinet, the British, 6, 19, 94 
 
 Canada, federation of, 47, 48, 54, 
 57,58 
 
 , population of, 47 
 
 , distribution of powers in 
 
 Union of, 54 
 
 , central power in, 54, 55 
 
 , State rights in, 55 
 
 , Supreme Court of, 68 
 
 , State interference in, 139, 
 
 140 
 
 , railways in, 168 
 
 Cape Colony, Customs Union of, 
 with Orange Free State, 39 
 
 Capital towns in federations, 73, 74 
 
 Central America, federations in, 
 39,63 
 
 Charles I., his conflict with par- 
 liament, 11 
 
 Charles I., his description of the 
 
 Commons, 20 
 Charles V.. empire of, 160 
 Chase, Chief Justice, on the 
 
 American Union, 63 
 Chatham, Lord, his opinion of 
 
 the founders of the American 
 
 Union, 52 
 China, 160, 161 
 Chinese, legislation against, in 
 
 Australia, 142 
 Civil Damages Clause in United 
 
 States, 140 
 Cleveland, President, 24 
 Colonies and scientific discovery, 
 
 163, 165 
 Conspiracy and Protection of Pro- 
 perty Act, 109 
 Constitutions, rigid and' flexible, 
 
 5, 6, 73, 96 
 Constitutional Conventions, 30 
 Co-operation, 115-117, 147 
 Comitia, 2, 85, 18 
 Crimes, legislation in United 
 
 States against books on and 
 
 pictures of, 134 
 Crispi, Signer, on Irredentists, 161 
 Customary law in East and West, 
 
 14 
 
 Dante, his political writings, 2 
 
 Debts, exemptions from attach- 
 ment for, in the United States, 
 134 
 
 Decraix, Julian M., on State in- 
 tervention in England and on 
 the Continent, 146 
 
 Delegation of powers by sovereign 
 body, 9 
 
 Democracy, growth of, 28, 171 
 
 in Switzerland, 79, 80, 84, 
 
 85,88 
 
 and State intervention, 128, 
 
 129, 151-153 
 
 Demosthenes, his description of 
 laws, 26 
 
 Despotisms, 169, 173, 174, 177 
 
INDEX. 
 
 185 
 
 Decey, Professor, on constitu- 
 tional conventions, 30 
 
 on the prerogative, 31 
 
 on the introduction of the 
 
 Referendum into England, 35 
 
 Dilke, Sir Charles, on socialistic 
 legislation in Australia, 140, 141 
 
 on English unprepareduess 
 
 for war, 175 
 
 Directors' Liability Act, 148 
 
 Druey, M., his saying on the 
 Swiss Confederation, 60 
 
 Dunning, his resolution on the 
 influence of the Crown, 31 
 
 E 
 
 Elizabeth, Queen, use of veto by, 
 
 35 
 Egypt, slavery in, 105 
 Economical Society of Sheerness, 
 
 115 
 
 Factory Acts, 112 
 
 in Canada, 140 
 
 in Australia, 142 
 
 Fawcett, Professor, on the pre- 
 rogative, 32 
 
 Federation Congress at Mel- 
 bourne, 41 
 
 Federations, history of, 43 
 
 , origin of, 45-48 
 
 , basis of, 50, 51 
 
 , dangers of, 58, 59, 65, 71 
 
 , conflicting forces in, 62, 06 
 
 , sovereignty in, 66, 67 
 
 , judicial body in, 67, 68 
 
 , advantages and disadvan- 
 tages of, 70-72 
 
 , peculiarities of, 73, 74 
 
 , political careers in, 74, 75 
 
 , size of, 165 
 
 , relation of scientific dis- 
 covery to, 165-168 
 
 Federal Council, Swiss, 92-94 
 
 Ferry, M., colonial policy of, 162 
 
 Fiji, position of, towards Austra- 
 lasian federation, 42 
 
 Flint, Professor, his definition of 
 socialism, 126 
 
 France, reputation of, as a revo- 
 lutionary country, 6 
 
 , sovereignty in, 8 
 
 , constitution of, 6. 8, 95, 96 
 
 French President, 98, 99 
 
 Free library vote, 83 
 
 Free trade, beginning of, 114 
 
 Freeman, Prof., on the Landes- 
 gemeinden, 85 
 
 on the political importance 
 
 of scientific discovery, 156, 172 
 
 G 
 
 Gambling, laws in the United 
 
 States, restricting, 134 
 George III., on the position of the 
 
 Crown, 31 
 • , dismissal of a ministry by, 
 
 31 
 Germany, federation of, 39, 47, 57 
 , State insurance for workmen 
 
 in, 147 
 Giflfen, Mr. R., on wages, 121, 122 
 
 , on food consumption, 123 
 
 Gladstone, Mr., his use of the 
 
 prerogative, 32 
 on Homeric popular assem- 
 blies, 87 
 
 on free trade, 114 
 
 Golden Age for labourers, 120 
 Greece, popular assemblies in, 18, 
 
 85, 87 
 
 , small States in, 158 
 
 , democracy in, 169, 170 
 
 , earliest federations in, 43 
 
 , slavery in, 103, 105 
 
 Granvelle, Cardinal, his view of 
 
 the people, 28 
 Grevy, M., ex-President, 23 
 Gregory the Great, Pope, his 
 
 efforts to suppress slavery, 105 
 Griffith, Sir Samuel, on Australian 
 
 federation, 41 
 
186 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Grote, Mr., on Athenian de- 
 mocracy, 28 
 
 , on the Keferendum, 35 
 
 , on Swiss politics, 60 
 
 Hallam on slavery in the ancient 
 
 world, 103 
 Hamerton, Mr., on the French 
 
 Chambers, 25 
 Hamilton, the architect of the 
 
 American Constitution, 43, 69 
 Heligoland, cession of, 33 
 Henry, Patrick, on the American 
 
 Union, 62 
 Helvetic Eepublic, 78 
 Hindoo village community, 12 
 Hobbes on sovereignty, 2, 3 
 
 on political liberty, 102 
 
 Holland, Professor, on sovereignty 
 
 in the East, 14 
 Holmes, Mr. W. O., on status of 
 
 the servant, 102 
 Homeric popular assemblies, 87 
 Housing of the poor. Acts regulat- 
 ing, 113 
 
 Imperial federation, 10, 42, 49, 171 
 Initiative in Switzerland, 84 
 Ireland, disestablishment of Epis- 
 copal Church in, 10 
 
 ■ , application of federation to, 
 
 42 
 Irish Land Acts, 139 
 Isle of Man, constitution of, 22 
 Isocrates on the rule of the people, 
 
 36 
 Italy, kingdom of, 161 
 , medisBval republics of, 28 
 
 Jackson, President, 69 
 Jameson, Mrs., story of St. Bavon 
 106 
 
 Janson, Mr., on repealed legisla- 
 tion, 26 
 Jews, captivity of, in Persia, 13 
 Johnson, President, 23, 95 
 
 K 
 
 Koran, 13 
 
 Labour, laws in the United States 
 regulating hours of, 132, 133 
 
 in Canada, 140 
 
 in Australia, 142 
 
 La Bruyere on serfage, 106 
 
 Landesgemeinden, 85-88 
 
 Leeward Islands, federation of, 
 37,39 
 
 Legislation, the mark of sove- 
 reignty in the West, 14 
 
 , increased activity of British 
 
 Parliament in, 15 
 
 , injurious, 26 
 
 Legislature, encroachment of, on ^ 
 the Executive, 18-20 
 
 Leone Levi, Professor, on Savings 
 Banks, 118 
 
 , on wages, 121, 122 
 
 , on food consumption, 123 
 
 , on increased power of pro- 
 duction, 179 
 
 Liberty and Property Defence 
 League, 128 
 
 Limitation of powers of sovereign 
 body impossible, 10 
 
 Liquor traffic, laws in the TJuited 
 States regulating, 131 
 
 in Canada, 140 
 
 in Australasia, 143 
 
 Local government, 165 
 
 Locke, on sovereignty, 3 
 
 on division of executive and 
 
 legislative powers, 17 
 
 M 
 
 Machiavelli, character of his 
 writings, 2 
 
INDEX. 
 
 187 
 
 Machinery, changes caused by in- 
 troduction of, 110, 178-180 
 
 Maine, Sir H. S., on oriental 
 sovereignty, 12 
 
 , on growth of legislation, 15 
 
 , on the paradox of the British 
 
 constitution, 19 
 
 , on popular dislike of change, 
 
 25 
 
 ^^ , on legislation in the United 
 
 States, 138 
 
 Married Women's Property Acts, 
 14 
 
 Marshall, Chief Justice, eminence 
 of, 69 
 
 May, Sir Erskine, (Lord Farn- 
 borough), on the corn laws. 111 
 
 McKinley Act, 49, 97, 130, 167 
 
 Medicine, laws in America regu- 
 lating, 131 
 
 Menu, Institutes of, 13 
 
 Mill, J. S., on English sympathy 
 with slaveholders in the United 
 States, 104 
 
 on statute of labourers, 107 
 
 Minnesota, as a corn -growing 
 State, 136 
 
 Montesquieu, on division of ex- 
 ecutive and legislative powers, 
 17 
 
 on democracy and federa- 
 tion, 169 
 
 Morley, Mr. J., his description of 
 the Roman Empire, 105 
 
 Mowatt, Sir Oliver, on State 
 rights in Canada, 55 
 
 N 
 
 Nationalization of land in Aus- 
 tralia, 148 
 
 Newfoundland, federation of, with 
 Canada, 49 
 
 Newgate Gaol, wages at building 
 of, 119 
 
 New Zealand, position of, in 
 Australasian federation, 40, 41, 
 42, 168 
 
 New Zealand, Government life 
 insurance in, 143 
 
 , Public Trust Office in, 143 
 
 Norfolk Island, 87; popular as- 
 sembly in, 87 
 
 Nova Scotia, position of, in Cana- 
 dian Union, 55 
 
 Norway and Sweden, union of, 45 
 
 O 
 
 Oleomargarine, laws in United 
 
 States regulating, 131 
 Orange Free State, Customs Union 
 
 of, with Cape Colony, 39 
 Owen starts co-operation at 
 
 Lanark, 116 
 
 Parkes, Sir H., on Australian 
 federation, 41 
 
 Parliamentary and non- parlia- 
 mentary governments, 22, 95 
 
 Payment of members of parlia- 
 ment, 88, 89 
 
 Peasant revolt, 107 
 
 Peel, Sir Robert, inaugurates free 
 trade, 114 
 
 , dismissal of his ministry, 32 
 
 Pericles on Athenian citizenship, 
 170 
 
 Persia, kingdom, difficulties of 
 governing, 158 
 
 Petty, Sir W., on wages in seven- 
 teenth century, 120 
 
 Philip IL, of Spain, 174 
 
 Plato on democracy, 28 
 
 Play fair, Sir Lyon, on increased 
 power of production, 178 
 
 Plebescite, French, true nature of, 
 84 
 
 Poland, Kings of, 98 
 
 Polybius, remark of, on human 
 folly, 147 
 
 Pope on the aristocracy, 28 
 
 Prerosrative, 30-32 
 
188 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 President, American, 28, 29, 97- 
 
 99 
 
 , French, 23, 29, 98, 99 
 
 , Swiss, 80, 97 
 
 Press, power of, 177 
 
 Prevost Paradol, M,, on French 
 
 colonial policy, 161 
 Prices, history of, 118-123. 
 Pseudo-Smerdis, 173 
 Purchase system in the army, 
 
 abolition of, 32 
 
 Queen, prerogative of, 30 
 Queensland, federation of, 41 
 
 R 
 
 Eae. definition of Socialism by, 
 
 127 
 Kenan, M., on creations, 52 
 Keferendum, Swiss, 33, 80-85 
 , institutions analogous to, 
 
 83,84 
 , introduction into England, 
 
 34,35 
 Representation, 170-172 
 Rhodes, Mr. Cecil, on South 
 
 African federation, 39 
 Rochdale, co-operation at, 1 16 
 Rogers, Professor, on history of 
 
 wages and prices, 118-120, 124 
 Rome, slavery in, 103, 105 
 
 , original smallness of, 158 
 
 , growth of, 170 
 
 , difficulty in maintaining, 
 
 158, 170 
 Rousseau, on sovereignty, 3 
 
 on the sovereisjn people, 27 
 
 on republics, 88 
 
 on democracy in large States, 
 
 168 
 
 on liberty, 104 
 
 Runjeet Singh, rule of, 12, 16 
 Russell, Lord John, on the British 
 
 Cabinet, 19 
 
 Russell, Lord John, on the prero- 
 gative, 30 
 
 on the press and the Schles- 
 
 wig-Holstein war, 177, 178 
 
 Russia, extent and growth of, 160, 
 161 
 
 S 
 
 Saint Bavon, story of, 106 
 
 San Marino, republic of, 85 
 
 Savings banks, 117, 118 
 
 Scientiiic discovery, political im- 
 portance of, 155, 166, 167, 181 
 
 , relation of, to decentraliza- 
 tion, 165 
 
 , , to representative 
 
 government, 171, 172 
 
 ■ , , to war, 175, 176 
 
 , , to size of States, 162- 
 
 164 
 
 , , to productive power, 
 
 178, 180 
 
 ■ , , to industrial con- 
 ditions, 180 
 
 Septennial Act, 7 
 
 Serfage, 106 
 
 Shaffle — his definition of Social- 
 ism, 127 
 
 Sharpe, Conversation, on think- 
 ing, 35 
 
 Shelburne, Lord, on royal pre- 
 rogative, 31 
 
 Shipping, Acts regulating, 113 
 
 Shaftesbury, Lord, on human 
 misery, 102 
 
 Slavery, long continuance of, 103- 
 105 
 
 Smith, Goldwin, on Canadian 
 federation, 48 
 
 Smith, Sir Thomas, on sovereignty, 
 2 
 
 Socialism, definitions of, 127 
 
 , alien to the British, 145 
 
 Socialistic legislation, moral and 
 philanthropic elements in, 148- 
 150 
 
 Slidell and Mason incident, 163 
 
 Sonderbund, 61, 71 
 
INDEX. 
 
 189 
 
 Sovereignty, legal and political, 
 
 27, 29, 80 
 Soum Africa, federation in, 39 
 Spencer, Herbert, on injurious 
 
 legislation, 26 
 Stael, Madame de, on politics, 35 
 States, large and small, 158-164, 
 
 172 
 , superior influence of small, 
 
 IbO 
 , small, merger of, in large 
 
 states, 161 
 Statute of Labourers, 107 
 Statute of Apprentices, 108 
 Stephen, Sir J., on dormant an- 
 archy, 11 
 Stephens, Mr, Brunton, on Aus- 
 tralian unity, 41 
 Strafford, his description of the 
 
 Commons, 20 
 Sweden, Kings of, 98 
 Swift on candidates, 99 
 Switzerland, federation of, 38, 43, 
 
 46, 77, 78 
 
 , neutrality of, 46, 65 
 
 , Federal Assembly of, 56, 
 
 90-92 
 , conflict between cantons in, 
 
 60,61 
 
 , judicial body in, 68 
 
 , position of rebellious cantons 
 
 in, 70 
 , democracy in, 79, 80, 84, 85, 
 
 88 
 
 , President of, 80, 97 
 
 , political careers in, 89 
 
 , economy of administration 
 
 in, 89, 90 
 
 , Federal Council in, 92-94 
 
 , merits of goverument of, 95, 
 
 96 
 
 Tacitus on the Germans, 87 
 Thiers, M., on the French Ee- 
 
 public, 24 
 Thomas Aquinas, the character 
 
 of his political writings, 2 
 
 Thrasea Foetus, saying of, 103 
 Tiberius, the Emperor, tyranny 
 of, 174 ^ ' ^ y 
 
 Ticino, revolution in, 70, 79, 96 
 Toynbee, Mr. Arnold, on the 
 
 condition of the working 
 
 classes, 110 
 Trades-unions, 115, 117 
 Transvaal, future of, 39 
 Triple alliance, 45, 46 
 
 U 
 
 United States, sovereignty in, 8, 9 
 , executive and legislature 
 
 in, how related, 22-24, 95 
 , State legislatures of, 9, 24, 
 
 26, 137, 138 
 , sovereignty of the states in, 
 
 51 
 , distribution of powers in. 
 
 53, 54 
 
 , central power in, 53 
 
 , State rights in, 38, 55 
 
 , Congress of, 9, 23, 56 
 
 , conflict of State and federal 
 
 rights, 59, 60 
 
 , Supreme Court of, 67, 69 
 
 , position of rebellious State 
 
 in, 70 
 
 , State Secretaries of, 94 
 
 , State intervention in, 129- 
 
 139 
 
 , protection in, 130 
 
 , industrial peculiarities of, 
 
 135, 136 
 
 , consolidation of, 63, 167 
 
 , railways in, 167 
 
 Union Padfic Bailway, 167 
 United Netlierlands' federation 
 
 of, 43, 46 
 
 Veto, royal prerogative of, 35, 36 
 Venice, Doges of, 98 
 , oligarchy of, 174 
 
190 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 W 
 
 Wages, history of, 118-123 
 
 , statutes regulating, 109, 113 
 
 Warfare, modern, 175, 176 
 Washington, his opinion of the 
 
 American Union, 59 
 West Indies, federation in, 40 
 
 . federation with Canada, 49 
 
 Wheat, prices of, 119, 121-123 
 William III., use of veto by, 35 
 William IV., dismissal of a 
 
 ministry by, 32 
 
 Working classes in England 
 
 character of, 144 
 , statutes passed to aid, 112- 
 
 114 
 Wurtemburg, position of German 
 
 confederation, 57 
 
 Young, Arthur, on wages in the 
 eighteenth century, 121 
 
 PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BECCLES. 
 
FOURTEEN DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 ^ This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 170ct55RE 
 
 REC'O LD 
 
 ♦iCTl61!J5Sl^ 
 
 REC'D LD 
 
 DEC 19 r^ 
 
 MAY 11958 
 
 *Whn'62Kl 
 
 i6&fr^ 
 
 toO uO 
 
 ^m 
 
 n 
 
 iUl4l9bl 
 
 i^< 
 
 sn^iormY 
 
 MM 2 9 1960 
 
 XL 
 
 f^OV 
 
 i^ 
 
 ^^^^mz 
 
 28 OCT'BORT 
 
 13Nov'68SM 
 
 LD 21-100m-2,'55 
 (B139s22)476 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 

 ^-rjcff 
 
 f-VTls' 
 
 ^^ y^ - •-;'^-' r 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY