NormalizeHEADmain

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 21240 deletions

diff --git a/old/54076-0.txt b/old/54076-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 2021c3f..0000000
--- a/old/54076-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,21240 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg EBook of Essays: Scientific, Political, and
-Speculative, Volume III (of 3), by Herbert Spencer
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
-other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
-the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
-www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
-to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
-
-Title: Essays: Scientific, Political, and Speculative, Volume III (of 3)
-       Library Edition (1891), Containing Seven Essays not before
-       Republished, and Various other Additions.
-
-Author: Herbert Spencer
-
-Release Date: January 30, 2017 [EBook #54076]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: UTF-8
-
-*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ESSAYS: SCIENTIFIC, POLITICAL, VOL III ***
-
-
-
-
-Produced by Josep Cols Canals, Adrian Mastronardi, RichardW,
-and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
-http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
-generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian
-Libraries)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- ESSAYS: SCIENTIFIC, POLITICAL, & SPECULATIVE.
-
- BY
- HERBERT SPENCER.
-
- LIBRARY EDITION,
- (OTHERWISE FIFTH THOUSAND,)
- _Containing Seven Essays not before Republished,
- and various other additions_.
-
- VOL. III.
-
- WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
- 14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON;
- AND 20, SOUTH FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH.
- 1891.
-
-
-
-
- LONDON:
- G. NORMAN AND SON, PRINTERS, HART STREET,
- COVENT GARDEN.
-
-
-
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. III.
-
-
-                                                        PAGE
-
- MANNERS AND FASHION                                       1
-
- RAILWAY MORALS AND RAILWAY POLICY                        52
-
- THE MORALS OF TRADE                                     113
-
- PRISON-ETHICS                                           152
-
- THE ETHICS OF KANT                                      192
-
- ABSOLUTE POLITICAL ETHICS                               217
-
- OVER-LEGISLATION                                        229
-
- REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT—WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR?          283
-
- STATE-TAMPERINGS WITH MONEY AND BANKS                   326
-
- PARLIAMENTARY REFORM: THE DANGERS AND THE SAFEGUARDS    358
-
- “THE COLLECTIVE WISDOM”                                 387
-
- POLITICAL FETICHISM                                     393
-
- SPECIALIZED ADMINISTRATION                              401
-
- FROM FREEDOM TO BONDAGE                                 445
-
- THE AMERICANS                                           471
-
- THE INDEX.
-
-{1}
-
-
-
-
-MANNERS AND FASHION.
-
-[_First published in_ The Westminster Review _for April 1854_.]
-
-
-Whoever has studied the physiognomy of political meetings, cannot
-fail to have remarked a connexion between democratic opinions and
-peculiarities of costume. At a Chartist demonstration, a lecture
-on Socialism, or a _soirée_ of the Friends of Italy, there will be
-seen many among the audience, and a still larger ratio among the
-speakers, who get themselves up in a style more or less unusual.
-One gentleman on the platform divides his hair down the centre,
-instead of on one side; another brushes it back off the forehead, in
-the fashion known as “bringing out the intellect;” a third has so
-long forsworn the scissors, that his locks sweep his shoulders. A
-sprinkling of moustaches may be observed; here and there an imperial;
-and occasionally some courageous breaker of conventions exhibits a
-full-grown beard.[1] This nonconformity in hair is countenanced by
-various nonconformities in dress, shown by others of the assemblage.
-Bare necks, shirt-collars _à la_ Byron, waistcoats cut Quaker fashion,
-wonderfully shaggy great coats, numerous oddities in form and
-colour, destroy the monotony usual in crowds. Even those exhibiting
-no conspicuous peculiarity, frequently indicate by something in the
-pattern of their clothes, that they pay small regard to what their {2}
-tailors tell them about the prevailing taste. And when the gathering
-breaks up, the varieties of head gear displayed—the number of caps,
-and the abundance of felt hats—suffice to prove that were the world at
-large like-minded, the black cylinders which tyrannize over us would
-soon be deposed.
-
- [1] This was written before moustaches and beards had become general.
-
-This relationship between political discontent and disregard of
-customs exists on the Continent also. Red republicanism is everywhere
-distinguished by its hirsuteness. The authorities of Prussia, Austria,
-and Italy, alike recognize certain forms of hat as indicative of
-disaffection, and fulminate against them accordingly. In some places
-the wearer of a blouse runs a risk of being classed among the
-_suspects_; and in others, he who would avoid the bureau of police,
-must beware how he goes out in any but the ordinary colours. Thus,
-democracy abroad, as at home, tends towards personal singularity.
-Nor is this association of characteristics peculiar to modern times,
-or to reformers of the State. It has always existed; and it has been
-manifested as much in religious agitations as in political ones. The
-Puritans, disapproving of the long curls of the Cavaliers, as of
-their principles, cut their own hair short, and so gained the name of
-“Roundheads.” The marked religious nonconformity of the Quakers was
-accompanied by an equally-marked nonconformity of manners—in attire,
-in speech, in salutation. The early Moravians not only believed
-differently, but at the same time dressed differently, and lived
-differently, from their fellow Christians. That the association between
-political independence and independence of personal conduct, is not
-a phenomenon of to-day only, we may see alike in the appearance of
-Franklin at the French court in plain clothes, and in the white hats
-worn by the last generation of radicals. Originality of nature is sure
-to show itself in more ways than one. The mention of George Fox’s suit
-of leather, or Pestalozzi’s school name, “Harry Oddity,” will at
-once suggest the {3} remembrance that men who have in great things
-diverged from the beaten track, have frequently done so in small things
-likewise. Minor illustrations may be gathered in almost every circle.
-We believe that whoever will number up his reforming and rationalist
-acquaintances, will find among them more than the usual proportion of
-those who in dress or behaviour exhibit some degree of what the world
-calls eccentricity.
-
-If it be a fact that men of revolutionary aims in politics or religion,
-are commonly revolutionists in custom also, it is not less a fact that
-those whose office it is to uphold established arrangements in State
-and Church, are also those who most adhere to the social forms and
-observances bequeathed to us by past generations. Practices elsewhere
-extinct still linger about the head quarters of government. The monarch
-still gives assent to Acts of Parliament in the old French of the
-Normans; and Norman French terms are still used in law. Wigs, such as
-those we see depicted in old portraits, may yet be found on the heads
-of judges and barristers. The Beefeaters at the Tower wear the costume
-of Henry VIIth’s body-guard. The University dress of the present year
-varies but little from that worn soon after the Reformation. The
-claret-coloured coat, knee-breeches, lace shirt-frills, white silk
-stockings, and buckled shoes, which once formed the usual attire of a
-gentleman, still survive as the court-dress. And it need scarcely be
-said that at _levées_ and drawing-rooms, the ceremonies are prescribed
-with an exactness, and enforced with a rigour, not elsewhere to be
-found.
-
-Can we consider these two series of coincidences as accidental and
-unmeaning? Must we not rather conclude that some necessary relationship
-obtains between them? Are there not such things as a constitutional
-conservatism, and a constitutional tendency to change? Is there not a
-class which clings to the old in all things; and another class so in
-love with progress as often to mistake novelty for {4} improvement? Do
-we not find some men ready to bow to established authority of whatever
-kind; while others demand of every such authority its reason, and
-reject it if it fails to justify itself? And must not the minds thus
-contrasted tend to become respectively conformist and nonconformist,
-not only in politics and religion, but in other things? Submission,
-whether to a government, to the dogmas of ecclesiastics, or to that
-code of behaviour which society at large has set up, is essentially
-of the same nature; and the sentiment which induces resistance to the
-despotism of rulers, civil or spiritual, likewise induces resistance
-to the despotism of the world’s usages. All enactments, alike of the
-legislature, the consistory, and the saloon—all regulations, formal or
-virtual, have a common character: they are all limitations of men’s
-freedom. “Do this—Refrain from that,” are the blank forms into which
-they may severally be written; and throughout the understanding is
-that obedience will bring approbation here and paradise hereafter;
-while disobedience will entail imprisonment, or sending to Coventry,
-or eternal torments, as the case may be. And if restraints, however
-named, and through whatever apparatus of means exercised, are one in
-their action upon men, it must happen that those who are patient under
-one kind of restraint, are likely to be patient under another; and
-conversely, that those impatient of restraint in general, will, on the
-average, tend to show their impatience in all directions.
-
-That Law, Religion, and Manners are thus related, and that they have
-in certain contrasted characteristics of men a common support and a
-common danger, will, however, be most clearly seen on discovering
-that they have a common origin. Little as from present appearances we
-should suppose it, we shall yet find that at first, the control of
-religion, the control of laws, and the control of manners, were all
-one control. Strange as it now seems, we believe it to be demonstrable
-that the rules of etiquette, the provisions of the statute-book, and
-the commands of the {5} decalogue, have grown from the same root. If
-we go far enough back into the ages of primeval Fetishism, it becomes
-manifest that originally Deity, Chief, and Master of the Ceremonies
-were identical. To make good these positions, and to show their bearing
-on what is to follow, it will be necessary here to traverse ground that
-is in part somewhat beaten, and at first sight irrelevant to our topic.
-We will pass over it as quickly as consists with the exigencies of the
-argument.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-That the earliest social aggregations were ruled solely by the will
-of the strong man, few dispute.[2] That from the strong man proceeded
-not only Monarchy, but the conception of a God, few admit: much as
-Carlyle and others have said in evidence of it. If, however, those who
-are unable to believe this, will lay aside the ideas of God and man
-in which they have been educated, and study the aboriginal ideas of
-them, they will at least see some probability in the hypothesis. Let
-them remember that before experience had yet taught men to distinguish
-between the possible and the impossible; and while they were ready on
-the slightest suggestion to ascribe unknown powers to any object and
-make a fetish of it; their conceptions of humanity and its capacities
-were necessarily vague, and without specific limits. The man who by
-unusual strength, or cunning, achieved something that others had failed
-to achieve, or something which they did not understand, was considered
-by them as differing from themselves; and, as we see in the belief of
-some Polynesians that only their chiefs have souls, or in that of the
-ancient Peruvians that their nobles were divine by birth, the ascribed
-difference was apt to be not one of degree only, but one of kind. Let
-them remember next, how gross were the notions of God, or {6} rather
-of gods, prevalent during the same era and afterwards—how concretely
-gods were conceived as men of specific aspects dressed in specific
-ways—how their names were literally “the strong,” “the destroyer,”
-“the powerful one,”—how, according to the Scandinavian mythology, the
-“sacred duty of blood-revenge” was acted on by the gods themselves,—and
-how they were not only human in their vindictiveness, their cruelty,
-and their quarrels with each other, but were supposed to have amours
-on earth, and to consume the viands placed on their altars. Add to
-which, that in various mythologies, Greek, Scandinavian, and others,
-the oldest beings are giants; that according to a traditional genealogy
-the gods, demi-gods, and in some cases men, are descended from these
-after the human fashion; and that while in the East we hear of sons
-of God who saw the daughters of men that they were fair, the Teutonic
-myths tell of unions between the sons of men and the daughters of the
-gods. Let them remember, too, that at first the idea of death differed
-widely from that which we have; that there are still tribes who, on
-the decease of one of their number, attempt to make the corpse stand,
-and put food into its mouth; that the Peruvians had feasts at which
-the mummies of their dead Incas presided, when, as Prescott says, they
-paid attention “to these insensible remains as if they were instinct
-with life;” that among the Fijians it is believed that every enemy has
-to be killed twice; that the Eastern Pagans give extension and figure
-to the soul, and attribute to it all the same members, all the same
-substances, both solid and liquid, of which our bodies are composed;
-and that it is the custom among most barbarous races to bury food,
-weapons, and trinkets along with the dead body, under the manifest
-belief that it will presently need them. Lastly, let them remember
-that the other world, as originally conceived, is simply some distant
-part of this world—some Elysian fields, some happy hunting-ground,
-accessible even to the living, and to which, {7} after death, men
-travel in anticipation of a life analogous in general character to that
-which they led before. Then, co-ordinating these general facts—the
-ascription of unknown powers to chiefs and medicine men; the belief
-in deities having human forms, passions, and behaviour; the imperfect
-comprehension of death as distinguished from life; and the proximity
-of the future abode to the present, both in position and character—let
-them reflect whether they do not almost unavoidably suggest the
-conclusion that the aboriginal god is the dead chief: the chief not
-dead in our sense, but gone away, carrying with him food and weapons to
-some rumoured region of plenty, some promised land, whither he had long
-intended to lead his followers, and whence he will presently return
-to fetch them. This hypothesis once entertained, is seen to harmonize
-with all primitive ideas and practices. The sons of the deified chief
-reigning after him, it necessarily happens that all early kings are
-held descendants of the gods; and the fact that alike in Assyria,
-Egypt, among the Jews, Phœnicians, and ancient Britons, kings’ names
-were formed out of the names of the gods, is fully explained. The
-genesis of Polytheism out of Fetishism, by the successive migrations of
-the race of god-kings to the other world—a genesis illustrated in the
-Greek mythology, alike by the precise genealogy of the deities, and by
-the specifically-asserted apotheosis of the later ones—tends further
-to bear it out. It explains the fact that in the old creeds, as in the
-still extant creed of the Otaheitans, every family has its guardian
-spirit, who is supposed to be one of their departed relatives; and that
-they sacrifice to these as minor gods—a practice still pursued by the
-Chinese and even by the Russians. It is perfectly congruous with the
-Grecian myths concerning the wars of the Gods with the Titans and their
-final usurpation; and it similarly agrees with the fact that among the
-Teutonic gods proper was one Freir who came among them by adoption,
-“but was born {8} among the _Vanes_, a somewhat mysterious _other_
-dynasty of gods, who had been conquered and superseded by the stronger
-and more warlike Odin dynasty.” It harmonizes, too, with the belief
-that there are different gods to different territories and nations,
-as there were different chiefs; that these gods contend for supremacy
-as chiefs do; and it gives meaning to the boast of neighbouring
-tribes—“Our god is greater than your god.” It is confirmed by the
-notion universally current in early times, that the gods come from this
-other abode, in which they commonly live, and appear among men—speak to
-them, help them, punish them. And remembering this, it becomes manifest
-that the prayers put up by primitive peoples to their gods for aid in
-battle, are meant literally—that their gods are expected to come back
-from the other kingdom they are reigning over, and once more fight the
-old enemies they had before warred against so implacably; and it needs
-but to name the Iliad, to remind every one how thoroughly they believed
-the expectation fulfilled.[3]
-
- [2] The few who disputed it would be right however. There are stages
- preceding that in which chiefly power becomes established; and in many
- cases it never does become established.
-
- [3] In this paragraph, which I have purposely left standing word for
- word as it did when republished with other essays in Dec. 1857, will be
- seen the outline of the ghost-theory. Though there are references to
- fetishism as a primitive form of belief, and though at that time I had
- passively accepted the current theory (though never with satisfaction,
- for the origin of fetishism as then conceived seemed incomprehensible)
- yet the belief that inanimate objects may possess supernatural powers
- (which is what was then understood as fetishism) is not dwelt upon as
- a primitive belief. The one thing which is dwelt upon is the belief in
- the double of the dead man as continuing to exist, and as becoming an
- object of propitiation and eventually of worship. There are clearly
- marked out the rudiments which, when supplied with the mass of facts
- collected in the _Descriptive Sociology_ developed into the doctrine
- elaborated in Part I. of _The Principles of Sociology_.
-
-All government, then, being originally that of the strong man who has
-become a fetish by some manifestation of superiority, there arises,
-at his death—his supposed departure on a long-projected expedition,
-in which he is accompanied by the slaves and concubines sacrificed
-at his tomb—there arises, then, the incipient division of religious
-{9} from political control, of spiritual rule from civil. His son
-becomes deputed chief during his absence; his authority is cited
-as that by which his son acts; his vengeance is invoked on all who
-disobey his son; and his commands, as previously known or as asserted
-by his son, become the germ of a moral code: a fact we shall the more
-clearly perceive if we remember, that early moral codes inculcate
-mainly the virtues of the warrior, and the duty of exterminating some
-neighbouring tribe whose existence is an offence to the deity. From
-this point onwards, these two kinds of authority, at first complicated
-together as those of principal and agent, become slowly more and more
-distinct. As experience accumulates, and ideas of causation grow more
-precise, kings lose their supernatural attributes; and, instead of
-God-king, become God-descended king, God-appointed king, the Lord’s
-anointed, the vicegerent of Heaven, ruler reigning by Divine right.
-The old theory, however, long clings to men in feeling, after it has
-disappeared in name; and “such divinity doth hedge a king,” that even
-now, many, on first seeing one, feel a secret surprise at finding him
-an ordinary sample of humanity. The sacredness attaching to royalty
-attaches afterwards to its appended institutions—to legislatures,
-to laws. Legal and illegal are synonymous with right and wrong; the
-authority of Parliament is held unlimited; and a lingering faith
-in governmental power continually generates unfounded hopes from
-its enactments. Political scepticism, however, having destroyed the
-divine _prestige_ of royalty, goes on ever increasing, and promises
-ultimately to reduce the State to a purely secular institution, whose
-regulations are limited in their sphere, and have no other authority
-than the general will. Meanwhile, the religious control has been little
-by little separating itself from the civil, both in its essence and
-in its forms. While from the God-king of the barbarian have arisen
-in one direction, secular rulers who, age by age, have been losing
-{10} the sacred attributes men ascribed to them; there has arisen in
-another direction, the conception of a deity, who, at first human in
-all things, has been gradually losing human materiality, human form,
-human passions, human modes of action: until now, anthropomorphism
-has become a reproach. Along with this wide divergence in men’s ideas
-of the divine and civil ruler has been taking place a corresponding
-divergence in the codes of conduct respectively proceeding from them.
-While the king was a deputy-god—a governor such as the Jews looked
-for in the Messiah—a governor considered, as the Czar still is, “our
-God upon earth,”—it, of course, followed that his commands were the
-supreme rules. But as men ceased to believe in his supernatural origin
-and nature, his commands ceased to be the highest; and there arose a
-distinction between the regulations made by him, and the regulations
-handed down from the old god-kings, who were rendered ever more sacred
-by time and the accumulation of myths. Hence came respectively, Law
-and Morality: the one growing ever more concrete, the other more
-abstract; the authority of the one ever on the decrease, that of
-the other ever on the increase; originally the same, but now placed
-daily in more marked antagonism. Simultaneously there has been going
-on a separation of the institutions administering these two codes of
-conduct. While they were yet one, of course Church and State were
-one: the king was arch-priest, not nominally, but really—alike the
-giver of new commands and the chief interpreter of the old commands;
-and the deputy-priests coming out of his family were thus simply
-expounders of the dictates of their ancestry: at first as recollected,
-and afterwards as ascertained by professed interviews with them. This
-union between sacred and secular—which still existed practically
-during the middle ages, when the authority of kings was mixed up
-with the authority of the pope, when there were bishop-rulers having
-all the powers of feudal lords, and when priests punished {11} by
-penances—has been, step by step, becoming less close. Though monarchs
-are still “defenders of the faith,” and ecclesiastical chiefs, they
-are but nominally such. Though bishops still have civil power, it is
-not what they once had. Protestantism shook loose the bonds of union;
-Dissent has long been busy in organizing a mechanism for religious
-control, wholly independent of law; in America, a separate organization
-for that purpose already exists; and if anything is to be hoped from
-the Anti-State-Church Association—or, as it has been newly named,
-“The Society for the Liberation of Religion from State Patronage and
-Control”—we shall presently have a separate organization here also.
-Thus, in authority, in essence, and in form, political and spiritual
-rule have been ever more widely diverging from the same root. That
-increasing division of labour which marks the progress of society in
-other things, marks it also in this separation of government into civil
-and religious; and if we observe how the morality which now forms the
-substance of religions in general, is beginning to be purified from
-the associated creeds, we may anticipate that this division will be
-ultimately carried much further.
-
-Passing now to the third species of control—that of Manners—we shall
-find that this, too, while it had a common genesis with the others,
-has gradually come to have a distinct sphere and a special embodiment.
-Among early aggregations of men before yet social observances existed,
-the sole forms of courtesy known were the signs of submission to the
-strong man; as the sole law was his will, and the sole religion the awe
-of his supposed supernaturalness. Originally, ceremonies were modes of
-behaviour to the god-king. Our commonest titles have been derived from
-his names. And all salutations were primarily worship paid to him. Let
-us trace out these truths in detail, beginning with titles.
-
-The fact already noticed, that the names of early kings among divers
-races are formed by the addition of certain {12} syllable to the
-names of their gods—which certain syllables, like our _Mac_ and
-_Fitz_, probably mean “son of,” or “descended from”—at once gives
-meaning to the term _Father_ as a divine title. And when we read, in
-Selden, that “the composition out of these names of Deities was not
-only proper to Kings: their Grandees and more honorable Subjects”
-(no doubt members of the royal race) “had sometimes the like;” we
-see how the term _Father_, properly used by these also, and by their
-multiplying descendants, came to be a title used by the people in
-general. As bearing on this point, it is significant that in the
-least advanced country of Europe, where belief in the divine nature
-of the ruler still lingers, _Father_ in this higher sense, is still a
-regal distinction. When, again, we remember how the divinity at first
-ascribed to kings was not a complimentary fiction but a supposed fact;
-and how, further, the celestial bodies were believed to be personages
-who once lived among men; we see that the appellations of oriental
-rulers, “Brother to the Sun,” &c., were probably once expressive of
-a genuine belief; and have simply, like many other things, continued
-in use after all meaning has gone out of them. We may infer, too,
-that the titles God, Lord, Divinity, were given to primitive rulers
-literally—that the _nostra divinitas_ applied to the Roman emperors,
-and the various sacred designations that have been borne by monarchs,
-down to the still extant phrase, “Our Lord the King,” are the dead and
-dying forms of what were once living facts. From these names, God,
-Father, Lord, Divinity, originally belonging to the God-king, and
-afterwards to God and the king, the derivation of our commonest titles
-of respect is traceable. There is reason to think that these titles
-were originally proper names. Not only do we see among the Egyptians,
-where Pharaoh was synonymous with king, and among the Romans, where to
-be Cæsar, meant to be Emperor, that the proper names of the greatest
-men were transferred to their successors, and so became class-names;
-{13} but in the Scandinavian mythology we may trace a human title of
-honour up to the proper name of a divine personage. In Anglo-Saxon
-_bealdor_, or _baldor_, means _Lord_; and Balder is the name of the
-favourite of Odin’s sons. How these names of honour became general is
-easily understood. The relatives of the primitive kings—the grandees
-described by Selden as having names formed on those of the gods, and
-shown by this to be members of the divine race—necessarily shared
-in the epithets descriptive of superhuman relationships and nature.
-Their ever-multiplying offspring inheriting these, gradually rendered
-them comparatively common. And then they came to be applied to every
-man of power: partly from the fact that, in those early days when men
-conceived divinity simply as a stronger kind of humanity, great persons
-could be called by divine epithets with but little exaggeration; partly
-from the fact that the unusually potent were apt to be considered as
-unrecognised or illegitimate descendants of “the strong, the destroyer,
-the powerful one;” and partly, also, from compliment and the desire
-to propitiate. As superstition diminished, this last became the sole
-cause. And if we remember that it is the nature of compliment, to
-attribute more than is due—that in the ever widening application of
-“esquire,” in the perpetual repetition of “your honour” by the fawning
-Irishman, and in the use of the name “gentleman” to any coalheaver or
-dustman by the lower classes of London, we have current examples of the
-depreciation of titles consequent on compliment—and that in barbarous
-times, when the wish to propitiate was stronger than now, this effect
-must have been greater; we shall see that there naturally arose from
-this cause an extensive misuse of all early distinctions. Hence the
-facts that the Jews called Herod a god; that _Father_, in its higher
-sense, was a term used among them by servants to masters; that _Lord_
-was applicable to any person of worth and power. Hence, too, the fact
-that, in the later periods of the Roman Empire, every man saluted his
-neighbour as {14} _Dominus_ or _Rex_. But it is in the titles of the
-middle ages, and in the growth of our modern ones out of them, that
-the process is most clearly seen. _Herr_, _Don_, _Signor_, _Seigneur_,
-_Señor_, were all originally descriptive names of rulers. By the
-complimentary use of these names to all who could, on any pretence,
-be supposed to merit them, and by successive descents to still lower
-grades, they have come to be common forms of address. At first the
-phrase in which a serf accosted his despotic chief, _mein Herr_ is now
-familiarly applied in Germany to ordinary people. The Spanish title
-_Don_, once proper to noblemen and gentlemen only, is now accorded to
-all classes. So, too, is it with _Signor_ in Italy. _Seigneur_ and
-_Monseigneur_, by contraction in _Sieur_ and _Monsieur_, have produced
-the term of respect claimed by every Frenchman. And whether _Sire_ be
-or be not a like contraction of _Signor_, it is clear that, as it was
-borne by sundry of the ancient feudal lords of France, who, as Selden
-says, “affected rather to bee stiled by the name of _Sire_ than Baron,
-as _Le Sire de Montmorencie_, _Le Sire de Beaujeu_, and the like,”
-and as it has been commonly used to monarchs, our word _Sir_, which
-is derived from it, originally meant lord or king. Thus, too, is it
-with feminine titles. _Lady_, which, according to Horne Tooke, means
-_exalted_, and was at first given only to the few, is now given to
-all women of education. _Dame_, once an honourable name to which, in
-old books, we find the epithets of “high-born” and “stately” affixed,
-has now, by repeated widenings of its application, become relatively
-a term of contempt. And if we trace the compound of this, _ma Dame_,
-through its contractions—_Madam_, _ma’am_, _mam_, _mum_, we find that
-the “Yes’m” of Sally to her mistress is originally equivalent to “Yes,
-my exalted,” or “Yes, your highness.” Throughout, therefore, the
-genesis of words of honour has been the same. Just as with the Jews and
-with the Romans, has it been with the modern Europeans. Tracing these
-everyday names to their primitive significations of _lord_ and _king_,
-and {15} remembering that in aboriginal societies these were applied
-only to the gods and their descendants, we arrive at the conclusion
-that our familiar _Sir_ and _Monsieur_ are, in their primary and
-expanded meanings, terms of adoration.
-
-Further to illustrate this gradual depreciation of titles, and to
-confirm the inference drawn, it may be well to notice in passing, that
-the oldest of them have, as might be expected, been depreciated to the
-greatest extent. Thus, _Master_—a word proved by its derivation, and by
-the similarity of the connate words in other languages (Fr., _maître_
-for _maistre_; Dutch, _meester_; Dan., _mester_; Ger., _meister_)
-to have been one of the earliest in use for expressing lordship—has
-now become applicable to children only, and, under the modification
-of “Mister,” to persons next above the labourer. Again, knighthood,
-the oldest kind of dignity, is also the lowest; and Knight Bachelor,
-which is the lowest order of knighthood, is more ancient than any
-other of the orders. Similarly, too, with the peerage: Baron is alike
-the earliest and least elevated of its divisions. This continual
-degradation of all names of honour has, from time to time, made it
-requisite to introduce new ones having the distinguishing effects
-which the originals had lost by generality of use; just as our habit
-of misapplying superlatives has, by gradually destroying their force,
-entailed the need for fresh ones. And if, within the last thousand
-years, this process has worked results thus marked, we may readily
-conceive how, during previous thousands, the titles of gods and
-demi-gods came to be used to all persons exercising power; as they have
-since come to be used to persons of respectability.
-
-If from names of honour we turn to phrases of honour, we find similar
-facts. The oriental styles of address, applied to ordinary people—“I
-am your slave,” “All I have is yours,” “I am your sacrifice”—attribute
-to the individual spoken to the same greatness that _Monsieur_ and _My
-Lord_ do: they ascribe to him the character of an {16} all-powerful
-ruler, so immeasurably superior to the speaker as to be his owner. So,
-likewise, with the Polish expressions of respect—“I throw myself under
-your feet,” “I kiss your feet.” In our now meaningless subscription
-to a formal letter—“Your most obedient servant”—the same thing is
-visible. Nay, even in the familiar signature “Yours faithfully,” the
-“yours,” if interpreted as originally meant, is the expression of a
-slave to his master. All these dead forms were once living embodiments
-of fact; were primarily the genuine indications of that submission to
-authority which they verbally assert; were afterwards naturally used by
-the weak and cowardly to propitiate those above them; gradually grew
-to be considered the due of such; and, by a continually wider misuse,
-have lost their meanings, as _Sir_ and _Master_ have done. That, like
-titles, they were in the beginning used only to the God-king, is
-indicated by the fact that, like titles, they were subsequently used
-in common to God and the king. Religious worship has ever largely
-consisted of professions of obedience, of being God’s servants, of
-belonging to him to do what he will with. Like titles, therefore, these
-common phrases of honour had a devotional origin. Perhaps, however,
-it is in the use of the word _you_ as a singular pronoun that the
-popularizing of what were once supreme distinctions is most markedly
-illustrated. This addressing of a single individual in the plural,
-was originally an honour given only to the highest—was the reciprocal
-of the imperial “we” assumed by such. Yet now, by being applied to
-successively lower and lower classes, it has become all but universal.
-Only by one sect of Christians, and in a few secluded districts, is the
-primitive _thou_ still used. And the _you_, in becoming common to all
-ranks, has simultaneously lost every vestige of the distinction once
-attaching to it.
-
-But the genesis of Manners out of forms of allegiance and worship, is
-above all shown in modes of salutation. Note first the significance of
-the word. Among the Romans, the {17} _salutatio_ was a daily homage
-paid by clients and inferiors to their superiors. This was alike the
-case with civilians and in the army. The very derivation of our word,
-therefore, is suggestive of submission. Passing to particular forms of
-obeisance (mark the word again), let us begin with the Eastern one of
-baring the feet. This was, primarily, a mark of reverence, alike to
-a god and a king. The act of Moses before the burning bush, and the
-practice of Mahometans, who are sworn on the Koran with their shoes
-off, exemplify the one employment of it; the custom of the Persians,
-who remove their shoes on entering the presence of their monarch,
-exemplifies the other. As usual, however, this homage, paid next to
-inferior rulers, has descended from grade to grade. In India it is
-a common mark of respect; the lower orders of Turks never enter the
-presence of their superiors but in their stockings; and in Japan,
-this baring of the feet is an ordinary salutation of man to man.
-Take another case. Selden, describing the ceremonies of the Romans,
-says:—“For whereas it was usuall either to kiss the Images of their
-Gods, or, adoring them, to stand somewhat off before them, solemnly
-moving the right hand to the lips, and then, casting it as if they had
-cast kisses, to turne the body on the same hand (which was the right
-forme of Adoration), it grew also by custom, first that the Emperors,
-being next to Deities, and by some accounted as Deities, had the like
-done to them in acknowledgment of their Greatness.” If, now, we call to
-mind the awkward salute of a village school-boy, made by putting his
-open hand up to his face and describing a semicircle with his forearm;
-and if we remember that the salute thus used as a form of reverence in
-country districts, is most likely a remnant of the feudal times; we
-shall see reason for thinking that our common wave of the hand to a
-friend across the street, represents what was primarily a devotional
-act.
-
-Similarly have originated all forms of respect depending {18} upon
-inclinations of the body. Entire prostration is the aboriginal sign
-of submission. The passage of Scripture—“Thou hast put all under his
-feet,” and that other one, so suggestive in its anthropomorphism—“The
-Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, until I make
-thine enemies thy footstool,” imply, what the Assyrian sculptures
-bear out, that it was the practice of the ancient god-kings of the
-East to trample on the conquered. As there are existing savages who
-signify submission by placing the neck under the foot of the person
-submitted to, it becomes obvious that all prostration, especially when
-accompanied by kissing the foot, expressed a willingness to be trodden
-upon—was an attempt to mitigate wrath by saying, in signs, “Tread on
-me if you will.” Remembering, too, that kissing the foot, as of the
-Pope and of a saint’s statue, still continues in Europe to be a mark of
-extreme reverence; that prostration to feudal lords was once general,
-and that its disappearance must have taken place, not abruptly, but by
-gradual change into something else; we have ground for deriving from
-these deepest of humiliations all inclinations of respect: especially
-as the transition is traceable. The reverence of a Russian serf,
-who bends his head to the ground, and the salaam of the Hindoo, are
-abridged prostrations; a bow is a short salaam; a nod is a short bow.
-Should any hesitate to admit this conclusion, then perhaps, on being
-reminded that the lowest of these obeisances are common where the
-submission is most abject; that among ourselves the profundity of the
-bow marks the amount of respect; and lastly, that the bow is even now
-used devotionally in our churches—by Catholics to their altars, and by
-Protestants at the name of Christ—they will see sufficient reason for
-thinking that this salutation also was originally worship.
-
-The same may be said, too, of the curtsy, or courtesy, as it is
-otherwise written. Its derivation from _courtoisie_, courteousness,
-that is, behaviour like that at court, at once {19} shows that it
-was primarily the reverence paid to a monarch. And if we call to mind
-that falling on the knees, or on one knee, has been a common obeisance
-of subjects to rulers; that in ancient manuscripts and tapestries,
-servants are depicted as assuming this attitude while offering the
-dishes to their masters at table; and that this same attitude is
-assumed towards our own queen at every presentation; we may infer, what
-the character of the curtsy itself suggests, that it is an abridged act
-of kneeling. As the word has been contracted from _courtoisie_ into
-curtsy; so the motion has been contracted from a placing of the knee on
-the floor, to a lowering of the knee towards the floor. Moreover, when
-we compare the curtsy of a lady with the awkward one a peasant girl
-makes, which, if continued, would bring her down on both knees, we may
-see in this last a remnant of that greater reverence required of serfs.
-And when, from considering that simple kneeling of the West, still
-represented by the curtsy, we pass Eastward, and note the attitude of
-the Mahommedan worshipper, who not only kneels but bows his head to
-the ground, we may infer that the curtsy also, is an evanescent form
-of the aboriginal prostration. In further evidence of this it may be
-remarked, that there has but recently disappeared from the salutations
-of men, an action having the same proximate derivation with the curtsy.
-That backward sweep of the right foot with which the conventional
-stage-sailor accompanies his bow—a movement which prevailed generally
-in past generations, when “a bow and a scrape” went together, and
-which, within the memory of living persons, was made by boys to their
-master when entering school, with the effect of wearing a hole in the
-floor—is pretty clearly a preliminary to going on one knee. A motion
-so ungainly could never have been intentionally introduced; even if
-the artificial introduction of obeisances were possible. Hence we must
-regard it as the remnant of something antecedent: and {20} that this
-something antecedent was humiliating may be inferred from the phrase,
-“scraping an acquaintance;” which, being used to denote the gaining of
-favour by obsequiousness, implies that the scrape was considered a mark
-of servility—that is, of servile position.
-
-Consider, again, the uncovering of the head. Almost everywhere this
-has been a sign of reverence, alike in temples and before potentates;
-and it yet preserves among us some of its original meaning. Whether
-it rains, hails, or shines, you must keep your head bare while
-speaking to the monarch; and no one may keep his hat on in a place of
-worship. As usual, however, this ceremony, at first a submission to
-gods and kings, has become in process of time a common civility. Once
-an acknowledgment of another’s unlimited supremacy, the removal of
-the hat is now a salute accorded to very ordinary persons; and that
-uncovering originally reserved for entrance into “the house of God” or
-the residence of the ruler, good manners now dictates on entrance into
-a labourer’s cottage.
-
-Standing, too, as a mark of respect, has undergone like extensions
-in its application. Shown, by the practice in our churches, to be
-intermediate between the humiliation signified by kneeling and the
-self-respect which sitting implies, and used at courts as a form of
-homage when more active demonstrations of it have been made, this
-posture is now employed in daily life to show consideration; as seen
-alike in the attitude of a servant before a master, and in that rising
-which politeness prescribes on the entrance of a visitor.
-
-Many other threads of evidence might have been woven into our argument.
-As, for example, the significant fact, that if we trace back our
-still existing law of primogeniture—if we consider it as displayed by
-Scottish clans, in which not only ownership but government devolved
-from the beginning on the eldest son of the eldest—if we look further
-back, and observe that the old titles of lordship, {21} _Signor_,
-_Seigneur_, _Señor_, _Sire_, _Sieur_, all originally mean senior, or
-elder—if we go Eastward, and find that _Sheick_ has a like derivation,
-and that the Oriental names for priests, as _Pir_, for instance, are
-literally interpreted _old man_—if we note in Hebrew records how far
-back dates the ascribed superiority of the first-born, how great the
-authority of elders, and how sacred the memory of patriarchs—and if,
-then, we remember that among divine titles are “Ancient of Days,”
-and “Father of Gods and men;”—we see how completely these facts
-harmonize with the hypothesis, that the aboriginal god is the first
-man sufficiently great to become a tradition, the earliest whose power
-and deeds made him remembered; that hence antiquity unavoidably became
-associated with superiority, and age with nearness in blood to “the
-powerful one;” that so there naturally arose that domination of the
-eldest which characterizes the history of all the higher races, and
-that theory of human degeneracy which even yet survives. We might
-further dwell on the facts, that _Lord_ signifies high-born, or, as
-the same root gives a word meaning heaven, possibly heaven-born; that,
-before it became common, Sir or _Sire_, as well as _Father_, was the
-distinction of a priest; that _worship_, originally worth-ship—a term
-of respect that has been used commonly, as well as to magistrates—is
-also our term for the act of attributing greatness or worth to the
-Deity; so that to ascribe worth-ship to a man is to worship him. We
-might make much of the evidence that all early governments are more
-or less distinctly theocratic; and that among ancient Eastern nations
-even the commonest forms and customs had religious sanctions. We
-might enforce our argument respecting the derivation of ceremonies,
-by tracing out the aboriginal obeisance made by putting dust on the
-head, which symbolizes putting the head in the dust; by affiliating the
-practice found in certain tribes, of doing another honour by presenting
-him with a portion of hair torn from the head—an act which {22} seems
-tantamount to saying, “I am your slave;” by investigating the Oriental
-custom of giving to a visitor any object he speaks of admiringly, which
-is pretty clearly a carrying out of the compliment, “All I have is
-yours.”
-
-Without enlarging, however, on these and minor facts, we venture
-to think that the evidence assigned is sufficient. Had the proofs
-been few, or of one kind, little faith could have been placed in the
-inference. But numerous as they are, alike in the case of titles, in
-that of complimentary phrases, and in that of salutes—similar and
-simultaneous, too, as the process of depreciation has been in all of
-these; the evidences become strong by mutual confirmation. And when
-we recollect, also, that not only have the results of this process
-been visible in various nations and in all times, but that they are
-occurring among ourselves at the present moment, and that the causes
-assigned for previous depreciations may be seen daily working out
-others—when we recollect this, it becomes scarcely possible to doubt
-that the process has been as alleged; and that our ordinary words,
-acts, and phrases of civility originally expressed submission to
-another’s omnipotence.
-
-Thus the general doctrine, that all kinds of government exercised over
-men were at first one government—that the political, the religious,
-and the ceremonial forms of control are divergent branches of a
-general and once indivisible control—begins to look tenable. When,
-with the above facts fresh in mind, we read that in Eastern traditions
-Nimrod, among others, figures in all the characters of hero, king, and
-divinity—when we turn to the sculptures exhumed by Mr. Layard, and
-contemplating in them the effigies of kings driving over enemies, and
-adored by prostrate slaves, then observe how their actions correspond
-to the primitive names for gods, “the strong,” “the destroyer,” “the
-powerful one”—and when, lastly, we discover that among races of men
-still living, there are current {23} superstitions analogous to those
-which old records and old buildings indicate; we begin to realize the
-probability of the hypothesis that has been set forth. Representing
-to ourselves the conquering chief as figured in ancient myths, and
-poems, and ruins; we may see that all rules of conduct spring from
-his will. Alike legislator and judge, quarrels among his subjects
-are decided by him; and his words become the Law. Awe of him is
-the incipient Religion; and his maxims furnish his first precepts.
-Submission is made to him in the forms he prescribes; and these give
-birth to Manners. From the first, time developes political allegiance
-and the administration of justice; from the second, the worship of a
-being whose personality becomes ever more vague, and the inculcation of
-precepts ever more abstract; from the third, forms and names of honour
-and the rules of etiquette. In conformity with the law of evolution of
-all organized bodies, that general functions are gradually separated
-into the special functions constituting them, there have grown up in
-the social organism for the better performance of the governmental
-office, an apparatus of law-courts, judges, and barristers; a national
-church, with its bishops and priests; and a system of caste, titles,
-and ceremonies, administered by society at large. By the first, overt
-aggressions are cognized and punished; by the second, the disposition
-to commit such aggressions is in some degree checked; by the third,
-those minor breaches of good conduct which the others do not notice,
-are denounced and chastised. Law and Religion control behaviour in
-its essentials; Manners control it in its details. For regulating
-those daily actions which are too numerous and too unimportant to
-be officially directed there comes into play this subtler set of
-restraints. And when we consider what these restraints are—when we
-analyze the words, and phrases, and movements employed, we see that
-in origin as in effect, the system is a setting up of temporary {24}
-governments between all men who come in contact, for the purpose of
-better managing the intercourse between them.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-From the proposition, that these several kinds of government are
-essentially one, both in genesis and function, may be deduced several
-important corollaries, directly bearing on our special topic.
-
-Let us first notice, that there is not only a common origin and
-office for all forms of rule, but a common necessity for them. The
-aboriginal man, coming fresh from the killing of bears and from lying
-in ambush for his enemy, has, by the necessities of his condition, a
-nature requiring to be curbed in its every impulse. Alike in war and
-in the chase, his daily discipline has been that of sacrificing other
-creatures to his own needs and passions. His character, bequeathed
-to him by ancestors who led similar lives, is moulded by this
-discipline—is fitted to this existence. The unlimited selfishness,
-the love of inflicting pain, the blood-thirstiness, thus kept active,
-he brings with him into the social state. These dispositions put him
-in constant danger of conflict with his equally savage neighbour. In
-small things as in great, in words as in deeds, he is aggressive; and
-is hourly liable to the aggressions of others like natured. Only,
-therefore, by rigorous control exercised over all actions, can the
-primitive unions of men be maintained. There must be a ruler strong,
-remorseless, and of indomitable will; there must be a creed terrible
-in its threats to the disobedient; there must be servile submission
-of inferiors to superiors. The law must be cruel; the religion must
-be stern; the ceremonies must be strict. The co-ordinate necessity
-for these several kinds of restraint might be largely illustrated
-from history were there space. Suffice it to point out that where the
-civil power has been weak, the multiplication of thieves, assassins,
-and banditti, has indicated the approach of social dissolution; that
-when, {25} from the corruptness of its ministry, religion has lost
-its influence, as it did just before the Flagellants appeared, the
-State has been endangered; and that the disregard of established social
-observances has ever been an accompaniment of political revolutions.
-Whoever doubts the necessity for a government of manners proportionate
-in strength to the co-existing political and religious governments,
-will be convinced on calling to mind that until recently even elaborate
-codes of behaviour failed to keep gentlemen from quarrelling in the
-streets and fighting duels in taverns; and on remembering that even now
-people exhibit at the doors of a theatre, where there is no ceremonial
-law to rule them, an aggressiveness which would produce confusion if
-carried into social intercourse.
-
-As might be expected, we find that, having a common origin and like
-general functions, these several controlling agencies act during each
-era with similar degrees of vigour. Under the Chinese despotism,
-stringent and multitudinous in its edicts and harsh in the enforcement
-of them, and associated with which there is an equally stern domestic
-despotism exercised by the eldest surviving male of the family, there
-exists a system of observances alike complicated and rigid. There is a
-tribunal of ceremonies. Previous to presentation at court, ambassadors
-pass many days in practising the required forms. Social intercourse
-is cumbered by endless compliments and obeisances. Class distinctions
-are strongly marked by badges. And if there wants a definite measure
-of the respect paid to social ordinances, we have it in the torture to
-which ladies submit in having their feet crushed. In India, and indeed
-throughout the East, there exists a like connexion between the pitiless
-tyranny of rulers, the dread terrors of immemorial creeds, and the
-rigid restraint of unchangeable customs. Caste regulations continue
-still unalterable; the fashions of clothes and furniture have remained
-the same for ages; suttees are so ancient as to be mentioned by Strabo
-and {26} Diodorus Siculus; justice is still administered at the
-palace-gates as of old; in short, “every usage is a precept of religion
-and a maxim of jurisprudence.” A similar relationship of phenomena was
-exhibited in Europe during the Middle Ages. While its governments,
-general and local, were despotic, while the Church was unshorn of its
-power, while the criminal code was full of horrors and the hell of the
-popular creed full of terrors, the rules of behaviour were both more
-numerous and more carefully conformed to than now. Differences of dress
-marked divisions of rank. Men were limited by law to certain widths
-of shoe-toes; and no one below a specified degree might wear a cloak
-less than so many inches long. The symbols on banners and shields were
-carefully attended to. Heraldry was an important branch of knowledge.
-Precedence was strictly insisted on. And those various salutes of which
-we now use the abridgments, were gone through in full. Even during our
-own last century, with its corrupt House of Commons and little-curbed
-monarchs, we may mark a correspondence of social formalities. Gentlemen
-were still distinguished from lower classes by dress; and children
-addressed their parents as _Sir_ and _Madam_.
-
-A further corollary naturally following this last, and almost, indeed,
-forming part of it, is, that these several kinds of government
-decrease in stringency at the same rate. Simultaneously with the
-decline in the influence of priesthoods, and in the fear of eternal
-torments—simultaneously with the mitigation of political tyranny,
-the growth of popular power, and the amelioration of criminal codes;
-has taken place that diminution of formalities and that fading of
-distinctive marks, now so observable. Looking at home, we may note that
-there is less attention to precedence than there used to be. No one in
-our day ends an interview with the phrase “your humble servant.” The
-employment of the word _Sir_, once general in social intercourse, is
-at present considered bad breeding; and on the occasions {27} calling
-for them, it is held vulgar to use the words “Your Majesty,” or “Your
-Royal Highness,” more than once in a conversation. People no longer
-formally drink one another’s healths; and even the taking wine with one
-another at dinner has ceased to be fashionable. It is remarked of us
-by foreigners, that we take off our hats less than any other nation in
-Europe—a remark which should be coupled with the other, that we are the
-freest nation in Europe. As already implied, this association of facts
-is not accidental. These modes of address and titles and obeisances,
-bearing about them, as they all do, something of that servility which
-marks their origin, become distasteful in proportion as men become more
-independent themselves, and sympathize more with the independence of
-others. The feeling which makes the modern gentleman tell the labourer
-standing bareheaded before him to put on his hat—the feeling which
-gives us a dislike to those who cringe and fawn—the feeling which makes
-us alike assert our own dignity and respect that of others—the feeling
-which thus leads us more and more to discountenance forms and names
-which confess inferiority and submission; is the same feeling which
-resists despotic power and inaugurates popular government, denies the
-authority of the Church and establishes the right of private judgment.
-
-A fourth fact, akin to the foregoing, is, that with decreasing
-coerciveness in these several kinds of government, their respective
-forms lose their meanings. The same process which has made our monarch
-put forth as his own acts what are the acts of ministers approved
-by the people, and has thus changed him from master into agent—the
-same process which, making attendance at church very much a matter of
-respectability, has done away with the telling of beads, the calling
-on saints, and the performance of penances; is a process by which
-titles and ceremonies that once had a meaning and a power have been
-reduced to empty forms. Coats of arms which served to distinguish
-{28} men in battle, now figure on the carriage panels of retired
-merchants. Once a badge of high military rank, the shoulder-knot has
-become, on the modern footman, a mark of servitude. The name Banneret,
-which originally marked a partially-created Baron—a Baron who had
-passed his military “little go”—is now, under the modification of
-Baronet, applicable to any one favoured by wealth or interest or party
-feeling. Knighthood has so far ceased to be an honour, that men honour
-themselves by declining it. The military dignity _Escuyer_ has, in the
-modern Esquire, become a wholly unmilitary affix.
-
-But perhaps it is in that class of social observances comprehended
-under the term Fashion (which we must here discuss parenthetically)
-that this process is seen with the greatest distinctness. As contrasted
-with Manners, which dictate our minor acts in relation to other
-persons, Fashion dictates our minor acts in relation to ourselves.
-While the one prescribes that part of our deportment which directly
-affects our neighbours; the other prescribes that part of our
-deportment which is primarily personal, and in which our neighbours
-are concerned only as spectators. Thus distinguished as they are,
-however, the two have a common source. For while, as we have shown,
-Manners originate by imitation of the behaviour pursued _towards_
-the great; Fashion originates by imitation of the behaviour _of_ the
-great. While the one has its derivation in the titles, phrases, and
-salutes used _to_ those in power; the other is derived from the habits
-and appearances exhibited _by_ those in power. The Carrib mother who
-squeezes her child’s head into a shape like that of the chief; the
-young savage who makes marks on himself similar to the scars carried
-by the warriors of his tribe; the Highlander who adopts the plaid worn
-by the head of his clan; the courtiers who affect greyness, or limp,
-or cover their necks, in imitation of their king, and the people who
-ape the courtiers; are alike acting under a kind of government connate
-with that of Manners, {29} and, like it too, primarily beneficial.
-For notwithstanding the numberless absurdities into which this copying
-has led people, from nose-rings to ear-rings, from painted faces to
-beauty-spots, from shaven heads to powdered wigs, from filed teeth and
-stained nails to bell-girdles, peaked shoes, and breeches stuffed with
-bran, it must yet be concluded that as the men of will, intelligence,
-and originality, who have got to the top, are, on the average, more
-likely to show judgment in their habits and tastes than the mass,
-the imitation of such is advantageous. By and by, however, Fashion,
-decaying like these other forms of rule, almost wholly ceases to be an
-imitation of the best, and becomes an imitation of quite other than
-the best. As those who take orders are not those having a special
-fitness for the priestly office, but those who hope to get livings;
-as legislators and public functionaries do not become such by virtue
-of their political insight and power to rule, but by virtue of birth,
-acreage, and class influence; so, the self-elected clique who set the
-fashion, do this, not by force of nature, by intellect, by higher
-worth or better taste, but solely by unchecked assumption. Among the
-initiated are to be found neither the noblest in rank, the chief in
-power, the best cultured, the most refined, nor those of greatest
-genius, wit, or beauty; and their reunions, so far from being superior
-to others, are noted for their inanity. Yet, by the example of these
-sham great, and not by that of the truly great, does society at large
-now regulate its habits, its dress, its small usages. As a natural
-consequence, these have generally little of that suitableness which
-the theory of fashion implies they should have. Instead of a progress
-towards greater elegance and convenience, which might be expected to
-occur did people copy the ways of the really best, or follow their
-own ideas of propriety, we have a reign of mere whim, of unreason,
-of change for the sake of change, of wanton oscillations from either
-extreme to the other. And so life _à la mode_, instead of being life
-conducted in the {30} most rational manner, is life regulated by
-spendthrifts and idlers, milliners and tailors, dandies and silly women.
-
-To these several corollaries—that the various orders of control
-exercised over men have a common origin and a common function, are
-called out by co-ordinate necessities and co-exist in like stringency,
-decline together and decay together—it now only remains to add that
-they simultaneously become less needful. The social discipline which
-has already wrought out great changes in men, must go on eventually
-to work out greater ones. That daily curbing of the lower nature and
-culture of the higher, which out of cannibals and devil-worshippers has
-evolved philanthropists, lovers of peace, and haters of superstition,
-may be expected to evolve out of these, men as much superior to them
-as they are to their progenitors. The causes that have produced past
-modifications are still in action; must continue in action as long as
-there exists any incongruity between men’s desires and the requirements
-of the social state; and must eventually make them organically fit
-for the social state. As it is now needless to forbid man-eating, so
-will it ultimately become needless to forbid murder, theft, and the
-minor offences of our criminal code. Along with growth of human nature
-into harmony with the moral law, there will go decreasing need for
-judges and statute-books; when the right course has become the course
-spontaneously chosen, prospects of future reward or punishment will
-not be wanted as incentives; and when due regard for others has become
-instinctive, there will need no code of ceremonies to say how behaviour
-shall be regulated.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Thus, then, may be recognized the meaning of those eccentricities of
-reformers which we set out by describing. They are not accidental;
-they are not mere personal caprices. They are inevitable results of
-the law of relationship above illustrated. That community of genesis,
-function, {31} and decay which all forms of restraint exhibit, is
-simply the obverse of the fact at first pointed out, that they have
-in two sentiments of human nature a common preserver and a common
-destroyer. Awe of power originates and cherishes them all; love of
-freedom undermines and weakens them all. The one defends despotism
-and asserts the supremacy of laws, adheres to old creeds and supports
-ecclesiastical authority, pays respect to titles and conserves forms;
-the other, putting rectitude above legality, achieves periodical
-instalments of political liberty, inaugurates Protestantism and works
-out its consequences, ignores the senseless dictates of Fashion and
-emancipates men from dead customs. To the true reformer no institution
-is sacred, no belief above criticism. Everything shall conform itself
-to equity and reason; nothing shall be saved by its prestige. Conceding
-to each man liberty to pursue his own ends and satisfy his own tastes,
-he demands for himself like liberty; and consents to no restrictions
-on this, save those which other men’s equal claims involve. No matter
-whether it be an ordinance of one man, or an ordinance of all men, if
-it trenches on his legitimate sphere of action, he denies its validity.
-The tyranny that would impose on him a particular style of dress and
-a set mode of behaviour, he resists equally with the tyranny that
-would limit his buyings and sellings, or dictate his creed. Whether
-the regulation be formally made by a legislature, or informally
-made by society at large—whether the penalty for disobedience be
-imprisonment, or frowns and social ostracism, he sees to be a question
-of no moment. He will utter his belief notwithstanding the threatened
-punishment; he will break conventions spite of the petty persecutions
-that will be visited on him. Show him that his actions are inimical
-to his fellow-men, and he will pause. Prove that he is disregarding
-their legitimate claims, and he will alter his course. But until you
-do this—until you demonstrate that his proceedings are essentially
-inconvenient or {32} inelegant, essentially irrational, unjust, or
-ungenerous, he will persevere.
-
-Some, indeed, argue that his conduct _is_ unjust and ungenerous. They
-say that he has no right to annoy other people by his whims; that the
-gentleman to whom his letter comes with no “Esq.” appended to the
-address, and the lady whose evening party he enters with gloveless
-hands, are vexed at what they consider his want of respect or want of
-breeding; that thus his eccentricities cannot be indulged save at the
-expense of his neighbours’ feelings; and that hence his nonconformity
-is in plain terms selfishness.
-
-He answers that this position, if logically developed, would deprive
-men of all liberty whatever. Each must conform all his acts to the
-public taste, and not his own. The public taste on every point having
-been once ascertained, men’s habits must thenceforth remain for ever
-fixed; seeing that no man can adopt other habits without sinning
-against the public taste, and giving people disagreeable feelings.
-Consequently, be it an era of pig-tails or high-heeled shoes, of
-starched ruffs or trunk-hose, all must continue to wear pig-tails,
-high-heeled shoes, starched ruffs, or trunk-hose to the crack of doom.
-
-If it be still urged that he is not justified in breaking through
-others’ forms that he may establish his own, and so sacrificing the
-wishes of many to the wishes of one, he replies that all religious and
-political changes might be negatived on like grounds. He asks whether
-Luther’s sayings and doings were not extremely offensive to the mass of
-his cotemporaries; whether the resistance of Hampden was not disgusting
-to the time-servers around him; whether every reformer has not shocked
-men’s prejudices and given immense displeasure by the opinions he
-uttered. The affirmative answer he follows up by demanding what right
-the reformer has, then, to utter these opinions—whether he is not
-sacrificing the feelings {33} of many to the feelings of one; and so
-he proves that, to be consistent, his antagonists must condemn not only
-all nonconformity in actions, but all nonconformity in beliefs.
-
-His antagonists rejoin that _his_ position, too, may be pushed to an
-absurdity. They argue that if a man may offend by the disregard of some
-forms, he may as legitimately do so by the disregard of all; and they
-inquire—Why should he not go out to dinner in a dirty shirt, and with
-an unshorn chin? Why should he not spit on the drawing-room carpet, and
-stretch his heels up to the mantle-shelf?
-
-The convention-breaker answers, that to ask this, implies a confounding
-of two widely-different classes of actions—the actions which are
-_essentially_ displeasurable to those around, with the actions which
-are but _incidentally_ displeasurable to them. He whose skin is so
-unclean as to offend the nostrils of his neighbours, or he who talks
-so loudly as to disturb a whole room, may be justly complained of, and
-rightly excluded by society from its assemblies. But he who presents
-himself in a surtout in place of a dress-coat, or in brown trousers
-instead of black, gives offence not to men’s senses, or their innate
-tastes, but merely to their bigotry of convention. It cannot be said
-that his costume is less elegant or less intrinsically appropriate
-than the one prescribed; seeing that a few hours earlier in the day it
-is admired. It is the implied rebellion, therefore, which annoys. How
-little the cause of quarrel has to do with the dress itself, is seen
-in the fact that a century ago black clothes would have been thought
-preposterous for hours of recreation, and that a few years hence some
-now forbidden style may be nearer the requirements of Fashion than the
-present one. Thus the reformer explains that it is not against the
-natural restraints, but against the artificial ones, that he protests;
-and that manifestly the fire of angry glances which he has to bear,
-{34} is poured upon him because he will not bow down to the idol which
-society has set up.
-
-Should he be asked how we are to distinguish between conduct which is
-in itself disagreeable to others, and conduct which is disagreeable by
-its implication, he answers, that they will distinguish themselves,
-if men will let them. Actions intrinsically repugnant will ever be
-frowned upon, and must ever remain as exceptional as now. Actions
-not intrinsically repugnant will establish themselves as proper. No
-relaxation of customs will introduce the practice of going to a party
-in muddy boots, and with unwashed hands; for the dislike of dirt would
-continue were Fashion abolished to-morrow. That love of approbation
-which now makes people solicitous to be _en règle_ would still
-exist—would still make them careful of their personal appearance—would
-still induce them to seek admiration by making themselves
-ornamental—would still cause them to respect the natural laws of good
-behaviour, as they now do the artificial laws. The change would simply
-be from a repulsive monotony to a picturesque variety. And if there be
-any regulations respecting which it is uncertain whether they are based
-on reality or on convention, experiment will soon decide, if due scope
-be allowed.
-
-When at length the controversy comes round, as controversies often do,
-to the point whence it started, and the “party of order” repeat their
-charge against the rebel, that he is sacrificing the feelings of others
-to gratify his own wilfulness, he replies once for all that they cheat
-themselves by mis-statements. He accuses them of being so despotic,
-that, not content with being masters over their own ways and habits,
-they would be masters over his also; and grumble because he will not
-let them. He merely asks the same freedom which they exercise; they,
-however, propose to regulate his course as well as their own—to cut
-and clip his mode of life into {35} agreement with their approved
-pattern; and then charge him with wilfulness and selfishness, because
-he does not quietly submit! He warns them that he shall resist,
-nevertheless; and that he shall do so, not only for the assertion of
-his own independence, but for their good. He tells them that they are
-slaves, and know it not; that they are shackled, and kiss their chains;
-that they have lived all their days in prison, and complain because the
-walls are being broken down. He says he must persevere, however, with a
-view to his own release; and, in spite of their present expostulations,
-he prophesies that when they have recovered from the fright which the
-prospect of freedom produces, they will thank him for aiding in their
-emancipation.
-
-Unamiable as seems this find-fault mood, offensive as is this defiant
-attitude, we must beware of overlooking the truths enunciated, in
-dislike of the advocacy. It is an unfortunate hindrance to all
-innovation, that in virtue of their very function, the innovators stand
-in a position of antagonism; and the disagreeable manners, and sayings,
-and doings, which this antagonism generates, are commonly associated
-with the doctrines promulgated. Quite forgetting that whether the thing
-attacked be good or bad, the combative spirit is necessarily repulsive;
-and quite forgetting that the toleration of abuses seems amiable merely
-from its passivity; the mass of men contract a bias against advanced
-views, and in favour of stationary ones, from intercourse with their
-respective adherents. “Conservatism,” as Emerson says, “is debonnair
-and social; reform is individual and imperious.” And this remains true,
-however vicious the system conserved, however righteous the reform to
-be effected. Nay, the indignation of the purists is usually extreme in
-proportion as the evils to be got rid of are great. The more urgent
-the required change, the more intemperate is the vehemence of its
-promoters. Let no one, then, confound with the principles {36} of this
-social nonconformity the acerbity and the disagreeable self-assertion
-of those who first display it.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The most plausible objection raised against resistance to conventions,
-is grounded on its impolicy, considered even from the progressist’s
-point of view. It is urged by many of the more liberal and
-intelligent—usually those who have themselves shown some independence
-of behaviour in earlier days—that to rebel in these small matters is
-to destroy your own power of helping on reform in greater matters.
-“If you show yourself eccentric in manners or dress, the world,” they
-say, “will not listen to you. You will be considered as crotchety, and
-impracticable. The opinions you express on important subjects, which
-might have been treated with respect had you conformed on minor points,
-will now inevitably be put down among your singularities; and thus, by
-dissenting in trifles, you disable yourself from spreading dissent in
-essentials.”
-
-Only noting, as we pass, that this is one of those anticipations which
-bring about their own fulfilment—that it is because most who disapprove
-these conventions do not show their disapproval, that the few who do
-show it look eccentric—and that did all act out their convictions, no
-such argument as the above would have force;—noting this as we pass,
-we go on to reply that these social restraints are not small evils but
-among the greatest. Estimate their sum total, and we doubt whether they
-would not exceed most others. Could we add up the trouble, the cost,
-the jealousies, vexations, misunderstandings, the loss of time and the
-loss of pleasure, which these conventions entail—we should perhaps come
-to the conclusion that the tyranny of Mrs. Grundy is worse than any
-other tyranny. Let us look at a few of its hurtful results; beginning
-with those of minor importance.
-
-It produces extravagance. The desire to be _comme il faut_, which
-underlies all conformities, whether of manners, {37} dress, or styles
-of entertainment, is the desire which makes many a spendthrift and many
-a bankrupt. To “keep up appearances,” to have a house in an approved
-quarter furnished in the latest taste, to give expensive dinners and
-crowded _soirées_, is an ambition forming the natural outcome of the
-conformist spirit. It is needless to enlarge on these follies: they
-have been satirized by hosts of writers, and in every drawing-room. All
-which here concerns us, is to point out that the respect for social
-observances, which men think so praiseworthy, has the same root with
-this effort to be fashionable in mode of living; and that, other things
-equal, the last cannot be diminished without the first being diminished
-also. If, now, we consider what this extravagance entails—if we count
-up the robbed tradesmen, the stinted governesses, the ill-educated
-children, the fleeced relatives, who have to suffer from it—if we mark
-the anxiety and the many moral delinquencies which its perpetrators
-involve themselves in; we shall see that this regard for conventions is
-not quite so innocent as it looks.
-
-Again, it decreases the amount of social intercourse. Passing over the
-reckless, and those who make a great display on speculation with the
-occasional result of getting on in the world to the exclusion of better
-men, we come to the far larger class who, being prudent and honest
-enough not to exceed their means, and yet wishing to be “respectable,”
-are obliged to limit their entertainments to the smallest possible
-number; and that each of these may be turned to the greatest advantage
-in meeting the claims on their hospitality, issue their invitations
-with little or no regard to the comfort or mutual fitness of their
-guests. A few inconveniently-large assemblies, made up of people mostly
-strange to each other or but distantly acquainted, are made to serve
-in place of many small parties of friends intimate enough to have some
-bond of sympathy. Thus the quantity of intercourse is diminished, and
-the quality deteriorated. Because it is the custom to make costly {38}
-preparations and provide costly refreshments; and because it entails
-both less expense and less trouble to do this for many persons on few
-occasions than for few persons on many occasions; the reunions of our
-less wealthy classes are rendered alike infrequent and tedious.
-
-Let it be further observed, that the existing formalities of social
-intercourse drive away many who most need its refining influence; and
-drive them into injurious habits and associations. Not a few men,
-and not the least sensible men either, give up in disgust this going
-out to stately dinners and stiff evening-parties; and instead, seek
-society in clubs, and cigar-divans, and taverns. “I’m sick of this
-standing about in drawing-rooms, talking nonsense, and trying to look
-happy,” will answer one of them when taxed with his desertion. “Why
-should I any longer waste time and money, and temper? Once I was ready
-enough to rush home from the office to dress; I sported embroidered
-shirts, submitted to tight boots, and cared nothing for tailors’ and
-haberdashers’ bills. I know better now. My patience lasted a good
-while; for though I found each night pass stupidly, I always hoped
-the next would make amends. But I’m undeceived. Cab-hire and kid
-gloves cost more than any evening party pays for; or rather—it is
-worth the cost of them to avoid the party. No, no; I’ll no more of
-it. Why should I pay five shillings a time for the privilege of being
-bored?” If, now, we consider that this very common mood tends towards
-billiard-rooms, towards long sittings over cigars and brandy-and-water,
-towards Evans’s and the Coal Hole; it becomes a question whether these
-precise observances which hamper our set meetings, have not to answer
-for much of the prevalent dissoluteness. Men must have excitements of
-some kind or other; and if debarred from higher ones will fall back
-upon lower. It is not that those who thus take to irregular habits
-are essentially those of low tastes. Often it is quite the reverse.
-Among half a dozen intimate friends, abandoning {39} formalities and
-sitting at ease round the fire, none will enter with greater enjoyment
-into the highest kind of social intercourse—the genuine communion of
-thought and feeling; and if the circle includes women of intelligence
-and refinement, so much the greater is their pleasure. It is because
-they will no longer be choked with the mere dry husks of conversation
-which society offers them, that they fly its assemblies, and seek
-those with whom they may have discourse that is at least real, though
-unpolished. The men who thus long for substantial mental sympathy,
-and will go where they can get it, are often, indeed, much better at
-the core than the men who are content with the inanities of gloved
-and scented party-goers—men who feel no need to come morally nearer
-to their fellow-creatures than they can come while standing, tea-cup
-in hand, answering trifles with trifles; and who, by feeling no such
-need, prove themselves shallow-thoughted and cold-hearted. It is true,
-that some who shun drawing-rooms do so from inability to bear the
-restraints prescribed by a genuine refinement, and that they would be
-greatly improved by being kept under these restraints. But it is not
-less true that, by adding to the legitimate restraints, which are based
-on convenience and a regard for others, a host of factitious restraints
-based only on convention, the refining discipline, which would else
-have been borne with benefit, is rendered unbearable, and so misses
-its end. Excess of government defeats itself by driving away those to
-be governed. And if over all who desert its entertainments in disgust
-either at their emptiness or their formality, society thus loses its
-salutary influence—if such not only fail to receive that moral culture
-which the company of ladies, when rationally regulated, would give
-them, but, in default of other relaxation, are driven into habits and
-companionships which often end in gambling and drunkenness; must we not
-say that here, too, is an evil not to be passed over as insignificant?
-
-Then consider what a blighting effect these {40} multitudinous
-preparations and ceremonies have upon the pleasures they profess
-to subserve. Who, on calling to mind the occasions of his highest
-social enjoyments, does not find them to have been wholly informal,
-perhaps impromptu? How delightful a pic-nic of friends, who forget
-all observances save those dictated by good nature! How pleasant the
-unpretending gatherings of small book-societies, and the like; or those
-purely accidental meetings of a few people well known to each other!
-Then, indeed, we may see that “a man sharpeneth the countenance of his
-friend.” Cheeks flush, and eyes sparkle. The witty grow brilliant, and
-even the dull are excited into saying good things. There is an overflow
-of topics; and the right thought, and the right words to put it in,
-spring up unsought. Grave alternates with gay: now serious converse,
-and now jokes, anecdotes, and playful raillery. Everyone’s best nature
-is shown; everyone’s best feelings are in pleasurable activity; and,
-for the time, life seems well worth having. Go now and dress for some
-half-past eight dinner, or some ten o’clock “at home;” and present
-yourself in spotless attire, with every hair arranged to perfection.
-How great the difference! The enjoyment seems in the inverse ratio of
-the preparation. These figures, got up with such finish and precision,
-appear but half alive. They have frozen each other by their primness;
-and your faculties feel the numbing effects of the atmosphere the
-moment you enter it. All those thoughts, so nimble and so apt awhile
-since, have disappeared—have suddenly acquired a preternatural power
-of eluding you. If you venture a remark to your neighbour, there comes
-a trite rejoinder, and there it ends. No subject you can hit upon
-outlives half a dozen sentences. Nothing that is said excites any real
-interest in you; and you feel that all you say is listened to with
-apathy. By some strange magic, things that usually give pleasure seem
-to have lost all charm. You have a taste for art. Weary of frivolous
-{41} talk, you turn to the table, and find that the book of engravings
-and the portfolio of photographs are as flat as the conversation. You
-are fond of music. Yet the singing, good as it is, you hear with utter
-indifference; and say “Thank you” with a sense of being a profound
-hypocrite. Wholly at ease though you could be, for your own part, you
-find that your sympathies will not let you. You see young gentlemen
-feeling whether their ties are properly adjusted, looking vacantly
-round, and considering what they shall do next. You see ladies sitting
-disconsolately, waiting for some one to speak to them, and wishing
-they had the wherewith to occupy their fingers. You see the hostess
-standing about the doorway, keeping a factitious smile on her face,
-and racking her brain to find the requisite nothings with which to
-greet her guests as they enter. You see numberless traits of weariness
-and embarrassment; and, if you have any fellow feeling, these cannot
-fail to produce a sense of discomfort. The disorder is catching;
-and do what you will, you cannot resist the general infection. You
-struggle against it; you make spasmodic efforts to be lively; but
-none of your sallies or your good stories do more than raise a simper
-or a forced laugh: intellect and feeling are alike asphyxiated. And
-when, at length, yielding to your disgust, you rush away, how great
-is the relief when you get into the fresh air, and see the stars!
-How you “Thank God, that’s over!” and half resolve to avoid all such
-boredom for the future! What, now, is the secret of this perpetual
-miscarriage and disappointment? Does not the fault lie with these
-needless adjuncts—these elaborate dressings, these set forms, these
-expensive preparations, these many devices and arrangements that
-imply trouble and raise expectation? Who that has lived thirty years
-in the world has not discovered that Pleasure is coy; and must not
-be too directly pursued, but must be caught unawares? An air from a
-street-piano, heard while at work, will often gratify more than the
-{42} choicest music played at a concert by the most accomplished
-musicians. A single good picture seen in a dealer’s window, may give
-keener enjoyment than a whole exhibition gone through with catalogue
-and pencil. By the time we have got ready our elaborate apparatus by
-which to secure happiness, the happiness is gone. It is too subtle to
-be contained in these receivers, garnished with compliments, and fenced
-round with etiquette. The more we multiply and complicate appliances,
-the more certain are we to drive it away. The reason is patent enough.
-These higher emotions to which social intercourse ministers, are of
-extremely complex nature; they consequently depend for their production
-upon very numerous conditions; the more numerous the conditions,
-the greater the liability that one or other of them will not be
-fulfilled. It takes a considerable misfortune to destroy appetite; but
-cordial sympathy with those around may be extinguished by a look or
-a word. Hence it follows, that the more multiplied the _unnecessary_
-requirements with which social intercourse is surrounded, the less
-likely are its pleasures to be achieved. It is difficult enough to
-fulfil continuously all the _essentials_ to a pleasurable communion
-with others: how much more difficult, then, must it be continuously to
-fulfil a host of _non-essentials_ also! What chance is there of getting
-any genuine response from the lady who is thinking of your stupidity
-in taking her in to dinner on the wrong arm? How are you likely to
-have agreeable converse with the gentleman who is fuming internally
-because he is not placed next to the hostess? Formalities, familiar
-as they may become, necessarily occupy attention—necessarily multiply
-the occasions for mistake, misunderstanding, and jealousy, on the part
-of one or other—necessarily distract all minds from the thoughts and
-feelings which should occupy them—necessarily, therefore, subvert those
-conditions under which only any sterling intercourse is to be had.
-
-And this, indeed, is the fatal mischief which these {43} conventions
-entail—a mischief to which every other is secondary. They destroy those
-pleasures which they profess to subserve. All institutions are alike in
-this, that however useful, and needful even, they originally were, they
-in the end cease to be so, but often become detrimental. While humanity
-is growing, they continue fixed; daily get more mechanical and unvital;
-and by and by tend to strangle what they before preserved. Old forms
-of government finally grow so oppressive, that they must be thrown off
-even at the risk of reigns of terror. Old creeds end in being dead
-formulas, which no longer aid but distort and arrest the general mind;
-while the State-churches administering them, come to be instruments
-for subsidizing conservatism and repressing progress. Old schemes
-of education, incarnated in public schools and colleges, continue
-filling the heads of new generations with what has become relatively
-useless knowledge, and, by consequence, excluding knowledge which is
-useful. Not an organization of any kind—political, religious, literary,
-philanthropic—but what, by its ever-multiplying regulations, its
-accumulating wealth, its yearly addition of officers, and the creeping
-into it of patronage and party feeling, eventually loses its original
-spirit, and sinks into a lifeless mechanism, worked with a view to
-private ends—a mechanism which not merely fails of its first purpose,
-but is a positive hindrance to it. Thus is it, too, with social usages.
-We read of the Chinese that they have “ponderous ceremonies transmitted
-from time immemorial,” which make social intercourse a burden. The
-court forms prescribed by monarchs for their own exaltation, have, in
-all times and places, ended in consuming the comfort of their lives.
-And so the artificial observances of the dining-room and saloon, in
-proportion as they are many and strict, extinguish that agreeable
-communion which they were intended to secure. The dislike with which
-people commonly speak of society that is “formal,” and “stiff,” and
-“ceremonious,” {44} implies a general recognition of this fact; and
-this recognition involves the inference that all usages of behaviour
-which are not based on natural requirements, are injurious. That
-these conventions defeat their own ends is no new assertion. Swift,
-criticising the manners of his day, says—“Wise men are often more
-uneasy at the over-civility of these refiners than they could possibly
-be in the conversation of peasants and mechanics.”
-
-But it is not only in these details that the self-defeating action of
-our arrangements is traceable; it is traceable in the very substance
-and nature of them. Our social intercourse, as commonly managed, is a
-mere semblance of the reality sought. What is it that we want? Some
-sympathetic converse with our fellow-creatures:—some converse that
-shall not be mere dead words, but the vehicle of living thoughts and
-feelings—converse in which the eyes and the face shall speak, and the
-tones of the voice be full of meaning—converse which shall make us
-feel no longer alone, but shall draw us closer to others, and double
-our own emotions by adding their’s to them. Who is there that has
-not, from time to time, felt how cold and flat is all this talk about
-politics and science, and the new books and the new men, and how a
-genuine utterance of fellow-feeling outweighs the whole of it? Mark
-the words of Bacon:—“For a crowd is not company, and faces are but a
-gallery of pictures, and talk but a tinkling cymbal, where there is no
-love.” If this be true, then it is only after acquaintance has grown
-into intimacy, and intimacy has ripened into friendship, that the real
-communion which men need becomes possible. A rationally-formed circle
-must consist almost wholly of those on terms of familiarity and regard,
-with but one or two strangers. What folly, then, underlies the whole
-system of our grand dinners, our “at homes,” our evening parties—crowds
-made up of many who never met before, many who just bow to one another,
-many who though well known feel mutual indifference, with just a few
-{45} real friends lost in the general mass! You need but look round
-at the artificial expressions of face, to see at once how it is. All
-have their disguises on; and how can there be sympathy between masks?
-No wonder that in private every one exclaims against the stupidity of
-these gatherings. No wonder that hostesses get them up rather because
-they must than because they wish. No wonder that the invited go less
-from the expectation of pleasure than from fear of giving offence. The
-whole thing is an organized disappointment.
-
-And then note, lastly, that in this case, as in others, an organization
-inoperative for its proper purpose, it is employed for quite other
-purposes. What is the usual plea put in for giving and attending these
-tedious assemblies? “I admit that they are dull and frivolous enough,”
-replies every man to your criticisms; “but then, you know, one must
-keep up one’s connexions.” And could you get from his wife a sincere
-answer, it would be—“Like you, I am sick of these formal parties; but
-then, we must get our daughters married.” The one knows that there is a
-profession to push, a business to extend; or parliamentary influence,
-or county patronage, or votes, or office, to be got: position,
-berths, favours, profit. The other’s thoughts run upon husbands
-and settlements, wives and dowries. Worthless for their ostensible
-purpose of daily bringing human beings into pleasurable relations
-with each other, these cumbrous appliances of our social intercourse
-are now perseveringly kept in action with a view to the pecuniary and
-matrimonial results which they indirectly produce.
-
-Who then shall say that the reform of our system of observances
-is unimportant? When we see how this system induces fashionable
-extravagance, with its occasional ruin—when we mark how greatly
-it limits the amount of social intercourse among the less wealthy
-classes—when we find that many who most need to be disciplined by
-mixing {46} with the refined are driven away by it, and led into bad
-courses—when we count up the many minor evils it inflicts, the extra
-work which its costliness entails on all professional and mercantile
-men, the damage to public taste in dress and decoration by the setting
-up of its absurdities as standards for imitation, the injury to health
-indicated in the faces of its devotees at the close of the London
-season, the mortality of milliners and the like, which its sudden
-exigencies yearly involve;—and when to all these we add its fatal
-sin, that it withers up and kills that high enjoyment it professedly
-ministers to—shall we not conclude that to rationalize etiquette and
-fashion, is an aim yielding to few in urgency?
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-There needs, then, a protestantism in social usages. Forms which have
-ceased to facilitate and have become obstructive—have to be swept
-away. Signs are not wanting that some change is at hand. A host of
-satirists, led on by Thackeray, have long been engaged in bringing
-our sham-festivities, and our fashionable follies, into contempt; and
-in their candid moods, most men laugh at the frivolities with which
-they and the world in general are deluded. Ridicule has always been a
-revolutionary agent. Institutions that have lost their roots in men’s
-respect and faith are doomed; and the day of their dissolution is not
-far off. The time is approaching, then, when our system of social
-observances must pass through some crisis, out of which it will come
-purified and comparatively simple.
-
-How this crisis will be brought about, no one can say. Whether by the
-continuance and increase of individual protests, or whether by the
-union of many persons for the practice and diffusion of better usages,
-the future alone can decide. The influence of dissentients acting
-without co-operation, seems inadequate. Frowned on by conformists, and
-expostulated with even by those who secretly sympathize with them;
-subject to petty persecutions, and {47} unable to trace any benefit
-produced by their example; they are apt, one by one, to give up their
-attempts as hopeless. The young convention-breaker eventually finds
-that he pays too heavily for his nonconformity. Hating, for example,
-everything that bears about it any remnant of servility, he determines,
-in the ardour of his independence, that he will uncover to no one.
-But what he means simply as a general protest, he finds that ladies
-interpret into a personal disrespect. In other cases his courage
-fails him. Such of his unconventionalities as can be attributed only
-to eccentricity, he has no qualms about; for, on the whole, he feels
-rather complimented than otherwise in being considered a disregarder of
-public opinion. But when they are liable to be put down to ignorance,
-to ill-breeding, or to poverty, he becomes a coward. However clearly
-the recent innovation of eating some kinds of fish with knife and fork
-proves the fork-and-bread practice to have had little but caprice for
-its basis, yet he dares not wholly ignore that practice while fashion
-partially maintains it.[4] Though he thinks that a silk handkerchief
-is quite as appropriate for drawing-room use as a white cambric one,
-he is not altogether at ease in acting out his opinion. Then, too, he
-begins to perceive that his resistance to prescription brings round
-disadvantageous results which he had not calculated upon. He had
-expected that it would save him from a great deal of social intercourse
-of a frivolous kind—that it would offend the silly people, but not the
-sensible people; and so would serve as a self-acting test by which
-those worth knowing would be separated from those not worth knowing.
-But the silly people prove to be so greatly in the majority that,
-by offending them, he closes against himself nearly all the avenues
-through which the sensible people are to be reached. Thus he finds,
-that his nonconformity is frequently misinterpreted; that there are
-but few directions in which he dares {48} to carry it consistently
-out; that the disadvantages it entails are greater than he anticipated;
-and that the chances of his doing any good are very remote. Hence he
-gradually loses resolution, and lapses, step by step, into the ordinary
-routine of observances.
-
- [4] This was written before the introduction of silver fish-knives.
-
-Abortive as individual protests thus generally turn out, it may
-possibly be that nothing effectual will be done until there arises
-some organized resistance to this invisible despotism, by which our
-modes and habits are dictated. It may happen, that the government of
-Manners and Fashion will be rendered less tyrannical, as the political
-and religious governments have been, by some antagonistic union.
-Alike in Church and State, men’s first emancipations from excesses
-of restriction were achieved by numbers, bound together by a common
-creed or a common political faith. What remained undone while there
-were but individual schismatics or rebels, was effected when there
-came to be many acting in concert. It is tolerably clear that these
-earliest instalments of freedom could not have been obtained in any
-other way; for so long as the feeling of personal independence was weak
-and the rule strong, there could never have been a sufficient number
-of separate dissentients to produce the desired results. Only in these
-later times, during which the secular and spiritual controls have been
-growing less coercive, and the tendency towards individual liberty
-greater, has it become possible for smaller and smaller sects and
-parties to fight against established creeds and laws; until now men may
-safely stand even alone in their antagonism. The failure of individual
-nonconformity to customs, suggests that an analogous series of changes
-may have to be gone through in this case also. It is true that the
-_lex non scripta_ differs from the _lex scripta_ in this, that, being
-unwritten, it is more readily altered; and that it has, from time to
-time, been quietly ameliorated. Nevertheless, we shall find that the
-analogy holds substantially good. For in this case, as {49} in the
-others, the essential revolution is not the substituting of any one
-set of restraints for any other, but the limiting or abolishing the
-authority which prescribes restraints. Just as the fundamental change
-inaugurated by the Reformation, was not a superseding of one creed by
-another, but an ignoring of the arbiter who before dictated creeds—just
-as the fundamental change which Democracy long ago commenced, was not
-from this particular law to that, but from the despotism of one to
-the freedom of all; so, the parallel change yet to be wrought out in
-this supplementary government of which we are treating, is not the
-replacing of absurd usages by sensible ones, but the dethronement of
-that power which now imposes our usages, and the assertion of the
-rights of individuals to choose their own usages. In rules of living,
-a West-end clique is our Pope; and we are all papists, with but a mere
-sprinkling of heretics. On those who decisively rebel, comes down the
-penalty of excommunication, with its long catalogue of disagreeable
-and, indeed, serious consequences. The liberty of the subject asserted
-in our constitution, and ever on the increase, has yet to be wrested
-from this subtler tyranny. The right of private judgment, which our
-ancestors wrung from the church, remains to be claimed from this
-dictator of our habits. Or, as before said, to free us from these
-idolatries and superstitious conformities, there has still to come a
-protestantism in social usages. Parallel, therefore, as is the change
-to be wrought out, it seems not improbable that it may be wrought out
-in an analogous way. That influence which solitary dissentients fail to
-gain, and that perseverance which they lack, may come into existence
-when they unite. That persecution which the world now visits upon them
-from mistaking their nonconformity for ignorance or disrespect, may
-diminish when it is seen to result from principle. The penalty which
-exclusion now entails may disappear when they become numerous enough to
-form {50} visiting circles of their own. And when a successful stand
-has been made, and the brunt of the opposition has passed, that large
-amount of secret dislike to our observances which now pervades society,
-may manifest itself with sufficient power to effect the desired
-emancipation.
-
-Whether such will be the process, time alone can decide. That community
-of origin, growth, supremacy, and decadence, which we have found among
-all kinds of government, suggests a community in modes of change
-also. On the other hand, Nature often performs substantially similar
-operations, in ways apparently different. Hence these details can never
-be foretold.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Meanwhile, let us glance at the conclusions that have been reached. On
-the one side, government, originally one, and afterwards subdivided
-for the better fulfilment of its function, must be considered as
-having ever been, in all its branches—political, religious, and
-ceremonial—beneficial; and, indeed, absolutely necessary. On the other
-side, government, under all its forms, must be regarded as subserving
-an office, made needful by the unfitness of aboriginal humanity for
-social life; and the successive diminutions of its coerciveness in
-State, in Church, and in Custom, must be looked upon accompanying the
-increasing adaptation of humanity to its conditions. To complete the
-conception, there requires to be borne in mind the third fact, that the
-genesis, the maintenance, and the decline of all governments, however
-named, are alike brought about by the humanity to be controlled; from
-which may be drawn the inference that, on the average, restrictions of
-every kind cannot last much longer than they are wanted, and cannot
-be destroyed much faster than they ought to be. Society, in all its
-developments, undergoes the process of exuviation. These old forms
-which it successively throws off, have all been once vitally united
-with it—have severally served as the protective envelopes within which
-a higher humanity {51} was being evolved. They are cast aside only
-when they become hindrances—only when some inner and better envelope
-has been formed; and they bequeath to us all that there was in them
-of good. The periodical abolitions of tyrannical laws have left the
-administration of justice not only uninjured, but purified. Dead
-and buried creeds have not carried with them the essential morality
-they contained, which still exists, uncontaminated by the sloughs of
-superstition. And all that there is of justice and kindness and beauty,
-embodied in our cumbrous forms of etiquette, will live perennially when
-the forms themselves have been forgotten.
-
-{52}
-
-
-
-
-RAILWAY MORALS AND RAILWAY POLICY.
-
-[_First published in the_ Edinburgh Review _for October 1854_.]
-
-
-Believers in the intrinsic virtues of political forms, might draw an
-instructive lesson from the politics of our railways. If there needs
-a conclusive proof that the most carefully-framed constitutions are
-worthless, unless they be embodiments of the popular character—if
-there needs a conclusive proof, that governmental arrangements in
-advance of the time will inevitably lapse into congruity with the
-time; such proof may be found over and over again repeated in the
-current history of joint-stock enterprises. As devised by Act of
-Parliament, the administrations of our public companies are almost
-purely democratic. The representative system is carried out in them
-with scarcely a check. Shareholders elect their directors, directors
-their chairman; there is an annual retirement of a certain proportion
-of members of the board, giving facilities for superseding them;
-and, by this means, the whole ruling body may be changed in periods
-varying from three to five years. Yet, not only are the characteristic
-vices of our political state reproduced in each of these mercantile
-corporations—some even in an intenser degree—but the very form of
-government, while remaining nominally democratic, is substantially
-so remodelled as to become a miniature of our national constitution.
-The direction, ceasing to fulfil its theory as a {53} council formed
-of members who possess equal powers, falls under the control of some
-one member of superior cunning, will, or wealth, to whom the majority
-become so subordinate, that the decision on every question depends on
-the course he takes. Proprietors, instead of constantly exercising
-their franchise, allow it to become on all ordinary occasions a dead
-letter. Retiring directors are so habitually re-elected without
-opposition, and have so great a power of insuring their own election
-when opposed, that the board becomes practically a close body; and
-it is only when the misgovernment grows extreme enough to produce a
-revolutionary agitation among the shareholders, that any change can
-be effected. Thus, a mixture of the monarchic, the aristocratic, and
-the democratic elements, is repeated with such modifications only as
-the circumstances involve. The modes of action, too, are substantially
-the same; save in this, that the copy outruns the original. Threats of
-resignation, which ministries hold out in extreme cases, are commonly
-made by railway-boards to stave off disagreeable inquiries. By no
-means regarding themselves as servants of the shareholders, directors
-rebel against dictation from them; and construe any amendment to their
-proposals into a vote of want of confidence. At half-yearly meetings,
-disagreeable criticisms and objections are met by the chairman with
-the remark, that if the shareholders cannot trust his colleagues and
-himself, they had better choose others. With most, this assumption of
-offended dignity tells; and, under fear that the company’s interests
-may suffer from any disturbance, measures quite at variance with the
-wishes of the proprietary are allowed to be carried. The parallel holds
-yet further. If it be true of national administrations, that those in
-power have the support of public _employés_; it is not less true of
-incorporated companies, that the directors are aided by the officials
-in their struggles with shareholders. If, in times past, there have
-been ministries who spent public money to secure party ends; there
-are, in {54} times present, railway-boards who use the funds of the
-shareholders to defeat the shareholders. Nay, even in detail, the
-similarity is maintained. Like their prototype, joint-stock companies
-have their expensive election contests, managed by election committees,
-employing election agents; they have their canvassing with its sundry
-illegitimate accompaniments; they have their occasional manufacture of
-fraudulent votes. And, as a general result, that class-legislation,
-which has been habitually charged against statesmen, is now habitually
-displayed in the proceedings of these trading associations: constituted
-though they are on purely representative principles.
-
-These last assertions will surprise not a few. The general public who
-never see a railway-journal, and who skip the reports of half-yearly
-meetings which appear in the daily papers, are under the impression
-that dishonesties like those gigantic ones so notorious during the
-mania, are no longer committed. They do not forget the doings of
-stags and stock-jobbers and runaway-directors. They remember how
-men-of-straw held shares amounting to £100,000, and even £200,000;
-how numerous directorates were filled by the same persons—one having
-a seat at twenty-three boards; how subscription-contracts were made
-up with signatures bought at 10_s_ and even 4_s_ each, and porters
-and errand-boys made themselves liable for £30,000 and £40,000
-a-piece. They can narrate how boards kept their books in cipher, made
-false registries, and refrained from recording their proceedings in
-minute-books; how in one company, half-a-million of capital was put
-down to unreal names; how in another, directors bought for account
-more shares than they issued, and so forced up the price; and how in
-many others, they repurchased for the company their own shares, paying
-themselves with the depositors’ money. But, though more or less aware
-of the iniquities which have been practised, the generality think
-of them solely as the accompaniments {55} of bubble schemes. More
-recent enterprises they know to have been _bonâ fide_ ones, mostly
-carried out by old-established companies; and knowing this, they do
-not suspect that in the getting-up of branch lines and extensions,
-there are chicaneries near akin to those of Capel Court; and quite as
-disastrous in their ultimate results. Associating the ideas of wealth
-and respectability, and habitually using respectability as synonymous
-with morality, it seems to them incredible that many of the large
-capitalists and men of station who administer railway affairs, should
-be guilty of indirectly enriching themselves at the expense of their
-constituents. True, they occasionally meet with a law-report disclosing
-some enormous fraud; or read a _Times_ leader, characterising
-directorial acts in terms which are held libellous. But they regard
-the cases thus brought to light as entirely exceptional; and, under
-that feeling of loyalty which ever idealises men in authority, they
-constantly tend towards the conviction, if not that directors can do no
-wrong, yet that they are very unlikely to do wrong.
-
-A history of railway management and railway intrigue, however, would
-quickly undeceive them. In such a history, the tricks of projectors
-and the mysteries of the share-market would occupy less space than
-the analysis of the multiform dishonesties which have been committed
-since 1845, and the genesis of that elaborate system of tactics
-by which companies are betrayed into ruinous undertakings which
-benefit the few at the cost of the many. Such a history would not
-only have to detail the doings of the personage famed for “making
-things pleasant;” nor would it have merely to add the misdeeds of his
-colleagues; but it would have to describe the kindred corruptness
-of other railway administrations. From the published report of an
-investigation-committee, it would be shown how, not many years since,
-the directors of one of our lines allotted among themselves 15,000
-new shares then at a premium in the {56} market; how to pay the
-deposits on these shares they used the company’s funds; and how one of
-their number thus accommodated himself in meeting both deposits and
-calls to the extent of more than £80,000. We should read in it of one
-railway chairman who, with the secretary’s connivance, retained shares
-exceeding a quarter of a million in amount, intending to claim them as
-his allotment if they rose to a premium; and who, as they did not do
-so, left them as unissued shares on the hands of the proprietors, to
-their vast loss. We should also read in it of directors who made loans
-to themselves out of the company’s floating balances at a low rate of
-interest, when the market rate was high; and who paid themselves larger
-salaries than those assigned: entering the difference in an obscure
-corner of the ledger under the head of “petty disbursements.” There
-would be a description of the manœuvres by which a delinquent board,
-under impending investigation, gets a favourable committee nominated—“a
-whitewashing committee.” There would be documents showing that the
-proxies enabling boards to carry contested measures, have in some
-cases been obtained by garbled statements; and, again, that proxies
-given for a specified purpose have been used for other purposes. One
-of our companies would be proved to have projected a line, serving as
-a feeder, for which it obtained shareholders by offering a guaranteed
-dividend, which, though understood by the public to be unconditional,
-was really contingent upon a condition not likely to be fulfilled.
-The managers of another company would be convicted of having carried
-party measures by the aid of preference-shares standing in the names of
-station-masters; and of being aided by the proxies of the secretary’s
-children too young to write.
-
-That the corruptions here glanced at are not exceptional evils, but
-result from some deep-seated vice in our system of railway-government,
-is sufficiently proved by the fact, that notwithstanding the falling
-of railway-dividends {57} produced by the extension policy, that
-policy has been year after year continued. Does any tradesman, who,
-having enlarged his shop, finds a proportionate diminution in his
-rate of profits, go on, even under the stimulus of competition,
-making further enlargements at the risk of further diminutions? Does
-any merchant, however strong his desire to take away an opponent’s
-markets, make successive mortgages on his capital, and pay for each sum
-thus raised a higher interest than he gains by trading with it? Yet
-this course, so absurd that no one would insult a private individual
-by asking him to follow it, is the course which railway-boards, at
-meeting after meeting, persuade their clients to pursue. Since 1845,
-when the dividends of our leading lines ranged from 8 to 10 per cent.,
-they have, notwithstanding an ever-growing traffic, fallen from 10
-per cent. to 5, from 8 to 4, from 9 to 3 1/4; and yet the system of
-extensions, leases, and guarantees, notoriously the cause of this,
-has been year by year persevered in. Is there not something needing
-explanation here—something more than the world is allowed to see?
-If there be any one to whom the broad fact of obstinate persistence
-in unprofitable expenditure does not alone carry the conviction
-that sinister influences are at work, let him read the seductive
-statements by which shareholders are led to authorize new projects,
-and then compare these with the proved results. Let him look at the
-estimated cost, anticipated traffic, and calculated dividend on some
-proposed branch line; let him observe how the proprietary before whom
-the scheme is laid, are induced to approve it as promising a fair
-return; and then let him contemplate, in the resulting depreciation
-of stock, the extent of their loss. Is there any avoiding the
-inference? Railway-shareholders can never have habitually voted for
-new undertakings which they knew would be injurious to them. Every
-one knows, however, that these new undertakings have almost uniformly
-proved injurious to them. Obviously, therefore, railway-shareholders
-have been {58} continually deluded by false representations. The
-only possible escape from this conclusion is in the belief that
-boards and their officers have been themselves deceived; and were the
-discrepancies between promises and results occasional only, there
-would be grounds for this lenient interpretation. But to suppose
-that a railway-government should repeatedly make such mistakes,
-and yet gain no wisdom from disastrous experiences—should after a
-dozen disappointments again mislead half-yearly meetings by bright
-anticipations into dark realities, and all in good faith—taxes
-credulity somewhat too far. Even, then, were there no demonstrated
-iniquities to rouse suspicion, we think that the continuous
-depreciation in the value of railway-stock, the determined perseverance
-of boards in the policy which has produced this depreciation, and
-the proved untruth of the statements by which they have induced
-shareholders to sanction this policy, would of themselves suffice to
-show the viciousness of railway-administration.
-
-That the existing evils, and the causes conspiring to produce them,
-may be better understood, it will be needful to glance at the mode in
-which the system of extensions grew up. Earliest among the incentives
-to it was a feeling of rivalry. Even while yet their main lines were
-unfinished, a contest for supremacy arose between our two greatest
-companies. This presently generated a confirmed antagonism; and the
-same impulse which in election contests has sometimes entailed the
-squandering of a fortune to gain a victory, has largely aided to make
-each of these great rivals submit to repeated sacrifices rather than be
-beaten. Feuds of like nature are in other cases perpetually prompting
-boards to make aggressions on each other’s territories—every attack
-on the one side leading to a reprisal on the other; and so violent is
-the hostility occasionally produced, that directors might be pointed
-out whose votes are wholly determined by the desire to be revenged
-on their opponents. {59} Among the first methods used by leading
-companies to strengthen themselves and weaken their competitors, was
-the leasing or purchase of subordinate neighbouring lines. Of course
-those to whom overtures were made, obtained bids from both sides; and
-it naturally resulted that the first sales thus effected, being at
-prices far above the real values, brought great profits to the sellers.
-What resulted? A few recurrences of this proceeding, made it clear to
-quick-witted speculators, that constructing lines so circumstanced as
-to be bid for by competing companies, would be a lucrative policy.
-Shareholders who had once pocketed these large and easily-made gains,
-were eager to repeat the process; and cast about for districts in which
-it might be done. Even the directors of the companies by whom these
-high prices were given, were under the temptation to aid in this; for
-it was manifest to them that by obtaining a larger interest in any such
-new undertaking than they possessed in the purchasing company, and
-by using their influence in the purchasing company to obtain a good
-price or guarantee for the new undertaking, a great advantage would be
-gained. That this motive has been largely operative, railway history
-abundantly proves. Once commenced, sundry other influences conspired
-to stimulate this making of feeders and extensions. The non-closure
-of capital-accounts rendered possible the “cooking” of dividends,
-which was at one period carried to a great extent. Expenditure that
-should have been charged against revenue was charged against capital;
-works and rolling stock were allowed to go unrepaired, or insufficient
-additions made to them, by which means the current expenses were
-rendered delusively small; long-credit agreements with contractors
-permitted sundry disbursements that had virtually been made, to be
-kept out of the accounts; and thus the net returns were made to
-appear greater than they really were. Naturally new undertakings put
-before the moneyed world by companies whose stock and dividends had
-been thus artificially raised, {60} were received with proportionate
-favour. Under the prestige of their parentage their shares came out
-at high premiums, bringing large profits to the projectors. The hint
-was soon taken; and it presently became an established policy, under
-the auspices of a prosperity either real or mock, to get up these
-subsidiary lines—“calves,” as they were called in the slang of the
-initiated—and to traffic in the premiums their shares commanded.
-Meanwhile had been developing, a secondary set of influences which
-also contributed to foster unwise enterprises; namely, the business
-interests of the lawyers, engineers, contractors, and others directly
-or indirectly employed in railway construction. The ways of getting up
-and carrying new schemes, could not fail, in the course of years, to
-become familiar to all concerned; and there could not fail to grow up
-among them a system of concerted tactics for achieving their common
-end. Thus, partly from the jealousy of rival boards, partly from
-the greediness of shareholders in purchased lines, partly from the
-dishonest schemings of directors, partly from the manœuvres of those
-whose occupation it is to carry out the projects legally authorized,
-partly, and perhaps mainly, from the delusive appearance of prosperity
-maintained by many established companies, there came the wild
-speculations of 1844 and 1845. The consequent disasters, while they
-pretty well destroyed the last of these incentives, left the rest much
-as they were. Though the painfully-undeceived public have ceased to aid
-as they once did, the various private interests that had grown up have
-since been working together as before—have developed their methods of
-co-operation into still more complex and subtle forms; and are even now
-daily thrusting unfortunate shareholders into losing undertakings.
-
-Before proceeding to analyze the existing state of things, however,
-we would have it clearly understood that we do not suppose those
-implicated to be _on the average_ morally lower than the community
-at large. Men taken at random {61} from any class, would, in all
-probability, behave much in the same way when placed in like positions.
-There are unquestionably directors grossly dishonest. Unquestionably
-also there are others whose standard of honour is far higher than that
-of most persons. And for the remainder, they are, doubtless, as good as
-the mass. Of the engineers, parliamentary agents, lawyers, contractors,
-and others concerned, it may be admitted that though custom has
-induced laxity of principle, yet they would be harshly judged were the
-transactions which may be recorded against them, used as tests. Those
-who do not see how in these involved affairs, bad deeds may be wrought
-out by men not correspondingly bad, will readily do so on considering
-all the conditions. In the first place, there is the familiar fact that
-the corporate conscience is inferior to the individual conscience—that
-a body of men will commit as a joint act, that which each one of them
-would shrink from, did he feel personally responsible. And it may
-be remarked that not only is the conduct _of_ a corporate body thus
-comparatively lax, but also the conduct _towards_ one. There is ever a
-more or less distinct perception, that a broad-backed company scarcely
-feels what would be ruinous to a private person; and this perception is
-in constant operation on all railway-boards and their _employés_, as
-well as on all contractors, landowners, and others concerned: leading
-them to show a want of principle foreign to their general behaviour.
-Again, the indirectness and remoteness of the evils produced, greatly
-weaken the restraints on wrongdoing. Men’s actions are proximately
-caused by mental representations of the results to be anticipated; and
-the decisions come to, largely depend on the vividness with which these
-results can be imagined. A consequence, good or bad, that is immediate
-and clearly apprehended, influences conduct far more potently than
-a consequence that has to be traced through a long chain of actions
-or influences, and, as eventually reached, is not a particular and
-{62} readily conceivable one, but a general and vaguely conceivable
-one. Hence, in railway affairs, a questionable share-transaction,
-an exorbitant charge, a proceeding which brings great individual
-advantage without apparently injuring any one, and which, even if
-traced to its ultimate results, can but very circuitously affect
-unknown persons living no one knows where, may be brought home to
-men who, could the results be embodied before them, would be shocked
-at the cruel injustices they had committed—men who in their private
-business, where the results _can_ be thus embodied, are sufficiently
-equitable. Further, it requires to be noted that most of these great
-delinquencies are ascribable not to the extreme dishonesty of any one
-man or group of men, but to the combined self-interest of many men
-and groups of men, whose minor delinquencies are cumulative. Much as
-a story which, passing from mouth to mouth, and receiving a slight
-exaggeration at each repetition, comes round to the original narrator
-in a form scarcely to be recognised; so, by a little improper influence
-on the part of landowners, a little favouritism on the part of members
-of Parliament, a little intriguing of lawyers, a little manœuvring
-by contractors and engineers, a little self-seeking on the part of
-directors, a little under-statement of estimates and over-statement
-of traffic, a little magnifying of the evils to be avoided and the
-benefits to be gained—it happens that shareholders are betrayed into
-ruinous undertakings by grossly untrue representations, without any
-one being guilty of more than a small portion of the fraud. Bearing
-in mind then, the comparative laxity of the corporate conscience; the
-diffusion and remoteness of the evils which malpractices produce;
-and the composite origin of these malpractices; it becomes possible
-to understand how, in railway affairs, gigantic dishonesties can be
-perpetrated by men who, on the average, are little if at all below the
-generality in moral character.
-
-With this preliminary mitigation we proceed to detail the {63} various
-illegitimate influences by which these seemingly insane extensions and
-this continual squandering of shareholders’ property are brought about.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Conspicuous among these is the self-interest of landowners. Once the
-greatest obstacles to railway enterprise, owners of estates have of
-late years been among its chief promoters. Since the Liverpool and
-Manchester line was first defeated by landed opposition, and succeeded
-with its second bill only by keeping out of sight of all mansions, and
-avoiding game preserves—since the time when the London and Birmingham
-Company, after seeing their project thrown out by a committee of peers
-who ignored the evidence, had to “conciliate” opponents by raising
-the estimate for land from £250,000 to £750,000—since the time when
-Parliamentary counsel justified resistance by the flimsiest excuses,
-even to reproaching engineers with having “trodden down the corn
-of widows” and “destroyed the strawberry-beds of gardeners”—since
-then, a marked change of policy has taken place. Nor was it in
-human nature that it should be otherwise. When it became known that
-railway-companies commonly paid for “land and compensation,” sums
-varying from £4000 to £8000 per mile; that men were indemnified
-for supposed injury to their property, by sums so inordinate that
-the greater part has been known to be returned by the heir as
-conscience-money; that in one case £120,000 was given for land said
-to be worth but £5000—when it was noised abroad that large bonuses
-in the shape of preference shares and the like, were granted to buy
-off opposition—when it came to be an established fact that estates
-are greatly enhanced in value by the proximity of railways; it is not
-surprising that country gentlemen should have become active friends of
-schemes to which they were once the bitterest enemies. On considering
-the many temptations, we shall see nothing wonderful in the fact that
-in 1845 they were zealous {64} provisional committee-men; nor in the
-fact that their influence as promoters enabled them to get large sums
-for their own acres. If we are told of squires soliciting interviews
-with the engineer of a projected railway; prompting him to take their
-side of the country; promising support if he did, and threatening
-opposition if he did not; dictating the course to be followed through
-their domains; and hinting that a good price would be expected; we are
-simply told of the special modes in which certain private interests
-show themselves. If we hear of an extensive landowner using his
-influence as chairman of a board of directors, to project a branch
-running for many miles through his own estate, and putting his company
-to the cost of a parliamentary contest to carry this line; we hear
-only of that which was likely to occur under such circumstances. If
-we find now before the public, a line proposed by a large capitalist,
-serving among other ends to effect desirable communications with his
-property, and the estimates for which line, though considered by the
-engineering world insufficient, are alleged by him to be ample; we have
-but a marked case of the distorted representations which under such
-conditions self-interest is sure to engender. If we discover of this or
-that scheme, that it was got up by the local nobility and gentry—that
-they employed to make the survey a third-rate engineer, who was ready
-in anticipation of future benefit to do this for his bare expenses—that
-principals and agent wearied the directors of an adjacent trunk-line
-to take up their project; threatened that if they did not their great
-rival would; alarmed them into concession; asked for a contribution
-to their expenses; and would have gained all these points but for
-shareholders’ resistance—we do but discover the organized tactics
-which, in course of time, naturally grow up under such stimuli. It
-is not that these facts are particularly remarkable. From the gross
-instance of the landowner who asked £8000 for that which he eventually
-accepted £80 for, down to the {65} every-day instances of influence
-used to get railway accommodation for the neighbourhood, the acts of
-the landed class are simply manifestations of the average character
-acting under special conditions. All that it now behoves us to notice,
-is, that we have here a large and powerful body whose interests are
-ever pressing on railway extension, irrespective of its intrinsic
-propriety.
-
-The great change in the attitude of the Legislature towards railways,
-from “the extreme of determined rejection or dilatory acquiescence,
-to the opposite extreme of unlimited concession,” was simultaneous
-with the change above described. It could not well fail to be so.
-Supplying, as the landowning community does, so large a portion of both
-Houses of Parliament, it necessarily follows that the play of private
-interests seen in the first, repeats itself in the last under modified
-forms, and complicated by other influences. Remembering the extent to
-which legislators were themselves implicated in the speculations of
-the mania, it is unlikely that they should since have been free from
-personal bias. A return proved, that in 1845 there were 157 members of
-Parliament whose names were on the registers of new companies for sums
-varying from £291,000 downwards. The supporters of new projects boasted
-of the numbers of votes they could command in the House. Members
-were personally canvassed, and peers were solicited. It was publicly
-complained in the upper chamber, that “it was nearly impossible to
-bring together a jury, some members of which were not interested in
-the railway they were about to assess.” Doubtless this state of things
-was in a great degree exceptional; and there has since been not only
-a diminution of the temptations, but a marked increase of equitable
-feeling. Still, it is not to be expected that private interests should
-cease to act. It is not to be expected that a landowner who, out of
-Parliament, exerts himself to get a railway for his district, should,
-when in Parliament, not employ the power his new position gives him to
-the same {66} end. It is not to be expected that the accumulation of
-such individual actions should leave the legislative policy unchanged.
-Hence the fact, that the influence once used to throw out railway bills
-is now used to carry them. Hence the fact, that railway committees no
-longer require a good traffic case to be made out in justification
-for the powers asked. Hence the fact, that railway directors having
-seats in the House of Commons, are induced to pledge their companies
-to carry out extensions. We could name a member of Parliament who,
-having bought an estate fitly situated, offered to an engineer, also
-in Parliament, the making of a railway running through it; and having
-obtained the Act (in doing which the influence of himself and his
-friend was of course useful), pitted three railway companies against
-each other for the purchase of it. We could name another member of
-Parliament who, having projected and obtained powers for an extension
-through his property, induced the directors of the main line, with
-whom he had great influence, to subscribe half the capital for his
-extension, to work it for fifty per cent. of the gross receipts, and to
-give up all traffic brought by it on to the main line until he received
-four per cent. on his capital; which was tantamount to a four per
-cent. guarantee. But it is not only, nor indeed mainly, from directly
-personal motives that legislators have of late years unduly fostered
-railway enterprises. Indirectly personal motives of various kinds have
-been largely operative. The wish to satisfy constituents has been one.
-Inhabitants of an unaccommodated district, are naturally urgent with
-their representatives to help them to a line. Not unfrequently such
-representatives are conscious that their next elections may perhaps
-turn upon their successful response to this appeal. Even when there is
-no popular pressure there is the pressure of their leading political
-supporters—of large landholders whom it will not do to neglect; of
-local lawyers, important as electioneering friends, to whom a railway
-always brings {67} business. Thus, without having immediately private
-ends, members of Parliament are often almost coerced into urging
-forward schemes which, from a national point of view, or from a
-shareholder’s point of view, are very unwise ones. Then there come the
-still less direct stimuli. Where neither personal nor political ends
-are to be gained, there are still the interests of a relative to be
-subserved; or, if not those of a relative, still those of a friend.
-And where there is no decided impulse to the contrary, these motives,
-of course, have their weight. Moreover, it requires in fairness to be
-said, that possessed as most members of Parliament are, with the belief
-that all railway-making is nationally beneficial, there exist in their
-minds few or no reasons for resisting the influences brought to bear on
-them. True, shareholders may be injured; but that is their own affair.
-The public will be better served; constituents will be satisfied;
-friends will be pleased; perhaps private ends gained: and under some
-or all of these incentives, affirmative votes are readily given.
-Thus, from the Legislature also, there has of late years proceeded a
-factitious stimulus to railway extensions.
-
-From Parliament to Parliamentary agents, and the general body of
-lawyers concerned in railway enterprise, is a ready transition. With
-these, the getting up and carrying of new lines and branches is a
-matter of business. Whoever traces the process of obtaining a railway
-Act, or considers the number of legal transactions involved in the
-execution of railway works, or notes the large sums that figure in
-half-yearly reports under the head of “law charges;” will at once
-see how strong are the temptations which a new project holds out to
-solicitors, conveyancers, and counsel. It has been shown that in past
-years, parliamentary expenses have varied from £650 to £3000 per
-mile; of which a large proportion has gone into the pockets of the
-profession. In one contest, £57,000 was spent among six counsel and
-twenty solicitors. At a late {68} meeting of one of our companies
-it was pointed out, that the sum expended in legal and parliamentary
-expenses during nine years, had reached £480,000; or had averaged
-£53,500 a-year. With these and scores of like facts before them, it
-would be strange did not so acute a body of men as lawyers use vigorous
-efforts and sagacious devices to promote fresh enterprises. Indeed, if
-we look back at the proceedings of 1845, we shall suspect, not only
-that lawyers are still the active promoters of fresh enterprises, but
-often the originators of them. Many have heard how in those excited
-times the projects daily announced were not uncommonly set afloat by
-local solicitors—how these looked over maps to see where plausible
-lines could be sketched out—how they canvassed the local gentry to
-obtain provisional committeemen—how they agreed with engineers to make
-trial surveys—how, under the wild hopes of the day, they found little
-difficulty in forming companies—and how most of them managed to get as
-far as the Committee on Standing Orders, if no farther. Remembering
-all this, and remembering that those who were successful are not
-likely to have forgotten their cunning, but rather to have yearly
-exercised and increased it, we may expect to find railway lawyers
-among the most influential of the many parties conspiring to urge
-railway proprietaries into disastrous undertakings; and we shall not be
-deceived. To a great extent they are in league with engineers. From the
-proposal to the completion of a new line, the lawyer and the engineer
-work together; and their interests are throughout identical. While the
-one makes the survey, the other prepares the book of reference. The
-parish plans which the one gets ready, the other deposits. The notices
-to owners and occupiers which the one fills in, the other serves upon
-those concerned. And there are frequent consultations between them
-as to the dealing with local opposition and the obtainment of local
-support. In the getting up of {69} their case for Parliament, they
-necessarily act in concert. While, before committee, the one gets
-his ten guineas per day for attending to give evidence, the other
-makes profits on all the complicated transactions which carrying a
-bill involves. During the execution of the works they are in constant
-correspondence; and alike profit by any expansion of the undertaking.
-Thus there naturally arises in each, the perception that in aiding the
-other he is aiding himself; and gradually as, in course of years, the
-proceedings come to be often repeated, and a perfect familiarity with
-railway politics gained, there grows up a well-organized system of
-co-operation between them—a system rendered the more efficient by the
-wealth and influence which each has year by year accumulated.
-
-Among the manœuvres employed by railway solicitors thus established
-and thus helped, not the least remarkable is that of getting their own
-nominees elected as directors. It is a fact, which we state on good
-authority, that there are puppet-directors who vote for this or that at
-the instigation of the company’s lawyer. The obtainment of such tools
-is not difficult. Vacancies are about to occur in the directorate.
-Almost always there are men over whom a solicitor, conducting the
-extensive law-business of a railway, has considerable power: not only
-connexions and friends, but persons to whom in his legal capacity he
-can do great benefit or great injury. He selects the most suitable of
-these; giving the preference, if other things are equal, to one living
-in the country near the line. On opening the matter to him, he points
-out the sundry advantages attendant on a director’s position—the free
-pass and the many facilities it gives; the annual £100 or so which the
-office brings; the honour and influence accruing; the opportunities for
-profitable investment that are likely to occur; and so forth. Should
-ignorance of railway affairs be raised as an objection, the tempter, in
-whose eyes this ignorance is a chief recommendation, {70} replies that
-he shall always be at hand to guide his votes. Should non-possession of
-a due amount of the company’s stock be pleaded, the tempter meets the
-difficulty by offering himself to furnish the needful qualification.
-Thus incited and flattered, and perhaps conscious that it would be
-dangerous to refuse, the intended puppet allows himself to be put in
-nomination; and as it is the habit of half-yearly meetings, unless
-under great indignation, to elect any one proposed to them by those in
-authority, the nomination is successful. On subsequent occasions this
-proceeding can, of course, be repeated; and thus the company’s legal
-agent and those leagued with him, may command sufficient votes to turn
-the scale in their own favour.
-
-Then, to the personal interest and power of the head solicitor, have
-to be added those of the local solicitors, with whom he is in daily
-intercourse. They, too, profit by new undertakings; they, therefore,
-are urgent in pressing them forwards. Acting in co-operation with
-their chief, they form a dispersed staff of great influence. They are
-active canvassers; they stimulate and concentrate the feeling of their
-districts; they encourage rivalry with other lines; they alarm local
-shareholders with rumours of threatened competition. When the question
-of extension or non-extension comes to a division, they collect
-proxies for the extension party. They bring pressure to bear on their
-shareholding clients and relatives. Nay, so deep an interest do they
-feel in the decision, as sometimes to create votes with the view of
-influencing it. We have before us the case of a local solicitor, who,
-before the special meeting called to adopt or reject a contemplated
-branch, transferred portions of his own shares into the names of sundry
-members of his family, and so multiplied his seventeen votes into
-forty-one; all of which he recorded in favour of the new scheme.
-
-The morality of railway engineers is not much above {71} that of
-railway lawyers. The gossip of Great George Street is fertile in
-discreditable revelations. It tells how So-and-so, like others before
-him, testified to estimates which he well knew were insufficient. It
-makes jocose allusion to this man as being employed to do his senior’s
-“dirty work”—his hard-swearing; and narrates of the other that, when
-giving evidence before committee, he was told by counsel that he was
-not to be believed even on his knees. It explains how cheaply the
-projector of a certain line executed the parliamentary survey, by
-employing on it part of the staff in the pay of another company to
-which he was engineer. Now it alludes to the suspicion attaching to a
-certain member of the fraternity from his having let a permanent-way
-contract, for a term of years, at an extravagant sum per mile. Again it
-rumours the great profits which some of the leaders of the profession
-made in 1845, by charging for the use of their names at so much the
-prospectus: even up to a thousand guineas. And then, it enlarges on the
-important advantages possessed by engineers who have seats in the House
-of Commons.
-
-Thus lax as is the ethical code of engineers, and greatly as they are
-interested in railway enterprise, it is to be expected that they should
-be active and not very scrupulous promoters of it. To illustrate the
-vigour and skill with which they further new undertakings, a few facts
-may be cited. Not far from London, and lying between two lines of
-railway, is an estate lately purchased by one of our engineers. He has
-since obtained Acts for branches to both of the adjacent lines. One
-of these branches he has leased to the company whose line it joins;
-and he has tried to do the like with the other, but as yet without
-success. Even as it is, however, he is considered to have doubled the
-value of his property. Again, an engineer of celebrity once nearly
-succeeded in smuggling through Parliament, in the bill for a proposed
-railway, a clause extending the limits of deviation, to several miles
-on each side of the line, {72} throughout a certain district—the
-usual limits being but five chains on each side; and the attempt is
-accounted for by the fact, that this engineer possessed mines in this
-district. To press forward extensions by the companies with which they
-are connected, they occasionally go to great lengths. Not long since,
-at a half-yearly meeting, certain projects which the proprietary had
-already once rejected, were again brought forward by two engineers
-who attended in their capacity of shareholders. Though known to be
-personally interested, one of them moved and the other seconded, that
-some new proposals from the promoters of these schemes be considered
-without delay by the directors. The motion was carried; the directors
-approved the proposals; and again, the proprietors negatived them. A
-third time a like effort was made; a third time a conflict arose; and
-within a few days of the special meeting at which the division was to
-take place, one of these engineers circulated among the shareholders a
-pamphlet denying the allegations of the dissentient party and making
-counter-statements which it was then too late to meet. Nay, he did
-more: he employed agents to canvass the shareholders for proxies in
-support of the new undertaking; and was obliged to confess as much when
-charged with it at the meeting.
-
-Turn we now to contractors. Railway-enterprise has given to this class
-of men a gigantic development; not only in respect of numbers, but
-in respect of the vast wealth to which some of them have acquired.
-Originally, half a dozen miles of earthwork, fencing, and bridges, was
-as much as any single contractor undertook. Of late years, however it
-has become common for one man to engage to construct an entire railway;
-and deliver it to the company in a fit condition for opening. Great
-capital is required for this. Great profits are made by it. And the
-fortunes accumulated in course of time have been such, that sundry
-contractors are named as being each able to make a railway at his own
-{73} cost. But they are as insatiable as millionaires in general;
-and so long as they continue in business at all, are, in some sort,
-forced to provide new undertakings to keep their plant employed. As
-may be imagined, enormous stocks of working appliances are needed:
-many hundreds of earth-waggons and of horses; many miles of temporary
-rails and sleepers; some dozen locomotive engines, and several fixed
-ones; innumerable tools; besides vast stores of timber, bricks, stone,
-rails, and other constituents of permanent works, that have been bought
-on speculation. To keep the capital thus invested, and also a large
-staff of _employés_, standing idle, entails loss, partly negative,
-partly positive. The great contractor, therefore, is both under a
-strong stimulus to get fresh work, and enabled by his wealth to do
-this. Hence the not unfrequent inversion of the old arrangement under
-which companies and engineers employed contractors, into an arrangement
-under which contractors employ engineers and form companies. Many
-recent undertakings have been thus set on foot. The most gigantic
-project which private enterprise has yet dared, originated with a
-distinguished contracting firm. In some cases this mode of procedure
-may, perhaps, be advantageous; but in far more numerous cases its
-results are disastrous. Interested in promoting railway extensions,
-even in a greater degree than engineers and lawyers, contractors
-habitually co-operate with these, either as agents or as coadjutors.
-Lines are fostered into being, which it is known from the beginning,
-will not pay. Of late, it has become common for landowners, merchants,
-and others personally interested, who, under the belief that their
-indirect gains will compensate for their meagre dividends, have
-themselves raised part of the capital for a local railway, but cannot
-raise the rest—it has become common for such to make an agreement with
-a wealthy contractor to construct the line, taking in part payment
-a portion of the shares, amounting to perhaps a third of the whole,
-and to charge for his work according to {74} a schedule of prices to
-be thereafter settled between himself and the engineer. By this last
-clause the contractor renders himself secure. It would never answer
-his purpose to take part payment in shares likely to return some £2
-per cent., unless he compensated himself by unusually high profits;
-and this subsequent settlement of prices with one whose interests,
-like his own, are wrapped up in the prosecution of the undertaking,
-ensures him high profits. Meanwhile, it is noised abroad that all the
-capital has been subscribed and the line contracted for; these facts
-unduly raise the public estimate of the scheme; the shares are quoted
-at much above their true worth; unwary persons buy; the contractor
-from time to time parts with his moiety at fair prices; and the new
-shareholders ultimately find themselves part owners of a railway which,
-unprofitable as it originally promised to be, had been made yet more
-unprofitable by expensiveness of construction. Nor are these the only
-cases in which contractors gain after this fashion. They do the like
-with lines of their own projecting. To obtain Acts for these, they
-sign the subscription-contracts for large amounts; knowing that in the
-way above described, they can always make it answer to do this. So
-general had the practice latterly become, as to attract the attention
-of committees. As was remarked by a personage noted for his complicity
-in these transactions—“Committees are getting too knowing; they won’t
-stand that dodge now.” Nevertheless, the thing is still done under a
-disguised form. Though contractors no longer enter their own names on
-subscription lists for thousands of shares; yet they effect the same
-end by making nominal holders of their foremen and others: themselves
-being the real ones.
-
-Of directorial misdoings some samples have already been given; and more
-might be added. Besides those arising from directly personal aims,
-there are sundry others. One of these is the increasing community
-between railway {75} boards and the House of Commons. There are
-eighty-one directors sitting in Parliament; and though some of these
-take little part in the affairs of their respective railways, many of
-them are the most active members of the boards to which they belong.
-We have but to look back a few years, and mark the unanimity with
-which companies adopted the policy of getting themselves represented
-in the Legislature, to see that the furtherance of their respective
-interests—especially in cases of competition—was the incentive. How
-well this policy is understood by the initiated, may be judged from
-the fact, that gentlemen are now in some cases elected on boards,
-simply because they are members of Parliament. Of course this implies
-that railway legislation is affected by a complicated play of private
-influences; and that these influences generally work towards the
-facilitation of new enterprises, is obvious. It naturally happens that
-directors having seats in the House of Commons can more or less smooth
-the way of their annual batch of new bills through committees. It
-naturally happens that those whose companies are not opposed, exchange
-good offices. Not only do they aid the passing of schemes in which they
-are interested, but they are solicited to undertake further schemes by
-those around them. It is a common-sense conclusion that representatives
-of small towns and country districts needing railway accommodation, who
-are daily thrown in contact with the chairman of a company capable of
-giving this accommodation, do not neglect the opportunity of furthering
-their ends. It is a common-sense conclusion that by hospitalities,
-by favours, by flattery, by the many means used to bias men, they
-seek to obtain his assistance. And it is an equally common-sense
-conclusion that in many cases they succeed—that by some complication of
-persuasions and temptations they swerve him from his calmer judgment;
-and so introduce into the company he represents, influences at variance
-with its welfare.
-
-Under some motives however—whether those of direct {76} self-interest,
-of private favour, or of antagonistic feeling, matters not here—it is
-certain that directors are constantly committing their constituents
-to unwise enterprises; and that they frequently employ unjustifiable
-means for either eluding or overcoming their opposition. Shareholders
-occasionally find that their directors have given to Parliament,
-pledges of extension much exceeding any they were authorised to
-give; and they are then persuaded that they are bound to endorse
-the promises made for them by their agents. In some cases, among
-the misleading statements laid before shareholders to obtain their
-consent to a new project, will be found an abstract of the earnings
-of a previously-executed branch to which the proposed one bears some
-analogy. These earnings are shown (not always without “cooking”)
-to be tolerably good and improving; and it is argued that the new
-project, having like prospects, offers a fair investment. Meanwhile,
-it is not stated that the capital for this previously-executed branch
-was raised on debentures or by guaranteed shares at a higher rate of
-interest than the dividend pays; it is not stated that as the capital
-for this further undertaking will be raised on like terms, the annual
-interest on debt will swallow up more than the annual revenue; and
-thus unsuspecting shareholders—some unacquainted with the company’s
-antecedents, some unable to understand its complicated accounts—give
-their proxies, or raise their hands, for new works which will tell
-with disastrous effect on their future dividends. In pursuit of their
-ends, directors will from time to time go directly in the teeth of
-established regulations. Where it has been made a rule that proxies
-shall be issued only by order of a meeting of the proprietors, they
-will yet issue them without any such order, when by so doing they can
-steal a march on dissentients. If it suits their purpose, they will
-occasionally bring forward most important measures without due notice.
-In stating the amount of the company’s stock which has {77} voted with
-them on a division, they have been known to include thousands of shares
-on which a small sum only was paid up, counting them as though fully
-paid up.
-
-To complete the sketch, something must be said on the management of
-board meetings and meetings of shareholders. For the first—their
-decisions are affected by various manœuvres. Of course, on fit
-occasions, there is a whipping-up of those favourable to any project
-which it is desired to carry. Were this all, there would be little to
-complain of; but something more than this is done. There are boards
-in which it is the practice to defeat opposition by stratagem. The
-extension party having summoned their forces for the occasion, and
-having entered on the minutes of business a notice worded with the
-requisite vagueness, shape their proceedings according to the character
-of the meeting. Should their antagonists muster more strongly than
-was expected, this vaguely-worded notice serves simply to introduce
-some general statement or further information concerning the project
-named in it; and the matter is passed over as though nothing more
-had been meant. On the contrary, should the proportion of the two
-sides be more favourable, the notice becomes the basis of a definite
-motion committing the board to some important act. If due precautions
-have been taken, the motion is passed; and once passed, those who,
-if present, would have resisted it, have no remedy; for in railway
-government there is no “second reading,” much less a third. So
-determined and so unscrupulous are the efforts sometimes made by the
-stronger party to overcome and silence their antagonists, that when
-a contested measure, carried by them at the board, has to go before
-a general meeting for confirmation, they have been known to pass a
-resolution that their dissentient colleagues shall not address the
-proprietary!
-
-That, at half-yearly and special meetings, shareholders should be so
-readily misled by boards, even after repeated {78} experience of their
-untrustworthiness, seems at first sight difficult to understand. The
-mystery disappears, however, on inquiry. Very frequently, contested
-measures are carried against the sense of the meetings before which
-they are laid, by means of the proxies previously collected by the
-directors. These proxies are obtained from proprietors scattered
-everywhere throughout the kingdom, who are mostly weak enough to
-sign the first document sent to them. Then, of those present when
-the question is brought to an issue, not many dare attempt a speech.
-Of those who dare, but few are clear-headed enough to see the full
-bearings of the measure they are about to vote upon; and such as
-can see them are often prevented by nervousness from doing justice
-to the views they hold. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that
-proprietors displaying antagonism to the board are usually regarded
-by their brother proprietors with more or less reprobation. Unless
-the misconduct of the governing body has been very glaring and very
-recent, there ever arises in the mass a prejudice against all playing
-the part of an opposition. They are condemned as noisy, and factious,
-and obstructive; and often only by determined courage avoid being put
-down. Besides these negative reasons for the general inefficiency of
-shareholders’ resistance, there are sundry positive ones. As writes to
-us a Member of Parliament who has been an extensive holder of stock in
-many companies from the first days of railway enterprise:—“My large
-and long acquaintance with Railway Companies’ affairs, enables me
-to say, that a large majority of shareholders trust wholly to their
-directors, having little or no information, nor caring to have any
-opinion of their own. . . . . Some others, better informed but timid,
-are afraid, by opposing the directors, of causing a depreciation
-of the value of their stock in the market, and are more alarmed at
-the prospect of this temporary depreciation than at the permanent
-loss entailed on the company by the useless, and therefore {79}
-unprofitable, outlay of additional capital. . . . . Others again,
-believing that the impending permanent evil is inevitable, resolve on
-the spot to sell out immediately, and to keep up the prices of their
-shares, also give their support to the directors.” Thus, from lack of
-organization and efficiency among those who express their opposition,
-and from the timidity and double-facedness of those who do not, it
-happens that extremely unwise projects are carried by large majorities.
-Nor is this all. The tactics of the aggressive party are commonly as
-skilful as those of their antagonists are bungling. The chairman, who
-is generally the chief promoter of the contested scheme, has it in his
-power to favour those who take his own side, and to throw difficulties
-in the way of opponents; and this he not unfrequently does to a great
-extent—refusing to hear, putting down on some plea of breach of order,
-browbeating, even using threats.[5] It generally turns out too, that,
-whether intentionally or not, some of the most important motions are
-postponed until nearly the close of the meeting, when the greater part
-of the shareholders are gone. Large money-votes, extensive powers,
-unlimited permits to directors to take, in certain matters, “such
-steps as in their judgment they may deem most expedient,”—these, and
-the like, are hurried over during the last half-hour, when the tired
-and impatient remnant will no longer listen to objectors; and when
-those who have personal ends to serve by outstaying the rest, carry
-everything their own way. Indeed, in some cases, the arrangements
-are such as almost ensure the meeting becoming a pro-extension one
-towards the end. {80} This result is brought about thus:—A certain
-portion of the general body of proprietors are also proprietors of
-some subordinate work—some branch line, or canal, or steamboats, which
-the Company has purchased or leased; and as holders of guaranteed
-stock, ready to take up further such stock if they can get it, these
-lean towards projects that are to be executed on the preference-share
-system. They hold their meeting for the declaration of dividend, &c.,
-as soon as the meeting of the Company at large has been dissolved; and
-in the same room. Hence it happens that being kept together by the
-prospect of subsequent business, they gradually, towards the close of
-the general meeting, come to form the majority of those present; and
-the few ordinary shareholders who have been patient enough to stay, are
-outvoted by those having interests distinct from their own and quite at
-variance with the welfare of the Company.
-
- [5] We may remark in passing, that the practice of making the chairman
- of the board also chairman of the half-yearly meetings, is a very
- injudicious one. The directors are the servants of the proprietary; and
- meet them from time to time to render an account of their stewardship.
- That the chief of these servants, whose proceedings are about to
- be examined, should himself act as chief of the jury is absurd.
- Obviously, the business of each meeting should be conducted by some one
- independently chosen for the purpose; as the Speaker is chosen by the
- House of Commons.
-
-And here this allusion to the preference-share system, introduces
-us to a fact which may fitly close this detail of private interests
-and questionable practices—a fact serving at once to illustrate the
-subtlety and concert of railway officialism, and the power it can
-exert. That this fact may be fully appreciated, it must be premised,
-that though preference-shares do not usually carry votes, they
-are sometimes specially endowed with them; and further, that they
-occasionally remain unpaid up until the expiration of a time after
-which no further calls can be legally made. In the case in question,
-a large number of £50 preference-shares had thus long stood with but
-£5 paid. Promoters of extensions, &c., had here a fine opportunity of
-getting great power in the Company at small cost; and, as we shall see,
-they duly availed themselves of it. Already had their party twice tried
-to thrust the proprietors into a new undertaking of great magnitude.
-Twice had they entailed on them an expensive and harassing contest. A
-third time, notwithstanding a professed relinquishment of it, they {81}
-brought forward substantially the same scheme, and were defeated only
-by a small majority. The following extracts from the division lists we
-take from the statement of one of the scrutineers.
-
- +──────────────────────────+──────────+──────────────────────+────────+────────+──────────+
- │                          │  50_l._  │                      │Recorded│ Total  │ Number   │
- │                          │Preference│ Additional Stock or  │Stock at│ actual │of Votes  │
- │                          │  Shares  │        Shares        │the Poll│Capital │ scored   │
- │                          │with 5_l._│                      │as held.│paid up.│ for the  │
- │                          │ paid up. │                      │        │        │Extension.│
- +──────────────────────────+──────────+──────────────────────+────────+────────+──────────+
- │                          │          │                      │    £   │   £    │          │
- │                          │          +──────────────────────+────────+────────+──────────│
- │                          │          │ 7,500_l._ stock, and │        │        │          │
- │The Company’s solicitor   │      500 │  100 50_l._ shares,  │        │        │          │
- │                          │          │  with 42_l._ 10_s._  │        │        │          │
- │                          │          │  paid up.            │ 75,650 │ 18,140 │      188 │
- │                          │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │Ditto in joint account    │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  with another            │      778 │        None.         │        │        │          │
- │                          │          +──────────────────────+────────+────────+──────────│
- │The solicitor’s partner   │       60 │        None.         │  3,000 │    300 │       20 │
- │The Company’s engineer    │      150 │        None.         │  7,500 │    750 │       33 │
- │The engineer’s partner    │    1,354 │   4,266_l._ stock.   │ 71,966 │ 11,036 │      161 │
- │One of the Company’s      │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  parliamentary counsel   │      200 │   1,000_l._ stock.   │ 11,000 │  2,000 │       40 │
- │Another ditto, ditto      │      125 │     200_l._ stock.   │  6,450 │    825 │       30 │
- │Local solicitor for       │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  the proposed extension  │        7 │        None.         │    350 │     35 │        7 │
- │The Company’s contractor  │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  for permanent-way       │      347 │      52,833_l._      │ 70,183 │ 54,568 │      158 │
- │The Company’s conveyancer │    1,003 │     333_l._ stock.   │ 50,483 │  5,348 │      118 │
- │The Company’s furniture   │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  printer                 │       35 │  10,000_l._ stock.   │ 11,750 │ 10,175 │       41 │
- │The Company’s surveyor    │      360 │   1,250_l._ stock.   │ 19,250 │  3,050 │       56 │
- │The Company’s architect   │      217 │14,916_l._ stock; 119 │ 32,230 │ 20,416 │       82 │
- │                          │          │  50_l._ shares, with │        │        │          │
- │                          │          │  42_l._ 10_s._ paid  │        │        │          │
- │                          │          │  up; and 13 40_l._   │        │        │          │
- │                          │          │  shares, with 34_l._ │        │        │          │
- │                          │          │  paid up.            │        │        │          │
- │One of the Company’s      │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  carriers.               │       17 │     833_l._ stock.   │  1,683 │    918 │       14 │
- │The Company’s bankers:—   │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │  One Partner             │  .. ..   │        ..    ..      │ 33,666 │ 32,366 │       90 │
- │  Another partner         │  .. ..   │        ..    ..      │  2,500 │  2,500 │       18 │
- │  Ditto in joint account  │          │                      │        │        │          │
- │    with another          │  .. ..   │        ..    ..      │  1,000 │    850 │       12 │
- +──────────────────────────+──────────+──────────────────────+────────+────────+──────────+
-
-To this list, some seven or eight of the Company’s tradesmen, similarly
-armed, might be added; raising the number of the almost factitious
-shares held by functionaries to about 5200, and increasing the votes
-commanded by them, from its present total of 1068 to upwards of
-1100. If now we separate the £380,000, which these gentlemen bring
-to bear against their brother shareholders, into real and nominal;
-we find that while not quite £120,000 of it is _bonâ fide_ property
-invested, the remaining £260,000 is nine {82} parts shadow and one
-part substance. And thus it results, that by virtue of certain stock
-actually representing but £26,000, these lawyers, engineers, counsel,
-conveyancers, contractors, bankers, and others interested in the
-promotion of new schemes, outweigh more than a quarter of a million of
-the real capital held by shareholders whom these schemes will injure!
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Need we any longer wonder, then, at the persistence of Railway
-Companies in seemingly reckless competition and ruinous extensions?
-Is not this obstinate continuance of a policy that has year after
-year proved disastrous, sufficiently explicable on contemplating the
-many illegitimate influences at work? Is it not manifest that the
-small organized party always out-manœuvres the large unorganized one?
-Consider their respective characters and circumstances. Here are the
-shareholders diffused throughout the kingdom, in towns and country
-houses; knowing nothing of each other, and too remote to co-operate
-were they acquainted. Very few of them see a railway journal; and
-scarcely any know much of railway politics. Necessarily a fluctuating
-body, only a small number are familiar with the Company’s history—its
-acts, engagements, policy, management. A great proportion are
-incompetent to judge of the matters that come before them, and lack
-decision to act out such judgments as they may form—executors who do
-not like to take steps involving much responsibility; trustees fearful
-of interfering with the property under their care, lest possible loss
-should entail a lawsuit; widows who have never in their lives acted for
-themselves in any affair of moment; maiden ladies, alike nervous and
-innocent of all business knowledge; clergymen whose daily discipline
-has been little calculated to make them acute men of the world;
-retired tradesmen whose retail transactions have given them small
-ability for grasping large considerations; servants possessed of {83}
-accumulated savings and cramped notions; with sundry others of like
-helpless characters—all of them rendered more or less conservative by
-ignorance or timidity, and proportionately inclined to support those in
-authority. To these should be added the temporary shareholders, who,
-having bought stock on speculation, and knowing that a revolution in
-the Company is likely to depress prices for a time, have an interest in
-supporting the board irrespective of the goodness of its policy. Turn
-now to those whose efforts are directed to railway expansion. Consider
-the constant pressure of local populations—of small towns, of rural
-districts, of landowners: all of them eager for branch accommodation;
-all of them with great and definite advantages in view; few of them
-conscious of the loss those advantages may entail on others. Remember
-the influence of legislators, prompted, some by their constituents,
-some by personal aims, and encouraged by the belief that additional
-railway facilities are in every case nationally beneficial; and then
-infer the extent to which as stated to Mr. Cardwell’s committee,
-Parliament has “excited and urged forward” Companies into rivalry.
-Note the temptations under which lawyers are placed—the vast profits
-accruing to them from every railway contest, whether ending in success
-or failure; and then imagine the range and subtlety of their extension
-manœuvring. Conceive the urgency of engineers; to the richer of whom
-more railway-making means more wealth; to the mass of whom more
-railway-making means daily bread. Estimate the capitalist-power of
-contractors; whose unemployed plant brings heavy loss; whose plant when
-employed brings great gain. Then recollect that to lawyers, engineers,
-and contractors the getting up and executing of new undertakings is a
-business—a business to which every energy is directed; in which many
-years of practice have given great skill; and to the facilitation of
-which, all means tolerated by men of the world are thought justifiable.
-{84} Finally, consider that the classes interested in carrying out
-new schemes, are in constant communication, and have every facility
-for combined action. A great part of them live in London, and most
-of these have offices at Westminster—in Great George Street, in
-Parliament Street, clustering round the Legislature. Not only are they
-thus concentrated—not only are they throughout the year in frequent
-business intercourse; but during the session they are daily together,
-in Palace-Yard Hotels, in the lobbies, in the committee-rooms, in the
-House of Commons itself. Is it any wonder then, that the wide-spread,
-ill-informed unorganized body of shareholders, standing severally
-alone, and each pre-occupied with his private affairs, should be
-continually out-generalled by the comparatively small but active,
-skilful, combined body opposed to them, whose very occupation is at
-stake in gaining the victory?
-
-“But how about the directors?” it will perhaps be asked. “How can they
-be parties to these obviously unwise undertakings? They are themselves
-shareholders; they gain by whatever benefits the proprietary at large;
-they lose by whatever injures it. And if without their consent, or
-rather their agency, no new scheme can be adopted by the Company, the
-classes interested in fostering railway enterprise are powerless to do
-harm.”
-
-This belief in the identity of directorial and proprietary interests,
-is the fatal error commonly made by shareholders. It is this which,
-in spite of bitter experiences, leads them to be so careless and so
-trustful. “Their profit is our profit; their loss is our loss; they
-know more than we do; therefore let us leave the matter to them.”
-Such is the argument which more or less definitely passes through the
-shareholding mind—an argument of which the premises are delusive, and
-the inference disastrous. Let us consider it in detail.
-
-Not to dwell on the disclosures that have in years past {85} been made
-respecting the share-trafficking of directors, and the large profits
-realized by it—disclosures which alone suffice to disprove the assumed
-identity between the interests of board and proprietary—and taking for
-granted that little, if any, of this now takes place; let us go on
-to notice the still-prevailing influences which render this apparent
-community of aims illusive. The immediate interests which directors
-have in the prosperity of the Company, are often much less than is
-supposed. Occasionally they possess only the bare qualification of
-£1000 worth of stock. In some instances even this is partly nominal.
-Admitting, however, as we do frankly, that in the great majority of
-cases the full qualification, and much more than the qualification, is
-held; yet it must be borne in mind that the indirect advantages which
-a wealthy member of a board may gain from the prosecution of a new
-undertaking, will often far outweigh the direct injury it will inflict
-on him by lowering the value of his shares. A board usually consists,
-to a considerable extent, of gentlemen residing at different points
-throughout the tract of country traversed by the railway they control:
-some of them landowners; some merchants or manufacturers; some owners
-of mines or shipping. Almost always some or all of them are advantaged
-by a new branch or feeder. Those in close proximity to it, gain either
-by enhanced value of their lands, or by increased facilities of transit
-for their commodities. Those at more remote parts of the main line,
-though less directly interested, are still frequently interested in
-some degree; for every extension opens up new markets either for
-produce or raw materials; and if it is one effecting a junction with
-some other system of railways, the greater mercantile conveniences
-afforded to directors thus circumstanced, become important. Obviously,
-therefore, the indirect profits accruing to such from one of these
-extensions, may more than counterbalance the direct loss upon their
-railway investments; {86} and though there are, doubtless, men too
-honourable to let such considerations sway them, yet the generality can
-scarcely fail to be affected by temptations so strong. Then we have to
-remember the influences brought to bear upon directors having seats in
-Parliament. Already these have been noticed; and we recur to them only
-for the purpose of pointing out that the immediate evil of an increased
-discount on his £1000 worth of stock, may be to a director of much less
-consequence than the favours, patronage, connexions, which his aid in
-carrying a new scheme will bring him. So that here too the supposed
-identity of interests between directors and shareholders does not hold.
-
-Moreover, this disunion of interests is increased by the system of
-preference-stock. Were there no other cause in action, the raising
-of capital for supplementary undertakings, by issuing shares bearing
-a guaranteed interest of 5, 6, and 7 per cent., would destroy that
-community of motives supposed to exist between a railway proprietary
-and its executive. Little as the fact is recognized, it is yet readily
-demonstrable that by raising one of these mortgages, a Company is
-forthwith divided into two classes; the one consisting of the richer
-shareholders, inclusive of the directors, and the other of the poorer
-shareholders; of which classes the richer one can protect itself from
-the losses which the poorer one has to bear—nay, can even profit by the
-losses of the poorer one. This assertion, startling as it will be to
-many, we will proceed to prove.
-
-When the capital required for a branch or extension is raised by
-means of guaranteed shares, it is the custom to give each proprietor
-the option of taking up a number of such shares proportionate to the
-number of his original shares. By availing himself of this offer, he
-partially protects himself against any loss which the new undertaking
-may entail. Should this, not fulfilling the promises of its advocates,
-diminish in some degree the general {87} dividend; yet, a high
-dividend on the due proportion of preference-stock, may nearly or
-quite compensate for this. Hence, it becomes the policy of all who
-can do so, to take up as many guaranteed shares as they can get.
-But what happens when the circular announcing this apportionment of
-guaranteed shares is sent round? Those who possess much stock, being
-generally capitalists, accept as many as are allotted to them. On the
-other hand, the smaller holders, constituting as they do the bulk of
-the Company, having no available funds with which to pay the calls
-on new shares, are obliged to part with their letters of allotment.
-What results? When this additional line has been opened, and it turns
-out, as usual, that its revenue is insufficient to meet the guaranteed
-dividend on its shares—when the general income of the Company is
-laid under contribution to make up this guaranteed dividend—when as
-a consequence, the dividend on the original stock is diminished;
-then the poorer shareholders who possess original stock only, find
-themselves losers; while the richer ones, possessing guaranteed shares
-in addition, find that their gain on preference-dividends nearly or
-quite counterbalances their loss on general dividends. Indeed, as above
-hinted, the case is even worse. For as the large share-proprietor who
-has obtained his proportion of guaranteed stock, is not obliged to
-retain his original stock—as, if he doubts the paying character of the
-new undertaking, he can always sell such of his shares as will suffer
-from it; it is obvious that he may, if he pleases, become the possessor
-of preference-shares only; and may so obtain a handsome return for his
-money at the expense of the Company at large and the small shareholders
-in particular. How far this policy is pursued we do not pretend to
-say; though the table given some pages back suggests extensive pursuit
-of it. All which it here concerns us to notice, is, that directors,
-being mostly men of large means, and being therefore able to avail
-themselves of this guaranteed {88} stock, are liable to be swayed
-by motives different from those of the general proprietary. And that
-they often are so swayed there cannot be a doubt. Without assuming
-that any of them deliberately intend to benefit at the cost of their
-co-proprietors; and believing, as we do, that few of them duly perceive
-that the protection they will have, is a protection not available by
-the shareholders at large; we think it is a rational deduction from
-common experience, that this prospect of compensation often turns the
-scale in the minds of those who are hesitating, and diminishes the
-opposition of those who disapprove.
-
-Thus, the belief which leads most railway shareholders to place
-implicit faith in their directors, is an erroneous one. It is not true
-that there is an identity of interest between the proprietary and its
-executive. It is not true that the board forms an efficient guard
-against the intrigues of lawyers, engineers, contractors, and others
-who profit by railway-making. Contrariwise, its members are not only
-liable to be drawn from their line of duty by various indirect motives,
-but by the system of guaranteed shares they are placed under a positive
-temptation to betray their constituents.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now what is the proximate origin of these corruptions? and what is
-the remedy for them? What error in railway legislation is it that has
-made possible such complicated chicaneries? Whence arises this facility
-with which interested persons thrust companies into unwise enterprises?
-We believe there is a very simple answer to these questions. It is an
-answer, however, which will at first sight seem quite irrelevant; and
-we doubt not that the corollary we propose drawing from it, will be
-forthwith condemned by so-called practical men. Nevertheless, we are
-not without hope of showing, both that the evils laboured under would
-be excluded were this corollary recognized, and that recognition of it
-is not only feasible, but would {89} even open the way out of sundry
-perplexities in which railway legislation is at present involved.
-
-We conceive, then, that the fundamental vice of our system, as hitherto
-carried out, lies in _the misinterpretation of the proprietary
-contract_—the contract tacitly entered into between each shareholder
-and the body of shareholders with whom he unites; and that the remedy
-for these evils which have now become so great, lies simply in the
-enforcement of an equitable interpretation of this contract. In reality
-the contract is a strictly limited one. In practice it is treated
-as altogether unlimited. And the thing needed is, that it should be
-clearly defined and abided by.
-
-Our popular form of government has so habituated us to seeing public
-questions decided by the voice of the majority, and the system is
-so manifestly equitable in the cases daily before us, that there
-has been produced in the general mind, an unhesitating belief that
-the majority’s right is unbounded. Under whatever circumstances men
-co-operate, it is held that if difference of opinion arises among
-them, justice requires that the will of the greater number shall be
-executed rather than that of the smaller number; be the question at
-issue what it may. So confirmed is this conviction, that to most this
-mere suggestion of a doubt will cause astonishment. Yet it needs but
-a brief analysis to show that the conviction is little better than
-a political superstition. Instances may readily be selected which
-prove, by _reductio ad absurdum_, that the right of a majority is a
-purely conditional right, valid only within specific limits. Let us
-take a few. Suppose that at the general meeting of some philanthropic
-association, it was resolved that in addition to relieving distress
-the association should employ home-missionaries to preach down popery.
-Might the subscriptions of Catholics, who had joined the body with
-charitable views, be rightfully used for this end? Suppose that of the
-members of a book-club, the greater number, thinking {90} that under
-existing circumstances rifle-practice is more important than reading,
-should decide to change the purpose of their union, and to apply the
-funds in hand for the purchase of powder, ball, and targets. Would the
-rest be bound by this decision? Suppose that under the excitement of
-news from Australia, the majority of a Freehold Land Society should
-determine, not simply to start in a body for the gold diggings, but
-to use their accumulated capital to provide outfits. Would this
-appropriation of property be just to the minority? and must these join
-the expedition? Scarcely any one would venture an affirmative answer
-even to the first of these questions; much less to the others. And why?
-Because everyone must perceive that by joining with others, no man
-can equitably be committed to acts utterly foreign to the purpose for
-which he joined them. Each of these supposed minorities would properly
-reply to those seeking to coerce them:—“We combined with you for a
-defined object; we gave money and time for the furtherance of that
-object; on all questions thence arising, we tacitly agreed to conform
-to the will of the greater number; but we did not agree to conform
-on any other questions. If you induce us to join you by professing a
-certain end, and then undertake some other end of which we were not
-apprised, you obtain our support under false pretences; you exceed
-the expressed or understood compact to which we committed ourselves;
-and we are no longer bound by your decisions.” Clearly this is the
-only rational interpretation of the matter. The general principle
-underlying the right government of every incorporated body, is, that
-its members contract with each other severally to submit to the will of
-the majority _in all matters concerning the fulfilment of the objects
-for which they are incorporated; but in no others_. To this extent
-only can the contract hold. For as it is implied in the very nature of
-a contract, that those entering into it must know what they contract
-to do; and as those who unite with others for a specified object,
-{91} cannot contemplate all the unspecified objects which it is
-hypothetically possible for the union to undertake; it follows that the
-contract entered into cannot extend to such unspecified objects. And if
-there exists no expressed or understood contract between the union and
-its members respecting unspecified objects, then for the majority to
-coerce the minority into undertaking them, is nothing less than gross
-tyranny.
-
-Now this almost self-evident principle is wholly ignored, alike in our
-railway legislation and the proceedings of our companies. Definite as
-is the purpose with which the promoters of a public enterprise combine,
-many other purposes not dreamed of at the outset are commonly added
-to it; and this, apparently, without any suspicion that such a course
-is unwarrantable, unless taken with the _unanimous_ consent of the
-proprietors. The unsuspecting shareholder who signed the subscription
-contract for a line from Greatborough to Grandport, did so under the
-belief that this line would not only be a public benefit but a good
-investment. He was familiar with the country. He had been at some
-trouble to estimate the traffic. And, fully believing that he knew
-what he was embarking in, he put down his name for a large amount.
-The line has been made; a few years of prosperity have justified his
-foresight; when, at some fatal special meeting, a project is put before
-him for a branch from Littlehomestead to Stonyfield. The will of the
-board and the intrigues of the interested, overbear all opposition;
-and in spite of the protests of many who like him see its impolicy,
-he presently finds himself involved in an undertaking which, when he
-joined the promoters of the original line, he had not the remotest
-conception would ever be proposed. From year to year this proceeding is
-repeated. His dividends dwindle and his shares go down; and eventually
-the congeries of enterprises to which he is committed, grows so vast
-that the first enterprise of the series becomes but a small fraction
-of the whole. Yet it is in virtue of his {92} consent to this first
-of the series, that all the rest are thrust upon him. He feels that
-there is injustice somewhere; but, believing in the unlimited right of
-a majority, fails to detect it. He does not see that when the first of
-these extensions was proposed, he should have denied the power of his
-brother-shareholders to implicate him in an undertaking not named in
-their deed of incorporation. He should have told its proposers that
-they were perfectly free to form a separate Company for the execution
-of it; but that they could not rightfully compel dissentients to
-join in a new undertaking, any more than they could rightfully have
-compelled dissentients to join in the original. Had such a shareholder
-united with others for the specified purpose of _making railways_, he
-would have had no ground for protest. But he united with others for
-the specified purpose of _making a particular railway_. Yet such is
-the confusion of ideas on the subject, that there is absolutely no
-difference recognized between these cases!
-
-It will doubtless be alleged in defence of all this, that these
-secondary enterprises are supplementary to the original one—are in
-part undertaken for the furtherance of it; professedly minister to
-its prosperity; cannot, therefore, be regarded as altogether separate
-enterprises. And it is true that they have this for their excuse. But
-if it is a sufficient excuse for accessories of this kind, it may
-be made a sufficient excuse for any accessories whatever. Already,
-Companies have carried the practice beyond the making of branches and
-extensions. Already, under the plea of bringing traffic to their lines,
-they have constructed docks; bought lines of steam-packets; built vast
-hotels; deepened river-channels. Already, they have created small towns
-for their workmen; erected churches and schools; salaried clergymen and
-teachers. Are these warranted on the ground of advancing the Companies’
-interests? Then thousands of other undertakings are similarly
-warranted. If a view to the development of traffic, justifies the
-making {93} of a branch to some neighbouring coal-mines; then, should
-the coal-mines be inefficiently worked, the same view would justify
-the purchase of them—would justify the Company in becoming coal-miner
-and coal-seller. If anticipated increase of goods and passengers is a
-sufficient reason for carrying a feeder into an agricultural district;
-then, it is a sufficient reason for organizing a system of coaches and
-waggons to run in connexion with this feeder; for making the requisite
-horse-breeding establishments; for hiring the needful farms; for buying
-estates; for becoming agriculturists. If it be allowable to purchase
-steamers plying in conjunction with the railway; it must be allowable
-to purchase merchant vessels to trade in conjunction with it; it must
-be allowable to set up a yard for building such vessels; it must be
-allowable to erect depôts at foreign ports for the receipt of goods;
-it must be allowable to employ commission agents for collecting such
-goods; it must be allowable to extend a mercantile organization all
-over the world. From making its own engines and carriages, a Company
-may readily progress to manufacturing its own iron and growing
-its own timber. From giving its _employés_ secular and religious
-instruction, and providing houses for them, it may go on to supply them
-with food, clothing, medical attendance, and all the needs of life.
-Beginning simply as a corporation to make and work a railway between
-A and B; it may become a miner, manufacturer, merchant, shipowner,
-canal-proprietor, hotel-keeper, landowner, house-builder, farmer,
-retail-trader, priest, teacher—an organization of indefinite extent
-and complication. There is no logical alternative between permitting
-this, and strictly limiting the corporation to the object first agreed
-upon. A man joining with others for a specific purpose, must be held to
-commit himself to that purpose only; or else to all purposes whatever
-which they may choose to undertake.
-
-But proprietors dissenting from one of these supplementary projects
-are told that they have the option of {94} selling out. So might the
-dissentients from a new State-enforced creed be told, that if they
-did not like it they might leave the country. The one reply is little
-more satisfactory than the other would be. The opposing shareholder
-sees himself in possession of a good investment—one perhaps which,
-as an original subscriber, he ran some risk in obtaining. This
-investment is about to be endangered by an act not named in the deed of
-incorporation. And his protests are met by saying, that if he fears the
-danger he may part with his investment. Surely this choice between two
-evils scarcely meets his claims. Moreover, he has not even this in any
-fair sense. It is often an unfavourable time to sell. The very rumour
-of one of these extensions frequently causes a depreciation of stock.
-And if many of the minority throw their shares on the market, this
-depreciation is greatly increased; a fact which further hinders them
-from selling. So that each is in a dilemma: he has to part with a good
-investment at much less than its value; or to run the risk of having
-its value greatly diminished.
-
-The injustice thus inflicted on minorities is, indeed, already
-recognized in a vague way. The recently-established Standing Order
-of the House of Lords, that before a Company carry out any new
-undertaking, three-fourths of the votes of the proprietors shall be
-recorded in its favour, clearly implies a perception that the usual
-rule of the majority does not apply. And again, in the case of The
-Great Western Railway Company _versus_ Rushout, the decision that the
-funds of the Company could not be used for purposes not originally
-authorized, without a special legislative permit, involves the doctrine
-that the will of the greater number is not of unlimited validity. In
-both these cases, however, it is taken for granted that a State-warrant
-can justify an act which without it would be unjustifiable. We must
-take leave to question this. If it be held that an Act of Parliament
-can make murder proper, or can give rectitude to robbery; it may be
-consistently held that it {95} can sanctify a breach of contract;
-but not otherwise. We are not about to enter upon the vexed question
-of the standard of right and wrong; and to inquire whether it is the
-function of a government to make rules of conduct, or simply to enforce
-rules deducible from the laws of social life. We are content, for the
-occasion, to adopt the expediency-hypothesis; and adopting it, must
-yet contend that, rightly interpreted, it gives no countenance to this
-supposed power of a Government to alter the limits of an equitable
-contract against the wishes of some of the contracting parties. For,
-as understood by its teachers and their chief disciples, the doctrine
-of expediency is not a doctrine implying that each particular act is
-to be determined by the particular consequences that may be expected
-to flow from it; but that the general consequences of entire classes
-of acts having been ascertained by induction from experience, rules
-shall be framed for the regulation of such classes of acts, and each
-rule shall be uniformly applied to every act coming under it. Our whole
-administration of justice proceeds on this principle of invariably
-enforcing an ordained course, regardless of special results. Were
-immediate consequences to be considered, the verdict gained by the rich
-creditor against the poor debtor would generally be reversed; for the
-starvation of the last is a much greater evil than the inconvenience
-of the first. Most thefts arising from distress would go unpunished; a
-large proportion of men’s wills would be cancelled; many of the wealthy
-would be dispossessed of their fortunes. But it is clearly seen that
-were judges thus guided by proximate evils and benefits, the ultimate
-result would be social confusion; that what was immediately expedient
-would be ultimately inexpedient; and hence the aim at rigorous
-uniformity, spite of incidental hardships. Now, the binding nature
-of agreements is one of the commonest and most important principles
-of civil law. A large part of the causes daily heard in our courts,
-involve the {96} question, whether in virtue of some expressed or
-understood contract, some of those concerned are, or are not, bound to
-certain acts or certain payments. And when it has been decided what
-the contract implies, the matter is settled. The contract itself is
-held sacred. This sacredness of a contract being, according to the
-expediency-hypothesis, justified by the experience of all nations in
-all times that it is generally beneficial, it is _not_ competent for
-a Legislature to declare that contracts are violable. Assuming that
-the contracts are themselves equitable, there is no rational system
-of ethics which warrants the alteration or dissolving of them, save
-by the consent of all concerned. If then it be shown, as we think it
-has been shown, that the contract tacitly entered into by railway
-shareholders with each other, has definite limits; it is the function
-of the Government to _enforce_, and not to _abolish_, those limits. It
-cannot decline to enforce them without running counter, not only to all
-theories of moral obligation, but to its own judicial system. It cannot
-abolish them without glaring self-stultification.
-
-Returning, now, to the manifold evils of which the cause was asked;
-it only remains to point out that, were the just construction of the
-proprietary contract insisted upon, such evils would, in great part, be
-excluded. The various illicit influences by which Companies are daily
-betrayed into disastrous extensions, would necessarily be inoperative
-when such extensions could not be undertaken by them. When such
-extensions had to be undertaken by independent bodies of shareholders,
-with no one to guarantee them good dividends, those who are locally
-and professionally interested would find it a less easy matter than at
-present to aggrandize themselves at the expense of others.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now as to the policy of thus modifying railway legislation—the
-commercial policy we mean. Leaving out of sight the more general social
-interests, let us glance at {97} the effects on business interests—the
-proximate instead of the ultimate effects. The implication contained
-in the last paragraph, that the making of supplementary lines would
-no longer be so facile, will be thought to prove the disadvantage of
-any such limit as the one advocated. Many will argue, that to restrict
-Companies to their original undertakings would fatally cripple railway
-enterprise. Many others will remark, that, however detrimental to
-shareholders this extension system may have been, it has manifestly
-proved beneficial to the public. Both these positions seem to us more
-than questionable. We will first look at the last of them.
-
-Even were travelling accommodation the sole thing to be considered, it
-would not be true that prodigality in new lines has been advantageous.
-The districts supplied have, in many cases, themselves been injured
-by it. It is shown by the evidence given before the Select Committee
-on Railway and Canal Bills, that in Lancashire, the existence of
-competing lines has, in some cases, both diminished the facilities
-of communication and increased the cost. It is further shown by this
-evidence, that a town obtaining branches from two antagonist Companies,
-by-and-by, in consequence of a working arrangement between these
-Companies, comes to be worse off than if it had but one branch; and
-Hastings is quoted as an example. It is again shown that a district may
-be wholly deprived of railway accommodation by granting a superfluity
-of lines; as in the case of Wilts and Dorset. In 1844–5, the Great
-Western and the South Western Companies projected rival systems of
-lines, supplying these and parts of the adjacent counties. The Board of
-Trade, “asserting that there was not sufficient traffic to remunerate
-an outlay for two independent railways,” reported in favour of the
-Great Western schemes; and bills were granted for them: a certain
-agreement, suggested by the Board of Trade, being at the same time
-made with the South Western, which, in {98} return for specified
-advantages, conceded this district to its rival. Notwithstanding
-this agreement, the South Western, in 1847, projected an extension
-calculated to take most of the traffic from the Great Western
-extensions; and in 1848, Parliament, though it had virtually suggested
-this agreement, and though the Great Western Company had already spent
-a million and a half in part execution of the new lines, authorized
-the South Western project. The result was, that the Great Western
-Company suspended their works; the South Western Company were unable,
-from financial difficulties, to proceed with theirs; the district has
-remained for years unaccommodated; and only since the powers granted
-to the South Western have expired from delay, has the Great Western
-recommenced its long-suspended undertakings.
-
-And if this undue multiplication of supplementary lines has often
-directly decreased the facilities of communication, still more has
-it done this indirectly, by maintaining the cost of travelling on
-the main lines. Little as the public are conscious of the fact,
-it is nevertheless true, that they pay for the accommodation of
-unremunerative districts, by high fares in remunerative districts.
-Before this reckless branch-making commenced, 8 and 9 per cent. were
-the dividends returned by our chief railways; and these dividends were
-rapidly increasing. The maximum dividend allowed by their Acts is 10
-per cent. Had there not been unprofitable extensions, this maximum
-would have been reached many years since; and in the absence of the
-power to undertake new works, the fact that it had been reached could
-not have been hidden. Lower rates for goods and passengers would
-necessarily have followed. These would have caused much additional
-traffic; and with the aid of the natural increase otherwise going on,
-the maximum would shortly again have been reached. There can scarcely
-be a doubt that repetitions of this process would, before now, have
-reduced the fares and {99} freights on our main lines by at least
-one-third. This reduction, be it remembered, would have affected those
-railways which subserve commercial and social intercourse in the
-greatest degree—would, therefore, have applied to the most important
-part of the traffic throughout the kingdom. As it is, however, this
-greater proportion of the traffic has been heavily taxed for the
-benefit of the smaller proportion. That the tens who travel on branches
-might have railway communication, the hundreds who travel along
-main lines have been charged 30, or 40 per cent. extra. Nay, worse:
-that these few might be accommodated, the many who would have been
-brought on to the main lines by lower fares have gone unaccommodated.
-Is it then so clear that undertakings which have been disastrous to
-shareholders have yet been beneficial to the public?
-
-But it is not only in greater cost of transit that the evil has been
-felt; it has been felt also in diminished safety. The multiplication of
-railway accidents, which has of late years drawn so much attention, has
-been in no inconsiderable degree caused by the extension policy. The
-relation is not obvious; and we had ourselves no conception that such
-a relation existed, until the facts illustrative of it were furnished
-to us by a director who had witnessed the whole process of causation.
-When preference-share dividends and guarantees began to make large
-draughts upon half-yearly returns—when original stock was greatly
-depreciated, and the dividends upon it fell from 9 and 8 per cent. to
-4 1/2 and 4 and 3 1/2, great dissatisfaction necessarily arose
-among shareholders. There were stormy meetings, motions of censure,
-and committees of investigation. Retrenchment was the general cry;
-and retrenchment was carried to a most imprudent extent. Directors
-with an indignant proprietary to face, and under the fear that their
-next dividend would be no greater, perhaps less, than the last,
-dared not to lay out money for the needful repairs. {100} Permanent
-way, reported to them as requiring to be replaced, was made to serve
-awhile longer. Old rolling stock was not superseded by new to the
-proper extent; nor increased in proportion to the demand. Committees,
-appointed to examine where the expenditure could be cut down, went
-round discharging a porter here, dispensing with a clerk there, and
-diminishing the salaries of the officials in general. To such a length
-was this policy carried, that in one case, to effect a saving of £1200
-per annum, the working staff was so crippled as to cause, in the course
-of a few years, a loss of probably £100,000: such, at least, is the
-opinion of the gentleman on whose authority we make this statement,
-who was himself one of the retrenchment committee. What, now, was the
-necessary result of all this? With the line out of condition; with
-engines and carriages neither sufficient in number nor in the best
-working order; with drivers, guards, porters, clerks, and the rest,
-decreased to the smallest number with which it was possible to work;
-with inexperienced managers in place of the experienced ones driven
-away by reduced salaries; what was likely to occur? Was it not certain
-that an apparatus of means just competent to deal with the ordinary
-traffic, would be incompetent to deal with extraordinary traffic? that
-a decimated body of officials under inferior regulation, would fail
-in the emergencies sure from time to time to occur? that with way and
-works and rolling stock all below par, there would occasionally be a
-concurrence of small defects, permitting something to go wrong? Was
-not a multiplication of accidents inevitable? No one can doubt it. And
-if we trace back this result step by step to its original cause—the
-reckless expenditure on new lines—we shall see further reason to doubt
-whether such expenditure has been as advantageous to the public as
-is supposed. We shall hesitate to indorse the opinion of the Select
-Committee on Railway and Canal Bills, that it is {101} desirable “to
-increase the facility for obtaining lines of local convenience.”
-
-Still more doubtful becomes the alleged benefit accruing to the
-public from extensions which cause loss to shareholders, when, from
-considering the question as one of traffic, we turn to consider it as
-a general commercial question—a question of political economy. Were
-there no facts showing that the travelling facilities gained were
-counterbalanced, if not more than counterbalanced, by the travelling
-facilities lost; we should still contend that the making of branches
-which do not return fair dividends, is a national evil, and not a
-national good. The prevalent error committed in studying matters of
-this nature, consists in looking at them separately, rather than in
-connexion with other social wants and social benefits. Not only does
-one of these undertakings, when executed, affect society in various
-ways, but the effort put forth in the execution of it affects society
-in various ways; and to form a true estimate, the two sets of results
-must be compared. The axiom that “action and re-action are equal, and
-in opposite directions,” is true, not only in mechanics—it is true
-everywhere. No power can be put forth by a nation to achieve a given
-end, without producing, for the time being, a corresponding inability
-to achieve some other end. No amount of capital can be abstracted
-for one purpose, without involving an equivalent lack of capital for
-another purpose. Every advantage wrought out by labour, is purchased
-by the relinquishment of some alternative advantage which that labour
-might else have wrought out. In judging, therefore, of the benefits
-flowing from any public undertaking, it is requisite to consider
-them not by themselves, but as compared with the benefits which the
-invested capital would otherwise have secured. But how can these
-relative benefits be measured? it may be asked. Very simply. The rate
-of interest which the capital will bring as thus respectively {102}
-employed, is the measure. Money which, if used for a certain end,
-gives a smaller return than it would give if otherwise used, is used
-disadvantageously, not only to its possessors, but to the community.
-This is a corollary from the commonest principles of political
-economy—a corollary so obvious that we can scarcely understand how,
-after the free-trade controversy, a committee, numbering among its
-members Mr. Bright and Mr. Cardwell, should have overlooked it. Have
-we not been long ago taught, that in the mercantile world capital
-goes where it is most wanted—that the business which is at any time
-attracting capital by unusually high returns, is a business proved by
-that very fact to be unusually active—that its unusual activity shows
-society to be making great demands upon it; giving it high profits;
-wanting its commodities or services more than other commodities or
-services? Do not comparisons among our railways demonstrate that
-those paying large dividends are those subserving the public needs
-in a greater degree than those paying small dividends? and is it not
-obvious that the efforts of capitalists to get these large dividends
-led them to supply the greater needs before the lesser needs? Surely,
-the same law which holds in ordinary commerce, and also holds between
-one railway investment and another, holds likewise between railway
-investments and other investments. If the money spent in making
-branches and feeders is yielding an average return of from 1 to 2 per
-cent.; while if employed in land-draining or ship-building, it would
-return 4 or 5 per cent.; it is a conclusive proof that money is more
-wanted for land-draining and ship-building than for branch-making. And
-the general conclusions to be drawn are, that that large proportion
-of railway capital which does not pay the current rate of interest,
-is capital ill laid out; that if the returns on such proportion were
-capitalized at the current rate of interest, the resulting sum would
-represent its real value; and that {103} the difference between this
-sum and the amount expended, would indicate the national loss—a loss
-which, on the lowest estimate, would exceed £100,000,000. And however
-true it may be that the sum invested in unprofitable lines will go on
-increasing in productiveness; yet as, if more wisely invested, it would
-similarly have gone on increasing in productiveness, perhaps even at a
-greater rate, this vast loss must be regarded as a permanent and not as
-a temporary one.
-
-Again then, we ask, is it so obvious that undertakings which have
-been disastrous to shareholders have been advantageous to the public?
-Is it not obvious, rather, that, in this respect, as in others, the
-interests of shareholders and the public are in the end identical? And
-does it not seem that instead of recommending “increased facilities
-for obtaining lines of local convenience,” the Select Committee might
-properly have reported that the existing facilities are abnormally
-great, and should be decreased?
-
-There remains still to be considered the other of the two objections
-above stated as liable to be raised against the proposed interpretation
-of the proprietary contract—the objection, namely, that it would be a
-serious hindrance to railway enterprise. After what has already been
-said, it is scarcely needful to reply, that the hindrance would be no
-greater than is natural and healthful—no greater than is requisite
-to hold in check the private interests at variance with public ones.
-This notion that railway enterprise will not go on with due activity
-without artificial incentives—that bills for local extensions “rather
-need encouragement,” as the Committee say, is nothing but a remnant
-of protectionism. The motive which has hitherto led to the formation
-of all independent railway companies—the search of capitalists for
-good investments—may safely be left to form others as fast as local
-requirements become great enough to promise fair returns—as fast, that
-is, as local requirements {104} should be satisfied. This would be
-manifest enough without illustration; but there are facts proving it.
-
-Already we have incidentally referred to the circumstance, that it has
-of late become common for landowners, merchants, and others locally
-interested, to get up railways for their own accommodation, which they
-do not expect to pay satisfactory dividends; and in which they are
-yet content to invest considerable sums, under the belief that the
-indirect profits accruing to them from increased facilities of traffic,
-will outbalance the direct loss. To so great an extent is this policy
-being carried that, as stated to the Select Committee, “in Yorkshire
-and Northumberland, where branch lines are being made through mere
-agricultural districts, the landowners are _giving their land_ for the
-purpose, and taking shares.” With such examples before us, it cannot
-rationally be doubted that there will always be capital forthcoming
-for making local lines as soon as the sum of the calculated benefits,
-direct and indirect, justifies its expenditure.
-
-“But,” it will be urged, “a branch that would be unremunerative as an
-independent property, is often remunerative to the company which has
-made it, in virtue of the traffic it brings to the trunk line. Though
-yielding meagre returns on its own capital, yet, by increasing the
-returns on the capital of the trunk line, it compensates, or more than
-compensates. Were the existing company, however, forbidden to extend
-its undertaking, such a branch would not be made; and injury would
-result.” This is all true, with the exception of the last assertion,
-that such a branch would not be made. Though in its corporate capacity
-the company owning the trunk line would be unable to execute a work of
-this nature, there would be nothing to prevent individual shareholders
-in the trunk line from uniting to execute it; and were the prospects as
-favourable as is assumed, this course, being manifestly advantageous to
-individual shareholders, would be pursued by many of them. If, acting
-in concert with others similarly {105} circumstanced, the owner of
-£10,000 worth of stock in the trunk line, could aid the carrying out
-of a proposed feeder promising to return only 2 per cent. on its cost,
-by taking shares to the extent of £1000, it would answer his purpose
-to do this, providing the extra traffic it brought would raise the
-trunk-line dividend by one-fourth per cent. Thus, under a limited
-proprietary contract, companies would still, as now, foster extensions
-where they were wanted: the only difference being that, in the absence
-of guaranteed dividends, due caution would be shown; and the poorer
-shareholders would not, as at present, be sacrificed to the richer.
-
-In brief, our position is, that whenever, by the efforts of all parties
-to be advantaged—local landowners, manufacturers, merchants, trunk-line
-shareholders, &c., the capital for an extension can be raised—whenever
-it becomes clear to all such, that their indirect profits plus their
-direct profits will make the investment a paying one; the fact is proof
-that the line is wanted. On the contrary, whenever the prospective
-gains to those interested are insufficient to induce them to undertake
-it, the fact is proof that the line is not wanted so much as other
-things are wanted, and therefore _ought not to be made_. Instead, then,
-of the principle we advocate being objectionable as a check to railway
-enterprise, one of its merits is, that by destroying the artificial
-incentives to such enterprise, it would confine it within normal limits.
-
-A perusal of the evidence given before the Select Committee will show
-that it has sundry other merits, which we have space only to indicate.
-
-It is estimated by Mr. Laing—and Mr. Stephenson, while declining to
-commit himself to the estimate, “does not believe he has overstated
-it,”—that out of the £280,000,000 already raised for the construction
-of our railways, £70,000,000 has been needlessly spent in contests,
-in duplicate lines, in “the multiplication of an immense number of
-schemes prosecuted at an almost reckless {106} expense;” and Mr.
-Stephenson believes that this sum is “a very inadequate representative
-of the actual loss in point of convenience, economy, and other
-circumstances connected with traffic, which the public has sustained
-by reason of parliamentary carelessness in legislating for railways.”
-Under an equitable interpretation of the proprietary contract, the
-greater part of this would have been avoided.
-
-The competition between rival companies in extension and branch-making,
-which has already done vast injury, and the effects of which, if not
-stopped, will, in the opinion of Mr. Stephenson, be such that “property
-now paying 5 1/2 per cent. will in ten years be worth only 3 per
-cent., and that on twenty-one millions of money”—this competition
-could never have existed in its intense and deleterious form under the
-limiting principle we advocate.
-
-Prompted by jealousy and antagonism, our companies have obtained powers
-for 2000 miles of railway which they have never made. The millions thus
-squandered in surveys and parliamentary contests—“food for lawyers and
-engineers”—would nearly all have been saved, had each supplementary
-line been obtainable only by an independent body of proprietors with no
-one to shield them from the penalties of reckless scheming.
-
-It is admitted that the branches and feeders constructed from
-competitive motives have not been laid out in the best directions for
-the public. To defeat, or retaliate upon, opponents, having been one of
-the ends—often the chief end—in making them, routes have been chosen
-especially calculated to effect this end; and the local traffic has
-in consequence been ill provided for. Had these branches and feeders,
-however, been left to the enterprise of their respective districts,
-aided by such other enterprise as they could attract, the reverse would
-have been the fact; seeing that on the average, in these smaller cases
-as in the greater ones, the routes which most accommodate the public
-must be the routes most profitable to projectors.
-
-Were the illegitimate competition in extension-making {107} done away,
-there would remain between companies just that normal competition which
-is advantageous to all. It is not true, as is alleged, that there
-cannot exist between railways a competition analogous to that which
-exists between traders. The evidence of Mr. Saunders, the secretary of
-the Great Western Company, proves the contrary. He shows that where
-the Great Western and the North Western railways communicate with the
-same towns, as at Birmingham and Oxford, each has tacitly adopted the
-fare which the other was charging; and that while there is thus no
-competition in fares, there is competition in speed and accommodation.
-The results are, that each takes that portion of the traffic which, in
-virtue of its position and local circumstances, naturally falls to its
-share; that each stimulates the other to give the greatest advantages
-it can afford; and that each keeps the other in order by threatening
-to take away its natural share of the traffic if, by ill-behaviour or
-inefficiency, it counterbalances the special advantages it offers. Now,
-this is just the form which competition eventually assumes between
-traders. After it has been ascertained by underselling what is the
-lowest remunerative price at which any commodity can be sold, the
-general results are, that that becomes the established price; that
-each trader is content to supply those only who, from proximity or
-other causes, naturally come to him; and that only when he treats his
-customers ill, need he fear that they will inconvenience themselves by
-going elsewhere for their goods.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Is there not, then, pressing need for an amendment of the laws
-affecting the proprietary contract—an amendment which shall transform
-it from an unlimited into a limited contract; or rather—not _transform_
-it into such, but _recognize_ it as such? If there be truth in our
-argument, the absence of any limitation has been the chief cause of the
-manifold evils of our railway administration. The share-trafficking
-{108} of directors; the complicated intrigues of lawyers, engineers,
-contractors, and others; the betrayal of proprietaries—all the
-complicated corruptions which we have detailed, have primarily arisen
-from it, have been made possible by it. It has rendered travelling more
-costly and less safe than it would have been; and while apparently
-facilitating traffic, has indirectly hindered it. By fostering
-antagonism, it has led to the ill laying-out of supplementary lines;
-to the wasting of enormous sums in useless parliamentary contests; to
-the loss of an almost incredible amount of national capital in the
-making of railways for which there is no due requirement. Regarded in
-the mass, the investments of shareholders have been reduced by it to
-less than half the average productiveness which such investments should
-possess; and, as all authorities admit, railway property is, even
-now, kept below its real value, by the fear of future depreciations
-consequent on future extensions. Considering, then, the vastness of
-the interests at stake—considering that the total capital of our
-companies will soon reach £300,000,000—considering, on the one hand,
-the immense number of persons owning this capital (many of them with
-no incomes but what are derived from it), and, on the other hand, the
-great extent to which the community is concerned, both directly as to
-its commercial facilities, and indirectly as to the economy of its
-resources—considering all this, it becomes extremely important that
-railway property should be placed on a secure footing, and railway
-enterprise confined within normal bounds. The change is demanded
-alike for the welfare of shareholders and the public. No charge of
-over-legislation can be brought against it. It is simply an extension
-to joint-stock contracts, of the principle applied to all other
-contracts; it is merely a fulfilment of the State’s judicial function
-in cases hitherto neglected; it is nothing but a better administration
-of justice.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-
-POSTSCRIPT.—That the proprietary contract should be {109} strictly
-adhered to, and no undertakings beyond those specified in the
-deed of incorporation entered upon, is a doctrine unpalatable to
-those in authority. A friend who, as chairman of one of our great
-railway-companies, has been familiar with railway-politics and
-parliamentary usages in connexion with them, contends that such a
-restrictive interpretation would be unworkable; and, further, that the
-legislature would never allow itself to be shackled in the implied way.
-
-That he is right in the last of these assertions I think highly
-probable. In face of the currently accepted dogma that an Act of
-Parliament can do anything, it is foolish to expect that Parliament
-would, by ethical considerations, be restrained from breaking
-contracts and authorizing the breaking of contracts. When we see this
-dogma habitually acted upon to the extent of trampling under foot
-State-guarantees (as in the case of those who purchased land under
-the Irish Encumbered Estates Act, or as in the case of agreements
-originally entered into with companies to confer on them certain powers
-under certain conditions) it would be absurd to suppose that any tender
-regard for the claims of dissentient proprietors would deter the
-ruling body from cancelling the understanding under which shareholders
-consented to co-operate. Men must be much more conscientious than they
-are before any such check is likely to be effective.
-
-To the other objection—that such a restriction would entail an
-unworkable complication—I entirely demur. That its consequences would
-be awkward under our present form of railway-administration may be
-true; but it is also true that had such a restriction been insisted on,
-another and better form of railway-administration would have arisen.
-This will probably be thought an unwarranted assertion. Nevertheless
-I make it with some confidence, since the form of administration to
-which I refer is one which was, in a different guise, contemplated
-when railways {110} were originally authorized. To those whose only
-conception of the mode of carrying on railway-traffic is that derived
-from their daily observations, this will be an incomprehensible
-statement; but those who remember how railways were originally intended
-to be used will know what I mean.
-
-Novel schemes are always more or less shaped by old habits. At the time
-when the first railways were authorized, the experience men had of
-coach-travelling on high roads, affected in various ways the structures
-of the new appliances and the natures of the new arrangements. The
-railway gauge was determined by the width between the wheels of a
-stage-coach. Early first-class carriages were made to appear like the
-central parts of three stage-coaches joined together: preserving their
-convex panels and curved outlines, and frequently having, on the centre
-one, the words “_Tria juncta in uno_.” The inside of the first-class
-carriage was fitted up to resemble the inside of a stage-coach; and
-the original second-class carriage, having bare wooden seats over
-which, on vertical iron rods, was supported a roof allowing the wind
-and rain to blow through from side to side, was so designed as to be
-scarcely more comfortable than the outside of a coach. For some years
-the guard had a seat on the outside, at the end of a carriage, as on
-a coach; and for many years the luggage, covered with tarpaulin, was
-placed on the roofs of carriages, as on the outsides of coaches. Once
-more the booking-offices were at first like the booking-offices for
-stage-coaches—places where passengers entered their names to secure
-seats. Little as the fact is now recognized, this kinship of ideas
-extended to the contemplated arrangements for working. Men thought
-that traffic on railways might be carried on after the same manner as
-traffic on high roads. It was assumed that on lines of rails, where the
-passing of vehicles going in the same direction is impracticable, the
-system pursued might be like that in use on high roads, {111} where
-vehicles can pass and re-pass in any direction and join or leave the
-stream at will. Does the reader ask proof of this? The proof lies in
-the fact, well-known to those who were adult in the early days of
-railways, that in the office or waiting-room of every railway-station
-was fixed up a table of tolls, like that which was fixed up at every
-toll-gate; but in this case specifying the rate chargeable per mile for
-all things carried—passengers, horses, cattle, goods, &c. This table
-of tolls implied that it was within the power of others besides the
-company to run vehicles on the company’s line, and pay them at such and
-such rates for the privilege of doing so—a privilege which, so far as
-I know, was never made use of, for the sufficient reason that it would
-have been impossible to carry on business amid the confusion which
-would have resulted.
-
-But while this arrangement, in the form implied, would have been
-impracticable, it foreshadows an arrangement which would have been
-practicable; and one which would have grown up had each railway company
-been limited to the undertaking specified in its deed of incorporation.
-After experience of inefficient co-operation, when so many independent
-bodies owning branches and extensions had to adjust their train
-services, &c., there would, in all probability, have been formed what
-we may call running-companies or traffic-companies, separate from the
-original railway-companies. Each one of these would have proposed to
-the companies owning the various main lines, extensions, and branches,
-within some large district conveniently delimited, to undertake the
-working of their various lines: either taking them severally on lease,
-or agreeing to give a specified share of the net returns annually
-received, or agreeing to pay certain tolls for passengers and goods.
-Under such an arrangement the original companies, standing in the
-position of landlords, would have had for their chief business to keep
-the embankments, cuttings, bridges, permanent way, stations, &c., in
-working {112} order; while the running-companies, standing in the
-position of tenants, but owning the rolling-stock, would have had for
-their business to conduct the passenger and goods traffic throughout
-the whole area, with power to arrange the workings of the various
-subdivisions of the system in a harmonious manner. Clearly, if there
-is an advantage in division of labour in other cases, there would have
-been an advantage in this case. The fixed works constituting each of
-these inter-connected railways would have been kept in more perfect
-repair, had preservation of them been the exclusive business of the
-companies owning them; while the running-companies, with nothing
-to attend to beyond the keeping in order of their rolling-stock
-and the management of train-services &c. would have done this more
-satisfactorily.
-
-A further reason for believing that better results would have been
-achieved than are now achieved, is that under such circumstances
-there would have been no absorption of directors’ time in carrying on
-railway-wars and getting new acts of parliament—a business which, under
-the existing system, has chiefly occupied the attention of boards.
-
-The enforcement of equitable arrangements is often fraught with
-unanticipated benefits; and there seems reason to think that
-unanticipated benefits would have resulted in this case also.
-
-{113}
-
-
-
-
-THE MORALS OF TRADE.
-
-[_First published in_ The Westminster Review _for April 1859_.]
-
-
-We are not about to repeat, under the above title, the often-told
-tale of adulterations: albeit, were it our object to deal with this
-familiar topic, there are not wanting fresh materials. It is rather the
-less-observed and less-known dishonesties of trade, to which we would
-here draw attention. The same lack of conscientiousness which shows
-itself in the mixing of starch with cocoa, in the dilution of butter
-with lard, in the colouring of confectionery with chromate of lead and
-arsenite of copper, must of course come out in more concealed forms;
-and these are nearly, if not quite, as numerous and as mischievous.
-
-It is not true, as many suppose, that only the lower classes of the
-commercial world are guilty of fraudulent dealing. Those above them
-are to a great extent blameworthy. On the average, men who deal in
-bales and tons differ but little in morality from men who deal in yards
-and pounds. Illicit practices of every form and shade, from venial
-deception up to all but direct theft, may be brought home to the higher
-grades of our commercial world. Tricks innumerable, lies acted or
-uttered, elaborately-devised frauds, are prevalent: {114} many of them
-established as “customs of the trade;” nay, not only established, but
-defended.
-
-Passing over, then, the much-reprobated shopkeepers, of whose
-delinquencies most people know something, let us turn our attention to
-the delinquencies of the classes above them in the mercantile scale.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The business of wholesale houses—in the clothing-trades at least—is
-chiefly managed by a class of men called “buyers.” Each wholesale
-establishment is usually divided into several departments; and at the
-head of each department is placed one of these functionaries. A buyer
-is a partially-independent sub-trader. At the beginning of the year he
-is debited with a certain share of the capital of his employers. With
-this capital he trades. From the makers he orders for his department
-such goods as he thinks will find a market; and for the goods thus
-bought he obtains as large a sale as he can among the retailers of his
-connexion. The accounts show at the end of the year what profit has
-been made on the capital over which he has command; and, according
-to the result, his engagement is continued—perhaps at an increased
-salary—or he is discharged.
-
-Under such circumstances, bribery would hardly be expected. Yet we
-learn, on unquestionable authority, that buyers habitually bribe and
-are bribed. Giving presents, as a means of obtaining custom, is an
-established practice between them and all with whom they have dealings.
-Their connexions among retailers they extend by treating and favours;
-and they are themselves influenced in their purchases by like means. It
-might be presumed that self-interest would in both cases negative this.
-But apparently, no very obvious sacrifice results from yielding to such
-influences. When, as usually happens, there are many manufacturers
-producing articles of like goodness at the same prices, or many buyers
-between whose commodities and whose terms there is little room for
-choice, there exists no {115} motive to purchase of one rather than
-another; and then the temptation to take some immediate bonus turns
-the scale. Whatever be the cause, however, the fact is testified to
-us alike in London and the provinces. By manufacturers, buyers are
-sumptuously entertained for days together, and are plied throughout the
-year with hampers of game, turkeys, dozens of wine, etc.: nay, they
-receive actual money-bribes; sometimes, as we hear from a manufacturer,
-in the shape of bank-notes, but more commonly in the shape of discounts
-on the amounts of their purchases. The extreme prevalence—universality
-we might say—of this system, is proved by the evidence of one who,
-disgusted as he is, finds himself inextricably entangled in it. He
-confessed to us that all his transactions were thus tainted. “Each of
-the buyers with whom I deal,” he said, “expects an occasional bonus in
-one form or other. Some require the bribe to be wrapped up; and some
-take it without disguise. To an offer of money, this one replies—‘Oh,
-I don’t like that sort of thing,’ but nevertheless, does not object to
-money’s-worth; while my friend So-and-so, who promises to bring me a
-large trade this season, will, I very well know, look for one per cent.
-discount in cash. The thing is not to be avoided. I could name sundry
-buyers who look askance at me, and never will inspect my goods; and I
-have no doubt about the cause—I have not bought their patronage.” And
-then our informant appealed to another of the trade, who agreed in the
-assertion that in London their business could not be done on any other
-terms. So greedy do some of these buyers become, that their perquisites
-absorb a great part of the profits, and make it a question whether
-it is worth while to continue the dealing with them. Next, as above
-hinted, there comes a like history of transactions between buyers and
-retailers—the bribed being now the bribers. One of those above referred
-to as habitually expecting douceurs, said to the giver of them, whose
-testimony we have just repeated—“I’ve spent pounds and pounds over
-――― {116} (naming a large tailor), and now I think I have gained him
-over.” To which confession this buyer added the complaint, that his
-house did not make him any allowance for sums thus disbursed.
-
-Under the buyer, who has absolute control of his own department
-in a wholesale house, come sundry assistants, who transact the
-business with retail traders; much as retail trader’s assistants
-transact the business with the general public. These higher-class
-assistants, working under the same pressure as the lower, are similarly
-unscrupulous. Liable to prompt dismissal as they are for failure in
-selling; gaining higher positions as they do in proportion to the
-quantities of goods they dispose of at profitable rates; and finding
-that no objections are made to any dishonest artifices they use, but
-rather that they are applauded for them; these young men display a
-scarcely credible demoralization. As we learn from those who have been
-of them, their duplicity is unceasing—they speak almost continuous
-falsehood; and their tricks range from the simplest to the most
-Machiavellian. Take a few samples. When dealing with a retailer, it is
-an habitual practice to bear in mind the character of his business; and
-to delude him respecting articles of which he has least experience. If
-his shop is in a neighbourhood where the sales are chiefly of inferior
-goods (a fact ascertained from the traveller), it is inferred that,
-having a comparatively small demand for superior goods, he is a bad
-judge of them; and advantage is taken of his ignorance. Again, it is
-usual purposely to present samples of cloths, silks, etc., in such
-order as to disqualify the perceptions. As, when tasting different
-foods or wines, the palate is disabled by something strongly flavoured,
-from appreciating the more delicate flavour of another thing afterwards
-taken; so with the other organs of sense, a temporary disability
-follows an excessive stimulation. This holds not only with the eyes
-in judging of colours, but also, as we are told by one who has been
-in the trade, it holds with the fingers in judging of textures; and
-cunning {117} salesmen are in the habit of thus partially paralysing
-the customers’ perceptions, and then selling second-rate articles as
-first-rate ones. Another common manœuvre is that of raising a false
-belief of cheapness. Suppose a tailor is laying in a stock of broad
-cloths. He is offered a bargain. Three pieces are put before him—two of
-good quality, at, perhaps, 14_s._ per yard; and one of much inferior
-quality, at 8_s._ per yard. These pieces have been purposely a little
-tumbled and creased, to give an apparent reason for a pretended
-sacrifice upon them. And the tailor is then told that he may have
-these nominally-damaged cloths as “a job lot,” at 12_s._ per yard.
-Misled by the appearances into a belief of the professed sacrifice;
-impressed, moreover, by the fact that two of the pieces are really
-worth considerably more than the price asked; and not sufficiently
-bearing in mind that the great inferiority of the third just balances
-this; the tailor probably buys; and he goes away with the comfortable
-conviction that he has made a specially-advantageous purchase, when
-he has really paid the full price for every yard. A still more subtle
-trick has been described to us by one who himself made use of it, when
-engaged in one of these wholesale-houses—a trick so successful that he
-was often sent for to sell to customers who could be induced to buy
-by none other of the assistants, and who ever afterwards would buy
-only of him. His policy was to seem extremely simple and honest, and,
-during the first few purchases, to exhibit his honesty by pointing
-out defects in the things he was selling; and then, having gained the
-customer’s confidence, he proceeded to pass off upon him inferior
-goods at superior prices. These are a few out of the various manœuvres
-in constant practice. Of course there is a running accompaniment of
-falsehoods, uttered as well as acted. It is expected of the assistant
-that he will say whatever is needed to effect a sale. “Any fool can
-sell what is wanted,” said a master in reproaching a shopman for not
-having persuaded a customer to buy something quite unlike that which
-he asked {118} for. And the unscrupulous mendacity thus required by
-employers, and encouraged by example, grows to a height of depravity
-that has been described to us in words too strong to be repeated.
-Our informant was obliged to relinquish his position in one of these
-establishments, because he could not lower himself to the required
-depth of degradation. “You don’t lie as though you believe what you
-say,” observed one of his fellow-assistants. And this was uttered as a
-reproach!
-
-As those subordinates who have fewest qualms of conscience are those
-who succeed the best, are soonest promoted to more remunerative posts,
-and have therefore the greatest chances of establishing businesses of
-their own; it may be inferred that the morality of the heads of these
-establishments, is much on a par with that of their _employés_. The
-habitual malpractices of wholesale houses, confirm this inference.
-Not only, as we have just seen, are assistants under a pressure
-impelling them to deceive purchasers respecting the qualities of the
-goods they buy, but purchasers are also deceived in respect to the
-quantities; and that, not by an occasional unauthorized trick, but by
-an organized system, for which the firm itself is responsible. The
-general practice is to make up goods, or to have them made up, in
-lengths that are shorter than they profess to be. A piece of calico
-nominally thirty-six yards long, never measures more than thirty-one
-yards—is understood throughout the trade to measure only so much. And
-the long-accumulating delinquencies which this custom indicates—the
-successive diminutions of length, each introduced by some adept in
-dishonesty, and then imitated by his competitors—are now being daily
-carried to a still greater extent, wherever they are not likely to be
-immediately detected. Articles that are sold in small bundles, knots,
-packets, or such forms as negative measurement at the time of sale, are
-habitually deficient in quantity. Silk-laces called six quarters, or
-fifty-four {119} inches, really measure four quarters, or thirty-six
-inches. Tapes were originally sold in grosses containing twelve knots
-of twelve yards each; but these twelve-yard-knots are now cut of all
-lengths, from eight yards down to five yards, and even less—the usual
-length being six yards. That is to say, the 144 yards which the gross
-once contained, has now in some cases dwindled down to 60 yards. In
-widths, as well as in lengths, this deception is practised. French
-cotton-braid, for instance (French only in name), is made of different
-widths; which are respectively marked 5, 7, 9, 11, etc.: each figure
-indicating the number of threads of cotton which the width includes, or
-rather should include, but does not. For those which should be marked
-5 are marked 7; and those which should be marked 7 are marked 9: out
-of three samples from different houses shown to us by our informant,
-only one contained the alleged number of threads. Fringe, again, which
-is sold wrapped on card, will often be found two inches wide at the
-end exposed to view, but will diminish to one inch at the end next the
-card; or perhaps the first twenty yards will be good, and all the rest,
-hidden under it, will be bad. These frauds are committed unblushingly,
-and as a matter of business. We have ourselves read in an agent’s
-order-book, the details of an order, specifying the actual lengths of
-which the articles were to be cut, and the much greater lengths to be
-marked on the labels. And we have been told by a manufacturer who was
-required to make up tapes into lengths of fifteen yards, and label them
-“warranted 18 yards,” that when he did not label them falsely, his
-goods were sent back to him; and that the greatest concession he could
-obtain was to be allowed to send them without labels.
-
-It is not to be supposed that in their dealings with manufacturers,
-these wholesale-houses adopt a code of morals differing much from
-that which regulates their dealings with retailers. The facts prove
-it to be much the {120} same. A buyer for instance (who exclusively
-conducts the purchases of a wholesale-house from manufacturers) will
-not unfrequently take from a first-class maker, a small supply of
-some new fabric, on the pattern of which much time and money have
-been spent; and this new-pattern fabric he will put into the hands
-of another maker, to have copied in large quantities. Some buyers,
-again, give their orders orally, that they may have the opportunity of
-afterwards repudiating them if they wish; and in a case narrated to us,
-where a manufacturer who had been thus deluded, wished on a subsequent
-occasion to guarantee himself by obtaining the buyer’s signature to his
-order, he was refused it. For other unjust acts of wholesale-houses,
-the heads of these establishments are, we presume, responsible. Small
-manufacturers working with insufficient capital, and in times of
-depression not having the wherewith to meet their engagements, are
-often obliged to become dependants on the wholesale-houses with which
-they deal; and are then cruelly taken advantage of. One who has thus
-committed himself, has either to sell his accumulated stock at a
-great sacrifice—thirty to forty per cent. below its value—or else to
-mortgage it; and when the wholesale-house becomes the mortgagee, the
-manufacturer has little chance of escape. He is obliged to work at the
-wholesale-dealer’s terms; and ruin almost certainly follows. This is
-especially the case in the silk-hosiery business. As was said to us by
-one of the larger silk-hosiers, who had watched the destruction of many
-of his smaller brethren—“They may be spared for a time as a cat spares
-a mouse; but they are sure to be eaten up in the end.” And we can the
-more readily credit this statement from having found that a like policy
-is pursued by some provincial curriers in their dealings with small
-shoe-makers; and also by hop-merchants and maltsters in their dealings
-with small publicans. We read that in Hindostan the ryots, when crops
-fall short, borrow from the Jews to buy seed; and {121} once in their
-clutches are doomed. It seems that our commercial world can furnish
-parallels.
-
-Of another class of wholesale-traders—those who supply grocers with
-foreign and colonial produce—we may say that though, in consequence
-of the nature of their business, their malpractices are less numerous
-and multiform, as well as less glaring, they bear the same stamp as
-the foregoing. Unless it is to be supposed that sugar and spices are
-moral antiseptics as well as physical ones, it must be expected that
-wholesale dealers in them will transgress much as other wholesale
-dealers do, in those directions where the facilities are greatest. And
-the truth is that, both in the qualities and quantities of the articles
-they sell, they take advantage of the retailers. The descriptions they
-give of their commodities are habitually misrepresentations. Samples
-sent round to their customers are characterized as first-rate when
-they are really second-rate. The travellers are expected to endorse
-these untrue statements; and unless the grocer has adequate keenness
-and extensive knowledge, he is more or less deceived. In some cases,
-indeed, no skill will save him. There are frauds that have grown up
-little by little into customs of the trade, which the retailer must
-submit to. In the purchase of sugar, for example, he is imposed on
-in respect alike of the goodness and the weight. The history of the
-dishonesty is this. Originally the tare allowed by the merchant on each
-hogshead, was 14 per cent. of the gross weight. The actual weight of
-the wood of which the hogshead was made, was at that time about 12 per
-cent. of the gross weight. And thus the trade-allowance left a profit
-of 2 per cent. to the buyer. Gradually, however, the hogshead has grown
-thicker and heavier; until now, instead of amounting to 12 per cent.
-of the gross weight, it amounts to 17 per cent. As the allowance of 14
-per cent. still continues, the result is that the retail grocer loses
-3 per cent.: to the extent of 3 per cent. he buys wood {122} in place
-of sugar. In the quality of the sugar, he is deluded by the practice
-of giving him a sample from the best part of the hogshead. During its
-voyage from Jamaica or elsewhere, the contents of a hogshead undergo a
-slow drainage. The molasses, of which more or less is always present,
-filters from the uppermost part of the mass of sugar to the lowermost
-part; and this lowermost part, technically known as the “foots,” is
-of darker colour and smaller value. The quantity of it contained
-in a hogshead varies greatly; and the retailer, receiving a false
-sample, has to guess what the quantity of “foots” may be; and, to his
-cost, often under-estimates it. As will be seen from the following
-letter, copied from the _Public Ledger_ for the 20th Oct., 1858, these
-grievances, more severe even than we have represented them, are now
-exciting an agitation.
-
- “_To the Retail Grocers of the United Kingdom._
-
- “Gentlemen,—The time has arrived for the trade at once to make a move
- for the revision of tares on all raw sugars. Facts prove the evil of
- the present system to be greatly on the increase. We submit a case as
- under, and only one out of twenty. On the 30th August, 1858, we bought
- 3 hogsheads of Barbados, mark TG
-                                K
-
-      Invoice Tares.                 Re Tares.
- No.   cwt.  qrs.  lb.  lb.        No.  cwt.  qrs.  lb.
-  1     1     2    14    6 drft.    1    1     3    27
-  7     1     2     7               7    1     3    20
-  3     1     2    21               3    1     3    27
-        ─────────────                    ─────────────
-        4     3    20                    5     3    18
-                        Deduct           4     3    20
-                                         ─────────────   _s._  £  _s._  _d._
-                                         0     3    26 at 42 — 2   1     3
-
- “We make a claim for £2. 1_s._ 3_d._; we are told by the wholesale
- grocer there is no redress.
-
- “There is another evil which the retail grocer has to contend with,
- that is, the mode of sampling raw sugars: the foots are excluded
- from the merchants’ samples. Facts will prove that in thousands of
- hogsheads of Barbados this season there is an average of 5 cwt. of
- foots in each; we have turned out some with 10 cwt., which are at
- least 5_s._ per cwt. less value than sample, and in these cases we are
- told again there is no redress.
-
- “These two causes are bringing hundreds of hard-working men to ruin
- {123} and will bring hundreds more unless the trade take it up, and
- we implore them to unite in obtaining so important a revision.
-
- “We are, Gentlemen, your obedient servants,
-
- “WALKER and STAINES.[6]
-
- “Birmingham, October 19, 1858.”
-
-   [6] The abuses described in this letter have now, we believe, been
-   abolished.
-
-A more subtle method of imposition remains to be added. It is the
-practice of sugar-refiners to put moist, crushed sugar into dried
-casks. During the time that elapses before one of these casks is opened
-by the retailer, the desiccated wood has taken up the excess of water
-from the sugar; which is thus brought again into good condition. When
-the retailer, finding that the cask weighs much more than was allowed
-as tare by the wholesale dealer, complains to him of this excess, the
-reply is—“Send it up to us, and we will _dry it_ and weigh it, as is
-the custom of the trade.”
-
-Without further detailing these malpractices, of which the above
-examples are perhaps the worst, we will advert only to one other
-point in the transactions of these large houses—the drawing-up of
-trade-circulars. It is the habit of many wholesale dealers to send
-round to their customers, periodic accounts of the past transactions,
-present condition, and prospects of the markets. Serving as checks on
-each other, as they do, these documents are prevented from swerving
-very widely from the truth. But it is scarcely to be expected that
-they should be quite honest. Those who issue them, being in most
-cases interested in the prices of the commodities referred to in
-their circulars, are swayed by their interests in the representations
-they make respecting the probabilities of the future. Far-seeing
-retailers are on their guard against this. A large provincial grocer,
-who thoroughly understands his business, said to us—“As a rule, I
-throw trade-circulars on the fire.” And that this estimate of their
-trustworthiness is not unwarranted, we gather from the expressions of
-those engaged in other businesses. From two leather-dealers, one in
-the country and one in London, we have heard the same complaint {124}
-against the circulars published by houses in their trade, that they
-are misleading. Not that they state untruths; but that they produce
-false impressions by leaving out facts which they should have stated.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-In illustrating the morality of manufacturers, we shall confine
-ourselves to one class—those who work in silk. And it will be the most
-convenient method of arranging facts, to follow the silk through its
-various stages; from its state when imported, to its state when ready
-for the wearer.
-
-Bundles of raw silk from abroad—not uncommonly weighted with rubbish,
-stones, or rouleaux of Chinese copper coin, to the loss of the
-buyer—are disposed of by auction. Purchases are made on behalf of the
-silk-dealers by “sworn brokers;” and the regulation is, that these
-sworn brokers shall confine themselves to their functions as agents.
-From a silk-manufacturer, however, we learn that they are currently
-understood to be themselves speculators in silk, either directly or
-by proxy; and that as thus personally interested in prices, they
-become faulty as agents. We give this, however, simply as a prevailing
-opinion, for the truth of which we do not vouch.
-
-The silk bought by the London dealer, he sends into the manufacturing
-districts to be “thrown;” that is, to be made into thread fit for
-weaving. In the established form of bargain between the silk-dealer
-and the silk-throwster, we have a strange instance of an organized and
-recognized deception; which has seemingly grown out of a check on a
-previous deception. The throwing of silk is necessarily accompanied
-by some waste, from broken ends, knots, and fibres too weak to wind.
-This waste varies in different kinds of silk from 3 per cent. to 20 per
-cent.: the average being about 5 per cent. The per-centage of waste
-being thus variable, it is obvious that in the absence of restraint,
-a dishonest silk-throwster might abstract a portion of the silk; and,
-on returning the rest to the dealer, might plead {125} that the great
-diminution in weight had resulted from the large amount of loss in the
-process of throwing. Hence there has arisen a system, called “working
-on cost,” which requires the throwster to send back to the dealer
-the same weight of silk which he receives: the meaning of the phrase
-being, we presume, that whatever waste the throwster makes must be at
-his own cost. Now, as it is impossible to throw silk without _some_
-waste—at least 3 per cent., and ordinarily 5 per cent.—this arrangement
-necessitates a deception; if, indeed, that can be called a deception
-which is tacitly understood by all concerned. The silk has to be
-weighted. As much as is lost in throwing, has to be made up by some
-foreign substance introduced. Soap is largely used for this. In small
-quantity, soap is requisite to facilitate the running of the threads
-in the process of manufacture; and the quantity is readily increased.
-Sugar also is used. And by one means or other, the threads are made to
-absorb enough matter to produce the desired weight. To this system all
-silk-throwsters are obliged to succumb; and some of them carry it to
-a great extent, as a means of hiding either carelessness or something
-worse.
-
-The next stage through which silk passes, is that of dyeing. Here,
-too, impositions have grown chronic and general. In times past, as we
-learn from a ribbon-manufacturer, the weighting by water was the chief
-dishonesty. Bundles returned from the dyer’s, if not manifestly damp,
-still, containing moisture enough to make up for a portion of the silk
-that had been kept back; and precautions had to be taken to escape
-losses thus entailed. Since then, however, there has arisen a method
-of deception which leaves this far behind—that of employing heavy
-dyes. The following details have been given us by a silk-throwster.
-It is now, he says, some five-and-thirty years since this method was
-commenced. Before that time silk lost a considerable part of its weight
-in the copper. The ultimate fibre of silk is coated, in issuing from
-the spinneret of the silk-worm, with {126} a film of varnish which is
-soluble in boiling water. In dyeing, therefore, this film, amounting
-to 25 per cent. of the entire weight of the silk, is dissolved off;
-and the silk is rendered that much lighter. So that originally, for
-every sixteen ounces of silk sent to the dyer’s, only twelve ounces
-were returned. Gradually, however, by the use of heavy dyes, this
-result has been reversed. The silk now gains in weight; and sometimes
-to a scarcely credible extent. According to the requirement, silk is
-sent back from the dyer’s of any weight, from twelve ounces to the
-pound up to forty ounces to the pound. The original pound of silk,
-instead of losing four ounces, as it naturally would, is actually,
-when certain black dyes are used, made to gain as much as twenty-four
-ounces! Instead of 25 per cent. lighter, it is returned 150 per cent.
-heavier—is weighted with 175 per cent. of foreign matter! Now as,
-during this stage of its manufacture, the transactions in silk are
-carried on by weight, it is manifest that in the introduction and
-development of this system, we have a long history of frauds. At
-present all in the trade are aware of it, and on their guard against
-it. Like other modes of adulteration, in becoming established and
-universal, it has ceased to be profitable to any one. But it still
-serves to indicate the morals of those concerned.
-
-The thrown and dyed silk passes into the hands of the weaver; and here
-again we come upon dishonesties. Manufacturers of figured silks sin
-against their fellows by stealing their patterns. The laws which have
-been found necessary to prevent this species of piracy, show that it
-has been carried to a great extent. Even now it is not prevented. One
-who has himself suffered from it, tells us that manufacturers still
-get one another’s designs by bribing the workmen. In their dealings
-with “buyers,” too, some manufacturers resort to deceptions: perhaps
-tempted to do so by the desire to compensate themselves for the heavy
-tax paid in treating, etc. Goods which have already been seen {127}
-and declined by other buyers, are brought before a subsequent one with
-artfully-devised appearances of secrecy, accompanied by professions
-that these goods have been specially reserved for his inspection:
-a manœuvre by which an unwary man is sometimes betrayed. That the
-process of production has its delusions, scarcely needs saying. In the
-ribbon-trade, for example, there is a practice called “top-ending;”
-that is, making the first three yards good, and the rest (which is
-covered when rolled up) of bad or loose texture—80 “shutes” to the inch
-instead of 108. And then there comes the issuing of imitations made
-of inferior materials—textile adulterations as we may call them. This
-practice of debasement, not an occasional but an established one, is
-carried to a surprising extent, and with surprising rapidity. Some new
-fabric, first sold at 7_s._ 6_d._ per yard, is supplanted by successive
-counterfeits; until at the end of eighteen months a semblance of it is
-selling at 4_s._ 3_d._ per yard. Nay, still greater depreciations of
-quality and price take place—from 10_s._ down to 3_s._, and even 2_s._
-per yard. Until at length the badness of these spurious fabrics becomes
-so conspicuous, that they are unsaleable; and there ensues a reaction,
-ending either in the reintroduction of the original fabric, or in the
-production of some novelty to supply its place.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Among our notes of malpractices in trade, retail, wholesale, and
-manufacturing, we have many others that must be passed over. We cannot
-here enlarge on the not uncommon trick of using false trade-marks; or
-of imitating another maker’s wrappers. We must be satisfied with simply
-referring to the doings of apparently-reputable houses, which purchase
-goods known to be dishonestly obtained. And we are obliged to refrain
-from particularizing certain established arrangements, existing under
-cover of the highest respectability, which seem intended to facilitate
-these nefarious transactions. The frauds we have detailed {128} are
-but samples of a state of things which it would take a volume to
-describe in full.
-
-The further instances of trading-immorality which it seems desirable
-here to give, are those which carry with them a certain excuse: showing
-as they do how insensibly, and almost irresistibly, men are thrust
-into vicious practices. Always, no doubt, some utterly unconscientious
-trader is the first to introduce a new form of fraud. He is by-and-by
-followed by others who wear their moral codes but loosely. The more
-upright traders are continually tempted to adopt this questionable
-device which those around them are adopting. The greater the number who
-yield, and the more familiar the device becomes, the more difficult
-is it for the remainder to stand out against it. The pressure of
-competition upon them becomes more and more severe. They have to fight
-an unequal battle: debarred as they are from one of the sources of
-profit which their antagonists possess. And they are finally almost
-compelled to follow the lead of the rest. Take for example what
-has happened in the candle-trade. As all know, the commoner kinds
-of candles are sold in bunches, supposed to weigh a pound each.
-Originally, the nominal weight corresponded with the real weight. But
-at present the weight is habitually short by an amount varying from
-half an ounce to two ounces—is sometimes depreciated 12 1/2 per
-cent. If, now, an honest chandler offers to supply a retailer at, say,
-six shillings for the dozen pounds, the answer he receives is—“Oh, we
-get them for five-and-eightpence.” “But mine,” replies the chandler,
-“are of full weight; while those you buy at five-and-eightpence are
-not.” “What does that matter to me?” the retailer rejoins—“a pound
-of candles is a pound of candles: my customers buy them in the
-bunch, and won’t know the difference between yours and another’s.”
-And the honest chandler, being everywhere met with this argument,
-finds that he must either make his bunches of short weight, or give
-up business. Take another case, which, {129} like the last, we have
-direct from the mouth of one who has been obliged to succumb. It is
-that of a manufacturer of elastic webbing, now extensively used in
-making boots, etc. From a London house with which he dealt largely,
-this manufacturer recently received a sample of webbing produced by
-some one else, accompanied by the question, “Can you make us this
-at ——— per yard?” (naming a price below that at which he had before
-supplied them); and hinting that if he could not do so they must go
-elsewhere. On pulling to pieces the sample (which he showed to us),
-this manufacturer found that sundry of the threads which should have
-been of silk were of cotton. Indicating this fact to those who sent
-him the sample, he replied that, if he made a like substitution, he
-could furnish the fabric at the price named; and the result was that
-he eventually did thus furnish it. He saw that if he did not do so, he
-must lose a considerable share of his trade. He saw further, that if
-he did not at once yield, he would have to yield in the end; for that
-other elastic-webbing-makers would one after another engage to produce
-this adulterated fabric at correspondingly diminished prices; and that
-when at length he stood alone in selling an apparently-similar article
-at a higher price, his business would leave him. This manufacturer we
-have the best reasons for knowing to be a man of fine moral nature,
-both generous and upright; and yet we here see him obliged, in a sense,
-to implicate himself in one of these processes of vitiation. It is a
-startling assertion, but it is none the less a true one, that those
-who resist these corruptions often do it at the risk of bankruptcy;
-sometimes the certainty of bankruptcy. We do not say this simply as
-a manifest inference from the conditions, as above described. We say
-it on the warrant of instances which have been given to us. From one
-brought up in his house, we have had the history of a draper who,
-carrying his conscience into his shop, refused to commit the current
-frauds of the trade. He would not represent his {130} goods as of
-better quality than they really were; he would not say that patterns
-were just out, when they had been issued the previous season; he
-would not warrant to wash well, colours which he knew to be fugitive.
-Refraining from these and the like malpractices of his competitors;
-and, as a consequence, daily failing to sell various articles which
-his competitors would have sold by force of lying; his business was so
-unremunerative that he twice became bankrupt. And in the opinion of
-our informant, he inflicted more evil upon others by his bankruptcies,
-than he would have done by committing the usual trade-dishonesties.
-See, then, how complicated the question becomes; and how difficult to
-estimate the trader’s criminality. Often—generally indeed—he has to
-choose between two wrongs. He has tried to carry on his business with
-strict integrity. He has sold none but genuine articles, and has given
-full measure. Others in the same business adulterate or otherwise
-delude, and are so able to undersell him. His customers, not adequately
-appreciating the superiority in the quality or quantity of his goods,
-and attracted by the apparent cheapness at other shops, desert him.
-Inspection of his books proves the alarming fact that his diminishing
-returns will soon be insufficient to meet his engagements, and provide
-for his increasing family. What then must he do? Must he continue his
-present course; stop payment; inflict heavy losses on his creditors;
-and, with his wife and children, turn out into the streets? Or must he
-follow the example of his competitors; use their artifices; and give
-his customers the same apparent advantages? The last not only seems
-the least detrimental to himself, but also may be considered the least
-detrimental to others. Moreover, the like is done by men regarded as
-respectable. Why should he ruin himself and family in trying to be
-better than his neighbours? He will do as they do.
-
-Such is the position of the trader; such is the reasoning by which
-he justifies himself; and it is hard to visit him {131} with harsh
-condemnation. Of course this statement of the case is by no means
-universally true. There are businesses in which, competition being
-less active, the excuse for falling into corrupt practices does not
-hold; and here, indeed, we find corrupt practices much less prevalent.
-Many traders, too, have obtained connexions which secure to them
-adequate returns without descending to small rogueries; and they have
-no defence if they thus degrade themselves. Moreover, there are the
-men—commonly not prompted by necessity but by greed—who introduce
-these adulterations and petty frauds; and on these should descend
-unmitigated indignation: both as being themselves criminals without
-excuse, and as causing criminality in others. Leaving out, however,
-these comparatively small classes, most traders by whom the commoner
-businesses are carried on, must receive a much more qualified censure
-than they at first sight seem to deserve. On all sides we have met with
-the same conviction, that for those engaged in the ordinary trades
-there are but two courses—either to adopt the practices of their
-competitors, or to give up business. Men in different occupations and
-in different places—men naturally conscientious, who manifestly chafed
-under the degradations they submitted to, have one and all expressed to
-us the sad belief that it is impossible to carry on trade with strict
-rectitude. Their concurrent opinion, independently given by each, is
-that the scrupulously honest man must go to the wall.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-But that it has been, during the past year, frequently treated by
-the daily press, we might here enter at some length on the topic of
-banking-delinquencies. As it is, we may presume all to be familiar with
-the facts, and shall limit ourselves to making a few comments.
-
-In the opinion of one whose means of judging have been second to those
-of few, the directors of joint-stock-banks have rarely been guilty of
-direct dishonesty. Admitting {132} notorious exceptions, the general
-fact appears to be that directors have had no immediate interests
-in furthering these speculations which have proved so ruinous to
-depositors and shareholders; but have usually been among the greatest
-sufferers. Their fault has rather been the less flagitious, though
-still grave fault, of indifference to their responsibilities. Often
-with very inadequate knowledge they have undertaken to trade with
-property belonging in great part to needy people. Instead of using as
-much care in the investment of this property as though it were their
-own, many of them have shown culpable recklessness: either themselves
-loaning the entrusted capital without adequate guarantee, or else
-passively allowing their colleagues to do this. Sundry excuses may
-doubtless be made for them. The well-known defects of a corporate
-conscience, caused by divided responsibility, must be remembered in
-mitigation. And it may also be pleaded for such delinquents that
-if shareholders, swayed by reverence for mere wealth and position,
-choose as directors, not the most intelligent, the most experienced,
-and those of longest-tried probity, but those of largest capital or
-highest rank, the blame must not be cast solely on the men so chosen,
-but must be shared by the men who choose them. Nay, further, it must
-fall on the public as well as on shareholders; seeing that this
-unwise selection of directors is in part determined by the known bias
-of depositors. But after all allowances have been made, it must be
-admitted that these bank-administrators who risk the property of their
-clients by lending it to speculators, are near akin in morality to the
-speculators themselves. As these speculators risk other men’s money in
-undertakings which they hope will be profitable; so do the directors
-who lend them the money. If these last plead that the money thus lent
-is lent with the belief that it will be repaid with good interest, the
-first may similarly plead that they expect their investment to return
-the borrowed capital along with a {133} handsome profit. In each
-case the transaction is one of which the evil consequences, if they
-come, fall more largely on others than on the actors. And though it
-may be contended, on behalf of the director, that what he does is done
-chiefly for the benefit of his constituents, whereas the speculator has
-in view only his own benefit; it may be replied that the director’s
-blameworthiness is not the less because he took a rash step with a
-comparatively weak motive. The truth is that when a bank-director lends
-the capital of shareholders to those to whom he would not lend his own
-capital, he is guilty of a breach of trust. In tracing the gradations
-of crime, we pass from direct robbery to robbery one, two, three, or
-more degrees removed. Though a man who speculates with other people’s
-money is not chargeable with direct robbery, he is chargeable with
-robbery one degree removed: he deliberately stakes his neighbour’s
-property, intending to appropriate the gain, if any, and to let his
-neighbour suffer the loss, if any: his crime is that of contingent
-robbery. And hence any one who, standing like a bank-director in the
-position of trustee, puts the money with which he is entrusted into a
-speculator’s hands, must be called an accessory to contingent robbery.
-
-If so grave a condemnation is to be passed on those who lend
-trust-money to speculators, as well as on the speculators who borrow
-it, what shall we say of the still more delinquent class who obtain
-loans by fraud—who not only pawn other men’s property when obtained,
-but obtain it under false pretences? For how else than thus must we
-describe the doings of those who raise money by accommodation-bills?
-When A and B agree, the one to draw and the other to accept a bill
-of £1000 for “value received;” while in truth there has been no sale
-of goods between them, or no value received; the transaction is not
-simply an embodied lie, but it becomes thereafter a living and active
-lie. Whoever discounts the bill, does so in the {134} belief that B,
-having become possessed of £1000 worth of goods, will, when the bill
-falls due, have either the £1000 worth of goods or some equivalent,
-with which to meet it. Did he know that there were no such goods in the
-hands of either A or B, and no other property available for liquidating
-the bill, he would not discount it—he would not lend money to a man of
-straw without security. Had A taken to the bank a forged mortgage-deed,
-and obtained a loan upon it, he would not have committed a greater
-wrong. Practically, an accommodation-bill is a forgery. It is an error
-to suppose that forgery is limited to the production of documents
-that are _physically_ false—that contain signatures or other symbols
-which are not what they appear to be: forgery, properly understood,
-equally includes the production of documents that are _morally_ false.
-What constitutes the crime committed in forging a bank-note? Not the
-mere mechanical imitation. This is but a means to the end; and, taken
-alone, is no crime at all. The crime consists in deluding others into
-the acceptance of what seems to be a representative of so much money,
-but which actually represents nothing. It matters not whether the
-delusion is effected by copying the forms of the letters and figures,
-as in a forged bank-note, or by copying the form of expression, as in
-an accommodation-bill. In either case a semblance of value is given to
-that which has no value; and it is in giving this false appearance of
-value that the crime consists. It is true that generally, the acceptor
-of an accommodation-bill hopes to be able to meet it when due. But if
-those who think this exonerates him, will remember the many cases in
-which, by the use of forged documents, men have obtained possession of
-moneys which they hoped presently to replace, and were nevertheless
-judged guilty of forgery, they will see that the plea is insufficient.
-We contend, then, that the manufacturers of accommodation-bills should
-be classed as forgers. That if the law so classed them, much good
-would result, we are {135} not prepared to say. Several questions
-present themselves:—Whether such a change would cause inconvenience,
-by negativing the many harmless transactions carried on under this
-fictitious form by solvent men? Whether making it penal to use the
-words “value received,” unless there _had_ been value received, would
-not simply originate an additional class of bills in which these words
-were omitted? Whether it would be an advantage if bills bore on their
-faces proofs that they did or did not represent actual sales? Whether
-a restraint on undue credit would result, when bankers and discounters
-saw that certain bills coming to them in the names of speculative or
-unsubstantial traders, were avowed accommodation-bills? But these
-are questions we need not go out of our way to discuss. We are here
-concerned only with the morality of the question.
-
-Duly to estimate the greatness of the evils indicated, however, we
-must bear in mind both that the fraudulent transactions thus entered
-into are numerous, and that each generally becomes the cause of
-others. The original lie is commonly the parent of further lies, which
-again give rise to an increasing progeny; and so on for successive
-generations, multiplying as they descend. When A and B find their
-£1000 bill about to fall due, and the expected proceeds of their
-speculation not forthcoming—when they find, as they often do, either
-that the investment has resulted in a loss instead of a gain; or that
-the time for realizing their hoped-for profits, has not yet come; or
-that the profits, if there are any, do not cover the extravagances of
-living which, in the meantime, they have sanguinely indulged in—when,
-in short, they find that the bill cannot be taken up; they resort to
-the expedient of manufacturing other bills with which to liquidate
-the first. And while they are about it, they usually think it will be
-as well to raise a somewhat larger sum than is required to meet their
-outstanding engagements. Unless it happens that great success enables
-{136} them to redeem themselves, this proceeding is repeated, and
-again repeated. So long as there is no monetary crisis, it continues
-easy thus to keep afloat; and, indeed, the appearance of prosperity
-which is given by an extended circulation of bills in their names,
-bearing respectable indorsements, creates a confidence in them which
-renders the obtainment of credit easier than at first. And where, as
-in some cases, this process is carried to the extent of employing men
-in different towns throughout the kingdom, and even in distant parts
-of the world, to accept bills, the appearances are still better kept
-up, and the bubble reaches a still greater development. As, however,
-all these transactions are carried on with borrowed capital, on which
-interest has to be paid; as, further, the maintenance of this organized
-fraud entails constant expenses, as well as occasional sacrifices;
-and as it is in the very nature of the system to generate reckless
-speculation; the fabric of lies is almost certain ultimately to fall;
-and, in falling, to ruin or embarrass others besides those who had
-given credit.
-
-Nor does the evil end with the direct penalties from time to time
-inflicted on honest traders. There is also a grave indirect penalty
-which they suffer from the system. These forgers of credit are
-habitually instrumental in lowering prices below their natural level.
-To meet emergencies, they are obliged every now and then to sell goods
-at a loss: the alternative being immediate stoppage. Though with each
-such concern, this is but an occasional incident, yet, taking the whole
-number of them connected with any one business, it results that there
-are generally some who are making sacrifices—generally some who are
-unnaturally depressing the market. In short, the capital fraudulently
-obtained from some traders is, in part, dissipated in rendering the
-business of other traders deficiently remunerative: often to their
-serious embarrassment.
-
-If, however, the whole truth must be said, the condemnation visited on
-these commercial vampires is not to be {137} confined to them; but
-is in some degree deserved by a much more numerous class. Between the
-penniless schemer who obtains the use of capital by false pretences,
-and the upright trader who never contracts greater liabilities than
-his estate will liquidate, there lie all gradations. From businesses
-carried on entirely with other people’s capital, obtained by forgery,
-we pass to businesses in which there is a real capital of one-tenth
-and a credit-capital of nine-tenths; to other businesses in which the
-ratio of real to fictitious capital is somewhat greater; and so on
-until we reach the very extensive class of men who trade but a little
-beyond their means. To get more credit than would be given were the
-state of the business known, is in all cases the aim; and the cases
-in which this credit is partially unwarranted, differ only in degree
-from those in which it is wholly unwarranted. As most are beginning to
-see, the prevalence of this indirect dishonesty has not a little to
-do with our commercial disasters. Speaking broadly, the tendency is
-for every trader to hypothecate the capital of other traders, as well
-as his own. And when A has borrowed on the strength of B’s credit; B
-on the strength of C’s; and C on the strength of A’s—when, throughout
-the trading world, each has made engagements which he can meet only by
-direct or indirect aid—when everybody is wanting help from some one
-else to save him from falling; a crash is certain. The punishment of a
-general unconscientiousness may be postponed, but it is sure to come
-eventually.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The average commercial morality cannot, of course, be accurately
-depicted in so brief a space. On the one hand, we have been able to
-give but a few typical instances of the malpractices by which trade is
-disgraced. On the other hand, we have been obliged to present these
-alone; unqualified by the large amount of honest dealing throughout
-which they are dispersed. While, by accumulating such evidences, the
-indictment may be made heavier; by diluting them {138} with the
-immense mass of equitable transactions daily carried on, the verdict
-would be mitigated. After making every allowance, however, we fear
-that the state of things is very bad. Our impression on this point
-is due less to the particular facts above given, than to the general
-opinion expressed by our informants. On all sides we have found
-the result of long personal experience, to be the conviction that
-trade is essentially corrupt. In tones of disgust or discouragement,
-reprehension or derision, according to their several natures, men in
-business have one after another expressed or implied this belief.
-Omitting the highest mercantile classes, a few of the less common
-trades, and those exceptional cases where an entire command of the
-market has been obtained, the uniform testimony of competent judges
-is, that success is incompatible with strict integrity. To live in
-the commercial world it appears necessary to adopt its ethical code:
-neither exceeding nor falling short of it—neither being less honest
-nor more honest. Those who sink below its standard are expelled;
-while those who rise above it are either pulled down to it or ruined.
-As, in self-defence, the civilized man becomes savage among savages;
-so, it seems that in self-defence, the scrupulous trader is obliged
-to become as little scrupulous as his competitors. It has been said
-that the law of the animal creation is—“Eat and be eaten;” and of
-our trading community it may similarly be said that its law is—Cheat
-and be cheated. A system of keen competition, carried on, as it is,
-without adequate moral restraint, is very much a system of commercial
-cannibalism. Its alternatives are—Use the same weapons as your
-antagonists or be conquered and devoured.
-
-Of questions suggested by these facts, one of the most obvious
-is—Are not the prejudices which have ever been entertained against
-trade and traders, thus fully justified? do not these meannesses
-and dishonesties, and the moral degradation they imply, warrant the
-disrespect shown to men in business? A prompt affirmative answer will
-{139} probably be looked for; but we very much doubt whether it
-should be given. We are rather of opinion that these delinquencies are
-products of the average character placed under special conditions.
-There is no reason for assuming that the trading classes are
-intrinsically worse than other classes. Men taken at random from higher
-and lower ranks, would, most likely, if similarly circumstanced, do
-much the same. Indeed the mercantile world might readily recriminate.
-Is it a solicitor who comments on their misdoings? They may quickly
-silence him by referring to the countless dark stains on the reputation
-of his fraternity. Is it a barrister? His frequent practice of putting
-in pleas which he knows are not valid, and his established habit of
-taking fees for work he does not perform, make his criticism somewhat
-suicidal. Does the condemnation come through the press? The condemned
-may remind those who write, of the fact that it is not quite honest
-to utter a positive verdict on a book merely glanced through, or to
-pen glowing eulogies on the mediocre work of a friend while slighting
-the good one of an enemy; and they may further ask whether those who,
-at the dictation of an employer, write what they disbelieve, are not
-guilty of the serious offence of adulterating public opinion. Moreover,
-traders might contend that many of their delinquencies are thrust on
-them by the injustice of their customers. They, and especially drapers,
-might point to the fact that the habitual demand for an abatement of
-price, is made in utter disregard of their reasonable profits; and
-that, to protect themselves against attempts to gain by their loss,
-they are obliged to name prices greater than those they intend to take.
-They might also urge that the straits to which they are often brought
-by non-payment of large sums due from their wealthier customers, is
-itself a cause of their malpractices: obliging them, as it does, to
-use all means, illegitimate as well as legitimate, for getting the
-wherewith to meet their engagements. And then, after proving that
-those without {140} excuse show this disregard of other men’s claims,
-traders might ask whether they, who have the excuse of having to
-contend with a merciless competition, are alone to be blamed if they
-display a like disregard in other forms. Nay, even to the guardians
-of social rectitude—members of the legislature—they might use the _tu
-quoque_ argument: asking whether bribery of a customer’s servant,
-is any worse than bribery of an elector? or whether the gaining
-of suffrages by clap-trap hustings-speeches, containing insincere
-professions adapted to the taste of the constituency, is not as bad as
-getting an order for goods by delusive representations respecting their
-quality? No; few if any classes are free from immoralities which are as
-great, _relatively to the temptations_, as these we have been exposing.
-Of course they will not be so petty or so gross where the circumstances
-do not prompt pettiness or grossness; nor so constant and organized
-where the class-conditions have not tended to make them habitual. But,
-taken with these qualifications, we think that much might be said for
-the proposition that the trading classes, neither better nor worse
-intrinsically than other classes, are betrayed into their flagitious
-habits by external causes.
-
-Another question, here naturally arising, is—Are not these evils
-growing worse? Many of the facts we have cited seem to imply that they
-are. Yet there are many other facts which point as distinctly the
-other way. In weighing the evidence, we must bear in mind that the
-greater public attention at present paid to such matters, is itself a
-source of error—is apt to generate the belief that evils now becoming
-recognized are evils that have recently arisen; when in truth they
-have merely been hitherto disregarded, or less regarded. It has been
-clearly thus with crime, with distress, with popular ignorance; and
-it is very probably thus with trading-dishonesties. As it is true of
-individual beings, that their height in the scale of creation may be
-measured by the degree of their self-consciousness; {141} so, in a
-sense, it is true of societies. Advanced and highly-organized societies
-are distinguished from lower ones by the evolution of something that
-stands for a _social self-consciousness_. Among ourselves there
-has, happily, been of late years a remarkable growth of this social
-self-consciousness; and we believe that to this is chiefly ascribable
-the impression that commercial malpractices are increasing. Such facts
-as have come down to us respecting the trade of past times, confirm
-this view. In his _Complete English Tradesman_, Defoe mentions, among
-other manœuvres of retailers, the false lights which they introduced
-into their shops, for the purpose of giving delusive appearances
-to their goods. He comments on the “shop rhetorick,” the “flux of
-falsehoods,” which tradesmen habitually uttered to their customers;
-and quotes their defence as being that they could not live without
-lying. He says, too, that there was scarce a shopkeeper who had not a
-bag of spurious or debased coin, from which he gave change whenever he
-could; and that men, even the most honest, triumphed in their skill in
-getting rid of bad money. These facts show that the mercantile morals
-of that day were, at any rate, not better than ours; and if we call to
-mind the numerous Acts of Parliament passed in old times to prevent
-frauds of all kinds, we perceive the like implication. As much may,
-indeed, be safely inferred from the general state of society. When,
-reign after reign, governments debased the coinage, the moral tone of
-the middle classes could scarcely have been higher than now. Among
-generations whose sympathy with the claims of fellow-creatures was so
-weak, that the slave-trade was not only thought justifiable, but the
-initiator of it was rewarded by permission to record the feat in his
-coat of arms, it is hardly possible that men respected the claims of
-their fellow-citizens more than at present. Times characterized by an
-administration of justice so inefficient, that there were in London
-nests of criminals who defied the law, and on all high roads robbers
-who eluded it, cannot {142} have been distinguished by just mercantile
-dealings. While, conversely, an age which, like ours, has seen so many
-equitable social changes thrust on the legislature by public opinion,
-is very unlikely to be an age in which the transactions between
-individuals have been growing more inequitable. Yet, on the other hand,
-it is undeniable that many of the dishonesties we have described are
-of modern origin. Not a few of them have become established during
-the last thirty years; and others are even now arising. How are these
-seeming contradictions to be reconciled?
-
-The reconciliation is not difficult. It lies in the fact that while
-the _direct_ frauds have been diminishing, the _indirect_ frauds have
-been increasing: alike in variety and in number. And this admission we
-take to be consistent with the opinion that the standard of commercial
-morals is higher than it was. For if we omit, as excluded from the
-question, the penal restraints—religious and legal—and ask what is the
-ultimate moral restraint to the aggression of man on man, we find it to
-be—sympathy with the pain inflicted. Now the keenness of the sympathy,
-depending on the vividness with which this pain is realized, varies
-with the conditions of the case. It may be active enough to check
-misdeeds which will manifestly cause great suffering, and yet not be
-active enough to check misdeeds which will cause but slight annoyance.
-While sufficiently acute to prevent a man from doing that which will
-entail immediate injury on a known person, it may not be sufficiently
-acute to prevent him from doing that which will entail remote injuries
-on unknown persons. And we find the facts to agree with this deduction,
-that the moral restraint varies according to the clearness with which
-the evil consequences are conceived. Many a one who would shrink
-from picking a pocket does not scruple to adulterate his goods; and
-he who never dreams of passing base coin will yet be a party to
-joint-stock-bank deceptions. Hence, as we say, the multiplication of
-the more subtle and complex forms of {143} fraud, is consistent with
-a general progress in morality; provided it is accompanied with a
-decrease in the grosser forms of fraud.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-But the question which most concerns us is, not whether the morals
-of trade are better or worse than they have been? but rather—why are
-they so bad? Why in this civilized state of ours, is there so much
-that betrays the cunning selfishness of the savage? Why, after the
-careful inculcations of rectitude during education, comes there in
-after-life all this knavery? Why, in spite of all the exhortations to
-which the commercial classes listen every Sunday, do they next morning
-recommence their evil deeds? What is this so potent agency which almost
-neutralizes the discipline of education, of law, of religion?
-
-Various subsidiary causes that might be assigned, must be passed over,
-that we may have space to deal with the chief cause. In an exhaustive
-statement, something would have to be said on the credulity of
-consumers, which leads them to believe in representations of impossible
-advantages; and something, too, on their greediness, which, ever
-prompting them to look for more than they ought to get, encourages
-sellers to offer delusive bargains. The increased difficulty of living
-consequent on growing pressure of population, might perhaps come in
-as a part cause; and that greater cost of bringing up a family, which
-results from the higher standard of education, might be added. But
-the chief inciter of these trading malpractices is intense desire for
-wealth. And if we ask—Why this intense desire? the reply is—It results
-from the _indiscriminate respect paid to wealth_.
-
-To be distinguished from the common herd—to be somebody—to make a
-name, a position—this is the universal ambition; and to accumulate
-riches is alike the surest and the easiest way of fulfilling this
-ambition. Very early in life all learn this. At school, the court
-paid to one whose {144} parents have called in their carriage to see
-him, is conspicuous; while the poor boy whose insufficient stock of
-clothes implies the small means of his family, soon has burnt into
-his memory the fact that poverty is contemptible. On entering the
-world, the lessons which may have been taught about the nobility of
-self-sacrifice, the reverence due to genius, the admirableness of high
-integrity, are quickly neutralized by experience: men’s actions proving
-that these are not their standards of respect. It is soon perceived
-that while abundant outward marks of deference from fellow-citizens
-may almost certainly be gained by directing every energy to the
-accumulation of property, they are but rarely to be gained in any other
-way; and that even in the few cases in which they are otherwise gained,
-they are not given with entire unreserve, but are commonly joined
-with a more or less manifest display of patronage. When, seeing this,
-the young man further sees that while the acquisition of property is
-possible with his mediocre endowments, the acquirement of distinction
-by brilliant discoveries, or heroic acts, or high achievements in
-art, implies faculties and feelings which he does not possess; it is
-not difficult to understand why he devotes himself heart and soul to
-business.
-
-We do not mean to say that men act on the consciously reasoned-out
-conclusions thus indicated; but we mean that these conclusions are the
-unconsciously-formed products of their daily experiences. From early
-childhood the sayings and doings of all around them have generated
-the idea that wealth and respectability are two sides of the same
-thing. This idea, growing with their growth, and strengthening with
-their strength, becomes at last almost what we may call an organic
-conviction. And this organic conviction it is which prompts the
-expenditure of all their energies in money-making. We contend that the
-chief stimulus is not the desire for the wealth itself, but for the
-applause and position which the wealth brings. And in this belief, we
-{145} find ourselves at one with various intelligent traders with whom
-we have talked on the matter. It is incredible that men should make
-the sacrifices, mental and bodily, which they do, merely to get the
-material benefits which money purchases. Who would undertake an extra
-burden of business for the purpose of getting a cellar of choice wines
-for his own drinking? He who does it, does it that he may have choice
-wines to give his guests and gain their praises. What merchant would
-spend an additional hour at his office daily, merely that he might
-move into a house in a more fashionable quarter? He submits to the
-tax not to gain health and comfort but for the sake of the increased
-social consideration which the new house will bring him. Where is the
-man who would lie awake at nights devising means of increasing his
-income, in the hope of being able to provide his wife with a carriage,
-were the use of the carriage the sole consideration? It is because
-of the _éclat_ which the carriage will give, that he enters on these
-additional anxieties. So manifest, so trite, indeed, are these truths,
-that we should be ashamed of insisting on them, did not our argument
-require it.
-
-For if the desire for that homage which wealth brings, is the chief
-stimulus to these strivings after wealth, then the giving of this
-homage (when given, as it is, with but little discrimination) is the
-chief cause of the dishonesties into which these strivings betray
-mercantile men. When the shopkeeper, on the strength of a prosperous
-year and favourable prospects, has yielded to his wife’s persuasions,
-and replaced the old furniture with new, at an outlay greater than
-his income covers—when, instead of the hoped-for increase, the next
-year brings a decrease in his returns—when he finds that his expenses
-are out-running his revenue; then does he fall under the strongest
-temptation to adopt some newly-introduced adulteration or other
-malpractice. When, having by display gained a certain recognition, the
-wholesale trader begins to give dinners {146} appropriate only to
-those of ten times his income, with other expensive entertainments to
-match—when, having for a time carried on this style at a cost greater
-than he can afford, he finds that he cannot discontinue it without
-giving up his position; then is he most strongly prompted to enter
-into larger transactions, to trade beyond his means, to seek undue
-credit, to get into that ever-complicating series of misdeeds which
-ends in disgraceful bankruptcy. And if these are the facts then is it
-an unavoidable conclusion that the blind admiration which society gives
-to mere wealth, and the display of wealth, is the chief source of these
-multitudinous immoralities.
-
-Yes, the evil is deeper than appears—draws its nutriment from far
-below the surface. This gigantic system of dishonesty, branching out
-into every conceivable form of fraud, has roots which run underneath
-our whole social fabric, and, sending fibres into every house, suck
-up strength from our daily sayings and doings. In every dining-room
-a rootlet finds food, when the conversation turns on So-and-so’s
-successful speculations, his purchase of an estate, his probable
-worth—on this man’s recent large legacy, and the other’s advantageous
-match; for being thus talked about is one form of that tacit respect
-which men struggle for. Every drawing-room furnishes nourishment
-in the admiration awarded to costliness—to silks that are “rich,”
-that is, expensive; to dresses that contain an enormous quantity of
-material, that is, are expensive; to laces that are hand-made, that
-is, expensive; to diamonds that are rare, that is, expensive; to china
-that is old, that is, expensive. And from scores of small remarks and
-minutiæ of behaviour which, in all circles, hourly imply how completely
-the idea of respectability involves that of costly externals, there is
-drawn fresh pabulum.
-
-We are all implicated. We all, whether with self-approbation or not,
-give expression to the established feeling. Even he who disapproves
-this feeling finds himself unable to {147} treat virtue in threadbare
-apparel with a cordiality as great as that which he would show to the
-same virtue endowed with prosperity. Scarcely a man is to be found who
-would not behave with more civility to a knave in broadcloth than to
-a knave in fustian. Though for the deference which they have shown to
-the vulgar rich, or the dishonestly successful, men afterwards compound
-with their consciences by privately venting their contempt; yet when
-they again come face to face with these imposing externals covering
-worthlessness, they do as before. And so long as imposing worthlessness
-gets the visible marks of respect, while the disrespect felt for it is
-hidden, it naturally flourishes.
-
-Hence, then, is it that men persevere in these evil practices which
-all condemn. They can so purchase a homage which, if not genuine, is
-yet, so far as appearances go, as good as the best. To one whose wealth
-has been gained by a life of frauds, what matters it that his name is
-in all circles a synonym of roguery? Has he not been conspicuously
-honoured by being twice elected mayor of his town? (we state a fact)
-and does not this, joined to the personal consideration shown him,
-outweigh in his estimation all that is said against him; of which
-he hears scarcely anything? When, not many years after the exposure
-of his inequitable dealing, a trader attains to the highest civic
-distinction which the kingdom has to offer, and that, too, through the
-instrumentality of those who best know his delinquency, is not the fact
-an encouragement to him, and to all others, to sacrifice rectitude to
-aggrandizement? If, after listening to a sermon that has by implication
-denounced the dishonesties he has been guilty of, the rich ill-doer
-finds, on leaving church, that his neighbours cap to him, does not
-this tacit approval go far to neutralize the effect of all he has
-heard? The truth is that with the great majority of men, the visible
-expression of social opinion is far the most efficient of incentives
-and restraints. Let any one who wishes to estimate the strength {148}
-of this control, propose to himself to walk through the streets in the
-dress of a dustman, or hawk vegetables from door to door. Let him feel,
-as he probably will, that he had rather do something morally wrong
-than commit such a breach of usage and suffer the resulting derision.
-He will then better estimate how powerful a curb to men is the open
-disapproval of their fellows, and how, conversely, the outward applause
-of their fellows is a stimulus surpassing all others in intensity.
-Fully realizing which facts, he will see that the immoralities of trade
-are in great part traceable to an immoral public opinion.
-
-Let none infer, from what has been said, that the payment of respect
-to wealth rightly acquired and rightly used, is deprecated. In its
-original meaning, and in due degree, the feeling which prompts such
-respect is good. Primarily, wealth is the sign of mental power; and
-this is always respectable. To have honestly-acquired property, implies
-intelligence, energy, self-control; and these are worthy of the homage
-that is indirectly paid to them by admiring their results. Moreover,
-the good administration and increase of inherited property, also
-requires its virtues; and therefore demands its share of approbation.
-And besides being applauded for their display of faculty, men who gain
-and increase wealth are to be applauded as public benefactors. For he
-who, as manufacturer or merchant, has, without injustice to others,
-realized a fortune, is thereby proved to have discharged his functions
-better than those who have been less successful. By greater skill,
-better judgment, or more economy than his competitors, he has afforded
-the public greater advantages. His extra profits are but a share of the
-extra produce obtained by the same outlay: the other share going to the
-consumers. And similarly, the landowner who, by judicious investment
-of money, has increased the value (that is, the productiveness) of his
-estate, has thereby added to the stock of national capital. By all
-means, then, {149} let the right acquisition and proper use of wealth
-have their due share of admiration.
-
-But that which we condemn as the chief cause of commercial dishonesty,
-is the _indiscriminate_ admiration of wealth—an admiration that has
-little or no reference to the character of the possessor. When, as
-generally happens, the external signs are reverenced where they
-signify no internal worthiness—nay, even where they cover internal
-unworthiness; then does the feeling become vicious. It is this idolatry
-which worships the symbol apart from the thing symbolized, that is
-the root of all these evils we have been exposing. So long as men
-pay homage to those social benefactors who have grown rich honestly,
-they give a wholesome stimulus to industry; but when they accord a
-share of their homage to those social malefactors who have grown
-rich dishonestly, then do they foster corruption—then do they become
-accomplices in all these frauds of commerce.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-As for remedy, it manifestly follows that there is none save a
-purified public opinion. When that abhorrence which society now shows
-to direct theft, is shown to theft of all degrees of indirectness;
-then will these mercantile vices disappear. When not only the trader
-who adulterates or gives short measure, but also the merchant who
-over-trades, the bank-director who countenances an exaggerated report,
-and the railway-director who repudiates his guarantee, come to be
-regarded as of the same genus as the pickpocket, and are treated with
-like disdain; then will the morals of trade become what they should be.
-
-We have little hope, however, that any such higher tone of public
-opinion will shortly be reached. The present condition of things
-appears to be, in great measure, a necessary accompaniment of our
-present phase of progress. Throughout the civilized world, especially
-in England, and above all in America, social activity is almost wholly
-expended in material development. To subjugate Nature {150} and bring
-the powers of production and distribution to their highest perfection,
-is the task of our age, and probably will be the task of many future
-ages. And as in times when national defence and conquest were the chief
-desiderata, military achievement was honoured above all other things;
-so now, when the chief desideratum is industrial growth, honour is
-most conspicuously given to that which generally indicates the aiding
-of industrial growth. The English nation at present displays what we
-may call the commercial diathesis; and the undue admiration for wealth
-appears to be its concomitant—a relation still more conspicuous in
-the worship of “the almighty dollar” by the Americans. And while the
-commercial diathesis, with its accompanying standard of distinction,
-continues, we fear the evils we have been delineating can be but
-partially cured. It seems hopeless to expect that men will distinguish
-between that wealth which represents personal superiority and benefits
-done to society, from that which does not. The symbols, the externals,
-have all the world through swayed the masses, and must long continue to
-do so. Even the cultivated, who are on their guard against the bias of
-associated ideas, and try to separate the real from the seeming, cannot
-escape the influence of current opinion. We must therefore content
-ourselves with looking for a slow amelioration.
-
-Something, however, may even now be done by vigorous protest against
-adoration of mere success. And it is important that it should be done,
-considering how this vicious sentiment is being fostered. When we have
-one of our leading moralists preaching, with increasing vehemence,
-the doctrine of sanctification by force—when we are told that while
-a selfishness troubled with qualms of conscience is contemptible,
-a selfishness intense enough to trample down everything in the
-unscrupulous pursuit of its ends is worthy of admiration—when we find
-that if it be sufficiently great, power, no matter of what kind or how
-directed, is held up for our reverence; we may fear lest the prevalent
-applause {151} of mere success, together with the commercial vices
-which it stimulates, should be increased rather than diminished. Not at
-all by this hero-worship grown into brute-worship is society to be made
-better, but by exactly the opposite—by a stern criticism of the means
-through which success has been achieved, and by according honour to the
-higher and less selfish modes of activity.
-
-And happily the signs of this more moral public opinion are showing
-themselves. It is becoming a tacitly-received doctrine that the
-rich should not, as in bygone times, spend their lives in personal
-gratification; but should devote them to the general welfare. Year
-by year is the improvement of the people occupying a larger share of
-the attention of the upper classes. Year by year are they voluntarily
-devoting more energy to furthering the material and mental progress
-of the masses. And those among them who do not join in the discharge
-of these high functions, are beginning to be looked upon with more or
-less contempt by their own order. This latest and most hopeful fact in
-human history—this new and better chivalry—promises to evolve a higher
-standard of honour, and so to ameliorate many evils: among others those
-which we have detailed. When wealth obtained by illegitimate means
-inevitably brings nothing but disgrace—when to wealth rightly acquired
-is accorded only its due share of homage, while the greatest homage is
-given to those who consecrate their energies and their means to the
-noblest ends; then may we be sure that, along with other accompanying
-benefits, the morals of trade will be greatly purified.
-
-{152}
-
-
-
-
-PRISON-ETHICS.
-
-[_First published in_ The British Quarterly Review _for July 1860_.]
-
-
-The two antagonist theories of morals, like many other antagonist
-theories, are both right and both wrong. The _a priori_ school has
-its truth; the _a posteriori_ school has its truth; and for the
-proper guidance of conduct, there must be due recognition of both. On
-the one hand, it is asserted that there is an absolute standard of
-rectitude; and, respecting certain classes of actions, it is rightly
-so asserted. From the fundamental laws of life and the conditions of
-social existence, are deducible certain imperative limitations to
-individual action—limitations which are essential to a perfect life,
-individual and social; or, in other words, essential to the greatest
-happiness. And these limitations, following inevitably as they do
-from undeniable first principles, deep as the nature of life itself,
-constitute what we may distinguish as absolute morality. On the other
-hand it is contended, and in a sense rightly contended, that with men
-as they are and society as it is, the dictates of absolute morality
-are impracticable. Legal control, which involves infliction of pain,
-alike on those who are restrained and on those who pay the cost of
-restraining them, is proved by this fact to be not absolutely moral;
-seeing that absolute morality is the regulation of conduct in such way
-that pain shall not be inflicted. {153}
-
-Wherefore, if it be admitted that legal control is at present
-indispensable, it must be admitted that these _a priori_ rules cannot
-be immediately carried out. And hence it follows that we must adapt
-our laws and actions to the existing character of mankind—that we must
-estimate the good or evil resulting from this or that arrangement,
-and so reach, _a posteriori_, a code fitted for the time being. In
-short, we must fall back on expediency. Now, each of these positions
-being valid, it is a grave mistake to adopt either to the exclusion
-of the other. They should be respectively appealed to for mutual
-qualification. Progressing civilization, which is of necessity a
-succession of compromises between old and new, requires a perpetual
-readjustment of the compromise between the ideal and the practicable
-in social arrangements: to which end both elements of the compromise
-must be kept in view. If it is true that pure rectitude prescribes a
-system of things too good for men as they are; it is not less true
-that mere expediency does not of itself tend to establish a system
-of things any better than that which exists. While absolute morality
-owes to expediency the checks which prevent it from rushing into
-utopian absurdities; expediency is indebted to absolute morality for
-all stimulus to improvement. Granted that we are chiefly interested in
-ascertaining what is _relatively right_; it still follows that we must
-first consider what is _absolutely right_; since the one conception
-presupposes the other. That is to say, though we must ever aim to do
-what is best for the present times, yet we must ever bear in mind what
-is abstractedly best; so that the changes we make may be _towards_ it,
-and not _away_ from it. Unattainable as pure rectitude is, and will
-long continue to be, we must keep an eye on the compass which tells
-us whereabout it lies; or we shall otherwise wander in the opposite
-direction.
-
-Illustrations from our recent history will show very conclusively,
-we think, how important it is that {154} considerations of abstract
-expediency should be joined with those of concrete expediency—how
-immense would be the evils avoided and the benefits gained, if _a
-posteriori_ morality were enlightened by _a priori_ morality. Take
-first the case of free trade. Until recently it has been the practice
-of all nations, artificially to restrict their commerce with other
-nations. Throughout past centuries this course was defensible as
-conducing to safety. Without saying that law-givers had the motive of
-promoting industrial independence, it may yet be said that in ages when
-national quarrels were perpetual, it would not have been well for any
-people to be much dependent on others for necessary commodities. But
-though there is this ground for asserting that commercial restrictions
-were once expedient, it cannot be asserted that our corn-laws were thus
-justified: it cannot be alleged that the penalties and prohibitions
-which, until lately, hampered our trade, were needful to prevent us
-from being industrially disabled by a war. Protection in all its forms
-was established and maintained for other reasons of expediency; and
-the reasons for which it was opposed and finally abolished were also
-those of expediency. Calculations of immediate and remote consequences
-were set forth by the antagonist parties; and the mode of decision was
-by a balancing of these various anticipated consequences. And what,
-after generations of mischievous legislation and long years of arduous
-struggle, was the conclusion arrived at, and since justified by the
-results? Exactly the one which abstract equity plainly teaches. The
-moral course proves to be the politic course. That ability to exercise
-the faculties, the total denial of which causes death—that liberty to
-pursue the objects of desire, without which there cannot be complete
-life—that freedom of action which his nature prompts every individual
-to claim, and on which equity puts no limit save the like freedom
-of action of other individuals, involves, among other corollaries,
-freedom of exchange. {155} Government which, in protecting citizens
-from murder, robbery, assault or other aggression, shows us that it
-has the all-essential function of securing to each this free exercise
-of faculties within the assigned limits, is called on, in the due
-discharge of its function, to maintain this freedom of exchange;
-and cannot abrogate it without reversing its function, and becoming
-aggressor instead of protector. Thus, absolute morality would all along
-have shown in what direction legislation should tend. Qualified only by
-the consideration that in turbulent times they must not be so carried
-out as to endanger national life, through suspensions in the supply of
-necessaries, these _a priori_ principles would have guided statesmen,
-as fast as circumstances allowed, towards the normal condition. We
-should have been saved from thousands of needless restrictions. Such
-restrictions as were needful would have been abolished as soon as was
-safe. An enormous amount of suffering would have been prevented. That
-prosperity which we now enjoy would have commenced much sooner. And
-our present condition would have been one of greater power, wealth,
-happiness, and morality.
-
-Our railway-politics furnish another instance. A vast loss of national
-capital has been incurred, and great misery has been inflicted, in
-consequence of the neglect of a simple principle clearly dictated by
-abstract justice. Whoso enters into a contract, though he is bound to
-do that which the contract specifies, is not bound to do some other
-thing which is neither specified nor implied in the contract. We do
-not appeal to moral perception only in warranty of this position. It
-is one deducible from that first principle of equity which, as above
-pointed out, follows from the laws of life, individual and social;
-and it is one which the accumulated experience of mankind has so
-uniformly justified, that it has become a tacitly-recognized doctrine
-of civil law among all nations. In cases of disputes about agreements,
-the question in each case brought to trial {156} always is, whether
-the terms bind one or other of the contracting parties to do this
-or that; and it is assumed, as a matter of course, that neither of
-them can be called upon to do more than is expressed or understood
-in the agreement. Now this almost self-evident principle has been
-wholly ignored in railway-legislation. A shareholder, uniting with
-others to make and work a line from one specified place to another
-specified place, binds himself to pay certain sums in furtherance of
-the project; and, by implication, agrees to yield to the majority
-of his fellow-shareholders on all questions raised respecting the
-execution of this project. But he commits himself no further than
-this. He is not required to obey the majority concerning things
-not named in the deed of incorporation. Though with respect to the
-specified railway he has bound himself, he has not bound himself,
-with respect to any _un_specified railway which his co-proprietors
-may wish to make; and he cannot be committed to such unspecified
-railway by a vote of the majority. But this distinction has been
-wholly passed over. Shareholders in joint-stock undertakings have been
-perpetually involved in other undertakings subsequently decided on by
-their fellow-shareholders; and, against their will, have had their
-properties heavily mortgaged for the execution of projects that were
-ruinously unremunerative. In every case the proprietary contract for
-making a particular railway, has been dealt with as though it were a
-proprietary contract for making railways! Not only have directors thus
-misinterpreted it, and not only have shareholders allowed it to be
-thus misinterpreted, but legislators have so little understood their
-duties as to have endorsed the misinterpretation. To this simple cause
-has been owing most of our railway-companies’ disasters. Abnormal
-facilities for getting capital have caused reckless competition in
-extension-making and branch-making, and in needless opposition lines,
-got up to be purchased by the companies they threatened. Had each new
-scheme been {157} executed by an independent body of shareholders,
-without any guarantee from another company—without any capital raised
-by preference shares—there would have been little or none of the
-ruinous expenditure we have seen. Something like a hundred millions of
-money would have been saved, and thousands of families preserved from
-misery, had the proprietary-contract been enforced according to the
-dictates of pure equity.
-
-These cases go far to justify our position. The general reasons we
-gave for thinking that the ethics of immediate experience must be
-enlightened by abstract ethics, to ensure correct guidance, are
-strongly enforced by these instances of the gigantic errors which are
-made when the dictates of abstract ethics are ignored. The complex
-estimates of relative expediency, cannot do without the clue furnished
-by the simple deductions of absolute expediency.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-We propose to study the treatment of criminals from this point of view.
-And first, let us set down those temporary requirements which have
-hitherto prevented, and do still, in part, prevent the establishment of
-a just system.
-
-The same average popular character which necessitates a rigorous form
-of government, necessitates also a rigorous criminal code. Institutions
-are ultimately determined by the natures of the citizens living under
-them; and when these citizens are too impulsive or selfish for free
-institutions, and unscrupulous enough to supply the requisite staff
-of agents for maintaining tyrannical institutions, they are proved
-by implication to be citizens who will tolerate, and will probably
-need, severe forms of punishment. The same mental defect underlies
-both results. The character which originates and sustains political
-liberty, is a character swayed by remote considerations—a character
-not at the mercy of immediate temptations, but one which contemplates
-the consequences likely to arise in future. We have only to remember
-that, among ourselves, a political encroachment is {158} resisted,
-not because of any direct evil it inflicts, but because of the evils
-likely hereafter to flow from it, to see how the maintenance of
-freedom presupposes the habit of weighing distant results, and being
-chiefly guided by them. Conversely, it is manifest that men who dwell
-only in the present, the special, the concrete—who do not realize
-with clearness the contingencies of the future—will put little value
-on those rights of citizenship which profit them nothing, save as a
-means of warding off unspecified evils that can possibly affect them
-only at a distant time in an obscure way. Well, is it not obvious
-that the forms of mind thus contrasted, will require different kinds
-of punishment for misconduct? To restrain the second, there must be
-penalties which are severe, prompt, and specific enough to be vividly
-conceived; while the first may be deterred by penalties which are less
-definite, less intense, less immediate. For the more civilized, dread
-of a long, monotonous, criminal discipline may suffice; but for the
-less civilized there must be inflictions of bodily pain and death. Thus
-we hold, not only that a social condition which generates a harsh form
-of government, also generates harsh retributions; but also, that in
-such a social condition, harsh retributions are requisite. And there
-are facts which illustrate this. Witness the case of one of the Italian
-states, in which the punishment of death having been abolished in
-conformity with the wish of a dying duchess, assassinations increased
-so greatly that it became needful to re-establish it.
-
-Besides the fact that in the less-advanced stages of civilization, a
-bloody penal code is both a natural product of the time and a needful
-restraint for the time, there must be noted the fact that a more
-equitable and humane code could not be carried out from want of fit
-administration. To deal with delinquents not by short and sharp methods
-but by such methods as abstract justice indicates, implies a class of
-agencies too complicated to exist in a low society, {159} and a class
-of officers more trustworthy than can be found among its citizens.
-Especially would the equitable treatment of criminals be impracticable
-where the amount of crime was very great. The number to be dealt with
-would be unmanageable. Some simpler method of purging the community of
-its worst members becomes, under such circumstances, a necessity.
-
-The inapplicability of an absolutely just system of penal discipline to
-a barbarous or semi-barbarous people, is thus, we think, as manifest
-as is the inapplicability of an absolutely just form of government
-to them. And in the same manner that, for some nations, a despotism
-is warranted; so may a criminal code of the extremest severity be
-warranted. In either case the defence is, that the institution is
-as good as the average character of the people permits—that less
-stringent institutions would entail social confusion and its far more
-severe evils. Bad as a despotism is, yet where anarchy is the only
-alternative, we must say that, as anarchy would bring greater suffering
-than despotism brings, despotism is justified by the circumstances. And
-similarly, however inequitable in the abstract were the beheadings,
-crucifyings, and burnings of ruder ages, yet, if it be shown that,
-without penalties thus extreme, the safety of society could not
-have been insured—if, in their absence, the increase of crime would
-have inflicted a larger total of evil, and that, too, on peaceable
-members of the community; then it follows that morality warranted this
-severity. In the one case, as in the other, we must say that, measured
-by the quantities of pain respectively inflicted and avoided, the
-course pursued was the _least wrong_; and to say that it was the least
-wrong is to say that it was _relatively right_.
-
-But while we thus admit all that can be alleged by the defenders
-of Draconian codes, we go on to assert a correlative truth which
-they overlook. While fully recognizing the evils that must follow
-the premature establishment of a {160} penal system dictated by
-pure equity, let us not overlook the evils that have arisen from
-altogether rejecting the guidance of pure equity. Let us note how
-terribly the one-sided regard for immediate expediency has retarded the
-ameliorations from time to time demanded.
-
-Consider, for instance, the immense amount of suffering and
-demoralization needlessly caused by our severe laws in the last
-century. Those many merciless penalties which Romilly and others
-succeeded in abolishing, were as little justified by social necessities
-as by abstract morality. Experience has since proved that to hang men
-for theft, was not requisite for the security of property. And that
-such a measure was opposed to pure equity, scarcely needs saying.
-Evidently, had considerations of relative expediency been all along
-qualified by considerations of absolute expediency, these severities,
-with their many concomitant evils, would have ceased long before they
-did.
-
-Again, the dreadful misery, demoralization, and crime, generated by the
-harsh treatment of transported convicts, would have been impossible,
-had our authorities considered what seemed just as well as what seemed
-politic. There would never have been inflicted on transports the
-shocking cruelties proved before the Parliamentary Committee of 1848.
-We should not have had men condemned to the horrors of the chain-gang
-even for insolent looks. There could not have been perpetrated such
-an atrocity as that of locking up chain-gangs “from sunset to sunrise
-in the caravans or boxes used for this description of prisons, which
-hold from twenty to twenty-eight men, but in which the whole number
-_can neither stand upright nor sit down at the same time, except with
-their legs at right angles to their bodies_.” Men would never have been
-doomed to tortures extreme enough to produce despair, desperation,
-and further crimes—tortures under which “a man’s heart is taken
-from him, and there is given to him the heart of a {161} beast,” as
-said by one of these law-produced criminals before his execution. We
-should not have been told, as by a chief justice of Australia, that
-the discipline was “carried to an extent of _suffering, such as to
-render death desirable, and to induce many prisoners to seek it under
-its most appalling aspects_.” Sir G. Arthur would not have had to
-testify that, in Van Diemen’s Land, convicts committed murder for the
-purpose “_of being sent up to Hobart Town for trial, though aware that
-in the ordinary course they must be executed within a fortnight after
-arrival_;” nor would tears of commiseration have been drawn from Judge
-Burton’s eyes, by one of these cruelly-used transports placed before
-him for sentence. In brief, had abstract equity joined with immediate
-expediency in devising convict discipline, not only would untold
-suffering, degradation, and mortality have been prevented; but those
-who were responsible for atrocities like those above-named, would not
-themselves be chargeable with crime, as we now hold them to be.
-
-Probably we shall meet with a less general assent when, as a further
-benefit which the guidance of absolute morality would have conferred,
-we instance the prevention of such methods as those in use at
-Pentonville. How the silent and the separate systems are negatived by
-abstract justice we shall by and by see. For the present, the position
-we have to defend is that these systems are bad. That but a moderate
-per-centage of the prisoners subjected to them are re-convicted, may be
-true; though, considering the fallaciousness of negative statistics,
-this by no means proves that those not re-convicted are reformed. But
-the question is not solely how many prisoners are prevented from again
-committing crime? A further question is, how many of them have become
-self-supporting members of society? It is notorious that this prolonged
-denial of human intercourse not unfrequently produces insanity or
-imbecility; and on those who remain sane, its depressing influence
-must almost {162} of necessity entail serious debility, bodily and
-mental.[7] Indeed, we think it probable that much of the apparent
-success is due to an enfeeblement which incapacitates for crime as
-much as for industry. Our own objection to such methods, however, has
-always been, that their effect on the moral nature is the reverse of
-that required. Crime is anti-social—is prompted by self-regarding
-feelings and checked by social feelings. The natural prompter of right
-conduct to others, and the natural opponent of misconduct to others,
-is sympathy; for out of sympathy grow both the kindly emotions, and
-that sentiment of justice which restrains us from aggressions. Well,
-this sympathy, which makes society possible, is cultivated by social
-intercourse. By habitual participation in the pleasures of others, the
-faculty is strengthened; and whatever prevents this participation,
-weakens it. Hence, therefore, shutting up prisoners within themselves,
-or forbidding all interchange of feeling, inevitably deadens such
-sympathies as they have; and so tends rather to diminish than to
-increase the moral check to transgression. This _a priori_ conviction,
-which we have long entertained, we now find confirmed by facts. Captain
-Maconochie states, as a result of observation, that a long course
-of separation so fosters the self-regarding desires, and so weakens
-the sympathies, as to make even well-disposed men very unfit to bear
-the little trials of domestic life on their return to their homes.
-Thus there is good reason to think that, while silence and solitude
-may cow the spirit or undermine the energies, it cannot produce true
-reformation.
-
- [7] Mr. Baillie-Cochrane says:—“The officers at the Dartmoor prison
- inform me that the prisoners who arrive there even after one year’s
- confinement at Pentonville, may be distinguished from the others
- by their miserable downcast look. In most instances their brain is
- affected; and they are unable to give satisfactory replies to the
- simplest questions.”
-
-“But how can it be shown,” asks the reader, “that these injudicious
-penal systems are inequitable? Where is the method which will enable us
-to say what kind of {163} punishment is justified by absolute morality,
-and what kind is not?” These questions we will now attempt to answer.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-So long as the individual citizen pursues the objects of his desires
-without diminishing the equal freedom of any of his fellow citizens
-to do the like, society cannot equitably interfere with him. While
-he contents himself with the benefits won by his own energies, and
-attempts not to intercept any of the benefits similarly won for
-themselves by others, or any of those which Nature has conferred on
-them; no legal penalties can rightly be inflicted on him. But when,
-by murder, theft, assault, arson, or minor aggression, he has broken
-through these limits, the community is warranted in putting him under
-restraint. On the relative propriety of doing this we need say nothing:
-it is demonstrated by social experience. Its absolute propriety not
-being so manifest, we will proceed to point out how it is deducible
-from the ultimate laws of life.
-
-Life depends on the maintenance of certain natural relations between
-actions and their results. If respiration does not supply oxygen to
-the blood, as in the normal order of things it should do, but instead
-supplies carbonic acid, death quickly results. If the swallowing of
-food is not followed by the usual organic sequences—the contractions
-of the stomach, and the pouring into it of gastric juice—indigestion
-arises, and the energies flag. If active movements of the limbs fail
-in exciting the heart to supply blood more rapidly, or if the extra
-current propelled by the heart is greatly retarded by an aneurism
-through which it passes, speedy prostration ensues. In which, and
-endless like cases, we see that bodily life depends on the maintenance
-of the established connexions between physiological causes and their
-consequences. Among the intellectual processes, the same thing
-holds. If certain impressions made on the senses do not induce the
-appropriate muscular adjustments—if the brain is clouded with wine, or
-consciousness is {164} pre-occupied, or the perceptions are naturally
-obtuse; the movements are so ill-controlled that accidents happen.
-Where, as in paralytic patients, the natural link between mental
-impressions and the appropriate motions is broken, the life is greatly
-vitiated. And when, as during insanity, evidence fitted, according to
-the usual order of thought, to produce certain convictions, produces
-convictions of an opposite kind, conduct is reduced to chaos, and
-life endangered—perhaps cut short. So it is with more involved
-phenomena. Just as we here find that, throughout both its physical
-and intellectual divisions, healthful life implies continuance of the
-established successions of antecedents and consequents among our vital
-actions; so shall we find it throughout the moral division. In our
-dealings with external Nature and our fellow men, there are relations
-of cause and effect, on the maintenance of which, as on the maintenance
-of the internal ones above instanced, life depends. Conduct of this
-or that kind tends to bring results which are pleasurable or painful;
-and the welfare of every one demands that these natural sequences
-shall not be interfered with. To speak more specifically, we see that
-in the order of Nature, inactivity entails want. There is a connexion
-between exertion and the fulfilment of certain imperative needs. If,
-now, this connexion is broken—if labour of body or mind has been gone
-through, and the produce of the labour is intercepted by another,
-one of the conditions to complete life is unfulfilled. The defrauded
-person is physically injured by deprivation of the wherewithal to
-make good the wear and tear he had undergone; and if the robbery be
-continually repeated, he must die. Where all men are dishonest a
-reflex evil results. When, throughout a society, the normal relation
-between work and benefit is habitually broken, not only are the lives
-of many directly undermined, but the lives of all are indirectly
-undermined by destruction of the motive for work, and by the consequent
-poverty. Thus, to demand that there shall {165} be no breach of the
-natural sequence between labour and the rewards obtained by labour,
-is to demand that the laws of life shall be respected. What we call
-the right of property, is simply a corollary from certain necessary
-conditions to complete living. It is a formulated recognition of the
-relation between expenditure of force and the need for force-sustaining
-objects obtainable by the expenditure of force—a recognition in full
-of a relation which cannot be wholly ignored without causing death.
-And all else regarded as individual rights, are indirect implications
-of like nature—similarly insist on certain relations between man and
-man, as conditions without which there cannot be fully maintained that
-correspondence between inner and outer actions which constitutes life.
-It is not, as some moralists and most lawyers absurdly assert, that
-such rights are derived from human legislation; nor is it, as asserted
-by others with absurdity almost as great, that there is no basis for
-them save the inductions of immediate expediency. These rights are
-deducible from the established connexions between our acts and their
-results. As certainly as there are conditions which must be fulfilled
-before life can exist, so certainly are there conditions which must be
-fulfilled before complete life can be enjoyed by the respective members
-of a society; and those which we call the requirements of justice,
-simply answer to the most important of such conditions.
-
-Hence, if life is our legitimate aim—if absolute morality means, as it
-does, conformity to the laws of complete life; then absolute morality
-warrants the restraint of those who force their fellow-citizens into
-non-conformity. Our justification is, that life is impossible save
-under certain conditions; that it cannot be entire unless these
-conditions are maintained unbroken; and that if it is right for us to
-live completely, it is right for us to remove any one who either breaks
-these conditions in our persons or constrains us to break them.
-
-Such being the basis of our right to coerce the criminal, {166} there
-next come the questions:—What is the legitimate extent of the coercion?
-Can we from this source derive authority for certain demands on him?
-and are there any similarly-derived limits to such demands? To both
-these questions there are affirmative answers.
-
-First, we find authority for demanding restitution or compensation.
-Conformity to the laws of life being the substance of absolute
-morality; and the social regulations which absolute morality dictates,
-being those which make this conformity possible; it is a manifest
-corollary that whoever breaks these regulations, may be justly required
-to undo, as far as possible, the wrong he has done. The object being to
-maintain the conditions essential to complete life, it follows that,
-when one of these conditions has been transgressed, the first thing
-to be required of the transgressor is, that he shall put matters as
-nearly as may be in the state they previously were. The property stolen
-shall be restored, or an equivalent for it given. Any one injured by an
-assault shall have his surgeon’s bill paid, compensation for lost time,
-and also for the suffering he has borne. And similarly in all cases of
-infringed rights.
-
-Second, we are warranted by this highest authority in restricting
-the actions of the offender as much as is needful to prevent further
-aggressions. Any citizen who will not allow others to fulfil the
-conditions to complete life—who takes away the produce of his
-neighbour’s labour, or deducts from that bodily health and comfort
-which his neighbour has earned by good conduct, must be forced to
-desist. And society is warranted in using such force as may be found
-requisite. Equity justifies the fellow-citizens of such a man in
-limiting the free exercise of his faculties to the extent necessary for
-preserving the free exercise of their own faculties.
-
-But now mark that absolute morality countenances no restraint beyond
-this—no gratuitous inflictions of pain, no revengeful penalties. The
-conditions it insists on being such as make possible complete life, we
-cannot rightly abrogate {167} these conditions, even in the person
-of a criminal, further than is needful to prevent greater abrogations
-of them. Freedom to fulfil the laws of life being the thing insisted
-on, to the end that the sum of life may be the greatest possible, it
-follows that the life of the offender must be taken into account as an
-item in this sum. We must permit him to live as completely as consists
-with social safety. It is commonly said that the criminal loses all his
-rights. This may be so according to law, but it is not so according
-to justice. Such portion of them only is justly taken away, as cannot
-be left to him without danger to the community. Those exercises
-of faculty, and consequent benefits, which are possible under the
-necessary restraint, cannot be equitably denied. If any do not think it
-proper that we should be thus regardful of an offender’s claims, let
-them consider for a moment the lesson which Nature reads us. We do not
-find that those processes of life by which bodily health is maintained,
-are miraculously suspended in the person of the prisoner. In him, as in
-others, good digestion waits on appetite. If he is wounded, the healing
-process goes on with the usual rapidity. When he is ill, as much effect
-is expected from the _vis medicatrix naturæ_ by the medical officer, as
-in one who has not transgressed. His perceptions yield him guidance as
-they did before he was imprisoned; and he is capable of much the same
-pleasurable emotions. When we thus see that the beneficent arrangements
-of things, are no less uniformly sustained in his person than in that
-of another, are we not bound to respect in his person such of these
-beneficent arrangements as we have power to thwart? are we not bound
-to interfere with the laws of life no further than is needful? If
-any still hesitate, there is another lesson for them having the same
-implication. Whoso disregards any one of those simpler laws of life
-out of which, as we have shown, the moral laws originate, has to bear
-the evil necessitated by the transgression—just that, and no more. If,
-careless of your footing, you fall, the {168} consequent bruise, and
-possibly some constitutional disturbance entailed by it, are all you
-have to suffer: there is not the further gratuitous penalty of a cold
-or an attack of small-pox. If you have eaten something which you know
-to be indigestible, there follow certain visceral derangements and
-their concomitants; but, for your physical sin, there is no vengeance
-in the shape of a broken bone or a spinal affection. The punishments,
-in these and other cases, are neither greater nor less than flow from
-the natural workings of things. Well, should we not with all humility
-follow this example? Must we not infer that, similarly, a citizen who
-has transgressed the conditions to social welfare, ought to bear the
-needful penalties and restraints, but nothing beyond these? Is it not
-clear that neither by absolute morality nor by Nature’s precedents, are
-we warranted in visiting on him any pains besides those involved in
-remedying, as far as may be, the evil committed, and preventing other
-such evils? To us it seems manifest that if society exceeds this, it
-trespasses against the criminal.
-
-Those who think that we are tending towards a mischievous leniency,
-will find that the next step in our argument disposes of any such
-objection; for while equity forbids us to punish the criminal otherwise
-than by making him suffer the natural consequences, these, when
-rigorously enforced, are quite severe enough.
-
-Society having proved in the high court of absolute morality, that
-the offender must make restitution or compensation, and submit to
-the restraints requisite for public safety; and the offender having
-obtained from the same court the decision, that these restraints shall
-be no greater than the specified end requires; society thereupon makes
-the further demand that, while living in durance, the offender shall
-maintain himself; and this demand absolute morality at once endorses.
-The community having taken measures for self-preservation, and having
-inflicted on the aggressor no punishments or disabilities beyond those
-{169} involved in these necessary measures, is no further concerned in
-the matter. With the support of the prisoner it has no more to do than
-before he committed the crime. It is the business of society simply
-to defend itself against him; and it is his business to live as well
-as he can under the restrictions society is obliged to impose on him.
-All he may rightly ask is, to have the opportunity of labouring, and
-exchanging the produce of his labour for necessaries; and this claim
-is a corollary from that already admitted, that his actions shall not
-be restricted more than is needful for the public safety. With these
-opportunities, however, he must make the best of his position. He must
-be content to gain as good a livelihood as the circumstances permit;
-and if he cannot employ his powers to the best advantage, if he has
-to work hard and fare scantily, these evils must be counted among the
-penalties of his transgression—the natural reactions of his wrong
-action.
-
-On this self-maintenance equity sternly insists. The reasons which
-justify his imprisonment, equally justify the refusal to let him have
-any other sustenance than he earns. He is confined that he may not
-further interfere with the complete living of his fellow-citizens—that
-he may not again intercept any of those benefits which the order
-of Nature has conferred on them, or any of those procured by their
-exertions and careful conduct. And he is required to support himself
-for exactly the same reasons—that he may not interfere with others’
-complete living—that he may not intercept the benefits they earn. For,
-if otherwise, whence must come his food and clothing? Directly from
-the public stores, and indirectly from the pockets of all tax-payers.
-And what is the property thus abstracted from tax-payers? It is the
-equivalent of so much benefit earned by labour. It is so much means
-to complete living. And when this property is taken away—when the
-toil has been gone through, and the produce of it is intercepted by
-the tax-gatherer on behalf of the convict; the conditions to {170}
-complete life are broken: the convict commits by deputy a further
-aggression on his fellow-citizens. It matters not that such abstraction
-is made according to law. We are here considering the _dictum_ of that
-authority which is above law; and which law ought to enforce. And this
-_dictum_ we find to be, that each individual shall take the evils and
-benefits of his own conduct—that the offender must suffer, as far
-as is possible, all pains entailed by his offence; and must not be
-allowed to visit part of them on the unoffending. Unless the criminal
-maintains himself, he indirectly commits an additional crime. Instead
-of repairing the breach he has made in the conditions to complete
-social life, he widens this breach. He inflicts on others that very
-injury which the restraint imposed on him was to prevent. As certainly,
-therefore, as such restraint is warranted by absolute morality; so
-certainly does absolute morality warrant us in refusing him gratuitous
-support.
-
-These, then, are the requirements of an equitable penal system:—That
-the aggressor shall make restitution or compensation; that he shall
-be placed under the restraints requisite for social security; that
-neither any restraints beyond these, nor any gratuitous penalties,
-shall be inflicted on him; and that while living in confinement, or
-under surveillance, he shall maintain himself. We are not prepared
-to say that such dictates may at once be fully obeyed. Already we
-have admitted that the deductions of absolute expediency must, in
-our transition state, be qualified by the inductions of relative
-expediency. We have pointed out that in rude times, the severest
-criminal codes were morally justified if, without them, crime could
-not be repressed and social safety insured. Whence, by implication, it
-follows that our present methods of treating criminals are warranted,
-if they come as near to those of pure equity as circumstances permit.
-That any system now feasible must fall short of the ideal sketched out,
-is probable. It may be that the enforcement of restitution or {171}
-compensation, is in many cases impracticable. It may be that on some
-convicts, penalties more severe than abstract justice demands must be
-inflicted. On the other hand, it may be that entire self-maintenance
-would entail on the wholly-unskilled criminal, a punishment too
-grievous to be borne. But any such shortcomings do not affect our
-argument. All we insist on is, that the commands of absolute morality
-shall be obeyed as far as possible—that we shall fulfil them up to
-those limits beyond which experiment proves that more evil than good
-results—that, ever keeping in view the ideal, each change we make shall
-be towards its realization.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-But now we are prepared to say, that this ideal may be in great part
-realized at the present time. Experience in various countries, under
-various circumstances, has shown that immense benefits result from
-substituting for the old penal systems, systems that approximate to
-that above indicated. Germany, France, Spain, England, Ireland, and
-Australia, send statements to the effect that the most successful
-criminal discipline, is a discipline of decreased restraints and
-increased self-dependence. And the evidence proves the success to
-be greatest, where the nearest approach is made to the arrangements
-prescribed by abstract justice. We shall find the facts striking: some
-of them even astonishing.
-
-When M. Obermair was appointed Governor of the Munich State-Prison―
-
-  “He found from 600 to 700 prisoners in the jail, in the worst state
- of insubordination, and whose excesses, he was told, defied the
- harshest and most stringent discipline; the prisoners were all chained
- together, and attached to each chain was an iron weight, which the
- strongest found difficulty in dragging along. The guard consisted of
- about 100 soldiers, who did duty not only at the gates and around
- the walls, but also in the passages, and even in the workshops and
- dormitories; and, strangest of all protections against the possibility
- of an outbreak or individual invasion, twenty to thirty large savage
- dogs, of the bloodhound breed, were let loose at night in the passages
- and courts to keep their watch and ward. {172} According to his
- account the place was a perfect Pandemonium, comprising, within the
- limits of a few acres, the worst passions, the most slavish vices, and
- the most heartless tyranny.”
-
-M. Obermair gradually relaxed this harsh system. He greatly lightened
-the chains; and would, if allowed, have thrown them aside. The dogs,
-and nearly all the guards, were dispensed with; and the prisoners
-were treated with such consideration as to gain their confidence. Mr.
-Baillie-Cochrane, who visited the place in 1852, says the prison-gates
-were
-
- “Wide open, without any sentinel at the door, and a guard of
- only twenty men idling away their time in a guard-room off the
- entrance-hall. . . . . None of the doors were provided with bolts
- and bars; the only security was an ordinary lock, and as in most of
- the rooms the key was not turned, there was no obstacle to the men
- walking into the passage. . . . . Over each workshop some of the
- prisoners with the best characters were appointed overseers, and M.
- Obermair assured me that if a prisoner transgressed a regulation, his
- companions generally told him, ‘Es ist verboten’ (it is forbidden),
- and it rarely happened that he did not yield to the opinion of his
- fellow-prisoners. . . . . Within the prison walls every description
- of work is carried on; the prisoners, divided into different gangs
- and supplied with instruments and tools, make their own clothes,
- repair their own prison walls, and forge their own chains, producing
- various specimens of manufacture which are turned to most excellent
- account—the result being, that each prisoner, by occupation and
- industry, maintains himself; the surplus of his earnings being given
- him on his emancipation, avoids his being parted with in a state of
- destitution.”
-
-And further, the prisoners “associate in their leisure hours, without
-any check on their intercourse, but at the same time under an efficient
-system of observation and control”—an arrangement by which, after many
-years’ experience, M. Obermair asserts that morality is increased.
-
-And now what has been the result? During his six-years’ government
-of the Kaiserslauten (the first prison under his care), M. Obermair
-discharged 132 criminals, of which number 123 have since conducted
-themselves well, and 7 have been recommitted. From the Munich prison,
-between 1843 and 1845, 298 prisoners were discharged.
-
-Of these, 246 have been restored, improved, to society. Those whose
-characters are doubtful, but have not been {173} remanded for any
-criminal act, 26; again under examination, 4; punished by the police,
-6; remanded, 8; died, 8. This statement, says M. Obermair, “is based
-on irrefutable evidence.” And to the reality of his success, we have
-the testimony not only of Mr. Baillie-Cochrane, but of the Rev. C. H.
-Townsend, Mr. George Combe, Mr. Matthew Hill, and Sir John Milbanke,
-our Envoy at the Court of Bavaria.
-
-Take, again, the case of Mettray. Every one has heard something about
-Mettray, and its success as a reformatory of juvenile criminals.
-Observe how nearly the successful system there pursued, conforms to the
-abstract principles above enunciated.
-
-This “Colonie Agricole” is “without wall or enclosure of any sort, for
-the purposes at least of confinement;” and except when for some fault a
-child is temporarily put in a cell, there is no physical restraint. The
-life is industrial: the boys being brought up to trades or agriculture
-as they prefer; and all the domestic services being discharged by them.
-“They all do their work by the _piece_;” are rewarded according to
-the judgment of the _chef d’atelier_; and, a portion being placed at
-the disposal of the child, the rest is deposited in the savings-bank
-at Tours. “A boy in receipt of any money has to make payment for any
-part of his dress which requires to be renewed before the stated
-time arrives at which fresh clothing is given out; . . . . . on the
-other hand, if his clothes are found in good condition at such time,
-he receives the benefit of it by having the money which would have
-been laid out in clothes placed to his account. Two hours per day are
-allowed for play. Part-singing is taught; and if a boy shows any turn
-for drawing he receives a little instruction in it. . . . . . Some
-of the boys also are formed into a fire-brigade, and have rendered
-at times substantial assistance in the neighbourhood.” In which few
-leading facts do we not clearly see that the essential peculiarities
-{174} are—no more restraint than is absolutely necessary; self-support
-as far as possible; extra benefits earned by extra labour; and as much
-gratifying exercise of faculties as the circumstances permit.
-
-The “intermediate system” which has of late been carried out with much
-success in Ireland, exemplifies, in a degree, the practicability of
-the same general principles. Under this system, prisoners working as
-artizans are allowed “such a modified degree of liberty as shall in
-various ways prove their power of self-denial and self-dependence, in
-a manner wholly incompatible with the rigid restraints of an ordinary
-prison.” An offender who has passed through this stage of probation,
-is tested by employment “on messenger’s duties daily throughout the
-city, and also in special works required by the department outside the
-prison-walls. The performance of the duties of messengers entails their
-being out until seven or eight in the evening, unaccompanied by an
-officer; and although a small portion of their earnings is allowed them
-weekly, and they would have the power of compromising themselves if
-so disposed, not one instance has as yet taken place of the slightest
-irregularity, or even the want of punctuality, although careful checks
-have been contrived to detect either, should it occur.” A proportion
-of their prison-earnings is set aside for them in a savings-bank; and
-to this they are encouraged to add during their period of partial
-freedom, with a view to subsequent emigration. The results are:—“In the
-penitentiary the greatest possible order and regularity, and an amount
-of willing industry performed that cannot be obtained in the prisons.”
-Employers to whom prisoners are eventually transferred, “have on many
-occasions returned for others in consequence of the good conduct of
-those at first engaged.” And according to Captain Crofton’s pamphlet
-of 1857, out of 112 conditionally discharged during the previous year,
-85 were going on satisfactorily, “9 have been discharged {175} too
-recently to be spoken of, and 5 have had their licences revoked. As
-to the remaining 13, it has been found impossible to obtain accurate
-information, but it is supposed that 5 have left the country, and 3
-enlisted.”
-
-The “mark system” of Captain Maconochie, is one which more fully
-carries out the principle of self-maintenance, under restraints
-no greater than are needful for safety. The plan is to join with
-time-sentences certain labour-sentences—specific tasks to be worked out
-by the convicts. “No rations, or other supplies of any kind, whether
-of food, bedding, clothing, or even education or indulgences, to be
-given _gratuitously_, but all to be made exchangeable, at fixed rates,
-at the prisoners’ own option, for marks previously earned; it being
-understood, at the same time, that only those shall count towards
-liberation which remain over and above all so exchanged; the prisoners
-being thus caused to depend for every necessary on their own good
-conduct; and their prison-offences to be in like manner restrained by
-corresponding fines imposed according to the measures of each.” The
-use of marks, which thus play the part of money, was first introduced
-by Captain Maconochie in Norfolk Island. Describing the working of his
-method, he says―
-
- “First, it gave me wages and then fines. One gave me willing and
- progressively-skilled labourers, and the other saved me from the
- necessity of imposing brutal and demoralizing punishments. . . . .
- My form of money next gave me school fees. I was most anxious to
- encourage education among my men, but as I refused them rations
- gratuitously, so I would not give them schooling either, but compelled
- them to yield marks to acquire it. . . . . I never saw adult schools
- make such rapid progress. . . . . My form of money next gave me
- bailbonds in cases of minor or even great offences; a period of close
- imprisonment being wholly or in part remitted in consideration of a
- sufficient number of other prisoners of good character becoming bound,
- under a penalty, for the improved conduct of the culprit.”
-
-Even in the establishment of a sick-club and a burial-club, Captain
-Maconochie applied “the inflexible principle of giving nothing for
-nothing.” That is to say, here, as throughout, he made the discipline
-of the prisoners as {176} much like the discipline of ordinary life
-as possible: let them experience just such good or evil as naturally
-flowed from their conduct—a principle which he rightly asserts is
-the only true one. What were the effects? The extreme debasement of
-Norfolk Island convicts was notorious; and on a preceding page we have
-described some of the horrible sufferings inflicted on them. Yet,
-starting with these most demoralized of criminals, Captain Maconochie
-obtained highly-favourable results. “In four years,” he says, “I
-discharged 920 doubly-convicted men to Sydney, of whom only 20, or
-2 per cent., had been re-convicted up to January, 1845;” while, at
-the same time, the ordinary proportion of re-convicted Van Diemen’s
-Land men, otherwise trained, was 9 per cent. “Captain Maconochie,”
-writes Mr. Harris in his _Settlers and Convicts_, “did more for the
-reformation of these unhappy wretches, and amelioration of their
-physical circumstances, than the most sanguine practical mind could
-beforehand have ventured even to hope.” Another witness says—“a
-reformation far greater than has been hitherto effected in any body
-of men by any system, either before or after yours, has taken place
-in them.” “As pastor of the island, and for two years a magistrate,
-I can prove that at no period was there so little crime,” writes the
-Rev. B. Naylor. And Thomas H. Dixon, Chief Superintendent of Convicts
-in Western Australia, who partially introduced the system there in
-1856, asserts that not only was the amount of work done under it
-extraordinary, but that “even although the characters of some of the
-party were by no means good previously (many of them being men whose
-licences had been revoked in England), yet the transformation which
-in this and all other respects they underwent, was very remarkable
-indeed.” If such were the results, when the method was imperfectly
-carried out (for the Government all along refused to give any fixed
-value to the marks as a means to liberation); what might be {177}
-expected if its motives and restraints were allowed their full
-influence?
-
-Perhaps, however, of all evidence, the most conclusive is that afforded
-by the prison of Valencia. When, in 1835, Colonel Montesinos was
-appointed governor, “the average of re-committals was from 30 to 35
-per cent. per annum—nearly the same that is found in England and other
-countries in Europe; but such has been the success of his method, that
-for the last three years _there has not been even one re-committal to
-it_, and for the ten previous years they did not, on an average, exceed
-1 per cent.” And how has this marvellous change been brought about? By
-diminished restraint and industrial discipline. The following extracts,
-taken irregularly from Mr. Hoskins’s _Account of the Public Prison at
-Valencia_, will prove this:―
-
- “When first the convict enters the establishment he wears chains, but
- on his application to the commander they are taken off, unless he has
- not conducted himself well.”
-
- “There are a thousand prisoners, and in the whole establishment I did
- not see above three or four guardians to keep them in order. They
- say there are only a dozen old soldiers, and not a bar or bolt that
- might not be easily broken—apparently not more fastenings than in any
- private house.”
-
- “When a convict enters, he is asked what trade or employment he will
- work at or learn, and above forty are open to him. . . . . There
- are weavers and spinners of every description; . . . . blacksmiths,
- shoemakers, basketmakers, ropemakers, joiners, cabinetmakers, making
- handsome mahogany drawers; and they had also a printing machine hard
- at work.”
-
- “The labour of every description for the repair, rebuilding, and
- cleaning the establishment, is supplied by the convicts. They were
- all most respectful in demeanour, and certainly I never saw such
- a good-looking set of prisoners, useful occupations (and other
- considerate treatment) having apparently improved their countenances.
- . . . . [And besides a] garden for exercise planted with orange trees,
- there was also a poultry yard for their amusement, with pheasants and
- various other kinds of birds; washing-houses, where they wash their
- clothes; and a shop, where they can purchase, if they wish, tobacco
- and other little comforts out of one-fourth of the profits of their
- labour, which is given to them. Another fourth they are entitled to
- when they leave; the other half goes to the establishment, and _often
- this is sufficient for all expenses, without any assistance from the
- Government_.”
-
-Thus the highest success, regarded by Mr. Hoskins as {178} “really
-a miracle,” is achieved by a system most nearly conforming to those
-dictates of absolute morality on which we have insisted. The convicts
-are almost, if not quite, self-supporting. They are subject neither
-to gratuitous penalties nor unnecessary restrictions. While made to
-earn their living, they are allowed to purchase such enjoyments as
-consist with their confinement: the avowed principle being, in the
-words of Colonel Montesinos, to “give as much latitude to their free
-agency as can be made conformable to discipline at all.” Thus they are
-(as we found that equity required they should be) allowed to live as
-satisfactorily as they can, under such restraints only as are needful
-for the safety of their fellow-citizens.
-
-To us it appears extremely significant that there should be so close
-a correspondence between _a priori_ conclusions, and the results
-of experiments tried without reference to such conclusions. On the
-one hand, neither in the doctrines of pure equity with which we set
-out, nor in the corollaries drawn from them, is there any mention of
-criminal-reformation: our concern has been solely with the rights of
-citizens and convicts in their mutual relations. On the other hand,
-those who have carried out the improved penal systems above described,
-have had almost solely in view the improvement of the offender: the
-just claims of society, and of those who sin against it, having been
-left out of the question. Yet the methods which have succeeded so
-marvellously in decreasing criminality, are the methods which most
-nearly fulfil the requirements of abstract justice.
-
-That the most equitable system is the one best calculated to reform
-the offender, may indeed be deductively shown. The internal experience
-of every one must prove to him, that excessive punishment begets,
-not penitence, but indignation and hatred. So long as an aggressor
-suffers nothing beyond the evils which have naturally resulted from
-his misconduct—so long as he perceives that his fellow-men have done
-no more than was needful for self-defence—he {179} has no excuse for
-anger; and is led to contemplate his crime and his punishment as cause
-and effect. But if gratuitous sufferings are inflicted on him, a sense
-of injustice is produced. He regards himself as an injured man. He
-cherishes animosity against all who have brought this harsh treatment
-on him. Glad of any plea for forgetting the injury he has done to
-others, he dwells instead on the injury others have done to him. Thus
-nurturing a desire for revenge rather than atonement, he re-enters
-society not better but worse; and if he does not commit further crimes,
-as he often does, he is restrained by the lowest of motives—fear.
-Again, this industrial discipline, to which criminals subject
-themselves under a purely equitable system, is the discipline they
-especially need. Speaking generally, we are all compelled to work by
-the necessities of our social existence. For most of us this compulsion
-suffices; but there are some whose aversion to labour cannot be thus
-overcome. Not labouring, and yet needing sustenance, they are compelled
-to obtain it in illegitimate ways; and so bring on themselves the legal
-penalties. The criminal class being thus in great part recruited from
-the idle class; and the idleness being the source of the criminality;
-it follows that a successful discipline must be one which shall cure
-the idleness. The natural compulsions to labour having been eluded, the
-thing required is that the offender shall be so placed that he cannot
-elude them. And this is just what is done under the system we advocate.
-Its action is such that men whose natures are ill-adapted to the
-conditions of social life, bring themselves into a position in which a
-better adaptation is forced on them by the alternative of starvation.
-Lastly, let us not forget that this discipline which absolute morality
-dictates, is salutary, not only because it is industrial, but because
-it is voluntarily industrial. As we have shown, equity requires that
-the confined criminal shall be left to maintain himself—that is, shall
-be {180} left to work much or little, and to take the consequent
-plenitude or hunger. When, therefore, under this sharp but natural
-spur, a prisoner begins to exert himself, he does so by his own will.
-The process which leads him into habits of labour, is a process by
-which his self-control is strengthened; and this is what is wanted
-to make him a better citizen. It is to no purpose that you make him
-work by external coercion; for when he is again free, and the coercion
-absent, he will be what he was before. The coercion must be an internal
-one, which he shall carry with him out of prison. It avails little that
-you force him to work; he must force himself to work. And this he will
-do, only when placed in those conditions which equity dictates.
-
-Here, then, we find a third order of evidences. Psychology supports
-our conclusion. The various experiments above detailed, carried out
-by men who had no political or ethical theories to propagate, have
-established facts which we find to be quite concordant, not only with
-the deductions of absolute morality, but also with the deductions of
-mental science. Such a combination of different kinds of proof, cannot,
-we think, be resisted.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now let us try whether, by pursuing somewhat further the method
-thus far followed, we can see our way to the development of certain
-improved systems which are coming into use.
-
-Equity requires that the restraint of the criminal shall be as great
-as is needful for the safety of society; but not greater. In respect
-to the _quality_ of the restraint, there is little difficulty in
-interpreting this requirement; but there is considerable difficulty in
-deciding on the _duration_ of the restraint. No obvious mode presents
-itself of finding out how long a transgressor must be held in legal
-bondage, to insure society against further injury from him. A longer
-period than is necessary, implies an actual injustice to {181} the
-offender. A shorter period than is necessary, implies a potential
-injustice to society. And yet, without good guidance, one or other of
-these extremes is almost sure to be fallen into.
-
-At present, the lengths of penal sentences are fixed in a manner
-that is wholly empirical. For offences defined in certain technical
-ways, Acts of Parliament assign transportations and imprisonments,
-having durations not greater than so much nor less than so much: these
-partially-determined periods being arbitrarily fixed by legislators,
-under the promptings of moral feeling. Within the assigned limits
-the judge exercises his discretion; and in deciding on the time over
-which the restraint shall extend, he is swayed, partly by the special
-quality of the offence, partly by the circumstances under which it was
-committed, partly by the prisoner’s appearance and behaviour, partly
-by the character given to him. And the conclusion he arrives at after
-consideration of these data, depends very much on his individual
-nature—his moral bias and his theories of human conduct. Thus the mode
-of fixing the lengths of penal restraints, is from beginning to end,
-little else than guessing. How ill this system of guessing works, we
-have abundant proofs. “Justices’ justice,” which illustrates it in
-its simplest form, has become a bye-word; and the decisions of higher
-criminal court frequently err in the directions of both undue severity
-and undue lenity. Daily there occur cases of extremely-trifling
-transgressions visited with imprisonments of considerable lengths; and
-daily there occur cases in which the punishments are so inadequate,
-that the offenders time after time commit new crimes, when time after
-time discharged from custody.
-
-Now the question is whether, in place of this purely empirical method
-which answers so ill, equity can guide us to a method which shall more
-correctly adjust the period of restraint to the requirement. We believe
-it can. We believe that by following out its dictates, we shall arrive
-{182} at a method that is in great measure self-acting; and therefore
-less liable to be vitiated by errors of individual judgment or feeling.
-
-We have seen that were the injunctions of absolute morality obeyed,
-every transgressor would be compelled to make restitution or
-compensation. Throughout a considerable range of cases, this would
-itself involve a period of restraint varying in proportion to the
-magnitude of the offence. It is true that when the malefactor possessed
-ample means, the making restitution or compensation would usually be
-to him but a slight punishment. But though in these comparatively few
-cases, the regulation would fall short of its object, in so far as its
-effect on the criminal was concerned, yet in the immense majority of
-cases—in all cases of aggressions committed by the poorer members of
-the community—it would act with efficiency. It would involve periods
-of detention that would be longer or shorter according as the injury
-done was greater or less, and according as the transgressor was idle or
-industrious. And although between the injury done by an offender and
-his moral turpitude, there is no constant and exact proportion, yet
-the greatness of the injury done, affords, on the average of cases,
-a better measure of the discipline required, than do the votes of
-Parliamentary majorities and the guesses of judges.
-
-But our guidance does not end here. An endeavour still further to do
-that which is strictly equitable, will carry us still nearer to a
-correct adjustment of discipline to delinquency. When, having enforced
-restitution, we insist on some adequate guarantee that society shall
-not again be injured, and accept any guarantee that is sufficient, we
-open the way to a self-acting regulator of the period of detention.
-Already our laws are in many cases satisfied with securities for future
-good behaviour. Already this system manifestly tends to separate the
-more vicious from the less vicious; seeing that, on the average, the
-difficulty of {183} finding securities is great in proportion as the
-character is bad. And what we propose is that this system, now confined
-to particular kinds of offences, shall be made general. But let us be
-more specific.
-
-A prisoner on his trial calls witnesses to testify to his previous
-character—that is, if his character has been tolerably good. The
-evidence thus given weighs more or less in his favour, according to
-the respectability of the witnesses, their number, and the nature of
-their testimony. Taking into account these several elements, the judge
-forms his conception of the delinquent’s general disposition, and
-modifies the length of punishment accordingly. Now, may we not fairly
-say that if the current opinion respecting a convict’s character could
-be brought _directly_ to bear in qualifying the statutory sentence,
-instead of being brought _indirectly_ to bear, as at present, it
-would be a great improvement? Clearly the estimate made by a judge
-from such testimony, must be less accurate than the estimate made by
-the prisoner’s neighbours and employers. Clearly, too, the opinion
-expressed by such neighbours and employers in the witness-box, is
-less trustworthy than an opinion which entails on them serious
-responsibility. _The desideratum is, that a prisoner’s sentence shall
-be qualified by the judgment of those who have had life-long experience
-of him; and that the sincerity of this judgment shall be tested by
-their readiness to act on it._
-
-But how is this to be done? A very simple method of doing it has
-been suggested.[8] When a convict has fulfilled his task of making
-restitution or compensation, let it be possible for one or other of
-those who have known him, to take him out of confinement, on giving
-adequate bail for his good behaviour. Always premising that such
-an arrangement shall be possible only under an official permit, to
-be withheld if the prisoner’s conduct has been unsatisfactory; and
-always premising that the person who offers bail shall {184} be
-of good character and means; let it be competent for such a one to
-liberate a prisoner by being bound on his behalf for a specific sum,
-or by undertaking to make good any injury which he may do to his
-fellow-citizens within a specified period. This will doubtless be
-thought a startling proposal. We shall, however, find good reasons to
-believe it might be safely acted on—nay, we shall find facts proving
-the success of a plan that is obviously less safe.
-
- [8] We owe the suggestion to the late Mr. Octavius H. Smith.
-
-Under such an arrangement, the liberator and the convict would usually
-stand in the relation of employer and employed. Those to be thus
-conditionally released, would be ready to work for somewhat lower wages
-than were usual in their occupation; and those who became bound for
-them, besides having this economy of wages as an incentive, would be
-in a manner guaranteed by it against the risk undertaken. In working
-for less money, and in being under the surveillance of his master,
-the convict would still be undergoing a mitigated discipline. And
-while, on the one hand, he would be put on his good behaviour by the
-consciousness that his master might at any time cancel the contract
-and surrender him back to the authorities, he would, on the other
-hand, have a remedy against his master’s harshness, in the option of
-returning to prison, and there maintaining himself for the remainder of
-his term.
-
-Observe, next, that the difficulty of obtaining such conditional
-release would vary with the gravity of the offence which had been
-committed. Men guilty of heinous crimes would remain in prison; for
-none would dare to become responsible for their good behaviour. Any one
-convicted a second time would remain unbailed for a much longer period
-than before; seeing that having once inflicted loss on some one bound
-for him, he would not again be so soon offered the opportunity of doing
-the like: only after a long period of good behaviour testified to by
-prison-officers, would he be likely to get another chance. Conversely,
-those whose transgressions were not serious, and who had usually been
-{185} well-conducted, would readily obtain recognizances; while to
-venial offenders this qualified liberation would come as soon as
-they had made restitution. Moreover, when innocent persons had been
-pronounced guilty, as well as when solitary misdeeds had been committed
-by those of really superior natures, the system we have described would
-supply a remedy. From the wrong verdicts of the law and its mistaken
-estimates of turpitude, there would be an appeal; and long-proved worth
-would bring its reward in the mitigation of grievous injustices.
-
-A further advantage would by implication result, in the shape of a
-long industrial discipline for those who most needed it. Speaking
-generally, diligent and skilful workmen, who were on the whole useful
-members of society, would, if their offences were not serious, soon
-obtain employers to give bail for them. Whereas members of the criminal
-class—the idle and the dissolute—would remain long in confinement;
-since, until they had been brought by habitual self-maintenance under
-restraint, to something like industrial efficiency, employers would not
-be tempted to become responsible for them.
-
-We should thus have a self-acting test, not only of the length of
-restraint required for social safety, but also of that apprenticeship
-to labour which many convicts need; while there would be supplied a
-means of rectifying sundry failures and excesses of our present system.
-The plan would practically amount to an extension of trial by jury. At
-present, the State calls in certain of a prisoner’s fellow-citizens to
-decide whether he is guilty or not guilty: the judge, under guidance of
-the penal laws, being left to decide what punishment he deserves, if
-guilty. Under the arrangement we have described, the judge’s decision
-would admit of modification by a jury of the convict’s neighbours. And
-this natural jury, while it would be best fitted by previous knowledge
-of the man to form an opinion, would be rendered cautious by the sense
-of grave responsibility; inasmuch as {186} any one of its number who
-gave a conditional release, would do so at his own peril.
-
-And now mark that all the evidence forthcoming to prove the safety
-and advantages of the “intermediate system,” proves, still more
-conclusively, the safety and advantages of this system which we would
-substitute for it. What we have described, is nothing more than an
-intermediate system reduced to a natural instead of an artificial
-form—carried out with natural checks instead of artificial checks.
-If, as Captain Crofton has experimentally shown, it is safe to give
-a prisoner conditional liberation, on the strength of good conduct
-during a certain period of prison-discipline; it is evidently safer to
-let his conditional liberation depend not alone on good conduct while
-under the eyes of his jailors, but also on the character he had earned
-during his previous life. If it is safe to act on the judgments of
-officials whose experience of a convict’s behaviour is comparatively
-limited, and who do not suffer penalties when their judgments are
-mistaken; then, manifestly, it is safer (when such officials can show
-no reason to the contrary), to act on the additional judgment of one
-who has not only had better opportunities of knowing the convict, but
-who will be a serious loser if his judgment proves erroneous. Further,
-that surveillance over each conditionally-liberated prisoner, which
-the “intermediate system” exercises, would be still better exercised
-when, instead of going to a strange master in a strange district, the
-prisoner went to some master in his own district; and, under such
-circumstances, it would be easier to get information respecting his
-after-career. There is every reason to think that this method would be
-workable. If, on the recommendation of the officers, Captain Crofton’s
-prisoners obtain employers “who have on many occasions returned for
-others, in consequence of the good conduct of those at first engaged;”
-still better would be the action of the system when, instead of the
-employers having “every {187} facility placed at their disposal for
-satisfying themselves as to the antecedents of the convict,” they were
-already familiar with his antecedents.
-
-Finally, let us not overlook the fact, that this course is the only one
-which, while duly consulting social safety, is also entirely just to
-the prisoner. As we have shown, the restraints imposed on a criminal
-are warranted by absolute equity, only to the extent needful to prevent
-further aggressions on his fellow-men; and when his fellow-men impose
-greater restraints than these, they trespass against him. Hence, when
-a prisoner has worked out his task of making restitution, and, so far
-as is possible, undone the wrong he had done, society is, in strict
-justice, bound to accept any arrangement which adequately protects
-its members against further injury. And if, moved by the expectation
-of profit, or other motive, any citizen sufficiently substantial and
-trustworthy, will take on himself to hold society harmless, society
-must agree to his proposal. All it can rightly require is, that the
-guarantee against contingent injury _shall_ be adequate; which, of
-course, it never can be where the contingent injury is of the gravest
-kind. No bail could compensate for murder; and therefore against
-this, and other extreme crimes, society would rightly refuse any such
-guarantee, even if offered, which it would be very unlikely to be.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Such, then, is our code of prison-ethics. Such is the ideal which we
-ought to keep ever in view when modifying our penal system. Again we
-say, as we said at the outset, that the realization of such an ideal
-wholly depends on the advance of civilization. Let no one carry away
-the impression that we regard all these purely equitable regulations as
-immediately practicable. Though they may be partially carried out, we
-think it highly improbable that they could at present be carried out
-in full. The number of offenders, the low average of enlightenment,
-the ill-working of {188} administrative machinery, and above all,
-the difficulty of obtaining officials of adequate intelligence, good
-feeling, and self-control, are obstacles which must long stand in
-the way of a system so complex as that which morality dictates. And
-we here assert, as emphatically as before, that the harshest penal
-system is ethically justified if it is as good as the circumstances
-of the time permit. However great the cruelties it inflicts, yet
-if a system theoretically more equitable would not be a sufficient
-terror to evil-doers, or could not be worked, from lack of officers
-sufficiently judicious, honest, and humane—if less rigorous methods
-would entail a diminution of social security; then the methods in use
-are extrinsically good though intrinsically bad. They are, as before
-said, the least wrong, and therefore relatively right.
-
-Nevertheless, as we have endeavoured to prove, it is immensely
-important that, while duly considering the relatively right, we should
-keep the absolutely right constantly in view. True as it is that, in
-this transition state, our conceptions of the ultimately expedient must
-ever be qualified by our experience of the proximately expedient; it is
-not the less true that the proximately expedient cannot be determined
-unless the ultimately expedient is known. Before we can say what is as
-good as the time permits, we must say what is abstractedly good; for
-the first idea involves the last. We must have some fixed standard,
-some invariable measure, some constant clue; otherwise we shall
-inevitably be misled by the suggestions of immediate policy, and wander
-away from the right rather than advance towards it. This conclusion is
-fully borne out by the facts we have cited. In other cases, as well as
-in the case of penal discipline, the evidence shows how terribly we
-have erred from obstinately refusing to consult first principles and
-clinging to an unreasoning empiricism. Though, during civilization,
-grievous evils have occasionally arisen from attempts suddenly to
-realize absolute rectitude, yet a {189} greater sum total of evils
-has arisen from the more usual course of ignoring absolute rectitude.
-Age after age, effete institutions have been maintained far longer
-than they would else have been, and equitable arrangements have been
-needlessly postponed. Is it not time for us to profit by past lessons?
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-
-POSTSCRIPT.—Since the publication of this essay in 1860 further
-evidence supporting its conclusions has been made public. Dr. F.J.
-Mouat, late Inspector-General of Gaols in Lower Bengal, has given,
-in various pamphlets and articles, dating from 1872, accounts of his
-experiences, which entirely harmonize with the foregoing general
-argument. Speaking of three leading systems of prison-discipline,
-“based on opposite theories,” he says:―
-
- “The oldest is, that a prison should be rendered a terror to evil
- doers by the infliction of as much pain as can be inflicted, without
- direct injury to health or risk to life. The second plan is a
- graduated system of punishment, from which the direct infliction of
- pain is eliminated, and the prisoner is allowed to work his way to
- freedom and mitigation of sentence, by mere good conduct in jail.
- The third, and in my humble judgment the best, is to convert every
- prison into a school of industry, labour being used as an instrument
- of punishment, discipline, and reformation.”—_Prison Industry in its
- Primitive, Reformatory, and Economic Aspects_ (London, Nov. 1889).
-
-In his pamphlet on the _Prison System of India_, published in 1872, Dr.
-Mouat contends:―
-
- “That remunerative prison labour is an efficient instrument of
- punishment and reformation by occupying the whole available time of
- criminals in uncongenial and compulsory employments; by teaching
- them the means of gaining an honest livelihood on release; by the
- inculcation of habits of order and industry, to the displacement of
- the irregularity and idleness which are the sources of so much vice
- and crime; and by repaying to the State the whole or part of the cost
- of repression of crime by the compulsory industry of the unproductive
- classes, and thus relieving the community at large from a burden which
- it is at present compelled to bear.
-
- “That the economic objections to the remunerative employment of
- convicts are unsound and untenable; and that even if they were true
- as respects individuals and small sections of the community, the
- interests of the minority should yield to the general welfare.”
-
-Once more, under the title _Prison Discipline and its Results in
-Bengal_, first published in the _Journal of the {190} Society of Arts_
-in 1872, Dr. Mouat, after describing an exhibition of gaol-manufactures
-held in Calcutta in 1856, urges “that every prisoner sentenced to
-labour should be made to repay to the State the whole cost of his
-punishment in gaol; . . . and that prisons should be made, as much as
-possible, schools of industry, as combining, more completely than can
-be effected by any other system, the punishment of the offender, with
-the protection of society.” He then goes on to show what have been the
-results of the self-supporting system:―
-
- “The net profits realized from the labour of the convicts actually
- employed in handicrafts, after deducting the cost of production, were,
- in round numbers, as follows:―
-
-              £
- 1855–56   11,019
-  ’56–57   12,300
-  ’57–58   10,841
-  ’59–60   14,065
-  ’60–61   23,124
-  ’61–62   54,542
-  ’62–63   30,604
-  ’63–64   54,542
-  ’64–65   32,988
-  ’65–66   35,543
-  ’66      14,287
-  ’67      41,168
-  ’68      56,817
-  ’69      46,588
-  ’70      45,274
-
- In all, nearly half a million of money. In 1866, the accounts were
- made up for only eight months, to introduce the calendar in place of
- the official year, which ended on the 30th of April.
-
- “If the limits of time and space permitted, I could show you in minute
- detail that each skilled prisoner employed in handicrafts, striking
- the average of all the jails, earned considerably more than he cost;
- that five of the prisons under my charge were at various times
- self-supporting, and that one of them, the great industrial prison at
- Alipore, a suburb of Calcutta, has repaid very considerably more than
- its cost, for the last ten years continuously.”
-
-As Dr. Mouat held the position of Inspector-General of Gaols in Lower
-Bengal for 15 years, and as, during that period, he had under his
-control an average of 20,000 prisoners, it may, I think, be held that
-his experiences have been tolerably extensive, and that a system
-justified by such experiences is worthy of adoption. Unfortunately,
-however, men pooh-pooh those experiences which do not accord with their
-foregone conclusions.
-
-I have occasionally vented the paradox that mankind go {191} right
-only when they have tried all possible ways of going wrong: intending
-it to be taken with some qualification. Of late, however, I have
-observed that in some respects this paradox falls short of the truth.
-Sundry instances have shown me that even when mankind have at length
-stumbled into the right course, they often deliberately return to the
-wrong.
-
-{192}
-
-
-
-
-THE ETHICS OF KANT.
-
-[_From the_ Fortnightly Review _for July 1888. This essay was called
-forth by attacks on me made in essays published in preceding numbers of
-the_ Fortnightly Review—_essays in which the Kantian system of ethics
-was lauded as immensely superior to the system of ethics defended by
-me. The last section now appears for the first time._]
-
-
-If, before Kant uttered that often-quoted saying in which, with the
-stars of Heaven he coupled the conscience of Man, as being the two
-things that excited his awe, he had known more of Man than he did, he
-would probably have expressed himself somewhat otherwise. Not, indeed,
-that the conscience of Man is not wonderful enough, whatever be its
-supposed genesis; but the wonderfulness of it is of a different kind
-according as we assume it to have been supernaturally given or infer
-that it has been naturally evolved. The knowledge of Man in that large
-sense which Anthropology expresses, had made, in Kant’s day, but small
-advances. The books of travel were relatively few, and the facts which
-they contained concerning the human mind as existing in different
-races, had not been gathered together and generalized. In our days the
-conscience of Man, as inductively known, has none of that universality
-of presence and unity of nature, which Kant’s saying tacitly assumes.
-Sir John Lubbock writes:―
-
-  “In fact, I believe that the lower races of men may be said to be
- deficient {193} in the idea of right. . . . . That there should be any
- races of men so deficient in moral feeling, was altogether opposed
- to the preconceived ideas with which I commenced the study of savage
- life, and I have arrived at the conviction by slow degrees, and even
- with reluctance.”—_Origin of Civilization_, 1882, pp. 404–5.
-
-But now let us look at the evidence from which this impression
-is derived, as we find it in the testimonies of travellers and
-missionaries.
-
- Praising his deceased son, Tui Thakau, a Fijian Chief, concluded “by
- speaking of his daring spirit and consummate cruelty, as he could kill
- his own wives if they offended him, and eat them afterwards.”—_Western
- Pacific._ J. E. Erskine, p. 248.
-
- “Shedding of blood is to him no crime, but a glory . . . . to be
- somehow an acknowledged murderer is the object of the Fijian’s
- restless ambition.”—_Fiji and the Fijians._ Rev. T. Williams, i., p.
- 112.
-
- “It is a melancholy fact that when they [the Zulu boys] have arrived
- at a very early age, should their mothers attempt to chastise them,
- such is the law, that these lads are at the moment allowed to kill
- their mothers.”—_Travels and Adventures in Southern Africa._ G.
- Thompson, ii., p. 418.
-
- “Murther, adultery, thievery, and all other such like crimes, are here
- [Gold Coast] accounted no sins.”—_Description of the Coast of Guinea._
- W. Bosman, p. 130.
-
- “The accusing conscience is unknown to him [the East African]. His
- only fear after committing a treacherous murder is that of being
- haunted by the angry ghost of the dead.”—_Lake Regions of Central
- Africa._ R. F. Burton, ii., p. 336.
-
- “I never could make them [East Africans] understand the existence of
- good principle.”—_The Albert N’Yanza._ S. W. Baker, i., pp. 241.
-
- “The Damaras kill useless and worn-out people; even sons smother their
- sick fathers.”—_Narrative of an Explorer in Tropical South Africa._ F.
- Galton, p. 112.
-
- The Damaras “seem to have no perceptible notion of right and
- wrong.”—_Ibid._ p. 72.
-
-Against these we may set some converse facts. At the other extreme
-we have a few Eastern tribes—pagans they are called—who practise the
-virtues which Western nations—Christians they are called—do but teach.
-While Europeans thirst for blood-revenge in much the same way as the
-lowest savages, there are some simple peoples of the Indian Hills,
-as the Lepchas, who “are singularly forgiving of injuries;”[9] and
-Campbell exemplifies “the effect of a {194} very strong sense of duty
-on this savage.”[10] That character which the creed of Christendom
-is supposed to foster is exhibited in high degree by the Arafuras
-(Papuans) who live in “peace and brotherly love with one another”[11]
-to such extent that government is but nominal. And concerning various
-of the Indian Hill-tribes, as the Santáls, Sowrahs, Marias, Lepchas,
-Bodo and Dhimáls, different observers testify of them severally that
-“they were the most truthful set of men I ever met,”[12] “crime and
-criminal officers are almost unknown,”[13] “a pleasing feature in their
-character is their complete truthfulness,”[14] “they bear a singular
-character for truthfulness and honesty,”[15] they are “wonderfully
-honest,”[16] “honest and truthful in deed and word.”[17] Irrespective
-of race, we find these traits in men who are, and have long been,
-absolutely peaceful (the uniform antecedent), be they the Jakuns of the
-South Malayan Peninsula, who “are never known to steal anything, not
-even the most insignificant trifle,”[18] or be it in the Hos of the
-Himalaya, among whom “a reflection on a man’s honesty or veracity may
-be sufficient to send him to self-destruction.”[19] So that in respect
-of conscience these uncivilized people are as superior to average
-Europeans, as average Europeans are superior to the brutal savages
-previously described.
-
- [9] Campbell in _Journal of the Ethnological Society_, July, N. S. vol.
- i., 1869, p. 150.
-
- [10] _Ibid._ p. 154.
-
- [11] Dr. H. Kolff, _Voyages of the Dutch brig “Dourga.”_ Earl’s
- translation, pp. 161.
-
- [12] W. W. Hunter, _Annals of Rural Bengal_, p. 248.
-
- [13] _Ibid._ p. 217.
-
- [14] Dr. J. Shortt, _Hill Ranges of Southern India_, pt. iii., p. 38.
-
- [15] Glasfind in _Selections from the Records of Government of India_
- (Foreign Department), No. xxxix., p. 41.
-
- [16] Campbell in _Journal of the Ethnological Society_, N. S. vol. i.,
- 1869, p. 150.
-
- [17] B. H. Hodgson in _Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal_,
- xviii., p. 745.
-
- [18] Rev. P. Favre in _Journal of the Indian Archipelago_, ii., p. 266.
-
- [19] Col. E. T. Dalton, _Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal_, p. 206.
-
-Had Kant had these and kindred facts before him, {195} his conception
-of the human mind, and consequently his ethical conception, would
-scarcely have been what they were. Believing, as he did, that one
-object of his awe—the stellar Universe—has been evolved, he might by
-evidence like the foregoing have been led to suspect that the other
-object of his awe—the human conscience—has been evolved, and has
-consequently a real nature unlike its apparent nature.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-For the disciples of Kant living in our day there can be made no such
-defence as that which may be made for their master. On all sides of
-them lie classes of facts of various kinds, which might suffice to make
-them hesitate, if nothing more. Here are a few such classes of facts.
-
-Though, unlike the uncultured, who suppose everything to be what it
-appears, chemists had for many generations known that multitudinous
-substances which seem simple are really compound, and often highly
-compound; yet, until the time of Sir Humphrey Davy, even chemists had
-believed that certain substances which resisted all their powers of
-decomposition, were to be classed among the elements. Davy, however,
-by subjecting the alkalies to a force not before applied, proved that
-they are oxides of metals; and, suspecting the like to be the case with
-the earths, similarly proved the composite nature of these also. Not
-only the common sense of the uncultured, but the common sense of the
-cultured was shown to be wrong. Wider knowledge has, as usual, led to
-greater modesty, and, since Davy’s day, chemists have felt less certain
-that the so-called elements are elementary. Contrariwise, increasing
-evidence of sundry kinds leads them to suspect more and more strongly
-that they are all compound.
-
-Alike to the labourer who digs it out and to the carpenter who uses it
-in his workshop, a piece of chalk appears a thing than which nothing
-can be simpler; and ninety-nine people out of a hundred would agree
-with them. Yet a {196} piece of chalk is highly complex. A microscope
-shows it to consist of myriads of shells of _Foraminifera_; shows,
-further, that it contains more kinds than one; and shows, further
-still, that each minute shell, whole or broken, is formed of many
-chambers, every one of which once contained a living unit. Thus by
-ordinary inspection, however close, the true nature of chalk cannot be
-known; and to one who has absolute confidence in his eyes the assertion
-of its true nature appears absurd.
-
-Take again a living body of a seemingly uncomplicated kind—say a
-potato. Cut it through and observe how structureless is its substance.
-But though unaided vision gives this verdict, aided vision gives a
-widely different one. Aided vision discovers, in the first place, that
-the mass is everywhere permeated by vessels of complex formation.
-Further, that it is made up of innumerable units called cells, each of
-which has walls composed of several layers. Further still, that each
-cell contains a number of starch-grains. And yet still further, that
-each of these grains is formed of layer within layer, like the coats
-of an onion. So that where there appears perfect simplicity there is
-really complexity within complexity.
-
-From these examples which the objective world furnishes, let us turn to
-some examples furnished by the subjective world—some of our states of
-consciousness. Up to modern times any one who, looking out on the snow,
-was told that the impression of whiteness it gave him was composed of
-impressions such as those given by the rainbow, would have regarded his
-informant as a lunatic; as would even now the great mass of mankind.
-But since Newton’s day, it has become well known to a relatively small
-number that this is literal fact. Not only may white light be resolved
-by a prism into a number of brilliant colours, but, by an appropriate
-arrangement, these colours can be re-combined into white light: the
-visual sensation which seems perfectly simple proves to be highly
-compound. Those who {197} habitually suppose that things are what they
-seem, are wrong here as in multitudinous other cases.
-
-Another example is supplied by the sensation of sound. A solitary note
-struck on the piano, or a blast from a horn, yields through the ear a
-feeling which appears homogeneous; and the uninstructed are incredulous
-if told that it is an intricate combination of noises. In the first
-place, that which constitutes the more voluminous part of the tone is
-accompanied by a number of over-tones, producing what is known as its
-_timbre_: instead of one note, there are half a dozen notes, of which
-the chief has its character specialized by the others. In the second
-place, each of these notes, consisting objectively of a rapid series
-of aërial waves, produces subjectively a rapid series of impressions
-on the auditory nerve. Either by the appliance of Hooke or by Savart’s
-machine or by the siren, it is proved to demonstration that every
-musical sound is the product of successive units of sound, each in
-itself unmusical, which, as they succeed one another with increasing
-rapidity, produce a tone which progressively rises in pitch. Here
-again, then, under an apparent simplicity there is a double complexity.
-
-Most of these examples of the illusiveness of unaided perception,
-whether exercised upon objective or subjective existences, were unknown
-to Kant. Had they been known to him they might have suggested other
-views concerning certain of our states of consciousness, and might
-have given a different character to his philosophy. Let us observe
-what would possibly have been the changes in two of his cardinal
-conceptions—metaphysical and ethical.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Our consciousness of Time and Space appeared to him, as they appear to
-everyone, perfectly simple; and the apparent simplicity he accepted
-as actual simplicity. Had he suspected that, just as the seemingly
-homogeneous and undecomposable consciousness of Sound really consists
-of multitudinous units of consciousness, so might the {198} apparently
-homogeneous and undecomposable consciousness of Space, he would
-possibly have been led to inquire whether the consciousness of Space
-is not wholly composed of infinitely numerous relations of position,
-such as those which every portion of it presents. And finding that
-every portion of Space, immense or minute, cannot be either known or
-conceived save in some relative position to the conscious subject,
-and that, besides involving the relations of distance and direction,
-it invariably contains within itself relations of right and left,
-top and bottom, nearer and farther; he might perhaps have concluded
-that our consciousness of that matrix of phenomena we call Space, has
-been built up in the course of Evolution by accumulated experiences
-registered in the nervous system. And had he concluded this, he would
-not have committed himself to the many absurdities which his doctrine
-involves.[20]
-
-Similarly, if, instead of assuming that conscience is simple because
-it seems simple to ordinary introspection, he had entertained the
-hypothesis that it is perhaps complex—a consolidated product of
-multitudinous experiences received, mainly by ancestors and added
-to by self—he might have arrived at a consistent system of Ethics.
-That the habitual association of pains with certain things and acts,
-generation after generation, may produce organic repugnance to such
-things and acts,[21] might, had it been known to him, have made him
-suspect that conscience is a product of Evolution. And in that case his
-conception of it would not have been incongruous with the facts above
-named, showing that there are widely different degrees of conscience in
-different races.
-
- [20] See _Principles of Psychology_, § 399.
-
- [21] See _Principles of Psychology_, § 189 (note) and § 520.
-
-In brief, as already implied, had Kant, instead of his incongruous
-beliefs that the celestial bodies have had an evolutionary origin, but
-that the minds of living beings on them, or at least on one of them,
-have had a {199} non-evolutionary origin, entertained the belief
-that both have arisen by Evolution, he would have been saved from the
-impossibilities of his Metaphysics, and the untenabilities of his
-Ethics. To the consideration of these last, let us now pass.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Before doing this, however, something must be said concerning abnormal
-reasoning as compared with normal reasoning.
-
-Knowledge which is of the highest order in respect of certainty, and
-which we call exact science, is distinguished from other knowledge by
-its definitely quantitative previsions.[22] It sets out with data,
-and proceeds by steps which, taken together, enable it to say under
-what specified conditions a specified relation of phenomena will be
-found; and to say in what place, or at what time, or in what quantity,
-or all of them, a certain effect will be witnessed. Given the factors
-of any arithmetical operation, and there is absolute certainty in the
-result reached, supposing there are no stumblings: stumblings which
-always admit of detection and disproof by the method which we shall
-presently find is pursued. Base and angles having been accurately
-measured, that sub-division of geometry which is called trigonometry
-yields with certainty the distance or the height of the object of
-which the position is sought. The ratio of the arms of a lever having
-been stated, mechanics tells us what weight at one end will balance
-an assigned weight at the other. And by the aid of these three exact
-sciences, the Calculus, Geometry, and Mechanics, Astronomy can predict
-to the minute, for each separate place on the Earth, when an eclipse
-will begin and end, and how near it will approach to totality.
-Knowledge of this order has infinite justifications in the successful
-guidance of infinitely numerous human actions. The accounts of every
-trader, the operations of every workshop, the navigation of every
-vessel, depend for their trustworthiness {200} on these sciences. The
-method they pursue, therefore, verified in cases which pass all human
-power to enumerate, is a method not to be transcended in certainty.
-
- [22] See Essay on “Genesis of Science.”
-
-What is this method? Whichever of these sciences we examine, we
-find the course uniformly pursued to be that of setting out with
-propositions of which the negations are inconceivable, and advancing
-by successive dependent propositions, each of which has the like
-character—that its negation is inconceivable. In a developed
-consciousness (and of course I exclude minds of which the faculties
-are unformed) it is impossible to represent things that are equal
-to the same thing as being themselves unequal; and in a developed
-consciousness, action and re-action cannot be thought of as other
-than equal and opposite. In like manner, every _because_ and every
-_therefore_, used in a mathematical argument, connotes a proposition of
-which the terms are absolutely coherent in the mode alleged: the proof
-being that an attempt to bring together in consciousness the terms
-of the opposite proposition is futile. And this method of testing,
-alike the fundamental propositions and all members of the fabrics of
-propositions raised upon them, is consistently pursued in verifying
-the conclusion. Inference and observation are compared; and when they
-agree, it is held inconceivable that the inference is other than true.
-
-In contrast to the method which I have just described, distinguishable
-as the legitimate _a priori_ method, there is one which may be called—I
-was about to say, the illegitimate _a priori_ method. But the word is
-not strong enough; it must be called the inverted _a priori_ method.
-Instead of setting out with a proposition of which the negation is
-inconceivable, it sets out with a proposition of which the affirmation
-is inconceivable, and therefrom proceeds to draw conclusions. It is
-not consistent, however: it does not continue to do that which it does
-at first. Having posited an inconceivable proposition to begin with,
-it does not {201} frame its argument out of a series of inconceivable
-propositions. All steps after the first are of the kind ordinarily
-accepted as valid. The successive _therefores_ and _becauses_ have
-the usual connotations. The peculiarity lies in this, that in every
-proposition save the first, the reader is expected to admit the logical
-necessity of an inference drawn, for the reason that the opposite is
-not thinkable; but he is not supposed to expect a like conformity to
-logical necessity in the primary proposition. The dictum of a logical
-consciousness which must be recognized as valid in every subsequent
-step, must be ignored in the first step. We pass now to an illustration
-of this method which here concerns us.
-
-The first sentence in Kant’s first chapter runs thus:—“Nothing can
-possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be
-called good without qualification, except a Good Will.”[23] And then on
-the next page we come upon the following definition:―
-
- “A good will is good not because of what it performs or effects, nor
- by its aptness for the attainment of some proposed end, but simply by
- virtue of the volition, that is, it is good in itself, and considered
- by itself is to be esteemed much higher than all that can be brought
- about by it in favour of any inclination, nay even of the sum total of
- all inclinations.”[24]
-
-   [23] _Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason and other works on the
-   Theory of Ethics_, trans. by T. K. Abbott, p. 11.
-
-   [24] _Ibid._ pp. 12–13.
-
-Most fallacies result from the habit of using words without fully
-rendering them into thoughts—passing them by with recognitions of their
-meanings as ordinarily used, without stopping to consider whether
-these meanings admit of being given to them in the cases named. Let
-us not rest satisfied with thinking vaguely of what is understood
-by “a Good Will,” but let us interpret the words definitely. Will
-implies the consciousness of some end. Exclude from it every idea of
-purpose and the conception of Will disappears. An end of some kind
-being necessarily implied by the conception of Will, the quality of
-the Will is determined {202} by the quality of the end contemplated.
-Will itself, considered apart from any distinguishing epithet, is
-not cognizable by Morality at all. It becomes cognizable by Morality
-only when it gains its character as good or bad by virtue of its
-contemplated end as good or bad. If any one doubts this, let him try
-whether he can think of a good will which contemplates a bad end. The
-whole question, therefore, centres in the meaning of the word good. Let
-us look at the meanings habitually given to it.
-
-We speak of good meat, good bread, good wine; by which phrases we mean
-either things that are palatable, and so give pleasure, or things that
-are wholesome, and by conducing to health conduce to pleasure. A good
-fire, good clothing, a good house, we so name because they minister
-either to comfort, which means pleasure, or gratify the æsthetic
-sentiment, which also means pleasure. So it is with things which more
-indirectly further welfare, as good tools or good roads. When we speak
-of a good workman, a good teacher, a good doctor, it is the same:
-efficiency in aiding others’ well-being is what we indirectly mean.
-Yet again, good government, good institutions, good laws, connote
-benefits yielded to the society in which they exist: benefits being
-equivalent to certain kinds of happiness, positive or negative. But
-Kant tells us that a good will is one that is good in and for itself
-without reference to ends. We are not to think of it as prompting acts
-which will profit the man himself, either by conducing to his health,
-advancing his culture, or improving his inclinations; for all these
-are in the long run conducive to happiness, and are urged only for
-the reason that they do this. We are not to think of a will as good
-because, by fulfilment of it, friends are saved from sufferings or have
-their gratifications increased; for this would involve calling it good
-because of beneficial ends in view. Nor must conduciveness to social
-ameliorations, present or future, be taken into account when we attempt
-to conceive {203} a good will. In short, we are to frame our idea of a
-good will without any material out of which to frame the idea of good:
-good is to be used in thought as an eviscerated term.
-
-Here, then, is illustrated what I have called above the inverted _a
-priori_ method of philosophizing: the setting out with an inconceivable
-proposition. The Kantian Metaphysics starts by asserting that Space is
-“nothing but” a form of intuition—pertains wholly to the subject and
-not at all to the object. This is a verbally intelligible proposition,
-but one of which the terms cannot be put together in consciousness;
-for neither Kant, nor any one else, ever succeeded in bringing into
-unity of representation the thought of Space and the thought of Self,
-as being the one an attribute of the other. And here we see that, just
-in the same way, the Kantian Ethics begins by positing something which
-seems to have a meaning but which has really no meaning—something
-which, under the conditions imposed, cannot be rendered into thought at
-all. For neither Kant, nor any one else, ever has or ever can, frame a
-consciousness of a good will when from the word good are expelled all
-thoughts of those ends which we distinguish by the word good.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Evidently Kant himself sees that his assumption invites attack, for he
-proceeds to defend it. He says:―
-
- “There is, however, something so strange in this idea of the absolute
- value of the mere will, in which no account is taken of its utility,
- that notwithstanding the thorough assent of even common reason to the
- idea [!], yet a suspicion must arise that it may perhaps really be the
- product of mere high-flown fancy, &c.” (p. 13).
-
-And then to prepare for a justification, he goes on to say:―
-
- “In the physical constitution of an organized being we assume it as
- a fundamental principle that no organ for any purpose will be found
- in it but what is also the fittest and best adapted for that purpose”
- (pp. 13–14).
-
-Now, even had this assumption been valid, the argument he bases upon
-it, far-fetched as it is, might be considered of very inadequate
-strength to warrant the supposition that there can be a will conceived
-as good without any reference {204} to good ends. But, unfortunately
-for Kant, the assumption is utterly invalid. In his day it probably
-passed without question; but in our day few if any biologists would
-admit it. On the special-creation hypothesis some defence of the
-proposition might be attempted, but the evolution-hypothesis tacitly
-negatives it entirely. Let us begin with some minor facts which
-militate against Kant’s supposition. Take, first, rudimentary organs.
-These are numerous throughout the animal kingdom. While representing
-organs which were of use in ancestral types, they are of no use in the
-types possessing them; and, as being rudimentary, they are of necessity
-imperfect. Moreover, besides being injurious by taxing nutrition to no
-purpose, they are almost certainly in some cases injurious by being
-in the way. Then, beyond the argument from rudimentary organs, there
-is the argument from make-shift organs, which form a large class. We
-have a conspicuous case in the swimming organ of the seal, formed by
-the apposition of the two hind limbs—an organ manifestly inferior to
-one specially shaped for its function, and one which, during early
-stages of the changes which have produced it, must have been very
-inefficient. But the untruth of the assumption is best shown by
-comparing a given organ in a low type of creature with the same organ
-in a high type. The alimentary canal, for example, in very inferior
-creatures is a simple tube, substantially alike from end to end, and
-having throughout all its parts the same function. But in a superior
-creature this tube is differentiated into mouth, æsophagus, stomach
-(or stomachs), small and large intestines with their various appended
-glands pouring in secretions. Now if this last form of alimentary canal
-is to be regarded as a perfect organ, or something like it, what shall
-we say of the original form; and what shall we say of all those forms
-lying between the two? The vascular system, again, furnishes a clear
-instance. The primitive heart is nothing but a dilatation of the great
-blood vessel—a pulsatile {205} sac. But a mammal has a four-chambered
-heart with valves, by the aid of which the blood is propelled through
-the lungs for aëration, and throughout the system at large for general
-purposes. If this four-chambered heart is a perfect organ, what is
-the primitive heart, and what are the hearts possessed by all the
-multitudinous creatures below the higher _vertebrata_? Manifestly the
-process of evolution implies a continual replacing of creatures having
-inferior organs, by creatures having superior organs; leaving such of
-the inferior as can survive to occupy inferior spheres of life. This
-is not only so throughout the whole animal creation up to Man himself,
-but it is so within the limits of the human race. Both the brains and
-the lower limbs of various inferior races are ineffective organs,
-compared with those of superior races. Nay, even in the highest type
-of Man we have obvious imperfections. The structure of the groin is
-imperfect: the frequent ruptures which result from it would have been
-prevented by closure of the inguinal rings during fœtal life after they
-had performed their office. That all-important organ the vertebral
-column, too, is as yet but incompletely adapted to the upright posture.
-Only while the vigour is considerable can there be maintained, without
-appreciable effort, those muscular contractions which produce the
-sigmoid flexure, and bring the lumbar portion into such a position
-that the “line of direction” falls within it. In young children, in
-boys and girls who are admonished to “sit up,” in weakly people, and
-in the old, the spine lapses into that convex form characteristic of
-lower _Primates_. It is the same with the balancing of the head. Only
-by a muscular strain to which habit makes us insensible, as it does to
-the exposure of the face to cold, is the head maintained in position.
-Immediately certain cervical muscles are relaxed the head falls
-forward; and where there is great debility the chin rests permanently
-on the chest.
-
-So far, indeed, is the assumption of Kant from being true that the very
-reverse is probably true. After {206} contemplating the countless
-examples of imperfections exhibited in low types of creatures, and
-decreasing with the ascent to high types, but still exemplified in the
-highest, anyone who concludes, as he may reasonably do, that Evolution
-has not yet reached its limit, must infer that most likely no such
-thing as a perfect organ exists. Thus the basis of the argument by
-which Kant attempts to justify his assumption that there exists a good
-will apart from a good end, disappears utterly; and leaves his dogma in
-all its naked unthinkableness.[25]
-
- [25] I find that in the above three paragraphs I have done Kant
- less than justice and more than justice—less, in assuming that
- his evolutionary view was limited to the genesis of our sidereal
- system, and more, in assuming that he had not contradicted himself.
- My knowledge of Kant’s writings is extremely limited. In 1844 a
- translation of his _Critique of Pure Reason_ (then I think lately
- published) fell into my hands, and I read the first few pages
- enunciating his doctrine of Time and Space: my peremptory rejection
- of which caused me to lay the book down. Twice since then the same
- thing has happened; for, being an impatient reader, when I disagree
- with the cardinal propositions of a work I can go no further. One
- other thing I knew. By indirect references I was made aware that Kant
- had propounded the idea that celestial bodies have been formed by
- the aggregation of diffused matter. Beyond this my knowledge of his
- conceptions did not extend; and my supposition that his evolutionary
- conception had stopped short with the genesis of sun, stars, and
- planets, was due to the fact that his doctrine of Time and Space, as
- forms of thought anteceding experience, implied a supernatural origin
- inconsistent with the hypothesis of natural genesis. Dr. Paul Carus,
- who, shortly after the publication of this article in the _Fortnightly
- Review_ for July, 1888, undertook to defend the Kantian ethics in the
- American journal which he edits, _The Open Court_, has now (Sept. 4,
- 1890), in another defensive article, translated sundry passages from
- Kant’s _Critique of Judgment_, his _Presumable Origin of Humanity_,
- and his work _Upon the different Races of Mankind_, showing that Kant
- was, if not fully, yet partially, an evolutionist in his speculations
- about living beings. There is, perhaps, some reason for doubting the
- correctness of Dr. Carus’s rendering of these passages into English.
- When, as in the first of the articles just named, he failed to
- distinguish between consciousness and conscientiousness, and when,
- as in this last article, he blames the English for mistranslating
- Kant, since they have said “Kant maintained that Space and Time are
- intuitions,” which is quite untrue, for they have everywhere described
- him as maintaining that Space and Time are _forms_ of intuition, one
- may be excused for thinking that possibly Dr. Carus has read into some
- of Kant’s expressions, meanings which they do not rightly bear. Still,
- the general drift of the passages quoted makes it tolerably clear
- that Kant must have believed in the operation of natural causes as
- largely, though not entirely, instrumental in producing organic forms:
- extending this belief (which he says “can be named a daring venture of
- reason”) in some measure to the origin of Man himself. He does not,
- however, extend the theory of natural genesis to the exclusion of the
- theory of supernatural genesis. When he speaks of an organic habit
- “which in the wisdom of nature appears to be thus arranged in order
- that the species shall be preserved;” and when, further, he says “we
- see, moreover, that a germ of reason is placed in him, whereby, after
- the development of the same, he is destined for social intercourse,”
- he implies divine intervention. And this shows that I was justified in
- ascribing to him the belief that Space and Time, as forms of thought,
- are supernatural endowments. Had he conceived of organic evolution in
- a consistent manner, he would necessarily have regarded Space and Time
- as subjective forms generated by converse with objective realities.
-
- Beyond showing that Kant had a partial, if not a complete, belief in
- organic evolution (though with no idea of its causes), the passages
- translated by Dr. Carus show that he entertained an implied belief
- which it here specially concerns me to notice as bearing on his theory
- of “a good will.” He quotes approvingly Dr. Moscati’s lecture showing
- “that the upright walk of man is constrained and unnatural,” and
- showing the imperfect visceral arrangements and consequent diseases
- which result: not only adopting, but further illustrating, Dr.
- Moscati’s argument. If here, then, there is a distinct admission, or
- rather assertion, that various human organs are imperfectly adjusted
- to their functions, what becomes of the postulate above quoted “that
- no organ for any purpose will be found in it but what is also the
- fittest and best adapted for that purpose?” And what becomes of the
- argument which sets out with this postulate? Clearly, I am indebted to
- Dr. Carus for enabling me to prove that Kant’s defence of his theory
- of “a good will” is, by his own showing, baseless.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-One of the propositions contained in Kant’s first chapter {207} is
-that “we find that the more a cultivated reason applies itself with
-deliberate purpose to the enjoyment of life and happiness, so much the
-more does the man fail of true satisfaction.” A preliminary remark to
-be made on this statement is that in its sweeping form it is not true.
-I assert that it is untrue on the strength of personal experiences. In
-the course of my life there have occurred many intervals, averaging
-more than a month each, in which the pursuit of happiness was the
-sole object, and in {208} which happiness was successfully pursued.
-How successfully, may be judged from the fact that I would gladly
-live over again each of those periods without change—an assertion
-which I certainly cannot make of any portions of my life spent in
-the daily discharge of duties. That which Kant should have said is
-that the _exclusive_ pursuit of what are distinguished as pleasures
-and amusements, is disappointing. This is doubtless true; and for
-the obvious reason that it over-exercises one group of faculties and
-exhausts them, while it leaves unexercised another group of faculties,
-which consequently do not yield the gratifications accompanying their
-exercise. It is not, as Kant says, guidance by “a cultivated reason”
-which leads to disappointment, but guidance by an uncultivated reason;
-for a cultivated reason teaches that continuous action of a small
-part of the nature joined with inaction of the rest, must end in
-dissatisfaction.
-
-But now, supposing we accept Kant’s statement in full, what is its
-implication? That happiness is the thing to be desired, and, in one way
-or another, the thing to be achieved. For if not, what meaning is there
-in the statement that it will not be achieved when made the immediate
-object? One who was thus admonished might properly rejoin:—“You say I
-shall fail to get happiness if I make it the object of pursuit? Suppose
-then I do not make it the object of my pursuit; shall I get it? If I
-do, then your admonition amounts to this, that I shall obtain it better
-if I proceed in some other way than that I adopt. If I do not get it,
-then I remain without happiness if I follow your way, just as much
-as if I follow my own, and nothing is gained.” An illustration will
-best show how the matter stands. To a tyro in archery the instructor
-says:—“Sir, you must not point your arrow directly at the target.
-If you do, you will inevitably miss it. You must aim high above the
-target; and you may then possibly pierce the bull’s eye.” What now is
-implied by the warning and the {209} advice? Clearly that the purpose
-is to hit the target. Otherwise there is no sense in the remark that it
-will be missed if directly aimed at; and no sense in the remark that to
-be hit, something higher must be aimed at. Similarly with happiness.
-There is no sense in the remark that happiness will not be found if it
-is directly sought, unless happiness is a thing to be somehow or other
-obtained.
-
-“Yes; there is sense,” I hear it said. “Just as it may be that the
-target is not the thing to be hit at all, either by aiming directly or
-indirectly at it, but that some other thing is to be hit; so it may be
-that the thing to be achieved immediately or remotely is not happiness
-at all, but some other thing: the other thing being duty.” In answer
-to this the admonished man may reasonably say:—“What then is meant by
-Kant’s statement that the man who pursues happiness ‘fails of true
-satisfaction’? All happiness is made up of satisfactions. The ‘true
-satisfaction’ which Kant offers as an alternative, must be some kind of
-happiness; and if a truer satisfaction, must be a better happiness; and
-better must mean on the average, and in the long run, greater. If this
-‘true satisfaction’ does not mean greater happiness of self,—distant if
-not proximate, in another life if not in this life—and if it does not
-mean greater happiness by achieving the happiness of others; then you
-propose to me as an end a smaller happiness instead of a greater, and I
-decline it.”
-
-So that in this professed repudiation of happiness as an end, there
-lies the inavoidable implication that it _is_ the end.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The last consideration introduces us naturally to another of Kant’s
-cardinal doctrines. That there may be no mistake in my representation
-of it, I must make a long quotation.
-
- “I omit here all actions which are already recognized as inconsistent
- with duty, although they may be useful for this or that purpose, for
- with these the question whether they are done _from duty_ cannot
- arise at all, since they even conflict with it. I also set aside
- those actions which really conform to {210} duty, but to which men
- have _no_ direct _inclination_, performing them because they are
- impelled thereto by some other inclination. For in this case we can
- readily distinguish whether the action which agrees with duty is done
- _from duty_, or from a selfish view. It is much harder to make this
- distinction when the action accords with duty, and the subject has
- besides a _direct_ inclination to it. For example, it is always a
- matter of duty that a dealer should not overcharge an inexperienced
- purchaser, and wherever there is much commerce the prudent tradesman
- does not overcharge, but keeps a fixed price for every one, so that
- a child buys of him as well as any other. Men are thus _honestly_
- served; but this is not enough to make us believe that the tradesman
- has so acted from duty and from principles of honesty: his own
- advantage required it; it is out of the question in this case to
- suppose that he might besides have a direct inclination in favour of
- the buyers, so that, as it were, from love he should give no advantage
- to one over another [!]. Accordingly the action was done neither from
- duty nor from direct inclination, but merely with a selfish view. On
- the other hand, it is a duty to maintain one’s life; and, in addition,
- every one has also a direct inclination to do so. But on this account
- the often anxious care which most men take for it has no intrinsic
- worth, and their maxim has no moral import. They preserve their life
- _as duty requires_, no doubt, but not _because duty requires_. On the
- other hand, if adversity and hopeless sorrow have completely taken
- away the relish for life; if the unfortunate one, strong in mind,
- indignant at his fate rather than desponding or dejected, wishes
- for death, and yet preserves his life without loving it—not from
- inclination or fear, but from duty—then his maxim has a moral worth.
-
- “To be beneficent when we can is a duty; and besides this, there are
- many minds so sympathetically constituted that without any other
- motive of vanity or self-interest, they find a pleasure in spreading
- joy around them, and can take delight in the satisfaction of others
- so far as it is their own work. But I maintain that in such a case
- an action of this kind, however proper, however amiable it may be,
- has nevertheless no true moral worth, but is on a level with other
- inclinations” (pp. 17–19).
-
-I have given this extract at length that there may be fully understood
-the remarkable doctrine it embodies—a doctrine especially remarkable as
-exemplified in the last sentence. Let us now consider all that it means.
-
-Before doing this, however, I may remark that, space permitting, it
-might be shown clearly enough that the assumed distinction between
-_sense_ of duty and inclination is untenable. The very expression
-sense of duty implies that the mental state signified is a feeling;
-and if a feeling it must, like other feelings, be gratified by acts
-of one kind and offended by acts of an opposite kind. If we take
-the {211} name conscience, which is equivalent to sense of duty,
-we see the same thing. The common expressions “a tender conscience”
-“a seared conscience,” indicate the perception that conscience is a
-feeling—a feeling which has its satisfactions and dissatisfactions,
-and which _inclines_ a man to acts which yield the one and avoid the
-other—produces an _inclination_. The truth is that conscience, or the
-sense of duty, is an inclination of a complex kind as distinguished
-from inclinations of simpler kinds.
-
-But let us grant Kant’s distinction in an unqualified form. Doing
-this, let us entertain, too, his proposition that acts of whatever
-kind done from inclination have no moral worth, and that the only acts
-having moral worth are those done from a sense of duty. To test this
-proposition let us follow an example he sets. As he would have the
-quality of an act judged by supposing it universalized, let us judge of
-moral worth as he conceives it by making a like supposition. That we
-may do this effectually, let us assume that it is exemplified not only
-by every man but by all the acts of every man. Unless Kant alleges that
-a man may be morally worthy in too high a degree, we must admit that
-the greater the number of his acts which have moral worth the better.
-Let us then contemplate him as doing nothing from inclination but
-everything from a sense of duty.
-
-When he pays the labourer who has done a week’s work for him, it
-is not because letting a man go without wages would be against his
-inclination, but solely because he sees it to be a duty to fulfil
-contracts. Such care as he takes of his aged mother is prompted not by
-tender feeling for her but by the consciousness of filial obligation.
-When he gives evidence on behalf of a man whom he knows to have been
-falsely charged, it is not that he would be hurt by seeing the man
-wrongly punished, but simply in pursuance of a moral intuition showing
-him that public duty requires him to testify. When he sees a little
-child in danger of {212} being run over, and steps aside to snatch,
-it away, he does so not because thought of the impending death of the
-child pains him, but because he knows it is a duty to save life. And
-so throughout, in all his relations as husband, as friend, as citizen,
-he thinks always of what the law of right conduct directs, and does
-it because it is the law of right conduct, not because he satisfies
-his affections or his sympathies by doing it. This is not all however.
-Kant’s doctrine commits him to something far beyond this. If those acts
-only have moral worth which are done from a sense of duty, we must not
-only say that the moral worth of a man is greater in proportion as the
-number of the acts so done is greater. We must also say that his moral
-worth is greater in proportion as his sense of duty makes him do the
-right thing not only apart from inclination but against inclination.
-According to Kant, then, the most moral man is the man whose sense of
-duty is so strong that he refrains from picking a pocket though he is
-much tempted to do it; who says of another that which is true though
-he would like to injure him by a falsehood; who lends money to his
-brother though he would prefer to see him in distress; who fetches the
-doctor to his sick child though death would remove what he feels to
-be a burden. What, now, shall we think of a world peopled with Kant’s
-typically moral men—men who, in the one case, while doing right by one
-another, do it with indifference, and severally know one another to be
-so doing it; and men who, in the other case, do right by one another
-notwithstanding the promptings of evil passions to do otherwise, and
-who severally know themselves surrounded by others similarly prompted?
-Most people will, I think, say that even in the first case life would
-be hardly bearable, and that in the second case it would be absolutely
-intolerable. Had such been men’s natures, Schopenhauer would indeed
-have had good reason for urging that the race should bring itself to an
-end as quickly as possible.
-
-Contemplate now the doings of one whose acts, according {213} to
-Kant, have no moral worth. He goes through his daily work not thinking
-of duty to wife and child, but having in his mind the pleasure of
-witnessing their welfare; and on reaching home he delights to see his
-little girl with rosy cheeks and laughing eyes eating heartily. When
-he hands back to a shopkeeper the shilling given in excess of right
-change, he does not stop to ask what the moral law requires: the
-thought of profiting by the man’s mistake is intrinsically repugnant
-to him. One who is drowning he plunges in to rescue without any idea
-of obligation, but because he cannot contemplate without horror the
-death which threatens. If, for a worthy man who is out of employment,
-he takes much trouble to find a place, he does it because the
-consciousness of the man’s difficulties is painful to him, and because
-he knows that he will benefit not only him but the employer who engages
-him: no moral maxim enters his mind. When he goes to see a sick friend
-the gentle tones of his voice and the kindly expression of his face
-show that he is come not from any sense of duty, but because pity and
-a desire to raise his friend’s spirits have moved him. If he aids in
-some public measure which helps men to help themselves, it is not in
-pursuance of the admonition “Do as you would be done by,” but because
-the distresses around make him unhappy, and the thought of mitigating
-them gives him pleasure. And so throughout: he ever does the right
-thing not in obedience to any injunction but because he loves the right
-thing in and for itself. And now who would not like to live in a world
-where everyone was thus characterized?
-
-What, then, shall we think of Kant’s conception of moral worth, when,
-if it were displayed universally in men’s acts the world would be
-intolerable, and when if these same acts were universally performed
-from inclination, the world would be delightful?
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-But now, from these indirect criticisms, let us pass to a {214} direct
-criticism of the Kantian principle—the principle often quoted as
-distinctive of his ethics. He states it thus:―
-
- “There is therefore but one categorical imperative, namely this: _Act
- only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it
- should become a universal law_.” (pp. 54–5.)
-
-Again, subsequently, we read:―
-
- “_Act on maxims which can at the same time have for their object
- themselves as universal laws of nature._ Such then is the formula of
- an absolutely good will.” (p. 80.)
-
-Here, then, we have a clear statement of that which constitutes the
-character of a good will; which good will, as we have already seen,
-is said to exist independently of any contemplated end. Let us now
-observe how this theory is reduced to practice. Speaking of a man who
-is absolutely selfish and yet absolutely just, he represents him as
-saying:―
-
- “Let everyone be as happy as heaven pleases or as he can make himself;
- I will take nothing from him nor even envy him, only I do not wish
- to contribute anything either to his welfare or to his assistance in
- distress! Now no doubt if such a mode of thinking were a universal
- law, the human race might very well subsist, and doubtless even better
- than in a state in which every one talks of sympathy and good will, or
- even takes care occasionally to put it into practice, but on the other
- side, also cheats when he can, betrays the rights of men or otherwise
- violates them. But although it is possible that a universal law of
- nature might exist in accordance with that maxim, it is impossible to
- _will_ that such a principle should have the universal validity of a
- law of nature. For a will which resolved this would contradict itself,
- inasmuch as many cases might occur in which one would have need of the
- love and sympathy of others, and in which by such a law of nature,
- sprung from his own will, he would deprive himself of all hope of the
- aid he desires.” (pp. 58–9.)
-
-Thus we see illustrated the guidance of conduct in conformity with
-the Kantian maxim; and what is the process of guidance? It is that
-of considering what, in the particular case, would be the result if
-the suggested course of conduct were made universal; and then being
-deterred from willing such conduct by the badness of the conceived
-result. Now, in the first place, what here becomes of the doctrine of a
-good will, which we are told exists “without paying {215} any regard
-to the effect expected from it”? (p. 24). The good will, characterized
-by readiness to see the act it prompts made universal, has, in this
-particular case, as in every other case, to be decided by contemplation
-of an end—if not a special and immediate end then a general and remote
-end. And what, in this case, is to be the deterrent from a suggested
-course of conduct? Consciousness that the result, if such conduct were
-universal, might be suffering to self: there might be no aid when it
-was wanted. So that, in the first place, the question is to be decided
-by the contemplation of happiness or misery as likely to be caused by
-the one or the other course; and, in the second place, this happiness
-or misery is that of the individual himself. Strangely enough, this
-principle which is lauded because of its apparently implied altruism,
-turns out, in the last resort, to have its justification in egoism!
-
-The essential truth here to be noted, however, is that the Kantian
-principle, so much vaunted as higher than that of expediency or
-utilitarianism, is compelled to take expediency or utilitarianism as
-its basis. Do what it will, it cannot escape the need for conceiving
-happiness or misery, to self or others or both, as respectively to
-be achieved or avoided; for in any case what, except the conceived
-happiness or misery which would follow if a given mode of action were
-made universal, can determine the will for or against such mode of
-action? If, in one who has been injured, there arises a temptation to
-murder the injurer; and if, following out the Kantian injunction, the
-tempted man thinks of himself as willing that all men who have been
-injured should murder those who have injured them; and if, imagining
-the consequences experienced by mankind at large, and possibly on some
-occasion by himself in particular, he is deterred from yielding to the
-temptation; what is it which deters him? Obviously the representation
-of the many evils, pains, deprivations of happiness, which would be
-caused. If, on imagining his act to be {216} universalized, he saw
-that it would increase human happiness, the alleged deterrent would not
-act. Hence the conduct to be insured by adoption of the Kantian maxim
-is simply the conduct to be insured by making the happiness of self or
-others or both the end to be achieved. By implication, if not avowedly,
-the Kantian principle is as distinctly utilitarian as the principle
-of Bentham. And it falls short of a scientific ethics in just the
-same way; since it fails to furnish any method by which to determine
-whether such and such acts _would_ or _would not_ be conducive to
-happiness—leaves all such questions to be decided empirically.
-
-{217}
-
-
-
-
-ABSOLUTE POLITICAL ETHICS.
-
-[_Originally published in_ The Nineteenth Century _for January 1890.
-The writing of this essay was consequent on a controversy carried on
-in_ The Times _between Nov. 7 and Nov. 27, 1889, and was made needful
-by the misapprehensions and misrepresentations embodied in that
-controversy. Hence the allusions which the essay contains. The last few
-paragraphs of it in its original form were mainly personal in their
-character; and, not wishing to perpetuate personalities, I have omitted
-them_.]
-
-
-Life in Fiji, at the time when Thomas Williams settled there, must
-have been something worse than uncomfortable. One of the people who
-passed near the string of nine hundred stones with which Ra Undreundre
-recorded the number of human victims he had devoured, must have had
-unpleasant waking thoughts and occasionally horrible dreams. A man
-who had lost some fingers for breaches of ceremony, or had seen his
-neighbour killed by a chief for behaviour not sufficiently respectful,
-and who remembered how King Tanoa cut off his cousin’s arm, cooked
-it and ate it in his presence, and then had him hacked to pieces,
-must not unfrequently have had “a bad quarter of an hour.” Nor could
-creeping sensations have failed to run through women who heard Tui
-Thakau eulogizing his dead son for cruelty, and saying that “he could
-kill his own wives if they offended him, and eat them afterwards.”
-Happiness {218} could not have been general in a society where there
-was a liability to be one among the ten whose life-blood baptized the
-decks of a new canoe—a society in which the killing even of unoffending
-persons was no crime but a glory; and in which everyone knew that his
-neighbour’s restless ambition was to be an acknowledged murderer.
-Still, there must have been some moderation in murdering even in Fiji.
-Or must we hesitate to conclude that unlimited murder would have caused
-extinction of the society?
-
-The extent to which each man’s possessions among the Biluchis are
-endangered by the predatory instincts of his neighbours, may be judged
-from the fact that “a small mud tower is erected in each field, where
-the possessor and his retainers guard his produce.” If turbulent
-states of society such as early histories tell of, do not show us so
-vividly how the habit of appropriating one another’s goods interferes
-with social prosperity and individual comfort, yet they do not leave
-us in doubt respecting these results. It is an inference which few
-will be hardy enough to dispute, that in proportion as the time of
-each man, instead of being occupied in further production, is occupied
-in guarding that which he has produced against marauders, the total
-production must be diminished and the sustentation of each and all less
-satisfactorily achieved. And it is a manifest corollary that if each
-pushes beyond a certain limit the practice of trying to satisfy his
-needs by robbing his neighbour, the society must dissolve: solitary
-life will prove preferable.
-
-A deceased friend of mine, narrating incidents in his life, told me
-that as a young man he sought to establish himself in Spain as a
-commission agent; and that, failing by expostulation or other means
-to obtain payment from one who had ordered goods through him, he, as
-a last resource, went to the man’s house and presented himself before
-him pistol in hand—a proceeding which had the desired effect: the
-account was settled. Suppose now that everywhere {219} contracts had
-thus to be enforced by more or less strenuous measures. Suppose that
-a coal-mine proprietor in Derbyshire, having sent a train-load to a
-London coal-merchant, had commonly to send a _posse_ of colliers up to
-town, to stop the man’s wagons and take out the horses until payment
-had been made. Suppose the farm-labourer or the artisan was constantly
-in doubt whether, at the end of the week, the wages agreed upon would
-be forthcoming; or whether he would get only half, or whether he
-would have to wait six months. Suppose that daily in every shop there
-occurred scuffles between shopman and customer, the one to get the
-money without giving the goods, and the other to get the goods without
-paying the money. What in such case would happen to the society? What
-would become of its producing and distributing businesses? Is it a rash
-inference that industrial co-operation (of the voluntary kind at least)
-would cease?
-
-“Why these absurd questions?” asks the impatient reader. “Surely
-everyone knows that murder, assault, robbery, fraud, breach of
-contract, &c., are at variance with social welfare and must be punished
-when committed,” My replies are several. In the first place, I am quite
-content to have the questions called absurd; because this implies a
-consciousness that the answers are so self-evident that it is absurd to
-assume the possibility of any other answers. My second reply is that
-I am not desirous of pressing the question _whether_ we know these
-things, but of pressing the question _how_ we know these things. Can
-we know them, and do we know them, by contemplating the necessities
-of the case? or must we have recourse to “inductions based on careful
-observation and experience”? Before we make and enforce laws against
-murder, ought we to inquire into the social welfare and individual
-happiness in places where murder prevails, and observe whether or not
-the welfare and happiness are greater in places where murder is rare?
-Shall robbery be allowed to go on until, {220} by collecting and
-tabulating the effects in countries where thieves predominate and in
-countries where thieves are but few, we are shown by induction that
-prosperity is greater when each man is allowed to retain that which he
-has earned? And is it needful to prove by accumulated evidence that
-breaches of contract impede production and exchange, and those benefits
-to each and all which mutual dependence achieves? In the third place,
-these instances of actions which, pushed to extremes, cause social
-dissolution, and which, in smaller degrees, hinder social co-operation
-and its benefits, I give for the purpose of asking what is their
-common trait. In each of such actions we see aggression—a carrying on
-of life in a way which directly interferes with the carrying on of
-another’s life. The relation between effort and consequent benefit in
-one man, is either destroyed altogether or partially broken by the
-doings of another man. If it be admitted that life can be maintained
-only by certain activities (the internal ones being universal, and the
-external ones being universal for all but parasites and the immature),
-it must be admitted that when like-natured beings are associated, the
-required activities must be mutually limited; and that the highest
-life can result only when the associated beings are so constituted as
-severally to keep within the implied limits. The restrictions stated
-thus generally, may obviously be developed into special restrictions
-referring to this or that kind of conduct. These, then, I hold are
-_a priori_ truths which admit of being known by contemplation of the
-conditions—axiomatic truths which bear to ethics a relation analogous
-to that which the mathematical axioms bear to the exact sciences.
-
-I do not mean that these axiomatic truths are cognisable by all. For
-the apprehension of them, as for the apprehension of simpler axioms, a
-certain mental growth and a certain mental discipline are needed. In
-the _Treatise on Natural Philosophy_ by Professors Thomson and Tait
-[1st ed.], {221} it is remarked that “physical axioms are axiomatic
-to those only who have sufficient knowledge of the action of physical
-causes to enable them to see at once their necessary truth.” Doubtless
-a fact and a significant fact. A plough-boy cannot form a conception
-of the axiom that action and reaction are equal and opposite. In the
-first place he lacks a sufficiently generalized idea of action—has not
-united into one conception pushing and pulling, the blow of a fist,
-the recoil of a gun, and the attraction of a planet. Still less has he
-any generalized idea of reaction. And even had he these two ideas, it
-is probable that, defective in power of representation as he is, he
-would fail to recognize the necessary equality. Similarly with these
-_a priori_ ethical truths. If a member of that Fijian slave-tribe who
-regarded themselves as food for the chiefs had suggested that there
-might arrive a time when men would not eat one another, his implied
-belief that men might come to have a little respect for one another’s
-lives, condemned as utterly without justification in experience, would
-be considered as fit only for a wild speculator. Facts furnished by
-every-day observation make it clear to the Biluchi, keeping watch
-in his mud-tower, that possession of property can be maintained
-only by force; and it is most likely to him scarcely conceivable
-that there exist limits which, if mutually recognized, may exclude
-aggressions, and make it needless to mount guard over fields: only an
-absurd idealist (supposing such a thing known to him) would suggest
-the possibility. And so even of our own ancestors in feudal times,
-it may be concluded that, constantly going about armed and often
-taking refuge in strongholds, the thought of a peaceful social state
-would have seemed ridiculous; and the belief that there might be
-a recognized equality among men’s claims to pursue the objects of
-life, and a consequent desistence from aggressions, would have been
-scarcely conceivable. But now that an orderly social state has been
-maintained for generations—now that in daily {222} intercourse men
-rarely use violence, commonly pay what they owe, and in most cases
-respect the claims of the weak as well as those of the strong—now
-that they are brought up with the idea that all men are equal before
-the law, and daily see judicial decisions turning upon the question
-whether one citizen has or has not infringed upon the equal rights
-of another; there exist in the general mind materials for forming
-the conception of a _régime_ in which men’s activities are mutually
-limited, and in which maintenance of harmony depends on respect for the
-limits. There has arisen an ability to see that mutual limitations are
-required when lives are carried on in proximity; and to see that there
-necessarily emerge definite sets of restraints applying to definite
-classes of actions. And it has become manifest to some, though not it
-seems to many, that there results an _a priori_ system of absolute
-political ethics—a system under which men of like natures, severally
-so constituted as spontaneously to refrain from trespassing, may work
-together without friction, and with the greatest advantage to each and
-all.
-
-“But men are not wholly like-natured and are unlikely to become so. Nor
-are they so constituted that each is solicitous for his neighbour’s
-claims as for his own, and there is small probability that they ever
-will be. Your absolute political ethics is therefore an ideal beyond
-the reach of the real.” This is true. Nevertheless, much as it seems to
-do so, it does not follow that there is no use for absolute political
-ethics. The contrary may clearly enough be shown. An analogy will
-explain the paradox.
-
-There exists a division of physical science distinguished as abstract
-mechanics or absolute mechanics—absolute in the sense that its
-propositions are unqualified. It is concerned with statics and dynamics
-in their pure forms—deals with forces and motions considered as free
-from all interferences resulting from friction, resistances of media,
-and special properties of matter. If it enunciates a law of motion,
-it {223} recognizes nothing which modifies manifestation of it. If
-it formulates the properties of the lever it treats of this assuming
-it to be perfectly rigid and without thickness—an impossible lever.
-Its theory of the screw imagines the screw to be frictionless; and in
-treating of the wedge, absolute incompressibility is supposed. Thus
-its truths are never presented in experience. Even those movements
-of the heavenly bodies which are deducible from its propositions
-are always more or less perturbed; and on the Earth the inferences
-to be drawn from them deviate very considerably from the results
-reached by experiment. Nevertheless this system of ideal mechanics is
-indispensable for the guidance of real mechanics. The engineer has
-to deal with its propositions as true in full, before he proceeds
-to qualify them by taking into account the natures of the materials
-he uses. The course which a projectile would take if subject only
-to the propulsive force and the attraction of the Earth must be
-recognized, though no such course is ever pursued: correction for
-atmospheric resistance cannot else be made. That is to say, though,
-by empirical methods, applied or relative mechanics may be developed
-to a considerable extent, it cannot be highly developed without
-the aid of absolute mechanics. So is it here. Relative political
-ethics, or that which deals with right and wrong in public affairs
-as partially determined by changing circumstances, cannot progress
-without taking into account right and wrong considered apart from
-changing circumstances—cannot do without absolute political ethics; the
-propositions of which, deduced from the conditions under which life
-is carried on in an associated state, take no account of the special
-circumstances of any particular associated state.
-
-And now observe a truth which seems entirely overlooked; namely, that
-the set of deductions thus arrived at is verified by an immeasurably
-vast induction, or rather by a great assemblage of vast inductions.
-For what else are the laws and judicial systems of all civilized
-nations, and of {224} all societies which have risen above savagery?
-What is the meaning of the fact that all peoples have discovered the
-need for punishing murder, usually by death? How is it that where any
-considerable progress has been made, theft is forbidden by law, and
-a penalty attached to it? Why along with further advance does the
-enforcing of contracts become general? And what is the reason that
-among fully civilized peoples frauds, libels, and minor aggressions
-of various kinds are repressed in more or less rigorous ways? No
-cause can be assigned save a general uniformity in men’s experiences,
-showing them that aggressions directly injurious to the individuals
-aggressed upon are indirectly injurious to society. Generation after
-generation observations have forced this truth on them; and generation
-after generation they have been developing the interdicts into greater
-detail. That is to say, the above fundamental principle and its
-corollaries arrived at _a priori_ are verified in an infinity of cases
-_a posteriori_. Everywhere the tendency has been to carry further
-in practice the dictates of theory—to conform systems of law to the
-requirements of absolute political ethics: if not consciously, still
-unconsciously. Nay, indeed, is not this truth manifest in the very name
-used for the end aimed at—equity or equalness? Equalness of what? No
-answer can be given without a recognition—vague it may be, but still a
-recognition—of the doctrine above set forth.
-
-Thus, instead of being described as putting faith in “long chains of
-deduction from abstract ethical assumptions” I ought to be described as
-putting faith in simple deductions from abstract ethical necessities;
-which deductions are verified by infinitely numerous observations and
-experiences of semi-civilized and civilized mankind in all ages and
-places. Or rather I ought to be described as one who, contemplating
-the restraints everywhere put on the various kinds of transgressions,
-and seeing in them all a common principle everywhere dictated by the
-necessities {225} of the associated state, proceeds to develop the
-consequences of this common principle by deduction, and to justify both
-the deductions and the conclusions which legislators have empirically
-reached by showing that the two correspond. This method of deduction
-verified by induction is the method of developed science at large. I
-do not believe that I shall be led to abandon it and change my “way of
-thinking” by any amount of disapproval, however strongly expressed.
-
-Are we then to understand that by this imposing title, “Absolute
-Political Ethics,” nothing more is meant than a theory of the needful
-restraints which law imposes on the actions of citizens—an ethical
-warrant for systems of law? Well, supposing even that I had to answer
-“Yes” to this question (which I do not), there would still be an ample
-justification for the title. Having for its subject-matter all that is
-comprehended under the word “Justice,” alike as formulated in law and
-administered by legal instrumentalities, the title has a sufficiently
-large area to cover. This would scarcely need saying were it not for a
-curious defect of thought which we are everywhere led into by habit.
-
-Just as, when talking of knowledge, we ignore entirely that familiar
-knowledge of surrounding things, animate and inanimate, acquired in
-childhood, in the absence of which death would quickly result, and
-think only of that far less essential knowledge gained at school
-and college or from books and conversation—just as, when thinking
-of mathematics, we include under the name only its higher groups of
-truths and drop out that simpler group constituting arithmetic, though
-for the carrying on of life this is more important than all the rest
-put together; so, when politics and political ethics are discussed,
-there is no thought of those parts of them which include whatever
-is fundamental and long settled. The word political raises ideas of
-party-contests, ministerial changes, prospective elections, or else of
-the Home-Rule question, the {226} Land-Purchase scheme, Local Option,
-or the Eight-Hours movement. Rarely does the word suggest law-reform,
-or a better judicial organization, or a purified police. And if ethics
-comes into consideration, it is in connexion with the morals of
-parliamentary strife or of candidates’ professions, or of electoral
-corruptions. Yet it needs but to look at the definition of politics
-(“that part of ethics which consists in the regulation and government
-of a nation or state, for the preservation of its safety, peace, and
-prosperity”), to see that the current conception fails by omitting
-the chief part. It needs but to consider how relatively immense a
-factor in the life of each man is constituted by safety of person,
-security of house and property, and enforcement of claims, to see that
-not only the largest part but the part which is vital is left out.
-Hence the absurdity does not exist in the conception of an absolute
-political ethics, but it exists in the ignoring of its subject-matter.
-Unless it be considered absurd to regard as absolute the interdicts
-against murder, burglary, fraud and all other aggressions, it cannot
-be considered absurd to regard as absolute the ethical system which
-embodies these interdicts.
-
-It remains to add that beyond the deductions which, as we have seen,
-are verified by vast assemblages of inductions, there may be drawn
-other deductions not thus verified—deductions drawn from the same
-data, but which have no relevant experiences to say yes or no to
-them. Such deductions may be valid or invalid; and I believe that
-in my first work, written forty years ago and long since withdrawn
-from circulation, there are some invalid deductions. But to reject a
-principle and a method because of some invalid deductions, is about as
-proper as it would be to pooh-pooh arithmetic because of blunders in
-certain arithmetical calculations.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-I turn now to a question above put—whether, by absolute political
-ethics, nothing more is meant than an ethical {227} warrant for
-systems of law—a question to which, by implication, I answered No.
-And now I have to answer that it extends over a further field equally
-wide if less important. For beyond the relations among citizens taken
-individually, there are the relations between the incorporated body of
-citizens and each citizen. And on these relations between the State and
-the man, absolute political ethics gives judgments as well as on the
-relations between man and man. Its judgments on the relations between
-man and man are corollaries from its primary truth, that the activities
-of each in pursuing the objects of life may be rightly restricted
-only by the like activities of others: such others being like-natured
-(for the principle does not contemplate slave-societies or societies
-in which one race dominates over another); and its judgments on the
-relations between the man and the State are corollaries from the allied
-truth, that the activities of each citizen may be rightly limited
-by the incorporated body of citizens only as far as is needful for
-securing to him the remainder. This further limitation is a necessary
-accompaniment of the militant state; and must continue so long as,
-besides the criminalities of individual aggression, there continue
-the criminalities of international aggression. It is clear that the
-preservation of the society is an end which must take precedence of the
-preservation of its individuals taken singly; since the preservation
-of each individual and the maintenance of his ability to pursue the
-objects of life, depend on the preservation of the society. Such
-restrictions upon his actions as are imposed by the necessities of
-war, and of preparedness for war when it is probable, are therefore
-ethically defensible.
-
-And here we enter upon the many and involved questions with which
-relative political ethics has to deal. When originally indicating
-the contrast, I spoke of “absolute political ethics, or that which
-ought to be, as distinguished from relative political ethics, or that
-which is at present the nearest practicable approach to it;” and had
-any {228} attention been paid to this distinction, no controversy
-need have arisen. Here I have to add that the qualifications which
-relative political ethics sets forth vary with the type of the society,
-which is primarily determined by the extent to which defence against
-other societies is needful. Where international enmity is great and
-the social organization has to be adapted to warlike activities, the
-coercion of individuals by the State is such as almost to destroy
-their freedom of action and make them slaves of the State; and where
-this results from the necessities of defensive war (not offensive war,
-however), relative political ethics furnishes a warrant. Conversely,
-as militancy decreases, there is a diminished need both for that
-subordination of individuals which is necessitated by consolidating
-them into a fighting machine, and for that further subordination
-entailed by supplying this fighting machine with the necessaries
-of life; and as fast as this change goes on, the warrant for
-State-coercion which relative political ethics furnishes becomes less
-and less.
-
-Obviously it is out of the question here to enter upon the complex
-questions raised. It must suffice to indicate them as above. Should I
-be able to complete Part IV. of _The Principles of Ethics_, treating
-of “Justice,” of which the first chapters only are at present written,
-I hope to deal adequately with these relations between the ethics of
-the progressive condition and the ethics of that condition which is
-the goal of progress—a goal ever to be recognized, though it cannot be
-actually reached.
-
-{229}
-
-
-
-
-OVER-LEGISLATION.[26]
-
-[_First published in_ The Westminster Review _for July 1853_.]
-
-
-From time to time there returns on the cautious thinker, the conclusion
-that, considered simply as a question of probabilities, it is unlikely
-that his views upon any debatable topic are correct. “Here,” he
-reflects, “are thousands around me holding on this or that point
-opinions differing from mine—wholly in many cases; partially in most
-others. Each is as confident as I am of the truth of his convictions.
-Many of them are possessed of great intelligence; and, rank myself high
-as I may, I must admit that some are my equals—perhaps my superiors.
-Yet, while every one of us is sure he is right, unquestionably most
-of us are wrong. Why should not I be among the mistaken? True, I
-cannot realize the likelihood that I am so. But this proves nothing;
-for though the majority of us are necessarily in error, we all labour
-under the inability to think we are in error. Is it not then foolish
-thus to trust myself? When {230} I look back into the past, I find
-nations, sects, theologians, philosophers, cherishing beliefs in
-science, morals, politics, and religion, which we decisively reject.
-Yet they held them with a faith quite as strong as ours: nay—stronger,
-if their intolerance of dissent is any criterion. Of what little worth,
-therefore, seems this strength of my conviction that I am right! A like
-warrant has been felt by men all the world through; and, in nine cases
-out of ten, has proved a delusive warrant. Is it not then absurd in me
-to put so much faith in my judgments?”
-
- [26] Some of the illustrations used in this essay refer to laws
- and arrangements changed since it was written; while many recent
- occurrences might now be cited in further aid of its argument. As,
- however, the reasoning is not affected by these changes; and as to
- keep it corrected to the facts of the day would involve perpetual
- alterations; it seems best to leave it substantially in its original
- state: or rather in the state in which it was republished in Mr.
- Chapman’s _Library for the People_.
-
-Barren of practical results as this reflection at first sight appears,
-it may, and indeed should, influence some of our most important
-proceedings. Though in daily life we are constantly obliged to act out
-our inferences, trustless as they may be—though in the house, in the
-office, in the street, there hourly arise occasions on which we may not
-hesitate; seeing that if to act is dangerous, never to act at all is
-fatal—and though, consequently, on our private conduct, this abstract
-doubt as to the worth of our judgments, must remain inoperative;
-yet, in our public conduct, we may properly allow it to weigh. Here
-decision is no longer imperative; while the difficulty of deciding
-aright is incalculably greater. Clearly as we may think we see how a
-given measure will work, we may infer, drawing the above induction from
-human experience, that the chances are many against the truth of our
-anticipations. Whether in most cases it is not wiser to do nothing,
-becomes now a rational question. Continuing his self-criticism, the
-cautious thinker may reason:—“If in these personal affairs, where
-all the conditions of the case were known to me, I have so often
-miscalculated, how much oftener shall I miscalculate in political
-affairs, where the conditions are too numerous, too wide-spread, too
-complex, too obscure to be understood. Here, doubtless, is a social
-evil and there a desideratum; and were I sure of doing no mischief I
-would forthwith try to cure the one and achieve {231} the other. But
-when I remember how many of my private schemes have miscarried—how
-speculations have failed, agents proved dishonest, marriage been
-a disappointment—how I did but pauperize the relative I sought to
-help—how my carefully-governed son has turned out worse than most
-children—how the thing I desperately strove against as a misfortune
-did me immense good—how while the objects I ardently pursued brought
-me little happiness when gained, most of my pleasures have come from
-unexpected sources; when I recall these and hosts of like facts, I am
-struck with the incompetence of my intellect to prescribe for society.
-And as the evil is one under which society has not only lived but
-grown, while the desideratum is one it may spontaneously obtain, as it
-has most others, in some unforeseen way, I question the propriety of
-meddling.”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-There is a great want of this practical humility in our political
-conduct. Though we have less self-confidence than our ancestors, who
-did not hesitate to organize in law their judgments on all subjects
-whatever, we have yet far too much. Though we have ceased to assume
-the infallibility of our theological beliefs and so ceased to enact
-them, we have not ceased to enact hosts of other beliefs of an
-equally doubtful kind. Though we no longer presume to coerce men
-for their _spiritual good_, we still think ourselves called upon to
-coerce them for their _material good_: not seeing that the one is
-as useless and as unwarrantable as the other. Innumerable failures
-seem, so far, powerless to teach this. Take up a daily paper and you
-will probably find a leader exposing the corruption, negligence, or
-mismanagement of some State-department. Cast your eye down the next
-column, and it is not unlikely that you will read proposals for an
-extension of State-supervision. Yesterday came a charge of gross
-carelessness against the Colonial office. To-day Admiralty bunglings
-are burlesqued. To-morrow brings the question—“Should there {232}
-not be more coal-mine inspectors?” Now there is a complaint that
-the Board of Health is useless; and now an outcry for more railway
-regulation. While your ears are still ringing with denunciations of
-Chancery abuses, or your cheeks still glowing with indignation at some
-well-exposed iniquity of the Ecclesiastical Courts, you suddenly come
-upon suggestions for organizing “a priesthood of science.” Here is a
-vehement condemnation of the police for stupidly allowing sight-seers
-to crush each other to death. You look for the corollary that official
-regulation is not to be trusted; when, instead, _à propos_ of a
-shipwreck, you read an urgent demand for government-inspectors to see
-that ships always have their boats ready for launching. Thus, while
-every day chronicles a failure, there every day reappears the belief
-that it needs but an Act of Parliament and a staff of officers, to
-effect any end desired. Nowhere is the perennial faith of mankind
-better seen. Ever since society existed Disappointment has been
-preaching—“Put not your trust in legislation;” and yet the trust in
-legislation seems scarcely diminished.
-
-Did the State fulfil efficiently its unquestionable duties, there
-would be some excuse for this eagerness to assign it further duties.
-Were there no complaints of its faulty administration of justice; of
-its endless delays and untold expenses; of its bringing ruin in place
-of restitution; of its playing the tyrant where it should have been
-the protector—did we never hear of its complicated stupidities; its
-20,000 statutes, which it assumes all Englishmen to know, and which not
-one Englishman does know; its multiplied forms, which, in the effort
-to meet every contingency, open far more loopholes than they provide
-against—had it not shown its folly in the system of making every petty
-alteration by a new act, variously affecting innumerable preceding
-acts; or in its score of successive sets of Chancery rules, which so
-modify, and limit, and extend, and abolish, and alter each other, that
-not even Chancery lawyers know {233} what the rules are—were we never
-astounded by such a fact as that, under the system of land registration
-in Ireland, 6000l. have been spent in a “negative search” to establish
-the title of an estate—did we find in its doings no such terrible
-incongruity as the imprisonment of a hungry vagrant for stealing a
-turnip, while for the gigantic embezzlements of a railway director it
-inflicts no punishment;—had we, in short, proved its efficiency as
-judge and defender, instead of having found it treacherous, cruel, and
-anxiously to be shunned, there would be some encouragement to hope
-other benefits at its hands.
-
-Or if, while failing in its judicial functions, the State had proved
-itself a capable agent in some other department—the military for
-example—there would have been some show of reason for extending its
-sphere of action. Suppose that it had rationally equipped its troops,
-instead of giving them cumbrous and ineffective muskets, barbarous
-grenadier caps, absurdly heavy knapsacks and cartouche-boxes, and
-clothing coloured so as admirably to help the enemy’s marksmen—suppose
-that it organized well and economically, instead of salarying an
-immense superfluity of officers, creating sinecure colonelcies
-of 4000_l._ a year, neglecting the meritorious and promoting
-incapables—suppose that its soldiers were always well housed instead of
-being thrust into barracks that invalid hundreds, as at Aden, or that
-fall on their occupants, as at Loodianah, where ninety-five were thus
-killed—suppose that, in actual war, it had shown due administrative
-ability, instead of occasionally leaving its regiments to march
-barefoot, to dress in patches, to capture their own engineering
-tools, and to fight on empty stomachs, as during the Peninsular
-campaign;—suppose all this, and the wish for more State-control might
-still have had some warrant.
-
-Even though it had bungled in everything else, yet had it in one case
-done well—had its naval management alone been efficient—the sanguine
-would have had a colourable {234} excuse for expecting success in a
-new field. Grant that the reports about bad ships, ships that will
-not sail, ships that have to be lengthened, ships with unfit engines,
-ships that will not carry their guns, ships without stowage, and ships
-that have to be broken up, are all untrue—assume those to be mere
-slanderers who say that the _Megœra_ took double the time taken by
-a commercial steamer to reach the Cape; that during the same voyage
-the _Hydra_ was three times on fire, and needed the pumps kept going
-day and night; that the _Charlotte_ troop-ship set out with 75 days’
-provisions on board, and was three months in reaching her destination;
-that the _Harpy_, at an imminent risk of life, got home in 110 days
-from Rio—disregard as calumnies the statements about septuagenarian
-admirals, dilettante ship building, and “cooked” dockyard accounts—set
-down the affair of the Goldner preserved meats as a myth, and
-consider Professor Barlow mistaken when he reported of the Admiralty
-compasses in store, that “at least one-half were mere lumber;”—let
-all these, we say, be held groundless charges, and there would remain
-for the advocates of much government some basis for their political
-air-castles, spite of military and judicial mismanagement.
-
-As it is, however, they seem to have read backwards the parable of
-the talents. Not to the agent of proved efficiency do they consign
-further duties, but to the negligent and blundering agent. Private
-enterprise has done much, and done it well. Private enterprise
-has cleared, drained, and fertilized the country, and built the
-towns—has excavated mines, laid out roads, dug canals, and embanked
-railways—has invented, and brought to perfection, ploughs, looms,
-steam-engines, printing-presses, and machines innumerable—has built
-our ships, our vast manufactories, our docks—has established banks,
-insurance societies, and the newspaper press—has covered the sea
-with lines of steam-vessels, and the land with electric telegraphs.
-Private enterprise has brought agriculture, manufactures, {235} and
-commerce to their present height, and is now developing them with
-increasing rapidity. Therefore, do not trust private enterprise. On
-the other hand, the State so fulfils its judicial function as to ruin
-many, delude others, and frighten away those who most need succour;
-its national defences are so extravagantly and yet inefficiently
-administered, as to call forth almost daily complaint, expostulation,
-or ridicule; and as the nation’s steward, it obtains from some of our
-vast public estates a minus revenue. Therefore, trust the State. Slight
-the good and faithful servant, and promote the unprofitable one from
-one talent to ten.
-
-Seriously, the case, while it may not, in some respects, warrant this
-parallel, is, in one respect, even stronger. For the new work is not
-of the same order as the old, but of a more difficult order. Ill as
-government discharges its true duties, any other duties committed to
-it are likely to be still worse discharged. To guard its subjects
-against aggression, either individual or national, is a straightforward
-and tolerably simple matter; to regulate, directly or indirectly, the
-personal actions of those subjects is an infinitely complicated matter.
-It is one thing to secure to each man the unhindered power to pursue
-his own good; it is a widely different thing to pursue the good for
-him. To do the first efficiently, the State has merely to look on while
-its citizens act; to forbid unfairness; to adjudicate when called on;
-and to enforce restitution for injuries. To do the last efficiently,
-it must become an ubiquitous worker—must know each man’s needs better
-than he knows them himself—must, in short, possess superhuman power and
-intelligence. Even, therefore, had the State done well in its proper
-sphere, no sufficient warrant would have existed for extending that
-sphere; but seeing how ill it has discharged those simple offices which
-we cannot help consigning to it, small indeed is the probability that
-it will discharge well offices of a more complicated nature.
-
-Change the point of view however we may, and this {236} conclusion
-still presents itself. If we define the primary State-duty to be
-that of protecting each individual against others; then, all other
-State-action comes under the definition of protecting each individual
-against himself—against his own stupidity, his own idleness, his own
-improvidence, rashness, or other defect—his own incapacity for doing
-something or other which should be done. There is no questioning this
-classification. For manifestly all the obstacles that lie between
-a man’s desires and the satisfaction of them, are either obstacles
-arising from other men’s counter desires, or obstacles arising from
-inability in himself. Such of these counter desires as are just,
-have as much claim to satisfaction as his; and may not, therefore,
-be thwarted. Such of them as are unjust, it is the State’s duty to
-hold in check. The only other possible sphere for it, therefore, is
-that of saving the individual from the consequences of his nature,
-or, as we say—protecting him against himself. Making no comment, at
-present, on the policy of this, and confining ourselves solely to
-the practicability of it, let us inquire how the proposal looks when
-reduced to its simplest form. Here are men possessed of instincts,
-and sentiments, and perceptions, all conspiring to self-preservation.
-The due action of each brings its quantum of pleasure; the inaction,
-its more or less of pain. Those provided with these faculties in due
-proportions, prosper and multiply; those ill-provided, tend to die out.
-And the general success of this human organization is seen in the fact,
-that under it the world has been peopled, and by it the complicated
-appliances and arrangements of civilized life have been developed. It
-is complained, however, that there are certain directions in which this
-apparatus of motives works but imperfectly. While it is admitted that
-men are duly prompted by it to bodily sustenance, to the obtainment
-of clothing and shelter, to marriage and the care of offspring, and
-to the establishment of the more important industrial and commercial
-agencies; it is argued that there are many desiderata, as pure air,
-{237} more knowledge, good water, safe travelling, and so forth,
-which it does not duly achieve. And these short-comings being assumed
-permanent, it is urged that some supplementary means must be employed.
-It is therefore proposed that out of the mass of men a certain number,
-constituting the legislature, shall be instructed to attain these
-various objects. The legislators thus instructed (all characterized, on
-the average, by the same defects in this apparatus of motives as men in
-general), being unable personally to fulfil their tasks, must fulfil
-them by deputy—must appoint commissions, boards, councils, and staffs
-of officers; and must construct their agencies of this same defective
-humanity that acts so ill. Why now should this system of complex
-deputation succeed where the system of simple deputation does not? The
-industrial, commercial, and philanthropic agencies, which citizens
-form spontaneously, are directly deputed agencies; these governmental
-agencies made by electing legislators who appoint officers, are
-indirectly deputed ones. And it is hoped that, by this process of
-double deputation, things may be achieved which the process of single
-deputation will not achieve. What is the rationale of this hope? Is it
-that legislators, and their employés, are made to feel more intensely
-than the rest these evils they are to remedy, these wants they are to
-satisfy? Hardly; for by position they are mostly relieved from such
-evils and wants. Is it, then, that they are to have the primary motive
-replaced by a secondary motive—the fear of public displeasure, and
-ultimate removal from office? Why scarcely; for the minor benefits
-which citizens will not organize to secure _directly_, they will not
-organize to secure _indirectly_, by turning out inefficient servants:
-especially if they cannot readily get efficient ones. Is it, then, that
-these State-agents are to do from a sense of duty, what they would
-not do from any other motive? Evidently this is the only possibility
-remaining. The proposition on which the {238} advocates of much
-government have to fall back, is, that things which the people will
-not unite to effect for personal benefit, a law-appointed portion of
-them will unite to effect for the benefit of the rest. Public men
-and functionaries love their neighbours better than themselves! The
-philanthropy of statesmen is stronger than the selfishness of citizens!
-
-No wonder, then, that every day adds to the list of legislative
-miscarriages. If colliery explosions increase, notwithstanding
-the appointment of coal-mine inspectors, why it is but a natural
-sequence to these false methods. If Sunderland shipowners complain
-that, as far as tried, “the Mercantile Marine Act has proved a total
-failure;” and if, meanwhile, the other class affected by it—the
-sailors—show their disapprobation by extensive strikes; why it does
-but exemplify the folly of trusting a theorising benevolence rather
-than an experienced self-interest. On all sides we may expect such
-facts; and on all sides we find them. Government, turning engineer,
-appoints its lieutenant, the Sewers’ Commission, to drain London.
-Presently Lambeth sends deputations to say that it pays heavy rates,
-and gets no benefit. Tired of waiting, Bethnal-green calls meetings
-to consider “the most effectual means of extending the drainage of
-the district.” From Wandsworth come complainants, who threaten to
-pay no more until something is done. Camberwell proposes to raise
-a subscription and do the work itself. Meanwhile, no progress is
-made towards the purification of the Thames; the weekly returns show
-an increasing rate of mortality; in Parliament, the friends of the
-Commission have nothing save good intentions to urge in mitigation of
-censure; and, at length, despairing ministers gladly seize an excuse
-for quietly shelving the Commission and its plans altogether.[27]
-As architectural {239} surveyor, the State has scarcely succeeded
-better than as engineer; witness the Metropolitan Buildings’ Act. New
-houses still tumble down from time to time. A few months since two
-fell at Bayswater, and one more recently near the Pentonville Prison:
-all notwithstanding prescribed thicknesses, and hoop-iron bond, and
-inspectors. It never struck those who provided these delusive sureties,
-that it was possible to build walls without bonding the two surfaces
-together, so that the inner layer might be removed after the surveyor’s
-approval. Nor did they foresee that, in dictating a larger _quantity_
-of bricks than experience proved absolutely needful, they were simply
-insuring a slow deterioration of _quality_ to an equivalent extent.[28]
-The government guarantee for safe passenger ships answers no better
-than its guarantee for safe houses. Though the burning of the _Amazon_
-arose from either bad construction or bad stowage, she had received
-the Admiralty certificate before sailing. Notwithstanding official
-approval, the _Adelaide_ was found, on her first voyage, to steer ill,
-to have useless pumps, ports that let floods of water into the cabins,
-and coals so near the furnaces that they twice caught fire. The _W.
-S. Lindsay_, which turned out unfit for sailing, had been passed by
-the government agent; and, but for the owner, might have gone to sea
-at a great risk of life. The _Melbourne_—originally a State-built
-ship—which took twenty-four days to reach Lisbon, and then needed to
-be docked to undergo a thorough repair, had been duly inspected. And
-lastly, the notorious _Australian_, before her third futile attempt
-to proceed on her {240} voyage, had, her owners tell us, received
-“the full approbation of the government inspector.” Neither does the
-like supervision give security to land-travelling. The iron bridge
-at Chester, which, breaking, precipitated a train into the Dee, had
-passed under the official eye. Inspection did not prevent a column
-on the South-Eastern from being so placed as to kill a man who put
-his head out of the carriage window. The locomotive that burst at
-Brighton lately, did so notwithstanding a State-approval given but ten
-days previously. And—to look at the facts in the gross—this system of
-supervision has not prevented the increase of railway accidents; which,
-be it remembered, has arisen _since_ the system was commenced.
-
- [27] So complete is the failure of this and other sanitary bodies,
- that, at the present moment (March, 1854) a number of philanthropic
- gentlemen are voluntarily organizing a “Health Fund for London,”
- with the view of meeting the threatened invasion of the Cholera;
- and the plea for this _purely private enterprise_, is, that the
- Local Boards of Health and Boards of Guardians are inoperative, from
- “_ignorance_, 1st, _of the extent of the danger_; 2nd, _of the means
- which experience has discovered for meeting it; and_ 3rd, _of the
- comparative security which those means may produce_.”
-
- [28] The _Builder_ remarks, that “the removal of the brick-duties
- has not yet produced that improvement in the make of bricks which we
- ought to find, . . . . . but as bad bricks can be obtained for less
- than good bricks, so long as houses built of the former will sell
- as readily as if the better had been used, no improvement is to be
- expected.”
-
-“Well; let the State fail. It can but do its best. If it succeed, so
-much the better: if it do not, where is the harm? Surely it is wiser
-to act, and take the chance of success, than to do nothing.” To this
-plea the rejoinder is that, unfortunately, the results of legislative
-intervention are not only negatively bad, but often positively so.
-Acts of Parliament do not simply fail; they frequently make worse. The
-familiar truth that persecution aids rather than hinders proscribed
-doctrines—a truth lately afresh illustrated by the forbidden work of
-Gervinus—is a part of the general truth that legislation often does
-indirectly, the reverse of that which it directly aims to do. Thus has
-it been with the Metropolitan Buildings’ Act. As was lately agreed
-unanimously by the delegates from all the parishes in London, and as
-was stated by them to Sir William Molesworth, this act “has encouraged
-bad building, and has been the means of covering the suburbs of the
-metropolis with thousands of wretched hovels, which are a disgrace to
-a civilized country.” Thus, also, has it been in provincial towns. The
-Nottingham Inclosure Act of 1845, by prescribing the structure of the
-houses to be built, and the extent of yard or garden to be allotted
-to each, has rendered it impossible to build working-class dwellings
-at such moderate {241} rents as to compete with existing ones. It is
-estimated that, as a consequence, 10,000 of the population are debarred
-from the new homes they would otherwise have, and are forced to live
-crowded together in miserable places unfit for human habitation; and
-so, in its anxiety to insure healthy accommodation for artisans, the
-law has entailed on them still worse accommodation than before. Thus,
-too, has it been with the Passengers’ Act. The terrible fevers which
-arose in the Australian emigrant ships a few months since, causing in
-the _Bourneuf_ 83 deaths, in the _Wanota_ 39 deaths, in the _Marco
-Polo_ 53 deaths, and in the _Ticonderoga_ 104 deaths, arose in vessels
-sent out by the government; and arose _in consequence_ of the close
-packing which the Passengers’ Act authorizes.[29] Thus, moreover, has
-it been with the safeguards provided by the Mercantile Marine Act. The
-examinations devised for insuring the efficiency of captains, have
-had the effect of certifying the superficially-clever and unpractised
-men, and, as we are told by a shipowner, rejecting many of the
-long-tried and most trustworthy: the general result being that _the
-ratio of shipwrecks has increased_. Thus also has it happened with
-Boards of Health, which have, in sundry cases, exacerbated the evils
-to be removed; as, for instance, at Croydon, where, according to the
-official report, the measures of the sanitary authorities produced an
-epidemic, which attacked 1600 people and killed 70. Thus again has it
-been with the Joint Stock Companies Registration Act. As was shown
-by Mr. James Wilson, in his late motion for a select committee on
-life-assurance associations, this measure, passed in 1844 to guard the
-public against bubble schemes, actually facilitated the rascalities
-of 1845 and subsequent years. The legislative sanction, devised as
-a guarantee of genuineness, and supposed by the people to be {242}
-such, clever adventurers have without difficulty obtained for the most
-worthless projects. Having obtained it, an amount of public confidence
-has followed which they could never otherwise have gained. In this way
-literally hundreds of sham enterprises that would not else have seen
-the light, have been fostered into being; and thousands of families
-have been ruined who would never have been so but for legislative
-efforts to make them more secure.
-
- [29] Against which close packing, by the way, _a private mercantile
- body_—the Liverpool Shipowners’ Association—unavailingly protested when
- the Act was before Parliament.
-
-Moreover, when these topical remedies applied by statesmen do not
-exacerbate the evils they were meant to cure, they constantly induce
-collateral evils; and these often graver than the original ones. It
-is the vice of this empirical school of politicians that they never
-look beyond proximate causes and immediate effects. In common with the
-uneducated masses they habitually regard each phenomenon as involving
-but one antecedent and one consequent. They do not bear in mind that
-each phenomenon is a link in an infinite series—is the result of
-myriads of preceding phenomena, and will have a share in producing
-myriads of succeeding ones. Hence they overlook the fact that, in
-disturbing any natural chain of sequences, they are not only modifying
-the result next in succession, but all the future results into which
-this will enter as a part cause. The serial genesis of phenomena,
-and the interaction of each series upon every other series, produces
-a complexity utterly beyond human grasp. Even in the simplest cases
-this is so. A servant who puts coals on the fire sees but few effects
-from the burning of a lump. The man of science, however, knows that
-there are very many effects. He knows that the combustion establishes
-numerous atmospheric currents, and through them moves thousands of
-cubic feet of air inside the house and out. He knows that the heat
-diffused causes expansions and subsequent contractions of all bodies
-within its range. He knows that the persons warmed are affected in
-their rate of respiration and their waste of tissue; and that these
-physiological {243} changes must have various secondary results. He
-knows that, could he trace to their ramified consequences all the
-forces disengaged, mechanical, chemical, thermal, electric—could he
-enumerate all the subsequent effects of the evaporation caused, the
-gases generated, the light evolved, the heat radiated; a volume would
-scarcely suffice to enter them. If, now, from a simple inorganic change
-such numerous and complex results arise, how infinitely multiplied and
-involved must be the ultimate consequences of any force brought to bear
-upon society. Wonderfully constructed as it is—mutually dependent as
-are its members for the satisfaction of their wants—affected as each
-unit of it is by his fellows, not only as to his safety and prosperity,
-but in his health, his temper, his culture; the social organism cannot
-be dealt with in any one part, without all other parts being influenced
-in ways which cannot be foreseen. You put a duty on paper, and
-by-and-by find that, through the medium of the jacquard-cards employed,
-you have inadvertently taxed figured silk, sometimes to the extent of
-several shillings per piece. On removing the impost from bricks, you
-discover that its existence had increased the dangers of mining, by
-preventing shafts from being lined and workings from being tunnelled.
-By the excise on soap, you have, it turns out, greatly encouraged the
-use of caustic washing-powders; and so have unintentionally entailed
-an immense destruction of clothes. In every case you perceive, on
-careful inquiry, that besides acting upon that which you sought to act
-upon, you have acted upon many other things, and each of these again
-on many others; and so have propagated a multitude of changes in all
-directions. We need feel no surprise, then, that in their efforts to
-cure specific evils, legislators have continually caused collateral
-evils they never looked for. No Carlyle’s wisest man, nor any body of
-such, could avoid causing them. Though their production is explicable
-enough after it has occurred, it is never anticipated. {244} When,
-under the New Poor-law, provision was made for the accommodation of
-vagrants in the Union-houses, it was hardly expected that a body of
-tramps would be thereby called into existence, who would spend their
-time in walking from Union to Union throughout the kingdom. It was
-little thought by those who in past generations assigned parish-pay
-for the maintenance of illegitimate children, that, as a result, a
-family of such would by-and-by be considered a small fortune, and the
-mother of them a desirable wife; nor did the same statesmen see that,
-by the law of settlement, they were organizing a disastrous inequality
-of wages in different districts, and entailing a system of clearing
-away cottages, which would result in the crowding of bedrooms, and in
-a consequent moral and physical deterioration. The English tonnage law
-was enacted simply with a view to regulate the mode of measurement.
-Its framers overlooked the fact that they were practically providing
-“for the effectual and compulsory construction of bad ships;” and
-that “to cheat the law, that is, to build a tolerable ship in spite
-of it, was the highest achievement left to an English builder.”[30]
-Greater commercial security was alone aimed at by the partnership
-law. We now find, however, that the unlimited liability it insists
-upon is a serious hindrance to progress; it practically forbids the
-association of small capitalists; it is found a great obstacle to the
-building of improved dwellings for the people; it prevents a better
-relationship between artisans and employers; and by withholding from
-the working-classes good investments for their savings, it checks
-the growth of provident habits and encourages drunkenness. Thus on
-all sides are well-meant measures producing unforeseen mischiefs—a
-licensing law that promotes the adulteration of beer; a ticket-of-leave
-system that encourages men to commit crime; a {245} police regulation
-that forces street-huxters into the workhouse. And then, in addition
-to the obvious and proximate evils, come the remote and less
-distinguishable ones, which, could we estimate their accumulated
-result, we should probably find even more serious.
-
- [30] Lecture before the Royal Institution, by J. Scott Russell, Esq.,
- “On Wave-line Ships and Yachts,” Feb. 6, 1852.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-But the thing to be discussed is, not so much whether, by any amount of
-intelligence, it is _possible_ for a government to work out the various
-ends consigned to it, as whether its fulfilment of them is _probable_.
-It is less a question of _can_ than a question of _will_. Granting
-the absolute competence of the State, let us consider what hope there
-is of getting from it satisfactory performance. Let us look at the
-moving force by which the legislative machine is worked, and then
-inquire whether this force is thus employed as economically as it would
-otherwise be.
-
-Manifestly, as desire of some kind is the invariable stimulus to action
-in the individual, every social agency, of what nature soever, must
-have some aggregate of desires for its motive power. Men in their
-collective capacity can exhibit no result but what has its origin in
-some appetite, feeling, or taste common among them. Did not they like
-meat, there could be no cattle-graziers, no Smithfield, no distributing
-organization of butchers. Operas, Philharmonic Societies, song-books,
-and street organ-boys, have all been called into being by our love
-of music. Look through the trades’ directory; take up a guide to the
-London sights; read the index of Bradshaw’s time-tables, the reports
-of the learned societies, or the advertisements of new books; and
-you see in the publication itself, and in the things it describes,
-so many products of human activities, stimulated by human desires.
-Under this stimulus grow up agencies alike the most gigantic and the
-most insignificant, the most complicated and the most simple—agencies
-for national defence and for the sweeping of crossings; for the daily
-distribution of letters, and for the collection of bits of coal out
-{246} of the Thames mud—agencies that subserve all ends, from the
-preaching of Christianity to the protection of ill-treated animals;
-from the production of bread for a nation to the supply of groundsel
-for caged singing-birds. The accumulated desires of individuals being,
-then, the moving power by which every social agency is worked, the
-question to be considered is—Which is the most economical kind of
-agency? The agency having no power in itself, but being merely an
-instrument, our inquiry must be for the most efficient instrument—the
-instrument that costs least, and wastes the smallest amount of the
-moving power—the instrument least liable to get out of order, and most
-readily put right again when it goes wrong. Of the two kinds of social
-mechanism exemplified above, the spontaneous and the governmental,
-which is the best?
-
-From the form of this question will be readily foreseen the intended
-answer—that is the best mechanism which contains the fewest parts. The
-common saying—“What you wish well done you must do yourself,” embodies
-a truth, equally applicable to political life as to private life. The
-experience that farming by bailiff entails loss, while tenant-farming
-pays, is an experience still better illustrated in national history
-than in a landlord’s account books. This transference of power from
-constituencies to members of parliament, from these to the executive,
-from the executive to a board, from the board to inspectors, and from
-inspectors through their subs down to the actual workers—this operating
-through a series of levers, each, of which absorbs in friction
-and inertia part of the moving force; is as bad, in virtue of its
-complexity, as the direct employment by society of individuals, private
-companies, and spontaneously-formed institutions, is good in virtue of
-its simplicity. Fully to appreciate the contrast, we must compare in
-detail the working of the two systems.
-
-Officialism is habitually slow. When non-governmental agencies are
-dilatory, the public has its remedy: it ceases {247} to employ them
-and soon finds quicker ones. Under this discipline all private bodies
-are taught promptness. But for delays in State-departments there is
-no such easy cure. Life-long Chancery suits must be patiently borne;
-Museum-catalogues must be wearily waited for. While, by the people
-themselves, a Crystal Palace is designed, erected, and filled, in the
-course of a few months, the legislature takes twenty years to build
-itself a new house. While, by private persons, the debates are daily
-printed and dispersed over the kingdom within a few hours of their
-utterance, the Board of Trade tables are regularly published a month,
-and sometimes more, after date. And so throughout. Here is a Board of
-Health which, since 1849, has been about to close the metropolitan
-graveyards, but has not done it yet; and which has so long dawdled over
-projects for cemeteries, that the London Necropolis Company has taken
-the matter out of its hands. Here is a patentee who has had fourteen
-years’ correspondence with the Horse Guards, before getting a definite
-answer respecting the use of his improved boot for the Army. Here is a
-Plymouth port-admiral who delays sending out to look for the missing
-boats of the Amazon until ten days after the wreck.
-
-Again, officialism is stupid. Under the natural course of things each
-citizen tends towards his fittest function. Those who are competent
-to the kind of work they undertake, succeed, and, in the average of
-cases, are advanced in proportion to their efficiency; while the
-incompetent, society soon finds out, ceases to employ, forces to
-try something easier, and eventually turns to use. But it is quite
-otherwise in State-organizations. Here, as every one knows, birth, age,
-back-stairs intrigue, and sycophancy, determine the selections rather
-than merit. The “fool of the family” readily finds a place in the
-Church, if “the family” have good connexions. A youth too ill-educated
-for any profession, does very well for an officer in the Army. Grey
-{248} hair, or a title, is a far better guarantee of naval promotion
-than genius is. Nay, indeed, the man of capacity often finds that, in
-government offices, superiority is a hindrance—that his chiefs hate
-to be pestered with his proposed improvements, and are offended by
-his implied criticisms. Not only, therefore, is legislative machinery
-complex, but it is made of inferior materials. Hence the blunders we
-daily read of—the supplying to the dockyards from the royal forests
-of timber unfit for use; the administration of relief during the
-Irish famine in such a manner as to draw labourers from the field,
-and diminish the subsequent harvest by one-fourth[31]; the filing
-of patents at three different offices and keeping an index at none.
-Everywhere does this bungling show itself, from the elaborate failure
-of House of Commons ventilation down to the publication of _The London
-Gazette_, which invariably comes out wrongly folded.
-
-A further characteristic of officialism is its extravagance. In its
-chief departments, Army, Navy, and Church, it employs far more officers
-than are needful, and pays some of the useless ones exorbitantly. The
-work done by the Sewers Commission has cost, as Sir B. Hall tells
-us, from 300 to 400 per cent, over the contemplated outlay; while
-the management charges have reached 35, 40, and 45 per cent. on the
-expenditure. The trustees of Ramsgate Harbour—a harbour, by the way,
-that has taken a century to complete—are spending 18,000_l._ a year
-in doing what 5000_l._ has been proved sufficient for. The Board of
-Health is causing new surveys to be made of all the towns under its
-control—a proceeding which, as Mr. Stephenson states, and as every tyro
-in engineering knows, is, for drainage purposes, a wholly needless
-expense. These public agencies are subject to no such influence as
-that which obliges private enterprise to be economical. Traders and
-mercantile bodies succeed by serving society cheaply. Such of them
-{249} as cannot do this are continually supplanted by those who can.
-They cannot saddle the nation with the results of their extravagance,
-and so are prevented from being extravagant. On works that are to
-return a profit it does not answer to spend 48 per cent. of the capital
-in superintendence, as in the engineering department of the Indian
-Government; and Indian railway companies, knowing this, manage to
-keep their superintendence charges within 8 per cent. A shopkeeper
-leaves out of his accounts no item analogous to that 6,000,000_l._ of
-its revenues, which Parliament allows to be deducted on the way to
-the Exchequer. Walk through a manufactory, and you see that the stern
-alternatives, carefulness or ruin, dictate the saving of every penny;
-visit one of the national dockyards, and the comments you make on any
-glaring wastefulness are carelessly met by the slang phrase—“Nunky
-pays.”
-
- [31] See Evidence of Major Larcom.
-
-The unadaptiveness of officialism is another of its vices. Unlike
-private enterprise which quickly modifies its actions to meet
-emergencies—unlike the shopkeeper who promptly finds the wherewith
-to satisfy a sudden demand—unlike the railway company which doubles
-its trains to carry a special influx of passengers; the law-made
-instrumentality lumbers on under all varieties of circumstances through
-its ordained routine at its habitual rate. By its very nature it is
-fitted only for average requirements, and inevitably fails under
-unusual requirements. You cannot step into the street without having
-the contrast thrust upon you. Is it summer? You see the water-carts
-going their prescribed rounds with scarcely any regard to the needs
-of the weather—to-day sprinkling afresh the already moist roads;
-to-morrow bestowing their showers with no greater liberality upon
-roads cloudy with dust. Is it winter? You see the scavengers do not
-vary in number and activity according to the quantity of mud; and if
-there comes a heavy fall of snow, you find the thoroughfares remaining
-for nearly a week in a scarcely passable state, without an effort
-being {250} made, even in the heart of London, to meet the exigency.
-The late snow-storm, indeed, supplied a neat antithesis between the
-two orders of agencies in the effects it respectively produced on
-omnibuses and cabs. Not being under a law-fixed tariff, the omnibuses
-put on extra horses and raised their fares. The cabs on the contrary,
-being limited in their charges by an Act of Parliament which, with
-the usual shortsightedness, never contemplated such a contingency as
-this, declined to ply, deserted the stands and the stations, left
-luckless travellers to stumble home with their luggage as best they
-might, and so became useless at the very time of all others when they
-were most wanted! Not only by its unsusceptibility of adjustment does
-officialism entail serious inconveniences, but it likewise entails
-great injustices. In this case of cabs for example, it has resulted
-since the late change of law, that old cabs, which were before saleable
-at 10_l._ and 12_l._ each, are now unsaleable and have to be broken
-up; and thus legislation has robbed cab-proprietors of part of their
-capital. Again, the recently-passed Smoke-Bill for London, which
-applies only within certain prescribed limits, has the effect of taxing
-one manufacturer while leaving untaxed his competitor working within a
-quarter of a mile; and so, as we are credibly informed, gives one an
-advantage of 1500_l._ a year over another. These typify the infinity
-of wrongs, varying in degrees of hardship, which legal regulations
-necessarily involve. Society, a living growing organism, placed within
-apparatuses of dead, rigid, mechanical formulas, cannot fail to be
-hampered and pinched. The only agencies which can efficiently serve it,
-are those through which its pulsations hourly flow, and which change as
-it changes.
-
-How invariably officialism becomes corrupt every one knows. Exposed to
-no such antiseptic as free competition—not dependent for existence,
-as private unendowed organizations are, on the maintenance of a
-vigorous {251} vitality; all law-made agencies fall into an inert,
-over-fed state, from which to disease is a short step. Salaries flow
-in irrespective of the activity with which duty is performed; continue
-after duty wholly ceases; become rich prizes for the idle well born;
-and prompt to perjury, to bribery, to simony. East India directors are
-elected not for any administrative capacity they have; but they buy
-votes by promised patronage—a patronage alike asked and given in utter
-disregard of the welfare of a hundred millions of people. Registrars
-of wills not only get many thousands a year each for doing work which
-their miserably paid deputies leave half done; but they, in some cases,
-defraud the revenue, and that after repeated reprimands. Dockyard
-promotion is the result not of efficient services, but of political
-favouritism. That they may continue to hold rich livings, clergymen
-preach what they do not believe; bishops make false returns of their
-revenues; and at their elections to fellowships, well-to-do priests
-severally make oath that they are _pauper_, _pius et doctus_. From
-the local inspector whose eyes are shut to an abuse by a contractor’s
-present, up to the prime minister who finds lucrative berths for his
-relations, this venality is daily illustrated; and that in spite of
-public reprobation and perpetual attempts to prevent it. As we once
-heard said by a State-official of twenty-five years’ standing—“Wherever
-there is government there is villainy.” It is the inevitable result of
-destroying the direct connexion between the profit obtained and the
-work performed. No incompetent person hopes, by offering a _douceur_
-in the _Times_ to get a permanent place in a mercantile office. But
-where, as under government, there is no employer’s self-interest to
-forbid—where the appointment is made by some one on whom inefficiency
-entails no loss; there a _douceur_ is operative. In hospitals, in
-public charities, in endowed schools, in all social agencies in which
-duty done and income gained do not go hand in hand, the like corruption
-is found; and is great in {252} proportion as the dependence of income
-upon duty is remote. In State-organizations, therefore, corruption is
-unavoidable. In trading-organizations it rarely makes its appearance;
-and when it does, the instinct of self-preservation soon provides a
-remedy.
-
-To all which broad contrasts add this, that while private bodies are
-enterprising and progressive, public bodies are unchanging, and,
-indeed, obstructive. That officialism should be inventive nobody
-expects. That it should go out of its easy mechanical routine to
-introduce improvements, and this at a considerable expense of thought
-and application, without the prospect of profit, is not to be supposed.
-But it is not simply stationary; it resists every amendment either
-in itself or in anything with which it deals. Until now that County
-Courts are taking away their practice, all agents of the law have
-doggedly opposed law-reform. The universities have maintained an
-old _curriculum_ for centuries after it ceased to be fit; and are
-now struggling to prevent a threatened reconstruction. Every postal
-improvement has been vehemently protested against by the postal
-authorities. Mr. Whiston can say how pertinacious is the conservatism
-of Church grammar-schools. Not even the gravest consequences in
-view preclude official resistance: witness the fact that though, as
-already mentioned, Professor Barlow reported in 1820, of the Admiralty
-compasses then in store, that “at least one-half were mere lumber,” yet
-notwithstanding the constant risk of shipwrecks thence arising, “very
-little amelioration in this state of things appears to have taken place
-until 1838 to 1840.”[32] Nor is official obstructiveness to be readily
-overborne even by a powerful public opinion: witness the fact that
-though, for generations, nine-tenths of the nation have disapproved
-this ecclesiastical system which pampers the drones and starves the
-workers, and though commissions have been appointed to rectify it, it
-still remains substantially as it {253} was: witness again the fact
-that though, since 1818, there have been a score attempts to rectify
-the scandalous maladministration of Charitable Trusts—though ten times
-in ten successive years, remedial measures have been brought before
-Parliament—the abuses still continue in all their grossness. Not only
-do these legal instrumentalities resist reforms in themselves, but they
-hinder reforms in other things. In defending their vested interests the
-clergy delay the closing of town burial-grounds. As Mr. Lindsay can
-show, government emigration-agents are checking the use of iron for
-sailing-vessels. Excise officers prevent improvements in the processes
-they have to overlook. That organic conservatism which is visible in
-the daily conduct of all men, is an obstacle which in private life
-self-interest slowly overcomes. The prospect of profit does, in the
-end, teach farmers that deep draining is good; though it takes long
-to do this. Manufacturers do, ultimately, learn the most economical
-speed at which to work their steam-engines; though precedent has long
-misled them. But in the public service, where there is no self-interest
-to overcome it, this conservatism exerts its full force; and produces
-results alike disastrous and absurd. For generations after book-keeping
-had become universal, the Exchequer accounts were kept by notches cut
-on sticks. In the estimates for the current year appears the item,
-“Trimming the oil-lamps at the Horse-Guards.”
-
- [32] “Rudimentary Magnetism,” by Sir W. Snow Harris. Part III. p. 145.
-
-Between these law-made agencies and the spontaneously formed ones,
-who then can hesitate? The one class are slow, stupid, extravagant,
-unadaptive, corrupt, and obstructive: can any point out in the other,
-vices that balance these? It is true that trade has its dishonesties,
-speculation its follies. These are evils inevitably entailed by the
-existing imperfections of humanity. It is equally true, however, that
-these imperfections of humanity are shared by State-functionaries;
-and that being unchecked in them by the same stern discipline, they
-grow to far worse results. {254} Given a race of men having a certain
-proclivity to misconduct and the question is, whether a society of
-these men shall be so organized that ill-conduct directly brings
-punishment, or whether it shall be so organized that punishment is but
-remotely contingent on ill-conduct? Which will be the most healthful
-community—that in which agents who perform their functions badly,
-immediately suffer by the withdrawal of public patronage; or that in
-which such agents can be made to suffer only through an apparatus
-of meetings, petitions, polling booths, parliamentary divisions,
-cabinet-councils, and red-tape documents? Is it not an absurdly utopian
-hope that men will behave better when correction is far removed and
-uncertain than when it is near at hand and inevitable? Yet this is the
-hope which most political schemers unconsciously cherish. Listen to
-their plans, and you find that just what they propose to have done,
-they assume the appointed agents will do. That functionaries are
-trustworthy is their first postulate. Doubtless could good officers be
-ensured, much might be said for officialism; just as despotism would
-have its advantages could we ensure a good despot.
-
-If, however, we would duly appreciate the contrast between the
-artificial modes and the natural modes of achieving social desiderata,
-we must look not only at the vices of the one but at the virtues of the
-other. These are many and important. Consider first how immediately
-every private enterprise is dependent on the need for it; and how
-impossible it is for it to continue if there be no need. Daily are new
-trades and new companies established. If they subserve some existing
-public want, they take root and grow. If they do not, they die of
-inanition. It needs no agitation, no act of Parliament, to put them
-down. As with all natural organizations, if there is no function for
-them no nutriment comes to them, and they dwindle away. Moreover, not
-only do the new agencies disappear if they {255} are superfluous, but
-the old ones cease to be when they have done their work. Unlike public
-instrumentalities—unlike Heralds’ Offices, which are maintained for
-ages after heraldry has lost all value—unlike Ecclesiastial Courts,
-which continue to flourish for generations after they have become an
-abomination; these private instrumentalities dissolve when they become
-needless. A widely ramified coaching-system ceases to exist as soon as
-a more efficient railway-system comes into being. And not simply does
-it cease to exist, and to abstract funds, but the materials of which
-it was made are absorbed and turned to use. Coachmen, guards, and the
-rest, are employed to profit elsewhere—do not continue for twenty years
-a burden, like the compensated officials of some abolished department
-of the State. Consider, again, how necessarily these unordained
-agencies fit themselves to their work. It is a law of all organized
-things that efficiency presupposes apprenticeship. Not only is it true
-that the young merchant must begin by carrying letters to the post,
-that the way to be a successful innkeeper is to commence as waiter—not
-only is it true that in the development of the intellect there must
-come first the perceptions of identity and duality, next of number,
-and that without these, arithmetic, algebra, and the infinitesimal
-calculus, remain impracticable; but it is true that there is no part
-of an organism but begins in some simple form with some insignificant
-function, and passes to its final stage through successive phases of
-complexity. Every heart is at first a mere pulsatile sac; every brain
-begins as a slight enlargement of the spinal chord. This law equally
-extends to the social organism. An instrumentality that is to work
-well must not be designed and suddenly put together by legislators,
-but must grow gradually from a germ; each successive addition must be
-tried and proved good by experience before another addition is made;
-and by this tentative process only, can an efficient instrumentality be
-produced. From a {256} trustworthy man who receives deposits of money,
-insensibly grows up a vast banking system, with its notes, checks,
-bills, its complex transactions, and its Clearing-house. Pack-horses,
-then waggons, then coaches, then steam-carriages on common roads, and,
-finally, steam-carriages on roads made for them—such has been the slow
-genesis of our present means of communication. Not a trade in the
-directory but has formed itself an apparatus of manufacturers, brokers,
-travellers, and retailers, in so gradual a way that no one can trace
-the steps. And so with organizations of another order. The Zoological
-Gardens began as the private collection of a few naturalists. The best
-working-class school known—that at Price’s factory—commenced with
-half-a-dozen boys sitting among the candle-boxes, after hours, to teach
-themselves writing with worn-out pens. Mark, too, that as a consequence
-of their mode of growth, these spontaneously-formed agencies expand to
-any extent required. The same stimulus which brought them into being
-makes them send their ramifications wherever they are needed. But
-supply does not thus readily follow demand in governmental agencies.
-Appoint a board and a staff, fix their duties, and let the apparatus
-have a generation or two to consolidate, and you cannot get it to
-fulfil larger requirements without some act of parliament obtained only
-after long delay and difficulty.
-
-Were there space, much more might be said upon the superiority of what
-naturalists would call the _exogenous_ order of institutions over the
-_endogenous_ one. But, from the point of view indicated, the further
-contrasts between their characteristics will be sufficiently visible.
-
-Hence then the fact, that while the one order of means is ever failing,
-making worse, or producing more evils than it cures, the other order
-of means is ever succeeding, ever improving. Strong as it looks at the
-outset, State-agency perpetually disappoints every one. Puny as are its
-first {257} stages, private effort daily achieves results that astound
-the world. It is not only that joint-stock companies do so much—it is
-not only that by them a whole kingdom is covered with railways in the
-same time that it takes the Admiralty to build a hundred-gun ship; but
-it is that public instrumentalities are outdone even by individuals.
-The often quoted contrast between the Academy whose forty members took
-fifty-six years to compile the French Dictionary, while Dr. Johnson
-alone compiled the English one in eight—a contrast still marked enough
-after making due set-off for the difference in the works—is by no
-means without parallel. That great sanitary desideratum—the bringing
-of the New River to London—which the wealthiest corporation in the
-world attempted and failed, Sir Hugh Myddleton achieved single-handed.
-The first canal in England—a work of which government might have
-been thought the fit projector, and the only competent executor—was
-undertaken and finished as the private speculation of one man—the
-Duke of Bridgewater. By his own unaided exertions, William Smith
-completed that great achievement, the geological map of Great Britain;
-meanwhile, the Ordnance Survey—a very accurate and elaborate one, it
-is true—has already occupied a large staff for some two generations,
-and will not be completed before the lapse of another. Howard and
-the prisons of Europe; Bianconi and Irish travelling; Waghorn and
-the Overland route; Dargan and the Dublin Exhibition—do not these
-suggest startling contrasts? While private gentlemen like Mr. Denison,
-build model lodging-houses in which the deaths are greatly below the
-average, the State builds barracks in which the deaths are greatly
-above the average, even of the much-pitied town populations: barracks
-which, though filled with picked men under medical supervision, show
-an annual mortality per thousand of 13·6, 17·9 and even 20·4; though
-among civilians of the same age in the same places, the mortality
-{258} per thousand is but 11·9.[33] While the State has laid out
-large sums at Parkhurst in the effort to reform juvenile criminals,
-who are _not_ reformed, Mr. Ellis takes fifteen of the worst young
-thieves in London—thieves considered by the police irreclaimable—and
-reforms them all. Side by side with the Emigration Board, under whose
-management hundreds die of fever from close packing, and under whose
-licence sail vessels which, like the _Washington_, are the homes of
-fraud, brutality, tyranny, and obscenity, stands Mrs. Chisholm’s Family
-Colonisation Loan Society, which does not provide worse accommodation
-than ever before but much better; which does not demoralize by
-promiscuous crowding but improves by mild discipline; which does not
-pauperize by charity but encourages providence; which does not increase
-our taxes, but is self-supporting. Here are lessons for the lovers of
-legislation. The State outdone by a working shoemaker! The State beaten
-by a woman!
-
-Stronger still becomes this contrast between the results of public
-action and private action, when we remember that the one is constantly
-eked out by the other, even in doing the things unavoidably left to
-it. Passing over military and naval departments, in which much is done
-by contractors and not by men receiving government pay,—passing over
-the Church, which is constantly extended not by law but by voluntary
-effort—passing over the Universities, where the efficient teaching is
-given not by the appointed officers but by private tutors; let us look
-at the mode in which our judicial system is worked. Lawyers perpetually
-tell us that codification is impossible; and some are simple enough
-to believe them. Merely remarking, in passing, that what government
-and all its employés cannot do for the Acts of Parliament in general,
-was done for the 1500 Customs acts in 1825 by the energy of one
-man—Mr. Deacon Hume—let us see {259} how the absence of a digested
-system of law is made good. In preparing themselves for the bar, and
-finally the bench, law-students, by years of research, have to gain
-an acquaintance with this vast mass of unorganized legislation; and
-that organization which it is held impossible for the State to effect,
-it is held possible (sly sarcasm on the State!) for each student to
-effect for himself. Every judge can privately codify, though “united
-wisdom” cannot. But how is each judge enabled to codify? By the
-private enterprise of men who have prepared the way for him; by the
-partial codifications of Blackstone, Coke, and others; by the digests
-of Partnership Law, Bankruptcy Law, Law of Patents, Laws affecting
-Women, and the rest that daily issue from the press; by abstracts of
-cases, and volumes of reports—every one of them unofficial products.
-Sweep away all these fractional codifications made by individuals, and
-the State would be in utter ignorance of its own laws! Had not the
-bunglings of legislators been made good by private enterprise, the
-administration of justice would have been impossible!
-
- [33] See “Statistical Reports on the Sickness, Mortality, and
- Invaliding amongst the Troops.” 1853.
-
-Where, then, is the warrant for the constantly-proposed extensions of
-legislative action? If, as we have seen in a large class of cases,
-government measures do not remedy the evils they aim at; if, in another
-large class, they make these evils worse instead of remedying them;
-and if, in a third large class, while curing some evils they entail
-others, and often greater ones—if, as we lately saw, public action is
-continually outdone in efficiency by private action; and if, as just
-shown, private action is obliged to make up for the shortcomings of
-public action, even in fulfilling the vital functions of the State;
-what reason is there for wishing more public administrations? The
-advocates of such may claim credit for philanthropy, but not for
-wisdom; unless wisdom is shown by disregarding experience.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-“Much of this argument is beside the question,” will {260} rejoin our
-opponents. “The true point at issue is, not whether individuals and
-companies outdo the State when they come in competition with it, but
-whether there are not certain social wants which the State alone can
-satisfy. Admitting that private enterprise does much, and does it well,
-it is nevertheless true that we have daily thrust upon our notice many
-desiderata which it has not achieved, and is not achieving. In these
-cases its incompetency is obvious; and in these cases, therefore, it
-behoves the State to make up for its deficiencies: doing this, if not
-well, yet as well as it can.”
-
-Not to fall back upon the many experiences already quoted, showing
-that the State is likely to do more harm than good in attempting this;
-nor to dwell upon the fact that, in most of the alleged cases, the
-apparent insufficiency of private enterprise is a _result_ of previous
-State-interferences, as may be conclusively shown; let us deal with
-the proposition on its own terms. Though there would have been no need
-for a Mercantile Marine Act to prevent the unseaworthiness of ships
-and the ill-treatment of sailors, had there been no Navigation Laws to
-produce these; and though were all like cases of evils and shortcomings
-directly or indirectly produced by law, taken out of the category,
-there would probably remain but small basis for the plea above put; yet
-let it be granted that, every artificial obstacle having been removed,
-there would still remain many desiderata unachieved, which there was
-no seeing how spontaneous effort could achieve. Let all this, we say,
-be granted; the propriety of legislative action may yet be rightly
-questioned.
-
-For the said plea involves the unwarrantable assumption that social
-agencies will continue to work only as they are now working; and will
-produce no results but those they seem likely to produce. It is the
-habit of this school of thinkers to make a limited human intelligence
-the measure of phenomena which it requires omniscience to grasp. {261}
-That which it does not see the way to, it does not believe will
-take place. Though society has, generation after generation, been
-growing to developments which none foresaw, yet there is no practical
-belief in unforeseen developments in the future. The parliamentary
-debates constitute an elaborate balancing of probabilities, having
-for data things as they are. Meanwhile every day adds new elements
-to things as they are, and seemingly improbable results constantly
-occur. Who, a few years ago, expected that a Leicester-square refugee
-would shortly become Emperor of the French? Who looked for free trade
-from a landlords’ ministry? Who dreamed that Irish over-population
-would spontaneously cure itself, as it is now doing? So far from
-social changes arising in likely ways, they usually arise in ways
-which, to common sense, appear unlikely. A barber’s shop was not a
-probable-looking place for the germination of the cotton manufacture.
-No one supposed that important agricultural improvements would come
-from a Leadenhall-street tradesman. A farmer would have been the last
-man thought of to bring to bear the screw propulsion of steam-ships.
-The invention of a new species of architecture we should have hoped
-from any one rather than a gardener. Yet while the most unexpected
-changes are daily wrought out in the strangest ways, legislation daily
-assumes that things will go just as human foresight thinks they will
-go. Though by the trite exclamation—“What would our forefathers have
-said!” there is a frequent acknowledgment of the fact that wonderful
-results have been achieved in modes wholly unforeseen, yet there seems
-no belief that this will be again. Would it not be wise to admit such a
-probability into our politics? May we not rationally infer that, as in
-the past so in the future?
-
-This strong faith in State-agencies is, however, accompanied by so weak
-a faith in natural agencies (the two being antagonistic), that, spite
-of past experience, it will by {262} many be thought absurd to rest in
-the conviction that existing social needs will be spontaneously met,
-though we cannot say how they will be met. Nevertheless, illustrations
-exactly to the point are now transpiring before their eyes. Instance
-the scarcely credible phenomenon lately witnessed in the midland
-counties. Every one has heard of the distress of the stockingers—a
-chronic evil of some generation or two’s standing. Repeated petitions
-have prayed Parliament for remedy; and legislation has made attempts,
-but without success. The disease seemed incurable. Two or three years
-since, however, the circular knitting machine was introduced—a machine
-immensely outstripping the old stocking-frame in productiveness, but
-which can make only the legs of stockings, not the feet. Doubtless, the
-Leicester and Nottingham artizans regarded this new engine with alarm,
-as likely to intensify their miseries. On the contrary, it has wholly
-removed them. By cheapening production it has so enormously increased
-consumption, that the old stocking-frames, which were before too many
-by half for the work to be done, are now all employed in putting feet
-to the legs which the new machines make. How insane would he have been
-thought who anticipated cure from such a cause! If from the unforeseen
-removal of evils we turn to the unforeseen achievement of desiderata,
-we find like cases. No one recognized in Oersted’s electro-magnetic
-discovery the germ of a new agency for the catching of criminals and
-the facilitation of commerce. No one expected railways to become agents
-for the diffusion of cheap literature, as they now are. No one supposed
-when the Society of Arts was planning an international exhibition of
-manufactures in Hyde Park, that the result would be a place for popular
-recreation and culture at Sydenham.
-
-But there is yet a deeper reply to the appeals of impatient
-philanthropists. It is not simply that social vitality may be trusted
-by-and-by to fulfil each much-exaggerated {263} requirement in some
-quiet spontaneous way—it is not simply that when thus naturally
-fulfilled it will be fulfilled efficiently, instead of being botched
-as when attempted artificially; but it is that until thus naturally
-fulfilled it ought not to be fulfilled at all. A startling paradox,
-this, to many; but one quite justifiable, as we hope shortly to show.
-
-It was pointed out some distance back, that the force which produces
-and sets in motion every social mechanism—governmental, mercantile,
-or other—is some accumulation of personal desires. As there is no
-individual action without a desire, so, it was urged, there can be no
-social action without an aggregate of desires. To which there here
-remains to add, that as it is a general law of the individual that the
-intenser desires—those corresponding to all-essential functions—are
-satisfied first, and if need be to the neglect of the weaker and
-less important ones; so, it must be a general law of society that
-the chief requisites of social life—those necessary to popular
-existence and multiplication—will, in the natural order of things, be
-subserved before those of a less pressing kind. As the private man
-first ensures himself food; then clothing and shelter; these being
-secured, takes a wife; and, if he can afford it, presently supplies
-himself with carpeted rooms, and piano, and wines, hires servants and
-gives dinner parties; so, in the evolution of society, we see first a
-combination for defence against enemies, and for the better pursuit
-of game; by-and-by come such political arrangements as are needed
-to maintain this combination; afterwards, under a demand for more
-food, more clothes, more houses, arises division of labour; and when
-satisfaction of the animal wants has been provided for, there slowly
-grow up literature, science, and the arts. Is it not obvious that these
-successive evolutions occur in the order of their importance? Is it not
-obvious, that, being each of them produced by an aggregate of desires,
-they _must_ occur in the order of their importance, if it be a law of
-the individual that the {264} strongest desires correspond to the most
-needful actions? Is it not, indeed, obvious that the order of relative
-importance will be more uniformly followed in social action than in
-individual action; seeing that the personal idiosyncrasies which
-disturb that order in the latter case are _averaged_ in the former? If
-any one does not see this, let him take up a book describing life at
-the gold-diggings. There he will find the whole process exhibited in
-little. He will read that as the diggers must eat, they are compelled
-to offer such prices for food that it pays better to keep a store than
-to dig. As the store-keepers must get supplies, they give enormous sums
-for carriage from the nearest town; and some men, quickly seeing they
-can get rich at that, make it their business. This brings drays and
-horses into demand; the high rates draw these from all quarters; and,
-after them, wheelwrights and harness-makers. Blacksmiths to sharpen
-pickaxes, doctors to cure fevers, get pay exorbitant in proportion
-to the need for them; and are so brought flocking in proportionate
-numbers. Presently commodities become scarce; more must be fetched
-from abroad; sailors must have increased wages to prevent them from
-deserting and turning miners; this necessitates higher charges for
-freight; higher freights quickly bring more ships; and so there rapidly
-develops an organization for supplying goods from all parts of the
-world. Every phase of this evolution takes place in the order of its
-necessity; or as we say—in the order of the intensity of the desires
-subserved. Each man does that which he finds pays best; that which
-pays best is that for which other men will give most; that for which
-they will give most is that which, under the circumstances, they most
-desire. Hence the succession must be throughout from the more important
-to the less important. A requirement which at any period remains
-unfulfilled, must be one for the fulfilment of which men will not pay
-so much as to make it worth any one’s while to fulfil it—must be a
-_less_ requirement than all the {265} others for the fulfilment of
-which they will pay more; and must wait until other more needful things
-are done. Well, is it not clear that the same law holds good in every
-community? Is it not true of the latter phases of social evolution, as
-of the earlier, that when things are let alone the smaller desiderata
-will be postponed to the greater.
-
-Hence, then, the justification of the seeming paradox, that until
-spontaneously fulfilled a public want should not be fulfilled at all.
-It must, on the average, result in our complex state, as in simpler
-ones, that the thing left undone is a thing by doing which citizens
-cannot gain so much as by doing other things—is therefore a thing which
-society does not want done so much as it wants these other things done;
-and the corollary is, that to effect a neglected thing by artificially
-employing citizens to do it, is to leave undone some more important
-thing which they would have been doing—is to sacrifice the greater
-requisite to the smaller.
-
-“But,” it will perhaps be objected, “if the things done by a
-government, or at least by a representative government, are also done
-in obedience to some aggregate desire, why may we not look for this
-normal subordination of the more needful to the less needful in them
-too?” The reply is, that though they have a certain tendency to follow
-this order—though those primal desires for public defence and personal
-protection, out of which government originates, were satisfied through
-its instrumentality in proper succession—though, possibly, some other
-early and simple requirements may have been so too; yet, when the
-desires are not few, universal and intense, but, like those remaining
-to be satisfied in the latter stages of civilization, numerous,
-partial, and moderate, the judgment of a government is no longer to be
-trusted. To select out of an immense number of minor wants, physical,
-intellectual, and moral, felt in different degrees by different
-classes, and by a total mass varying in every case, the want that is
-most pressing, is a task which no legislature can accomplish. No man or
-men {266} by inspecting society can _see_ what it most needs; society
-must be left to _feel_ what it most needs. The mode of solution must be
-experimental, not theoretical. When left, day after day, to experience
-evils and dissatisfactions of various kinds, affecting them in various
-degrees, citizens gradually acquire repugnance to these proportionate
-to their greatness, and corresponding desires to get rid of them, which
-by spontaneously fostering remedial agencies are likely to end in the
-worst inconvenience being first removed. And however irregular this
-process may be (and we admit that men’s habits and prejudices produce
-many anomalies, or seeming anomalies, in it) it is a process far more
-trustworthy than are legislative judgments. For those who question this
-there are instances; and, that the parallel may be the more conclusive,
-we will take a case in which the ruling power is deemed specially fit
-to decide. We refer to our means of communication.
-
-Do those who maintain that railways would have been better laid out
-and constructed by government, hold that the order of importance would
-have been as uniformly followed as it has been by private enterprise?
-Under the stimulus of an enormous traffic—a traffic too great for the
-then existing means—the first line sprung up between Liverpool and
-Manchester. Next came the Grand Junction and the London and Birmingham
-(now merged in the London and North Western); afterwards the Great
-Western, the South Western, the South Eastern, the Eastern Counties,
-the Midland. Since then subsidiary lines and branches have occupied
-our capitalists. As they were quite certain to do, companies made
-first the most needed, and therefore the best paying, lines; under the
-same impulse that a labourer chooses high wages in preference to low.
-That government would have adopted a better order can hardly be, for
-the best has been followed; but that it would have adopted a worse,
-all the evidence we have goes to show. In default of materials {267}
-for a direct parallel, we might cite from India and the colonies,
-cases of injudicious road-making. Or, as exemplifying State-efforts to
-facilitate communication, we might dwell on the fact that while our
-rulers have sacrificed hundreds of lives and spent untold treasure in
-seeking a North-west passage, which would be useless if found, they
-have left the exploration of the Isthmus of Panama, and the making
-railways and canals through it, to private companies. But, not to make
-much of this indirect evidence, we will content ourselves with the one
-sample of a State-made channel for commerce, which we have at home—the
-Caledonian Canal. Up to the present time (1853), this public work has
-cost upwards of 1,100,000_l._ It has now been open for many years, and
-salaried emissaries have been constantly employed to get traffic for
-it. The results, as given in its forty-seventh annual report, issued
-in 1852, are—receipts during the year, 7,909_l._; expenditure ditto,
-9,261_l._—loss, 1,352_l._ Has any such large investment been made with
-such a pitiful result by a private canal company?
-
-And if a government is so bad a judge of the relative importance of
-social requirements, when these requirements are _of the same kind_,
-how worthless a judge must it be when they are of different kinds.
-If, where a fair share of intelligence might be expected to lead them
-right, legislators and their officers go so wrong, how terribly will
-they err where no amount of intelligence would suffice them,—where
-they must decide among hosts of needs, bodily, intellectual, and
-moral, which admit of no direct comparisons; and how disastrous must
-be the results if they act out their erroneous decisions. Should any
-one need this bringing home to him by an illustration, let him read
-the following extract from the last of the series of letters some time
-since published in the _Morning Chronicle_, on the state of agriculture
-in France. After expressing the opinion that French farming is some
-century behind English farming, the writer goes on to say:―
-
-  “There are two causes principally chargeable with this. In the first
- {268} place, strange as it may seem in a country in which two-thirds
- of the population are agriculturists, agriculture is a very unhonoured
- occupation. Develope in the slightest degree a Frenchman’s mental
- faculties, and he flies to a town as surely as steel filings fly to
- a loadstone. He has no rural tastes, no delight in rural habits. A
- French amateur farmer would indeed be a sight to see. Again, this
- national tendency is directly encouraged by the centralising system
- of government—by the multitude of officials, and by the payment of
- all functionaries. From all parts of France, men of great energy and
- resource struggle up, and fling themselves on the world of Paris.
- There they try to become great functionaries. Through every department
- of the eighty-four, men of less energy and resource struggle up to the
- _chef-lieu_—the provincial capital. There they try to become little
- functionaries. Go still lower—deal with a still smaller scale—and
- the result will be the same. As is the department to France, so
- is the arrondissement to the department, and the commune to the
- arrondissement. All who have, or think they have, heads on their
- shoulders, struggle into towns to fight for office. All who are, or
- are deemed by themselves or others, too stupid for anything else, are
- left at home to till the fields, and breed the cattle, and prune the
- vines, as their ancestors did for generations before them. Thus there
- is actually no intelligence left in the country. The whole energy, and
- knowledge, and resource of the land are barreled up in the towns. You
- leave one city, and in many cases you will not meet an educated or
- cultivated individual until you arrive at another—all between is utter
- intellectual barrenness.”—_Morning Chronicle._ August, 1851.
-
-To what end now is this constant abstraction of able men from rural
-districts? To the end that there may be enough functionaries to achieve
-those many desiderata which French governments have thought ought to
-be achieved—to provide amusements, to manage mines, to construct roads
-and bridges, to erect numerous buildings—to print books, encourage the
-fine arts, control this trade, and inspect that manufacture—to do all
-the hundred-and-one things which the State does in France. That the
-army of officers needed for this may be maintained, agriculture must go
-unofficered. That certain social conveniences may be better secured,
-the chief social necessity is neglected. The very basis of the national
-life is sapped, to gain a few non-essential advantages. Said we not
-truly, then, that until a requirement is spontaneously fulfilled, it
-should not be fulfilled at all?
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And here indeed we may recognise the close kinship {269} between the
-fundamental fallacy involved in these State-meddlings and the fallacy
-lately exploded by the free-trade agitation. These various law-made
-instrumentalities for effecting ends which might otherwise not yet be
-effected, all embody a subtler form of the protectionist hypothesis.
-The same short-sightedness which, looking at commerce, prescribed
-bounties and restrictions, looking at social affairs in general,
-prescribes these multiplied administrations; and the same criticism
-applies alike to all its proceedings.
-
-For was not the error that vitiated every law aiming at the artificial
-maintenance of a trade, substantially that which we have just been
-dwelling upon; namely, this overlooking of the fact that, in setting
-people to do one thing, some other thing is inevitably left undone? The
-statesmen who thought it wise to protect home-made silks against French
-silks, did so under the impression that the manufacture thus secured
-constituted a pure gain to the nation. They did not reflect that the
-men employed in this manufacture would otherwise have been producing
-something else—a something else which, as they could produce it without
-legal help, they could more profitably produce. Landlords who have
-been so anxious to prevent foreign wheat from displacing their own
-wheat, have never duly realized the fact that if their fields would not
-yield wheat so economically as to prevent the feared displacement, it
-simply proved that they were growing unfit crops in place of fit crops;
-and so working their land at a relative loss. In all cases where, by
-restrictive duties, a trade has been upheld that would otherwise not
-have existed, capital has been turned into a channel less productive
-than some other into which it would naturally have flowed. And so, to
-pursue certain State-patronized occupations, men have been drawn from
-more advantageous occupations.
-
-Clearly then, as above alleged, the same oversight runs through all
-these interferences; be they with commerce, or be they with other
-things. In employing people to achieve {270} this or that desideratum,
-legislators have not perceived that they were thereby preventing the
-achievement of some other desideratum. They have habitually assumed
-that each proposed good would, if secured, be a pure good, instead of
-being a good purchasable only by submission to some evil which would
-else have been remedied; and, making this error, have injuriously
-diverted men’s labour. As in trade, so in other things, labour will
-spontaneously find out, better than any government can find out for
-it, the things on which it may best expend itself. Rightly regarded,
-the two propositions are identical. This division into commercial and
-non-commercial affairs is quite a superficial one. All the actions
-going on in society come under the generalization—human effort
-ministering to human desire. Whether the ministration be effected
-through a process of buying and selling, or whether in any other way,
-matters not so far as the general law of it is concerned. In all cases
-it must be true that the stronger desires will get themselves satisfied
-before the weaker ones; and in all cases it must be true that to get
-satisfaction for the weaker ones before they would naturally have it,
-is to deny satisfaction to the stronger ones.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-To the immense positive evils entailed by over-legislation have to be
-added the equally great negative evils—evils which, notwithstanding
-their greatness, are scarcely at all recognized, even by the
-far-seeing. While the State does those things which it ought not to do,
-_as an inevitable consequence_, it leaves undone those things which it
-ought to do. Time and activity being limited, it necessarily follows
-that legislators’ sins of _commission_ entail sins of _omission_.
-Mischievous meddling involves disastrous neglect; and until statesmen
-are ubiquitous and omnipotent, must ever do so. In the very nature
-of things an agency employed for two purposes must fulfil both
-imperfectly; partly because, while fulfilling the one it cannot be
-fulfilling {271} the other, and partly because its adaptation to both
-ends implies incomplete fitness for either. As has been well said _à
-propos_ of this point,—“A blade which is designed both to shave and to
-carve, will certainly not shave so well as a razor or carve so well
-as a carving-knife. An academy of painting, which should also be a
-bank, would in all probability exhibit very bad pictures and discount
-very bad bills. A gas company, which should also be an infant-school
-society, would, we apprehend, light the streets ill, and teach the
-children ill.”[34] And if an institution undertakes, not two functions
-but a score—if a government, whose office it is to defend citizens
-against aggressors, foreign and domestic, engages also to disseminate
-Christianity, to administer charity, to teach children their lessons,
-to adjust prices of food, to inspect coal-mines, to regulate railways,
-to superintend house-building, to arrange cab-fares, to look into
-people’s stink-traps, to vaccinate their children, to send out
-emigrants, to prescribe hours of labour, to examine lodging-houses, to
-test the knowledge of mercantile captains, to provide public libraries,
-to read and authorize dramas, to inspect passenger-ships, to see that
-small dwellings are supplied with water, to regulate endless things
-from a banker’s issues down to the boat-fares on the Serpentine—is it
-not manifest that its primary duty must be ill-discharged in proportion
-to the multiplicity of affairs it busies itself with? Must not its
-time and energies be frittered away in schemes, and inquiries, and
-amendments, in discussions, and divisions, to the neglect of its
-essential business? And does not a glance over the debates make it
-clear that this is the fact? and that, while parliament and public are
-alike occupied with these mischievous interferences, these Utopian
-hopes, the one thing needful is left almost undone?
-
- [34] _Edinburgh Review_, April, 1839.
-
-See here, then, the proximate cause of our legal abominations. We drop
-the substance in our efforts to catch shadows. While our firesides,
-and clubs, and taverns are {272} filled with talk about corn-law
-questions, and church questions, and education questions, and poor-law
-questions—all of them raised by over-legislation—the justice question
-gets scarcely any attention; and we daily submit to be oppressed,
-cheated, robbed. This institution which should succour the man who
-has fallen among thieves, turns him over to solicitors, barristers,
-and a legion of law-officers; drains his purse for writs, briefs,
-affidavits, subpœnas, fees of all kinds and expenses innumerable;
-involves him in the intricacies of common courts, chancery courts,
-suits, counter-suits, and appeals; and often ruins where it should
-aid. Meanwhile, meetings are called, and leading articles written,
-and votes asked, and societies formed, and agitations carried on, not
-to rectify these gigantic evils, but partly to abolish our ancestors’
-mischievous meddlings and partly to establish meddlings of our own. Is
-it not obvious that this fatal neglect is a result of this mistaken
-officiousness? Suppose that external and internal protection had been
-the sole recognized functions of the ruling powers. Is it conceivable
-that our administration of justice would have been as corrupt as now?
-Can any one believe that had parliamentary elections been habitually
-contested on questions of legal reform, our judicial system would
-still have been what Sir John Romilly calls it,—“a technical system
-invented for the creation of costs?” Does any one suppose that, if
-the efficient defence of person and property had been the constant
-subject-matter of hustings pledges, we should yet be waylaid by a
-Chancery Court which has now more than two hundred millions of property
-in its clutches?—which keeps suits pending fifty years, until all the
-funds are gone in fees—which swallows in costs two millions annually?
-Dare any one assert that had constituencies been always canvassed
-on principles of law-reform versus law-conservatism, Ecclesiastical
-Courts would have continued for centuries fattening on the goods of
-widows and orphans? The questions are next to absurd. A child may {273}
-see that with the general knowledge people have of legal corruptions
-and the universal detestation of legal atrocities, an end would long
-since have been put to them, had the administration of justice always
-been _the_ political topic. Had not the public mind been constantly
-pre-occupied, it could never have been tolerated that a man neglecting
-to file an answer to a bill in due course, should be imprisoned
-fifteen years for contempt of court, as Mr. James Taylor was. It would
-have been impossible that, on the abolition of their sinecures, the
-sworn-clerks should have been compensated by the continuance of their
-exorbitant incomes, not only till death, but for seven years after,
-at a total estimated cost of £700,000. Were the State confined to its
-defensive and judicial functions, not only the people but legislators
-themselves would agitate against abuses. The sphere of activity and
-the opportunities for distinction being narrowed, all the thought,
-and industry, and eloquence which members of Parliament now expend on
-impracticable schemes and artificial grievances, would be expended in
-rendering justice pure, certain, prompt, and cheap. The complicated
-follies of our legal verbiage, which the uninitiated cannot understand
-and which the initiated interpret in various senses, would be quickly
-put an end to. We should no longer frequently hear of Acts of
-Parliament so bunglingly drawn up that it requires half a dozen actions
-and judges’ decisions under them, before even lawyers can say how they
-apply. There would be no such stupidly-designed measures as the Railway
-Winding-up Act, which, though passed in 1846 to close the accounts
-of the bubble schemes of the mania, leaves them still unsettled in
-1854—which, even with funds in hand, withholds payment from creditors
-whose claims have been years since admitted. Lawyers would no longer
-be suffered to maintain and to complicate the present absurd system
-of land titles, which, besides the litigation and loss it perpetually
-causes, lowers the value of estates, prevents the {274} ready
-application of capital to them, checks the development of agriculture,
-and thus hinders the improvement of the peasantry and the prosperity
-of the country. In short, the corruptions, follies, and terrors of law
-would cease; and that which men now shrink from as an enemy they would
-come to regard as what it purports to be—a friend.
-
-How vast then is the negative evil which, in addition to the positive
-evils before enumerated, this meddling policy entails on us! How many
-are the grievances men bear, from which they would otherwise be free!
-Who is there that has not submitted to injuries rather than run the
-risk of heavy law-costs? Who is there that has not abandoned just
-claims rather than “throw good money after bad?” Who is there that
-has not paid unjust demands rather than withstand the threat of an
-action? This man can point to property that has been alienated from
-his family from lack of funds or courage to fight for it. That man can
-name several relations ruined by a law-suit. Here is a lawyer who has
-grown rich on the hard earnings of the needy and the savings of the
-oppressed. There is a once wealthy trader who has been brought by legal
-iniquities to the workhouse or the lunatic asylum. The badness of our
-judicial system vitiates our whole social life: renders almost every
-family poorer than it would otherwise be; hampers almost every business
-transaction; inflicts daily anxieties on every trader. And all this
-loss of property, time, temper, comfort, men quietly submit to from
-being absorbed in the pursuit of schemes which eventually bring on them
-other mischiefs.
-
-Nay, the case is even worse. It is distinctly proveable that many of
-these evils about which outcries are raised, and to cure which special
-Acts of Parliament are loudly invoked, are themselves _produced_
-by our disgraceful judicial system. For example, it is well known
-that the horrors out of which our sanitary agitators make political
-capital, {275} are found in their greatest intensity on properties
-that have been for a generation in Chancery—are distinctly traceable
-to the ruin thus brought about; and would never have existed but for
-the infamous corruptions of law. Again, it has been shown that the
-long-drawn miseries of Ireland, which have been the subject of endless
-legislation, have been mainly produced by inequitable land-tenure
-and the complicated system of entail: a system which wrought such
-involvements as to prevent sales; which practically negatived all
-improvement; which brought landlords to the workhouse; and which
-required an Incumbered Estates Act to cut its gordian knots and render
-the proper cultivation of the soil possible. Judicial negligence, too,
-is the main cause of railway accidents. If the State would fulfil
-its true function, by giving passengers an easy remedy for breach of
-contract when trains are behind time, it would do more to prevent
-accidents than can be done by the minutest inspection or the most
-cunningly-devised regulations; for it is notorious that the majority
-of accidents are primarily caused by irregularity. In the case of bad
-house-building, also, it is obvious that a cheap, rigorous, and certain
-administration of justice, would make Building Acts needless. For is
-not the man who erects a house of bad materials ill put together, and,
-concealing these with papering and plaster, sells it as a substantial
-dwelling, guilty of fraud? And should not the law recognize this fraud
-as it does in the analogous case of an unsound horse? And if the
-legal remedy were easy, prompt, and sure, would not builders cease
-transgressing? So is it in other cases: the evils which men perpetually
-call on the State to cure by superintendence, themselves arise from
-non-performance of its original duty.
-
-See then how this vicious policy complicates itself. Not only does
-meddling legislation fail to cure the evils it aims at; not only does
-it make many evils worse; not only does it create new evils greater
-than the old; but while doing {276} this it entails on men the
-oppressions, robberies, ruin, which flow from the non-administration
-of justice. And not only to the positive evils does it add this vast
-negative one, but this again, by fostering many social abuses that
-would not else exist, furnishes occasions for more meddlings which
-again act and re-act in the same way. And thus as ever, “things bad
-begun make strong themselves by ill.”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-After assigning reasons thus fundamental, for condemning all
-State-action save that which universal experience has proved to be
-absolutely needful, it would seem superfluous to assign subordinate
-ones. Were it called for, we might, taking for text Mr. Lindsay’s work
-on “Navigation and Mercantile Marine Law,” say much upon the complexity
-to which this process of adding regulation to regulation—each
-necessitated by foregoing ones—ultimately leads: a complexity which, by
-the misunderstandings, delays, and disputes it entails, greatly hampers
-our social life. Something, too, might be added upon the perturbing
-effects of that “gross delusion,” as M. Guizot calls it, “a belief in
-the sovereign power of political machinery”—a delusion to which he
-partly ascribes the late revolution in France; and a delusion which
-is fostered by every new interference. But, passing over these, we
-would dwell for a short space upon the national enervation which this
-State-superintendence produces.
-
-The enthusiastic philanthropist, urgent for some act of parliament
-to remedy this evil or secure the other good, thinks it a trivial
-and far-fetched objection that the people will be morally injured by
-doing things for them instead of leaving them to do things themselves.
-He vividly conceives the benefit he hopes to get achieved, which is
-a positive and readily imaginable thing. He does not conceive the
-diffused, invisible, and slowly-accumulating effect wrought on the
-popular mind, and so does not believe in it; or, if he admits it,
-thinks it beneath consideration. Would he but {277} remember, however,
-that all national character is gradually produced by the daily action
-of circumstances, of which each day’s result seems so insignificant as
-not to be worth mentioning, he would perceive that what is trifling
-when viewed in its increments may be formidable when viewed in its
-total. Or if he would go into the nursery, and watch how repeated
-actions—each of them apparently unimportant,—create, in the end, a
-habit which will affect the whole future life; he would be reminded
-that every influence brought to bear on human nature tells, and, if
-continued, tells seriously. The thoughtless mother who hourly yields
-to the requests—“Mamma, tie my pinafore,” “Mamma, button my shoe,”
-and the like, cannot be persuaded that each of these concessions is
-detrimental; but the wiser spectator sees that if this policy be long
-pursued, and be extended to other things, it will end in inaptitude.
-The teacher of the old school who showed his pupil the way out of every
-difficulty, did not perceive that he was generating an attitude of
-mind greatly militating against success in life. The modern teacher,
-however, induces his pupil to solve his difficulties himself; believes
-that in so doing he is preparing him to meet the difficulties which,
-when he goes into the world, there will be no one to help him through;
-and finds confirmation for this belief in the fact that a great
-proportion of the most successful men are self-made. Well, is it not
-obvious that this relationship between discipline and success holds
-good nationally? Are not nations made of men; and are not men subject
-to the same laws of modification in their adult years as in their early
-years? Is it not true of the drunkard, that each carouse adds a thread
-to his bonds? of the trader, that each acquisition strengthens the
-wish for acquisitions? of the pauper, that the more you assist him the
-more he wants? of the busy man, that the more he has to do the more
-he can do? And does it not follow that if every individual is subject
-to this process of adaptation to conditions, a whole nation must be
-{278} so—that just in proportion as its members are little helped by
-extraneous power they will become self-helping, and in proportion as
-they are much helped they will become helpless? What folly is it to
-ignore these results because they are not direct, and not immediately
-visible. Though slowly wrought out they are inevitable. We can no
-more elude the laws of human development than we can elude the law of
-gravitation; and so long as they hold true must these effects occur.
-
-If we are asked in what special directions this alleged helplessness,
-entailed by much State-superintendence, shows itself; we reply
-that it is seen in a retardation of all social growths requiring
-self-confidence in the people—in a timidity that fears all difficulties
-not before encountered—in a thoughtless contentment with things as
-they are. Let any one, after duly watching the rapid evolution going
-on in England, where men have been comparatively little helped by
-governments—or better still, after contemplating the unparalleled
-progress of the United States, which is peopled by self-made men, and
-the recent descendants of self-made men;—let such an one, we say, go
-on to the Continent, and consider the relatively slow advance which
-things are there making; and the still slower advance they would
-make but for English enterprise. Let him go to Holland, and see that
-though the Dutch early showed themselves good mechanics, and have
-had abundant practice in hydraulics, Amsterdam has been without any
-due supply of water until now that works are being established by an
-English company. Let him go to Berlin, and there be told that, to give
-that city a water-supply such as London has had for generations, the
-project of an English firm is about to be executed by English capital,
-under English superintendence. Let him go to Vienna, and learn that
-it, in common with other continental cities, is lighted by an English
-gas-company. Let him go on the Rhone, on the Loire, on the Danube,
-and discover that Englishmen established steam {279} navigation on
-those rivers. Let him inquire concerning the railways in Italy, Spain,
-France, Sweden, Denmark, how many of them are English projects, how
-many have been largely helped by English capital, how many have been
-executed by English contractors, how many have had English engineers.
-Let him discover, too, as he will, that where railways have been
-government-made, as in Russia, the energy, the perseverance, and
-the practical talent developed in England and the United States
-have been called in to aid. And then if these illustrations of the
-progressiveness of a self-dependent race, and the torpidity of
-paternally-governed ones, do not suffice him, he may read Mr. Laing’s
-successive volumes of European travel, and there study the contrast
-in detail. What, now, is the cause of this contrast? In the order of
-nature, a capacity for self-help must in every case have been brought
-into existence by the practice of self-help; and, other things equal, a
-lack of this capacity must in every case have arisen from the lack of
-demand for it. Do not these two antecedents and their two consequents
-agree with the facts as presented in England and Europe? Were not the
-inhabitants of the two, some centuries ago, much upon a par in point
-of enterprise? Were not the English even behind in their manufactures,
-in their colonization, in their commerce? Has not the immense relative
-change the English have undergone in this respect, been coincident with
-the great relative self-dependence they have been since habituated
-to? And has not the one been caused by the other? Whoever doubts it,
-is asked to assign a more probable cause. Whoever admits it, must
-admit that the enervation of a people by perpetual State-aids is
-not a trifling consideration, but the most weighty consideration. A
-general arrest of national growth he will see to be an evil greater
-than any special benefits can compensate for. And, indeed, when, after
-contemplating this great fact, the overspreading of the Earth by the
-English, he remarks the {280} absence of any parallel achievement
-by a continental race—when he reflects how this difference must
-depend chiefly on difference of character, and how such difference of
-character has been mainly produced by difference of discipline; he will
-perceive that the policy pursued in this matter may have a large share
-in determining a nation’s ultimate fate.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-We are not sanguine, however, that argument will change the convictions
-of those who put their trust in legislation. With men of a certain
-order of thought the foregoing reasons will have weight. With men
-of another order of thought they will have little or none; nor
-would any accumulation of such reasons affect them. The truth that
-experience teaches, has its limits. The experiences which teach, must
-be experiences which can be appreciated; and experiences exceeding a
-certain degree of complexity become inappreciable to the majority.
-It is thus with most social phenomena. If we remember that for these
-two thousand years and more, mankind have been making regulations for
-commerce, which have all along been strangling some trades and killing
-others with kindness, and that though the proofs of this have been
-constantly before their eyes, they have only just discovered that they
-have been uniformly doing mischief—if we remember that even now only a
-small portion of them see this; we are taught that perpetually-repeated
-and ever-accumulating experiences will fail to teach, until there exist
-the mental conditions required for the assimilation of them. Nay, when
-they are assimilated, it is very imperfectly. The truth they teach is
-only half understood, even by those supposed to understand it best. For
-example, Sir Robert Peel, in one of his last speeches, after describing
-the immensely increased consumption consequent on free trade, goes on
-to say:―
-
-  “If, then, you can only continue that consumption—if, _by your
- legislation_, under the favour of Providence, _you can maintain the
- demand for labour and make your trade and manufactures prosperous_,
- you are not only increasing the {281} sum of human happiness, but are
- giving the agriculturists of this country the best chance of that
- increased demand which must contribute to their welfare.”—_Times_,
- Feb. 22, 1850.
-
-Thus the prosperity really due to the abandonment of all legislation,
-is ascribed to a particular kind of legislation. “_You_ can maintain
-the demand,” he says; “_you_ can make trade and manufactures
-prosperous;” whereas, the facts he quotes prove that they can do this
-only by doing nothing. The essential truth of the matter—that law had
-been doing immense harm, and that this prosperity resulted not from law
-but from the absence of law—is missed; and his faith in legislation in
-general, which should, by this experience, have been greatly shaken,
-seemingly remains as strong as ever. Here, again, is the House of
-Lords, apparently not yet believing in the relationship of supply and
-demand, adopting within these few weeks the standing order―
-
- “That before the first reading of any bill for making any work in the
- construction of which compulsory power is sought to take thirty houses
- or more inhabited by the labouring classes in any one parish or place,
- the promoters be required to deposit in the office of the clerk of
- the parliaments a statement of the number, description, and situation
- of the said houses, the number (so far as they can be estimated) of
- persons to be displaced, _and whether any and what provision is made
- in the bill for remedying the inconvenience likely to arise from such
- displacements_.”
-
-If, then, in the comparatively simple relationships of trade, the
-teachings of experience remain for so many ages unperceived, and are
-so imperfectly apprehended when they are perceived, it is scarcely
-to be hoped that where all social phenomena—moral, intellectual, and
-physical—are involved, any due appreciation of the truths displayed
-will presently take place. The facts cannot yet get recognized as
-facts. As the alchemist attributed his successive disappointments to
-some disproportion in the ingredients, some impurity, or some too
-great temperature, and never to the futility of his process or the
-impossibility of his aim; so, every failure of State-regulations
-the law-worshipper explains away as being caused by this trifling
-oversight, or that little {282} mistake: all which oversights and
-mistakes he assures you will in future be avoided. Eluding the facts
-as he does after this fashion, volley after volley of them produce no
-effect.
-
-Indeed this faith in governments is in a certain sense organic; and
-can diminish only by being outgrown. From the time when rulers were
-thought demi-gods, there has been a gradual decline in men’s estimates
-of their power. This decline is still in progress, and has still far
-to go. Doubtless, every increment of evidence furthers it in _some_
-degree, though not to the degree that at first appears. Only in so
-far as it modifies character does it produce a permanent effect. For
-while the mental type remains the same, the removal of a special error
-is inevitably followed by the growth of other errors of the same
-genus. All superstitions die hard; and we fear that this belief in
-government-omnipotence will form no exception.
-
-{283}
-
-
-
-
-REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT—WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR?
-
-[_First published in _The Westminster Review_ for October 1857._]
-
-
-Shakspeare’s simile for adversity―
-
- Which, like the toad, ugly and venomous,
- Wears yet a precious jewel in his head,
-
-might fitly be used also as a simile for a disagreeable truth.
-Repulsive as is its aspect, the hard fact which dissipates a cherished
-illusion, is presently found to contain the germ of a more salutary
-belief. The experience of every one furnishes instances in which an
-opinion long shrunk from as seemingly at variance with all that is
-good, but finally accepted as irresistible, turns out to be fraught
-with benefits. It is thus with self-knowledge: much as we dislike to
-admit our defects, we find it better to know and guard against than to
-ignore them. It is thus with changes of creed: alarming as looks the
-reasoning by which superstitions are overthrown, the convictions to
-which it leads prove to be healthier ones than those they superseded.
-And it is thus with political enlightenment: men eventually see cause
-to thank those who pull to pieces their political air-castles, hateful
-as they once seemed. Moreover, not only is it always better to believe
-truth than error; but the repugnant-looking facts are ever found to
-be parts of something far better than the ideal which they {284}
-dispelled. To the many illustrations of this which might be cited, we
-shall presently add another.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-It is a conviction almost universally entertained here in England,
-that our method of making and administering laws possesses every
-virtue. Prince Albert’s unlucky saying that “Representative Government
-is on its trial,” is vehemently repudiated: we consider that the
-trial has long since ended in our favour on all the counts. Partly
-from ignorance, partly from the bias of education, partly from that
-patriotism which leads the men of each nation to pride themselves in
-their own institutions, we have an unhesitating belief in the entire
-superiority of our form of political organization. Yet unfriendly
-critics can point out vices that are manifestly inherent. And if we
-may believe the defenders of despotism, these vices are fatal to its
-efficiency.
-
-Now instead of denying or blinking these allegations, it would
-be wiser candidly to inquire whether they are true; and if true,
-what they imply. If, as most of us are so confident, government by
-representatives is better than any other, we can afford to listen
-patiently to all adverse remarks: believing that they are either
-invalid, or that if valid they do not essentially tell against its
-merits. If our political system is well founded, this crucial criticism
-will serve but to bring out its worth more clearly than ever; and to
-give us higher conceptions of its nature, its meaning, its purpose. Let
-us, then, banishing for the nonce all prepossessions, and taking up a
-thoroughly antagonistic point of view, set down without mitigation its
-many flaws, vices, and absurdities.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Is it not manifest that a ruling body made up of many individuals,
-who differ in character, education, and aims, who belong to classes
-having antagonistic ideas and feelings, and who are severally swayed
-by the special {285} opinions of the districts deputing them, must
-be a cumbrous apparatus for the management of public affairs? When we
-devise a machine we take care that its parts are as few as possible;
-that they are adapted to their respective ends; that they are properly
-joined with one another; and that they work smoothly to their common
-purpose. Our political machine, however, is constructed upon directly
-opposite principles. Its parts are extremely numerous: multiplied,
-indeed, beyond all reason. They are not severally chosen as specially
-qualified for particular functions. No care is taken that they shall
-fit well together: on the contrary, our arrangements are such that
-they are certain not to fit. And that, as a consequence, they do not
-and cannot act in harmony, is a fact nightly demonstrated to all the
-world. In truth, had the problem been to find an appliance for the
-slow and bungling transaction of business, it could scarcely have been
-better solved. Immense hindrance results from the mere multiplicity of
-parts; a further immense hindrance results from their incongruity; yet
-another immense hindrance results from the frequency with which they
-are changed; while the greatest hindrance of all results from the want
-of subordination of the parts to their functions—from the fact that the
-personal welfare of the legislator is not bound up with the efficient
-performance of his political duty.
-
-These defects are inherent in the very nature of our institutions;
-and they cannot fail to produce disastrous mismanagement. If proofs
-be needed, they may be furnished in abundance, both from the current
-history of our central representative government, and from that of
-local ones, public and private. Let us, before going on to contemplate
-these evils as displayed on a great scale in our legislature, glance at
-some of them in their simpler and smaller manifestations.
-
-We will not dwell on the comparative inefficiency of deputed
-administration in mercantile affairs. The {286} untrustworthiness
-of directorial management might be afresh illustrated by the recent
-joint-stock-bank catastrophies: the recklessness and dishonesty of
-rulers whose interests are not one with those of the concern they
-control, being in these cases conspicuously displayed. Or we could
-enlarge on the same truth as exhibited in the doings of railway-boards:
-instancing the malversations proved against their members; the
-carelessness which has permitted Robson and Redpath frauds; the
-rashness perseveringly shown in making unprofitable branches and
-extensions. But facts of this kind are sufficiently familiar.
-
-Let us pass, then, to less notorious examples. Mechanics’ Institutions
-will supply our first. The theory of these is plausible enough.
-Artizans wanting knowledge, and benevolent middle-class people wishing
-to help them to it, constitute the raw material. By uniting their
-means they propose to obtain literary and other advantages, which
-else would be beyond their reach. And it is concluded that, being all
-interested in securing the proposed objects, and the governing body
-being chosen out of their number, the results cannot fail to be such as
-were intended. In most cases, however, the results are quite otherwise.
-Indifference, stupidity, party-spirit, and religious dissension,
-nearly always thwart the efforts of the promoters. It is thought good
-policy to select as president some local notability; probably not
-distinguished for wisdom, but whose donation or prestige more than
-counterbalances his defect in this respect. Vice-presidents are chosen
-with the same view: a clergyman or two; some neighbouring squires,
-if they can be had; an ex-mayor; several aldermen; half a dozen
-manufacturers and wealthy tradesmen; and a miscellaneous complement.
-While the committee, mostly elected more because of their position
-or popularity than their intelligence or fitness for co-operation,
-exhibit similar incongruities. Causes of dissension quickly arise. A
-book much wished for by the mass of the members, is tabooed, because
-{287} ordering it would offend the clerical party in the institution.
-Regard for the prejudices of certain magistrates and squires who figure
-among the vice-presidents, forbids the engagement of an otherwise
-desirable and popular lecturer, whose political and religious opinions
-are somewhat extreme. The selection of newspapers and magazines for
-the reading-room, is a fruitful source of disputes. Should some,
-thinking it would be a great boon to those for whom the institution
-was established, propose to open the reading-room on Sundays, there
-arises a violent fight; ending, perhaps, in the secession of some of
-the defeated party. The question of amusements, again, furnishes a bone
-of contention. Shall the institution exist solely for instruction, or
-shall it add gratification? The refreshment-question, also, is apt to
-be raised, and to add to the other causes of difference. In short,
-the stupidity, prejudice, party-spirit, and squabbling, are such as
-eventually to drive away in disgust those who should have been the
-administrators; and to leave the control in the hands of a clique, who
-pursue some humdrum middle course, satisfying nobody. Instead of that
-prosperity which would probably have been achieved under the direction
-of one good man-of-business, whose welfare was bound up with its
-success, the institution loses its prestige, and dwindles away: ceases
-almost entirely to be what was intended—a _mechanics_’ institution; and
-becomes little more than a middle-class lounge, kept up not so much by
-the permanent adhesion of its members, as by the continual addition of
-new ones in place of the old ones constantly falling off. Meanwhile,
-the end originally proposed is fulfilled, so far as it gets fulfilled
-at all, by private enterprise. Cheap newspapers and cheap periodicals,
-provided by publishers having in view the pockets and tastes of the
-working-classes; coffee-shops and penny reading-rooms, set up by men
-whose aim is profit; are the instruments of the chief proportion of
-such culture as is going on.
-
-In higher-class institutions of the same order—in Literary {288}
-Societies and Philosophical Societies, etc.—the like inefficiency of
-representative government is generally displayed. Quickly following
-the vigour of early enthusiasm, come class and sectarian differences,
-the final supremacy of a party, bad management, apathy. Subscribers
-complain they cannot get what they want; and one by one desert to
-private book-clubs or to Mudie.
-
-Turning from non-political to political institutions, we might, had
-we space, draw illustrations from the doings of the old poor-law
-authorities, or from those of modern boards of guardians; but omitting
-these and others such, we will, among local governments, confine
-ourselves to the reformed municipal corporations.
-
-If, leaving out of sight all other evidences, and forgetting that
-they are newly-organized bodies into which corruption has scarcely
-had time to creep, we were to judge of these municipal corporations
-by the town-improvements they have effected, we might pronounce
-them successful. But, even without insisting on the fact that such
-improvements are more due to the removal of obstructions, and to that
-same progressive spirit which has established railways and telegraphs,
-than to the positive virtues of these civic governments; it is to be
-remarked that the execution of numerous public works is by no means
-an adequate test. With power of raising funds limited only by a
-rebellion of ratepayers, it is easy in prosperous, increasing towns,
-to make a display of efficiency. The proper questions to be asked
-are:—Do municipal elections end in the choice of the fittest men who
-are to be found? Does the resulting administrative body, perform well
-and economically the work which devolves on it? And does it show
-sound judgment in refraining from needless or improper work? To these
-questions the answers are by no means satisfactory.
-
-Town-councils are not conspicuous for either intelligence or high
-character. There are competent judges who think that, on the average,
-their members are inferior to those of {289} the old corporations
-they superseded. As all the world knows, the elections turn mainly on
-political opinions. The first question respecting any candidate is,
-not whether he has great knowledge, judgment, or business-faculty—not
-whether he has any special aptitude for the duty to be discharged;
-but whether he is Whig or Tory. Even supposing his politics to be
-unobjectionable, his nomination still does not depend chiefly on his
-proved uprightness or capacity, but much more on his friendly relations
-with the dominant clique. A number of the town magnates, habitually
-meeting probably at the chief hotel, and there held together as much
-by the brotherhood of conviviality as by that of opinion, discuss the
-merits of all whose names are before the public, and decide which are
-the most suitable. This gin-and-water caucus it is which practically
-determines the choice of candidates; and, by consequence, the
-elections. Those who will succumb to leadership—those who will merge
-their private opinions in the policy of their party, of course have
-the preference. Men too independent for this—too far-seeing to join in
-the shibboleth of the hour, or too refined to mix with the “jolly good
-fellows” who thus rule the town, are shelved; notwithstanding that they
-are, above all others, fitted for office. Partly from this underhand
-influence, and partly from the consequent disgust which leads them
-to decline standing if asked, the best men are generally not in the
-governing body. It is notorious that in London the most respectable
-merchants will have nothing to do with the local government. And in
-New York, “the exertions of its better citizens are still exhausted
-in private accumulation, while the duties of administration are left
-to other hands,” It cannot then be asserted that in town-government,
-the representative system succeeds in bringing the ablest and most
-honourable men to the top.
-
-The efficient and economical discharge of duties is, of course,
-hindered by this inferiority of the deputies chosen; {290} and it
-is further hindered by the persistent action of party and personal
-motives. Not whether he knows well how to handle a level, but
-whether he voted for the popular candidate at the last parliamentary
-election, is the question on which may, and sometimes does, hang the
-choice of a town-surveyor; and if sewers are ill laid out, it is a
-natural consequence. When, a new public edifice having been decided
-on, competition designs are advertised for; and when the designs,
-ostensibly anonymous but really identifiable, have been sent in; T.
-Square, Esq., who has an influential relative in the corporation,
-makes sure of succeeding, and is not disappointed: albeit his plans
-are not those which would have been chosen by any one of the judges,
-had the intended edifice been his own. Brown, who has for many years
-been on the town-council and is one of the dominant clique, has a
-son who is a doctor; and when, in pursuance of an Act of Parliament,
-an officer of health is to be appointed, Brown privately canvasses
-his fellow-councillors, and succeeds in persuading them to elect his
-son; though his son is by no means the fittest man the place can
-furnish. Similarly with the choice of tradesmen to execute work for
-the town. A public clock which is frequently getting out of order, and
-Board-of-Health water-closets which disgust those who have them (we
-state facts), sufficiently testify that stupidity, favouritism, or
-some sinister influence, is ever causing mismanagement. The choice of
-inferior representatives, and by them of inferior _employés_, joined
-with private interest and divided responsibility, inevitably prevent
-the discharge of duties from being satisfactory.
-
-Moreover, the extravagance which is now becoming a notorious vice of
-municipal bodies, is greatly increased by the practice of undertaking
-things which they ought not to undertake; and the incentive to do this
-is, in many cases, traceable to the representative origin of the body.
-The system of compounding with landlords for municipal {291} rates,
-leads the lower class of occupiers into the erroneous belief that
-town-burdens do not fall in any degree on them; and they therefore
-approve of an expenditure which seemingly gives them gratis advantages
-while it creates employment. As they form the mass of the constituency,
-lavishness becomes a popular policy; and popularity-hunters vie with
-one another in bringing forward new and expensive projects. Here is
-a councillor who, having fears about his next election, proposes an
-extensive scheme for public gardens—a scheme which many who disapprove
-do not oppose, because they, too, bear in mind the next election. There
-is another councillor, who keeps a shop, and who raises and agitates
-the question of baths and wash-houses; very well knowing that his trade
-is not likely to suffer from such a course. And so in other cases:
-the small direct interest which each member of the corporation has in
-economical administration, is antagonized by so many indirect interests
-of other kinds, that he is not likely to be a good guardian of the
-public purse.
-
-Thus, neither in respect of the deputies chosen, nor the efficient
-performance of their work, nor the avoidance of unfit work, can
-the governments of our towns be held satisfactory. And if in these
-recently-formed bodies the defects are so conspicuous, still more
-conspicuous are they where they have had time to grow to their full
-magnitude: witness the case of New York. According to the _Times_
-correspondent in that city, the New York people pay “over a million
-and a half sterling, for which they have badly-paved streets, a police
-by no means as efficient as it should be, though much better than
-formerly, the greatest amount of dirt north of Italy, the poorest
-cab-system of any metropolis in the world, and only unsheltered wooden
-piers for the discharge of merchandize.”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now, having glanced at the general bearings of the question in
-these minor cases, let us take the major case of {292} our central
-government; and, in connexion with it, pursue the inquiry more closely.
-Here the inherent faults of the representative system are much more
-clearly displayed. The greater multiplicity of rulers involves greater
-cumbrousness, greater confusion, greater delay. Differences of class,
-of aims, of prejudices, are both larger in number and wider in degree;
-and hence arise dissensions still more multiplied. The direct effect
-which each legislator is likely to experience from the working of
-any particular measure, is usually very small and remote; while the
-indirect influences which sway him are, in this above all other cases,
-numerous and strong: whence follows a marked tendency to neglect
-public welfare for private advantage. But let us set out from the
-beginning—with the constituencies.
-
-The representative theory assumes that if a number of citizens,
-deeply interested as they all are in good government, are endowed
-with political power, they will choose the wisest and best men for
-governors. Seeing how greatly they suffer from bad administration of
-public affairs, it is considered self-evident that they must have
-the _will_ to select proper representatives; and it is taken for
-granted that average common sense gives the _ability_ to select proper
-representatives. How does experience bear out these assumptions? Does
-it not to a great degree negative them?
-
-Several considerable classes of electors have little or no _will_ in
-the matter. Not a few of those on the register pique themselves on
-taking no part in politics—claim credit for having the sense not to
-meddle with things which they say do not concern them. Many others
-there are whose interest in the choice of a member of Parliament is
-so slight, that they do not think it worth while to vote. A notable
-proportion, too, shopkeepers especially, care so little about the
-result, that their votes are determined by their wishes to please
-their chief patrons or to avoid offending them. In the minds of a
-yet larger class, small sums of money, or {293} even _ad libitum_
-supplies of beer, outweigh any desires they have to use their political
-powers independently. Those who adequately recognize the importance of
-honestly exercising their judgments in the selection of legislators,
-and who give conscientious votes, form but a minority; and the election
-usually hangs less upon their wills than upon the illegitimate
-influences which sway the rest. Here, therefore, the theory fails.
-
-Then, again, as to intelligence. Even supposing that the mass of
-electors have a sufficiently decided _will_ to choose the best rulers,
-what evidence have we of their _ability_? Is picking out the wisest
-man among them, a task within the range of their capacities? Let any
-one listen to the conversation of a farmer’s market-table, and then
-answer how much he finds of that wisdom which is required to discern
-wisdom in others. Or let him read the clap-trap speeches made from the
-hustings with a view of pleasing constituents, and then estimate the
-penetration of those who are to be thus pleased. Even among the higher
-order of electors he will meet with gross political ignorance—with
-notions that Acts of Parliament can do whatever it is thought well they
-should do; that the value of gold can be fixed by law; that distress
-can be cured by poor-laws; and so forth. If he descends a step, he will
-find in the still-prevalent ideas that machinery is injurious to the
-working-classes, and that extravagance is “good for trade,” indices
-of a yet smaller insight. And in the lower and larger class, formed
-by those who think that their personal interest in good government is
-not worth the trouble of voting, or is outbalanced by the loss of a
-customer, or is of less value than a bribe, he will perceive an almost
-hopeless stupidity. Without going the length of Mr. Carlyle, and
-defining the people as “twenty-seven millions, mostly fools,” he will
-confess that they are but sparely gifted with wisdom.
-
-That these should succeed in choosing the fittest {294} governors,
-would be strange; and that they do not so succeed is manifest. Even as
-judged by the most common-sense tests, their selections are absurd, as
-we shall shortly see.
-
-It is a self-evident truth that we may most safely trust those whose
-interests are identical with our own; and that it is very dangerous
-to trust those whose interests are antagonistic to our own. All
-the legal securities we take in our transactions with one another,
-are so many recognitions of this truth. We are not satisfied with
-_professions_. If another’s position is such that he must be liable
-to motives at variance with the promises he makes, we take care, by
-introducing an artificial motive (the dread of legal penalties), to
-make it his interest to fulfil these promises. Down to the asking for
-a receipt, our daily business-habits testify that, in consequence of
-the prevailing selfishness, it it extremely imprudent to expect men to
-regard the claims of others equally with their own: all asseverations
-of good faith notwithstanding. Now it might have been thought that
-even the modicum of sense possessed by the majority of electors,
-would have led them to recognize this fact in the choice of their
-representatives. But they show a total disregard of it. While the
-theory of our Constitution, in conformity with this same fact, assumes
-that the three divisions composing the Legislature will severally
-pursue each its own ends—while our history shows that Monarch, Lords,
-and Commons, _have_ all along more or less conspicuously done this;
-our electors manifest by their votes, the belief that their interests
-will be as well cared for by members of the titled class as by members
-of their own class. Though, in their determined opposition to the
-Reform-Bill, the aristocracy showed how greedy they were, not only of
-their legitimate power but of their illegitimate power—though, by the
-enactment and pertinacious maintenance of the Corn-Laws, they proved
-how little popular welfare weighed in the {295} scale against their
-own profits—though they have ever displayed a watchful jealousy even of
-their smallest privileges, whether equitable or inequitable (as witness
-the recent complaint in the House of Lords, that the Mercantile Marine
-Act calls on lords of manors to show their titles before they can claim
-the wrecks thrown on the shores of their estates, which before they
-had always done by prescription)—though they have habitually pursued
-that self-seeking policy which men so placed were sure to pursue;
-yet constituencies have decided that members of the aristocracy may
-fitly be chosen as representatives of the people. Our present House
-of Commons contains 98 Irish peers and sons of English peers; 66
-blood-relations of peers; and 67 connexions of peers by marriage: in
-all, 231 members whose interests, or sympathies, or both, are with the
-nobility rather than the commonalty. We are quite prepared to hear the
-doctrine implied in this criticism condemned by rose-water politicians
-as narrow and prejudiced. To such we simply reply that they and their
-friends fully recognize this doctrine when it suits them to do so. Why
-do they wish to prevent the town-constituencies from predominating
-over the county-ones; if they do not believe that each division of the
-community will consult its own welfare? Or what plea can there be for
-Lord John Russell’s proposal to represent minorities, unless it be the
-plea that those who have the opportunity will sacrifice the interests
-of others to their own? Or how shall we explain the anxiety of the
-upper class, to keep a tight rein on the growing power of the lower
-class, save from their consciousness that _bonâ fide_ representatives
-of the lower class would be less regardful of their privileges than
-they are themselves? If there be any reason in the theory of the
-Constitution, then, while the members of the House of Peers should
-belong to the peerage, the members of the House of Commons should
-belong to the commonalty. Either the constitutional theory is sheer
-nonsense, or else {296} the choice of lords as representatives of the
-people proves the folly of constituencies.
-
-But this folly by no means ends here: it works out other results quite
-as absurd. What should we think of a man giving his servants equal
-authority with himself over the affairs of his household? Suppose
-the shareholders in a railway-company were to elect, as members of
-their board of directors, the secretary, engineer, superintendent,
-traffic-manager, and others such. Should we not be astonished at
-their stupidity? Should we not prophesy that the private advantage of
-officials would frequently override the welfare of the company? Yet our
-parliamentary electors commit a blunder of just the same kind. For what
-are military and naval officers but servants of the nation; standing to
-it in a relation like that in which the officers of a railway-company
-stand to the company? Do they not perform public work? do they not
-take public pay? And do not their interests differ from those of the
-public, as the interests of the employed from those of the employer?
-The impropriety of admitting executive agents of the State into the
-Legislature, has over and over again thrust itself into notice; and
-in minor cases has been prevented by sundry Acts of Parliament.
-Enumerating those disqualified for the House of Commons, Blackstone
-says―
-
- “No persons concerned in the management of any duties or taxes created
- since 1692, except the commissioners of the treasury, nor any of the
- officers following, _viz._ commissioners of prizes, transports, sick
- and wounded, wine licences, navy, and victualling; secretaries or
- receivers of prizes; comptrollers of the army accounts; agents for
- regiments; governors of plantations, and their deputies; officers of
- Minorca or Gibraltar; officers of the excise and customs; clerks and
- deputies in the several offices of the treasury, exchequer, navy,
- victualling, admiralty, pay of the army and navy, secretaries of
- state, salt, stamps, appeals, wine licences, hackney coaches, hawkers
- and pedlars, nor any persons that hold any new office under the crown
- created since 1705, are capable of being elected, or sitting as
- members.”
-
-In which list naval and military officers would doubtless have been
-included, had they not always been too powerful a body and too closely
-identified with the dominant classes. {297} Glaring, however, as
-is the impolicy of appointing public servants to make the laws;
-and clearly as this impolicy is recognized in the above-specified
-exclusions from time to time enacted; the people at large seem totally
-oblivious of it. At the last general election they returned 9 naval
-officers, 46 military officers, and 51 retired military officers,
-who, in virtue of education, friendship, and _esprit de corps_, take
-the same views with their active comrades—in all 106: not including
-64 officers of militia and yeomanry, whose sympathies and ambitions
-are in a considerable degree the same. If any one thinks that this
-large infusion of officialism is of no consequence, let him look in
-the division-lists. Let him inquire how much it has had to do with the
-maintenance of the purchase-system. Let him ask whether the almost
-insuperable obstacles to the promotion of the private soldier, have
-not been strengthened by it. Let him see what share it had in keeping
-up those worn-out practices, and forms, and mis-arrangements, which
-entailed the disasters of our late war. Let him consider whether the
-hushing-up of the Crimean Inquiry and the whitewashing of delinquents
-were not aided by it. Yet, though abundant experience thus confirms
-what common sense would beforehand have predicted; and though,
-notwithstanding the late disasters, exposures, and public outcry for
-army-reform, the influence of the military caste is so great that the
-reform has been staved-off; our constituencies are stupid enough to
-send to Parliament as many military officers as ever!
-
-Not even now have we reached the end of these impolitic selections.
-The general principle on which we have been insisting, and which is
-recognized by expounders of the constitution when they teach that
-the legislative and executive divisions of the Government should be
-distinct—this general principle is yet further sinned against; though
-not in so literal a manner. For though they do not take State-pay, and
-are not nominally Government-officers, yet, {298} practically, lawyers
-are members of the executive organization. They form an important part
-of the apparatus for the administration of justice. By the working of
-this apparatus they make their profits; and their welfare depends on
-its being so worked as to bring them profits, rather than on its being
-so worked as to administer justice. Exactly as military officers have
-interests distinct from, and often antagonistic to, the efficiency
-of the army; so, barristers and solicitors have interests distinct
-from, and often antagonistic to, the cheap and prompt enforcement of
-the law. And that they are habitually swayed by these antagonistic
-interests, is notorious. So strong is the bias, as sometimes even
-to destroy the power of seeing from any other than the professional
-stand-point. We have ourselves heard a lawyer declaiming on the damage
-which the County-Courts-Act had done to the profession; and expecting
-his non-professional hearers to join him in condemning it there-for!
-And if, as all the world knows, the legal conscience is not of the
-tenderest, is it wise to depute lawyers to frame the laws which they
-will be concerned in carrying out; and the carrying out of which must
-affect their private incomes? Are barristers, who constantly take fees
-for work which they do not perform, and attorneys, whose bills are so
-often exorbitant that a special office has been established for taxing
-them—are these, of all others, to be trusted in a position which would
-be trying even to the most disinterested? Nevertheless, the towns and
-counties of England have returned to the present House of Commons 98
-lawyers—some 60 of them in actual practice, and the rest retired,
-but doubtless retaining those class-views acquired during their
-professional careers.
-
-These criticisms on the conduct of constituencies do not necessarily
-commit us to the assertion that _none_ belonging to the official and
-aristocratic classes ought to be chosen. Though it would be safer to
-carry out, in these important {299} cases, the general principle
-which, as above shown, Parliament has itself recognized and enforced
-in unimportant cases; yet we are not prepared to say that occasional
-exceptions might not be made, on good cause being shown. All we aim
-to show is the gross impolicy of selecting so large a proportion of
-representatives from classes having interests different from those of
-the general public. That in addition to more than a third taken from
-the dominant class, who already occupy one division of the Legislature,
-the House of Commons should contain nearly another third taken from
-the naval, military, and legal classes, whose policy, like that of
-the dominant class, is to maintain things as they are; we consider a
-decisive proof of electoral misjudgment. That out of the 654 members,
-of which the People’s House now consists, there should be but 250 who,
-as considered from a class point of view, are eligible, or tolerably
-eligible (for we include a considerable number who are more or less
-objectionable), is significant of anything but popular good sense. That
-into an assembly established to protect their interests, the commonalty
-of England should have sent one-third whose interests are the same as
-their own, and two-thirds whose interests are at variance with their
-own, proves a scarcely credible lack of wisdom; and seems an awkward
-fact for the representative theory.
-
-If the intelligence of the mass is thus not sufficient even to choose
-out men who by position and occupation are fit representatives,
-still less is it sufficient to choose out men who are the fittest
-in character and capacity. To see who will be liable to the bias
-of private advantage is a very easy thing; to see who is wisest is
-a very difficult thing; and those who do not succeed in the first
-must necessarily fail in the last. The higher the wisdom the more
-incomprehensible does it become by ignorance. It is a manifest fact
-that the popular man or writer, is always one who is but little in
-advance of the mass, and consequently {300} understandable by them:
-never the man who is far in advance of them and out of their sight.
-Appreciation of another implies some community of thought. “Only the
-man of worth can recognize worth in men. . . . . . The worthiest, if he
-appealed to universal suffrage, would have but a poor chance. . . . . .
-Alas! Jesus Christ, asking the Jews what _he_ deserved—was not the
-answer, Death on the gallows!” And though men do not now-a-days stone
-the prophet, they, at any rate, ignore him. As Mr. Carlyle says in his
-vehement way―
-
- “If of ten men nine are recognisable as fools, which is a common
- calculation, how, . . . in the name of wonder, will you ever get a
- ballot-box to grind you out a wisdom from the votes of these ten men?
- . . . . . I tell you a million blockheads looking authoritatively into
- one man of what you call genius, or noble sense, will make nothing but
- nonsense out of him and his qualities, and his virtues and defects, if
- they look till the end of time.”
-
-So that, even were electors content to choose the man proved by general
-evidence to be the most far-seeing, and refrained from testing him
-by the coincidence of his views with their own, there would be small
-chance of their hitting on the best. But judging of him, as they do, by
-asking him whether he thinks this or that crudity which they think, it
-is manifest that they will fix on one far removed from the best. Their
-deputy will be truly representative;—representative, that is, of the
-average stupidity.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now let us look at the assembly of representatives thus chosen.
-Already we have noted the unfit composition of this assembly as
-respects the interests of its members; and we have just seen what the
-representative theory itself implies as to their intelligence. Let us
-now, however, consider them more nearly under this last head.
-
-And first, what is the work they undertake? Observe, we do not say the
-work which they _ought_ to do, but the work which they _propose_ to do,
-and _try_ to do. This comprehends the regulation of nearly all actions
-going on throughout society. Besides devising measures to prevent {301}
-the aggression of citizens on one another, and to secure each the
-quiet possession of his own; and besides assuming the further function,
-also needful in the present state of mankind, of defending the nation
-as a whole against invaders; they unhesitatingly take on themselves
-to provide for countless wants, to cure countless ills, to oversee
-countless affairs. Out of the many beliefs men have held respecting
-God, Creation, the Future, etc., they presume to decide which are
-true; and authorize an army of priests to perpetually repeat them to
-the people. The distress resulting from improvidence, they undertake
-to remove: they settle the minimum which each ratepayer shall give
-in charity, and how the proceeds shall be administered. Judging that
-emigration will not naturally go on fast enough, they provide means for
-carrying off some of the labouring classes to the colonies. Certain
-that social necessities will not cause a sufficiently rapid spread
-of knowledge, and confident that they know what knowledge is most
-required, they use public money for the building of schools and paying
-of teachers; they print and publish State-school-books; they employ
-inspectors to see that their standard of education is conformed to.
-Playing the part of doctor, they insist that every one shall use their
-specific, and escape the danger of small-pox by submitting to an attack
-of cow-pox. Playing the part of moralist, they decide which dramas are
-fit to be acted and which are not. Playing the part of artist, they
-prompt the setting up of drawing-schools, provide masters and models;
-and, at Marlborough House, enact what shall be considered good taste
-and what bad. Through their lieutenants, the corporations of towns,
-they furnish appliances for the washing of peoples’ skins and clothes;
-they, in some cases, manufacture gas and put down water-pipes; they lay
-out sewers and cover over cess-pools; they establish public libraries
-and make public gardens. Moreover, they determine how houses shall be
-built, and what is a safe construction for a ship; they take measures
-for the {302} security of railway-travelling; they fix the hour
-after which public-houses may not be open; they regulate the prices
-chargeable by vehicles plying in the London streets; they inspect
-lodging-houses; they arrange for burial-grounds; they fix the hours
-of factory hands. If some social process does not seem to them to be
-going on fast enough, they stimulate it; where the growth is not in the
-direction which they think most desirable, they alter it; and so they
-seek to realize some undefined ideal community.
-
-Such being the task undertaken, what, let us ask, are the
-qualifications for discharging it? Supposing it possible to achieve
-all this, what must be the knowledge and capacities of those who
-shall achieve it? Successfully to prescribe for society, it is
-needful to know the structure of society—the principles on which
-it is organized—the natural laws of its progress. If there be not
-a true understanding of what constitutes social development, there
-must necessarily be grave mistakes made in checking these changes and
-fostering those. If there be lack of insight respecting the mutual
-dependence of the many functions which, taken together, make up the
-national life, unforeseen disasters will ensue from not perceiving
-how an interference with one will affect the rest. That is to say,
-there must be a due acquaintance with the social science—the science
-involving all others; the science standing above all others in
-complexity.
-
-And now, how far do our legislators possess this qualification? Do
-they in any moderate degree display it? Do they make even a distant
-approximation to it? That many of them are very good classical scholars
-is beyond doubt: not a few have written first-rate Latin verses, and
-can enjoy a Greek play; but there is no obvious relation between a
-memory well stocked with the words spoken two thousand years ago,
-and an understanding disciplined to deal with modern society. That
-in learning the languages of the past they have learnt some of its
-history, is true; but considering that this history is mainly a {303}
-narrative of battles and plots and negociations and treacheries, it
-does not throw much light on social philosophy—not even the simplest
-principles of political economy have ever been gathered from it. We
-do not question, either, that a moderate per centage of members of
-Parliament are fair mathematicians; and that mathematical discipline
-is valuable. As, however, political problems are not susceptible of
-mathematical analysis, their studies in this direction cannot much aid
-them in legislation. To the large body of military officers who sit as
-representatives, we would not for a moment deny a competent knowledge
-of fortification, of strategy, of regimental discipline; but we do not
-see that these throw much light on the causes and cure of national
-evils. Indeed, considering that war fosters anti-social sentiments,
-and that the government of soldiers is necessarily despotic, military
-education and habits are more likely to unfit than to fit men for
-regulating the doings of a free people. Extensive acquaintance with
-the laws, may doubtless be claimed by the many barristers chosen by
-our constituencies; and this seems a kind of information having some
-relation to the work to be done. Unless, however, this information
-is more than technical—unless it is accompanied by knowledge of the
-ramified consequences which laws have produced in times past and are
-producing now (which nobody will assert), it cannot give much insight
-into Social Science. A familiarity with laws is no more a preparation
-for rational legislation, than would a familiarity with all the
-nostrums men have ever used be a preparation for the rational practice
-of medicine. Nowhere, then, in our representative body, do we find
-appropriate culture. Here is a clever novelist, and there a successful
-maker of railways; this member has acquired a large fortune in trade,
-and that member is noted as an agricultural improver; but none of
-these achievements imply fitness for controlling and adjusting social
-processes. Among the many who have passed through the public {304}
-school and university _curriculum_—including though they may a few
-Oxford double-firsts and one or two Cambridge wranglers—there are none
-who have received the discipline required by the true legislator. None
-have that competent knowledge of Science in general, culminating in
-the Science of Life, which can alone form a basis for the Science of
-Society. For it is one of those open secrets which seem the more secret
-because they are so open, that all phenomena displayed by a nation are
-phenomena of Life, and are dependent on the laws of Life. There is
-no growth, decay, evil, improvement, or change of any kind, going on
-in the body politic, but what has its cause in the actions of human
-beings; and there are no actions of human beings but what conform to
-the laws of Life in general, and cannot be truly understood until those
-laws are understood.
-
-See, then, the immense incongruity between the end and the means. See
-on the one hand the countless difficulties of the task; and on the
-other hand the almost total unpreparedness of those who undertake
-it. Need we wonder that legislation is ever breaking down? Is it
-not natural that complaint, amendment, and repeal, should form the
-staple business of every session? Is there anything more than might be
-expected in the absurd Jack-Cadeisms which disgrace the debates? Even
-without setting up so high a standard of qualification as that above
-specified, the unfitness of most representatives for their duties is
-abundantly manifest. You need but glance over the miscellaneous list
-of noblemen, baronets, squires, merchants, barristers, engineers,
-soldiers, sailors, railway-directors, etc., and then ask what training
-their previous lives have given them for the intricate business of
-legislation, to see at once how extreme must be the incompetence. One
-would think that the whole system had been framed on the sayings of
-some political Dogberry:—“The art of healing is difficult; the art of
-government easy. The understanding of {305} arithmetic comes by study;
-while the understanding of society comes by instinct. Watchmaking
-requires a long apprenticeship; but there needs none for the making
-of institutions. To manage a shop properly requires teaching; but the
-management of a people may be undertaken without preparation.” Were
-we to be visited by some wiser Gulliver, or, as in the “Micromegas”
-of Voltaire, by some inhabitant of another sphere, his account of our
-political institutions might run somewhat as follows:―
-
-“I found that the English were governed by an assembly of men, said to
-embody the ‘collective wisdom.’ This assembly, joined with some other
-authorities which seem practically subordinate to it, has unlimited
-power. I was much perplexed by this. With us it is customary to define
-the office of any appointed body; and, above all things, to see that
-it does not defeat the ends for which it was appointed. But both the
-theory and the practice of this English Government imply that it may do
-whatever it pleases. Though, by their current maxims and usages, the
-English recognize the right of property as sacred—though the infraction
-of it is considered by them one of the gravest crimes—though the laws
-profess to be so jealous of it as to punish even the stealing of a
-turnip; yet their legislators suspend it at will. They take the money
-of citizens for any project which they choose to undertake; though
-such project was not in the least contemplated by those who gave them
-authority—nay, though the greater part of the citizens from whom the
-money is taken had no share in giving them such authority. Each citizen
-can hold property only so long as the 654 deputies do not want it. It
-seemed to me that an exploded doctrine once current among them of ‘the
-divine right of kings,’ had simply been changed into the divine right
-of Parliaments.
-
-“I was at first inclined to think that the constitution of things
-on the Earth was totally different from what it is with us; for the
-current political philosophy here, implies {306} that acts are not
-right or wrong in themselves but are made one or the other by the votes
-of law-makers. In our world it is considered manifest that if a number
-of beings live together, there must, in virtue of their natures, be
-certain primary conditions on which only they can work satisfactorily
-in concert; and we infer that the conduct which breaks through these
-conditions is bad. In the English legislature, however, a proposal to
-regulate conduct by any such abstract standard would be held absurd.
-I asked one of their members of Parliament whether a majority of the
-House could legitimize murder. He said, No. I asked him whether it
-could sanctify robbery. He thought not. But I could not make him see
-that if murder and robbery are intrinsically wrong, and not to be made
-right by decisions of statesmen, that similarly _all_ actions must be
-either right or wrong, apart from the authority of the law; and that if
-the right and wrong of the law are not in harmony with this intrinsic
-right and wrong, the law itself is criminal. Some, indeed, among the
-English think as we do. One of their remarkable men (_not_ included in
-their Assembly of Notables) writes thus:―
-
- “‘To ascertain better and better what the will of the Eternal was
- and is with us, what the laws of the Eternal are, all Parliaments,
- Ecumenic Councils, Congresses, and other Collective Wisdoms, have
- had this for their object. . . . . Nevertheless, in the inexplicable
- universal votings and debatings of these Ages, an idea or rather a
- dumb presumption to the contrary has gone idly abroad; and at this
- day, over extensive tracts of the world, poor human beings are to be
- found, whose practical belief it is that if we “vote” this or that,
- so this or that will thenceforth _be_. . . . . Practically, men have
- come to imagine that the Laws of this Universe, like the laws of
- constitutional countries, are decided by voting. . . . It is an idle
- fancy. The Laws of this Universe, of which if the Laws of England are
- not an exact transcript, they should passionately study to become
- such, are fixed by the everlasting congruity of things, and are not
- fixable or changeable by voting!’
-
-“But I find that, contemptuously disregarding all such protests, the
-English legislators persevere in their hyperatheistic notion, that an
-Act of Parliament duly enforced by State-officers, will work out any
-object: no question being {307} put whether Laws of Nature permit.
-I forgot to ask whether they considered that different kinds of food
-could be made wholesome or unwholesome by State-decree.
-
-“One thing that struck me was the curious way in which the members of
-their House of Commons judge of one another’s capacities. Many who
-expressed opinions of the crudest kinds, or trivial platitudes, or
-worn-out superstitions, were civilly treated. Follies as great as that
-but a few years since uttered by one of their ministers, who said that
-free-trade was contrary to common sense, were received in silence. But
-I was present when one of their number, who, as I thought, was speaking
-very rationally, made a mistake in his pronunciation—made what they
-call a wrong quantity; and immediately there arose a shout of derision.
-It seemed quite tolerable that a member should know little or nothing
-about the business he was there to transact; but quite intolerable that
-he should be ignorant on a point of no moment.
-
-“The English pique themselves on being especially practical—have a
-great contempt for theorizers, and profess to be guided exclusively
-by facts. Before making or altering a law it is the custom to appoint
-a committee of inquiry, who send for men able to give information
-concerning the matter in hand, and ask them some thousands of
-questions. These questions, and the answers given to them, are printed
-in large books, and distributed among the members of the Houses of
-Parliament; and I was told that they spent about £100,000 a year in
-thus collecting and distributing evidence. Nevertheless, it appeared
-to me that the ministers and representatives of the English people,
-pertinaciously adhere to theories long ago disproved by the most
-conspicuous facts. They pay great respect to petty details of evidence,
-but of large truths they are quite regardless. Thus, the experience
-of age after age has shown that their state-management is almost
-invariably bad. The national estates are so miserably administered as
-often to bring loss {308} instead of gain. The government ship-yards
-are uniformly extravagant and inefficient. The judicial system works
-so ill that most citizens will submit to serious losses rather than
-run risks of being ruined by law-suits. Countless facts prove the
-Government to be the worst owner, the worst manufacturer, the worst
-trader: in fact, the worst manager, be the thing managed what it may.
-But though the evidence of this is abundant and conclusive—though,
-during a recent war, the bunglings of officials were as glaring and
-multitudinous as ever; yet the belief that any proposed duties will
-be satisfactorily discharged by a new public department appointed to
-them, seems not a whit the weaker. Legislators, thinking themselves
-practical, cling to the plausible theory of an officially-regulated
-society, spite of overwhelming evidence that official regulation
-perpetually fails.
-
-“Nay, indeed, the belief seems to gain strength among these fact-loving
-English statesmen, notwithstanding the facts are against it. Proposals
-for State-control over this and the other, have been of late more rife
-than ever. And, most remarkable of all, their representative assembly
-lately listened with grave faces to the assertion, made by one of their
-high authorities, that State-workshops are more economical than private
-workshops. Their prime minister, in defending a recently-established
-arms-factory, actually told them that, at one of their arsenals,
-certain missiles of war were manufactured not only better than by the
-trade, but at about one-third the price; and added, ‘_so it would be in
-all things_.’ The English being a trading people, who must be tolerably
-familiar with the usual rates of profit among manufacturers, and the
-margin for possible economy, the fact that they should have got for
-their chief representative one so utterly in the dark on these matters,
-struck me as a wonderful result of the representative system.
-
-“I did not inquire much further, for it was manifest that {309} if
-these were really their wisest men, the English were not a wise people.”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Representative government, then, cannot be called a success, in so far
-as the choice of men is concerned. Those it puts into power are the
-fittest neither in respect of their interests, nor their culture, nor
-their wisdom. And as a consequence, partly of this and partly of its
-complex and cumbrous nature, representative government is anything
-but efficient for administrative purposes. In these respects it is
-manifestly inferior to monarchical government. This has the advantage
-of simplicity, which is always conducive to efficiency. And it has the
-further advantage that the power is in the hands of one who is directly
-concerned in the good management of national affairs; seeing that the
-continued maintenance of his power—nay, often his very life—depends
-on this. For his own sake a monarch chooses the wisest councillors he
-can find, regardless of class-distinctions. His interest in getting
-the best help is too great to allow of prejudices standing between
-him and a far-seeing man. We see this abundantly illustrated. Did not
-the kings of France take Richelieu, and Mazarin, and Turgot to assist
-them? Had not Henry VIII. his Wolsey, Elizabeth her Burleigh, James his
-Bacon, Cromwell his Milton? And were not these men of greater calibre
-than those who hold the reins under our constitutional _régime?_ So
-strong is the motive of an autocrat to make use of ability wherever it
-exists, that he will, like Louis XI., take even his barber into council
-if he finds him a clever fellow. Besides choosing them for ministers
-and advisers, he seeks out the most competent men for other offices.
-Napoleon raised his marshals from the ranks; and owed his military
-success in great part to the readiness with which he saw and availed
-himself of merit wherever found. We have recently seen in Russia how
-prompt was the recognition and promotion of engineering talent in
-the case of Todleben; and know to {310} our cost how greatly the
-prolonged defence of Sebastopol was due to this. In the marked contrast
-to these cases supplied by our own army, in which genius is ignored
-while muffs are honoured—in which wealth and caste make the advance
-of plebeian merit next to impossible—in which jealousies between
-Queen’s service and Company’s service render the best generalship
-almost unavailable; we see that the representative system fails in
-the officering of its executive, as much as in the officering of its
-legislative. A striking antithesis between the actions of the two forms
-of government, is presented in the evidence given before the Sebastopol
-Committee respecting the supply of huts to the Crimean army—evidence
-showing that while, in his negotiations with the English Government,
-the contractor for the huts met with nothing but vacillation, delay,
-and official rudeness, the conduct of the French Government was
-marked by promptitude, decision, sound judgment, and great civility.
-Everything goes to show that for administrative efficiency, autocratic
-power is the best. If your aim is a well-organized army—if you want
-to have sanitary departments, and educational departments, and
-charity-departments, managed in a business-like way—if you would have
-society actively regulated by staffs of State-agents; then by all means
-choose that system of complete centralization which we call despotism.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Probably, notwithstanding the hints dropped at the outset, most have
-read the foregoing pages with surprise. Very likely some have referred
-to the cover of the _Review_, to see whether they have not, in mistake,
-taken up some other than the “_Westminster_;” while some may, perhaps,
-have accompanied their perusal by a running commentary of epithets
-condemnatory of our seeming change of principles. Let them not be
-alarmed. We have not in the least swerved from the confession of faith
-set forth in our prospectus. On the contrary, as we shall shortly show,
-{311} our adhesion to free institutions is as strong as ever—nay, has
-even gained strength through this apparently antagonistic criticism.
-
-The subordination of a nation to a man, is not a wholesome but a
-vicious state of things: needful, indeed, for a vicious humanity; but
-to be outgrown as fast as may be. The instinct which makes it possible
-is anything but a noble one. Call it “hero-worship,” and it looks
-respectable. Call it what it is—a blind awe and fear of power, no
-matter of what kind, but more especially of the brutal kind; and it is
-by no means to be admired. Watch it in early ages deifying the cannibal
-chief; singing the praises of the successful thief; commemorating the
-most blood-thirsty warriors; speaking with reverence of those who had
-shown undying revenge; and erecting altars to such as carried furthest
-the vices which disgrace humanity; and the illusion disappears. Read
-how, where it was strongest, it immolated crowds of victims at the tomb
-of the dead king—how, at the altars raised to its heroes, it habitually
-sacrificed prisoners and children to satisfy their traditional appetite
-for human flesh—how it produced that fealty of subjects to rulers which
-made possible endless aggressions, battles, massacres, and horrors
-innumerable—how it has mercilessly slain those who would not lick the
-dust before its idols;—read all this, and the feeling no longer seems
-so worthy an one. See it in later days idealizing the worst as well
-as the best monarchs; receiving assassins with acclamation; hurrahing
-before successful treachery; rushing to applaud the processions and
-shows and ceremonies wherewith effete power strengthens itself;
-and it looks far from laudable. Autocracy presupposes inferiority
-of nature on the part of both ruler and subject: on the one side a
-cold, unsympathetic sacrificing of other’s wills to self-will; on the
-other side a mean, cowardly abandonment of the claims of manhood.
-Our very language {312} bears testimony to this. Do not _dignity_,
-_independence_, and other words of approbation, imply a nature at
-variance with this relation? Are not _tyrannical_, _arbitrary_,
-_despotic_, epithets of reproach? and are not _truckling_, _fawning_,
-_cringing_, epithets of contempt? Is not _slavish_ a condemnatory
-term? Does not _servile_, that is, serf-like, imply littleness,
-meanness? And has not the word _villain_, which originally meant
-bondsman, come to signify everything which is hateful? That language
-should thus inadvertently embody dislike for those who most display
-the instinct of subordination, is alone sufficient proof that this
-instinct is associated with evil dispositions. It has been the parent
-of countless crimes. It is answerable for the torturing and murder of
-the noble-minded who would not submit—for the horrors of Bastiles and
-Siberias. It has ever been the represser of knowledge, of free thought,
-of true progress. In all times it has fostered the vices of courts, and
-made those vices fashionable throughout nations. With a George IV. on
-the throne, it weekly tells ten thousand lies, in the shape of prayers
-for a “most religious and gracious king.” Whether you read the annals
-of the far past—whether you look at the various uncivilized races
-dispersed over the globe—or whether you contrast the existing nations
-of Europe; you equally find that submission to authority decreases as
-morality and intelligence increase. From ancient warrior-worship down
-to modern flunkeyism, the sentiment has ever been strongest where human
-nature has been vilest.
-
-This relation between barbarism and loyalty, is one of those beneficent
-arrangements which “the servant and interpreter of nature” everywhere
-meets with. The subordination of many to one, is a form of society
-needful for men so long as their natures are savage, or anti-social;
-and that it may be maintained, it is needful that they should have an
-extreme awe of the one. Just in proportion {313} as their conduct
-to one another is such as to breed perpetual antagonism, endangering
-social union; just in that proportion must there be a reverence for
-the strong, determined, cruel ruler, who alone can repress their
-explosive natures and keep them from mutual destruction. Among such a
-people any form of free government is an impossibility. There must be a
-despotism as stern as the people are savage; and, that such a despotism
-may exist, there must be a superstitious worship of the despot. But
-as fast as the discipline of social life modifies character—as fast
-as, through lack of use, the old predatory instincts dwindle—as fast
-as the sympathetic feelings grow; so fast does this hard rule become
-less necessary; so fast does the authority of the ruler diminish; so
-fast does the awe of him disappear. From being originally god, or
-demi-god, he comes at length to be a very ordinary person; liable to
-be criticized, ridiculed, caricatured. Various influences conspire to
-this result. Accumulating knowledge gradually divests the ruler of
-those supernatural attributes at first ascribed to him. The conceptions
-which developing science gives of the grandeur of creation, as well
-as the constancy and irresistibleness of its Omnipresent Cause, make
-all feel the comparative littleness of human power; and the awe once
-felt for the great man is, by degrees, transferred to that Universe of
-which the great man is seen to form but an insignificant part. Increase
-of population, with its average per-centage of great men, involves
-the comparative frequency of such; and the more numerous they are the
-less respect can be given to each: they dwarf one another. As society
-becomes settled and organized, its welfare and progress become more
-and more independent of any one. In a primitive society the death of a
-chief may alter the whole course of things; but in a society like ours,
-things go on much as before, no matter who dies. Thus, many influences
-combine to diminish autocratic power, whether political or other. It
-is true, {314} not only in the sense in which Tennyson writes it, but
-also in a higher sense, that―
-
- . . . “the individual withers, and the world is more and more.”
-
-Further, it is to be noted that while the unlimited authority of the
-greatest man ceases to be needful; and while the superstitious awe
-which upholds that unlimited authority decreases; it at the same time
-becomes impossible to get the greatest man to the top. In a rude social
-state, where might is right, where war is the business of life, where
-the qualities required in the ruler, alike for controlling his subjects
-and defeating his enemies, are bodily strength, courage, cunning, will,
-it is easy to pick out the best; or rather—he picks himself out. The
-qualities which make him the fittest governor for the barbarians around
-him, are the qualities by which he gets the mastery over them. But
-in an advanced, complex, and comparatively peaceful state like ours,
-these are not the qualities needed; and even were they needed, the
-firmly-organized arrangements of society do not allow the possessor of
-them to break through to the top. For the rule of a settled, civilized
-community, the characteristics required are—not a love of conquest but
-a desire for the general happiness; not undying hate of enemies but
-a calm dispassionate equity; not artful manœuvring but philosophic
-insight. How is the man most endowed with these to be found? In no
-country is he ordinarily born heir to the throne; and that he can be
-chosen out of thirty millions of people none will be foolish enough
-to think. The incapacity for recognizing the greatest worth, we have
-already seen illustrated in our parliamentary elections. And if the few
-thousands forming a constituency cannot pick out from among themselves
-their wisest man, still less can the millions forming a nation do it.
-Just as fast as society becomes populous, complex, peaceful; so fast
-does the political supremacy of the best become impossible. {315}
-
-But even were the relation of autocrat and slave a morally wholesome
-one; and even were it possible to find the fittest man to be autocrat;
-we should still contend that such a form of government is bad. We
-should not contend this simply on the ground that self-government is a
-valuable educator. But we should take the ground that no human being,
-however wise and good, is fit to be sole ruler over the doings of an
-involved society; and that, with the best intentions, a benevolent
-despot is very likely to produce the most terrible mischiefs which
-would else have been impossible. We will take the case of all others
-the most favourable to those who would give supreme power to the
-best. We will instance Mr. Carlyle’s model hero—Cromwell. Doubtless
-there was much in the manners of the times when Puritanism arose, to
-justify its disgust. Doubtless the vices and follies bequeathed by
-effete Catholicism still struggling for existence, were bad enough to
-create a reactionary asceticism. It is in the order of Nature, however,
-that men’s habits and pleasures are not to be changed suddenly. For
-any _permanent_ effect to be produced it must be produced slowly.
-Better tastes, higher aspirations, must be developed; not enforced
-from without. Disaster is sure to result from the withdrawal of
-lower gratifications before higher ones have taken their places; for
-gratification of some kind is a condition to healthful existence.
-Whatever ascetic morality, or rather immorality, may say, pleasures
-and pains are the incentives and restraints by which Nature keeps her
-progeny from destruction. No contemptuous title of “pig-philosophy”
-will alter the eternal fact that Misery is the highway to Death; while
-Happiness is added Life and the giver of Life. But indignant Puritanism
-could not see this truth; and with the extravagance of fanaticism
-sought to abolish pleasure in general. Getting into power, it put down
-not only questionable amusements but all others along with them. And
-{316} for these repressions Cromwell, either as enacting, maintaining,
-or allowing them, was responsible. What, now, was the result of this
-attempt to dragoon men into virtue? What came when the strong man
-who thought he was thus “helping God to mend all,” died? A dreadful
-reaction brought in one of the most degraded periods of our history.
-Into the newly-garnished house entered “seven other spirits more wicked
-than the first.” For generations the English character was lowered.
-Vice was gloried in, virtue was ridiculed; dramatists made marriage the
-stock-subject of laughter; profaneness and obscenity flourished; high
-aspirations ceased; the whole age was corrupt. Not until George III.
-reigned was there a better standard of living. And for this century of
-demoralization we have, in great measure, to thank Cromwell. Is it,
-then, so clear that the domination of one man, righteous though he may
-be, is a blessing?
-
-Lastly, it is to be remarked that when the political supremacy of the
-greatest no longer exists in an overt form, it still continues in a
-disguised and more beneficent form. For is it not manifest that in
-these latter days the wise man eventually gets his edicts enforced
-by others, if not by himself. Adam Smith, from his chimney-corner,
-dictated greater changes than prime ministers do. A General Thompson
-who forges the weapons with which the Anti-Corn-Law battle is fought—a
-Cobden and a Bright who add to and wield them, forward civilization
-much more than those who hold sceptres. Repugnant as the fact may
-be to statesmen, it is yet one not to be gainsayed. Whoever, to the
-great effects already produced by Free-trade, joins the far greater
-effects which will be hereafter produced, must see that the revolution
-initiated by these men is far wider than has been initiated by any
-potentate of modern times. As Mr. Carlyle very well knows, those
-who elaborate new truths and teach them to their fellows, are {317}
-now-a-days the real rulers—“the unacknowledged legislators”—the
-virtual kings. Thus we have the good which great men can do us, while
-we are saved from the evil.
-
-No; the old _régime_ has passed away. For ourselves at least, the
-subordination of the many to the one has become alike needless,
-repugnant, and impossible. Good for its time, bad for ours, the ancient
-“hero-worship” is dead; and happily no declamations, be they never so
-eloquent, can revive it.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Here seem to be two irreconcileable positions—two mutually-destructive
-arguments. First, a condemnatory criticism on representative
-government, and then a still more condemnatory criticism on monarchical
-government: each apparently abolishing the other.
-
-Nevertheless, the paradox is easily explicable. It is quite possible
-to say all that we have said concerning the defects of representative
-government, and still to hold that it is the best form of government.
-Nay, it is quite possible to derive a more profound conviction of its
-superiority from the very evidence which appears so unfavourable to it.
-
-For nothing that we have urged tells against its goodness as a means
-of securing justice between man and man, or class and class. Abundant
-evidence shows that the maintenance of equitable relations among its
-subjects, which forms the essential business of a ruling power, is
-surest when the ruling power is of popular origin; notwithstanding the
-defects to which such a ruling power is liable. For discharging the
-true function of a government, representative government is shown to be
-the best, alike by its _origin_, its _theory_, and its _results_. Let
-us glance at the facts under these three heads.
-
-Alike in Spain, in England, and in France, popular power embodied
-itself as a check upon kingly tyranny, that is—kingly injustice. The
-earliest accounts we have of the Spanish Cortes, say that it was their
-office to advise {318} the King; and to follow their advice was
-his duty. They petitioned, remonstrated, complained of grievances,
-and supplicated for redress. The King, having acceded to their
-requirements, swore to observe them; and it was agreed that any act
-of his in contravention of the statutes thus established, should be
-“respected as the King’s commands, but not executed, as contrary to
-the rights and privileges of the subject.” In all which we see very
-clearly that the special aim of the Cortes was to get rectified the
-injustices committed by the King or others; that the King was in the
-habit of breaking the promises of amendment he made to them; and that
-they had to adopt measures to enforce the fulfilment of his promises.
-In England we trace analogous facts. The Barons who bridled the tyranny
-of King John, though not formally appointed, were virtually impromptu
-representatives of the nation; and in their demand that justice should
-neither be sold, denied, nor delayed, we discern the social evils
-which led to this taking of the power into their own hands. In early
-times the knights and burgesses, summoned by the King with the view
-of getting supplies from them, had for their especial business to
-obtain from him the redress of grievances, that is—the execution of
-justice; and in their eventually-obtained and occasionally-exercised
-power of withholding supplies until justice was granted, we see both
-the need there was for remedying the iniquities of autocracy, and the
-adaptation of representative institutions to this end. And the further
-development of popular power latterly obtained, originated from the
-demand for fairer laws—for less class-privilege, class-exemption,
-class-injustice: a fact which the speeches of the Reform-Bill agitation
-abundantly prove. In France, again, representative government grew into
-a definite form under the stimulus of unbearable oppression. When the
-accumulated extortion of centuries had reduced the mass of the people
-to misery—when millions of haggard faces were seen throughout the {319}
-land—when starving complainants were hanged on “a gallows forty feet
-high”—when the exactions and cruelties of good-for-nothing kings and
-vampire-nobles had brought the nation to the eve of dissolution; there
-came, as a remedy, an assembly of men elected by the people.
-
-That, considered _a priori_, representative government is fitted for
-establishing just laws, is implied by the unanimity with which Spanish,
-English, and French availed themselves of it to this end; as well as
-by the endeavours latterly made by other European nations to do the
-like. The _rationale_ of the matter is simple enough. Manifestly,
-on the average of cases, a man will protect his own interests more
-solicitously than others will protect them for him. Manifestly, where
-regulations have to be made affecting the interests of several men,
-they are most likely to be equitably made when all those concerned are
-present, and have equal shares in the making of them. And manifestly,
-where those concerned are so numerous and so dispersed, that it is
-physically impossible for them all to take part in the framing of
-such regulations, the next best thing is for the citizens in each
-locality to appoint one of their number to speak for them, to care
-for their claims, to be their representative. The general principle
-is that the welfare of all will be most secure when each looks after
-his own welfare; and the principle is carried out as directly as the
-circumstances permit. It is inferable, alike from human nature and from
-history, that a single man cannot be trusted with the interests of a
-nation of men, where his real or imagined interests clash with theirs.
-It is similarly inferable from human nature and from history, that no
-small section of a nation, as the nobles, can be expected to consult
-the welfare of the people at large in preference to their own. And it
-is further inferable that only in a general diffusion of political
-power, is there a safeguard for the general welfare. This has all
-along been the conviction under which representative government has
-been advocated, {320} maintained, and extended. From the early writs
-summoning the members of the House of Commons—writs which declared it
-to be a most equitable rule that the laws which concerned all should be
-approved of by all—down to the reasons now urged by the unenfranchised
-for a participation in political power, this is the implied theory.
-Observe, nothing is said about wisdom or administrative ability. From
-the beginning, the end in view has been _justice_. Whether we consider
-the question in the abstract, or whether we examine the opinions men
-have entertained upon it from old times down to the present day, we
-equally see the theory of representative government to be, that it is
-the best means of insuring equitable social relations.
-
-And do not the results justify the theory? Did not our early
-Parliaments, after long-continued struggles, succeed in curbing the
-licentious exercise of royal power, and in establishing the rights
-of the subject? Are not the comparative security and justice enjoyed
-under our form of government, indicated by the envy with which other
-nations regard it? Was not the election of the French Constituent
-Assembly followed by the sweeping away of the grievous burdens that
-weighed down the people—by the abolition of tithes, seignorial dues,
-gabelle, excessive preservation of game—by the withdrawal of numerous
-feudal privileges and immunities—by the manumission of the slaves in
-the French colonies?—And has not that extension of our own electoral
-system embodied in the Reform-Bill, brought about more equitable
-arrangements?—as witness the repeal of the Corn-Laws, and the
-equalization of probate and legacy duties. The proofs are undeniable.
-It is clear, both _a priori_ and _a posteriori_, that representative
-government is especially adapted for the establishment and maintenance
-of just laws.
-
-And now mark that the objections to representative government awhile
-since urged, scarcely tell against it at all, so long as it does
-not exceed this comparatively limited {321} function. Though its
-mediocrity of intellect makes it incompetent to oversee and regulate
-the countless involved processes which make up the national life; it
-nevertheless has quite enough intellect to enact and enforce those
-simple principles of equity which underlie the right conduct of
-citizens to one another. These are such that the commonest minds can
-understand their chief applications. Stupid as may be the average
-elector, he can see the propriety of such regulations as shall prevent
-men from murdering and robbing; he can understand the fitness of
-laws which enforce the payment of debts; he can perceive the need of
-measures to prevent the strong from tyrannizing over the weak; and he
-can feel the rectitude of a judicial system that is the same for rich
-and poor. The average representative may be but of small capacity, but
-he is competent, under the leadership of his wiser fellows, to devise
-appliances for carrying out these necessary restraints; or rather—he is
-competent to uphold the set of appliances slowly elaborated by the many
-generations of his predecessors, and to do something towards improving
-and extending them in those directions where the need is most manifest.
-It is true that even these small demands upon electoral and senatorial
-wisdom are but imperfectly met. But though constituencies are blind
-to the palpable truth that if they would escape laws which favour the
-nobility at the expense of the commonalty, they must cease to choose
-representatives from among the nobility; yet when the injustice of
-this class-legislation is glaring—as in the case of the Corn-Laws—they
-have sense enough to use means for getting it abolished. And though
-most legislators have not sufficient penetration to perceive that
-the greater part of the evils which they attempt to cure by official
-inspection and regulation, would disappear were there a certain,
-prompt, and cheap administration of justice; yet the County-Courts-Act
-and other recent law-reforms, show that they do eventually recognize
-the importance of more efficient {322} judicial arrangements. While,
-therefore, the lower average of intelligence which necessarily
-characterizes representative government, unfits it for discharging the
-complex business of regulating the entire national life; it does not
-unfit it for discharging the comparatively simple duties of protector.
-Again, in respect of this all-essential function of a government, there
-is a much clearer identity of interest between representative and
-citizen, than in respect of the multitudinous other functions which
-governments undertake. Though it is generally of but little consequence
-to the member of Parliament whether state-teachers, state-preachers,
-state-officers of health, state-dispensers of charity, etc., do their
-work well, it is of great consequence to him that life and property
-should be secure; and hence he is more likely to care for the efficient
-administration of justice than for the efficient administration of
-anything else. Moreover, the complexity, incongruity of parts, and
-general cumbrousness which deprive a representative government of
-that activity and decision required for paternally-superintending
-the affairs of thirty millions of citizens; do not deprive it of the
-ability to establish and maintain the regulations by which these
-citizens are prevented from trespassing against one another. For the
-principles of equity are permanent as well as simple; and once having
-been legally embodied in their chief outlines, all that devolves
-on a government is to develop them more perfectly, and improve the
-appliances for enforcing them: an undertaking for which the slow and
-involved action of a representative government does not unfit it.
-So that while by its origin, theory, and results, representative
-government is shown to be the best for securing justice between class
-and class, as well as between man and man, the objections which so
-strongly tell against it in all its other relations to society, do not
-tell against it in this fundamental relation.
-
-Thus, then, we reach the solution of the paradox. Here is the
-reconciliation between the two seemingly-contradictory {323} positions
-awhile since taken. To the question—What is representative government
-good for? our reply is—It is good, especially good, good above all
-others, for doing the thing which a government should do. It is bad,
-especially bad, bad above all others, for doing the things which a
-government should not do.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-One point remains. We said, some distance back, that not only may
-representative government be the best, notwithstanding its many
-conspicuous deficiencies; but that it is even possible to discern
-in these very deficiencies further proofs of its superiority.
-The conclusion just arrived at, implying, as it does, that these
-deficiencies tend to hinder it from doing the things which
-no government should do, has already furnished a key to this
-strange-looking assertion. But it will be well here to make a more
-specific justification of it. This brings us to the pure science of the
-matter.
-
-The ever-increasing complexity which characterizes advancing societies,
-is a complexity that results from the multiplication of different parts
-performing different duties. The doctrine of the division of labour
-is now-a-days understood by most to some extent; and most know that
-by this division of labour each operative, each manufacturer, each
-town, each district, is constantly more and more restricted to one
-kind of work. Those who study the organization of living bodies find
-the uniform process of development to be, that each organ gradually
-acquires a definite and limited function: there arises, step by step,
-a more perfect “physiological division of labour.” And in an article
-on “Progress: its Law and Cause,” published in our April number, we
-pointed out that this increasing specialization of functions which goes
-on in all organized bodies, social as well as individual, is one of
-the manifestations of a still more general process pervading creation,
-inorganic as well as organic.
-
-Now this specialization of functions, which is the law of {324} all
-organization, has a twofold implication. At the same time that each
-part grows adapted to the particular duty it has to discharge, it grows
-unadapted to all other duties. The becoming especially fit for one
-thing, is a becoming less fit than before for everything else. We have
-not space here to exemplify this truth. Any modern work on physiology,
-however, will furnish the reader with abundant illustrations of it,
-as exhibited in the evolution of living creatures; and as exhibited
-in the evolution of societies, it may be studied in the writings of
-political economists. All which we wish here to point out is, that the
-governmental part of the body politic exemplifies this truth equally
-with its other parts. In virtue of this universal law, a government
-cannot gain ability to perform its special work without losing such
-ability as it had to perform other work.
-
-This then is, as we say, the pure science of the matter. The original
-and essential office of a government is that of protecting its
-subjects against aggression external and internal. In low, undeveloped
-forms of society, where yet there is but little differentiation of
-parts, and little specialization of functions, this essential work,
-discharged with extreme imperfection, is joined with endless other
-work: the government has a controlling action over all conduct,
-individual and social—regulates dress, food, ablutions, prices, trade,
-religion—exercises unbounded power. In becoming so constituted as
-to discharge better its essential function, the government becomes
-more limited alike in the power and the habit of doing other things.
-Increasing ability to perform its true duty, involves decreasing
-ability to perform all other kinds of actions. And this conclusion,
-deducible from the universal law of organization, is the conclusion
-to which inductive reasoning has already led us. We have seen that,
-whether considered in theory or practice, representative government
-is the best for securing justice. We have also seen that, whether
-{325} considered in theory or practice, it is the worst for all other
-purposes. And here we find that this last characteristic is a necessary
-accompaniment of the first. These various incapacities, which seem to
-tell so seriously against the goodness of representative government,
-are but the inevitable consequences of its more complete adaptation to
-its proper work; and, so understood, are themselves indications that
-it is the form of government natural to a more highly-organized and
-advanced social state.
-
-We do not expect this consideration to weigh much with those whom
-it most concerns. Truths of so abstract a character find no favour
-with senates. The metamorphosis we have described is not mentioned in
-Ovid. History, as at present written, makes no comments on it. There
-is nothing about it to be found in blue-books and committee-reports.
-Neither is it proved by statistics. Evidently, then, it has but small
-chance of recognition by the “practical” legislator. But to the select
-few who study the Social Science, properly so called, we commend
-this general fact as one of the highest significance. Those who know
-something of the general laws of life, and who perceive that these
-general laws of life underlie all social phenomena, will see that this
-dual change in the character of advanced governments, involves an
-answer to the first of all political questions. They will see that this
-specialization in virtue of which an advanced government gains power to
-perform one function, while it loses power to perform others, clearly
-indicates the true limitations of State-duty. They will see that, even
-leaving out all other evidence, this fact alone shows conclusively what
-is the proper sphere of legislation.
-
-{326}
-
-
-
-
-STATE-TAMPERINGS WITH MONEY AND BANKS.
-
-[_First published in_ The Westminster Review _for January 1858_.]
-
-
-Among unmitigated rogues, mutual trust is impossible. Among people
-of absolute integrity, mutual trust would be unlimited. These are
-truisms. Given a nation made up of liars and thieves, and all trade
-among its members must be carried on either by barter or by a currency
-of intrinsic value: nothing in the shape of _promises_-to-pay can pass
-in place of _actual_ payments; for, by the hypothesis, such promises
-being never fulfilled, will not be taken. On the other hand, given a
-nation of perfectly honest men—men as careful of others’ rights as of
-their own—and nearly all trade among its members may be carried on
-by memoranda of debts and claims, eventually written off against one
-another in the books of bankers; seeing that as, by the hypothesis,
-no man will ever issue more memoranda of debts than his goods and his
-claims will liquidate, his paper will pass current for whatever it
-represents. Coin will be needed only as a measure of value, and to
-facilitate those small transactions for which it is physically the most
-convenient. These we take to be self-evident truths.
-
-From them follows the corollary that in a nation neither wholly honest
-nor wholly dishonest, there may, and eventually will, be established a
-mixed currency—a currency {327} partly of intrinsic value and partly
-of credit-value. The ratio between the quantities of these two kinds of
-currency, will be determined by a combination of several causes.
-
-Supposing that there is no legislative meddling to disturb the
-natural balance, it is clear from what has already been said, that,
-fundamentally, the proportion of coin to paper will depend on the
-average conscientiousness of the people. Daily experience must ever
-be teaching each citizen, which other citizens he can put confidence
-in, and which not. Daily experience must also ever be teaching him how
-far this confidence may be carried. From personal experiment, and from
-current opinion, which results from the experiments of others, every
-one must learn, more or less truly, what credit may safely be given.
-If all find that their neighbours are little to be trusted, but few
-promises-to-pay will circulate. And the circulation of promises-to-pay
-will be great, if all find that the fulfilment of trading engagements
-is tolerably certain. The degree of _honesty_ characterizing a
-community, being the first regulator of a credit-currency; the second
-is the degree of _prudence_. Other things equal, it is manifest that
-among a sanguine, speculative people, promissory payments will be taken
-more readily, and will therefore circulate more largely, than among
-a cautious people. Two men having exactly the same experiences of
-mercantile risks will, under the same circumstances, respectively give
-credit and refuse it, if they are respectively rash and circumspect.
-And two nations thus contrasted in prudence, will be similarly
-contrasted in the relative quantities of notes and bills in circulation
-among them. Nay, they will be more than similarly contrasted in this
-respect; seeing that the prevailing incautiousness, besides making
-each citizen unduly ready to give credit, will also produce in him
-an undue readiness to risk his own capital in speculations, and a
-consequent undue demand for credit from other citizens. There will be
-both an increased pressure for credit and a diminished resistance; and
-therefore a more {328} than proportionate excess of paper-currency.
-Of this national characteristic and its consequences, we have a
-conspicuous example in the United States.
-
-To these comparatively permanent moral causes, on which the ordinary
-ratio of hypothetical to real money in a community depends, have to
-be added certain temporary moral and physical causes, which produce
-temporary variations in the ratio. The prudence of any people is liable
-to more or less fluctuation. In railway-manias and the like, we see
-that irrational expectations may spread through a whole nation, and
-lead its members to give and take credit almost recklessly. But the
-chief causes of temporary variations are those which directly affect
-the quantity of available capital. Wars, deficient harvests, or losses
-consequent on the misfortunes of other nations, will, by impoverishing
-the community, inevitably lead to an increase in the ratio of
-_promissory payments to actual payments_. For what must be done by
-the citizen disabled by such causes from meeting his engagements?—the
-shopkeeper whose custom has fallen off in consequence of the high
-price of bread; or the manufacturer whose goods lie in his ware-rooms
-unsaleable; or the merchant whose foreign correspondents fail him? As
-the proceeds of his business do not suffice to liquidate the claims on
-him that are falling due, he is compelled either to find other means
-of liquidating them, or to stop payment. Rather than stop payment, he
-will, of course, make temporary sacrifices—will give high terms to
-whoever will furnish him with the desired means. If, by depositing
-securities with his banker, he can get a loan at an advanced rate of
-interest, well. If not, by offering an adequate temptation, he may
-mortgage his property to some one having good credit; who either gives
-bills, or draws on his banker for the sum agreed to. In either case,
-extra promises to pay are issued; or, if the difficulty is met by
-accommodation-bills, the same result follows. And in proportion to the
-number of citizens obliged to resort to one {329} or other of these
-expedients, must be the increase of promissory payments in circulation.
-
-Reduce this proposition to its most general terms, and it becomes
-self-evident. Thus:—All bank-notes, cheques, bills of exchange, etc.,
-are so many _memoranda of claims_. No matter what may be the technical
-distinctions among them, on which upholders of the “currency principle”
-seek to establish their dogma, they all come within this definition.
-Under the ordinary state of things, the amount of available wealth in
-the hands, or at the command, of those concerned, suffices to meet
-these claims as they are severally presented for payment; and they are
-paid either by equivalents of intrinsic value, as coin, or by giving
-in place of them other memoranda of claims on some body of undoubted
-solvency. But now let the amount of available wealth in the hands
-of the community be greatly diminished. Suppose a large portion of
-the necessaries of life, or of coin, which is the most exchangeable
-equivalent of such necessaries, has been sent abroad to support an
-army, or to subsidize foreign states; or, suppose that there has
-been a failure in the crops of grain or potatoes. What follows? It
-follows that part of the claims cannot be liquidated. And what must
-happen from their non-liquidation? It must happen that those unable to
-liquidate them will either fail, or they will redeem them by directly
-or indirectly giving in exchange certain memoranda of claims on their
-stock-in-trade, houses, or land. That is, such of these claims as the
-deficient _floating_ capital does not suffice to meet, are replaced
-by claims on _fixed_ capital. The memoranda of claims which should
-have _dis_appeared by liquidation, _re_-appear in a new form; and the
-quantity of paper-currency is increased. If the war, famine, or other
-cause of impoverishment, continues, the process is repeated. Those
-who have no further fixed capital to mortgage, become bankrupt; while
-those whose fixed capital admits of it, mortgage still further, and
-still further increase the promissory {330} payments in circulation.
-Manifestly, if the members of a community whose annual returns but
-little more than suffice to meet their annual payments suddenly lose
-part of their annual returns, they must become proportionately in
-debt to one another; and the documents expressive of debt must be
-proportionately multiplied.
-
-This _a priori_ conclusion is in perfect harmony with mercantile
-experience. The last hundred years have furnished repeated
-illustrations of its truth. After the enormous export of gold in
-1795–6 for war-loans to Germany, and to meet bills drawn on the
-Treasury by British agents abroad; and after large advances made under
-a moral compulsion by the Bank of England to the Government; there
-followed an excessive issue of bank-notes. In 1796–7, there were
-failures of the provincial banks; a panic in London; a run on the
-nearly-exhausted Bank of England; and a suspension of cash-payments—a
-State-authorized refusal to redeem promises to pay. In 1800, the
-further impoverishment consequent on a bad harvest, joined with
-the legalized inconvertibility of bank-notes, entailed so great a
-multiplication of them as to cause their depreciation. During the
-temporary peace of 1802, the country partly recovered itself; and
-the Bank of England would have liquidated the claims on it had the
-Government allowed. On the subsequent resumption of war, the phenomenon
-was repeated; as in later times it has been on each occasion when the
-community, carried away by irrational hopes, has locked up an undue
-proportion of its capital in permanent works. Moreover, we have still
-more conclusive illustrations—illustrations of the sudden cessation of
-commercial distress and bankruptcy, resulting from a sudden increase of
-credit-circulation. When, in 1793, there came a general crash, mainly
-due to an unsafe banking-system which had grown up in the provinces
-_in consequence_ of the Bank of England monopoly—when the pressure,
-extending to London, became so great as to alarm the Bank-directors
-and to cause {331} them suddenly to restrict their issues, thereby
-producing a frightful multiplication of bankruptcies; the Government
-(to mitigate an evil indirectly produced by legislation) determined
-to issue Exchequer-Bills to such as could give adequate security.
-That is, they allowed hard-pressed citizens to mortgage their fixed
-capitals for equivalents of State-promises to pay, with which to
-liquidate the demands on them. The effect was magical. £2,202,000 only
-of Exchequer-Bills were required. The consciousness that loans could be
-had, in many cases prevented them from being needed. The panic quickly
-subsided; and all the loans were very soon repaid. In 1825, again,
-when the Bank of England, after having intensified a panic by extreme
-restriction of its issues, suddenly changed its policy, and in four
-days advanced £5,000,000 notes on all sorts of securities, the panic at
-once ceased.
-
-And now, mark two important truths. As just implied, those expansions
-of paper-circulation which naturally take place in times of
-impoverishment or commercial difficulty, are highly salutary. This
-issuing of securities for future payment when there does not exist the
-wherewith for immediate payment, is a means of mitigating national
-disasters. The process amounts to a postponement of trading-engagements
-which cannot at once be met. And the alternative questions to be asked
-respecting it are—Shall all the merchants, manufacturers, shopkeepers,
-etc., who, by unwise investments, or war, or famine, or great losses
-abroad, have been in part deprived of the means of meeting the claims
-upon them, be allowed to mortgage their fixed capital? or, by being
-debarred from issuing memoranda of claims on their fixed capital, shall
-they be made bankrupts? On the one hand, if they are permitted to avail
-themselves of that credit which their fellow-citizens willingly give
-them on the strength of the proffered securities, most of them will
-tide over their difficulties; and in virtue of that accumulation of
-surplus capital ever going on, they will be {332} able, by-and-by, to
-liquidate their debts in full. On the other hand, if they are forthwith
-bankrupted, carrying with them others, and these again others, there
-follows a disastrous loss to all the creditors: property to an
-immense amount being peremptorily sold at a time when there can be
-comparatively few able to buy, must go at a great sacrifice; and those
-who in a year or two would have been paid in full, must be content with
-10_s._ in the pound. Added to which evil comes the still greater one—an
-extensive damage to the organization of society. Numerous importing,
-producing, and distributing establishments are swept away; tens of
-thousands of their dependents are left without work; and before the
-industrial fabric can be repaired, a long time must elapse, much labour
-must lie idle, and great distress be borne. Between these alternatives,
-who, then, can pause? Let this spontaneous remedial process follow its
-own course, and the evil will either be in great measure eventually
-escaped, or will be spread little by little over a considerable period.
-Stop this remedial process, and the whole evil, falling at once on
-society, will bring wide-spread ruin and misery.
-
-The second of these important truths is, that an expanded circulation
-of promises to pay, caused by absolute or relative impoverishment,
-contracts to its normal limits as fast as the need for expansion
-disappears. For the conditions of the case imply that all who have
-mortgaged their fixed capitals to obtain the means of meeting their
-engagements, have done so on unfavourable terms; and are therefore
-under a strong stimulus to pay off their mortgages as quickly as
-possible. Every one who, at a time of commercial pressure, gets a loan
-from a bank, has to give high interest. Hence, as fast as prosperity
-returns, and his profits accumulate, he gladly escapes this heavy
-tax by repaying the loan; in doing which he, directly or indirectly,
-takes back to the bank as large a number of its credit documents as he
-originally received, and so diminishes the {333} credit-circulation
-as much as his original transaction had increased it. Considered apart
-from technical distinctions, a banker performs, in such case, the
-function of an agent in whose name traders issue negotiable memoranda
-of claims on their estates. The agent is already known to the public
-as one who issues memoranda of claims on capital that is partly
-floating and partly fixed—memoranda of claims that have an established
-character, and are convenient in their amounts. What the agent does
-under the circumstances specified, is to issue more such memoranda of
-claims, on the security of more fixed, and partially-fixed, capital
-put in his possession. His clients hypothecate their estates through
-the banker, instead of doing it in their own names, simply because
-of the facilities which he has and which they have not. And as the
-banker requires to be paid for his agency and his risk, his clients
-redeem their estates, and close these special transactions with him, as
-quickly as they can: thereby diminishing the amount of credit-currency.
-
-Thus we see that the balance of a mixed currency of voluntary origin
-is, under all circumstances, self-adjusting. Supposing considerations
-of physical convenience out of the question, the average ratio of paper
-to coin is primarily dependent on the average trustworthiness of the
-people, and secondarily dependent on their average prudence. When,
-in consequence of unusual prosperity, there is an unusual increase
-in the number of mercantile transactions, there is a corresponding
-increase in the quantity of currency, both metallic and paper, to meet
-the requirement. And when from war, famine, or over-investment, the
-available wealth in the hands of citizens is insufficient to pay their
-debts to one another, the memoranda of debts in circulation acquire an
-increased ratio to the quantity of gold: to decrease again as fast as
-the excess of debts can be liquidated.
-
-That these self-regulating processes act but imperfectly, is doubtless
-true. With an imperfect humanity, they cannot {334} act otherwise
-than imperfectly. People who are dishonest, or rash, or stupid,
-will inevitably suffer the penalties of dishonesty, or rashness, or
-stupidity. If any think that by some patent legislative mechanism,
-a society of bad citizens can be made to work together as well
-as a society of good ones, we shall not take pains to show them
-the contrary. If any think that the dealings of men deficient in
-uprightness and foresight, may be so regulated by cunningly-devised
-Acts of Parliament as to secure the effects of uprightness and
-foresight, we have nothing to say to them. Or if there are any (and
-we fear there are numbers) who think that in times of commercial
-difficulty, resulting from impoverishment or other natural causes, the
-evil can be staved-off by some ministerial sleight of hand, we despair
-of convincing them that the thing is impossible. See it or not, the
-truth is that the State can do none of these things. As we shall show,
-the State can, and sometimes does, _produce_ commercial disasters.
-As we shall also show, it can, and sometimes does, _exacerbate_ the
-commercial disasters otherwise produced. But while it can create and
-can make worse, it cannot prevent.
-
-All which the State has to do in the matter is to discharge its
-ordinary office—to administer justice. The enforcement of contracts is
-one of the functions included in its general function of maintaining
-the rights of citizens. And among other contracts which it is called
-on to enforce, are the contracts expressed in credit-documents—bills
-of exchange, cheques, bank-notes. If any one issues a promise-to-pay,
-either on demand or at specified date, and does not fulfil that
-promise, the State, when appealed to by the creditor, is bound in its
-protective capacity to obtain fulfilment of the promise, at whatever
-cost to the debtor, or such partial fulfilment of it as his effects
-suffice for. The State’s duty in the case of the currency, as in other
-cases, is sternly to threaten the penalty of bankruptcy on all who make
-engagements which they cannot meet, and sternly to inflict the {335}
-penalty when called on by those aggrieved. If it falls short of this,
-mischief ensues. If it exceeds this, mischief ensues. Let us glance at
-the facts.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Had we space to trace in detail the history of the Bank of England—to
-show how the privileges contained in its first charter were bribes
-given by a distressed Government in want of a large loan—how, soon
-afterwards, the law which forbad a partnership of more than six persons
-from becoming bankers, was passed to prevent the issue of notes by
-the South-Sea Company, and so to preserve the Bank-monopoly—how the
-continuance of State-favours to the Bank, corresponded with the
-continuance of the Bank’s claims on the State; we should see that, from
-the first, banking-legislation has been an organized injustice. But
-passing over earlier periods, let us begin with the events that closed
-the last century. Our rulers of that day had entered into a war—whether
-with adequate reason needs not here be discussed. They had lent vast
-sums in gold to their allies. They had demanded large advances from
-the Bank of England, which the Bank durst not refuse. They had thus
-necessitated an excessive issue of notes by the Bank. That is, they
-had so greatly diminished the floating capital of the community, that
-engagements could not be met; and an immense number of promises-to-pay
-took the place of actual payments. Soon after, the fulfilment of these
-promises became so difficult that it was forbidden by law; that is,
-cash-payments were suspended. Now for these results—for the national
-impoverishment and consequent abnormal condition of the currency, the
-State was responsible. How much of the blame lay with the governing
-classes and how much with the nation at large, we do not pretend to
-say. What it concerns us here to note is, that the calamity arose from
-the acts of the ruling power. When, again, in 1802, after a short
-peace, the available capital of the community had so far increased
-that the redemption of promises-to-pay became {336} possible, and the
-Bank of England was anxious to begin redeeming them, the legislature
-interposed its veto; and so continued the evils of an inconvertible
-paper-currency after they would naturally have ceased. Still more
-disastrous, however, were the results that by-and-by ensued from
-State-meddlings. Cash-payments having been suspended—the Government,
-instead of enforcing all contracts, having temporarily cancelled a
-great part of them, by saying to every banker, “You shall not be called
-on to liquidate in coin the promises-to-pay which you issue;” the
-natural checks to the multiplication of promises-to-pay, disappeared.
-What followed? Banks being no longer required to cash their notes in
-coin; and easily obtaining from the Bank of England, supplies of its
-notes in exchange for fixed securities; were ready to make advances to
-almost any extent. Not being obliged to raise their rate of discount in
-consequence of the diminution of their available capital; and reaping a
-profit by every loan (of notes) made on fixed capital; there arose both
-an abnormal facility of borrowing, and an abnormal desire to lend. Thus
-were fostered the wild speculations of 1809—speculations that were not
-only thus fostered, but were in great measure _caused_ by the previous
-over-issue of notes; which, by further exaggerating the natural rise
-of prices, increased the apparent profitableness of investments. And
-all this, be it remembered, took place at a time when there should have
-been rigid economy—at a time of impoverishment consequent on continued
-war—at a time when, but for law-produced illusions, there would have
-been commercial straitness and a corresponding carefulness. Just when
-its indebtedness was unusually great, the community was induced still
-further to increase its indebtedness. Clearly, then, the progressive
-accumulation and depreciation of promises-to-pay, and the commercial
-disasters which finally resulted from it in 1814–15–16, when ninety
-provincial banks were broken and more dissolved, were State-produced
-evils: partly due to {337} a war which, whether necessary or not,
-was carried on by the Government, and greatly exacerbated by the
-currency-regulations which that Government had made.
-
-Before passing to more recent facts, let us parenthetically notice
-the similarly-caused degradation of the currency which had previously
-arisen in Ireland. When examined by a parliamentary committee in 1804,
-Mr. Colville, one of the directors of the Bank of Ireland, stated
-that before the passing of the Irish Bank-Restriction-Bill (the bill
-by which cash-payments were suspended) the directors habitually met
-any unusual demand for gold by diminishing their issues. That is to
-say, in the ordinary course of business, they raised their rate of
-discount whenever the demand enabled them; and so, both increased
-their profits and warded-off the danger of bankruptcy. During this
-unregulated period their note-circulation was between £600,000 and
-£700,000. But as soon as they were guaranteed by law against the danger
-of bankruptcy, their circulation began rapidly to increase; and very
-soon reached £3,000,000. The results, as proved before the committee,
-were these:—The exchange with England became greatly depressed;
-nearly all the good specie was exported to England; it was replaced
-in Dublin (where small notes could not be issued) by a base coinage,
-adulterated to the extent of fifty per cent.; and elsewhere it was
-replaced by notes payable at twenty-one days’ date, issued by all sorts
-of persons, for sums down even as low as sixpence. And this excessive
-multiplication of small notes was _necessitated_ by the impossibility
-of otherwise carrying on retail trade, after the disappearance of
-the silver coinage. For these disastrous effects, then, legislation
-was responsible. The swarms of “silver-notes” resulted from the
-exportation of silver; the exportation of silver was due to the great
-depression of the exchange with England; this great depression arose
-from the excessive issue of notes by the Bank of Ireland; and this
-{338} excessive issue followed from their legalized inconvertibility.
-Yet, though these facts were long ago established by a committee
-of the House of Commons, the defenders of the “currency-principle”
-are actually blind enough to cite this multiplication of sixpenny
-promises-to-pay, _as proving the evils of an unregulated currency_!
-
-Returning now to the case of the Bank of England, let us pass at once
-to the Act of 1844. While still a protectionist—while still a believer
-in the beneficence of law as a controller of commerce—Sir Robert Peel
-undertook to stop the recurrence of monetary crises, like those of
-1825, 1836, and 1839. Overlooking the truth that, when not _caused_ by
-the meddlings of legislators, a monetary crisis is due, either to an
-absolute impoverishment, or to a relative impoverishment consequent
-on speculative over-investment; and that for the bad season, or the
-imprudence, causing this, there is no remedy; he boldly proclaimed that
-“_it is better to prevent the paroxysm than to excite it_:” and he
-brought forward the Bank-Act of 1844 as the means of prevention. How
-merciless has been Nature’s criticism on this remnant of Protectionism,
-we all know. The monetary sliding-scale has been as great a failure as
-its prototype. Within three years arose one of these crises which were
-to have been prevented. Within another ten years has arisen a second
-of these crises. And on both occasions this intended safeguard has so
-intensified the evil, that a temporary repeal of it has been imperative.
-
-We should have thought that, even without facts, every one might have
-seen that it is impossible, by Act of Parliament, to prevent imprudent
-people from doing imprudent things; and, if facts were needed, we
-should have thought that our commercial history up to 1844 supplied a
-sufficiency. But a superstitious faith in State-ordinances disregards
-such facts. And we doubt not that even now, though there have been two
-glaring failures of this professed check on over-speculation—though
-the evidence conclusively {339} shows that the late commercial
-catastrophes have had nothing whatever to do with the issue of
-bank-notes, but, as in the case of the Western Bank of Scotland,
-occurred along with diminished issues—and though in Hamburg, where the
-“currency principle” has been rigidly carried out to the very letter,
-there has been a worse crisis than anywhere else; yet there will remain
-plenty of believers in the efficiency of Sir R. Peel’s prophylactic.
-
-But, as already said, the measure has not only failed; it has made
-worse the panics it was to have warded-off. And it was sure to do
-this. As shown at the outset, the multiplication of promises-to-pay
-that occurs at a period of impoverishment caused by war, famine,
-over-investment, or losses abroad, is a salutary process of
-mitigation—is a mode of postponing actual payments till actual payments
-are possible—is a preventive of wholesale bankruptcy—is a spontaneous
-act of self-preservation. We pointed out, not only that this is an
-_a priori_ conclusion, but that facts in our own mercantile history
-illustrate at once the naturalness, the benefits, the necessity of it.
-And if this conclusion needs enforcing by further evidence, we have
-it in the recent events at Hamburg. In that city, there are no notes
-in circulation but such as are represented by actual equivalents of
-bullion or jewels in the bank: no one is allowed, as with us, to obtain
-bank-promises-to-pay in return for securities. Hence it resulted that
-when the Hamburg merchants, lacking their remittances from abroad,
-were suddenly deprived of the wherewith to meet their engagements;
-and were prevented by law from getting bank-promises-to-pay by
-pawning their estates; bankruptcy swept them away wholesale. And
-what finally happened? To prevent universal ruin, the Government
-was obliged to decree that all bills of exchange coming due, should
-have a month’s grace; and that there should be immediately formed a
-State-Discount-Bank—an office for issuing State-promises-to-pay in
-return for securities. That is, having first by its {340} restrictive
-law ruined a host of merchants, the Government was obliged to legalize
-that postponement of payments which, but for its law, would have
-spontaneously taken place. With such further confirmation of an
-_a priori_ conclusion, can it be doubted that our late commercial
-difficulties were intensified by the measure of 1844? Is it not,
-indeed, notorious in the City, that the progressively-increasing demand
-for accommodation, was in great part due to the conviction that, in
-consequence of the Bank-Act, there would shortly be no accommodation
-at all? Does not every London merchant know that his neighbours who
-had bills coming due, and who saw that by the time they were due the
-Bank would discount only at still higher rates, or not at all, decided
-to lay in beforehand the means of meeting those bills? Is it not an
-established fact that the hoarding thus induced, not only rendered the
-pressure on the Bank greater than it would otherwise have been, but, by
-taking both gold and notes out of circulation, made the Bank’s issues
-temporarily useless to the general public? Did it not happen in this
-case, as in 1793 and 1825, that when at last restriction was removed,
-the mere consciousness that loans could be had, itself prevented them
-from being required? And, indeed, is not the simple fact that the panic
-quickly subsided when the Act was suspended, sufficient proof that the
-Act had, in great measure, produced it.
-
-See, then, for what we have to thank legislative meddling. During
-ordinary times Sir R. Peel’s Act, by obliging the Bank of England,
-and occasionally provincial banks, to keep more gold than they would
-otherwise have kept (and if it has not done this it has done nothing),
-has inflicted a tax on the nation to the extent of the interest on such
-portion of the gold-currency as was in excess of the need: a tax which,
-in the course of the last thirteen years, has probably amounted to some
-millions. And then, on the two occasions when there have arisen the
-crises that were to {341} have been prevented, the Act, after having
-intensified the pressure, made bankrupt a great number of respectable
-firms which would else have stood, and increased the distress not only
-of the trading but of the working population, has been twice abandoned
-at the moment when its beneficence was to have been conspicuous. It
-has been a cost, a mischief, and a failure. Yet such is the prevailing
-delusion that, judging from appearances, it will be maintained!
-
-“But,” ask our opponents, “shall the Bank be allowed to let gold drain
-out of the country without check? Shall it have permission to let its
-reserve of gold diminish so greatly as to risk the convertibility of
-its notes? Shall it be enabled recklessly to increase its issues, and
-so produce a depreciated paper-currency?”
-
-Really, in these Free-trade days, it seems strange to have to answer
-questions like these; and, were it not for the confusion of facts and
-ideas which legislation has produced, it would be inexcusable to ask
-them.
-
-In the first place, the common notion that the draining of gold out of
-the country is intrinsically, and in all cases, an evil, is nothing
-but a political superstition—a superstition in part descended from the
-antique fallacy that money is the only wealth, and in part from the
-maxims of an artificial, law-produced state of things, under which
-the exportation of gold really _was_ a sign of a corrupted currency:
-we mean, during the suspension of cash-payments. Law having cancelled
-millions of contracts which it was its duty to enforce—law having
-absolved bankers from liquidating their promises-to-pay in coin, having
-rendered it needless to keep a stock of coin with which to liquidate
-them, and having thus taken away that natural check which prevents the
-over-issue and depreciation of notes—law having partly suspended that
-_home_ demand for gold which ordinarily competes with and balances
-the _foreign_ demand; there resulted an abnormal exportation of gold.
-By-and-by it {342} was seen that this efflux of gold was a consequence
-of the over-issue of notes; and that the accompanying high price of
-gold, as paid for in notes, proved the depreciation of notes. And then
-it became an established doctrine that an adverse state of the foreign
-exchanges, indicating a drain of gold, was significant of an excessive
-circulation of notes; and that the issue of notes should be regulated
-by the state of the exchanges.
-
-This unnatural condition of the currency having continued for a quarter
-of a century, the concomitant doctrine rooted itself in the general
-mind. And now mark one of the multitudinous evils of legislative
-meddling. This artificial test, good only for an artificial state, has
-survived the return to a natural state; and men’s ideas about currency
-have been reduced by it to chronic confusion.
-
-The truth is that while, during a legalized inconvertibility of
-bank-notes, an efflux of gold may, and often does, indicate an
-excessive issue of bank-notes; under ordinary circumstances an efflux
-of gold has little or nothing to do with the issue of bank-notes,
-but is determined by merely mercantile causes. And the truth is
-that far from being an evil, an efflux of gold thus brought about
-by mercantile causes, is a good. Leaving out of the question, as of
-course we must, such exportations of gold as take place for the support
-of armies abroad; the cause of efflux is either an actual plethora
-of all commodities, gold included, which results in gold being sent
-out of the country for the purpose of foreign investment; or else an
-abundance of gold as compared with other leading commodities. And
-while, in this last case, the efflux of gold indicates some absolute
-or relative impoverishment of the nation, it is a means of mitigating
-the bad consequences of that impoverishment. Consider the question as
-one of political economy, and this truth becomes obvious. Thus:—The
-nation habitually requires for use and consumption certain quantities
-of commodities, of which gold is one. These commodities {343} are
-severally and collectively liable to fall short; either from deficient
-harvests, from waste in war, from losses abroad, or from too great
-a diversion of labour or capital in some special direction. When a
-scarcity of some chief commodity or necessary occurs, what is the
-remedy? The commodity of which there is an excess (or if none is in
-excess, then that which can best be spared) is exported in exchange
-for an additional supply of the deficient commodity. And, indeed, the
-whole of our foreign trade, alike in ordinary and extraordinary times,
-consists in this process. But when it happens either that the commodity
-which we can best spare is not wanted abroad; or (as recently) that a
-chief foreign customer is temporarily disabled from buying; or that the
-commodity which we can best spare is gold; then gold itself is exported
-in exchange for the thing which we most want. Whatever form the
-transaction takes, it is nothing but bringing the supplies of various
-commodities into harmony with the demands for them. The fact that gold
-is exported, is simply a proof that the need for gold is less than
-the need for other things. Under such circumstances an efflux of gold
-will continue, and _ought_ to continue, until other things have become
-relatively so abundant, and gold relatively so scarce, that the demand
-for gold is equal to other demands. And he who would prevent this
-process, is about as wise as the miser who, finding his house without
-food, chooses to starve rather than draw upon his purse.
-
-The second question—“Shall the Bank have permission to let its reserve
-of gold diminish so greatly as to risk the convertibility of its
-notes?” is not more profound than the first. It may fitly be answered
-by the more general question—“Shall the merchant, the manufacturer,
-or the shopkeeper, be allowed so to invest his capital as to risk the
-fulfilment of his engagements?” If the answer to the first be “No,” it
-must be “No” to the second. If to the {344} second it be “Yes,” it
-must be “Yes” to the first. Any one who proposed that the State should
-oversee the transactions of every trader, so as to insure his ability
-to cash all demands as they fell due, might with consistency argue
-that bankers should be under like control. But while no one has the
-folly to contend for the one, nearly all contend for the other. One
-would think that the banker acquired, in virtue of his occupation, some
-abnormal desire to ruin himself—that while traders in other things are
-restrained by a wholesome dread of bankruptcy, traders in capital have
-a longing to appear in the _Gazette_, which law alone can prevent them
-from gratifying! Surely the moral checks which act on other men will
-act on bankers. And if these moral checks do not suffice to produce
-perfect security, we have ample proof that no cunning legislative
-checks will supply their place. The current notion that bankers
-can, and will, if allowed, issue notes to any extent, is one of the
-absurdest illusions—an illusion, however, which would never have arisen
-but for the vicious over-issues induced by law. The truth is that,
-in the first place, a banker _cannot_ increase his issue of notes at
-will. It has been proved by the unanimous testimony of all bankers who
-have been examined before successive parliamentary committees, that
-“the amount of their issues is exclusively regulated by the extent of
-local dealings and expenditure in their respective districts;” and that
-any notes issued in excess of the demand are “immediately returned
-to them.” And the truth is, in the second place, that a banker _will
-not_, on the average of cases, issue more notes than in his judgment it
-is safe to issue; seeing that if his promises-to-pay in circulation,
-are much in excess of his available means of paying them, he runs a
-great risk of having to stop payment—a result of which he has no less
-a horror than other men. If facts are needed in proof of this, they
-are furnished by the history of both the Bank of England and the Bank
-of Ireland; which, {345} before they were debauched by the State,
-habitually regulated their issues according to their stock of bullion,
-and would probably always have been still more careful but for the
-consciousness that there was the State-credit to fall back upon.
-
-The third question—“Shall the Bank be allowed to issue notes in such
-numbers as to cause their depreciation?” has, in effect, been answered
-in answering the first two. There can be no depreciation of notes
-so long as they are exchangeable for gold on demand. And so long as
-the State, in discharge of its duty, insists on the fulfilment of
-contracts, the alternative of bankruptcy must ever be a restraint
-on such over-issue of notes as endangers that exchangeability. The
-bugbear of depreciation is one that would have been unknown but for
-the sins of governments. In the case of America, where there have been
-occasional depreciations, the sin has been a sin of omission: the
-State has not enforced the fulfilment of contracts—has not forthwith
-bankrupted those who failed to cash their notes; and, if accounts are
-true, has allowed those to be mobbed who brought back far-wandering
-notes for payment.[35] In all other cases the sin has been a sin of
-commission. The depreciated paper-currency in France, during the
-revolution, was a State-currency. The depreciated paper-currencies
-of Austria and Russia have been State-currencies. And the only
-depreciated paper-currency we have known, has been to all intents and
-purposes a State-currency. It was the State which, in 1795–6, _forced_
-upon the Bank of England that excessive issue of notes which led to
-the suspension of cash-payments. It was the State which, in 1802,
-_forbad_ the resumption of cash-payments, when the Bank of England
-wished to resume them. It was the State which, during a quarter of a
-century, _maintained_ that suspension of cash-payments from which the
-excessive multiplication and depreciation of notes resulted. The entire
-corruption {346} was entailed by State-expenditure, and established
-by State-warrant. Yet now the State affects a virtuous horror of the
-crime committed at its instigation! Having contrived to shuffle-off
-the odium on to the shoulders of its tools, the State gravely lectures
-the banking-community upon its guilt; and with sternest face passes
-measures to prevent it from sinning!
-
- [35] This was written in 1858; when “greenbacks” were unknown.
-
-We contend, then, that neither to restrain the efflux of gold, nor to
-guard against the over-issue of bank-notes, is legislative interference
-warranted. If Government will promptly execute the law against all
-defaulters, the self-interest of bankers and traders will do the
-rest: such evils as would still result from mercantile dishonesties
-and imprudences, being evils which legal regulation may augment but
-cannot prevent. Let the Bank of England, in common with every other
-bank, simply consult its own safety and its own profits; and there
-will result just as much check as should be put, on the efflux of
-gold or the circulation of paper; and the only check that can be put
-on the doings of speculators. Whatever leads to unusual draughts on
-the resources of banks, immediately causes a rise in the rate of
-discount—a rise dictated both by the wish to make increased profits,
-and the wish to avoid a dangerous decrease of resources. This raised
-rate of discount prevents the demand from being so great as it would
-else have been—alike checks undue expansion of the note-circulation;
-stops speculators from making further engagements; and, if gold is
-being exported, diminishes the profit of exportation. Successive rises
-successively increase these effects; until, eventually, none will give
-the rate of discount asked, save those in peril of stopping payment;
-the increase of the credit-currency ceases; and the efflux of gold,
-if it is going on, is arrested by the home-demand out-balancing the
-foreign demand. And if, in times of great pressure, and under the
-temptation of high discounts, banks allow their circulation to expand
-to {347} a somewhat dangerous extent, the course is justified by the
-necessities. As shown at the outset, the process is one by which banks,
-on the deposit of good securities, loan their credit to traders who
-but for loans would be bankrupt. And that banks should run some risks
-to save hosts of solvent men from inevitable ruin, few will deny.
-Moreover, during a crisis which thus runs its natural course, there
-will really occur that purification of the mercantile world which many
-think can be effected only by some Act-of-Parliament ordeal. Under the
-circumstances described, men who have adequate securities to offer will
-get bank-accommodation; but those who, having traded without capital
-or beyond their means, have not, will be denied it, and will fail.
-Under a free system the good will be sifted from the bad; whereas the
-existing restrictions on bank-accommodation, tend to destroy good and
-bad together.
-
-Thus it is not true that there need special regulations to prevent
-the inconvertibility and depreciation of notes. It is not true that,
-but for legislative supervision, bankers would let gold drain out of
-the country to an undue extent. It is not true that these “currency
-theorists” have discovered a place at which the body-politic would
-bleed to death but for a State-styptic.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-What else we have to say on the general question, may best be joined
-with some commentaries on provincial and joint-stock banking, to which
-let us now turn.
-
-Government, to preserve the Bank of England-monopoly, having enacted
-that no partnership exceeding six persons should become bankers;
-and the Bank of England having refused to establish branches in the
-provinces; it happened, during the latter half of the last century,
-when the industrial progress was rapid and banks much needed, that
-numerous private traders, shopkeepers and others, began to issue
-notes payable on demand. And when, of the four {348} hundred small
-banks which had thus grown up in less than fifty years, a great
-number gave way under the first pressure—when, on several subsequent
-occasions, like results occurred—when in Ireland, where the Bank of
-Ireland-monopoly had been similarly guaranteed, it happened that
-out of fifty private provincial banks, forty became bankrupt—and
-when, finally, it grew notorious that in Scotland, where there had
-been no law limiting the number of partners, a whole century had
-passed with scarcely a single bank-failure; legislators at once
-decided to abolish the restriction which had entailed such mischiefs.
-Having, to use Mr. Mill’s words, “actually made the formation of
-safe banking-establishments a punishable offence”—having, for one
-hundred and twenty years, maintained a law which first caused
-great inconvenience and then extensive ruin, time after time
-repeated—Government, in 1826, conceded the liberty of joint-stock
-banking: a liberty which the good easy public, not distinguishing
-between a right done and a wrong undone, regarded as a great boon!
-
-But the liberty was not without conditions. Having previously, in
-anxiety for its _protégé_, the Bank of England, been reckless of
-the banking-security of the community at large, the State, like a
-repentant sinner rushing into asceticism, all at once became extremely
-solicitous on this point; and determined to put guarantees of its own
-devising, in place of the natural guarantee of mercantile judgment.
-To intending bank-shareholders it said—“You shall not unite on
-such publicly-understood conditions as you think fit, and get such
-confidence as will naturally come to you on those conditions.” And to
-the public it said—“You shall not put trust in this or that association
-in proportion as, from the character of its members and constitution,
-you judge it to be worthy of trust.” But to both it said—“You shall the
-one give, and the other receive, my infallible safeguards.”
-
-And now what have been the results? Every one knows {349} that these
-safeguards have proved anything but infallible. Every one knows that
-these banks with State-constitutions have been especially characterized
-by instability. Every one knows that credulous citizens, with a faith
-in legislation which endless disappointments fail to diminish, have
-trusted implicitly in these law-devised securities; and, not exercising
-their own judgments, have been led into ruinous undertakings. The evils
-of substituting artificial guarantees for natural ones, which the
-clear-sighted long ago discerned, have, by the late catastrophes, been
-made conspicuous to all.
-
-When commencing this article we had intended to dwell on this
-point. For though the mode of business which brought about these
-joint-stock-bank failures was, for weeks after their occurrence, time
-after time clearly described; yet nowhere did we see drawn the obvious
-corollary. Though in three separate City-articles of _The Times_, it
-was explained that, “relying upon the ultimate liability of large
-bodies of infatuated shareholders, the discount houses supply these
-banks with unlimited means, looking not to the character of the bills
-sent up, but simply to the security afforded by the Bank endorsement;”
-yet, in none of them was it pointed out that, but for the law of
-unlimited liability, this reckless trading would not have gone on.
-More recently, however, this truth has been duly recognized, alike in
-Parliament and in the Press; and it is therefore needless further to
-elucidate it. We will simply add that as, if there had been no law of
-unlimited liability, the London houses would not have discounted these
-bad bills; and as, in that case, these provincial joint-stock-banks
-could not have given these enormous credits to insolvent speculators;
-and as, if they had not done this, they would not have been ruined; it
-follows, inevitably, that these joint-stock-bank failures have been
-_law-produced disasters_.
-
-A measure for further increasing the safety of the provincial public,
-was that which limited the circulation of provincial bank-notes. At the
-same time that it established {350} a sliding-scale for the issues of
-the Bank of England, the Act of 1844 fixed the maximum circulation of
-every provincial bank-of-issue; and forbad any further banks-of-issue.
-We have not space to discuss at length the effects of this restriction;
-which must have fallen rather hardly on those especially-careful
-bankers who had, during the twelve weeks preceding the 27th April,
-1844, narrowed their issues to meet any incidental contingencies; while
-it gave a perennial license to such as had been incautious during that
-period. All which we can notice is, that this rigorous limitation of
-provincial issues to a low maximum (and a low maximum was purposely
-fixed) effectually prevents those local expansions of bank-note
-circulation which, as we have shown, _ought_ to take place in periods
-of commercial difficulty. And further, that by transferring all local
-demands to the Bank of England, as the only place from which extra
-accommodation can be had, the tendency is to concentrate a pressure
-which would else be diffused, and so to create panic.
-
-Saying nothing more, however, respecting the impolicy of the measure,
-let us mark its futility. As a means of preserving the convertibility
-of the provincial bank-note, it is useless unless it acts as some
-safeguard against bank-failures; and that it does not do this is
-demonstrable. While it diminishes the likelihood of failures caused by
-over-issue of notes, it increases the likelihood of failures from other
-causes. For what will be done by a provincial banker whose issues are
-restricted by the Act of 1844, to a level lower than that to which he
-would otherwise have let them rise? If he would, but for the law, have
-issued more notes than he now does—if his reserve is greater than,
-in his judgment, is needful for the security of his notes; is it not
-clear that he will simply extend his operations in other directions?
-Will not the excess of his available capital be to him a warrant either
-for entering into larger speculations himself, or for allowing his
-customers to draw on {351} him beyond the limit he would else have
-fixed? If, in the absence of restriction, his rashness would have led
-him to risk bankruptcy by over-issue, will it not now equally lead
-him to risk bankruptcy by over-banking? And is not the one kind of
-bankruptcy as fatal to the convertibility of notes as the other?
-
-Nay, the case is even worse. There is reason to believe that bankers
-are tempted into greater dangers under this protective system. They can
-and will hypothecate their capital in ways less direct than by notes;
-and may very likely be led, by the unobtrusiveness of the process, to
-commit themselves more than they would else do. A trader, applying to
-his banker in times of commercial difficulty, will often be met by the
-reply—“I cannot make you any direct advances, having already loaned
-as much as I can spare; but knowing you to be a safe man I will lend
-you my name. Here is my acceptance for the sum you require: they will
-discount it for you in London.” Now, as loans thus made do not entail
-the same immediate responsibilities as when made in notes (seeing that
-they are neither at once payable, nor do they add to the dangers of a
-possible run), a banker is under a temptation to extend his liabilities
-in this way further than he would have done, had not law forced him to
-discover a new channel through which to give credit.
-
-And does not the evidence that has lately transpired go to show
-that these roundabout ways of giving credit _do_ take the place
-of the interdicted ways; and that they _are_ more dangerous than
-the interdicted ways? Is it not notorious that dangerous forms of
-paper-currency have had an unexampled development since the Act of
-1844? Do not the newspapers and the debates give daily proofs of this?
-And is not the process of causation obvious?
-
-Indeed it might have been known, _a priori_, that such a result was
-sure to take place. It has been shown {352} conclusively that,
-when uninterfered with, the amount of note-circulation at any given
-time, is determined by the amount of trade going on—the quantity of
-payments that are being made. It has been repeatedly testified before
-committees, that when any local banker contracts his issues, he simply
-causes an equivalent increase in the issues of neighbouring bankers.
-And in past times it has been more than once complained, that when
-from prudential motives the Bank of England withdrew part of its
-notes, the provincial bankers immediately multiplied their notes to
-a proportionate extent. Well, is it not manifest that this inverse
-variation, which holds between one class of bank-notes and another,
-also holds between bank-notes and other forms of paper-currency?
-Will it not happen that just as diminishing the note-circulation of
-one bank, merely adds to the note-circulation of other banks; so, an
-artificial restriction on the circulation of bank-notes in general,
-will simply cause an increased circulation of some substituted kind
-of promise-to-pay? And is not this substituted kind, in virtue of its
-novelty and irregularity, likely to be a more unsafe kind? See, then,
-the predicament. Over all the bills of exchange, cheques, etc., which
-constitute nine-tenths of the paper-currency of the kingdom, the State
-exercises, and can exercise, no control. And the limit it puts on the
-remaining tenth vitiates the other nine-tenths, by causing an abnormal
-growth of new forms of credit, which experience proves to be especially
-dangerous.
-
-Thus, all which the State does when it exceeds its true duty is to
-hinder, to disturb, to corrupt. As already pointed out, the quantity
-of credit men will give each other, is determined by natural causes,
-moral and physical—their average characters, their temporary states of
-feeling, their circumstances. If the Government forbids one mode of
-giving credit, they will find another, and probably a worse. Be the
-degree of mutual trust prudent {353} or imprudent, it must take its
-course. The attempt to restrict it by law is nothing but a repetition
-of the old story of keeping out the sea with a fork.
-
-And now mark that were it not for these worse than futile
-State-safeguards, there might grow up certain natural safeguards, which
-would really put a check on undue credit and abnormal speculation. Were
-it not for the attempts to insure security by law, it is very possible
-that, under our high-pressure system of business, banks would compete
-with each other in respect of the degree of security they offered—would
-endeavour to outdo each other in the obtainment of a legitimate
-public confidence. Consider the position of a new joint-stock-bank
-with limited liability, and unchecked by legal regulations. It can
-do nothing until it has gained the general good opinion. In the way
-of this there stand great difficulties. Its constitution is untried,
-and is sure to be looked upon by the trading world with considerable
-distrust. The field is already occupied by old banks with established
-connexions and reputations. Out of a constituency satisfied with the
-present accommodation, it has to obtain supporters for a system which
-is apparently less safe than the old. How shall it do this? Evidently
-it must find some unusual mode of assuring the community of its
-trustworthiness. And out of a number of new banks so circumstanced, it
-is not too much to suppose that ultimately one would hit on some mode.
-It might be, for instance, that such a bank would give to all who held
-deposits over £1000 the liberty of inspecting its books—of ascertaining
-from time to time its liabilities and its investments. Already this
-plan is frequently adopted by private traders, as a means of assuring
-those who lend money to them; and this extension of it might naturally
-take place under the pressure of competition. We have put the question
-to a gentleman who has had long and successful experience, as manager
-of a joint-stock-bank, and his reply is, that some such course would
-very probably be adopted: adding that, {354} under this arrangement, a
-depositor would practically become a partner with limited liability.
-
-Were a system of this kind to establish itself, it would form a double
-check to unhealthy trading. Consciousness that its rashness would
-become known to its chief clients, would prevent the bank-management
-from being rash; and consciousness that his credit would be damaged
-when his large debt to the bank was whispered, would prevent the
-speculator from contracting so large a debt. Both lender and borrower
-would be restrained from reckless enterprize. Very little inspection
-would suffice to effect this end. One or two cautious depositors would
-be enough; seeing that the mere expectation of immediate disclosure, in
-case of misconduct, would mostly keep in order all those concerned.
-
-Should it however be contended, as by some it may, that this safeguard
-would be of no avail—should it be alleged that, having in their own
-hands the means of safety, citizens would not use them, but would still
-put blind faith in directors, and give unlimited trust to respectable
-names; then we reply that they would deserve whatever bad consequences
-fell on them. If they did not take advantage of the proffered
-guarantee, the penalty be on their own heads. We have no patience
-with the mawkish philanthropy which would ward-off the punishment of
-stupidity. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of
-folly, is to fill the world with fools.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-A few words in conclusion respecting the attitude of our opponents.
-Leaving joint-stock-bank legislation, on which the eyes of the public
-are happily becoming opened; and returning to the Bank-Charter, with
-its theory of currency-regulation; we have to charge its supporters
-with gross, if not wilful, misrepresentation. Their established policy
-is to speak of all antagonism as identified with adhesion to the
-vulgarest fallacies. They daily present, as the only alternatives,
-their own dogma or some wild doctrine too {355} absurd to be argued.
-“Side with us or choose anarchy,” is the substance of their homilies.
-
-To speak specifically:—They boldly assert, in the first place, that
-they are the upholders of “principle;” and on all opposition they seek
-to fasten the title of “empiricism.” Now we are at a loss to see what
-there is “empirical” in the position, that a bank-note-circulation
-will regulate itself in the same way that the circulation of other
-paper-currency does. It seems to us anything but “empirical,” to say
-that the natural check of prospective bankruptcy, which restrains the
-trader from issuing too many promises-to-pay at given dates, will
-similarly restrain the banker from issuing too many promises-to-pay on
-demand. We take him to be the very opposite of an “empiric,” who holds
-that people’s characters and circumstances determine the quantity of
-credit-memoranda in circulation; and that the monetary disorders which
-their imperfect characters and changing circumstances occasionally
-entail, can be exacerbated, but cannot be prevented, by State-nostrums.
-On the other hand, we do not see in virtue of what “principle” it
-is, that the contract expressed on the face of a bank-note must be
-dealt with differently from any other contract. We cannot understand
-the “principle” which requires the State to control the business of
-bankers, so that they may not make engagements they cannot fulfil, but
-which does _not_ require the State to do the like with other traders.
-To us it is a very incomprehensible “principle” which permits the Bank
-of England to issue £14,000,000 on the credit of the State; but which
-is broken if the State-credit is mortgaged beyond this—a “principle”
-which implies that £14,000,000 of notes may be issued without gold to
-meet them, but insists on rigorous precautions for the convertibility
-of every pound more. We are curious to learn how it was inferred from
-this “principle” that the average note-circulation of each provincial
-bank, during certain twelve weeks in 1844, was exactly the {356}
-note-circulation which its capital justified. So far from discerning a
-“principle,” it seems to us that both the idea and its applications are
-as empirical as they can well be.
-
-Still more astounding, however, is the assumption of these
-“currency-theorists,” that their doctrines are those of Free-trade.
-In the Legislature, Lord Overstone, and in the press, the _Saturday
-Review_, have, among others, asserted this. To call that a Free-trade
-measure, which has the avowed object of restricting certain voluntary
-acts of exchange, appears so manifest a contradiction in terms that
-it is scarcely credible it should be made. The whole system of
-currency-legislation is restrictionist from beginning to end: equally
-in spirit and detail. Is that a Free-trade regulation which has all
-along forbidden banks of issue within sixty-five miles of London?
-Is that Free-trade which enacts that none but such as have now the
-State-warrant, shall henceforth give promises-to-pay on demand? Is that
-Free-trade which at a certain point steps in between the banker and his
-customer, and puts a veto on any further exchange of credit-documents?
-We wonder what would be said by two merchants, the one about to draw
-a bill on the other in return for goods sold, who should be stopped
-by a State-officer with the remark that, having examined the buyer’s
-ledger, he was of opinion that ready as the seller might be to take
-the bill, it would be unsafe for him to do so; and that the law, in
-pursuance of the principles of Free-trade, negatived the transaction!
-Yet for the promise-to-pay in six months, it needs but to substitute a
-promise-to-pay on demand, and the case becomes substantially that of
-banker and customer.
-
-It is true that the “currency-theorists” have a colourable excuse
-in the fact, that among their opponents are the advocates of
-various visionary schemes, and propounders of regulations quite as
-protectionist in spirit as their own. It is true that there are some
-who contend for inconvertible “labour-notes;” and others who argue
-that, in times of {357} commercial pressure, banks should not raise
-their rates of discount. But is this any justification for recklessly
-stigmatizing all antagonism as coming from these classes, in the
-face of the fact that the Bank-Act has been protested against by
-the highest authorities in political economy? Do not the defenders
-of the “currency-principle” know that among their opponents are Mr.
-Thornton, long known as an able writer on currency-questions; Mr.
-Tooke and Mr. Newmarch, famed for their laborious and exhaustive
-researches respecting currency and prices; Mr. Fullarton, whose
-“Regulation of Currencies” is a standard work; Mr. Macleod, whose
-just-issued book displays the endless injustices and stupidities of our
-monetary history; Mr. James Wilson, M.P., who, in detailed knowledge
-of commerce, currency, and banking, is probably unrivalled; and Mr.
-John Stuart Mill, who both as logician and economist, stands in the
-first rank? Do they not know that the alleged distinction between
-bank-notes and other credit-documents, which forms the professed basis
-of the Bank-Act (and for which Sir R. Peel could quote only the one
-poor authority of Lord Liverpool) is denied, not only by the gentlemen
-above named, but also by Mr. Huskisson, Professor Storch, Dr. Travers
-Twiss, and the distinguished French Professors, M. Joseph Garnier and
-M. Michel Chevalier?[36] Do they not know, in short, that both the
-profoundest thinkers and the most patient inquirers are against them?
-If they do not know this, it is time they studied the subject on which
-they write with such an air of authority. If they do know it, a little
-more respect for their opponents would not be unbecoming.
-
- [36] See Mr. Tooke’s “Bank Charter Act of 1844,” etc.
-
-{358}
-
-
-
-
-PARLIAMENTARY REFORM: THE DANGERS AND THE SAFEGUARDS.
-
-[_First published in_ The Westminster Review _for April 1860_.]
-
-
-Thirty years ago, the dread of impending evils agitated not a few
-breasts throughout England. Instinctive fear of change, justified as
-it seemed by outbursts of popular violence, conjured up visions of the
-anarchy which would follow the passing of a Reform Bill. In scattered
-farm-houses there was chronic terror, lest those newly endowed with
-political power should in some way filch all the profits obtained by
-rearing cattle and growing corn. The occupants of halls and manors
-spoke of ten-pound householders almost as though they formed an army
-of spoilers, threatening to overrun and devastate the property of
-landholders. Among townspeople there were some who interpreted the
-abolition of old corruptions into the establishment of mob-government;
-which they thought equivalent to spoliation. And even in Parliament,
-such alarms found occasional utterance: as, for instance, through the
-mouth of Sir Robert Inglis, who hinted that the national debt would not
-improbably be repudiated if the proposed measure became law.
-
-There may perhaps be a few who regard the now pending change in the
-representation with similar dread—who think {359} that artizans
-and others of their grade are prepared, when the power is given
-to them, to lay hands on property. We presume, however, that such
-irrational alarmists form but a small percentage of the nation. Not
-only throughout the Liberal party, but among the Conservatives, there
-exists a much fairer estimate of the popular character than is implied
-by anticipations of so gloomy a kind. Many of the upper and middle
-classes are conscious of the fact that, if critically compared, the
-average conduct of the wealthy would not be found to differ very
-widely in rectitude from that of the poor. Making due allowance for
-differences in the kinds and degrees of temptations to which they are
-exposed, the respective grades of society are tolerably uniform in
-their morals. That disregard of the rights of property which, among
-the people at large, shows itself in the direct form of petty thefts,
-shows itself among their richer neighbours in various indirect forms,
-which are scarcely less flagitious and often much more detrimental
-to fellow-citizens. Traders, wholesale and retail, commit countless
-dishonesties, ranging from adulteration and short measure up to
-fraudulent bankruptcy—dishonesties of which we sketched out some of
-the ramifications in a late article on “The Morals of Trade.” The
-trickeries of the turf; the bribery of electors; the non-payment of
-tradesmen’s bills; the jobbing in railway-shares; the obtainment of
-exorbitant prices for land from railway-companies; the corruption that
-attends the getting of private bills through Parliament—these, and
-other such illustrations, show that the unconscientiousness of the
-upper class, manifested though it is in different forms, is not less
-than that of the lower class: bears as great a ratio to the size of the
-class, and, if traced to its ultimate results, produces evils as great
-if not greater.
-
-And if the facts prove that in uprightness of intentions there is
-little to choose between one class of the community and another, an
-extension of the franchise cannot rationally {360} be opposed on the
-ground that property would be directly endangered. There is no more
-reason to suppose that the mass of artizans and labourers would use
-political power with conscious injustice to their richer neighbours,
-than there is reason to suppose that their richer neighbours now
-consciously commit legal injustices against artizans and labourers.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-What, then, is the danger to be apprehended? If land, and houses,
-and railways, and funds, and property of all other kinds, would be
-held with no less security than now, why need there be any fears that
-the franchise would be misused? What are the misuses of it which are
-rationally to be anticipated?
-
-The ways in which those to be endowed with political power are likely
-to abuse it, may be inferred from the ways in which political power has
-been abused by those who have possessed it.
-
-What general trait has characterized the rule of the classes hitherto
-dominant? These classes have not habitually sought their own _direct_
-advantage at the expense of other classes; but their measures have
-nevertheless frequently been such as were _indirectly_ advantageous to
-themselves. Voluntary self-sacrifice has been the exception. The rule
-has been so to legislate as to preserve private interests from injury;
-whether public interests were injured or not. Though, in equity, a
-landlord has no greater claim on a defaulting tenant than any other
-creditor; yet landlords, having formed the majority of the legislature,
-have made laws giving them power to recover rent in anticipation
-of other creditors. Though the duties payable to government on the
-transfer of property to heirs and legatees, might justly have been
-made to fall more heavily on the wealthy than on the comparatively
-poor, and on real property rather than on personal property; yet the
-reverse arrangement was enacted and long maintained, and is even
-still partially in force. Rights of presentation to places in the
-Church, {361} obtained however completely in violation of the spirit
-of the law, are yet tenaciously defended, with little or no regard
-to the welfare of those for whom the Church ostensibly exists. Were
-it not accounted for by the bias of personal interests, it would be
-impossible to explain the fact that, on the question of protection
-to agriculture, the landed classes and their dependents were ranged
-against the other classes: the same evidence being open to both.
-And if there needs a still stronger illustration, we have it in the
-opposition made to the repeal of the Corn-Laws by the established
-clergy. Though, by their office, preachers of justice and mercy—though
-constantly occupied in condemning selfishness and holding up a supreme
-example of self-sacrifice; yet so swayed were they by those temporal
-interests which they thought endangered, that they offered to this
-proposed change an almost uniform resistance. Out of some ten thousand
-_ex officio_ friends of the poor and needy, there was but one (the Rev.
-Thomas Spencer), who took an active part in abolishing this tax imposed
-on the people’s bread for the maintenance of landlords’ rents.
-
-Such are a few of the ways in which, in modern times, those who have
-the power seek their own benefit at the expense of the rest. It is
-in analogous ways that we must expect any section of the community
-which may be made predominant by a political change, to sacrifice the
-welfare of other sections to its own. While we do not see reason to
-think that the lower classes are intrinsically less conscientious than
-the upper classes, we do not see reason to think that they are more
-conscientious. Holding, as we do, that in each society and in each
-age, the morality is, on the average, the same throughout all ranks;
-it seems to us clear that if the rich, when they have the opportunity,
-make laws which unduly favour themselves, the poor, if their power was
-in excess, will do the like in similar ways and to a similar extent.
-Without knowingly enacting injustice, they will be unconsciously biased
-by personal {362} considerations; and our legislation will err as much
-in a new direction as it has hitherto done in the old.
-
-This abstract conclusion we shall find confirmed on contemplating the
-feelings and opinions current among artizans and labourers. What the
-working classes now wish done, indicates what they would be likely to
-do, if a reform in the representation made them preponderate. Judging
-from their prevailing sentiments, they would doubtless do, or aid in
-doing, many things which it is desirable to have done. Such a question
-as that of Church-rates would have been settled long ago had the
-franchise been wider. Any great increase of popular influence, would
-go far to rectify the present inequitable relation of the established
-religious sect to the rest of the community. And other remnants of
-class-legislation would be swept away. But besides ideas likely to
-eventuate in changes which we should regard as beneficial, the working
-classes entertain ideas that could not be realized without gross
-injustice to other classes and ultimate injury to themselves. There is
-among them a prevailing enmity towards capitalists. The fallacy that
-machinery acts to their damage, is still widely spread, both among
-rural labourers and the inhabitants of towns. And they show a wish, not
-only to dictate how long per day men shall work, but to regulate all
-the relations between employers and employed. Let us briefly consider
-the evidence of this.
-
-When, adding another to the countless errors which it has taught the
-people, the Legislature, by passing the Ten-Hours-Bill, asserted that
-it is the duty of the State to limit the duration of labour, there
-naturally arose among the working classes the desire for further
-ameliorations to be secured in the same way. First came the formidable
-strike of the Amalgamated Engineers. The rules of this body aim to
-restrict the supply of labour in various ways. No member is allowed
-to work more than a fixed number of hours per week; nor for less
-than a fixed rate of wages. {363} No man is admitted into the trade
-who has not “earned a right by probationary servitude.” There is a
-strict registration; which is secured by fines on any one who neglects
-to notify his marriage, removal, or change of service. The council
-decides, without appeal, on all the affairs, individual and general,
-of the body. How tyrannical are the regulations may be judged from the
-fact, that members are punished for divulging anything concerning the
-society’s business; for censuring one another; for vindicating the
-conduct of those fined, etc. And their own unity of action having been
-secured by these coercive measures, the Amalgamated Engineers made a
-prolonged effort to impose on their employers, sundry restrictions
-which they supposed would be beneficial to themselves. More recently,
-we have seen similar objects worked for by similar means during the
-strike of the Operative Builders. In one of their early manifestoes,
-this body of men contended that they had “an equal right to share with
-other workers, that large amount of public sympathy which is now being
-so widely extended in the direction of shortening the hours of labour:”
-thus showing at once their delusion and its source. Believing, as they
-had been taught by an Act of Parliament to believe, that the relation
-between the quantity of labour given and the wages received, is not
-a natural but an artificial one; they demanded that while the wages
-remained the same, the hours should be reduced from ten to nine. They
-recommended their employers so to make their future contracts, as to
-allow for this diminished day’s work: saying they were “so sanguine as
-to consider the consummation of their desire inevitable:” a polite way
-of hinting that their employers must succumb to the irresistible power
-of their organization. Referring to the threat of the master-builders
-to close their works, they warned them against “the responsibility
-of causing the public disaster” thus indicated. And when the breach
-finally took place, the {364} Unionists set in action the approved
-appliances for bringing masters to terms; and would have succeeded had
-it not been that their antagonists, believing that concessions would
-be ruinous, made a united resistance. During several previous years,
-master-builders had been yielding to various extravagant demands, of
-which those recently made were a further development. Had they assented
-to the diminished day’s work, and abolished systematic overtime, as
-they were required to do, there is no reason to suppose the dictation
-would have ended. Success would have presently led to still more
-exacting requirements; and future years would have witnessed further
-extensions of this mischievous meddling between capital and labour.
-
-Perhaps the completest illustration of the industrial regulations
-which find favour with artizans, is supplied by the Printers’ Union.
-With the exception of those engaged in _The Times_ office, and in
-one other large establishment, the proprietors of which successfully
-resisted the combination, the compositors, pressmen, etc., throughout
-the kingdom, form a society which controls all the relations between
-employers and employed. There is a fixed price for setting up type—so
-much per thousand letters: no master can give less; no compositor being
-allowed by the Union to work for less. There are established rates for
-press-work; and established numbers less than which you cannot have
-printed without paying for work that is not done. The scale rises by
-what are called “tokens” of 250; and if but 50 copies are required,
-the charge is the same as for printing 250; or if 300 are wanted,
-payment must be made for 500. Besides regulating prices and modes of
-charging to their own advantage, in these and other ways, the members
-of the Union restrict competition by limiting the number of apprentices
-brought into the business. So well organized is this combination that
-the masters are obliged to succumb. An infraction of the rules in any
-{365} printing-office leads to a strike of the men; and as this is
-supported by the Union at large, the employer has to yield.
-
-That in other trades artizans would, if they could, establish
-restrictive systems equally complete with this, we take to
-be sufficiently proved by their often-repeated attempts. The
-Tin-plate-Workers’ strike, the Coventry-Weavers’ strikes, the
-Engineers’ strike, the Shoemakers’ strike, the Builders’ strike,
-all show a most decided leaning towards a despotic regulation of
-trade-prices, hours, and arrangements—towards an abolition of free
-trade between employers and employed. Should the men engaged in our
-various industries succeed in their aims, each industry would be so
-shackled as seriously to raise the cost of production. The chief
-penalty would thus fall on the working classes themselves. Each
-producer, while protected in the exercise of his own occupation, would
-on every commodity he bought have to pay an extra price, consequent
-on the protection of other producers. In short, there would be
-established, under a new form, the old mischievous system of mutual
-taxation. And a final result would be such a diminished ability to
-compete with other nations as to destroy our foreign trade.
-
-Against results like these it behoves us to guard. It becomes a grave
-question how far we may safely give political power to those who
-entertain views so erroneous respecting fundamental social relations;
-and who so pertinaciously struggle to enforce these erroneous views.
-Men who render up their private liberties to the despotic rulers of
-trades-unions, seem scarcely independent enough rightly to exercise
-political liberties. Those who so ill understand the nature of freedom,
-as to think that any man or body of men has a right to prevent employer
-and employed from making any contract they please, would almost
-appear to be incapacitated for the guardianship of their own freedom
-and that of their fellow-citizens. When their notions of rectitude
-are so confused, that they think it a duty to obey the arbitrary
-{366} commands of their union-authorities, and to abandon the right
-of individually disposing of their labour on their own terms—when,
-in conformity with this inverted sense of duty, they even risk the
-starvation of their families—when they call that an “odious document”
-which simply demands that master and man shall be free to make their
-own bargains—when their sense of justice is so obtuse that they are
-ready to bully, to deprive of work, to starve, and even to kill,
-members of their own class who rebel against dictation, and assert
-their rights to sell their labour at such rates and to such persons
-as they think fit—when in short they prove themselves ready to become
-alike slaves and tyrants, we may well pause before giving them the
-franchise.
-
-The objects which artizans have long sought to achieve by their private
-organizations, they would, had they adequate political power, seek
-to achieve by public enactments. If, on points like those instanced,
-their convictions are so strong and their determination so great, that
-they will time after time submit to extreme privations in the effort
-to carry them; it is a reasonable expectation that these convictions,
-pushed with this determination, would soon be expressed in law, if
-those who held them had predominant power. With working men, questions
-concerning the regulation of labour are of the highest interest.
-Candidates for Parliament would be more likely to obtain their
-suffrages by pandering to their prejudices on such questions, than in
-any other way. Should it be said that no evil need be feared unless
-the artizan-class numerically preponderated in the constituencies;
-it may be rejoined that not unfrequently, where two chief political
-parties are nearly balanced, some other party, though much smaller,
-determines the election. When we bear in mind that the trades-unions
-throughout the kingdom number 600,000 members, and command a fund of
-£300,000—when we remember that these trades-unions are in the habit of
-aiding each other, and have even been incorporated into one national
-association—when we also remember that {367} their organization
-is very complete, and their power over their members mercilessly
-exercised; it seems likely that at a general election their combined
-action would decide the result in many towns: even though the artizans
-in each case formed but a moderate portion of the constituency. How
-influential small but combined bodies are, the Irish Members of
-our House of Commons prove to us; and still more clearly the Irish
-emigrants in America. Certainly these trade-combinations are not less
-perfectly organized; nor are the motives of their members less strong.
-Judge then how efficient their political action would be.
-
-It is true that in county-constituencies and rural towns, the artizan
-class have no power; and that in the antagonism of agriculturists
-there would be a restraint on their projects. But, on the other hand,
-the artizans would, on these questions, have the sympathy of many not
-belonging to their own body. Numerous small shopkeepers and others who
-are in point of means about on their level, would go with them in their
-efforts to regulate the relations of capital and labour. Among the
-middle classes, too, there are not a few kindly-disposed men who are
-so ignorant of political economy as to think the artizans justified in
-their aims. Even among the landed class they might find supporters. We
-have but to recollect the antipathy shown by landowners in Parliament
-to the manufacturing interest, during the ten-hours’ agitation, to see
-that it is quite possible for country squires to join the working men
-in imposing restrictions unfavourable to employers. True, the angry
-feeling which then prompted them has in some measure died away. It is
-to be hoped, too, that they have gained wisdom. But still, remembering
-the past, we must take this contingency into account.
-
-Here, then, is one of the dangers to which an extension of the
-franchise opens the door. While the fear that the rights of property
-may be directly interfered with, is absurd, it is a very rational fear
-that the rights of property may be indirectly interfered with—that, by
-cramping laws, {368} the capitalist may be prevented from using his
-money as he finds best, and the workman from selling his labour as he
-pleases. We are not prepared to say what widening of the representation
-would bring about such results. We profess neither to estimate what
-amount of artizan-power a £6 or a £5 borough-franchise would give; nor
-to determine whether the opposing powers would suffice to keep it in
-check. Our purpose here is simply to indicate this establishment of
-injurious industrial regulations, as one of the dangers to be kept in
-view.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Turn we now to another danger, distinct from the foregoing though
-near akin to it. Next after the evils of that over-legislation which
-restricts the exchange of capital and labour, come the evils of that
-over-legislation which provides for the community, by State-agency,
-benefits which capital and labour should be left spontaneously to
-provide. And it naturally, though unfortunately, happens, that those
-who lean to the one kind of over-legislation, lean also to the other
-kind. Men leading laborious lives, relieved by little in the shape of
-enjoyment, give willing ears to the doctrine that the State should
-provide them with various positive advantages and gratifications. The
-much-enduring poor cannot be expected to deal very critically with
-those who promise them gratis pleasures. As a drowning man catches at
-a straw, so will one whose existence is burdensome catch at anything,
-no matter how unsubstantial, which holds out the slightest hope of a
-little happiness. We must not, therefore, blame the working-classes for
-being ready converts to socialistic schemes, or to a belief in “the
-sovereign power of political machinery.”
-
-Not that the working-classes alone fall into these delusions.
-Unfortunately they are countenanced, and have been in part misled, by
-those above them. In Parliament and out of Parliament, well-meaning men
-among the upper and middle ranks, have been active apostles of these
-false {369} doctrines. There has ever been, and continues to be, much
-law-making based on the assumption, that it is the duty of the State,
-not simply to insure each citizen fair play in the battle of life, but
-to help him in fighting the battle of life: having previously taken
-money from his, or some one else’s, pocket to pay the cost of doing
-this. And we cannot glance over the papers without seeing how active
-are the agitations carried on out of doors in furtherance of this
-policy; and how they threaten to become daily more active. The doings
-of the Chadwick-school furnish one set of illustrations. From those
-of the Shaftesbury-school other illustrations may be gathered. And in
-the transactions of the body, absurdly self-entitled “The National
-Association for the Promotion of Social Science,” we find still more
-numerous developments of this mischievous error.
-
-When we say that the working-classes, and more especially the
-artizan-classes, have strong leanings towards these Utopianisms which
-they have unhappily been encouraged to entertain by many who should
-have known better, we do not speak at random. We are not drawing an _a
-priori_ inference as to the doctrines likely to find favour with men
-in their position. Nor are we guided merely by evidence to be gathered
-from newspapers. We have a basis of definite fact in the proceedings
-of reformed municipal governments. These bodies have from year to year
-extended their functions; and so heavy has in some cases become the
-consequent local taxation, as to have caused a reaction against the
-political party which was responsible. Town-councils almost exclusively
-Whig, have of late been made comparatively Conservative, by the efforts
-of those richer classes who suffer most from municipal extravagance.
-With whom, then, has this extravagance been popular? With the poorer
-members of the constituencies. Candidates for town-councillorships
-have found no better means of obtaining the suffrages of the mass,
-than the advocacy of this or the other local undertaking. To {370}
-build baths and wash-houses at the expense of the town, has proved a
-popular proposal. The support of public gardens out of funds raised
-by local rates, has been applauded by the majority. So, too, with
-the establishment of free libraries, which has, of course, met with
-encouragement from working-men, and from those who wish to find favour
-with them. Should some one, taking a hint from the cheap concerts now
-common in our manufacturing towns, propose to supply music at the
-public cost, we doubt not he would be hailed as a friend of the people.
-And similarly with countless socialistic schemes, of which, when once
-commenced, there is no end.
-
-Such being the demonstrated tendencies of municipal governments, with
-their extended bases of representation, is it not a fair inference
-that a Central Government having a base of representation much wider
-than the present, would manifest like tendencies? We shall see the
-more reason for fearing this, when we remember that those who approve
-of multiplied State-agencies, would generally ally themselves with
-those who seek for the legislative regulation of labour. The doctrines
-are near akin; and they are, to a considerable extent, held by the
-same persons. If united the two bodies would have a formidable power;
-and, appealed to, as they would often be, by candidates expressing
-agreement on both these points, they might, even though a minority,
-get unduly represented in the legislature. Such, at least, seems to us
-a further danger. Led by philanthropists having sympathies stronger
-than their intellects, the working-classes are very likely to employ
-their influence in increasing over-legislation: not only by agitating
-for industrial regulations, but in various other ways. What extension
-of franchise would make this danger a serious one, we do not pretend
-to say. Here, as before, we would simply indicate a probable source of
-mischief.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now what are the safeguards? Not such as we {371} believe will
-be adopted. To meet evils like those which threaten to follow the
-impending political change, the common plan is to devise special
-checks—minor limitations and qualifications. Not to dry up the evil at
-its source but to dam it out, is, in analogous cases, the usual aim.
-We have no faith in such methods. The only efficient safeguard lies
-in a change of convictions and motives. And, to work a change of this
-kind, there is no certain way but that of letting men directly feel
-the penalties which mistaken legislation brings on them. “How is this
-to be done?” the reader will doubtless ask. Simply by letting causes
-and effects stand in their natural relations. Simply by taking away
-those vicious arrangements which now mostly prevent men from seeing the
-reactions that follow legislative actions.
-
-At present the extension of public administrations is popular, mainly
-because there has not been established in the minds of the people,
-any distinct connexion between the benefits to be gained and the
-expenses to be paid. Of the conveniences or gratifications secured to
-them by some new body of officials with a fund at its disposal, they
-have immediate experience; but of the way in which the costs fall
-on the nation, and ultimately on themselves, they have no immediate
-experience. Our fiscal arrangements dissociate the ideas of increased
-public expenditure and increased burdens on all who labour; and thus
-encourage the superstition that law can give gratis benefits. This is
-clearly the chief cause of that municipal extravagance to which we have
-above adverted. The working men of our towns possess public power,
-while most of them do not directly bear public burdens. On small houses
-the taxes for borough-purposes are usually paid by the landlords; and
-of late years, for the sake of convenience and economy, there has grown
-up a system of compounding with landlords of small houses even for the
-poor-rates chargeable to their tenants. Under this {372} arrangement,
-at first voluntary but now compulsory, a certain discount off the
-total rates due from a number of houses is allowed to the owner, in
-consideration of his paying the rates, and thus saving the authorities
-trouble and loss in collection. And he is supposed to raise his rents
-by the full amount of the rates charged. Thus, most municipal electors,
-not paying local taxes in a separate form, are not constantly reminded
-of the connexion between public expenditure and personal costs; and
-hence it happens that any outlay made for local purposes, no matter
-how extravagant and unreasonable, which brings to them some kind of
-advantage, is regarded as pure gain. If the corporation resolves,
-quite unnecessarily, to rebuild a town-hall, the resolution is of
-course approved by the majority. “It is good for trade and it costs us
-nothing,” is the argument which passes vaguely through their minds. If
-some one proposes to buy an adjoining estate and turn it into a public
-park, the working classes naturally give their support to the proposal;
-for ornamental grounds cannot but be an advantage, and though the rates
-may be increased that will be no affair of theirs. Thus necessarily
-arises a tendency to multiply public agencies and increase public
-outlay. It becomes an established policy with popularity-hunters to
-advocate new works to be executed by the town. Those who disapprove
-this course are in fear that their seats may be jeopardized at the next
-election, should they make a vigorous opposition. And thus do these
-local administrations inevitably lean towards abnormal developments.
-
-No one can, we think, doubt that were the rates levied directly on
-all electors, a check would be given to this municipal communism.
-If each small occupier found that every new work undertaken by the
-authorities cost him so many pence extra in the pound, he would begin
-to consider with himself whether the advantage gained was equivalent
-to the price paid; and would often reach a {373} negative conclusion.
-It would become a question with him whether, instead of letting the
-local government provide him with certain remote advantages in return
-for certain moneys, he might not himself purchase with such moneys
-immediate advantages of greater worth; and, generally, he would
-decide that he could do this. Without saying to what extent such a
-restraint would act, we may safely say that it would be beneficial.
-Every one must admit that each inhabitant of a town ought constantly
-to be reminded of the relation between the work performed for him by
-the corporation and the sum he pays for it. No one can deny that the
-habitual experience of this relation would tend to keep the action of
-local governments within proper bounds.
-
-Similarly with the Central Government. Here the effects wrought by
-public agencies are still more dissociated from the costs they entail
-on each citizen. The bulk of the taxes being raised in so unobtrusive
-a way, and affecting the masses in modes so difficult to trace, it is
-scarcely possible for the masses to realize the fact that the sums paid
-by Government for supporting schools, for facilitating emigration,
-for inspecting mines, factories, railways, ships, etc., have been in
-great part taken from their own pockets. The more intelligent of them
-understand this as an abstract truth; but it is not a truth present to
-their minds in such a definite shape as to influence their actions.
-Quite otherwise, however, would it be if taxation were direct; and
-the expense of every new State-agency were felt by each citizen as an
-additional demand made on him by the tax-gatherer. Then would there
-be a clear, constantly-recurring experience of the truth, that for
-everything which the State gives with one hand it takes away something
-with the other; and then would it be less easy to propagate absurd
-delusions about the powers and duties of Governments. No one can
-question this conclusion who calls to mind the reason currently given
-for maintaining {374} indirect taxation; namely, that the required
-revenue could not otherwise be raised. Statesmen see that if instead of
-taking from the citizen here a little and there a little, in ways that
-he does not know or constantly forgets, the whole amount were demanded
-in a lump sum, it would scarcely be possible to get it paid. Grumbling
-and resistance would rise probably to disaffection. Coercion would
-in hosts of cases be needed to obtain this large total tax; which,
-indeed, even with this aid, could not be obtained from the majority
-of the people, whose improvident habits prevent the accumulation of
-considerable sums. And so the revenue would fall immensely short of
-that expenditure which is supposed necessary. This being assented to,
-it must perforce be admitted that under a system of direct taxation,
-further extension of public administrations, entailing further costs,
-would meet with general opposition. Instead of multiplying the
-functions of the State, the tendency would obviously be to reduce their
-number.
-
-Here, then, is one of the safeguards. The incidence of taxation
-must be made more direct in proportion as the franchise is
-extended. Our changes ought not to be in the direction of the
-Compound-Householders-Act of 1851, which makes it no longer needful for
-a Parliamentary elector to have paid poor-rates before giving a vote;
-but they ought to be in the opposite direction. The exercise of power
-over the national revenue, should be indissolubly associated with the
-_conscious_ payment of contributions to that revenue. Direct taxation
-instead of being limited, as many wish, must be extended to lower and
-wider classes, as fast as these classes are endowed with political
-power.
-
-Probably this proposal will be regarded with small favour by statesmen.
-It is not in the nature of things for men to approve a system which
-tends to restrict their powers. We know, too, that any great extension
-of direct taxation will be held at present impossible; and we are not
-prepared {375} to assert the contrary. This, however, is no reason
-against reducing the indirect taxation and augmenting the direct
-taxation as far as circumstances allow. And if when the last had
-been increased and the first decreased to the greatest extent now
-practicable, it were made an established principle that any additional
-revenue must be raised by direct taxes, there would be an efficient
-check to one of the evils likely to follow from further political
-enfranchisement.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The other evil which we have pointed out as rationally to be feared,
-cannot be thus met, however. Though an ever-recurring experience of
-the relation between State-action and its cost, would hinder the
-growth of those State-agencies which undertake to supply citizens with
-positive conveniences and gratifications; it would be no restraint on
-that negative and inexpensive over-legislation which trespasses on
-individual freedom—it would not prevent mischievous meddling with the
-relations between labour and capital. Against this danger the only
-safeguards appear to be, the spread of sounder views among the working
-classes, and the moral advance which such sounder views imply.
-
-“That is to say, the people must be educated,” responds the reader.
-Yes, education is the thing wanted; but not the education for which
-most men agitate. Ordinary school-training is not a preparation for the
-right exercise of political power. Conclusive proof of this is given by
-the fact that the artizans, from whose mistaken ideas the most danger
-is to be feared, are the best informed of the working classes. Far
-from promising to be a safeguard, the spread of such education as is
-commonly given appears more likely to increase the danger. Raising the
-working classes in general to the artizan-level of culture, threatens
-to augment, rather than to diminish, their power of working political
-evil. The current faith in Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic, as fitting
-men for citizenship, seems to us quite {376} unwarranted; as are,
-indeed, most other anticipations of the benefits to be derived from
-learning lessons. There is no connexion between the ability to parse
-a sentence, and a clear understanding of the causes which determine
-the rate of wages. The multiplication-table affords no aid in seeing
-through the fallacy that the destruction of property is good for
-trade. Long practice may have produced extremely good penmanship
-without having given the least power to understand the paradox that
-machinery eventually increases the number of persons employed in the
-trades into which it is introduced. Nor is it proved that smatterings
-of mensuration, astronomy, or geography, fit men for estimating the
-characters and motives of Parliamentary candidates. Indeed we have only
-thus to bring together the antecedents and the anticipated consequents,
-to see how untenable is the belief in a relation between them. When we
-wish a girl to become a good musician, we seat her before the piano:
-we do not put drawing implements into her hands, and expect music to
-come along with skill in the use of pencils and colour-brushes. Sending
-a boy to pore over law-books would be thought an extremely irrational
-way of preparing him for civil engineering. And if in these and all
-other cases, we do not expect fitness for any function except through
-instruction and exercise in that function; why do we expect fitness
-for citizenship to be produced by a discipline which has no relation
-to the duties of the citizen? Probably it will be replied that by
-making the working man a good reader, we give him access to sources of
-information from which he may learn how to use his electoral power; and
-that other studies sharpen his faculties and make him a better judge
-of political questions. This is true; and the eventual tendency is
-unquestionably good. But what if for a long time to come he reads only
-to obtain confirmation of his errors? What if there exists a literature
-appealing to his prejudices, and supplying him with fallacious
-arguments for the mistaken beliefs which he naturally takes {377} up?
-What if he rejects all teaching that aims to disabuse him of cherished
-delusions? Must we not say that the culture which thus merely helps the
-workman to establish himself in error, rather unfits than fits him for
-citizenship? And do not the trades’-unions furnish evidence of this?
-
-How little that which people commonly call education prepares them
-for the use of political power, may be judged from the incompetency
-of those who have received the highest education the country affords.
-Glance back at the blunders of our legislation, and then remember that
-the men who committed them had mostly taken University-degrees; and
-you must admit that the profoundest ignorance of Social Science may
-accompany intimate acquaintance with all which our cultivated classes
-regard as valuable knowledge. Do but take a young member of Parliament,
-fresh from Oxford or Cambridge, and ask him what he thinks Law should
-do, and why? or what it should not do, and why? and it will become
-manifest that neither his familiarity with Aristotle nor his readings
-in Thucydides, have prepared him to answer the very first question a
-legislator ought to solve. A single illustration will suffice to show
-how different an education from that usually given, is required by
-legislators, and consequently by those who elect them: we mean the
-illustration which the Free-trade agitation supplies. By kings, peers,
-and members of Parliament, mostly brought up at universities, trade had
-been hampered by protections, prohibitions, and bounties. For centuries
-had been maintained these legislative appliances which a very moderate
-insight shows to be detrimental. Yet, of all the highly-educated
-throughout the nation during these centuries, scarcely a man saw how
-mischievous such appliances were. Not from one who devoted himself to
-the most approved studies, came the work which set politicians right
-on these points; but from one who left college without a degree,
-and prosecuted inquiries which the established education ignored.
-Adam {378} Smith examined for himself the industrial phenomena of
-societies; contemplated the productive and distributive activities
-going on around him; traced out their complicated mutual dependences;
-and thus reached general principles for political guidance. In recent
-days, those who have most clearly understood the truths he enunciated,
-and by persevering exposition have converted the nation to their views,
-have not been graduates of universities. While, contrariwise, those
-who have passed through the prescribed _curriculum_, have commonly
-been the most bitter and obstinate opponents of the changes dictated
-by politico-economical science. In this all-important direction, right
-legislation was urged by men deficient in the so-called best education,
-and was resisted by the great majority of men who had received this
-so-called best education!
-
-The truth for which we contend, and which is so strangely overlooked,
-is, indeed, almost a truism. Does not our whole theory of training
-imply that the right preparation for political power is political
-cultivation? Must not that teaching which can alone guide the citizen
-in the fulfilment of his public actions, be a teaching that acquaints
-him with the effects of his public actions?
-
-The second chief safeguard to which we must trust is, then, the spread,
-not of that mere technical and miscellaneous knowledge which men are
-so eagerly propagating, but of political knowledge; or, to speak more
-accurately—knowledge of Social Science. Above all, the essential thing
-is the establishment of a true theory of government—a true conception
-of what legislation is for, and what are its proper limits. This
-question which our political discussions habitually ignore, is a
-question of greater moment than any other. Inquiries which statesmen
-deride as speculative and unpractical, will one day be found infinitely
-more practical than those which they wade through Blue Books to master,
-and nightly spend many hours in debating. The considerations that
-every morning fill a dozen columns {379} of _The Times_, are mere
-frivolities when compared with the fundamental consideration—What is
-the proper sphere of government? Before discussing the way in which
-law should regulate some particular thing, would it not be wise to
-put the previous question—Whether law ought or ought not to meddle
-with that thing? and before answering this, to put the more general
-questions—What law should do? and what it should leave undone? Surely,
-if there are any limits at all to legislation, the settlement of these
-limits must have effects far more profound than any particular Act of
-Parliament can have; and must be by so much the more momentous. Surely,
-if there is danger that the people may misuse political power, it is
-of supreme importance that they should be taught for what purpose
-political power ought alone to be used.
-
-Did the upper classes understand their position they would, we think,
-see that the diffusion of sound views on this matter more nearly
-concerns their own welfare and that of the nation at large, than
-any other thing whatever. Popular influence will inevitably go on
-increasing. Should the masses gain a predominant power while their
-ideas of social arrangements and legislative action remain as crude
-as at present, there will certainly result disastrous meddlings with
-the relations of capital and labour, as well as a disastrous extension
-of State-administrations. Immense damage will be inflicted: primarily
-on employers; secondarily on the employed; and eventually on the
-nation as a whole. If these evils can be prevented at all, they can be
-prevented only by establishing in the public mind a profound conviction
-that there are certain definite limits to the functions of the State;
-and that these limits ought on no account to be transgressed. Having
-learned what these limits are, the upper classes ought to use all means
-of making them clear to the people.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-In No. XXIV. of this Review, for October, 1857, we {380} endeavoured
-to show that while representative government is, by its intrinsic
-nature, better than any other for administering justice or insuring
-equitable relations among citizens, it is, by its intrinsic nature,
-worse than any other for all the various additional functions which
-governments commonly undertake. To the question—What is representative
-government good for? our reply was—“It is good, especially good, good
-above all others, for doing the thing which a government should do.
-It is bad, especially bad, bad above all others, for doing the things
-which a government should not do.”
-
-To this truth we may here add a correlative one. As fast as a
-government, by becoming representative, grows better fitted for
-maintaining the rights of citizens, it grows not only unfitted for
-other purposes, but dangerous for other purposes. In gaining adaptation
-for the essential function of a government, it loses such adaptation
-as it had for other functions; not only because its complexity is a
-hindrance to administrative action, but also because in discharging
-other functions it must be mischievously influenced by class bias. So
-long as it is confined to the duty of preventing the aggressions of
-individuals on one another, and protecting the nation at large against
-external enemies, the wider its basis the better; for all men are
-similarly interested in the security of life, property, and freedom to
-exercise the faculties. But let it undertake to bring home positive
-benefits to citizens, or to interfere with any of the special relations
-between class and class, and there necessarily enters an incentive to
-injustice. For in no such cases can the immediate interests of all
-classes be alike. Therefore do we say that as fast as representation is
-extended, the sphere of government must be contracted.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-
-POSTSCRIPT.—Since the foregoing pages were written, Lord John Russell
-has introduced his Reform Bill; and in {381} application of the
-general principles we contend for, a few words may fitly be added
-respecting it.
-
-Of the extended county-franchise most will approve, save those whose
-illegitimate influence is diminished by it. Adding to the rural
-constituencies a class less directly dependent on large landowners,
-can scarcely fail to be beneficial. Even should it not at first
-perceptibly affect the choice of representatives, it will still be a
-good stimulus to political education and to consequent future benefits.
-Of the re-distribution of seats little is to be said, further than
-that, however far short it may fall of an equitable arrangement, it is
-perhaps as much as can at present be obtained.
-
-Whether the right limit for the borough-franchise has been chosen is,
-on the other hand, a question that admits of much discussion. Some
-hesitation will probably be felt by all who duly weigh the evidence on
-both sides. Believing, as we do, that the guidance of abstract equity,
-however much it may need qualification, must never be ignored, we
-should be glad were it at once practicable more nearly to follow it;
-since it is certain that only as fast as the injustice of political
-exclusion is brought to an end, will the many political injustices
-which grow out of it disappear. Nevertheless, we are convinced that
-the forms which freedom requires will not of themselves produce
-the reality of freedom, in the absence of an appropriate national
-character; any more than the most perfect mechanism will do its work
-in the absence of a motive power. There seems reason to think that the
-degree of liberty a people is capable of in any given age, is a fixed
-quantity; and that any artificial extension of it in one direction
-brings about an equivalent limitation in some other direction. French
-republics show scarcely any more respect for individual rights than
-the despotisms they supplant; and French electors use their freedom
-to put themselves again in slavery. In America the feeble restraints
-imposed by the {382} State are supplemented by the strong restraints
-of a public opinion which, in many respects, holds the citizens in
-greater bondage than here. And if there needs a demonstration that
-representative equality is an insufficient safeguard for freedom,
-we have it in the trades’-unions already referred to; which, purely
-democratic as are their organizations, yet exercise over their members
-a tyranny almost Neapolitan in its rigour and unscrupulousness. The
-greatest attainable amount of individual liberty being the true end;
-and the diffusion of political power being regarded mainly as a means
-to this end; the real question when considering further extensions of
-the franchise, is—whether the average freedom of action of citizens
-will be increased?—whether men will be severally freer than before to
-pursue the objects of life in their own way? Or, in the present case,
-the question is—whether the good which £7, £6, or £5 householders would
-do in helping to abolish existing injustices, will be partly or wholly
-neutralized by the evil they may do in establishing other injustices?
-The desideratum is as large an increase in the electorate as can be
-made without enabling the people to carry out their delusive schemes of
-over-legislation. Whether the increase proposed is greater or less than
-this, is the essential point. Let us briefly consider the evidence on
-each side.
-
-As shown by Lord J. Russell’s figures, the new borough-electors
-will consist mainly of artizans; and these, as we have seen, are
-in great part banded together by a common wish to regulate the
-relations of capital and labour. As a class, they are not as Lord J.
-Russell describes them, “fitted to exercise the franchise freely and
-independently.” On the contrary, there are no men in the community so
-shackled. They are the slaves of the authorities they have themselves
-set up. The dependence of farmers on landlords, or of operatives on
-employers, is much less servile; for they can carry their capital
-or labour elsewhere. But {383} the penalty for disobedience to
-trades-union dictates, pursues the rebel throughout the kingdom. Hence
-the great mass of the new borough-electors must be expected to act
-simultaneously, on the word of command being issued from a central
-council of united trades. Even while we write we meet with fresh reason
-for anticipating this result. An address from the Conference of the
-Building Trades to the working classes throughout the kingdom, has
-just been published; thanking them for their support; advising the
-maintenance of the organization; anticipating future success in their
-aims; and intimating the propriety of recommencing the nine-hours’
-agitation. We must, then, be prepared to see these industrial questions
-made leading questions; for artizans have a much keener interest in
-them than in any others. And we may feel certain that many elections
-will turn upon them.
-
-How many? There are some thirty boroughs in which the
-newly-enfranchised will form an actual majority—will, if they act
-together, be able to outvote the existing electors; even supposing
-the parties into which they are now divided were to unite. In
-half-a-dozen other boroughs the newly-enfranchised will form a virtual
-majority—will preponderate unless the present liberal and conservative
-voters co-operate with great unanimity, which they will be unlikely
-to do. And the number proposed to be added to the constituency, is
-one-half or more in nearly fifty other boroughs: that is, in nearly
-fifty other boroughs, the new party will be able to arbitrate between
-the two existing parties; and will give its support to whichever of
-these promises most aid to artizan-schemes. It maybe said that in this
-estimate we assume the whole of the new borough-electors to belong to
-the artizan-class, which they do not. This is true. But, on the other
-hand, it must be remembered that among the £10 householders there is a
-very considerable sprinkling of this class, while the freemen chiefly
-consist of it; and hence the whole artizan body in each constituency
-will probably {384} be not smaller than we have assumed. If so, it
-follows that should the trades-union organization be brought to bear
-on borough-elections, as it is pretty certain to be, it may prevail in
-some eighty or ninety places, and sway the votes of representatives in
-from 100 to 150 seats—supposing, that is, that it can obtain as many
-eligible candidates.
-
-Meanwhile, the county-constituencies in their proposed state, as much
-as in their existing state, not being under trades-union influence,
-may be expected to stand in antagonism to the artizan-constituencies;
-as may also the small boroughs. It is just possible, indeed, that
-irritated by the ever-growing power of a rich mercantile class,
-continually treading closer on their heels, the landowners, carrying
-with them their dependents, might join the employed in their dictation
-to employers; just as, in past times, the nobles joined the commonalty
-against the kings, or the kings joined the commonalty against the
-nobles. But leaving out this remote contingency, we may fairly expect
-the rural constituencies to oppose the large urban ones on these
-industrial questions. Thus, then, the point to be decided is, whether
-the benefits that will result from this extended suffrage—benefits
-which we doubt not will be great—may not be secured while the
-accompanying evil tendencies are kept in check. It may be that these
-new artizan-electors will be powerful for good, while their power to
-work evil will be in a great degree neutralized. But this we should
-like to see well discussed.
-
-On one question, however, we feel no hesitation; namely, the question
-of a ratepaying-qualification. From Lord John Russell’s answer to Mr.
-Bright, and more recently from his answer to Mr. Steel, we gather
-that on this point there is to be no alteration—that £6 householders
-will stand on the same footing that £10 householders do at present.
-Now by the Compound-Householders-Act of 1851, to which we have
-already referred, it is provided that tenants of £10 houses whose
-rates are paid by their {385} landlords, shall, after having _once_
-tendered payment of rates to the authorities, be thereafter considered
-as ratepayers, and have votes accordingly. That is to say, the
-ratepaying-qualification is made nominal; and that in practice it has
-become so, is proved by the fact that under this Act, 4000 electors
-were suddenly added to the constituency of Manchester.
-
-The continuance and extension of this arrangement we conceive to be
-wholly vicious. Already we have shown that the incidence of taxation
-ought to be made more direct as fast as popular power is increased, and
-that, as diminishing the elector’s personal experience of the costs of
-public administration, this abolition of a ratepaying-qualification
-is a retrograde step. But this is by no means the sole ground for
-disapproval. The ratepaying-qualification is a valuable test—a test
-which tends to separate the more worthy of the working classes from the
-less worthy. Nay more, it tends to select for enfranchisement, those
-who have the moral and intellectual qualities especially required for
-judicious political conduct. For what general mental characteristic
-does judicious political conduct presuppose? The power of realizing
-remote consequences. People who are misled by demagogues, are those who
-are impressed with the proximate results set forth to them but are not
-impressed by the distant results, even when these are explained—regard
-them as vague, shadowy, theoretical, and are not to be deterred by
-them from clutching at a promised boon. Conversely, the wise citizen
-is the one who conceives the distant evils so clearly that they are
-practically present to him, and thus outweigh the immediate temptation.
-Now these are just the respective characteristics of the two classes
-of tenants whom a ratepaying-qualification separates:—the one having
-their rates paid by their landlords and so losing their votes; the
-other paying their own rates that they may get votes:—the one unable to
-resist present temptations, unable to save money, {386} and therefore
-so inconvenienced by the payment of rates as to be disfranchised rather
-than pay them; the other resisting present temptations and saving
-money, with the view, among other ends, of paying rates and becoming
-electors. Trace these respective traits to their sources, and it
-becomes manifest that, on the average, the pecuniarily improvident must
-be also the politically improvident; and that the politically provident
-must be far more numerous among those who are pecuniarily provident.
-Hence, it is folly to throw aside a regulation under which these
-spontaneously separate themselves—severally disfranchise themselves and
-enfranchise themselves.
-
-{387}
-
-
-
-
-“THE COLLECTIVE WISDOM.”
-
-[_First published in_ The Reader _for April 15, 1865_.]
-
-
-A test of senatorial capacity is a desideratum. We rarely learn how
-near the mark or how wide of the mark the calculations of statesmen
-are: the slowness and complexity of social changes, hindering, as
-they do, the definite comparisons of results with anticipations.
-Occasionally, however, parliamentary decisions admit of being
-definitely valued. One which was arrived at a few weeks ago furnished a
-measure of legislative judgment too significant to be passed by.
-
-On the edge of the Cotswolds, just above the valley of the Severn,
-occur certain springs, which, as they happen to be at the end of the
-longest of the hundred streams which join to form the Thames, have been
-called by a poetical fiction “the sources of the Thames.” Names, even
-when poetical fictions, suggest conclusions; and conclusions drawn from
-words instead of facts are equally apt to influence conduct. Thus it
-happened that when, recently, there was formed a company for supplying
-Cheltenham and some other places from these springs, great opposition
-arose. The _Times_ published a paragraph headed “Threatened Absorption
-of the Thames,” stating that the application of {388} this company
-to Parliament had “caused some little consternation in the city of
-Oxford, and will, doubtless, throughout the valley of the Thames;”
-and that “such a measure, if carried out, will diminish the water
-of that noble river a million of gallons per day.” A million is an
-alarming word—suggests something necessarily vast. Translating words
-into thoughts, however, would have calmed the fears of the _Times_
-paragraphist. Considering that a million gallons would be contained
-by a room fifty-six feet cube, the nobility of the Thames would not
-be much endangered by the deduction. The simple fact is, that the
-current of the Thames, above the point at which the tides influence it,
-discharges in twenty-four hours eight hundred times this amount!
-
-When the bill of this proposed water-company was brought before the
-House of Commons for second reading, it became manifest that the
-imaginations of our rulers were affected by such expressions as the
-“sources of the Thames,” and “a million gallons daily,” in much the
-same way as the imaginations of the ignorant. Though the quantity of
-water proposed to be taken bears, to the quantity which runs over
-Teddington weir, about the same ratio that a yard bears to half a
-mile, it was thought by many members that its loss would be a serious
-evil. No method of measurement would be accurate enough to detect the
-difference between the Thames as it now is, and the Thames _minus_ the
-Cerney springs; and yet it was gravely stated in the House that, were
-the Thames diminished in the proposed way, “the proportion of sewage to
-pure water would be seriously increased.” Taking a minute out of twelve
-hours, would be taking as large a proportion as the Cheltenham people
-wish to take from the Thames. Nevertheless, it was contended that to
-let Cheltenham have this quantity would be “to rob the towns along the
-banks of the Thames of their rights,” Though, of the Thames flowing by
-each of these towns, some 999 parts out of 1,000 pass by unused, it was
-held {389} that a great injustice would be committed were one or two
-of these 999 parts appropriated by the inhabitants of a town who can
-now obtain daily but four gallons of foul water per head!
-
-But the apparent inability thus shown to think of causes and effects
-in something like their true quantitative relations, was still more
-conspicuously shown. It was stated by several members that the Thames
-Navigation Commissioners would have opposed the bill if the commission
-had not been bankrupt; and this hypothetical opposition appeared to
-have weight. If we may trust the reports, the House of Commons listened
-with gravity to the assertion of one of its members, that, if the
-Cerney springs were diverted, “shoals and flats would be created.” Not
-a laugh nor a cry of “Oh! oh,” appears to have been produced by the
-prophecy, that the volume and scouring power of the Thames would be
-seriously affected by taking away from it twelve gallons per second!
-The whole quantity which these springs supply would be delivered by a
-current moving through a pipe one foot in diameter at the rate of less
-than two miles per hour. Yet, when it was said that the navigability
-of the Thames would be injuriously affected by this deduction, there
-were no shouts of derision. On the contrary, the House rejected the
-Cheltenham Water Bill by a majority of one hundred and eighteen to
-eighty-eight. It is true that the data were not presented in the
-above shape. But the remarkable fact is that, even in the absence of
-a specific comparison, it should not have been at once seen that the
-water of springs which drain but a few square miles at most, can be
-but an inappreciable part of the water which runs out of the Thames
-basin, extending over several thousand square miles. In itself, this is
-a matter of small moment. It interests us here simply as an example of
-legislative judgment. The decision is one of those small holes through
-which a wide prospect may be seen, and a disheartening prospect it
-is. In a very simple case there {390} is here displayed a scarcely
-credible inability to see how much effect will follow so much cause;
-and yet the business of the assembly exhibiting this inability is that
-of dealing with causes and effects of an extremely involved kind. All
-the processes going on in society arise from the concurrences and
-conflicts of human actions, which are determined in their nature and
-amounts by the human constitution as it now is—are as much results of
-natural causation as any other results, and equally imply definite
-quantitative relations between causes and effects. Every legislative
-act presupposes a diagnosis and a prognosis; both of them involving
-estimations of social forces and the work done by them. Before it can
-be remedied, an evil must be traced to its source in the motives and
-ideas of men as they are, living under the social conditions which
-exist—a problem requiring that the actions tending toward the result
-shall be identified, and that there shall be something like a true idea
-of the quantities of their effects as well as the qualities. A further
-estimation has then to be made of the kinds and degrees of influence
-that will be exerted by the additional factors which the proposed
-law will set in motion: what will be the resultants produced by the
-new forces coöperating with preëxisting forces—a problem still more
-complicated than the other.
-
-We are quite prepared to hear the unhesitating reply, that men
-incapable of forming an approximately true judgment on a matter of
-simple physical causation may yet be very good law-makers. So obvious
-will this be thought by most, that a tacit implication to the contrary
-will seem to them absurd; and that it will seem to them absurd is one
-of the many indications of the profound ignorance that prevails. It
-is true that mere empirical generalizations which men draw from their
-dealings with their fellows suffice to give them some ideas of the
-proximate effects which new enactments will work; and, seeing these,
-they think they see as far as needful. Discipline in physical {391}
-science, however, would help to show them the futility of calculating
-consequences based on such simple data. And if there needs proof that
-calculations of consequences so based are futile, we have it in the
-enormous labour annually entailed on the Legislature in trying to undo
-the mischiefs it has previously done.
-
-Should any say that it is useless to dwell on this incompetency, seeing
-that the House of Commons contains the select of the nation, than whose
-judgments no better are to be had, we reply that there may be drawn
-two inferences which have important practical bearings. In the first
-place, we are shown how completely the boasted intellectual discipline
-of our upper classes fails to give them the power of following out in
-thought, with any correctness, the sequences of even simple phenomena,
-much less those of complex phenomena. And, in the second place, we may
-draw the corollary, that if the sequences of those complex phenomena
-which societies display, difficult beyond all others to trace out,
-are so unlikely to be understood by them, they may advantageously be
-restricted in their interferences with such sequences.
-
-In one direction, especially, shall we see reason to resist the
-extension of legislative action. There has of late been urged the
-proposal that the class contemptuously described as dividing its
-energies between business and bethels shall have its education
-regulated by the class which might, with equal justice, be described
-as dividing its energies between club-rooms and game preserves. This
-scheme does not seem to us a hopeful one. Considering that during the
-last half century our society has been remoulded by ideas that have
-come from the proposed pupil, and have had to overcome the dogged
-resistance of the proposed teacher, the propriety of the arrangement
-is not obvious. And if the propriety of the arrangement is not
-obvious on the face of it, still less obvious does it become when the
-competency of {392} the proposed teacher comes to be measured. British
-intelligence, as distilled through the universities and re-distilled
-into the House of Commons, is a product admitting of such great
-improvement in quality, that we should be sorry to see the present
-method of manufacture extended and permanently established.
-
-{393}
-
-
-
-
-POLITICAL FETICHISM.
-
-[_First published in_ The Reader _for June 10, 1865_.]
-
-
-A Hindoo, who, before beginning his day’s work, salaams to a bit of
-plastic clay, out of which, in a few moments, he has extemporized a god
-in his own image, is an object of amazement to the European. We read
-with surprise bordering on scepticism of worship done by machinery, and
-of prayers which owe their supposed efficacy to the motion given by the
-wind to the papers they are written on. When told how certain of the
-Orientals, if displeased with their wooden deities, take them down and
-beat them, men laugh and wonder.
-
-Why should men wonder? Kindred superstitions are exhibited by their
-fellows every day—superstitions that are, indeed, not so gross, but
-are intrinsically of the same nature. There is an idolatry which,
-instead of carving the object of its worship out of dead matter, takes
-humanity for its raw material, and expects, by moulding a mass of this
-humanity into a particular form, to give it powers or properties quite
-different from those it had before it was moulded. In the one case as
-in the other, the raw material is, as much as may be, disguised. There
-are decorative appliances by which the savage helps himself to think
-that he has something more than wood before him; and the {394} citizen
-gives to the political agencies he has helped to create, such imposing
-externals and distinctive names expressive of power, as serve to
-strengthen his belief in the benefits prayed for. Some faint reflection
-of that “divinity” which “doth hedge a king” spreads down through every
-state department to the lowest ranks; so that, in the eyes of the
-people, even the policeman puts on along with his uniform a certain
-indefinable power. Nay, the mere dead symbols of authority excite
-reverence in spite of better knowledge. A legal form of words seems to
-have something especially binding in it; and there is a preternatural
-efficiency about a government stamp.
-
-The parallelism is still more conspicuous between the persistency of
-faith in the two cases, notwithstanding perpetual disappointments. It
-is difficult to perceive how graven images, that have been thrashed
-for not responding to their worshipper’s desires, should still be
-reverenced and petitioned; but the difficulty of conceiving this is
-diminished when we remember how, in their turns, all the idols in
-our political pantheon undergo castigations for failing to do what
-was expected of them, and are nevertheless daily looked up to in the
-trustful hope that future prayers will be answered. The stupidity,
-the slowness, the perversity, the dishonesty of officialism, in one
-or other of its embodiments, are demonstrated afresh in almost every
-newspaper that issues. Probably half the leading articles written have
-for texts some absurd official blunder, some exasperating official
-delay, some astounding official corruption, some gross official
-injustice, some incredible official extravagance. And yet these
-whippings, in which balked expectation continually vents itself, are
-immediately followed by renewed faith: the benefits that have not
-come are still hoped for, and prayers for others are put up. Along
-with proof that the old State-machines are in themselves inert, and
-owe such powers as they seem to have to the public opinion which
-sets their parts in motion, there are continually proposed {395}
-new State-machines of the same type as the old. This inexhaustible
-credulity is counted on by men of the widest political experience.
-Lord Palmerston, who probably knows his public better than any other
-man, lately said, in reply to a charge made in the House—“I am quite
-convinced that no person belonging to the government, in whatever
-department he may be, high or low, would be guilty of any breach of
-faith in regard to any matter confided to him.” To assert as much in
-the face of facts continually disclosed, implies that Lord Palmerston
-knows well that men’s faith in officialism survives all adverse
-evidence.
-
-In which case are the hopes from State-agency realized? One might
-have thought that the vital interests at stake would have kept the
-all-essential apparatus for administering justice up to its work; but
-they do not. On the one hand, here is a man wrongly convicted, and
-afterward proved to be innocent, who is “pardoned” for an offence
-he did not commit; and has this as consolation for his unmerited
-suffering. On the other hand, here is a man whose grave delinquencies
-a Lord Chancellor overlooks, on partial restitution being made—nay,
-more, countenances the granting of a pension to him. Proved guilt is
-rewarded, while proved innocence is left without compensation for
-pains borne and fortunes blasted! This marvellous antithesis, if not
-often fully paralleled in the doings of officialism as administrator
-of justice, is, in endless cases, paralleled in part. The fact that
-imprisonment is the sentence on a boy for stealing a pennyworth of
-fruit, while thousands of pounds may be transferred from a public
-into a private purse without any positive punishment being adjudged,
-is an anomaly kept in countenance by numerous other judicial acts.
-Theoretically, the State is a protector of the rights of subjects;
-practically, the State continually plays the part of aggressor. Though
-it is a recognized principle of equity that he who makes a false charge
-shall pay the costs of the {396} defence, yet, until quite recently,
-the Crown has persisted in refusing to pay the costs of citizens
-against whom it has brought false charges. Nay, worse, deliberate
-attempts used to be made to establish charges by corrupt means. Within
-the memory of those now living, the Crown, in excise-prosecutions,
-bribed juries. When the verdict was for the Crown, the custom was to
-give double fees; and the practice was not put an end to until the
-counsel for a defendant announced in open court that the jury should
-have double fees if their verdict was for his client!
-
-Not alone in the superior parts of our judicial apparatus is this
-ill-working of officialism so thrust on men’s notice as to have
-become proverbial; not alone in the life-long delays and ruinous
-expenses which have made Chancery a word of dread; not alone in the
-extravagances of bankruptcy courts, which lead creditors carefully to
-shun them; not alone in that uncertainty which makes men submit to
-gross injustice rather than risk the still grosser injustice which
-the law will, as likely as not, inflict on them; but down through the
-lower divisions of the judicial apparatus are all kinds of failures
-and absurdities daily displayed. If may be fairly urged in mitigation
-of the sarcasms current respecting the police, that among so many men
-cases of misconduct and inefficiency must be frequent; but we might
-have expected the orders under which they act to be just and well
-considered. Very little inquiry shows that they are not. There is a
-story current that, in the accounts of an Irish official, a small
-charge for a telegram which an emergency had called for, was objected
-to at the head office in London, and, after a long correspondence,
-finally allowed, but with the understanding that in future no such
-item would be passed, unless the department in London had authorized
-it! We cannot vouch for this story, but we can vouch for one which
-gives credibility to it. A friend who had been robbed by his cook
-went to the police-office, detailed the case, gave good reasons for
-inferring the direction of her {397} flight, and requested the police
-to telegraph, that she might be intercepted. He was told, however,
-that they could not do this without authority; and this authority was
-not to be had without a long delay. The result was that the thief, who
-had gone to the place supposed, escaped, and has not since been heard
-of. Take another function assumed by the police—the regulation of
-traffic. Daily, all through London, ten thousand fast-going vehicles,
-with hard-pressed men of business in them, are stopped by a sprinkle
-of slow-going carts and wagons. Greater speed in these comparatively
-few carts and wagons, or limitation of them to early and late hours,
-would immensely diminish the evil. But, instead of dealing with these
-really great hinderances to traffic, the police deal with that which
-is practically no hindrance. Men with advertisement-boards were lately
-forbidden to walk about, on the groundless plea that they are in the
-way; and incapables, prevented thus from getting a shilling a day,
-were driven into the ranks of paupers and thieves. Worse cases may be
-observed. For years past there has been a feud between the police and
-the orange-girls, who are chased hither and thither because they are
-said to be obstructions to foot-passengers. Meanwhile, in some of the
-chief thoroughfares, may constantly be seen men standing with toys,
-which they delude children and their parents into buying by pretending
-that the toys make certain sounds which they themselves make; and when
-the police, quietly watching this obtainment of money under false
-pretences, are asked why they do not interfere, they reply that they
-have no orders. Admirable contrast! Trade dishonestly, and you may
-collect a small crowd on the pavement without complaint being made that
-you interrupt the traffic. Trade honestly, and you shall be driven from
-the pavement-edge as an impediment—shall be driven to dishonesty!
-
-One might have thought that the notorious inefficiency of officialism
-as a protector against injustice would have {398} made men sceptical
-of its efficiency in other things. If here, where citizens have such
-intense interests in getting a function well discharged, they have
-failed through all these centuries in getting it well discharged—if
-this agency, which is in theory the guardian of each citizen, is
-in so many cases his enemy, that going to law is suggestive of
-impoverishment and possible ruin; it might have been supposed that
-officialism would scarcely be expected to work well where the interests
-at stake are less intense. But so strong is political fetichism, that
-neither these experiences, nor the parallel experiences which every
-state-department affords, diminish men’s faith. For years past there
-has been thrust before them the fact that, of the funds of Greenwich
-Hospital, one-third goes to maintain the sailors, while two-thirds go
-in administration; but this and other such facts do not stop their
-advocacy of more public administrations. The parable of straining
-at gnats and swallowing camels they see absolutely paralleled by
-officialism, in the red-tape particularity with which all minute
-regulations are enforced, and the astounding carelessness with which
-the accounts of a whole department, like the Patent Office, are
-left utterly uncontrolled; and yet we continue to hear men propose
-government-audits as checks for mercantile companies! No diminution
-of confidence seems to result from disclosure of stupidities which
-even a wild imagination would scarcely have thought possible: instance
-the method of promotion lately made public, under which a clerk in
-one branch of a department takes the higher duties of some deceased
-superior clerk, without any rise of salary, while some clerk in another
-branch of the department gets the rise of salary without any increase
-in his responsibilities!
-
-Endless as are these evils and absurdities, and surviving generation
-after generation as they do, spite of commissions and reports and
-debates, there is an annual crop of new schemes for government agencies
-which are expected {399} to work just as legislators propose they
-shall work. With a system of army-promotion which insures an organized
-incompetence, but which survives perpetual protests; with a notoriously
-ill-constituted admiralty, of which the doings are stock-subjects of
-ridicule; with a church that maintains effete formulas, notwithstanding
-almost universal repudiation of them; there are daily demands for
-more law-established appliances. With building acts under which
-arise houses less stable than those of the last generation; with
-coal-mine inspection that does not prevent coal-mine explosions; with
-railway inspection that has for its accompaniment plenty of railway
-accidents—with these and other such failures continually displayed,
-there still prevails what M. Guizot rightly calls that “gross delusion,
-a belief in the sovereign power of political machinery.”
-
-A great service would be done by any man who would analyze the
-legislation, say of the last half century, and compare the expected
-results of Acts of Parliament with their proved results. He might make
-it an instructive revelation by simply taking all the preambles, and
-observing how many of the evils to be rectified were evils produced by
-preceding enactments. His chief difficulty would be that of getting
-within any moderate compass the immense number of cases in which the
-benefits anticipated were not achieved, while unanticipated disasters
-were caused. And then he might effectively close his digest by showing
-what immense advantages have, in instance after instance, followed
-the entire cessation of legislative action. Not, indeed, that such an
-accumulation of cases, however multitudinous and however conclusive,
-would have an appreciable effect on the average mind. Political
-fetichism will continue so long as men remain without scientific
-discipline—so long as they recognize only proximate causes, and never
-think of the remoter and more general causes by which their special
-agencies are set in motion. Until the thing which now usurps the name
-of education {400} has been dethroned by a true education, having
-for its end to teach men the nature of the world they live in, new
-political delusions will grow up as fast as old ones are extinguished.
-But there is a select class existing, and a larger select class
-arising, on whom a work of the kind described would have an effect, and
-for whom it would be well worth while to write it.
-
-{401}
-
-
-
-
-SPECIALIZED ADMINISTRATION.
-
-[_First published in_ The Fortnightly Review _for December 1871_.]
-
-
-It is contrary to common-sense that fish should be more difficult to
-get at the sea-side than in London; but it is true, nevertheless. No
-less contrary to common-sense seems the truth that though, in the
-West Highlands, oxen are to be seen everywhere, no beef can be had
-without sending two or three hundred miles to Glasgow for it. Rulers
-who, guided by common-sense, tried to suppress certain opinions
-by forbidding the books containing them, never dreamed that their
-interdicts would cause the diffusion of these opinions; and rulers who,
-guided by common-sense, forbade excessive rates of interest, never
-dreamed that they were thereby making the terms harder for borrowers
-than before. When printing replaced copying, any one who had prophesied
-that the number of persons engaged in the manufacture of books would
-immensely increase, as a consequence, would have been thought wholly
-devoid of common-sense. And equally devoid of common-sense would have
-been thought any one who, when railways were displacing coaches,
-said that the number of horses employed in bringing passengers and
-goods to and from railways, would be greater than the number directly
-displaced by railways. Such cases might {402} be multiplied. Whoso
-remembers that, among quite simple phenomena, causes produce effects
-which are sometimes utterly at variance with anticipation, will see how
-frequently this must happen among complex phenomena. That a balloon
-is made to rise by the same force which makes a stone fall; that
-the melting of ice may be greatly retarded by wrapping the ice in a
-blanket; that the simplest way of setting potassium on fire is to throw
-it into the water; are truths which those who know only the outside
-aspect of things would regard as manifest falsehoods. And, if, when the
-factors are few and simple, the results may be so absolutely opposed
-to seeming probability, much more will they be often thus opposed when
-the factors are many and involved. The saying of the French respecting
-political events, that “it is always the unexpected which happens”—a
-saying which they have been abundantly re-illustrating of late—is
-one which legislators, and those who urge on schemes of legislation,
-should have ever in mind. Let us pause a moment to contemplate a
-seemingly-impossible set of results which social forces have wrought
-out.
-
-Up to quite recent days, Language was held to be of supernatural
-origin. That this elaborate apparatus of symbols, so marvellously
-adapted for the conveyance of thought from mind to mind, was a
-miraculous gift, seemed unquestionable. No possible alternative way
-could be thought of by which there had come into existence these
-multitudinous assemblages of words of various orders, genera, and
-species, moulded into fitness for articulating with one another,
-and capable of being united from moment to moment into ever-new
-combinations, which represent with precision each idea as it arises.
-The supposition that, in the slow progress of things, Language grew
-out of the continuous use of signs—at first mainly mimetic, afterward
-partly mimetic, partly vocal, and at length almost wholly vocal—was an
-hypothesis never even conceived by men in early stages of civilization;
-and when {403} the hypothesis was at length conceived, it was thought
-too monstrous an absurdity to be even entertained. Yet this monstrous
-absurdity proves to be true. Already the evolution of Language has
-been traced back far enough to show that all its particular words,
-and all its leading traits of structure, have had a natural genesis;
-and day by day investigation makes it more manifest that its genesis
-has been natural from the beginning. Not only has it been natural
-from the beginning, but it has been spontaneous. No language is a
-cunningly-devised scheme of a ruler or body of legislators. There
-was no council of savages to invent the parts of speech, and decide
-on what principles they should be used. Nay, more. Going on without
-any authority or appointed regulation, this natural process went on
-without any man observing that it was going on. Solely under pressure
-of the need for communicating their ideas and feelings—solely in
-pursuit of their personal interests—men little by little developed
-speech in absolute unconsciousness that they were doing any thing more
-than pursuing their personal interests. Even now the unconsciousness
-continues. Take the whole population of the globe, and there is
-probably not above one in a million who knows that in his daily talk he
-is carrying on the process by which Language has been evolved.
-
-I commence thus by way of giving the key-note to the argument which
-follows. My general purpose, in dwelling a moment on this illustration,
-has been that of showing how utterly beyond the conceptions of
-common-sense, literally so called, and even beyond the conceptions
-of cultivated common-sense, are the workings-out of sociological
-processes—how these workings-out are such that even those who have
-carried to the uttermost “the scientific use of the imagination,” would
-never have anticipated them. And my more special purpose has been
-that of showing how marvellous are the results indirectly and {404}
-unintentionally achieved by the coöperation of men who are severally
-pursuing their private ends. Let me pass now to the particular topic to
-be here dealt with.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-I have greatly regretted to see Prof. Huxley strengthening, by his
-deservedly high authority, a school of politicians which can scarcely
-be held to need strengthening: its opponents being so few. I regret it
-the more because, thus far, men prepared for the study of Sociology by
-previous studies of Biology and Psychology, have scarcely expressed
-any opinions on the question at issue; and that Prof. Huxley, who by
-both general and special culture is so eminently fitted to judge,
-should have come to the conclusions set forth in the last number of the
-_Fortnightly Review_, will be discouraging to the small number who have
-reached opposite conclusions. Greatly regretting however, though I do,
-this avowed antagonism of Prof. Huxley to a general political doctrine
-with which I am identified, I do not propose to make any reply to his
-arguments at large: being deterred partly by reluctance to dwell on
-points of difference with one whom I so greatly admire, and partly by
-the consciousness that what I should say would be mainly a repetition
-of what I have explicitly or implicitly said elsewhere. But with one
-point raised I feel obliged to deal. Prof. Huxley tacitly puts to me a
-question. By so doing he leaves me to choose between two alternatives,
-neither of which is agreeable to me. I must either, by leaving it
-unanswered, accept the implication that it is unanswerable, and the
-doctrine I hold untenable; or else I must give it an adequate answer.
-Little as I like it, I see that the latter of these alternatives is
-that which, on public as well as on personal grounds, I must accept.
-
-Had I been allowed to elaborate more fully the Review-article from
-which Prof. Huxley quotes, this question would possibly not have been
-raised. That article closes {405} with the following words:—“We
-had hoped to say something respecting the different types of social
-organization, and something also on social metamorphoses; but we
-have reached our assigned limits.” These further developments of the
-conception—developments to be hereafter set forth in the _Principles of
-Sociology_—I must here sketch in outline before my answer can be made
-intelligible. In sketching them, I must say much that would be needless
-were my answer addressed to Prof. Huxley only. Bare allusions to
-general phenomena of organization, with which he is immeasurably more
-familiar than I am, would suffice. But, as the sufficiency of my answer
-has to be judged by the general reader, the general reader must be
-supplied with the requisite data: my presentation of them being under
-correction from Prof. Huxley if it is inaccurate.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The primary differentiation in organic structures, manifested alike
-in the history of each organism and in the history of the organic
-world as a whole, is the differentiation between outer and inner
-parts—the parts which hold direct converse with the environment and
-the parts which do not hold direct converse with the environment. We
-see this alike in those smallest and lowest forms improperly, though
-suggestively, sometimes called unicellular, and also in the next higher
-division of creatures which, with considerable reason, are regarded as
-aggregations of the lower. In these creatures the body is divisible
-into endoderm and ectoderm, differing very little in their characters,
-but serving the one to form the digestive sac, and the other to form
-the outer wall of the body. As Prof. Huxley describes them in his
-_Oceanic Hydrozoa_, these layers represent respectively the organs of
-nutrition and the organs of external relation—generally, though not
-universally; for there are exceptions, especially among parasites. In
-the embryos of higher types, these two layers severally become double
-by the splitting of a layer formed between {406} them; and from the
-outer double layer is developed the body-wall with its limbs, nervous
-system, senses, muscles, etc.; while from the inner double layer there
-arise the alimentary canal and its appendages, together with the heart
-and lungs. Though in such higher types these two systems of organs,
-which respectively absorb nutriment and expend nutriment, become so
-far connected by ramifying blood-vessels and nerves that this division
-cannot be sharply made, still the broad contrast remains. At the very
-outset, then, there arises this separation, which implies at once a
-coöperation and an antagonism—a co-operation, because, while the outer
-organs secure for the inner organs the crude food, the inner organs
-elaborate and supply to the outer organs the prepared materials by
-which they are enable to do their work; and an antagonism, because
-each set of organs, living and growing at the cost of these prepared
-materials, cannot appropriate any portion of the total supply without
-diminishing by so much the supply available for the other. This general
-coöperation and general antagonism becomes complicated with special
-coöperations and special antagonisms, as fast as these two great
-systems of organs develop. The originally simple alimentary canal,
-differentiating into many parts, becomes a congeries of structures
-which, by coöperation, fulfil better their general function, but
-between which there nevertheless arise antagonisms; since each has to
-make good its waste and to get matter for growth, at the cost of the
-general supply of nutriment available for them all. Similarly, as fast
-as the outer system develops into special senses and limbs, there arise
-among these, also, secondary coöperations and secondary antagonisms. By
-their variously-combined actions, food is obtained more effectually;
-and yet the activity of each set of muscles, or each directive nervous
-structure, entails a draft upon the stock of prepared nutriment which
-the outer organs receive, and is by so much at the cost of the rest.
-Thus the method of {407} organization, both in general and in detail,
-is a simultaneous combination and opposition. All the organs unite in
-subserving the interests of the organism they form; and yet they have
-all their special interests, and compete with one another for blood.
-
-A form of government, or control, or coördination, develops as fast
-as these systems of organs develop. Eventually this becomes double.
-A general distinction arises between the two controlling systems
-belonging to the two great systems of organs. Whether the inner
-controlling system is or is not originally derived from the outer,
-matters not to the argument—when developed it is in great measure
-independent.[37] If we contemplate their respective sets of functions,
-we shall perceive the origin of this distinction. That the outer organs
-may coöperate effectively for the purposes of catching prey, escaping
-danger, etc., it is needful that they should be under a government
-capable of directing their combined actions, now in this way and
-now in that, according as outer circumstances vary. From instant to
-instant there must be quick adjustments to occasions that are more or
-less new; and hence there requires a complex and centralized nervous
-apparatus, to which all these organs are promptly and completely
-obedient. The government needful for the {408} inner system of organs
-is a different and much simpler one. When the food obtained by the
-outer organs has been put into the stomach, the coöperation required
-of the viscera, though it varies somewhat as the quantity or kind of
-food varies, has nevertheless a general uniformity; and it is required
-to go on in much the same way whatever the outer circumstances may
-be. In each case the food has to be reduced to a pulp, supplied with
-various solvent secretions, propelled onward, and its nutritive part
-taken up by absorbent surfaces. That these processes may be effective,
-the organs which carry them on must be supplied with fit blood; and to
-this end the heart and the lungs have to act with greater vigor. This
-visceral coöperation, carried on with this comparative uniformity, is
-regulated by a nervous system which is to a large extent independent
-of that higher and more complex nervous system controlling the
-external organs. The act of swallowing is, indeed, mainly effected by
-the higher nervous system; but, being swallowed, the food affects by
-its presence the local nerves, through them the local ganglia, and
-indirectly, through nervous connexions with other ganglia, excites the
-rest of the viscera into coöperative activity. It is true that the
-functions of the sympathetic or ganglionic nervous system, or “nervous
-system of organic life,” as it is otherwise called, are imperfectly
-understood. But, since we know positively that some of its plexuses,
-as the cardiac, are centres of local stimulation and coördination,
-which can act independently, though they are influenced by higher
-centres, it is fairly to be inferred that the other and still larger
-plexuses, distributed among the viscera, are also such local and
-largely independent centres; especially as the nerves they send into
-the viscera, to join the many subordinate ganglia distributed through
-them, greatly exceed in quantity the cerebro-spinal fibres accompanying
-them. Indeed, to suppose otherwise is to leave unanswered the
-question—What are their functions? as well as the {409} question—How
-are these unconscious visceral coördinations effected? There remains
-only to observe the kind of co-operation which exists between the two
-nervous systems. This is both a general and a special coöperation.
-The general coöperation is that by which either system of organs is
-enabled to stimulate the other to action. The alimentary canal yields
-through certain nervous connexions the sensation of hunger to the
-higher nervous system; and so prompts efforts for procuring food.
-Conversely, the activity of the nervo-muscular system, or, at least,
-its normal activity, sends inward to the cardiac and other plexuses
-a gush of stimulus which excites the viscera to action. The special
-coöperation is one by which it would seem that each system puts an
-indirect restraint on the other. Fibres from the sympathetic accompany
-every artery throughout the organs of external relation, and exercise
-on the artery a constrictive action; and the converse is done by
-certain of the cerebro-spinal fibres which ramify with the sympathetic
-throughout the viscera: through the vagus and other nerves, an
-inhibitory influence is exercised on the heart, intestines, pancreas,
-etc. Leaving doubtful details, however, the fact which concerns us here
-is sufficiently manifest. There are, for these two systems of organs,
-two nervous systems, in great measure independent; and, if it is true
-that the higher system influences the lower, it is no less true that
-the lower very powerfully influences the higher. The restrictive action
-of the sympathetic upon the circulation, throughout the nervo-muscular
-system, is unquestionable; and it is possibly through this that,
-when the viscera have much work to do, the nervo-muscular system is
-incapacitated in so marked a manner.[38]
-
- [37] Here, and throughout the discussion, I refer to these controlling
- systems only as they exist in the _Vertebrata_, because their
- relations are far better known in this great division of the animal
- kingdom—not because like relations do not exist elsewhere. Indeed,
- in the great sub-kingdom _Annulosa_, these controlling systems have
- relations that are extremely significant to us here. For while an
- inferior annulose animal has only a single set of nervous structures,
- a superior annulose animal (as a moth) has a set of nervous structures
- presiding over the viscera, as well as a more conspicuous set
- presiding over the organs of external relation. And this contrast is
- analogous to one of the contrasts between undeveloped and developed
- societies; for, while among the uncivilized and incipiently civilized
- there is but a single set of directive agencies, there are among the
- fully civilized, as we shall presently see, two sets of directive
- agencies, for the outer and inner structures respectively.
-
- [38] To meet the probable objection that the experiments of Bernard,
- Ludwig, and others, show that in the case of certain glands the
- nerves of the cerebro-spinal system are those which set up the
- secreting process, I would remark that in these cases, and in many
- others where the relative functions of the cerebro-spinal nerves
- and the sympathetic nerves have been studied, the organs have been
- those in which _sensation_ is either the stimulus to activity or its
- accompaniment; and that from these cases no conclusion can be drawn
- applying to the cases of those viscera which normally perform their
- functions without sensation. Perhaps it may even be that the functions
- of those sympathetic fibres which accompany the arteries of the outer
- organs are simply ancillary to those of the central parts of the
- sympathetic system, which stimulate and regulate the viscera—ancillary
- in this sense, that they check the diffusion of blood in external
- organs when it is wanted in internal organs: cerebro-spinal inhibition
- (except in its action on the heart) working the opposite way. And
- possibly this is the instrumentality for carrying on that competition
- for nutriment which, as we saw, arises at the very outset between
- these two great systems of organs.
-
-The one further fact here concerning us is the contrast {410}
-presented in different kinds of animals, between the degrees of
-development of these two great sets of structures that carry on
-respectively the outer functions and the inner functions. There are
-active creatures in which the locomotive organs, the organs of sense,
-together with the nervous apparatus which combines their actions, bear
-a large ratio to the organs of alimentation and their appendages; while
-there are inactive creatures in which these organs of external relation
-bear a very small ratio to the organs of alimentation. And a remarkable
-fact, here especially instructive to us, is that very frequently there
-occurs a metamorphosis, which has for its leading trait a great change
-in the ratio of these two systems—a metamorphosis which accompanies a
-great change in the mode of life. The most familiar metamorphosis is
-variously illustrated among insects. During the early or larval stage
-of a butterfly, the organs of alimentation are largely developed,
-while the organs of external relation are but little developed; and
-then, during a period of quiescence, the organs of external relation
-undergo an immense development, making possible the creature’s active
-and varied adjustments to the surrounding world, while the alimentary
-system becomes relatively small. On the other hand, among the lower
-invertebrate animals there is a very common metamorphosis of an
-opposite kind. When young, the creature, with scarcely any alimentary
-system, but supplied {411} with limbs and sense organs, swims about
-actively. Presently it settles in a _habitat_ where food is to be
-obtained without moving about, loses in great part its organs of
-external relation, develops its visceral system, and, as it grows,
-assumes a nature utterly unlike that which it originally had—a nature
-adapted almost exclusively to alimentation and the propagation of the
-species.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Let us turn now to the social organism, and the analogies of structure
-and function which may be traced in it. Of course these analogies
-between the phenomena presented in a physically coherent aggregate
-forming an individual, and the phenomena presented in a physically
-incoherent aggregate of individuals distributed over a wide area,
-cannot be analogies of a visible or sensible kind; but can only be
-analogies between the systems, or methods, of organization. Such
-analogies as exist result from the one unquestionable community
-between the two organizations: _there is in both a mutual dependence
-of parts_. This is the origin of all organization; and determines what
-similarities there are between an individual organism and a social
-organism. Of course the similarities thus determined are accompanied
-by transcendent differences, determined, as above said, by the
-unlikenesses of the aggregates. One cardinal difference is that, while
-in the individual organism there is but one centre of consciousness
-capable of pleasure or pain, there are, in the social organism, as many
-such centres as there are individuals, and the aggregate of them has no
-consciousness of pleasure or pain—a difference which entirely changes
-the ends to be pursued. Bearing in mind this qualification, let us now
-glance at the parallelisms indicated.
-
-A society, like an individual, has a set of structures fitting it to
-act upon its environment—appliances for attack and defence, armies,
-navies, fortified and garrisoned places. At the same time, a society
-has an industrial organization {412} which carries on all those
-processes that make possible the national life. Though these two sets
-of organs for external activity and internal activity do not bear to
-one another just the same relation which the outer and inner organs
-of an animal do (since the industrial structures in a society supply
-themselves with raw materials, instead of being supplied by the
-external organs), yet they bear a relation otherwise similar. There is
-at once a coöperation and an antagonism. By the help of the defensive
-system the industrial system is enabled to carry on its functions
-without injury from foreign enemies; and by the help of the industrial
-system, which supplies it with food and materials, the defensive
-system is enabled to maintain this security. At the same time the two
-systems are opposed in so far that they both depend for their existence
-upon the common stock of produce. Further, in the social organism, as
-in the individual organism, this primary coöperation and antagonism
-subdivides into secondary coöperations and antagonisms. If we look at
-the industrial organization, we see that its agricultural part and its
-manufacturing part aid one another by the exchange of their products,
-and are yet otherwise opposed to one another; since each takes of the
-other’s products the most it can get in return for its own products.
-Similarly throughout the manufacturing system itself. Of the total
-returns secured by Manchester for its goods, Liverpool obtains as much
-as possible for the raw material, and Manchester gives as little as
-possible—the two at the same time coöperating in secreting for the
-rest of the community the woven fabrics it requires, and in jointly
-obtaining from the rest of the community the largest payment in other
-commodities. And thus it is in all kinds of direct and indirect ways
-throughout the industrial structures. Men prompted by their own needs
-as well as those of their children, and bodies of such men more or
-less aggregated, are quick to find every unsatisfied need of their
-fellow-men, and to {413} satisfy it in return for the satisfaction of
-their own needs; and the working of this process is inevitably such
-that the strongest need, ready to pay the most for satisfaction, is
-that which draws most workers to satisfy it, so that there is thus a
-perpetual balancing of the needs and of the appliances which subserve
-them.
-
-This brings us to the regulative structures under which these two
-systems of coöperating parts work. As in the individual organism, so
-in the social organism, the outer parts are under a rigorous central
-control. For adjustment to the varying and incalculable changes in the
-environment, the external organs, offensive and defensive, must be
-capable of prompt combination; and that their actions may be quickly
-combined to meet each exigency as it arises, they must be completely
-subordinated to a supreme executive power: armies and navies must be
-despotically controlled. Quite otherwise is it with the regulative
-apparatus required for the industrial system. This, which carries on
-the nutrition of a society, as the visceral system carries on the
-nutrition of an individual, has a regulative apparatus in great measure
-distinct from that which regulates the external organs. It is not by
-any “order in council” that farmers are determined to grow so much
-wheat and so much barley, or to divide their land in due proportion
-between arable and pasture. There requires no telegram from the Home
-Office to alter the production of woollens in Leeds, so that it may
-be properly adjusted to the stocks on hand and the forthcoming crop
-of wool. Staffordshire produces its due quantity of pottery, and
-Sheffield sends out cutlery with rapidity adjusted to the consumption,
-without any legislative stimulus or restraint. The spurs and checks
-to production which manufacturers and manufacturing centres receive,
-have quite another origin. Partly by direct orders from distributors
-and partly by the indirect indications furnished by the market reports
-throughout the kingdom, they are prompted to {414} secrete actively
-or to diminish their rates of secretion. The regulative apparatus by
-which these industrial organs are made to coöperate harmoniously, acts
-somewhat as the sympathetic does in a vertebrate animal. There is a
-system of communications among the great producing and distributing
-centres, which excites or retards as the circumstances vary. From
-hour to hour messages pass between all the chief provincial towns,
-as well as between each of them and London; from hour to hour prices
-are adjusted, supplies are ordered hither or thither, and capital is
-drafted from place to place, according as there is greater or less need
-for it. All this goes on without any ministerial overseeing—without
-any dictation from those executive centres which combine the actions
-of the outer organs. There is, however, one all-essential influence
-which these higher centres exercise over the industrial activities—a
-restraining influence which prevents aggression, direct and indirect.
-The condition under which only these producing and distributing
-processes can go on healthfully, is that, wherever there is work
-and waste, there shall be a proportionate supply of materials for
-repair. And securing this is nothing less than securing fulfilment of
-contracts. Just in the same way that a bodily organ which performs
-function, but is not adequately paid in blood, must dwindle, and
-the organism as a whole eventually suffer; so an industrial centre
-which has made and sent out its special commodity, but does not get
-adequately paid in other commodities, must decay. And when we ask what
-is requisite to prevent this local innutrition and decay, we find
-the requisite to be that agreements shall be carried out; that goods
-shall be paid for at the stipulated prices; that justice shall be
-administered.
-
-One further leading parallelism must be described—that between the
-metamorphoses which occur in the two cases. These metamorphoses are
-analogous in so far that {415} they are changes in the ratios of the
-inner and outer systems of organs; and also in so far as they take
-place under analogous conditions. At the one extreme we have that
-small and simple type of society which a wandering horde of savages
-presents. This is a type almost wholly predatory in its organization.
-It consists of little else than a coöperative structure for carrying
-on warfare—the industrial part is almost absent, being represented
-only by the women. When the wandering tribe becomes a settled tribe,
-an industrial organization begins to show itself—especially where, by
-conquest, there has been obtained a slave-class that may be forced
-to labour. The predatory structure, however, still for a long time
-predominates. Omitting the slaves and the women, the whole body
-politic consists of parts organized for offence and defence, and
-is efficient in proportion as the control of them is centralized.
-Communities of this kind, continuing to subjugate their neighbours,
-and developing an organization of some complexity, nevertheless retain
-a mainly-predatory type, with just such industrial structures as are
-needful for supporting the offensive and defensive structures. Of this
-Sparta furnished a good example. The characteristics of such a social
-type are these—that each member of the ruling race is a soldier; that
-war is the business of life; that every one is subject to a rigorous
-discipline fitting him for this business; that centralized authority
-regulates all the social activities, down to the details of each man’s
-daily conduct; that the welfare of the State is every thing, and that
-the individual lives for public benefit. So long as the environing
-societies are such as necessitate and keep in exercise the militant
-organization, these traits continue; but when, mainly by conquest
-and the formation of large aggregates, the militant activity becomes
-less constant, and war ceases to be the occupation of every free man,
-the industrial structures begin to predominate. Without tracing the
-transition, it will suffice to take, as a sample {416} of the pacific
-or industrial type, the Northern States of America before the late
-war. Here military organization had almost disappeared; the infrequent
-local assemblings of militia had turned into occasions for jollity, and
-every thing martial had fallen into contempt. The traits of the pacific
-or industrial type are these—that the central authority is relatively
-feeble; that it interferes scarcely at all with the private actions of
-individuals; and that the State, instead of being that for the benefit
-of which individuals exist, has become that which exists for the
-benefit of individuals.
-
-It remains to add that this metamorphosis, which takes place in
-societies along with a higher civilization, very rapidly retrogrades if
-the surrounding conditions become unfavorable to it. During the late
-war in America, Mr. Seward’s boast—“I touch this bell, and any man in
-the remotest State is a prisoner of the Government” (a boast which was
-not an empty one, and which was by many of the Republican party greatly
-applauded)—shows us how rapidly, along with militant activities, there
-tends to be resumed the needful type of centralized structure; and
-how there quickly grow up the corresponding sentiments and ideas.
-Our own history since 1815 has shown a double change of this kind.
-During the thirty years’ peace, the militant organization dwindled,
-the military sentiment greatly decreased, the industrial organization
-rapidly developed, the assertion of the individuality of the citizen
-became more decided, and many restrictive and despotic regulations were
-got rid of. Conversely, since the revival of militant activities and
-structures on the Continent, our own offensive and defensive structures
-have been re-developing; and the tendency toward increase of that
-centralized control which accompanies such structures has become marked.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-And now, closing this somewhat elaborate introduction, {417} I am
-prepared to deal with the question put to me. Prof. Huxley, after
-quoting some passages from that essay on the “Social Organism” which I
-have supplemented in the foregoing paragraphs; and after expressing a
-qualified concurrence which I greatly value as coming from so highly
-fitted a judge, proceeds, with characteristic acumen, to comment on
-what seems an incongruity between certain analogies set forth in that
-essay, and the doctrine I hold respecting the duty of the State.
-Referring to a passage in which I have described the function of
-the individual brain as “that of _averaging_ the interests of life,
-physical, intellectual, moral, social,” and have compared it to the
-function of Parliament as “that of _averaging_ the interests of the
-various classes in a community,” adding that “a good Parliament is one
-in which the parties answering to these respective interests are so
-balanced that their united legislation concedes to each class as much
-as consists with the claims of the rest;” Prof. Huxley proceeds to say:―
-
- “All this appears to be very just. But if the resemblances between the
- body physiological and the body politic are any indication, not only
- of what the latter is, and how it has become what it is, but what it
- ought to be, and what it is tending to become, I cannot but think that
- the real force of the analogy is totally opposed to the negative view
- of State function.
-
- “Suppose that, in accordance with this view, each muscle were to
- maintain that the nervous system had no right to interfere with its
- contraction, except to prevent it from hindering the contraction of
- another muscle; or each gland, that it had a right to secrete, so long
- as its secretion interfered with no other; suppose every separate cell
- left free to follow its own “interests,” and _laissez-faire_ Lord of
- all, what would become of the body physiological?”
-
-On this question the remark I have first to make is, that if I held the
-doctrine of M. Proudhon, who deliberately named himself an “anarchist,”
-and if along with this doctrine I held the above-indicated theory of
-social structures and functions, the inconsistency implied by the
-question put would be clear, and the question would be unanswerable.
-But since I entertain no such view as that of Proudhon—since I hold
-that within its proper limits {418} governmental action is not
-simply legitimate but all-important—I do not see how I am concerned
-with a question which tacitly supposes that I deny the legitimacy
-and the importance. Not only do I contend that the restraining power
-of the State over individuals, and bodies or classes of individuals,
-is requisite, but I have contended that it should be exercised much
-more effectually, and carried out much further, than at present.[39]
-And as the maintenance of this control implies the maintenance of a
-controlling apparatus, I do not see that I am placed in any difficulty
-when I am asked what would happen were the controlling apparatus
-forbidden to interfere. Further, on this general aspect of the
-question I have to say that, by comparing the deliberative assembly of
-a nation to the deliberative nervous centre of a vertebrate animal,
-as respectively averaging the interests of the society and of the
-individual, and as both doing this through processes of representation,
-I do not mean to _identify_ the two sets of interests; for these in
-a society (or at least a peaceful society) refer mainly to interior
-actions, while in an individual creature they refer mainly to exterior
-actions. The “interests” to which I refer, as being averaged by a
-representative governing body, are the conflicting interests between
-class and class, as well as between man and man—conflicting interests
-the balancing of which is nothing but the preventing of aggression and
-the administration of justice.
-
- [39] See _Social Statics_ chap. xxi., “The Duty of the State.” See also
- essay on “Over-Legislation.”
-
-I pass now from this general aspect of the question, which does not
-concern me, to a more special aspect which does concern me. Dividing
-the actions of governing structures, whether in bodies individual or
-bodies politic, into the _positively regulative_ and the _negatively
-regulative_, or those which stimulate and direct, as distinguished
-from those which simply restrain, I may say that if there is raised
-the question—What will happen when the controlling {419} apparatus
-does not act? there are quite different replies according as one or
-other system of organs is referred to. If, in the individual body,
-the muscles were severally independent of the deliberative and
-executive centres, utter impotence would result: in the absence of
-muscular coördination, there would be no possibility of standing,
-much less of acting on surrounding things, and the body would be a
-prey to the first enemy. Properly to combine the actions of these
-outer organs, the great nervous centres must exercise functions that
-are both positively regulative and negatively regulative—must both
-command action and arrest action. Similarly with the outer organs of a
-political body. Unless the offensive and defensive structures can be
-despotically commanded by a central authority, there cannot be those
-prompt combinations and adjustments required for meeting the variable
-actions of external enemies. But if, instead of asking what would
-happen supposing the outer organs in either case were without control
-from the great governing centres, we ask what would happen were the
-inner organs (the industrial and commercial structures in the one case,
-and the alimentary and distributive in the other) without such control,
-the answer is quite different. Omitting the respiratory and some
-minor ancillary parts of the individual organism, to which the social
-organism has nothing analogous; and limiting ourselves to absorptive,
-elaborative, and distributive structures, which are found in both; it
-may, I think, be successfully contended that in neither the one case
-nor the other do they require the positively regulative control of the
-great governing centres, but only the negatively regulative. Let us
-glance at the facts.[40]
-
- [40] Lest there should be any misunderstanding of the terms
- _positively regulative_ and _negatively regulative_, let me briefly
- illustrate them. If a man has land, and I either cultivate it for
- him, partially or wholly, or dictate any or all of his modes of
- cultivation, my action is positively regulative; but if, leaving him
- absolutely unhelped and unregulated in his farming, I simply prevent
- him from taking his neighbour’s crops, or from making approach-roads
- over his neighbour’s land, or from depositing rubbish upon it,
- my action is negatively regulative. There is a tolerably sharp
- distinction between the act of securing a citizen’s ends for him or
- interfering with his mode of securing them, and the act of checking
- him when he interferes with another citizen in the pursuit of his
- ends.
-
-Digestion and circulation go on very well in lunatics {420} and idiots,
-though the higher nervous centres are either deranged or partly absent.
-The vital functions proceed properly during sleep, though less actively
-than when the brain is at work. In infancy, while the cerebro-spinal
-system is almost incapable, and cannot even perform such simple
-actions as those of commanding the sphincters, the visceral functions
-are active and regular. Nor in an adult does that arrest of cerebral
-action shown by insensibility, or that extensive paralysis of the
-spinal system which renders all the limbs immovable, prevent these
-functions from being carried on for a considerable time; though they
-necessarily begin to flag in the absence of the demand which an active
-system of outer organs makes upon them. These internal organs are,
-indeed, so little under the positively directive control of the great
-nervous centres, that their independence is often very inconvenient. No
-mandate sent into the interior stops an attack of diarrhœa; nor, when
-an indigestible meal excites the circulation at night, and prevents
-sleep, will the bidding of the brain cause the heart to pulsate more
-quietly. It is doubtless true that these vital processes are modified
-in important ways, both by general stimulation and by inhibition,
-from the cerebro-spinal system; but that they are mainly independent
-cannot, I think, be questioned. The facts that peristaltic motion of
-the intestines can go on when their nervous connexions are cut, and
-that the heart (in cold-blooded vertebrates, at least) continues to
-pulsate for some time after being detached from the body, make it
-manifest that the spontaneous activities of these vital organs subserve
-the wants of the body at large without direction from its higher
-governing centres. And this is made even {421} more manifest if it
-be a fact, as alleged by Schmulewitsch experimenting under Ludwig’s
-direction, that, under duly-adjusted conditions, the secretion of bile
-may be kept up for some time when blood is passed through the excised
-liver of a newly-killed rabbit. There is an answer, not, I think,
-unsatisfactory, even to the crucial part of the question—“Suppose every
-separate cell left free to follow its own interests, and _laissez
-faire_ Lord of all, what would become of the body physiological?”
-Limiting the application of this question in the way above shown to
-the organs and parts of organs which carry on vital actions, it seems
-to me that much evidence may be given for the belief that, when they
-follow their respective “interests” (limited here to growing and
-multiplying), the general welfare will be tolerably well secured. It
-was proved by Hunter’s experiments on a kite and a sea-gull, that a
-part of the alimentary canal which has to triturate harder food than
-that which the creature naturally eats, acquires a thicker and harder
-lining. When a stricture of the intestine impedes the passage of its
-contents, the muscular walls of the intestine above, thicken and propel
-the contents with greater force. When there is somewhere in the course
-of the circulation a serious resistance to the passage of blood,
-there habitually occurs hypertrophy of the heart, or thickening of
-its muscular walls; giving it greater power to propel the blood. And
-similarly, when the duct through which it discharges its contents is
-obstructed, the gall-bladder thickens and strengthens. These changes go
-on without any direction from the brain—without any consciousness that
-they are going on. They are effected by the growth, or multiplication,
-or adaptation, of the local units, be they cells or fibres, which
-results from the greater action or modified action thrown upon them.
-The only pre-requisite to this spontaneous adaptive change is, that
-these local units shall be supplied with extra blood in proportion as
-they perform extra function—a pre-requisite answering to that secured
-{422} by the administration of justice in a society; namely, that more
-work shall bring more pay. If, however, direct proof be called for
-that a system of organs may, by carrying on their several independent
-activities uncontrolled, secure the welfare of the aggregate they
-form, we have it in that extensive class of creatures which do not
-possess any nervous systems at all; and which nevertheless show, some
-of them, considerable degrees of activity. The Oceanic Hydrozoa supply
-good examples. Notwithstanding “the multiplicity and complexity of the
-organs which some of them possess,” these creatures have no nervous
-centres—no regulative apparatus by which the actions of their organs
-are coördinated. One of their higher kinds is composed of different
-parts distinguished as cœnosarc, polypites, tentacles, hydrocysts,
-nectocalyces, genocalyces, etc., and each of these different parts is
-composed of many partially-independent units—thread-cells, ciliated
-cells, contractile fibres, etc.; so that the whole organism is a group
-of heterogeneous groups, each one of which is itself a more or less
-heterogeneous group. And, in the absence of a nervous system, the
-arrangement must necessarily be such that these different units, and
-different groups of units, severally pursuing their individual lives
-without positive direction from the rest, nevertheless do, by virtue of
-their constitutions, and the relative positions into which they have
-grown, coöperate for the maintenance of one another and the entire
-aggregate. And if this can be so with a set of organs that are not
-connected by nerves, much more can it be so with a set of organs which,
-like the viscera of a higher animal, have a special set of nervous
-communications for exciting one another to coöperation.
-
-Let us turn now to the parallel classes of phenomena which the social
-organism presents. In it, as in the individual organism, we find that
-while the system of external organs must be rigorously subordinated
-to a great governing centre which positively regulates it, the system
-{423} of internal organs needs no such positive regulation. The
-production and interchange by which the national life is maintained,
-go on as well while Parliament is not sitting as while it is sitting.
-When the members of the Ministry are following grouse or stalking
-deer, Liverpool imports, Manchester manufactures, London distributes,
-just as usual. All that is needful for the normal performance of these
-internal social functions is, that the restraining or inhibitory
-structures shall continue in action: these activities of individuals,
-corporate bodies, and classes, must be carried on in such ways as not
-to transgress certain conditions, necessitated by the simultaneous
-carrying on of other activities. So long as order is maintained, and
-the fulfilment of contracts is everywhere enforced—so long as there
-is secured to each citizen, and each combination of citizens, the
-full return agreed upon for work done or commodities produced; and so
-long as each may enjoy what he obtains by labour, without trenching
-on his neighbour’s like ability to enjoy; these functions will go on
-healthfully—more healthfully, indeed, than when regulated in any other
-way. Fully to recognize this fact, it is needful only to look at the
-origins and actions of the leading industrial structures. We will take
-two of them, the most remote from one another in their natures.
-
-The first shall be those by which food is produced and distributed.
-In the fourth of his _Introductory Lectures on Political Economy_,
-Archbishop Whately remarks that:―
-
- “Many of the most important objects are accomplished by the joint
- agency of persons who never think of them, nor have any idea of acting
- in concert; and that, with a certainty, completeness, and regularity,
- which probably the most diligent benevolence, under the guidance of
- the greatest human wisdom, could never have attained.”
-
-To enforce this truth he goes on to say:—“Let any one propose to
-himself the problem of supplying with daily provisions of all
-kinds such a city as our metropolis, containing above a million of
-inhabitants.” And then he points out the many immense difficulties of
-the task {424} caused by inconstancy in the arrival of supplies; by
-the perishable nature of many of the commodities; by the fluctuating
-number of consumers; by the heterogeneity of their demands; by
-variations in the stocks, immediate and remote, and the need for
-adjusting the rate of consumption; and by the complexity in the
-process of distribution required to bring due quantities of these many
-commodities to the homes of all citizens. And, having dwelt on these
-many difficulties, he finishes his picture by saying:―
-
- “Yet this object is accomplished far better than it could be by any
- effort of human wisdom, through the agency of men who think each of
- nothing beyond his own immediate interest—who, with that object in
- view, perform their respective parts with cheerful zeal—and combine
- unconsciously to employ the wisest means for effecting an object, the
- vastness of which it would bewilder them even to contemplate.”
-
-But though the far-spreading and complex organization by which foods
-of all kinds are produced, prepared, and distributed throughout the
-entire kingdom, is a natural growth and not a State-manufacture; though
-the State does not determine where and in what quantities cereals and
-cattle and sheep shall be reared; though it does not arrange their
-respective prices so as to make supplies last until fresh supplies can
-come; though it has done nothing toward causing that great improvement
-of quality which has taken place in food since early times; though it
-has not the credit of that elaborate apparatus by which bread, and
-meat, and milk, come round to our doors with a daily pulse that is as
-regular as the pulse of the heart; yet the State has not been wholly
-passive. It has from time to time done a great deal of mischief.
-When Edward I. forbade all towns to harbour forestallers, and when
-Edward VI. made it penal to buy grain for the purpose of selling
-it again, they were preventing the process by which consumption is
-adjusted to supply: they were doing all that could be done to insure
-alternations of abundance and starvation. Similarly with the many
-legislative attempts {425} since made to regulate one branch or other
-of the food-industry, down to the corn-law sliding-scale of odious
-memory. For the marvellous efficiency of this organization we are
-indebted to private enterprise; while the derangements of it we owe
-to the positively-regulative action of the Government. Meanwhile, its
-negatively-regulative action, required to keep this organization in
-order, Government has not duly performed. A quick and costless remedy
-for breach of contract, when a trader sells, as the commodity asked
-for, what proves to be wholly or in part some other commodity, is still
-wanting.
-
-Our second case shall be the organization which so immensely
-facilitates commerce by transfers of claims and credits. Banks were
-not inventions of rulers or their counsellors. They grew up by small
-stages out of the transactions of traders with one another. Men who
-for security deposited money with goldsmiths, and took receipts;
-goldsmiths who began to lend out at interest the moneys left with
-them, and then to offer interest at lower rates to those who would
-deposit money; were the founders of them. And when, as presently
-happened, the receipt-notes became transferable by indorsement, banking
-commenced. From that stage upward the development, notwithstanding many
-hinderances, has gone on naturally. Banks have sprung up under the
-same stimulus which has produced all other kinds of trading bodies.
-The multiplied forms of credit have been gradually differentiated
-from the original form; and while the banking system has spread and
-become complex, it has also become consolidated into a whole by a
-spontaneous process. The clearing-house, which is a place for carrying
-on the banking between bankers, arose unobtrusively out of an effort
-to economize time and money. And when, in 1862, Sir John Lubbock—not
-in his legislative capacity but in his capacity as banker—succeeded
-in extending the privileges of the clearing-house to country banks,
-the unification was made {426} perfect; so that now the transactions
-of any trader in the kingdom with any other may be completed by the
-writing off and balancing of claims in bankers’ books. This natural
-evolution, be it observed, has reached with us a higher phase than
-has been reached where the positively-regulative control of the State
-is more decided. They have no clearing-house in France; and in France
-the method of making payments by checks, so dominant among ourselves,
-is very little employed and in an imperfect way. I do not mean to
-imply that in England the State has been a mere spectator of this
-development. Unfortunately, it has from the beginning had relations
-with banks and bankers: not much, however, to their advantage, or
-that of the public. The first kind of deposit-bank was in some sense
-a State-bank: merchants left funds for security at the Mint in the
-Tower. But when Charles I. appropriated their property without consent,
-and gave it back to them only under pressure, after a long delay, he
-destroyed their confidence. Similarly, when Charles II., in furtherance
-of State-business, came to have habitual transactions with the richer
-of the private bankers; and when, having got nearly a million and a
-half of their money in the Exchequer, he stole it, ruined a multitude
-of merchants, distressed ten thousand depositors, and made some
-lunatics and suicides, he gave a considerable shock to the banking
-system as it then existed. Though the results of State-relations with
-banks in later times have not been so disastrous in this direct way,
-yet they have been indirectly disastrous—perhaps even in a greater
-degree. In return for a loan, the State gave the Bank of England
-special privileges; and for the increase and continuance of this
-loan the bribe was the maintenance of these privileges—privileges
-which immensely hindered the development of banks. The State did
-worse. It led the Bank of England to the verge of bankruptcy by a
-forced issue of notes, and then authorized it to break its promises
-{427} to pay. Nay, worse still, it prevented the Bank of England
-from fulfilling its promises to pay when it wished to fulfil them.
-The evils that have arisen from the positively-regulative action of
-the State on banks are too multitudinous to be here enumerated. They
-may be found in the writings of Tooke, Newmarch, Fullarton, Macleod,
-Wilson, J. S. Mill, and others. All we have here to note is, that
-while the enterprise of citizens in the pursuit of private ends has
-developed this great trading-process, which so immensely facilitates
-all other trading-processes, Governments have over and over again
-disturbed it to an almost fatal extent; and that, while they have done
-enormous mischief of one kind by their positively-regulative action,
-they have done enormous mischief of another kind by failing in their
-negatively-regulative action. They have not done the one thing they
-had to do: they have not uniformly insisted on fulfilment of contract
-between the banker and the customer who takes his promise to pay on
-demand.
-
-Between these two cases of the trade in food and the trade in money,
-might be put the cases of other trades: all of them carried on by
-organizations similarly evolved, and similarly more or less deranged
-from time to time by State-meddling. Passing over these, however, let
-us turn from the positive method of elucidation to the comparative
-method. When it is questioned whether the spontaneous coöperation
-of men in pursuit of personal benefits will adequately work out the
-general good, we may get guidance for judgment by comparing the results
-achieved in countries where spontaneous coöperation has been most
-active and least regulated, with the results achieved in countries
-where spontaneous coöperation has been less trusted and State-action
-more trusted. Two cases, furnished by the two leading nations on the
-Continent, will suffice.
-
-In France, the École des Ponts et Chaussées was founded in 1747 for
-educating civil engineers; and in 1795 was {428} founded the École
-Polytechnique, serving, among other purposes, to give a general
-scientific training to those who were afterward to be more specially
-trained for civil engineering. Averaging the two dates, we may say that
-for a century France has had a State-established and State-maintained
-appliance for producing skilled men of this class—a double gland,
-we may call it, to secrete engineering faculty for public use. In
-England, until quite recently, we have had no institution for preparing
-civil engineers. Not by intention, but unconsciously, we left the
-furnishing of engineering faculty to take place under the law of supply
-and demand—a law which at present seems to be no more recognized as
-applying to education, than it was recognized as applying to commerce
-in the days of bounties and restrictions. This, however, by the way. We
-have here simply to note that Brindley, Smeaton, Rennie, Telford, and
-the rest, down to George Stephenson, acquired their knowledge, and got
-their experience, without State-aid or supervision. What have been the
-comparative results in the two nations? Space does not allow a detailed
-comparison: the later results must suffice. Railways originated in
-England, not in France. Railways spread through England faster than
-through France. Many railways in France were laid out and officered by
-English engineers. The earlier French railways were made by English
-contractors; and English locomotives served the French makers as
-models. The first French work written on locomotive engines, published
-about 1840 (at least I had a copy at that date), was by the Comte de
-Pambour, who had studied in England, and who gave in his work nothing
-whatever but drawings and descriptions of the engines of English makers.
-
-The second illustration is supplied to us by the model nation, now so
-commonly held up to us for imitation. Let us contrast London and Berlin
-in respect of an all-essential appliance for the comfort and health of
-citizens. When, {429} at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the
-springs and local conduits, supplemented by water-carriers, failed to
-supply the Londoners; and when the water-famine, for a long time borne,
-had failed to make the Corporation do more than propose schemes, and
-had not spurred the central government to do any thing; Hugh Myddleton,
-a merchant citizen, took in hand himself the work of bringing the New
-River to Islington. When he had half completed the work, the king came
-to his help—not, indeed, in his capacity of ruler, but in the capacity
-of speculator, investing his money with a view to profit: his share
-being disposed of by his successor after the formation of the New
-River Company, which finished the distributing system. Subsequently,
-the formation of other water-companies, utilizing other sources, has
-given London a water-supply that has grown with its growth. What,
-meanwhile, happened at Berlin? Did there in 1613, when Hugh Myddleton
-completed his work, grow up there a like efficient system? Not at all.
-The seventeenth century passed, the eighteenth century passed, the
-middle of the nineteenth century was reached, and still Berlin had no
-water-supply like that of London. What happened then? Did the paternal
-government at length do what had been so long left undone? No. Did
-the citizens at length unite to secure the desideratum? No. It was
-finally achieved by the citizens of another nation, more accustomed to
-coöperate in gaining their own profits by ministering to public needs.
-In 1845 an English company was formed for giving Berlin an adequate
-water-supply; and the work was executed by English contractors—Messrs.
-Fox and Crampton.
-
-Should it be said that great works of ancient nations, in the shape
-of aqueducts, roads, etc., might be instanced in proof that State
-agency secures such ends, or should it be said that a comparison
-between the early growth of inland navigation on the Continent, and
-its later growth here, {430} would be to our disadvantage, I reply
-that, little as they at first seem so, these facts are congruous with
-the general doctrine. While the militant social type is dominant, and
-the industrial organization but little developed, there is but one
-coördinating agency for regulating both sets of activities; just as we
-saw happens with the lower types of individual organisms. It is only
-when a considerable advance has been made in that metamorphosis which
-develops the industrial structures at the expense of the militant
-structures, and which brings along with it a substantially-independent
-coördinating agency for the industrial structures—it is only then that
-the efficiency of these spontaneous coöperations for all purposes of
-internal social life becomes greater than the efficiency of the central
-governing agency.
-
-Possibly it will be said that though, for subserving material needs,
-the actions of individuals, stimulated by necessity and made quick
-by competition, are demonstrably adequate, they are not adequate for
-subserving other needs. I do not see, however, that the facts justify
-this position. We have but to glance around to find in abundance
-similarly-generated appliances for satisfying our higher desires, as
-well as our lower desires. The fact that the Fine Arts have not thriven
-here as much as in some Continental countries, is ascribable to natural
-character, to absorption of our energies in other activities, and to
-the repressive influence of chronic asceticism, rather than to the
-absence of fostering agencies: these the interests of individuals have
-provided in abundance. Literature, in which we are second to none,
-owes, with us, nothing to State-aid. The poetry which will live is
-poetry which has been written without official prompting; and though
-we have habitually had a prize-poet, paid to write loyal verses, it
-may be said, without disparaging the present one, that a glance over
-the entire list does not show any benefit derived by poetry from
-State-patronage. Nor are other {431} forms of literature any more
-indebted to State-patronage. It was because there was a public liking
-for fiction that fiction began to be produced; and the continued public
-liking causes a continued production, including, along with much that
-is worthless, much that could not have been made better by any academic
-or other supervision. And the like holds of biographies, histories,
-scientific books, etc. Or, as a still more striking case of an agency
-that has grown up to meet a non-material want, take the newspaper
-press. What has been the genesis of this marvellous appliance, which
-each day gives us an abstract of the world’s life the day before? Under
-what promptings have there been got together its staffs of editors,
-sub-editors, article-writers, reviewers; its reporters of parliamentary
-debates, of public meetings, of law cases and police cases; its critics
-of music, theatricals, paintings, etc.; its correspondents in all
-parts of the world? Who devised and brought to perfection this system
-which at six o’clock in the morning gives the people of Edinburgh a
-report of the debates that ended at two or three o’clock in the House
-of Commons, and at the same time tells them of events that occurred
-the day before in America? It is not a Government invention. It is
-not a Government suggestion. It has not been in anyway improved or
-developed by legislation. On the contrary, it has grown up in spite of
-many hinderances from the Government and burdens which the Government
-has imposed on it. For a long time the reporting of parliamentary
-debates was resisted; for generations censorships and prosecutions
-kept newspapers down, and for several subsequent generations the
-laws in force negatived a cheap press, and the educational benefits
-accompanying it. From the war-correspondent, whose letters give to
-the very nations that are fighting their only trustworthy accounts of
-what is being done, down to the newsboy who brings round the third
-edition with the latest telegrams, the whole organization is a product
-of spontaneous {432} coöperation among private individuals, aiming to
-benefit themselves by ministering to the intellectual needs of their
-fellows—aiming also, not a few of them, to benefit their fellows by
-giving them clearer ideas and a higher standard of right. Nay, more
-than this is true. While the press is not indebted to the Government,
-the Government is enormously indebted to the press; without which,
-indeed, it would stumble daily in the performance of its functions.
-This agency which the State once did its best to put down, and has
-all along impeded, now gives to the ministers news in anticipation of
-their dispatches, gives to members of Parliament a guiding knowledge of
-public opinion, enables them to speak from the House of Commons benches
-to their constituents, and gives to both legislative chambers a full
-record of their proceedings.
-
-I do not see, therefore, how there can be any doubt respecting the
-sufficiency of agencies thus originating. The truth that in this
-condition of mutual dependence brought about by social life, there
-inevitably grow up arrangements such that each secures his own ends
-by ministering to the ends of others, seems to have been for a long
-time one of those open secrets which remain secret because they are so
-open; and even now the conspicuousness of this truth seems to cause
-an imperfect consciousness of its full meaning. The evidence shows,
-however, that even were there no other form of spontaneous coöperation
-among men than that dictated by self-interest, it might be rationally
-held that this, under the negatively-regulative control of a central
-power, would work out, in proper order, the appliances for satisfying
-all needs, and carrying on healthfully all the essential social
-functions.
-
-But there is a further kind of spontaneous coöperation, arising,
-like the other, independently of State-action, which takes a large
-share in satisfying certain classes of needs. Familiar though it
-is, this kind of spontaneous coöperation is habitually ignored in
-sociological discussions. Alike {433} from newspaper articles and
-parliamentary debates, it might be inferred that, beyond the force
-due to men’s selfish activities, there is no other social force than
-the governmental force. There seems to be a deliberate omission of
-the fact that, in addition to their selfish interests, men have
-sympathetic interests, which, acting individually and coöperatively,
-work out results scarcely less remarkable than those which the selfish
-interests work out. It is true that, during the earlier phases of
-social evolution, while yet the type is mainly militant, agencies
-thus produced do not exist: among the Spartans, I suppose, there were
-few, if any, philanthropic agencies. But as there arise forms of
-society leading toward the pacific type—forms in which the industrial
-organization develops itself, and men’s activities become of a kind
-that do not perpetually sear their sympathies; these structures which
-their sympathies generate become many and important. To the egoistic
-interests, and the coöperations prompted by them, there come to be
-added the altruistic interests and their coöperations; and what the
-one set fails to do, the other does. That, in his presentation of the
-doctrine he opposes, Prof. Huxley did not set down the effects of
-fellow-feeling as supplementing the effects of self-regarding feelings,
-surprises me the more, because he displays fellow-feeling himself in
-so marked a degree, and shows in his career how potent a social agency
-it becomes. Let us glance rapidly over the results wrought out among
-ourselves by individual and combined “altruism”—to employ M. Comte’s
-useful word.
-
-Though they show a trace of this feeling, I will not dwell upon the
-numerous institutions by which men are enabled to average the chances
-throughout life by insurance societies, which provide against the evils
-entailed by premature deaths, accidents, fires, wrecks, etc.; for these
-are mainly mercantile and egoistic in their origin. Nor will I do more
-than name those multitudinous Friendly Societies that have arisen
-spontaneously among the {434} working-classes to give mutual aid in
-time of sickness, and which the Commission now sitting is showing to be
-immensely beneficial, notwithstanding their defects; for these also,
-though containing a larger element of sympathy, are prompted chiefly
-by anticipations of personal benefits. Leaving these, let us turn to
-the organizations in which altruism is more decided: taking first that
-by which religious ministrations are carried on. Throughout Scotland
-and England, cut away all that part of it which is not established by
-law—in Scotland, the Episcopal Church, the Free Church, the United
-Presbyterians, and other Dissenting bodies; in England, the Wesleyans,
-Independents, and the various minor sects. Cut off, too, from the
-Established Church itself, all that part added in recent times by
-voluntary zeal, made conspicuous enough by the new steeples that have
-been rising on all sides; and then also take out, from the remainder
-of the Established Church, that energy which has during these three
-generations been infused into it by competition with the Dissenters: so
-reducing it to the degraded, inert state in which John Wesley found it.
-Do this, and it becomes manifest that more than half the organisation,
-and immensely more than half its function, is extra-governmental.
-Look round, again, at the multitudinous institutions for mitigating
-men’s ills—the hospitals, dispensaries, alms-houses, and the like—the
-various benevolent and mendicity societies, etc., of which London alone
-contains between six and seven hundred. From our vast St. Thomas’s,
-exceeding the palace of the Legislature itself in bulk, down to Dorcas
-societies and village clothing-clubs, we have charitable agencies,
-many in kind and countless in number, which supplement, perhaps too
-largely, the legally-established one; and which, whatever evil they
-may have done along with the good, have done far less evil than the
-Poor-Law organization did before it was reformed in 1834. Akin to
-these are still more striking examples of power in {435} agencies
-thus originating, such as that furnished by the Anti-slavery Society,
-which carried the emancipation of the slaves, notwithstanding the
-class-opposition so predominant in the Legislature. And if we look for
-more recent like instances, we have them in the organization which
-promptly and efficiently dealt with the cotton-famine in Lancashire,
-and in that which last year ministered to the wounded and distressed
-in France. Once more, consider our educational system as it existed
-till within these few years. Such part of it as did not consist of
-private schools, carried on for personal profit, consisted of schools
-or colleges set up or maintained by men for the benefit of their
-fellows, and the posterity of their fellows. Omitting the few founded
-or partially founded by kings, the numerous endowed schools scattered
-throughout the kingdom, originated from altruistic feelings (so far,
-at least, as they were not due to egoistic desires for good places in
-the other world). And then, after these appliances for teaching the
-poor had been almost entirely appropriated by the rich, whence came
-the remedy? Another altruistic organization grew up for educating the
-poor, struggled against the opposition of the Church and the governing
-classes, eventually forced these to enter into competition and produce
-like altruistic organizations, until by school systems, local and
-general, ecclesiastical, dissenting, and secular, the mass of the
-people had been brought from a state of almost entire ignorance to one
-in which nearly all of them possessed the rudiments of knowledge. But
-for these spontaneously-developed agencies, ignorance would have been
-universal. Not only such knowledge as the poor now possess—not only
-the knowledge of the trading-classes—not only the knowledge of those
-who write books and leading articles; but the knowledge of those who
-carry on the business of the country as ministers and legislators,
-has been derived from these extra-governmental agencies, egoistic or
-altruistic. Yet now, strangely enough, the {436} cultured intelligence
-of the country has taken to spurning its parent; and that to which
-it owes both its existence and the consciousness of its own value is
-pooh-poohed as though it had done, and could do, nothing of importance!
-One other fact let me add. While such teaching organizations, and their
-results in the shape of enlightenment, are due to these spontaneous
-agencies, to such agencies also are due the great improvements in the
-quality of the culture now happily beginning to take place. The spread
-of scientific knowledge, and of the scientific spirit, has not been
-brought about by laws and officials. Our scientific societies have
-arisen from the spontaneous coöperation of those interested in the
-accumulation and diffusion of the kinds of truth they respectively deal
-with. Though the British Association has from time to time obtained
-certain small subsidies, their results in the way of advancing science
-have borne but an extremely small ratio to the results achieved
-without any such aid. If there needs a conclusive illustration of
-the power of agencies thus arising, we have it in the history and
-achievements of the Royal Institution. From this, which is a product
-of altruistic coöperation, and which has had for its successive
-professors Young, Davy, Faraday, and Tyndall, there has come a series
-of brilliant discoveries which cannot be paralleled by a series from
-any State-nurtured institution.
-
-I hold, then, that forced, as men in society are, to seek satisfaction
-of their own wants by satisfying the wants of others; and led as they
-also are by sentiments which social life has fostered, to satisfy
-many wants of others irrespective of their own; they are moved by two
-sets of forces which, working together, will amply suffice to carry
-on all needful activities; and I think the facts fully justify this
-belief. It is true that, _a priori_, one would not have supposed that
-by their unconscious coöperations men could have wrought out such
-results, any more than one would have supposed, _a priori_, that by
-their unconscious coöperation they could {437} have evolved Language.
-But reasoning _a posteriori_, which it is best to do when we have the
-facts before us, it becomes manifest that they can do this; that they
-have done it in very astonishing ways; and perhaps may do it hereafter
-in ways still more astonishing. Scarcely any scientific generalization
-has, I think, a broader inductive basis than we have for the belief
-that these egoistic and altruistic feelings are powers which, taken
-together, amply suffice to originate and carry on all the activities
-which constitute healthy national life: the only pre-requisite being,
-that they shall be under the negatively-regulative control of a
-central power—that the entire aggregate of individuals, acting through
-the legislature and executive as its agents, shall put upon each
-individual, and group of individuals, the restraints needful to prevent
-aggression, direct and indirect.
-
-And here I might go on to supplement the argument by showing that
-the immense majority of the evils which government aid is invoked to
-remedy, are evils which arise immediately or remotely because it does
-not perform properly its negatively-regulative function. From the
-waste of, probably, £100,000,000 of national capital in unproductive
-railways, for which the Legislature is responsible by permitting the
-original proprietary contracts to be broken,[41] down to the railway
-accidents and loss of life caused by unpunctuality, which would never
-have grown to its present height were there an easy remedy for breach
-of contract between company and passenger; nearly all the vices of
-railway management have arisen from the non-administration of justice.
-And everywhere else we shall find that, were the restraining action of
-the State prompt, effective, and costless to those aggrieved, the pleas
-put in for positive regulation would nearly all disappear.
-
- [41] See Essay on “Railway Morals and Railway Policy.”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-I am thus brought naturally to remark on the title given {438} to this
-theory of State-functions. That “Administrative Nihilism” adequately
-describes the view set forth by Von Humboldt, may be: I have not read
-his work. But I cannot see how it adequately describes the doctrine I
-have been defending; nor do I see how this can be properly expressed by
-the more positive title, “police-government.” The conception suggested
-by police-government does not include the conception of an organization
-for external protection. So long as each nation is given to burglary,
-I quite admit each other nation must keep guards, under the forms
-of army or navy, or both, to prevent burglars from breaking in. And
-the title police-government does not, in its ordinary acceptation,
-comprehend these offensive and defensive appliances needful for
-dealing with foreign enemies. At the other extreme, too, it falls
-short of the full meaning to be expressed. While it duly conveys the
-idea of an organization required for checking and punishing criminal
-aggression, it does not convey any idea of the no less important
-organization required for dealing with civil aggression—an organization
-quite essential for properly discharging the negatively-regulative
-function. Though latent police-force may be considered as giving
-their efficiency to legal decisions on all questions brought into
-_nisi prius_ courts, yet, since here police-force rarely comes into
-visible play, police-government does not suggest this very extensive
-part of the administration of justice. Far from contending for a
-_laissez-faire_ policy in the sense which the phrase commonly suggests,
-I have contended for a more active control of the kind distinguishable
-as negatively regulative. One of the reasons I have urged for
-excluding State-action from other spheres, is, that it may become
-more efficient within its proper sphere. And I have argued that the
-wretched performance of its duties within its proper sphere continues,
-because its time is chiefly spent over imaginary duties.[42] The facts
-that often, in bankruptcy {439} cases, three-fourths and more of
-the assets go in costs; that creditors are led by the expectation of
-great delay and a miserable dividend to accept almost any composition
-offered; and that so the bankruptcy-law offers a premium to roguery;
-are facts which would long since have ceased to be facts, had citizens
-been mainly occupied in getting an efficient judicial system. If the
-due performance by the State of its all-essential function had been
-the question on which elections were fought, we should not see, as we
-now do, that a shivering cottager who steals palings for firewood,
-or a hungry tramp who robs an orchard, gets punishment in more than
-the old Hebrew measure, while great financial frauds which ruin their
-thousands bring no punishments. Were the negatively-regulative function
-of the State in internal affairs dominant in the thoughts of men,
-within the Legislature and without, there would be tolerated no such
-treatment as that suffered lately by Messrs. Walker, of Cornhill;
-who, having been robbed of £6,000 worth of property and having spent
-£950 in rewards for apprehending thieves and prosecuting them, cannot
-get back the proceeds of their property found on the thieves—who bear
-the costs of administering justice, while the Corporation of London
-makes £940 profit out of their loss. It is in large measure because
-I hold that these crying abuses and inefficiencies, which everywhere
-characterize the administration of justice, need more than any other
-evils to be remedied; and because I hold that remedy of them can go on
-only as fast as the internal function of the State is more and more
-restricted to the administration of justice; that I take the view which
-I have been re-explaining. _It is a law illustrated by organizations
-of every kind, that, in proportion as there is to be efficiency, there
-must be specialization, both of structure and function—specialization
-which, of necessity, implies accompanying limitation._ And, as I have
-elsewhere argued, the development of representative government is the
-development of a type of {440} government fitted above all others for
-this negatively-regulative control, and, above all others, ill fitted
-for positively-regulative control.[43] This doctrine, that while the
-negatively-regulative control should be extended and made better,
-the positively-regulative control should be diminished, and that the
-one change implies the other, may properly be called the doctrine of
-Specialized Administration—if it is to be named from its administrative
-aspect. I regret that my presentation of this doctrine has been such as
-to lead to misinterpretation. Either it is that I have not adequately
-explained it, which, if true, surprises me, or else it is that the
-space occupied in seeking to show what are not the duties of the State
-is so much greater than the space occupied in defining its duties, that
-these last make but little impression. In any case, that Prof. Huxley
-should have construed my view in the way he has done, shows me that it
-needs fuller exposition; since, had he put upon it the construction I
-intended, he would not, I think, have included it under the title he
-has used, nor would he have seen it needful to raise the question I
-have endeavoured to answer.
-
- [42] See Essay on “Over-Legislation.”
-
- [43] See Essay on “Representative Government—What is it good for?”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-
-POSTSCRIPT.—Since the above article was written, a fact of some
-significance in relation to the question of State-management has
-come under my notice. There is one department, at any rate, in which
-the State succeeds well—the Post-Office. And this department is
-sometimes instanced as showing the superiority of public over private
-administration.
-
-I am not about to call in question the general satisfactoriness of
-our postal arrangements; nor shall I contend that this branch of
-State-organization, now well-established, could be replaced with
-advantage. Possibly the type of our social structure has become, in
-this respect, so far fixed that a radical change would be injurious.
-In dealing {441} with those who make much of this success, I have
-contented myself with showing that the developments which have made
-the Post-Office efficient, have not originated with the Government,
-but have been thrust upon it from without. I have in evidence cited
-the facts that the mail-coach system was established by a private
-individual, Mr. Palmer, and lived down official opposition; that the
-reform originated by Mr. Rowland Hill had to be made against the
-wills of _employés_; and, further, I have pointed out that, even as
-it is, a large part of the work is done by private enterprise—that
-the Government gets railway-companies to do for it most of the inland
-carriage, and steam-boat companies the outland carriage: contenting
-itself with doing the local collection and distribution.
-
-Respecting the general question whether, in the absence of our existing
-postal system, private enterprise would have developed one as good or
-better, I have been able to say only that analogies like that furnished
-by our newspaper-system, with its efficient news-vending organization,
-warrant us in believing that it would. Recently, however, I have been
-shown both that private enterprise is capable of this, and that, but
-for a legal interdict, it would have done long ago what the State has
-but lately done. Here is the proof:―
-
- “To facilitate correspondence between one part of London and another
- was not originally one of the objects of the Post-Office. But,
- in the reign of Charles II., an enterprising citizen of London,
- William Dockwray, set up, at great expense, a penny post, which
- delivered letters and parcels six or eight times a-day in the busy
- and crowded streets near the Exchange, and four times a-day in the
- outskirts of the capital. . . . As soon as it became clear that the
- speculation would be lucrative, the Duke of York complained of it as
- an infraction of his monopoly, and the courts of law decided in his
- favour.”—_Macaulay_, _History of England_, 1866, i., 302–3.
-
-Thus it appears that two centuries since, private enterprise initiated
-a local postal system, similar, in respect both of cheapness and
-frequency of distribution, to that lately-established one boasted of
-as a State-success. Judging by what has happened in other cases with
-private {442} enterprises which had small beginnings, we may infer
-that the system thus commenced, would have developed throughout the
-kingdom as fast as the needs pressed and the possibilities allowed. So
-far from being indebted to the State, we have reason to believe that,
-but for State-repression, we should have obtained a postal organization
-like our present one generations ago!
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-SECOND POSTSCRIPT.—When the foregoing essay was republished in the
-third series of my _Essays, Scientific, Political, and Speculative_,
-I included, in the preface to the volume, some comments upon Prof.
-Huxley’s reply. In the absence of this preface, now no longer
-appropriate, there seems no other fit place for these comments than
-this. I therefore here append them.
-
-“On the brief rejoinder to my arguments which Prof. Huxley makes in the
-preface to his _Critiques and Addresses_, I may here say a few words.
-The reasons he gives for still thinking that the name ‘Administrative
-Nihilism’ fitly indicates the system which I have described as
-‘negatively regulative,’ are, I think, adequately met by asking whether
-‘Ethical Nihilism’ would fitly describe the remnant of the decalogue,
-were all its positive injunctions omitted. If the eight commandments
-which, substantially or literally, come under the form ‘thou shalt
-not,’ constitute by themselves a set of rules which can scarcely
-be called nihilistic; I do not see how an administrative system
-limited to the enforcement of such rules can be called nihilistic:
-especially if to the punishment of murder, adultery, stealing, and
-false-witness, it adds the punishment of assault, breach of contract,
-and all minor aggressions, down to the annoyance of neighbours by
-nuisances. Respecting the second and essential question, whether
-limitation of the internal functions of government to those which are
-negatively regulative, is consistent with that theory of the social
-organism and its controlling {443} agencies held by me, I may say that
-the insufficiency of my reply has not, I think, been shown. I was
-tacitly asked how the analogy I have drawn between those governmental
-structures by which the parts of the body politic have their actions
-regulated and those nervous structures which regulate the organic
-actions of the individual living body, is to be reconciled with my
-belief that social activities will in the main adjust themselves. My
-answer was this. I recognized as essential the positively-regulative
-functions of the State in respect to the offensive and defensive
-appliances needful for national self-preservation, during the predatory
-phase of social evolution; and I not only admitted the importance of
-its negatively-regulative functions in respect to the internal social
-activities, but insisted that these should be carried out much more
-efficiently than now. Assuming always, however, that the internal
-social activities continue subject to that restraining action of the
-State which consists in preventing aggressions, direct and indirect,
-I contended that the coördination of these internal social activities
-is effected by other structures of a different kind. I aimed to show
-that my two beliefs are not inconsistent, by pointing out that in
-the individual organism, also, those vital activities which parallel
-the activities constituting national life, are regulated by a
-substantially-independent nervous system. Prof. Huxley does, indeed,
-remind me that recent researches show increasingly the influence of
-the cerebro-spinal nervous system over the processes of organic life;
-against which, however, has to be set the growing evidence of the power
-exercised by the visceral nervous system over the cerebro-spinal. But,
-recognizing the influence he names (which, indeed, corresponds to that
-governmental influence I regard as necessary); I think the consistency
-of my positions is maintainable so long as it is manifest that the
-viscera, under the control of their {444} own nervous system, can carry
-on the vital actions when the control of the cerebro-spinal system is
-substantially arrested by sleep, or by anæsthetics, or by other causes
-of insensibility; and while it is shown that a considerable degree of
-coördination may exist among the organs of a creature which has no
-nervous system at all.”
-
-{445}
-
-
-
-
-FROM FREEDOM TO BONDAGE.
-
-[_First published as the Introduction to a volume entitled_ A Plea
-for Liberty, &c.: _a series of anti-socialistic essays, issued at the
-beginning of 1891_.]
-
-
-Of the many ways in which common-sense inferences about social affairs
-are flatly contradicted by events (as when measures taken to suppress a
-book cause increased circulation of it, or as when attempts to prevent
-usurious rates of interest make the terms harder for the borrower, or
-as when there is greater difficulty in getting things at the places of
-production than elsewhere) one of the most curious is the way in which
-the more things improve the louder become the exclamations about their
-badness.
-
-In days when the people were without any political power, their
-subjection was rarely complained of; but after free institutions had
-so far advanced in England that our political arrangements were envied
-by continental peoples, the denunciations of aristocratic rule grew
-gradually stronger, until there came a great widening of the franchise,
-soon followed by complaints that things were going wrong for want of
-still further widening. If we trace up the treatment of women from the
-days of savagedom, when they bore all the burdens and after the men
-had eaten received such food as remained, up through the middle ages
-when they served the men at their meals, to {446} our own day when
-throughout our social arrangements the claims of women are always put
-first, we see that along with the worst treatment there went the least
-apparent consciousness that the treatment was bad; while now that
-they are better treated than ever before, the proclaiming of their
-grievances daily strengthens: the loudest outcries coming from “the
-paradise of women,” America. A century ago, when scarcely a man could
-be found who was not occasionally intoxicated, and when inability to
-take one or two bottles of wine brought contempt, no agitation arose
-against the vice of drunkenness; but now that, in the course of fifty
-years, the voluntary efforts of temperance societies, joined with
-more general causes, have produced comparative sobriety, there are
-vociferous demands for laws to prevent the ruinous effects of the
-liquor traffic. Similarly again with education. A few generations
-back, ability to read and write was practically limited to the upper
-and middle classes, and the suggestion that the rudiments of culture
-should be given to labourers was never made, or, if made, ridiculed;
-but when, in the days of our grandfathers, the Sunday-school system,
-initiated by a few philanthropists, began to spread and was followed by
-the establishment of day-schools, with the result that among the masses
-those who could read and write were no longer the exceptions, and the
-demand for cheap literature rapidly increased, there began the cry that
-the people were perishing for lack of knowledge, and that the State
-must not simply educate them but must force education upon them.
-
-And so is it, too, with the general state of the population in respect
-of food, clothing, shelter, and the appliances of life. Leaving out
-of the comparison early barbaric states, there has been a conspicuous
-progress from the time when most rustics lived on barley bread, rye
-bread, and oatmeal, down to our own time when the consumption of white
-wheaten bread is universal—from the days when coarse jackets reaching
-to the knees left the legs bare, down to the present {447} day when
-labouring people, like their employers, have the whole body covered,
-by two or more layers of clothing—from the old era of single-roomed
-huts without chimneys, or from the 15th century when even an ordinary
-gentleman’s house was commonly without wainscot or plaster on its
-walls, down to the present century when every cottage has more rooms
-than one and the houses of artizans usually have several, while all
-have fire-places, chimneys, and glazed windows, accompanied mostly by
-paper-hangings and painted doors; there has been, I say, a conspicuous
-progress in the condition of the people. And this progress has been
-still more marked within our own time. Any one who can look back 60
-years, when the amount of pauperism was far greater than now and
-beggars abundant, is struck by the comparative size and finish of the
-new houses occupied by operatives—by the better dress of workmen, who
-wear broad-cloth on Sundays, and that of servant girls, who vie with
-their mistresses—by the higher standard of living which leads to a
-great demand for the best qualities of food by working people: all
-results of the double change to higher wages and cheaper commodities,
-and a distribution of taxes which has relieved the lower classes at
-the expense of the upper classes. He is struck, too, by the contrast
-between the small space which popular welfare then occupied in public
-attention, and the large space it now occupies, with the result that
-outside and inside Parliament, plans to benefit the millions form the
-leading topics, and everyone having means is expected to join in some
-philanthropic effort. Yet while elevation, mental and physical, of
-the masses is going on far more rapidly than ever before—while the
-lowering of the death-rate proves that the average life is less trying,
-there swells louder and louder the cry that the evils are so great
-that nothing short of a social revolution can cure them. In presence
-of obvious improvements, joined with that increase of longevity which
-even alone yields conclusive proof of general amelioration, it is {448}
-proclaimed, with increasing vehemence, that things are so bad that
-society must be pulled to pieces and re-organized on another plan. In
-this case, then, as in the previous cases instanced, in proportion as
-the evil decreases the denunciation of it increases; and as fast as
-natural causes are shown to be powerful there grows up the belief that
-they are powerless.
-
-Not that the evils to be remedied are small. Let no one suppose
-that, by emphasizing the above paradox, I wish to make light of
-the sufferings which most men have to bear. The fates of the great
-majority have ever been, and doubtless still are, so sad that it is
-painful to think of them. Unquestionably the existing type of social
-organization is one which none who care for their kind can contemplate
-with satisfaction; and unquestionably men’s activities accompanying
-this type are far from being admirable. The strong divisions of rank
-and the immense inequalities of means, are at variance with that ideal
-of human relations on which the sympathetic imagination likes to dwell;
-and the average conduct, under the pressure and excitement of social
-life as at present carried on, is in sundry respects repulsive. Though
-the many who revile competition strangely ignore the enormous benefits
-resulting from it—though they forget that most of the appliances
-and products distinguishing civilization from savagery, and making
-possible the maintenance of a large population on a small area, have
-been developed by the struggle for existence—though they disregard the
-fact that while every man, as producer, suffers from the under-bidding
-of competitors, yet, as consumer, he is immensely advantaged by the
-cheapening of all he has to buy—though they persist in dwelling on the
-evils of competition and saying nothing of its benefits; yet it is
-not to be denied that the evils are great, and form a large set-off
-from the benefits. The system under which we at present live fosters
-dishonesty and lying. It prompts adulterations of countless kinds;
-it is answerable for the {449} cheap imitations which eventually
-in many cases thrust the genuine articles out of the market; it
-leads to the use of short weights and false measures; it introduces
-bribery, which vitiates most trading relations, from those of the
-manufacturer and buyer down to those of the shopkeeper and servant; it
-encourages deception to such an extent that an assistant who cannot
-tell a falsehood with a good face is blamed; and often it gives the
-conscientious trader the choice between adopting the malpractices of
-his competitors, or greatly injuring his creditors by bankruptcy.
-Moreover, the extensive frauds, common throughout the commercial world
-and daily exposed in law-courts and newspapers, are largely due to the
-pressure under which competition places the higher industrial classes;
-and are otherwise due to that lavish expenditure which, as implying
-success in the commercial struggle, brings honour. With these minor
-evils must be joined the major one, that the distribution achieved by
-the system, gives to those who regulate and superintend, a share of the
-total produce which bears too large a ratio to the share it gives to
-the actual workers. Let it not be thought, then, that in saying what I
-have said above, I under-estimate those vices of our competitive system
-which, 30 years ago, I described and denounced.[44] But it is not a
-question of absolute evils; it is a question of relative evils—whether
-the evils at present suffered are or are not less than the evils which
-would be suffered under another system—whether efforts for mitigation
-along the lines thus far followed are not more likely to succeed than
-efforts along utterly different lines.
-
-This is the question here to be considered. I must be excused for first
-of all setting forth sundry truths which are, to some at any rate,
-tolerably familiar, before proceeding to draw inferences which are not
-so familiar.
-
- [44] See essay on “The Morals of Trade.”
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Speaking broadly, every man works that he may avoid {450} suffering.
-Here, remembrance of the pangs of hunger prompts him; and there, he is
-prompted by the sight of the slave-driver’s lash. His immediate dread
-may be the punishment which physical circumstances will inflict, or
-may be punishment inflicted by human agency. He must have a master;
-but the master may be Nature or may be a fellow man. When he is under
-the impersonal coercion of Nature, we say that he is free; and when
-he is under the personal coercion of some one above him, we call
-him, according to the degree of his dependence, a slave, a serf, or
-a vassal. Of course I omit the small minority who inherit means: an
-incidental, and not a necessary, social element. I speak only of the
-vast majority, both cultured and uncultured, who maintain themselves by
-labour, bodily or mental, and must either exert themselves of their own
-unconstrained wills, prompted only by thoughts of naturally-resulting
-evils or benefits, or must exert themselves with constrained wills,
-prompted by thoughts of evils and benefits artificially resulting.
-
-Men may work together in a society under either of these two forms of
-control: forms which, though in many cases mingled, are essentially
-contrasted. Using the word coöperation in its wide sense, and not in
-that restricted sense now commonly given to it, we may say that social
-life must be carried on by either voluntary coöperation or compulsory
-coöperation; or, to use Sir Henry Maine’s words, the system must be
-that of _contract_ or that of _status_—that in which the individual is
-left to do the best he can by his spontaneous efforts and get success
-or failure according to his efficiency, and that in which he has his
-appointed place, works under coercive rule, and has his apportioned
-share of food, clothing, and shelter.
-
-The system of voluntary coöperation is that by which, in civilized
-societies, industry is now everywhere carried on. Under a simple form
-we have it on every farm, where the labourers, paid by the farmer
-himself and taking orders {451} directly from him, are free to stay
-or go as they please. And of its more complex form an example is
-yielded by every manufacturing concern, in which, under partners, come
-managers and clerks, and under these, time-keepers and over-lookers,
-and under these operatives of different grades. In each of these cases
-there is an obvious working together, or coöperation, of employer and
-employed, to obtain in the one case a crop and in the other case a
-manufactured stock. And then, at the same time, there is a far more
-extensive, though unconscious, coöperation with other workers of all
-grades throughout the society. For while these particular employers
-and employed are severally occupied with their special kinds of work,
-other employers and employed are making other things needed for the
-carrying on of their lives as well as the lives of all others. This
-voluntary coöperation, from its simplest to its most complex forms, has
-the common trait that those concerned work together by consent. There
-is no one to force terms or to force acceptance. It is perfectly true
-that in many cases an employer may give, or an _employé_ may accept,
-with reluctance: circumstances he says compel him. But what are the
-circumstances? In the one case there are goods ordered, or a contract
-entered into, which he cannot supply or execute without yielding; and
-in the other case he submits to a wage less than he likes because
-otherwise he will have no money wherewith to procure food and warmth.
-The general formula is not—“Do this, or I will make you;” but it is—“Do
-this, or leave your place and take the consequences.”
-
-On the other hand compulsory coöperation is exemplified by an army—not
-so much by our own army, the service in which is under agreement for a
-specified period, but in a continental army, raised by conscription.
-Here, in time of peace, the daily duties—cleaning, parade, drill,
-sentry work, and the rest—and in time of war the various actions of
-the camp and the battle-field, are done under command, {452} without
-room for any exercise of choice. Up from the private soldier through
-the non-commissioned officers and the half-dozen or more grades of
-commissioned officers, the universal law is absolute obedience from
-the grade below to the grade above. The sphere of individual will
-is such only as is allowed by the will of the superior. Breaches
-of subordination are, according to their gravity, dealt with by
-deprivation of leave, extra drill, imprisonment, flogging, and, in the
-last resort, shooting. Instead of the understanding that there must
-be obedience in respect of specified duties under pain of dismissal;
-the understanding now is—“Obey in everything ordered under penalty of
-inflicted suffering and perhaps death.”
-
-This form of coöperation, still exemplified in an army, has in days
-gone by been the form of coöperation throughout the civil population.
-Everywhere, and at all times, chronic war generates a militant type
-of structure, not in the body of soldiers only but throughout the
-community at large. Practically, while the conflict between societies
-is actively going on, and fighting is regarded as the only manly
-occupation, the society is the quiescent army and the army the
-mobilized society: that part which does not take part in battle,
-composed of slaves, serfs, women, &c., constituting the commissariat.
-Naturally, therefore, throughout the mass of inferior individuals
-constituting the commissariat, there is maintained a system of
-discipline identical in nature if less elaborate. The fighting body
-being, under such conditions, the ruling body, and the rest of the
-community being incapable of resistance, those who control the fighting
-body will, of course, impose their control upon the non-fighting
-body; and the _régime_ of coercion will be applied to it with such
-modifications only as the different circumstances involve. Prisoners
-of war become slaves. Those who were free cultivators before the
-conquest of their country, become serfs attached to the soil. Petty
-chiefs become subject to superior chiefs; these smaller lords {453}
-become vassals to over-lords; and so on up to the highest: the social
-ranks and powers being of like essential nature with the ranks and
-powers throughout the military organization. And while for the slaves
-compulsory coöperation is the unqualified system, a coöperation which
-is in part compulsory is the system that pervades all grades above.
-Each man’s oath of fealty to his suzerain takes the form—“I am your
-man.”
-
-Throughout Europe, and especially in our own country, this system of
-compulsory coöperation gradually relaxed in rigour, while the system
-of voluntary coöperation step by step replaced it. As fast as war
-ceased to be the business of life, the social structure produced by
-war and appropriate to it, slowly became qualified by the social
-structure produced by industrial life and appropriate to it. In
-proportion as a decreasing part of the community was devoted to
-offensive and defensive activities, an increasing part became devoted
-to production and distribution. Growing more numerous, more powerful,
-and taking refuge in towns where it was less under the power of the
-militant class, this industrial population carried on its life under
-the system of voluntary coöperation. Though municipal governments and
-guild-regulations, partially pervaded by ideas and usages derived
-from the militant type of society, were in some degree coercive;
-yet production and distribution were in the main carried on under
-agreement—alike between buyers and sellers, and between masters and
-workmen. As fast as these social relations and forms of activity became
-dominant in urban populations, they influenced the whole community:
-compulsory coöperation lapsed more and more, through money commutation
-for services, military and civil; while divisions of rank became less
-rigid and class-power diminished. Until at length, restraints exercised
-by incorporated trades having fallen into desuetude, as well as the
-rule of rank over rank, voluntary coöperation became the universal
-principle. {454} Purchase and sale became the law for all kinds of
-services as well as for all kinds of commodities.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-The restlessness generated by pressure against the conditions of
-existence, perpetually prompts the desire to try a new position.
-Everyone knows how long-continued rest in one attitude becomes
-wearisome—everyone has found how even the best easy chair, at first
-rejoiced in, becomes after many hours intolerable; and change to a
-hard seat, previously occupied and rejected, seems for a time to be a
-great relief. It is the same with incorporated humanity. Having by long
-struggles emancipated itself from the hard discipline of the ancient
-_régime_, and having discovered that the new _régime_ into which it has
-grown, though relatively easy, is not without stresses and pains, its
-impatience with these prompts the wish to try another system: which
-other system is, in principle if not in appearance, the same as that
-which during past generations was escaped from with much rejoicing.
-
-For as fast as the _régime_ of contract is discarded the _régime_ of
-status is of necessity adopted. As fast as voluntary coöperation is
-abandoned compulsory coöperation must be substituted. Some kind of
-organization labour must have; and if it is not that which arises by
-agreement under free competition, it must be that which is imposed by
-authority. Unlike in appearance and names as it may be to the old order
-of slaves and serfs, working under masters, who were coerced by barons,
-who were themselves vassals of dukes or kings, the new order wished
-for, constituted by workers under foremen of small groups, overlooked
-by superintendents, who are subject to higher local managers, who
-are controlled by superiors of districts, themselves under a central
-government, must be essentially the same in principle. In the one
-case, as in the other, there must be established grades, and enforced
-subordination of each grade to the grades above. This is a truth which
-the communist or the socialist does not dwell upon. Angry {455} with
-the existing system under which each of us takes care of himself, while
-all of us see that each has fair play, he thinks how much better it
-would be for all of us to take care of each of us; and he refrains from
-thinking of the machinery by which this is to be done. Inevitably, if
-each is to be cared for by all, then the embodied all must get the
-means—the necessaries of life. What it gives to each must be taken from
-the accumulated contributions; and it must therefore require from each
-his proportion—must tell him how much he has to give to the general
-stock in the shape of production, that he may have so much in the shape
-of sustentation. Hence, before he can be provided for, he must put
-himself under orders, and obey those who say what he shall do, and at
-what hours, and where; and who give him his share of food, clothing,
-and shelter. If competition is excluded, and with it buying and
-selling, there can be no voluntary exchange of so much labour for so
-much produce; but there must be apportionment of the one to the other
-by appointed officers. This apportionment must be enforced. Without
-alternative the work must be done, and without alternative the benefit,
-whatever it may be, must be accepted. For the worker may not leave
-his place at will and offer himself elsewhere. Under such a system he
-cannot be accepted elsewhere, save by order of the authorities. And
-it is manifest that a standing order would forbid employment in one
-place of an insubordinate member from another place: the system could
-not be worked if the workers were severally allowed to go or come as
-they pleased. With corporals and sergeants under them, the captains
-of industry must carry out the orders of their colonels, and these
-of their generals, up to the council of the commander-in-chief; and
-obedience must be required throughout the industrial army as throughout
-a fighting army. “Do your prescribed duties, and take your apportioned
-rations,” must be the rule of the one as of the other.
-
-“Well, be it so;” replies the socialist. “The workers {456} will
-appoint their own officers, and these will always be subject to
-criticisms of the mass they regulate. Being thus in fear of public
-opinion, they will be sure to act judiciously and fairly; or when they
-do not, will be deposed by the popular vote, local or general. Where
-will be the grievance of being under superiors, when the superiors
-themselves are under democratic control?” And in this attractive vision
-the socialist has full belief.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Iron and brass are simpler things than flesh and blood, and dead wood
-than living nerve; and a machine constructed of the one works in more
-definite ways than an organism constructed of the other,—especially
-when the machine is worked by the inorganic forces of steam or water,
-while the organism is worked by the forces of living nerve-centres.
-Manifestly, then, the ways in which the machine will work are much
-more readily calculable than the ways in which the organism will work.
-Yet in how few cases does the inventor foresee rightly the actions of
-his new apparatus! Read the patent-list, and it will be found that not
-more than one device in fifty turns out to be of any service. Plausible
-as his scheme seemed to the inventor, one or other hitch prevents the
-intended operation, and brings out a widely different result from that
-which he wished.
-
-What, then, shall we say of these schemes which have to do not with
-dead matters and forces, but with complex living organisms working
-in ways less readily foreseen, and which involve the coöperation
-of multitudes of such organisms? Even the units out of which this
-re-arranged body politic is to be formed are often incomprehensible.
-Everyone is from time to time surprised by others’ behaviour, and even
-by the deeds of relatives who are best known to him. Seeing, then, how
-uncertainly anyone can foresee the actions of an individual, how can
-he with any certainty foresee the operation of a social structure?
-He proceeds on the assumption that all concerned will judge rightly
-and act {457} fairly—will think as they ought to think, and act
-as they ought to act; and he assumes this regardless of the daily
-experiences which show him that men do neither the one nor the other,
-and forgetting that the complaints he makes against the existing
-system show his belief to be that men have neither the wisdom nor the
-rectitude which his plan requires them to have.
-
-Paper constitutions raise smiles on the faces of those who have
-observed their results; and paper social systems similarly affect those
-who have contemplated the available evidence. How little the men who
-wrought the French revolution and were chiefly concerned in setting up
-the new governmental apparatus, dreamt that one of the early actions of
-this apparatus would be to behead them all! How little the men who drew
-up the American Declaration of Independence and framed the republic,
-anticipated that after some generations the legislature would lapse
-into the hands of wire-pullers; that its doings would turn upon the
-contests of office-seekers; that political action would be everywhere
-vitiated by the intrusion of a foreign element holding the balance
-between parties; that electors, instead of judging for themselves,
-would habitually be led to the polls in thousands by their “bosses;”
-and that respectable men would be driven out of public life by the
-insults and slanders of professional politicians. Nor were there better
-previsions in those who gave constitutions to the various other states
-of the New World, in which unnumbered revolutions have shown with
-wonderful persistence the contrasts between the expected results of
-political systems and the achieved results. It has been no less thus
-with proposed systems of social re-organization, so far as they have
-been tried. Save where celibacy has been insisted on, their history has
-been everywhere one of disaster; ending with the history of Cabet’s
-Icarian colony lately given by one of its members, Madame Fleury
-Robinson, in _The Open Court_—a history of splittings, re-splittings
-and re-re-splittings, accompanied by {458} numerous individual
-secessions and final dissolution. And for the failure of such social
-schemes, as for the failure of the political schemes, there has been
-one general cause.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Metamorphosis is the universal law, exemplified throughout the Heavens
-and on the Earth: especially throughout the organic world; and above
-all in the animal division of it. No creature, save the simplest and
-most minute, commences its existence in a form like that which it
-eventually assumes; and in most cases the unlikeness is great—so great
-that kinship between the first and the last forms would be incredible
-were it not daily demonstrated in every poultry-yard and every garden.
-More than this is true. The changes of form are often several: each
-of them being an apparently complete transformation—egg, larva, pupa,
-imago, for example. And this universal metamorphosis, displayed alike
-in the development of a planet and of every seed which germinates on
-its surface, holds also of societies, whether taken as wholes or in
-their separate institutions. No one of them ends as it begins; and the
-difference between its original structure and its ultimate structure
-is such that, at the outset, change of the one into the other would
-have seemed incredible. In the rudest tribe the chief, obeyed as leader
-in war, loses his distinctive position when the fighting is over; and
-even where continued warfare has produced permanent chieftainship,
-the chief, building his own hut, getting his own food, making his own
-implements, differs from others only by his predominant influence.
-There is no sign that in course of time, by conquests and unions of
-tribes, and consolidations of clusters so formed with other such
-clusters, until a nation has been produced, there will originate from
-the primitive chief, one who, as czar or emperor, surrounded with pomp
-and ceremony, has despotic power over scores of millions, exercised
-through hundreds of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands
-of officials. When the early Christian missionaries, having humble
-{459} externals and passing self-denying lives, spread over pagan
-Europe, preaching forgiveness of injuries and the returning of good
-for evil, no one dreamt that in course of time their representatives
-would form a vast hierarchy, possessing everywhere a large part of
-the land, distinguished by the haughtiness of its members grade above
-grade, ruled by military bishops who led their retainers to battle,
-and headed by a pope exercising supreme power over kings. So, too,
-has it been with that very industrial system which many are now so
-eager to replace. In its original form there was no prophecy of the
-factory-system or kindred organizations of workers. Differing from
-them only as being the head of his house, the master worked along with
-his apprentices and a journeyman or two, sharing with them his table
-and accommodation, and himself selling their joint produce. Only with
-industrial growth did there come employment of a larger number of
-assistants, and a relinquishment, on the part of the master, of all
-other business than that of superintendence. And only in the course
-of recent times did there evolve the organizations under which the
-labours of hundreds and thousands of men receiving wages, are regulated
-by various orders of paid officials under a single or multiple head.
-These originally small, semi-socialistic, groups of producers, like the
-compound families or house-communities of early ages, slowly dissolved
-because they could not hold their ground: the larger establishments,
-with better sub-division of labour, succeeded because they ministered
-to the wants of society more effectually. But we need not go back
-through the centuries to trace transformations sufficiently great and
-unexpected. On the day when £30,000 a year in aid of education was
-voted as an experiment, the name of idiot would have been given to an
-opponent who prophesied that in 50 years the sum spent through imperial
-taxes and local rates would amount to £10,000,000 or who said that
-the aid to education would be followed by aids to feeding and {460}
-clothing, or who said that parents and children, alike deprived of all
-option, would, even if starving, be compelled by fine or imprisonment
-to conform, and receive that which, with papal assumption, the State
-calls education. No one, I say, would have dreamt that out of so
-innocent-looking a germ would have so quickly evolved this tyrannical
-system, tamely submitted to by people who fancy themselves free.
-
-Thus in social arrangements, as in all other things, change is
-inevitable. It is foolish to suppose that new institutions set up, will
-long retain the character given them by those who set them up. Rapidly
-or slowly they will be transformed into institutions unlike those
-intended—so unlike as even to be unrecognizable by their devisers.
-And what, in the case before us, will be the metamorphosis? The
-answer pointed to by instances above given, and warranted by various
-analogies, is manifest.
-
-A cardinal trait in all advancing organization is the development of
-the regulative apparatus. If the parts of a whole are to act together,
-there must be appliances by which their actions are directed; and in
-proportion as the whole is large and complex, and has many requirements
-to be met by many agencies, the directive apparatus must be extensive,
-elaborate, and powerful. That it is thus with individual organisms
-needs no saying; and that it must be thus with social organisms is
-obvious. Beyond the regulative apparatus such as in our own society is
-required for carrying on national defence and maintaining public order
-and personal safety, there must, under the _régime_ of socialism, be
-a regulative apparatus everywhere controlling all kinds of production
-and distribution, and everywhere apportioning the shares of products
-of each kind required for each locality, each working establishment,
-each individual. Under our existing voluntary coöperation, with its
-free contracts and its competition, production and distribution need
-no official oversight. Demand and {461} supply, and the desire of
-each man to gain a living by supplying the needs of his fellows,
-spontaneously evolve that wonderful system whereby a great city has
-its food daily brought round to all doors or stored at adjacent shops;
-has clothing for its citizens everywhere at hand in multitudinous
-varieties; has its houses and furniture and fuel ready made or stocked
-in each locality; and has mental pabulum from halfpenny papers
-hourly hawked round, to weekly shoals of novels, and less abundant
-books of instruction, furnished without stint for small payments.
-And throughout the kingdom, production as well as distribution is
-similarly carried on with the smallest amount of superintendence which
-proves efficient; while the quantities of the numerous commodities
-required daily in each locality are adjusted without any other agency
-than the pursuit of profit. Suppose now that this industrial _régime_
-of willinghood, acting spontaneously, is replaced by a _régime_ of
-industrial obedience, enforced by public officials. Imagine the vast
-administration required for that distribution of all commodities to
-all people in every city, town and village, which is now effected by
-traders! Imagine, again, the still more vast administration required
-for doing all that farmers, manufacturers, and merchants do; having not
-only its various orders of local superintendents, but its sub-centres
-and chief centres needed for apportioning the quantities of each
-thing everywhere needed, and the adjustment of them to the requisite
-times. Then add the staffs wanted for working mines, railways, roads,
-canals; the staffs required for conducting the importing and exporting
-businesses and the administration of mercantile shipping; the staffs
-required for supplying towns not only with water and gas but with
-locomotion by tramways, omnibuses, and other vehicles, and for the
-distribution of power, electric and other. Join with these the existing
-postal, telegraphic, and telephonic administrations; and finally those
-of the police and army, by which the dictates {462} of this immense
-consolidated regulative system are to be everywhere enforced. Imagine
-all this and then ask what will be the position of the actual workers!
-Already on the continent, where governmental organizations are more
-elaborate and coercive than here, there are chronic complaints of
-the tyranny of bureaucracies—the _hauteur_ and brutality of their
-members. What will these become when not only the more public actions
-of citizens are controlled, but there is added this far more extensive
-control of all their respective daily duties? What will happen when the
-various divisions of this vast army of officials, united by interests
-common to officialism—the interests of the regulators _versus_ those
-of the regulated—have at their command whatever force is needful to
-suppress insubordination and act as “saviours of society”? Where will
-be the actual diggers and miners and smelters and weavers, when those
-who order and superintend, everywhere arranged class above class, have
-come, after some generations, to inter-marry with those of kindred
-grades, under feelings such as are operative in existing classes;
-and when there have been so produced a series of castes rising in
-superiority; and when all these, having everything in their own power,
-have arranged modes of living for their own advantage: eventually
-forming a new aristocracy far more elaborate and better organized than
-the old? How will the individual worker fare if he is dissatisfied with
-his treatment—thinks that he has not an adequate share of the products,
-or has more to do than can rightly be demanded, or wishes to undertake
-a function for which he feels himself fitted but which is not thought
-proper for him by his superiors, or desires to make an independent
-career for himself? This dissatisfied unit in the immense machine will
-be told he must submit or go. The mildest penalty for disobedience will
-be industrial excommunication. And if an international organization of
-labour is formed as proposed, exclusion in one country {463} will mean
-exclusion in all others—industrial excommunication will mean starvation.
-
-That things must take this course is a conclusion reached not by
-deduction only, nor only by induction from those experiences of the
-past instanced above, nor only from consideration of the analogies
-furnished by organisms of all orders; but it is reached also by
-observation of cases daily under our eyes. The truth that the
-regulative structure always tends to increase in power, is illustrated
-by every established body of men. The history of each learned society,
-or society for other purpose, shows how the staff, permanent or
-partially permanent, sways the proceedings and determines the actions
-of the society with but little resistance, even when most members of
-the society disapprove: the repugnance to anything like a revolutionary
-step being ordinarily an efficient deterrent. So is it with joint-stock
-companies—those owning railways for example. The plans of a board of
-directors are usually authorized with little or no discussion; and if
-there is any considerable opposition, this is forthwith crushed by an
-overwhelming number of proxies sent by those who always support the
-existing administration. Only when the misconduct is extreme does the
-resistance of shareholders suffice to displace the ruling body. Nor
-is it otherwise with societies formed of working men and having the
-interests of labour especially at heart—the trades-unions. In these,
-too, the regulative agency becomes all powerful. Their members, even
-when they dissent from the policy pursued, habitually yield to the
-authorities they have set up. As they cannot secede without making
-enemies of their fellow workmen, and often losing all chance of
-employment, they succumb. We are shown, too, by the late congress,
-that already, in the general organization of trades-unions so recently
-formed, there are complaints of “wire-pullers” and “bosses” and
-“permanent officials.” If, then, this supremacy of the regulators is
-seen in bodies of quite modern origin, formed of men who {464} have,
-in many of the cases instanced, unhindered powers of asserting their
-independence, what will the supremacy of the regulators become in
-long-established bodies, in bodies which have become vast and highly
-organized, and in bodies which, instead of controlling only a small
-part of the unit’s life, control the whole of his life?
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Again there will come the rejoinder—“We shall guard against all that.
-Everybody will be educated; and all, with their eyes constantly open to
-the abuse of power, will be quick to prevent it.” The worth of these
-expectations would be small even could we not identify the causes which
-will bring disappointment; for in human affairs the most promising
-schemes go wrong in ways which no one anticipated. But in this case
-the going wrong will be necessitated by causes which are conspicuous.
-The working of institutions is determined by men’s characters; and
-the existing defects in their characters will inevitably bring about
-the results above indicated. There is no adequate endowment of those
-sentiments required to prevent the growth of a despotic bureaucracy.
-
-Were it needful to dwell on indirect evidence, much might be made
-of that furnished by the behaviour of the so-called Liberal party—a
-party which, relinquishing the original conception of a leader as a
-mouthpiece for a known and accepted policy, thinks itself bound to
-accept a policy which its leader springs upon it without consent or
-warning—a party so utterly without the feeling and idea implied by
-liberalism, as not to resent this trampling on the right of private
-judgment, which constitutes the root of liberalism—nay, a party
-which vilifies as renegade liberals, those of its members who refuse
-to surrender their independence! But without occupying space with
-indirect proofs that the mass of men have not the natures required to
-check the development of tyrannical officialism, it will suffice to
-contemplate the direct proofs furnished by those classes among whom
-{465} the socialistic idea most predominates, and who think themselves
-most interested in propagating it—the operative classes. These would
-constitute the great body of the socialistic organization, and their
-characters would determine its nature. What, then, are their characters
-as displayed in such organizations as they have already formed?
-
-Instead of the selfishness of the employing classes and the selfishness
-of competition, we are to have the unselfishness of a mutually-aiding
-system. How far is this unselfishness now shown in the behaviour of
-working men to one another? What shall we say to the rules limiting
-the numbers of new hands admitted into each trade, or to the rules
-which hinder ascent from inferior classes of workers to superior
-classes? One does not see in such regulations any of that altruism by
-which socialism is to be pervaded. Contrariwise, one sees a pursuit of
-private interests no less keen than among traders. Hence, unless we
-suppose that men’s natures will be suddenly exalted, we must conclude
-that the pursuit of private interests will sway the doings of all the
-component classes in a socialistic society.
-
-With passive disregard of others’ claims goes active encroachment on
-them. “Be one of us or we will cut off your means of living,” is the
-usual threat of each trades-union to outsiders of the same trade. While
-their members insist on their own freedom to combine and fix the rates
-at which they will work (as they are perfectly justified in doing),
-the freedom of those who disagree with them is not only denied but the
-assertion of it is treated as a crime. Individuals who maintain their
-rights to make their own contracts are vilified as “blacklegs” and
-“traitors,” and meet with violence which would be merciless were there
-no legal penalties and no police. Along with this trampling on the
-liberties of men of their own class, there goes peremptory dictation to
-the employing class: not prescribed terms and working arrangements only
-shall be conformed {466} to, but none save those belonging to their
-body shall be employed—nay, in some cases, there shall be a strike if
-the employer carries on transactions with trading bodies that give work
-to non-union men. Here, then, we are variously shown by trades-unions,
-or at any rate by the newer trades-unions, a determination to impose
-their regulations without regard to the rights of those who are to be
-coerced. So complete is the inversion of ideas and sentiments that
-maintenance of these rights is regarded as vicious and trespass upon
-them as virtuous.[45]
-
-Along with this aggressiveness in one direction there goes
-submissiveness in another direction. The coercion of outsiders by
-unionists is paralleled only by their subjection to their leaders.
-That they may conquer in the struggle they surrender their individual
-liberties and individual judgments, and show no resentment however
-dictatorial may be the rule exercised over them. Everywhere we see such
-subordination that bodies of workmen unanimously leave their work or
-return to it as their authorities order them. Nor do they resist when
-taxed all round to support strikers whose acts they may or may not
-approve, but instead, ill-treat recalcitrant members of their body who
-do not subscribe. {467}
-
- [45] Marvellous are the conclusions men reach when once they desert
- the simple principle, that each man should be allowed to pursue the
- objects of life, restrained only by the limits which the similar
- pursuits of their objects by other men impose. A generation ago we
- heard loud assertions of ‘the right to labour,’ that is, the right
- to have labour provided; and there are still not a few who think the
- community bound to find work for each person. Compare this with the
- doctrine current in France at the time when the monarchical power
- culminated; namely, that ‘the right of working is a royal right
- which the prince can sell and the subjects must buy.’ This contrast
- is startling enough; but a contrast still more startling is being
- provided for us. We now see a resuscitation of the despotic doctrine,
- differing only by the substitution of Trades-Unions for kings. For now
- that Trades-Unions are becoming universal, and each artisan has to
- pay prescribed monies to one or another of them, with the alternative
- of being a non-unionist to whom work is denied by force, it has come
- to this, that the right to labour is a Trade-Union right, which the
- Trade-Union can sell and the individual worker must buy!
-
-The traits thus shown must be operative in any new social organization,
-and the question to be asked is—What will result from their operation
-when they are relieved from all restraints? At present the separate
-bodies of men displaying them are in the midst of a society partially
-passive, partially antagonistic; are subject to the criticisms and
-reprobations of an independent press; and are under the control of law,
-enforced by police. If in these circumstances these bodies habitually
-take courses which override individual freedom, what will happen when,
-instead of being only scattered parts of the community, governed
-by their separate sets of regulators, they constitute the whole
-community, governed by a consolidated system of such regulators; when
-functionaries of all orders, including those who officer the press,
-form parts of the regulative organization; and when the law is both
-enacted and administered by this regulative organization? The fanatical
-adherents of a social theory are capable of taking any measures, no
-matter how extreme, for carrying out their views: holding, like the
-merciless priesthoods of past times, that the end justifies the means.
-And when a general socialistic organization has been established,
-the vast, ramified, and consolidated body of those who direct its
-activities, using without check whatever coercion seems to them needful
-in the interests of the system (which will practically become their
-own interests) will have no hesitation in imposing their rigorous rule
-over the entire lives of the actual workers; until, eventually, there
-is developed an official oligarchy, with its various grades, exercising
-a tyranny more gigantic and more terrible than any which the world has
-seen.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-Let me again repudiate an erroneous inference. Any one who supposes
-that the foregoing argument implies contentment with things as
-they are, makes a profound mistake. The present social state is
-transitional, as past social states have been transitional. There will,
-I hope {468} and believe, come a future social state differing as much
-from the present as the present differs from the past with its mailed
-barons and defenceless serfs. In _Social Statics_, as well as in _The
-Study of Sociology_ and in _Political Institutions_, is clearly shown
-the desire for an organization more conducive to the happiness of men
-at large than that which exists. My opposition to socialism results
-from the belief that it would stop the progress to such a higher state
-and bring back a lower state. Nothing but the slow modification of
-human nature by the discipline of social life, can produce permanently
-advantageous changes.
-
-A fundamental error pervading the thinking of nearly all parties,
-political and social, is that evils admit of immediate and radical
-remedies. “If you will but do this, the mischief will be prevented.”
-“Adopt my plan and the suffering will disappear.” “The corruption
-will unquestionably be cured by enforcing this measure.” Everywhere
-one meets with beliefs, expressed or implied, of these kinds. They
-are all ill-founded. It is possible to remove causes which intensify
-the evils; it is possible to change the evils from one form into
-another; and it is possible, and very common, to exacerbate the evils
-by the efforts made to prevent them; but anything like immediate cure
-is impossible. In the course of thousands of years mankind have, by
-multiplication, been forced out of that original savage state in which
-small numbers supported themselves on wild food, into the civilized
-state in which the food required for supporting great numbers can be
-got only by continuous labour. The nature required for this last mode
-of life is widely different from the nature required for the first; and
-long-continued pains have to be passed through in re-moulding the one
-into the other. Misery has necessarily to be borne by a constitution
-out of harmony with its conditions; and a constitution inherited
-from primitive men is out of harmony with the conditions imposed on
-existing men. Hence it is impossible to establish forthwith a {469}
-satisfactory social state. No such nature as that which has filled
-Europe with millions of armed men, here eager for conquest and there
-for revenge—no such nature as that which prompts the nations called
-Christian to vie with one another in filibustering expeditions all over
-the world, regardless of the claims of aborigines, while their tens of
-thousands of priests of the religion of love look on approvingly—no
-such nature as that which, in dealing with weaker races, goes beyond
-the primitive rule of life for life, and for one life takes many
-lives—no such nature, I say, can, by any device, be framed into a
-harmonious community. The root of all well-ordered social action is a
-sentiment of justice, which at once insists on personal freedom and is
-solicitous for the like freedom of others; and there at present exists
-but a very inadequate amount of this sentiment.
-
-Hence the need for further long continuance of a social discipline
-which requires each man to carry on his activities with due regard to
-the like claims of others to carry on their activities; and which,
-while it insists that he shall have all the benefits his conduct
-naturally brings, insists also that he shall not saddle on others
-the evils his conduct naturally brings: unless they freely undertake
-to bear them. And hence the belief that endeavours to elude this
-discipline, will not only fail, but will bring worse evils than those
-to be escaped.
-
-It is not, then, chiefly in the interests of the employing classes that
-socialism is to be resisted, but much more in the interests of the
-employed classes. In one way or other production must be regulated; and
-the regulators, in the nature of things, must always be a small class
-as compared with the actual producers. Under voluntary coöperation
-as at present carried on, the regulators, pursuing their personal
-interests, take as large a share of the produce as they can get;
-but, as we are daily shown by trades-union successes, are restrained
-in the selfish pursuit {470} of their ends. Under that compulsory
-coöperation which socialism would necessitate, the regulators, pursuing
-their personal interests with no less selfishness, could not be met by
-the combined resistance of free workers; and their power, unchecked
-as now by refusals to work save on prescribed terms, would grow and
-ramify and consolidate till it became irresistible. The ultimate
-result, as I have before pointed out, must be a society like that of
-ancient Peru, dreadful to contemplate, in which the mass of the people,
-elaborately regimented in groups of 10, 50, 100, 500, and 1000, ruled
-by officers of corresponding grades, and tied to their districts, were
-superintended in their private lives as well as in their industries,
-and toiled hopelessly for the support of the governmental organization.
-
-{471}
-
-
-
-
-THE AMERICANS:
-
-A CONVERSATION AND A SPEECH, WITH AN ADDITION.
-
-
-[_Originally published in America and afterwards published in
-England in_ The Contemporary Review _for January 1883, preceded by
-the following editorial note:—“The state of Mr. Spencer’s health
-unfortunately not permitting him, to give in the form of articles
-the results of his observations on American society, it is thought
-useful to reproduce, under his own revision and with some additional
-remarks, what he has said on the subject; especially as the accounts of
-it which have appeared in this country are imperfect: reports of the
-conversation having been abridged, and the speech being known only by
-telegraphic summary._
-
-_“The earlier paragraphs of the conversation, which refer to Mr.
-Spencer’s persistent exclusion of reporters and his objections to the
-interviewing system, are omitted, as not here concerning the reader.
-There was no eventual yielding, as has been supposed. It was not to
-a newspaper-reporter that the opinions which follow were expressed,
-but to an intimate American friend: the primary purpose being to
-correct the many misstatements to which the excluded interviewers had
-given currency; and the occasion being taken for giving utterance to
-impressions of American affairs._”—ED.]
-
-
-I.—A CONVERSATION: _October 20, 1882_.
-
-Has what you have seen answered your expectations?
-
-It has far exceeded them. Such books about America as I had looked into
-had given me no adequate idea of the immense developments of material
-civilization which {472} I have everywhere found. The extent, wealth,
-and magnificence of your cities, and especially the splendour of New
-York, have altogether astonished me. Though I have not visited the
-wonder of the West, Chicago, yet some of your minor modern places,
-such as Cleveland, have sufficiently amazed me by the results of one
-generation’s activity. Occasionally, when I have been in places of some
-ten thousand inhabitants where the telephone is in general use, I have
-felt somewhat ashamed of our own unenterprising towns, many of which,
-of fifty thousand inhabitants and more, make no use of it.
-
-I suppose you recognize in these results the great benefits of free
-institutions?
-
-Ah! Now comes one of the inconveniences of interviewing. I have been
-in the country less than two months, have seen but a relatively small
-part of it, and but comparatively few people, and yet you wish from me
-a definite opinion on a difficult question.
-
-Perhaps you will answer, subject to the qualification that you are but
-giving your first impressions?
-
-Well, with that understanding, I may reply that though the free
-institutions have been partly the cause, I think they have not been the
-chief cause. In the first place, the American people have come into
-possession of an unparalleled fortune—the mineral wealth and the vast
-tracts of virgin soil producing abundantly with small cost of culture.
-Manifestly, that alone goes a long way towards producing this enormous
-prosperity. Then they have profited by inheriting all the arts,
-appliances, and methods, developed by older societies, while leaving
-behind the obstructions existing in them. They have been able to pick
-and choose from the products of all past experience, appropriating the
-good and rejecting the bad. Then, besides these favours of fortune,
-there are factors proper to themselves. I perceive in American faces
-generally a great amount of determination—a kind of “do or die” {473}
-expression; and this trait of character, joined with a power of work
-exceeding that of any other people, of course produces an unparalleled
-rapidity of progress. Once more, there is the inventiveness which,
-stimulated by the need for economizing labour, has been so wisely
-fostered. Among us in England, there are many foolish people who, while
-thinking that a man who toils with his hands has an equitable claim to
-the product, and if he has special skill may rightly have the advantage
-of it, also hold that if a man toils with his brain, perhaps for years,
-and, uniting genius with perseverance, evolves some valuable invention,
-the public may rightly claim the benefit. The Americans have been more
-far-seeing. The enormous museum of patents which I saw at Washington
-is significant of the attention paid to inventors’ claims; and the
-nation profits immensely from having in this direction (though not in
-all others) recognized property in mental products. Beyond question,
-in respect of mechanical appliances the Americans are ahead of all
-nations. If along with your material progress there went equal progress
-of a higher kind, there would remain nothing to be wished.
-
-That is an ambiguous qualification. What do you mean by it?
-
-You will understand me when I tell you what I was thinking the other
-day. After pondering over what I have seen of your vast manufacturing
-and trading establishments, the rush of traffic in your street-cars
-and elevated railways, your gigantic hotels and Fifth Avenue palaces,
-I was suddenly reminded of the Italian Republics of the Middle Ages;
-and recalled the fact that while there was growing up in them great
-commercial activity, a development of the arts, which made them the
-envy of Europe, and a building of princely mansions which continue to
-be the admiration of travellers, their people were gradually losing
-their freedom.
-
-Do you mean this as a suggestion that we are doing the like?
-
-It seems to me that you are. You retain the forms of {474} freedom;
-but, so far as I can gather, there has been a considerable loss of the
-substance. It is true that those who rule you do not do it by means of
-retainers armed with swords; but they do it through regiments of men
-armed with voting papers, who obey the word of command as loyally as
-did the dependants of the old feudal nobles, and who thus enable their
-leaders to override the general will, and make the community submit
-to their exactions as effectually as their prototypes of old. It is
-doubtless true that each of your citizens votes for the candidate he
-chooses for this or that office, from President downwards; but his hand
-is guided by an agency behind which leaves him scarcely any choice.
-“Use your political power as we tell you, or else throw it away,”
-is the alternative offered to the citizen. The political machinery
-as it is now worked, has little resemblance to that contemplated at
-the outset of your political life. Manifestly, those who framed your
-Constitution never dreamed that twenty thousand citizens would go to
-the poll led by a “boss.” America exemplifies at the other end of
-the social scale, a change analogous to that which has taken place
-under sundry despotisms. You know that in Japan, before the recent
-Revolution, the divine ruler, the Mikado, nominally supreme, was
-practically a puppet in the hands of his chief minister, the Shogun.
-Here it seems to me that “the sovereign people” is fast becoming a
-puppet which moves and speaks as wire-pullers determine.
-
-Then you think that Republican institutions are a failure?
-
-By no means: I imply no such conclusion. Thirty years ago, when often
-discussing politics with an English friend, and defending Republican
-institutions, as I always have done and do still, and when he urged
-against me the ill-working of such institutions over here, I habitually
-replied that the Americans got their form of government by a happy
-accident, not by normal progress, and that they would have to go back
-before they could go forward. What has since happened seems to me
-to have justified that {475} view; and what I see now, confirms me
-in it. America is showing, on a larger scale than ever before, that
-“paper Constitutions” will not work as they are intended to work.
-The truth, first recognized by Mackintosh, that Constitutions are
-not made but grow, which is part of the larger truth that societies,
-throughout their whole organizations, are not made but grow, at once,
-when accepted, disposes of the notion that you can work as you hope
-any artificially-devised system of government. It becomes an inference
-that if your political structure has been manufactured and not grown,
-it will forthwith begin to grow into something different from that
-intended—something in harmony with the natures of the citizens, and the
-conditions under which the society exists. And it evidently has been so
-with you. Within the forms of your Constitution there has grown up this
-organization of professional politicians altogether uncontemplated at
-the outset, which has become in large measure the ruling power.
-
-But will not education and the diffusion of political knowledge fit men
-for free institutions?
-
-No. It is essentially a question of character, and only in a secondary
-degree a question of knowledge. But for the universal delusion about
-education as a panacea for political evils, this would have been made
-sufficiently clear by the evidence daily disclosed in your papers.
-Are not the men who officer and control your Federal, your State,
-and your Municipal organizations—who manipulate your caucuses and
-conventions, and run your partisan campaigns—all educated men? And has
-their education prevented them from engaging in, or permitting, or
-condoning, the briberies, lobbyings, and other corrupt methods which
-vitiate the actions of your administrations? Perhaps party newspapers
-exaggerate these things; but what am I to make of the testimony of your
-civil service reformers—men of all parties? If I understand the matter
-aright, they are attacking, as vicious and dangerous, a system {476}
-which has grown up under the natural spontaneous working of your free
-institutions—are exposing vices which education has proved powerless to
-prevent?
-
-Of course, ambitious and unscrupulous men will secure the offices, and
-education will aid them in their selfish purposes. But would not those
-purposes be thwarted, and better Government secured, by raising the
-standard of knowledge among the people at large?
-
-Very little. The current theory is that if the young are taught what is
-right, and the reasons why it is right, they will do what is right when
-they grow up. But considering what religious teachers have been doing
-these two thousand years, it seems to me that all history is against
-the conclusion, as much as is the conduct of these well-educated
-citizens I have referred to; and I do not see why you expect better
-results among the masses. Personal interests will sway the men in
-the ranks, as they sway the men above them; and the education which
-fails to make the last consult public good rather than private good,
-will fail to make the first do it. The benefits of political purity
-are so general and remote, and the profit to each individual is so
-inconspicuous, that the common citizen, educate him as you like, will
-habitually occupy himself with his personal affairs, and hold it not
-worth his while to fight against each abuse as soon as it appears. Not
-lack of information, but lack of certain moral sentiment, is the root
-of the evil.
-
-You mean that people have not a sufficient sense of public duty?
-
-Well, that is one way of putting it; but there is a more specific way.
-Probably it will surprise you if I say the American has not, I think, a
-sufficiently quick sense of his own claims, and, at the same time, as a
-necessary consequence, not a sufficiently quick sense of the claims of
-others—for the two traits are organically related. I observe that they
-tolerate various small interferences and dictations which Englishmen
-are prone to resist. I am told that the {477} English are remarked on
-for their tendency to grumble in such cases; and I have no doubt it is
-true.
-
-Do you think it worth while for people to make themselves disagreeable
-by resenting every trifling aggression? We Americans think it involves
-too much loss of time and temper, and doesn’t pay.
-
-Exactly; that is what I mean by character. It is this easy-going
-readiness to permit small trespasses, because it would be troublesome
-or profitless or unpopular to oppose them, which leads to the habit
-of acquiescence in wrong, and the decay of free institutions. Free
-institutions can be maintained only by citizens, each of whom is
-instant to oppose every illegitimate act, every assumption of
-supremacy, every official excess of power, however trivial it may seem.
-As Hamlet says, there is such a thing as “greatly to find quarrel in
-a straw,” when the straw implies a principle. If, as you say of the
-American, he pauses to consider whether he can afford the time and
-trouble—whether it will pay, corruption is sure to creep in. All these
-lapses from higher to lower forms begin in trifling ways, and it is
-only by incessant watchfulness that they can be prevented. As one of
-your early statesmen said—“The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
-But it is far less against foreign aggressions upon national liberty
-that this vigilance is required, than against the insidious growth
-of domestic interferences with personal liberty. In some private
-administrations which I have been concerned with, I have often insisted
-that instead of assuming, as people usually do, that things are going
-right until it is proved that they are going wrong, the proper course
-is to assume that they are going wrong until it is proved that they
-are going right. You will find continually that private corporations,
-such as joint-stock banking companies, come to grief from not acting
-on this principle; and what holds of these small and simple private
-administrations holds still more of the great and complex public
-administrations. {478} People are taught, and I suppose believe,
-that the heart of man “is deceitful above all things, and desperately
-wicked;” and yet, strangely enough, believing this, they place implicit
-trust in those they appoint to this or that function. I do not think so
-ill of human nature; but, on the other hand, I do not think so well of
-human nature as to believe it will go straight without being watched.
-
-You hinted that while Americans do not assert their own individualities
-sufficiently in small matters, they, reciprocally, do not sufficiently
-respect the individualities of others.
-
-Did I? Here, then, comes another of the inconveniences of interviewing.
-I should have kept this opinion to myself if you had asked me no
-questions; and now I must either say what I do not think, which I
-cannot, or I must refuse to answer, which, perhaps, will be taken to
-mean more than I intend, or I must specify, at the risk of giving
-offence. As the least evil, I suppose I must do the last. The trait I
-refer to comes out in various ways, small and great. It is shown by
-the disrespectful manner in which individuals are dealt with in your
-journals—the placarding of public men in sensational headings, the
-dragging of private people and their affairs into print. There seems to
-be a notion that the public have a right to intrude on private life as
-far as they like; and this I take to be a kind of moral trespassing.
-Then, in a larger way, the trait is seen in this damaging of private
-property by your elevated railways without making compensation; and
-it is again seen in the doings of railway autocrats, not only when
-overriding the rights of shareholders, but in dominating over courts
-of justice and State governments. The fact is that free institutions
-can be properly worked only by men, each of whom is jealous of his own
-rights, and also sympathetically jealous of the rights of others—who
-will neither himself aggress on his neighbours in small things or
-great, nor tolerate aggression on them by others. The Republican form
-of government is the highest form of government; but because of this
-it {479} requires the highest type of human nature—a type nowhere at
-present existing. We have not grown up to it; nor have you.
-
-But we thought, Mr. Spencer, you were in favour of free government in
-the sense of relaxed restraints, and letting men and things very much
-alone, or what is called _laissez faire_?
-
-That is a persistent misunderstanding of my opponents. Everywhere,
-along with the reprobation of Government intrusion into various spheres
-where private activities should be left to themselves, I have contended
-that in its special sphere, the maintenance of equitable relations
-among citizens, governmental action should be extended and elaborated.
-
-To return to your various criticisms, must I then understand that you
-think unfavourably of our future?
-
-No one can form anything more than vague and general conclusions
-respecting your future. The factors are too numerous, too vast, too far
-beyond measure in their quantities and intensities. The world has never
-before seen social phenomena at all comparable with those presented
-in the United States. A society spreading over enormous tracts, while
-still preserving its political continuity, is a new thing. This
-progressive incorporation of vast bodies of immigrants of various
-bloods, has never occurred on such a scale before. Large empires,
-composed of different peoples, have, in previous cases, been formed
-by conquest and annexation. Then your immense _plexus_ of railways
-and telegraphs tends to consolidate this vast aggregate of States in
-a way that no such aggregate has ever before been consolidated. And
-there are many minor co-operating causes, unlike those hitherto known.
-No one can say how it is all going to work out. That there will come
-hereafter troubles of various kinds, and very grave ones, seems highly
-probable; but all nations have had, and will have, their troubles.
-Already you have triumphed over one great trouble, and {480} may
-reasonably hope to triumph over others. It may, I think, be concluded
-that, both because of its size and the heterogeneity of its components,
-the American nation will be a long time in evolving its ultimate
-form, but that its ultimate form will be high. One great result is, I
-think, tolerably clear. From biological truths it is to be inferred
-that the eventual mixture of the allied varieties of the Aryan race
-forming the population, will produce a finer type of man than has
-hitherto existed; and a type of man more plastic, more adaptable, more
-capable of undergoing the modifications needful for complete social
-life. I think that whatever difficulties they may have to surmount,
-and whatever tribulations they may have to pass through, the Americans
-may reasonably look forward to a time when they will have produced a
-civilization grander than any the world has known.
-
-
-II.—A SPEECH:
-
-_Delivered on the occasion of a Complimentary Dinner in New York, on
-November 9, 1882._
-
-Mr. President and Gentlemen:—Along with your kindness there comes
-to me a great unkindness from Fate; for, now that, above all times
-in my life, I need full command of what powers of speech I possess,
-disturbed health so threatens to interfere with them that I fear I
-shall very inadequately express myself. Any failure in my response
-you must please ascribe, in part at least, to a greatly disordered
-nervous system. Regarding you as representing Americans at large, I
-feel that the occasion is one on which arrears of thanks are due. I
-ought to begin with the time, some two-and-twenty years ago, when my
-highly valued friend Professor Youmans, making efforts to diffuse my
-books here, interested on their behalf the Messrs. Appleton, who have
-ever treated me so honourably and so handsomely; and I ought to detail
-from that time onward the various {481} marks and acts of sympathy by
-which I have been encouraged in a struggle which was for many years
-disheartening. But, intimating thus briefly my general indebtedness
-to my numerous friends, most of them unknown, on this side of the
-Atlantic, I must name more especially the many attentions and proffered
-hospitalities met with during my late tour, as well as, lastly and
-chiefly, this marked expression of the sympathies and good wishes
-which many of you have travelled so far to give, at great cost of that
-time which is so precious to the American. I believe I may truly say,
-that the better health which you have so cordially wished me, will be
-in a measure furthered by the wish; since all pleasurable emotion is
-conducive to health, and, as you will fully believe, the remembrance of
-this event will ever continue to be a source of pleasurable emotion,
-exceeded by few, if any, of my remembrances.
-
-And now that I have thanked you, sincerely though too briefly, I am
-going to find fault with you. Already, in some remarks drawn from me
-respecting American affairs and American character, I have passed
-criticisms, which have been accepted far more good-humouredly than I
-could have reasonably expected; and it seems strange that I should now
-propose again to transgress. However, the fault I have to comment upon
-is one which most will scarcely regard as a fault. It seems to me that
-in one respect Americans have diverged too widely from savages, I do
-not mean to say that they are in general unduly civilized. Throughout
-large parts of the population, even in long-settled regions, there
-is no excess of those virtues needed for the maintenance of social
-harmony. Especially out in the West, men’s dealings do not yet betray
-too much of the “sweetness and light” which we are told distinguish
-the cultured man from the barbarian. Nevertheless, there is a sense
-in which my assertion is true. You know that the primitive man lacks
-power of application. Spurred by hunger, by danger, by revenge, he
-can exert himself {482} energetically for a time; but his energy is
-spasmodic. Monotonous daily toil is impossible to him. It is otherwise
-with the more developed man. The stern discipline of social life has
-gradually increased the aptitude for persistent industry; until, among
-us, and still more among you, work has become with many a passion.
-This contrast of nature has another aspect. The savage thinks only of
-present satisfactions, and leaves future satisfactions uncared for.
-Contrariwise, the American, eagerly pursuing a future good, almost
-ignores what good the passing day offers him; and when the future good
-is gained, he neglects that while striving for some still remoter good.
-
-What I have seen and heard during my stay among you has forced on
-me the belief that this slow change from habitual inertness to
-persistent activity has reached an extreme from which there must begin
-a counterchange—a reaction. Everywhere I have been struck with the
-number of faces which told in strong lines of the burdens that had
-to be borne. I have been struck, too, with the large proportion of
-gray-haired men; and inquiries have brought out the fact, that with you
-the hair commonly begins to turn some ten years earlier than with us.
-Moreover, in every circle I have met men who had themselves suffered
-from nervous collapse due to stress of business, or named friends who
-had either killed themselves by overwork, or had been permanently
-incapacitated, or had wasted long periods in endeavours to recover
-health. I do but echo the opinion of all the observant persons I have
-spoken to, that immense injury is being done by this high-pressure
-life—the physique is being undermined. That subtle thinker and poet
-whom you have lately had to mourn, Emerson, says, in his essay on the
-Gentleman, that the first requisite is that he shall be a good animal.
-The requisite is a general one—it extends to the man, to the father,
-to the citizen. We hear a great deal about “the vile body;” and many
-are encouraged by the phrase to transgress the laws of {483} health.
-But Nature quietly suppresses those who treat thus disrespectfully one
-of her highest products, and leaves the world to be peopled by the
-descendants of those who are not so foolish.
-
-Beyond these immediate mischiefs there are remoter mischiefs. Exclusive
-devotion to work has the result that amusements cease to please; and,
-when relaxation becomes imperative, life becomes dreary from lack of
-its sole interest—the interest in business. The remark current in
-England that, when the American travels, his aim is to do the greatest
-amount of sight-seeing in the shortest time, I find current here also:
-it is recognized that the satisfaction of getting on devours nearly all
-other satisfactions. When recently at Niagara, which gave us a whole
-week’s pleasure, I learned from the landlord of the hotel that most
-Americans come one day and go away the next. Old Froissart, who said
-of the English of his day that “they take their pleasures sadly after
-their fashion,” would doubtless, if he lived now, say of the Americans
-that they take their pleasures hurriedly after their fashion. In large
-measure with us, and still more with you, there is not that abandonment
-to the moment which is requisite for full enjoyment; and this
-abandonment is prevented by the ever-present sense of multitudinous
-responsibilities. So that, beyond the serious physical mischief caused
-by overwork, there is the further mischief that it destroys what value
-there would otherwise be in the leisure part of life.
-
-Nor do the evils end here. There is the injury to posterity. Damaged
-constitutions reappear in children, and entail on them far more of
-ill than great fortunes yield them of good. When life has been duly
-rationalized by science, it will be seen that among a man’s duties,
-care of the body is imperative; not only out of regard for personal
-welfare, but also out of regard for descendants. His constitution
-will be considered as an entailed estate, which he ought to pass
-on uninjured, if not improved, to those who follow; and it will be
-held that millions bequeathed by him {484} will not compensate for
-feeble health and decreased ability to enjoy life. Once more, there
-is the injury to fellow-citizens, taking the shape of undue disregard
-of competitors. I hear that a great trader among you deliberately
-endeavoured to crush out every one whose business competed with
-his own; and manifestly the man who, making himself a slave to
-accumulation, absorbs an inordinate share of the trade or profession
-he is engaged in, makes life harder for all others engaged in it, and
-excludes from it many who might otherwise gain competencies. Thus,
-besides the egoistic motive, there are two altruistic motives which
-should deter from this excess in work.
-
-The truth is, there needs a revised ideal of life. Look back through
-the past, or look abroad through the present, and we find that the
-ideal of life is variable, and depends on social conditions. Every
-one knows that to be a successful warrior was the highest aim among
-all ancient peoples of note, as it is still among many barbarous
-peoples. When we remember that in the Norseman’s heaven the time was
-to be passed in daily battles, with magical healing of wounds, we see
-how deeply rooted may become the conception that fighting is man’s
-proper business, and that industry is fit only for slaves and people
-of low degree. That is to say, when the chronic struggles of races
-necessitate perpetual wars, there is evolved an ideal of life adapted
-to the requirements. We have changed all that in modern civilized
-societies; especially in England, and still more in America. With the
-decline of militant activity, and the growth of industrial activity,
-the occupations once disgraceful have become honourable. The duty to
-work has taken the place of the duty to fight; and in the one case, as
-in the other, the ideal of life has become so well established that
-scarcely any dream of questioning it. Practically, business has been
-substituted for war as the purpose of existence.
-
-Is this modern ideal to survive throughout the future? I think not.
-While all other things undergo continuous {485} change, it is
-impossible that ideals should remain fixed. The ancient ideal was
-appropriate to the ages of conquest by man over man, and spread of
-the strongest races. The modern ideal is appropriate to ages in which
-conquest of the earth and subjection of the powers of Nature to human
-use, is the predominant need. But hereafter, when both these ends
-have in the main been achieved, the ideal formed will probably differ
-considerably from the present one. May we not foresee the nature of
-the difference? I think we may. Some twenty years ago, a good friend
-of mine, and a good friend of yours too, though you never saw him,
-John Stuart Mill, delivered at St. Andrews an inaugural address on the
-occasion of his appointment to the Lord Rectorship. It contained much
-to be admired, as did all he wrote. There ran through it, however,
-the tacit assumption that life is for learning and working. I felt at
-the time that I should have liked to take up the opposite thesis. I
-should have liked to contend that life is not for learning, nor is life
-for working, but learning and working are for life. The primary use
-of knowledge is for such guidance of conduct under all circumstances
-as shall make living complete. All other uses of knowledge are
-secondary. It scarcely needs saying that the primary use of work is
-that of supplying the materials and aids to living completely; and
-that any other uses of work are secondary. But in men’s conceptions
-the secondary has in great measure usurped the place of the primary.
-The apostle of culture as it is commonly conceived, Mr. Matthew
-Arnold, makes little or no reference to the fact that the first use of
-knowledge is the right ordering of all actions; and Mr. Carlyle, who is
-a good exponent of current ideas about work, insists on its virtues for
-quite other reasons than that it achieves sustentation. We may trace
-everywhere in human affairs a tendency to transform the means into the
-end. All see that the miser does this when, making the accumulation of
-money his sole satisfaction, he forgets that money is of value only
-to {486} purchase satisfactions. But it is less commonly seen that
-the like is true of the work by which the money is accumulated—that
-industry too, bodily or mental, is but a means; and that it is as
-irrational to pursue it to the exclusion of that complete living it
-subserves, as it is for the miser to accumulate money and make no use
-of it. Hereafter, when this age of active material progress has yielded
-mankind its benefits, there will, I think, come a better adjustment of
-labour and enjoyment. Among reasons for thinking this, there is the
-reason that the process of evolution throughout the organic world at
-large, brings an increasing surplus of energies that are not absorbed
-in fulfilling material needs, and points to a still larger surplus for
-the humanity of the future. And there are other reasons, which I must
-pass over. In brief, I may say that we have had somewhat too much of
-“the gospel of work.” It is time to preach the gospel of relaxation.
-
-This is a very unconventional after-dinner speech. Especially it will
-be thought strange that in returning thanks I should deliver something
-very much like a homily. But I have thought I could not better convey
-my thanks than by the expression of a sympathy which issues in a fear.
-If, as I gather, this intemperance in work affects more especially the
-Anglo-American part of the population—if there results an undermining
-of the physique, not only in adults, but also in the young, who, as I
-learn from your daily journals, are also being injured by overwork—if
-the ultimate consequence should be a dwindling away of those among
-you who are the inheritors of free institutions and best adapted to
-them; then there will come a further difficulty in the working out of
-that great future which lies before the American nation. To my anxiety
-on this account you must please ascribe the unusual character of my
-remarks.
-
-And now I must bid you farewell. When I sail by the _Germanic_ on
-Saturday, I shall bear with me pleasant {487} remembrances of my
-intercourse with many Americans, joined with regrets that my state of
-health has prevented me from seeing a larger number.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-
-POSTSCRIPT.—A few words may fitly be added respecting the causes of
-this over-activity in American life—causes which may be identified
-as having in recent times partially operated among ourselves, and as
-having wrought kindred, though less marked, effects. It is the more
-worth while to trace the genesis of this undue absorption of the
-energies in work, since it well serves to illustrate the general truth
-which should be ever present to all legislators and politicians, that
-the indirect and unforeseen results of any cause affecting a society
-are frequently, if not habitually, greater and more important than the
-direct and foreseen results.
-
-This high pressure under which Americans exist, and which is most
-intense in places like Chicago, where the prosperity and rate of growth
-are greatest, is seen by many intelligent Americans themselves to be
-an indirect result of their free institutions and the absence of those
-class-distinctions and restraints existing in older communities. A
-society in which the man who dies a millionaire is so often one who
-commenced life in poverty, and in which (to paraphrase a French saying
-concerning the soldier) every news-boy carries a president’s seal in
-his bag, is, by consequence, a society in which all are subject to a
-stress of competition for wealth and honour, greater than can exist in
-a society whose members are nearly all prevented from rising out of
-the ranks in which they were born, and have but remote possibilities
-of acquiring fortunes. In those European societies which have in great
-measure preserved their old types of structure (as in our own society
-up to the time when the great development of industrialism began to
-open ever-multiplying careers for the producing and distributing
-classes) there is so little chance of overcoming the obstacles to any
-great rise in position or possessions, that {488} nearly all have
-to be content with their places: entertaining little or no thought
-of bettering themselves. A manifest concomitant is that, fulfilling,
-with such efficiency as a moderate competition requires, the daily
-tasks of their respective situations, the majority become habituated
-to making the best of such pleasures as their lot affords, during
-whatever leisure they get. But it is otherwise where an immense growth
-of trade multiplies greatly the chances of success to the enterprising;
-and still more is it otherwise where class-restrictions are partially
-removed or wholly absent. Not only are more energy and thought put into
-the time daily occupied in work, but the leisure comes to be trenched
-upon, either literally by abridgment, or else by anxieties concerning
-business. Clearly, the larger the number who, under such conditions,
-acquire property, or achieve higher positions, or both, the sharper
-is the spur to the rest. A raised standard of activity establishes
-itself and goes on rising. Public applause given to the successful,
-becoming in communities thus circumstanced the most familiar kind of
-public applause, increases continually the stimulus to action. The
-struggle grows more and more strenuous, and there comes an increasing
-dread of failure—a dread of being “left,” as the Americans say: a
-significant word, since it is suggestive of a race in which the harder
-any one runs, the harder others have to run to keep up with him—a word
-suggestive of that breathless haste with which each passes from a
-success gained to the pursuit of a further success. And on contrasting
-the English of to-day with the English of a century ago, we may see
-how, in a considerable measure, the like causes have entailed here
-kindred results.
-
-Even those who are not directly spurred on by this intensified struggle
-for wealth and honour, are indirectly spurred on by it. For one of its
-effects is to raise the standard of living, and eventually to increase
-the average rate of expenditure for all. Partly for personal enjoyment,
-{489} but much more for the display which brings admiration, those
-who acquire fortunes distinguish themselves by luxurious habits. The
-more numerous they become, the keener becomes the competition for that
-kind of public attention given to those who make themselves conspicuous
-by great expenditure. The competition spreads downwards step by step;
-until, to be “respectable,” those having relatively small means feel
-obliged to spend more on houses, furniture, dress, and food; and are
-obliged to work the harder to get the requisite larger income. This
-process of causation is manifest enough among ourselves; and it is
-still more manifest in America, where the extravagance in style of
-living is greater than here.
-
-Thus, though it seems beyond doubt that the removal of all political
-and social barriers, and the giving to each man an unimpeded career,
-must be purely beneficial; yet there is (at first) a considerable
-set-off from the benefits. Among those who in older communities have
-by laborious lives gained distinction, some may be heard privately to
-confess that “the game is not worth the candle;” and when they hear
-of others who wish to tread in their steps, shake their heads and
-say—“If they only knew!” Without accepting in full so pessimistic an
-estimate of success, we must still say that very generally the cost of
-the candle deducts largely from the gain of the game. That which in
-these exceptional cases holds among ourselves, holds more generally in
-America. An intensified life, which may be summed up as—great labour,
-great profit, great expenditure—has for its concomitant a wear and
-tear which considerably diminishes in one direction the good gained in
-another. Added together, the daily strain through many hours and the
-anxieties occupying many other hours—the occupation of consciousness
-by feelings that are either indifferent or painful, leaving relatively
-little time for occupation of it by pleasurable feelings—tend to
-lower its level more than its level is raised by the gratifications
-of achievement {490} and the accompanying benefits. So that it may,
-and in many cases does, result that diminished happiness goes along
-with increased prosperity. Unquestionably, as long as order is fairly
-maintained, that absence of political and social restraints which gives
-free scope to the struggles for profit and honour, conduces greatly
-to material advance of the society—develops the industrial arts,
-extends and improves the business organizations, augments the wealth;
-but that it raises the value of individual life, as measured by the
-average state of its feeling, by no means follows. That it will do
-so eventually, is certain; but that it does so now seems, to say the
-least, very doubtful.
-
-The truth is that a society and its members act and react in such wise
-that while, on the one hand, the nature of the society is determined
-by the natures of its members; on the other hand, the activities of
-its members (and presently their natures) are re-determined by the
-needs of the society, as these alter: change in either entails change
-in the other. It is an obvious implication that, to a great extent the
-life of a society so sways the wills of its members as to turn them to
-its ends. That which is manifest during the militant stage, when the
-social aggregate coerces its units into co-operation for defence, and
-sacrifices many of their lives for its corporate preservation holds
-under another form during the industrial stage, as we at present know
-it. Though the co-operation of citizens is now voluntary instead of
-compulsory; yet the social forces impel them to achieve social ends
-while apparently achieving only their own ends. The man who, carrying
-out an invention, thinks only of private welfare to be thereby secured,
-is in far larger measure working for public welfare: instance the
-contrast between the fortune made by Watt and the wealth which the
-steam-engine has given to mankind. He who utilizes a new material,
-improves a method of production, or introduces a better way of carrying
-on business, and does this for the purpose of distancing competitors,
-gains {491} for himself little compared with that which he gains for
-the community by facilitating the lives of all. Either unknowingly or
-in spite of themselves, Nature leads men by purely personal motives to
-fulfil her ends: Nature being one of our expressions for the Ultimate
-Cause of things, and the end, remote when not proximate, being the
-highest form of human life.
-
-Hence no argument, however cogent, can be expected to produce much
-effect: only here and there one may be influenced. As in an actively
-militant stage of society it is impossible to make many believe
-that there is any glory preferable to that of killing enemies; so,
-where rapid material growth is going on, and affords unlimited scope
-for the energies of all, little can be done by insisting that life
-has higher uses than work and accumulation. While among the most
-powerful of feelings continue to be the desire for public applause
-and dread of public censure—while the anxiety to achieve distinction,
-now by conquering enemies, now by beating competitors, continues
-predominant—while the fear of public reprobation affects men more
-than the fear of divine vengeance (as witness the long survival of
-duelling in Christian societies); this excess of work which ambition
-prompts, seems likely to continue with but small qualification. The
-eagerness for the honour accorded to success, first in war and then in
-commerce, has been indispensable as a means to peopling the Earth with
-the higher types of man, and the subjugation of its surface and its
-forces to human use. Ambition may fitly come to bear a smaller ratio
-to other motives, when the working out of these needs is approaching
-completeness; and when also, by consequence, the scope for satisfying
-ambition is diminishing. Those who draw the obvious corollaries from
-the doctrine of Evolution—those who believe that the process of
-modification upon modification which has brought life to its present
-height must raise it still higher, will anticipate that the “last
-infirmity of noble mind” will in the distant future slowly {492}
-decrease. As the sphere for achievement becomes smaller, the desire
-for applause will lose that predominance which it now has. A better
-ideal of life may simultaneously come to prevail. When there is fully
-recognized the truth that moral beauty is higher than intellectual
-power—when the wish to be admired is in large measure replaced by the
-wish to be loved; that strife for distinction which the present phase
-of civilization shows us will be greatly moderated. Along with other
-benefits may then come a rational proportioning of work and relaxation;
-and the relative claims of to-day and to-morrow may be properly
-balanced.
-
-THE END.
-
-{493}
-
-
-
-
-SUBJECT-INDEX.
-
-(For this Index the Author is indebted to F. HOWARD COLLINS, Esq., of
-Edgbaston, Birmingham.)
-
-
-_A priori_, method, III, 199–203.
-
-Absolute, The:
-  Martineau on, II, 250–8;
-  and relativity of knowledge, II, 260.
-
-Abstract, definition of, II, 78.
-
-Abstract nouns, succeed concrete, I, 323.
-
-Abstraction, comparative psychology, I, 365–6.
-
-Accommodation bills:
-  morals of banking, III, 133–7;
-  state tamperings with money, III, 326–35, 335–47.
-
-Acoustics:
-  genesis, II, 57, 60–1;
-  “beats,” II, 169–70.
-
-Acquisitiveness, comparative psychology, I, 367.
-
-Action and reaction:
-  universal, III, 101;
-  the axiom, III, 221.
-
-Activity, relation to growth, I, 63–4.
-
-Adaptation:
-  individual and social, III, 277–8;
-  of alimentary canal, III, 421.
-
-Address, forms of, III, 15–6.
-
-_Adelaide_, Admiralty certificate of, III, 239.
-
-Adjective, collocation of substantive, III, 340–1.
-
-Administrative Nihilism, the title, II, 438, 442.
-
-Admiralty, ship certificates, III, 239.
-
-Adulteration:
-  examples, III, 113;
-  silk, III, 124–7.
-
-Æsthetics, and natural selection, I, 408.
-
-Agriculture, in France, III, 267–8.
-
-Air, expansion without pressure, I, 118.
-
-Alas! intonation of, II, 409.
-
-Albert, Prince, on representative government, III, 284.
-
-_Algæ_:
-  development and homogeneity, I, 90;
-  cell membrane, I, 439;
-  cells, I, 446.
-
-Algebra:
-  genesis, II, 56;
-  classification of sciences, II, 85;
-  subject matter, II, 113, 115;
-  evolution, II, 156;
-  (_see also_ Mathematics.)
-
-Alimentary canal:
-  evolution, III, 204;
-  differentiation, III, 406;
-  and nervous system, III, 409;
-  adaptation, III, 421.
-
-Allegory, compound metaphor, II, 354.
-
-Allotropism, complexity of elements, I, 155, 373.
-
-Alternative necessity, law of, II, 191–2.
-
-Altruism:
-  development, I, 346–50;
-  comparative psychology, I, 367–9.
-
-_Amazon_, burning of the ship, III, 239.
-
-America:
-  paleontological evidence, I, 17;
-  effects of subsidence, I, 42–3;
-  age of rocks, I, 200–5, 206, 209, 210;
-  admiration for wealth, III, 149–51;
-  progress in, III, 278;
-  paper currency, III, 328, 345;
-  liberty, III, 381–2;
-  militancy and industrialism, III, 415–6, 484–92;
-  politics, III, 457;
-  the Americans, III, 471–92;
-  New York, III, 472;
-  Cleveland, III, 472;
-  free institutions, III, 472;
-  patents, 473;
-  freedom, III, 473–4, 477;
-  republicanism, III, 474–5;
-  education, III, 475–6;
-  character, III, 476, 482–7;
-  railways, III, 478;
-  future, III, 479–80;
-  hair, III, 482;
-  health, III, 482, 483–4;
-  pleasures in, III, 482–3;
-  causes of over-activity, III, 487–92.
-
-_Amœba_, instability of homogeneous, I, 86.
-
-Amsterdam, English enterprise in, III, 278.
-
-Analysis, psychology and classification, I, 245–57.
-
-Anarchy, and despotism, III, 159.
-
-Anatomy:
-  transcendental, I, 63;
-  organic correlation, I, 96–101.
-
-Andes, age of rocks, I, 200–1.
-
-Andrews, Prof. T., researches, I, 164–7.
-
-Anger:
-  natural language of, I, 340–50;
-  indications, II, 402, 404, 405;
-  and laughter, II, 462–3.
-
-Anglesea, age of rocks, I, 198.
-
-Animals:
-  number of species, I, 1–2;
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 14–7, 35;
-  structure, I, 73, 76, 372–3;
-  form, I, 73, 76;
-  chemical composition, I, 74, 76;
-  specific gravity, I, 74, 76;
-  temperature, I, 74, 76;
-  self-mobility, I, 75, 76;
-  evolution and homogeneity, I, 83–4;
-  distribution and heat, I, 223–4;
-  also terrestrial change, I, 224–6;
-  social analogy, I, 272–7;
-  origin of worship, I, 308–30;
-  indistinguishable from plants, I, 375–6;
-  function, I, 392–3;
-  gracefulness, II, 381, 385;
-  muscular excitement, II, 400, 403.
-
-_Annulosa_:
-  integration, I, 67–71;
-  division of labour, I, 287–8;
-  nervous system, I, 300;
-  controlling system, III, 407.
-
-Anthropology, comparative psychology of man, I, 351–70.
-
-Antipodes, belief in, II, 199.
-
-Anti-realism, H. Sidgwick’s criticism, II, 242–50.
-
-Aphis, development, I, 65–6.
-
-Apoplexy:
-  belief in spirits, I, 311–2;
-  heart disease, I, 411.
-
-Appleton, D. & Co., as publishers, III, 480.
-
-Approbation, love of, I, 36–7, II, 421.
-
-Arago, F. J. D.:
-  distribution of nebulæ, I, 112;
-  also forms, I, 122, 123, 124.
-
-Architect, the State as, III, 239.
-
-Architecture:
-  relation to painting and sculpture, I, 24;
-  types, II, 375–80;
-  symmetry in buildings, II, 376–7;
-  Gothic type, II, 374, 377, 378;
-  Grecian, II, 376, 377, 378.
-
-Argyll, Duke of, criticism of, I, 467–78.
-
-Arithmetic, and test of necessity, II, 196–7; (_See also_ Mathematics.)
-
-Army:
-  maladministration, III, 233, 247, 257, 308, 310, 399;
-  parliamentary representatives, III, 297, 303, 304;
-  compulsory co-operation, III, 451–4.
-
-Arrest, H. L. d’, planetoids, I, 174.
-
-Art:
-  recognition of likeness, II, 34;
-  interdependence of the arts, II, 68–71;
-  use and beauty in historical pictures, II, 373;
-  contrast in, II, 373–4;
-  English and continental, III, 430.
-
-Arthur, Sir G., Van Diemen’s Land convicts, III, 161.
-
-_Articulata_, nervous system, I, 301.
-
-Assyrians:
-  language and painting, I, 25–6;
-  sculpture, I, 26, 29.
-
-Astronomy:
-  evolution and increase in heterogeneity, I, 10–11, 35;
-  nebular hypothesis and multiplication of effects, I, 38–9, 59;
-  history and generalization in, I, 192;
-  geology and earth’s motion, I, 221–4;
-  analogy from survival of the fittest, I, 478;
-  science and common knowledge, II, 3;
-  Hegel’s classification, II, 13;
-  Comte’s, II, 21–7;
-  genesis, II, 48–9, 52, 55;
-  genesis of trigonometry, II, 55–6;
-  genesis of physical, II, 59;
-  interdependence of sciences, II, 66–7, 70–1;
-  and abstract science, II, 80;
-  and concrete, II, 88–92;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 94–9;
-  deals with aggregates, II, 99;
-  Bain on classification of sciences, II, 111;
-  also Mill, II, 114;
-  discovery of laws, II, 149;
-  evolution, II, 152;
-  judgments of reason and common sense, II, 243–4;
-  laws of motion, II, 271–5, 283–8;
-  motion of system, II, 293;
-  exact science, III, 199.
-
-Australia:
-  size of the human limb, I, 17;
-  age of rocks, I, 206;
-  fauna, I, 216.
-
-_Australian_, the ship, and admiralty certificate, III, 239.
-
-Austria, paper currency, III, 345.
-
-Authority, and intelligence, III, 311.
-
-Axioms:
-  knowledge implied by, II, 270, 277–88;
-  origin of physical, II, 298–301, 313–4, 315–20;
-  Thomson and Tait on physical, III, 220–1.
-
-Babinet, M., on nebular hypothesis, I, 121.
-
-Bach, J. S., and heredity, I, 407.
-
-Bacon, Francis, Viscount St. Alban’s:
-  organization of sciences, II, 121;
-  literary style, II, 365;
-  “A crowd is not company,” III, 44.
-
-_Bacteria_, action of light, I, 465–6.
-
-Baer, C. von, formula of, and general evolution, I, 35, II, 137–8.
-
-Bail, prison discipline, III, 180–7.
-
-Baillie-Cochrane, Mr., on Munich prison, III, 172.
-
-Bain, A.:
-  _Emotions and the Will_, I, 241–64;
-  _Mental and Moral Science_, I, 332;
-  classification of sciences, II, 105–17;
-  on logic, II, 105–6;
-  mathematics, II, 106–7;
-  incongruities, II, 463.
-
-Balfour, F. M.:
-  on invagination, I, 452;
-  development of nervous system, I, 454.
-
-Ball, embryological analogy, I, 452.
-
-Balloon, reason for ascent, I, 427.
-
-Ballot, Carlyle on, III, 300.
-
-Balzac, H. de, quoted, II, 364.
-
-Bank notes:
-  forgery, III, 134;
-  issue, III, 349–50, 352, 355.
-
-Bank of England:
-  advances by, III, 330–5, 335–47;
-  note issue, III, 349–50.
-
-Bankers, local integration, I, 103.
-
-Banking:
-  morals of trade, III, 131–7;
-  accommodation bills, III, 133–7;
-  evolution, III, 255–6.
-
-Bankruptcy:
-  morals of trade, III, 129–31;
-  and Bank of England, III, 330–2, 341;
-  evils of law, III, 438–9.
-
-Banks:
-  State tamperings, III, 326–57;
-  joint-stock, III, 347–54;
-  and free-trade, III, 355–7;
-  and government, III, 425–7.
-
-Barbadoes, sugar, III, 122.
-
-Barnacle goose, myth of, II, 162.
-
-Barometer:
-  action, I, 426;
-  scientific knowledge, II, 3, 5.
-
-Baron, the title, III, 15, 28.
-
-Barracks, maladministration, III, 233, 257.
-
-Barristers:
-  and traders, III, 139;
-  number in parliament, III, 298, 303, 304.
-
-Barter, and measures, II, 46; (_see also_ Exchange.)
-
-Bas-relief, increase in heterogeneity, I, 26, 27.
-
-Beats, acoustical, II, 169–70.
-
-Beauty:
-  officialism, I, 335–6;
-  and use, II, 370–4;
-  personal, II, 387–99.
-
-Bees:
-  sex of, I, 48;
-  analogy for distribution of nebulæ, I, 114.
-
-Beethoven, L. von:
-  heredity, I, 406;
-  Adelaïde of, II, 447.
-
-Beliefs:
-  and pedigree, I, 108;
-  different meaning of, II, 188–91, 193, 222.
-
-Berkeley, Bishop, subject and object, II, 329.
-
-Berlin:
-  English enterprise, III, 278;
-  water supply, III, 429.
-
-Bills of accommodation, morals of banking, III, 133–7.
-
-Biluchis, robbery, III, 218, 221.
-
-Biology:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 14–7, 35;
-  multiplication of effects, I, 46–53;
-  concrete science, II, 89–92;
-  deals with aggregates, II, 103;
-  Bain on classification, II, 109–11;
-  origin of species, II, 131;
-  evolution of science, II, 153;
-  universality of law, II, 159;
-  organic matter and incident forces, II, 177;
-  organic differentiation, III, 405.
-
-Birds:
-  in newly discovered lands, I, 255–6;
-  use and disuse, I, 418;
-  colour as illustrating propositions, II, 205–8;
-  muscular excitement, II, 400, 403;
-  origin of music, II, 428;
-  evolution, II, 438.
-
-Black horse, the phrase, II, 340.
-
-Blacksmith, arm and heredity, I, 475.
-
-Blackstone, Sir Wm., persons ineligible for parliament, III, 296.
-
-Blister:
-  effect on walking, I, 403;
-  action of medicine, I, 448.
-
-Blood:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 47;
-  nutrition and growth, I, 289;
-  function and supply, I, 290;
-  social analogy, I, 291–8;
-  mental mass and bodily state, I, 354.
-
-Board-meetings, railway, III, 77–80.
-
-Bondage, from freedom to, III, 445–70.
-
-Bones:
-  evolution and ratio of, I, 17;
-  weight in duck, I, 417–8;
-  water hen, I, 418.
-
-Bookkeeping:
-  railway, III, 59;
-  officialism, III, 253.
-
-Books, serial arrangement, II, 28.
-
-Botany:
-  classification, II, 64;
-  discovery of laws, II, 150.
-
-Bow, the obeisance, III, 18, 19.
-
-Braid, morals of trade, III, 119.
-
-Brain:
-  effect on viscera, I, 290;
-  analogy to parliament, I, 302–5;
-  mental and bodily mass, I, 353–4;
-  size of jaw, I, 397;
-  embryo development, I, 454.
-
-Bribery:
-  of buyers, III, 114–8;
-  of juries, III, 396.
-
-Bricks:
-  position of falling, I, 99;
-  and building, III, 239;
-  tax on, III, 243.
-
-British Association, and government, III, 436.
-
-_British Quarterly Review_, criticism, II, 267–301, 315–20.
-
-Bronze, multiplication of effects, I, 55–6.
-
-Brown-Séquard, E., epilepsy in guinea pigs, I, 415–6.
-
-Builders, strike of, III, 363–4, 365, 383.
-
-Buildings Acts:
-  failure, III, 239, 240–1, 275;
-  displacements caused by, III, 281;
-  representative government, III, 301.
-
-Bull-dog, jaws of, I, 401.
-
-Burial, primitive ideas, III, 6–11.
-
-Buyers, in clothing trades, III, 114–8.
-
-Cabet, S., Icarian colony, III, 457.
-
-Cabs:
-  officialism, III, 250;
-  in New York, III, 291;
-  representative government, III, 302.
-
-Cadence, defined, II, 422.
-
-Caird, Rev. Princ., reply to criticism, II, 219–21.
-
-Calculus:
-  implies absolute equality, II,38;
-  classification of sciences, II, 84;
-  evolution, II, 156.
-
-Cambium, in plants, I, 450.
-
-Cambrian system, thickness, I, 231.
-
-Campbell, G., on style, II, 338–9.
-
-Canals:
-  first English, III, 257;
-  officialism, III, 267.
-
-Candles:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 37;
-  morals of trade, III, 128;
-  Price’s school, III, 256.
-
-Cannibalism, in Fiji, III, 217–8.
-
-Cannon ball, disintegration, I, 436.
-
-Caoutchouc, effects of, I, 58.
-
-Capital:
-  direction of flow, III, 101–3, 264;
-  amount of railway, III, 108;
-  relative and absolute ethics, III, 155–7;
-  State tamperings with, III, 326–35, 335–47.
-
-Captains, certificated, of ships, III, 241.
-
-Caradoc sandstone, age, I, 201.
-
-Carat, a small bean, II, 44.
-
-Carboniferous system, origin, I, 237.
-
-Carlyle, Thomas:
-  on people, III, 293;
-  the ballot, III, 300;
-  the real rulers, III, 316–7;
-  quotation from _Heroes and Hero-worship_, II, 357.
-
-Carpenter, W. B., evolution and paleontology, I, 16.
-
-Carus, P., on Kantian ethics, III, 206–7.
-
-Castles:
-  use and beauty, II, 371;
-  situation, II, 376.
-
-Cat, muscular excitement, II, 400–1, 403.
-
-Catalepsy, belief in spirits, I, 311–2.
-
-Caterpillar, mistake by, I, 419.
-
-Causation:
-  establishment of belief, I, 109;
-  ignorance of, III, 487–92.
-
-Cause:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 37;
-  consciousness of, II, 127;
-  proportionality to effect, II, 300–1, 302–5, 305–7, 310–11, 318–20.
-
-Cell, doctrine of, I, 442–3.
-
-Centralization, French, III, 268.
-
-Cerebrum, consciousness of, representative, I, 303.
-
-Ceremony:
-  increase of heterogeneity, I, 20–1;
-  evolution, III, 11–6, 23, 50;
-  obeisances, III, 17–22;
-  primitive man, III, 24;
-  Chinese, III, 25;
-  evolution of governments, III, 27–8, 50.
-
-Cerney springs, III, 387–92.
-
-Chaldeans, prediction of eclipses, II, 48–9.
-
-Chalk, complexity of, III, 195–6.
-
-Chancery:
-  rules, III, 232;
-  maladministration, III, 247, 272;
-  dread of, III, 396.
-
-Change:
-  pleasure of, III, 454;
-  universal, III, 458–60.
-
-Charity, and government, III, 434.
-
-_Charlotte_, The, naval maladministration, III, 234.
-
-Cheek-bones, personal beauty, I, 390–2.
-
-Cheltenham, water supply, III, 387–92.
-
-Chemistry:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 43–5, 59;
-  unstable equilibrium, I, 83;
-  organic evolution, I, 83–4;
-  complexity of elements, I, 155–9, 371–4;
-  organic synthesis, I, 374;
-  genesis, II, 51, 58, 60;
-  galvanic electricity, II, 61;
-  classification, II, 64;
-  abstract concrete science, II, 85–8;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 95–9;
-  deals with properties, II, 102, 103;
-  Bain on classification, II, 107–11;
-  elements, II, 195;
-  development, II, 423.
-
-Cheques (_see_ Money).
-
-Chesil Beach, size of stones, I, 432.
-
-Chicken, evolution of mind, I, 377.
-
-Chiefs:
-  differentiation, I, 284–5;
-  duties and individual nervous system, I, 299–307;
-  primitive belief in spirits, I, 344.
-
-Children:
-  emotions and expression, I, 339–50;
-  lack generalization, I, 354;
-  and traits of savage, I, 355;
-  mental variability, I, 356–7;
-  impulsiveness, I, 358;
-  vocabulary, II, 336;
-  poor law and illegitimate, III, 244;
-  old and new education, III, 277.
-
-China, manners and fashion, III, 25.
-
-Chisholme, Mrs., colonization society, III, 258.
-
-Cholera, private and state enterprise, III, 238–9.
-
-Chopin, F., character, II, 417.
-
-Chrysalis, transformations, II, 163.
-
-Church:
-  differentiation from State, I, 21;
-  officialism, III, 251, 252;
-  corn laws, III, 361;
-  franchise and rates, III, 362.
-
-Circle, relation to hyperbola, I, 5.
-
-Circulars, morals of trade, III, 123–4.
-
-_Cirrhipedia_, classification, I, 248.
-
-Civilization, development of sympathy, II, 425.
-
-Classification:
-  psychology and analysis, I, 245–57;
-  historical, I, 248;
-  non-linear of sciences, II, 27–9;
-  recognition of likeness and unlikeness, II, 29–31, 34;
-  and language, II, 31–3, 40;
-  and reasoning, II, 33, 34, 40;
-  genesis of science, II, 63–5, 72;
-  (_See also_ Sciences, Classification of the.)
-
-Clearing house, banker’s, III, 425.
-
-Climate:
-  increase of heterogeneity, I, 13–4, 35;
-  and paleontological evidence, I, 221–4.
-
-Coach:
-  and railway travelling, III, 110–2;
-  Palmer, III, 441.
-
-Coats of arms, derivation, I, 28.
-
-Cognitions, defined, I, 261–2, II, 241.
-
-Coleridge, S. T., sonnet quoted, II, 352.
-
-Colligation, the word, II, 368–9.
-
-Colloids, evolution of life, I, 374.
-
-Comets, origin, direction and constitution, I, 125–8, 153, 177–8.
-
-Common sense:
-  judgment of reason, II, 243–4;
-  anomalies, III, 401–4, 445.
-
-Companies (_see_ Joint-stock companies.)
-
-Comparative Psychology (see Psychology.)
-
-Compass, faulty Admiralty, III, 234, 252.
-
-Competition:
-  effect of railway, III, 97, 106–7;
-  effects, III, 448–9;
-  American, III, 487–92.
-
-Comte, A.:
-  classification of sciences, II, 15–29;
-  mathematics, II, 15–19;
-  astronomy, II, 21–3;
-  progress of mathematics, II, 56;
-  on gravitation, II, 65, 66;
-  on education, II, 72, 133;
-  Littré on classification of, II, 74–6;
-  abstract and concrete science, II, 79;
-  science and positivism, II, 118–22, 128, 139;
-  origin of knowledge, II, 122–5;
-  propositions of, II, 125–32;
-  and social statics, II, 134–7;
-  Mill on philosophy, II, 143;
-  Fouillée on, II, 143–4;
-  progress from simple to complex, II, 147;
-  positivism rejected by Mr. Spencer, II, 221.
-
-Concrete:
-  precedes abstract, I, 323;
-  definition, II, 78.
-
-Conduct (_see_ Morals.)
-
-Conglomerate, origin, I, 444.
-
-Conic sections, relation of circle to hyperbola, I, 5.
-
-Conscience:
-  corporate and individual, III, 61–2;
-  Kant on human, III, 192;
-  Lubbock, III, 192–3;
-  and duty, III, 210–1.
-
-Consciousness, the phrase, state of, II, 326–7.
-
-Conservatism:
-  and social state, I, 356;
-  of women, I, 363;
-  Emerson on, III, 35;
-  effects, III, 43–4.
-
-Contract:
-  principle of, III, 90, 108;
-  and expediency, III, 95–6;
-  railway proprietary, III, 108–12;
-  enforcement in Spain, III, 218;
-  effect of breaches, III, 220;
-  State to enforce, III, 334, 336.
-
-Contractors:
-  sociological division of labour, I, 106;
-  railway, III, 72–4, 83, 88, 108.
-
-Contrast:
-  in literature and art, II, 373–4;
-  in music, II, 444, 446.
-
-Convicts (_see_ Prison Ethics.)
-
-Coöperation:
-  needful to social life, III, 450;
-  voluntary, III, 450–1;
-  compulsory, III, 451–4;
-  and socialism, III, 454–6.
-
-Copernicus, N., solar theory, I, 193.
-
-Copula, arrangement of sentences, II, 342–4.
-
-Corn laws:
-  representative government, III, 294;
-  and clergy, III, 361.
-
-Corporations, representative government, III, 289.
-
-Correlation, organic, I, 96–101.
-
-Costume:
-  and political opinion, III, 1–5, 30;
-  reform and custom, III, 30–6, 36–7;
-  development, III, 447.
-
-Cotton:
-  industry and locality, I, 104;
-  manufacture, II, 68.
-
-Counterpoint, origin of music, II, 448.
-
-Counties, social development, I, 288.
-
-Courage, emotional expression, I, 343–50.
-
-Crabs, of Kentucky caves, I, 400–1, 402.
-
-Creation (_see_ Special creation.)
-
-Credit, State tamperings with money, III, 326–35, 335–47.
-
-Creed:
-  fatal to science, I, 463;
-  use and beauty, II, 371.
-
-Criminals (_see_ Prison Ethics.)
-
-Critical point, of gases, I, 164–7.
-
-Critics, faith in, II, 322.
-
-Crofton, Captain, prison discipline, III, 186.
-
-Cromwell, O., and representative government, III, 315–6.
-
-Croshek, the name, I, 313.
-
-Crosse, A. F., on Hungarian music, II, 449.
-
-Croydon, board of health, III, 241.
-
-_Crustacea_, integration, I, 68–71.
-
-Cubit, length of, II, 43, 44.
-
-Curiosity, comparative psychology, I, 364–5.
-
-Curtsy, obeisance, III, 18–9.
-
-Custom:
-  and political opinion, III, 1–5, 30;
-  Eastern, III, 25;
-  and reform, III, 30–6, 36–7;
-  effect on railways, III, 110–2.
-
-Cuvier, Baron de, organic correlation, I, 96–101.
-
-D’Alembert, J. le R., composition of forces, II, 24.
-
-Damaras, ethics of the, III, 193.
-
-Dancing:
-  origin and differentiation, I, 30–2;
-  grace in, II, 381, 382;
-  and pleasure, II, 402;
-  evolution, II, 441.
-
-Darwin, Charles:
-  natural selection of one variation, I, 407, 421;
-  natural selection and heredity, I, 408–12, 421;
-  on E. Darwin, I, 417;
-  inheritance of functionally produced changes, I, 417–21, 422;
-  origin of music, II, 426–37;
-  on the phrase natural selection, I, 429;
-  effect of changed conditions, I, 433.
-
-Darwin, Dr. E., organic evolution, I, 390–1, 397.
-
-Davy, Sir H., chemical elements, III, 195.
-
-Dawn, as name, I, 318, 319, 324.
-
-Death:
-  primitive ideas, III, 6;
-  punishment and associations, III, 158, 187;
-  duty and inclination, III, 212, 213, 215;
-  rate in barracks, III, 257;
-  improvement in rate, III, 447.
-
-Deduction:
-  and physiology, I, 77–81, 107;
-  qualitative and quantitative science, II, 7.
-
-Deer, growth of horns, I, 393.
-
-Defoe, D., _Complete English Tradesman_, III, 141.
-
-Deities, primitive ideas, III, 6–11, 12.
-
-De la Beche, Sir H., paleontological evidence, I, 205.
-
-Democracy, change inaugurated, III, 49.
-
-Desire, associated with talent, I, 54.
-
-Despotism:
-  and social state, I, 268, III, 313;
-  and anarchy, III, 159;
-  and representative government, III, 309–10.
-
-Development:
-  hypothesis, I, 1–7;
-  relation to function, I, 63–4;
-  (_see also_ Evolution.)
-
-Devonian System, age of, I, 203–5, 210.
-
-Dewar, Prof., complexity of elements, I, 162.
-
-Differentiation, sociological, I, 102–7.
-
-Directors:
-  and railway companies, III, 52–63, 69;
-  and shareholder’s interests, III, 82–8, 108;
-  morals of banking, III, 131–7.
-
-Disease:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 47;
-  dissimilar effects, I, 100;
-  beliefs about, II, 153;
-  criminality, III, 167;
-  representative government, III, 301, 304;
-  body and nerve functions, III, 419–22, 443.
-
-Distribution, individual and social, I, 291–8.
-
-Dividends, railway, III, 57, 98.
-
-Division of labour:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 53–8;
-  sociological, I, 105–6, 292–3, III, 323;
-  illustrations and growth, I, 266;
-  social and individual nervous system, I, 299–307;
-  progress of science, II, 24–7.
-
-Dixon, T. H., on Norfolk Island convicts, III, 176.
-
-Dogs:
-  size of jaws, I, 398–400, 401, 422;
-  use and disuse, I, 469–71;
-  simile of Hodgson, II, 231–3;
-  gracefulness, II, 381, 385;
-  muscular excitement, II, 400, 403;
-  origin of music, II, 428.
-
-Don, the title, III, 14.
-
-Downes, Dr., on light and protoplasm, I, 465–6.
-
-Drama:
-  cause of laughter, II, 461;
-  representative government, III, 301.
-
-Draper, honesty and bankruptcy, III, 129–31.
-
-Drawing, comparative psychology, I, 366.
-
-Dreams, belief in spirits, I, 310–3.
-
-Dress:
-  and political opinion, III, 1–5, 30;
-  custom and reform, III, 30–6, 36–7;
-  and extravagance, III, 36–7;
-  and enjoyment, III, 40–6.
-
-Drunkenness, and temperance, III, 446.
-
-Duck, weight of bones, I, 417–8.
-
-Duty:
-  Kant and pursuit of happiness, III, 207–9;
-  and inclination, III, 209–13.
-
-Dyeing, morals of trade, III, 125.
-
-Dymond, J., _Principles of Morality_, I, 346.
-
-Dynamics, Comte’s classification, II, 19.
-
-Ear, embryological development, I, 454.
-
-Earth:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 11–4, 35;
-  rotatory movement, I, 135, 136;
-  number of satellites, I, 139;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52;
-  size, I, 145;
-  paleontology and motion, I, 221–4;
-  laws of motion, II, 272, 283–8;
-  (_see also_ Geology.)
-
-Ease, and grace, II, 382.
-
-East Indies, effects of upheaval, I, 49–52.
-
-Echoes, belief in spirits, I, 310–3.
-
-Eclipse, prediction of, II, 48.
-
-Ectoderm:
-  development, I, 284;
-  social and individual analogy, I, 298–9;
-  differentiation, III, 405.
-
-Education:
-  comparative psychology, I, 370;
-  development of science, II, 72;
-  Comte’s views, II, 133;
-  and conservatism, III, 43;
-  old and new, III, 277;
-  representative government, III, 301;
-  parliamentary reform, III, 375–9;
-  and government, III, 435–6;
-  development, III, 446, 459–60;
-  American, III, 475–6.
-
-Effect:
-  proportionality to cause, II, 300–1, 302–5, 305–7, 310–11, 318–20;
-  relation to cause, III, 487–92.
-
-Egg, evolution of mind, I, 377.
-
-Egyptians:
-  language and painting, I, 25–6;
-  sculpture, I, 26–7, 29, 30;
-  music, I, 32.
-
-Electricity:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 59;
-  genesis of galvanic, II, 61;
-  Whewell on progress of theory, II, 62;
-  abstract-concrete science, II, 88;
-  mode of molecular motion, II, 126;
-  what is? 168–72, 186–7;
-  also thermo-, II, 172–6;
-  statical and molecular motion, II, 180–3, 186–7;
-  induction, II, 183;
-  voltaic and molecular motion, II, 183–4, 186–7.
-
-Elements, complexity of, I, 155–9, 162, 371–4.
-
-Ell, the measure, II, 44.
-
-Ellipse, relation to circle, I, 5.
-
-Embryo:
-  relation to adult, I, 6;
-  early changes in, I, 445;
-  development, I, 451–8.
-
-Embryology:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 17–9;
-  multiplication of effects, I, 48;
-  organic correlation, I, 97;
-  importance of, II, 8–9;
-  von Baer’s formula, II, 137–8.
-
-Emerson, R. W.:
-  _Lectures on the Times_, II, 354;
-  use and ornament, II, 370;
-  on conservatism, III, 35.
-
-Emotion:
-  Bain’s definition, I, 258–60;
-  defined, I, 262;
-  of beauty, I, 335–6;
-  relation to idea, I, 336;
-  expression in children, I, 339–50;
-  and intellect, I, 353, II, 465;
-  sexual sentiment, I, 363–4;
-  sociality, freedom, approbation, and acquisitiveness, I, 366–7;
-  poetry and effect on language, II, 357–61;
-  demonstration of, II, 401–3;
-  nervous and muscular system, II, 453–8;
-  physiology of laughter, II, 458–64;
-  waste, repair, and language, II, 361–7;
-  and health, III, 481.
-
-Empiricism:
-  reasoning of, II, 201–5;
-  test of truth, II, 214–7.
-
-Endoderm:
-  development, I, 284;
-  differentiation, III, 405.
-
-Endymion, the myth, I, 326, 327.
-
-Energy, conservation and persistence of force, II, 295.
-
-Engel, Carl, on ancient music, II, 414.
-
-Engineers:
-  and railways, III, 68–72, 83, 88, 108;
-  society, III, 362–3, 365;
-  English and French, III, 427–8.
-
-Engines, dissimilarity of similar, I, 99.
-
-England:
-  government in, I, 302–5;
-  enterprise in, III, 278–80;
-  representative government in, III, 305–9, 318–9;
-  militancy and industrialism, III, 416;
-  political liberty, III, 445.
-
-English language:
-  words, II, 336–8;
-  Latin and Greek words, II, 367–9.
-
-Entomology, insect transformations, II, 163.
-
-Epiblast, development, I, 452–3.
-
-Epilepsy:
-  belief in spirits, I, 311–2;
-  in guinea pigs, I, 415–6.
-
-Equality:
-  relations of likeness, I, 35–7, 40;
-  quantitative prevision, II, 41–9;
-  and barter, II, 46;
-  and mechanics, II, 50;
-  and law, II, 52;
-  and astronomy, II, 53;
-  hydrostatics, II, 57;
-  optics, II, 57;
-  acoustics, II, 57;
-  dynamics, II, 58.
-
-Equity (_see_ Justice.)
-
-Esquire, the title, III, 13, 28, 32.
-
-Ethics:
-  use and disuse, I, 463–5;
-  of lower races, II, 192–5;
-  _Quarterly Review_ criticisms, II, 259–65;
-  absolute politics, III, 217–28;
-  (_see also_ Kant, Morality, Morals, Prison Ethics.)
-
-Euclid:
-  test of necessity, II, 198;
-  axioms, II, 282–3.
-
-Evidence, valuation of, II, 161–7.
-
-Evolution:
-  and special creation, I, 1–7;
-  of solar system, I, 128–31;
-  law of elements, I, 156;
-  Hugh Miller on, I, 219;
-  geological record, I, 226–32, 232–40;
-  emotional, I, 250–7;
-  of mind, I, 263, 376–8;
-  of animal worship, I, 329;
-  comparative psychology of man, I, 352;
-  mental and bodily mass, 353–4;
-  rate of mental, I, 355;
-  mental variability, I, 356–7;
-  impulsiveness, I, 357–9;
-  Martineau on, I, 371–88;
-  complexity of elements, I, 371–4;
-  of life from not life, I, 374–5;
-  plants and animals indistinguishable, I, 375–6;
-  the word, I, 380;
-  and originating mind, I, 381–6;
-  materialism, I, 386–8;
-  and catastrophism in geology, I, 389–90;
-  Dr. Darwin and Lamarck, I, 390–1,397;
-  and reproductive system, I, 409, 412, 422–5;
-  summary on use and disuse, I, 421–5;
-  effect of conditions, I, 427–35;
-  of life, I, 458–60, 460–2;
-  Huxley on, I, 462–3;
-  terrestrial, II, 94–9;
-  von Baer’s formula, II, 137–8;
-  outline of synthetic philosophy, II, 140–2;
-  advance in complexity of science, II, 150–7;
-  Quarterly Reviewer on, II, 261–5;
-  Prof. Tait on, II, 274–5;
-  relation of thoughts to things, II, 320;
-  Prof. Green on, II, 323;
-  limitation of traits, II, 438;
-  of musical scales, II, 440–1;
-  of dancing, II, 441;
-  of music, II, 448–9;
-  Kant and, III, 197–9, 206–7;
-  and Kantian assumptions, III, 203–6, 206–7;
-  officialism, III, 255;
-  individual and social, III, 263–5;
-  railways, III, 266;
-  language, III, 402–3;
-  universal, III, 458;
-  industrialism, III, 459;
-  education, III, 459–60;
-  prospective, III, 491–2.
-
-Exchange:
-  origin, I, 54, II, 46;
-  State tamperings with money, III, 326–35, 335–47.
-
-Exchequer bills, and Bank of England, III, 331.
-
-Excitement, poetry and effect on language, II, 357–61.
-
-Excluded middle, law of, II, 191–2.
-
-Expediency:
-  doctrine of, III, 95–6;
-  relative and absolute ethics, III, 152–7, 188, 333;
-  and penal code, III, 159–63, 188.
-
-Experience hypothesis:
-  origin of knowledge, II, 122–5;
-  reasoning of empiricism, II, 201–5;
-  consciousness of object, II, 211–4;
-  and _a priori_ truths, II, 287–8.
-
-Extravagance:
-  and fashion, III, 36–7;
-  representative government, III, 290–1;
-  good for trade, III, 293.
-
-Eyes:
-  position in development, I, 71–2, 454;
-  brighter from good news, II, 402.
-
-Factors of organic evolution, I, 389–478.
-
-Faculties, exhausted by exercise, II, 361–7.
-
-Fainting, belief in spirits, I, 311–2.
-
-Farming, by owner and bailiff, III, 246.
-
-Fashion:
-  origin, III, 28;
-  extravagance of, III, 36–7;
-  social intercourse and pleasure, III, 36–46;
-  need of change, III, 46–51;
-  prospect, III, 51.
-
-Father, the title, III, 12, 13, 21.
-
-Faye, M.:
-  solar constitution, I, 182;
-  solar spots, I, 183–4, 188–9.
-
-Feathers, structure and function, I, 392.
-
-Features, and personal beauty, II, 387–99.
-
-Feelings:
-  definition, I, 262–4;
-  evolution, I, 263–4;
-  indications of, II, 400–3;
-  loudness of voice, II, 404–5;
-  also timbre, II, 405, 411;
-  and pitch, II, 406, 411;
-  and intervals, II, 406–9, 411;
-  variability of pitch, II, 409, 411;
-  emphasis and time in music, II, 412–3;
-  relation of music to sympathy, II, 424–6;
-  nervous and muscular system, II, 453–8.
-
-Feet, obeisance of uncovering, III, 17.
-
-Fetichism, political, III, 393–400.
-
-Figures of speech, II, 350–5.
-
-Fiji:
-  ethics in, III, 193;
-  life in, III, 217–8, 221.
-
-Fingers:
-  heredity and number, I, 413–4, 475;
-  and memory, II, 465.
-
-Fire, indirect effects, III, 242.
-
-_First Principles_:
-  Martineau on, II, 250–8;
-  data of philosophy, II, 286.
-
-Fish:
-  evolution and heterogeneity, I, 15–7;
-  temperature, I, 75, 76;
-  self-mobility, I, 76;
-  paleontological remains, I, 227, 235, 240;
-  eating of, III, 47;
-  anomalies, III, 401.
-
-Flint implements, discovery, I, 413.
-
-Flocculi, appearance of nebulæ, I, 118–25.
-
-Food:
-  absorption and deductive biology, I, 77–81;
-  for the dead, I, 311–2;
-  nutrition, III, 408;
-  and government, III, 423–4.
-
-Foot, the measure, II, 44.
-
-Force:
-  cognition of its persistence, II, 269, 275;
-  Tait on central forces, II, 290–3;
-  persistence and conservation of energy, II, 295;
-  relation to motion, II, 310–4.
-
-Forgery, III, 134.
-
-Forms of thought, consciousness of object, II, 211–4.
-
-Fossils (_see_ Paleontology.)
-
-Fouillée, Alfred, on Comte’s philosophy, II, 143–4.
-
-Fowls, use and disuse, I, 418.
-
-France:
-  English and French sheep, II, 396, 398;
-  agriculture and officialism, III, 267–8;
-  representative government, III, 318–9, 320;
-  paper currency, III, 345;
-  liberty in, III, 381;
-  banks in, III, 426;
-  engineering, III, 427–8.
-
-Franchise (_see_ Parliamentary Reform.)
-
-Freedom:
-  manners and customs, III, 30–6, 36–7, 46–51;
-  to bondage, III, 445–70;
-  loss of American, III, 473–4, 477, 478–9.
-
-Free trade:
-  effects on industry, I, 22–3;
-  and officialism, III, 268–70;
-  and banking, III, 356.
-
-Friendly societies, and individualism, III, 433–4.
-
-Frog, reflex action, II, 308.
-
-Fugue, origin, I, 33.
-
-Function:
-  relation to growth, I, 63–4;
-  and to integration of parts, I, 73;
-  and to structure, I, 249.
-
-Galactic circle, nebular distribution, I, 112.
-
-Galton, F., _English Men of Science_, I, 360.
-
-Ganglia (_see_ Nervous System.)
-
-Gas:
-  heat and liquifaction, I, 164–7;
-  English enterprise, III, 278.
-
-Gastrula stage, of embryos, I, 452, 457.
-
-General:
-  Comte’s use of word, II, 20;
-  definition, II, 79.
-
-Generalization:
-  universal tendency, I, 192;
-  absent in children, I, 354;
-  comparative psychology, I, 365–6.
-
-Generosity, comparative psychology, I, 368.
-
-Genius:
-  literary style, II, 365–7;
-  non-recognition, III, 299–300.
-
-Geology:
-  special creation and evolution, I, 6–7;
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 11–4, 14–7, 35;
-  life and multiplication of effects, I, 39–46, 49–53;
-  illogical, I, 192–240;
-  evolution of, I, 192–8;
-  Wernerian, I, 194–7;
-  Huttonian, I, 195–7;
-  age of systems, I, 198–205;
-  and paleontological evidence, I, 205–12;
-  past and present changes, I, 212–8;
-  Hugh Miller’s doctrines, I, 218–20;
-  breaks in record, I, 220–6, 226–32, 232–40;
-  original object of Geological Society, I, 241;
-  catastrophism and evolution, I, 389–90;
-  genesis, II, 60;
-  concrete science, II, 89–92;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 95–9;
-  deals with aggregates, II, 100;
-  English map, II, 257;
-  (_see also_ Earth.)
-
-Geometry:
-  Comte’s classification, II, 16–21;
-  origin, II, 40, 151;
-  genesis, II, 48–50, 59;
-  genesis of trigonometry, II, 55–6;
-  interdependence of science and art, II, 69;
-  and abstract science, II, 79–80;
-  classification of sciences, II, 84;
-  the name, II, 113, 115;
-  evolution, II, 155;
-  test of necessity, II, 198–200.
-
-Gerard, E., Hungarian music, II, 450–1.
-
-Gesticulation, and language, II, 335.
-
-Ghost:
-  the word misleading, I, 311;
-  outline of theory, III, 8.
-
-Giraffe, correlation of parts, I, 402–5.
-
-Glück, C. W. von, Handel on, II, 448.
-
-Gnomon, use, II, 53–4.
-
-God:
-  belief in personal, II, 223;
-  primitive ideas, III, 6–11, 12, 23.
-
-Gold:
-  digging for, and evolution, III, 264;
-  efflux of, III, 341–3;
-  (_see also_ Money.)
-
-Good, meaning of word, III, 202.
-
-Gothic, allied to vegetative style, II, 376, 377, 378.
-
-Gould, J., on colour of birds, I, 433.
-
-Gout, and heredity, II, 395.
-
-Government:
-  differentiation of, I, 21;
-  ideal society, II, 131–2;
-  evolution and divergence of, III, 22, 24–30, 50;
-  criminal code, III, 157;
-  what is representative government good for? III, 283–325;
-  belief in English, III, 284;
-  flaws, &c., III, 284–91;
-  selection of representatives, III, 291–300;
-  individualism and the state, III, 416–37, 442–4;
-  and food supply, III, 423–4;
-  banks, III, 425–6;
-  engineering, III, 427–8;
-  water supply, III, 429;
-  art and literature, III, 430–1;
-  and churches, III, 434;
-  charity, III, 434;
-  education, III, 435–6;
-  railways, III, 437;
-  post-office, III, 440–2;
-  (_see also_ Over-legislation.)
-
-Gracefulness, II, 381–6.
-
-Grand, the word great, II, 368.
-
-Granite:
-  metamorphism, I, 229;
-  at Philæ, I, 437.
-
-Gravitation:
-  Newton and law of, II, 26–7;
-  discovery of laws, II, 148.
-
-Great, and the word grand, II, 367–9.
-
-Great Western Railway:
-  _versus_ Rushout, III, 94;
-  and South Western, III, 97–8;
-  and North Western, III, 107.
-
-Greece:
-  sculpture, I, 27, 30;
-  dancing, I, 31;
-  poetry, I, 31;
-  music, I, 33;
-  architecture, II, 376, 377, 378;
-  personal beauty, II, 391–3;
-  early poems, II, 414–8.
-
-Greek language:
-  Latin and English words, II, 367–9;
-  sociology and knowledge of, III, 377.
-
-Green, Prof. T. H., criticism, II, 322–32.
-
-Greenwich Hospital, funds, III, 398.
-
-Greyhounds, use and disuse in, I, 469–71.
-
-Grief, voice of, II, 405.
-
-Grocers, morals of trade, III, 121–3.
-
-Grotz, A., on science and religion, II, 225.
-
-Growth:
-  relation to activity, I, 63–4;
-  various forms, I, 65–7;
-  social, I, 265–9, 306.
-
-Guinea pigs, epilepsy in, I, 415–6.
-
-Guizot, M.:
-  social aggregation, I, 282;
-  and specialization, I, 287;
-  political machinery, III, 276, 399.
-
-Gulliver, L., an imaginary, on English institutions, III, 305–9.
-
-Gurney, E., on origin of music, II, 437–43.
-
-Habit (_see_ Heredity.)
-
-Hair:
-  and political opinion, III, 1–5;
-  obeisance of offering, III, 21;
-  colour of American, III, 482.
-
-Hallo! intonation of, II, 407.
-
-Hamburg, currency, III, 339.
-
-Hamilton, Sir W.:
-  on space, II, 191–2;
-  the word belief, II, 222–3;
-  Grotz on, II, 225;
-  necessity of causation, II, 320;
-  (_see also_ Mill.)
-
-Hampstead Heath, II, 370.
-
-Hand:
-  the measure, II, 44;
-  ribbing of skin, I, 448;
-  rubbing together of hands, II, 402.
-
-Handel, G. F., on Glück, II, 448.
-
-Happiness, Kant and pursuit of, III, 207–9; (_see also_ Kant.)
-
-Harmony, origin of music, II, 448.
-
-Harp, strings in ancient, II, 415.
-
-Harris, Mr., on Norfolk Island convicts, III, 176.
-
-Hastings, railway service, II, 97.
-
-Hat, obeisance of removal, III, 20, 27, 47.
-
-Hayward, R. B., criticism, II, 307–14.
-
-Head:
-  obeisance of uncovering, III, 20;
-  putting dust on, III, 21.
-
-Health:
-  and criminality, III, 167;
-  failure of boards of, III, 241, 248, 290;
-  representative government, III, 301, 304;
-  body and nerve functions, III, 419–22, 443;
-  and feeling, III, 481;
-  in America, III, 482, 483–4.
-
-Heart.:
-  integration, I, 67;
-  disease, I, 410–11;
-  effect of emotion, II, 454, 455, 464;
-  and nervous system, III, 420–1.
-
-Heat:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 37, 38, 39, 47, 59;
-  terrestrial effects of diminishing, I, 40–6;
-  cause of heterogeneity, I, 82;
-  nebular change, I, 118;
-  liquefaction of gases, I, 164–7;
-  terrestrial motion and paleontological evidence, I, 221–4;
-  rock metamorphism, I, 229–30, 232;
-  action on bodies, I, 436;
-  genesis of science, II, 62, 63;
-  abstract concrete science, II, 88;
-  what is thermo-electricity? II, 172–6;
-  effect on compound molecules, II, 178–80, 186;
-  insensible motion, II, 266–8, 276.
-
-Hegel, G. W. F.:
-  “to philosophize on Nature,” II, 10, 11;
-  classification of sciences, II, 12–5.
-
-Heraldry, and manners and fashion, III, 26, 27–8.
-
-Heredity:
-  the general law, I, 64, 103, 104;
-  organic development, I, 90–2;
-  moral sentiments, I, 338;
-  effect of sex, I, 362;
-  size of jaw, I, 397–400, 422;
-  musical faculty, I, 406–7;
-  natural selection, I, 408–12;
-  functional modifications, I, 415–7;
-  Darwin’s belief in their inheritance, I, 417–21, 422;
-  summary on use and disuse, I, 421–5;
-  also their bearing on ethics, psychology, and sociology, I, 463–5;
-  Duke of Argyll’s criticism, I, 467–78;
-  personal beauty, II, 387–99;
-  officialism, III, 255.
-
-Hero-worship, III, 317.
-
-Herr, the title, III, 14.
-
-Herschel, Sir J.:
-  Magellanic clouds, I, 116–7;
-  form of nebulæ, I, 122, 124;
-  variation of terrestrial temperature, I, 222, 223;
-  complexity of elements, I, 372;
-  cause and effect, II, 306, 319.
-
-Herschel, Sir W.:
-  on nebulous matter, I, 110;
-  stellar magnitude and distance, I, 115;
-  stellar genesis, I, 129;
-  solar surface, I, 185, 187.
-
-Heterogeneity:
-  increase in, displayed by astronomy, I, 10–11, 35;
-  geology, I, 11–14, 35;
-  meteorology, I, 13–4, 35;
-  biology, I, 14–7, 35;
-  man, I, 17–9, 35;
-  society, I, 19–23, 35;
-  ceremony, I, 20–1;
-  religion, I, 20–3;
-  language, I, 23–6;
-  writing, I, 24–6;
-  the arts, I, 24–30;
-  poetry, music and drama, I, 30–2;
-  literature and science, I, 34–5;
-  development, I, 67;
-  (_see also_ Multiplication of Effects.)
-
-History, measure of time, II, 45–9.
-
-Hobbes, T., commonwealth of, I, 270–2.
-
-Hodgson, S. H.:
-  criticism of, II, 225–34;
-  reply to Prof. Green, II, 321–2, 329.
-
-Homogeneous:
-  instability of the, I, 81–4, 459–60;
-  orderly heterogeneity, I, 84–93.
-
-Honesty:
-  in trade and bankruptcy, III, 129–31, 138;
-  of lower races, III, 194;
-  state tamperings with money, III, 326–35, 335–47;
-  and social grade, III, 359;
-  and officialism, III, 397.
-
-Hornbills, head excrescences of, I, 392.
-
-Horns, evolution of, I, 395.
-
-Horse, the phrase black, II, 340.
-
-Hoskins, G. A., on Valencia prison, III, 177–8.
-
-Huguenots, Smiles on the, I, 360.
-
-Humboldt, A. von, distribution of nebulæ, I, 113, 114, 115.
-
-Hume, D.:
-  subject and object, II, 329;
-  law codification, III, 258.
-
-Hungary, music in, II, 449.
-
-Hutton, James, geological theory, I, 195, 197.
-
-Hutton, Richard H., “a questionable parentage for morals,” I, 331–50.
-
-Huxley, T. H.:
-  evolution and biological heterogeneity, I, 17;
-  organic correlation, I, 96–101;
-  belief in double personality, I, 310;
-  on “Origin of Species,” I, 389–90;
-  on evolution, I, 462–3;
-  a creed fatal to science, I, 463;
-  specialized administration, III, 404–5;
-  endoderm and ectoderm, III, 405;
-  function of parliament, III, 417;
-  and altruism, III, 433;
-  administrative nihilism, III, 438, 442–4.
-
-Hybrids, origin of worship, I, 320–2, 329.
-
-_Hydra_, the, naval maladministration, III, 234.
-
-Hydrogen, liquefaction, I, 160.
-
-Hydrostatics, genesis, II, 57, 59.
-
-_Hydrozoa_:
-  analogy to social organism, I, 280–3;
-  development, I, 284;
-  circulation, I, 291;
-  nervous system, III, 422.
-
-Hyperbola, relation to circle, I, 5.
-
-_Hyperion_, verse from, II, 344.
-
-Hypoblast, embryo development, I, 452–3, 455.
-
-Hypothesis, effect on observation, II, 162–7.
-
-Ice, temperature as illustrating propositions, II, 205–8.
-
-Idealism:
-  reasoning of, II, 201;
-  Sidgwick’s criticism, II, 242–50.
-
-Ideas:
-  relation to emotions, I, 336–8;
-  comparative psychology, I, 365–6;
-  actual and pseud-, I, 383.
-
-Idols, worship of, III, 393.
-
-Imitativeness, comparative psychology, I, 364.
-
-Impatience, indications of, II, 402.
-
-Impulsiveness, comparative psychology, I, 357–9.
-
-Inclination, and duty, III, 210–1.
-
-Inconceivability, Mill on, II, 193–200.
-
-Incongruities, Bain on, II, 463.
-
-Incuriosity, comparative psychology, I, 364–5.
-
-Indeed! intonation of, II, 408.
-
-India:
-  prisons of, III, 189–91;
-  ethics in, III, 193–5;
-  failure of government, III, 249.
-
-Individual, and the State, III, 416–37, 442–4.
-
-Induction:
-  qualitative and quantitative science, II, 7;
-  electrical, II, 183.
-
-Industrialism:
-  and social organism, III, 412–6;
-  development of, III, 459;
-  and unionism, III, 465;
-  in America, III, 487–92.
-
-Industry:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 53–8;
-  effects of railways, I, 57;
-  boundaries ignored by, I, 289.
-
-Infant:
-  relation to ovum, I, 6;
-  resemblance to uncivilized, I, 18.
-
-_Infusoria_, cell membrane, I, 441.
-
-Insanity:
-  and heredity, I, 416, II, 396;
-  Pentonville Prison, III, 162;
-  and life, III, 164;
-  and bodily functions, III, 419–20.
-
-Insects:
-  temperature, I, 75;
-  self-mobility, I, 76;
-  mimicry, I, 396;
-  colours of, I, 433;
-  metamorphosis, III, 410.
-
-Intaglio, increase of heterogeneity, I, 26.
-
-Integration:
-  longitudinal and tranverse, I, 67–73;
-  relation to function, I, 73;
-  sociological, I, 102–7.
-
-Intellect, effect of emotion, II, 465.
-
-Intelligence:
-  relation to sexual sentiment, I, 363–4;
-  and authority, III, 311.
-
-Intonation, origin in churches, II, 416.
-
-Invagination, Balfour on, I, 452.
-
-Involution, and evolution, I, 380.
-
-Ireland:
-  prison discipline, III, 174;
-  and bad legislation, III, 275;
-  currency in, III, 337, 344–5;
-  bank of, III, 348.
-
-Irish elk, correlation of parts, I, 402.
-
-Iron:
-  analogy from cutting, I, 97–8;
-  industry and locality, I, 104;
-  complexity of, I, 373.
-
-Isomerism:
-  complexity of elements, I, 155;
-  evolution of life, I, 374–5.
-
-Italy, language, II, 423.
-
-Jam, association of ideas, I, 337.
-
-Jaw:
-  personal beauty, II, 389–90, 391;
-  size, I, 397–400, 473;
-  size of teeth, I, 401;
-  drooping from excitement, II, 464.
-
-Joint-stock companies:
-  history, III, 52, 108;
-  failure of Act, III, 241;
-  importance of, III, 257;
-  maladministration, III, 286;
-  banking, III, 347–54;
-  regulative system, III, 463.
-
-Jupiter:
-  rotatory movement, I, 135, 136;
-  motion of satellites, I, 137, 141–2;
-  number of satellites, I, 139–40;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52;
-  size, I, 145;
-  luminosity, I, 150;
-  orbit, I, 169.
-
-Juries, bribery of, III, 396.
-
-Justice:
-  re-representative sentiment, I, 263;
-  development of sympathy, I, 347–50;
-  comparative psychology, I, 368;
-  and equity, II, 52;
-  and prison ethics, III, 165, 167, 180, 181;
-  political ethics, III, 225, 228;
-  faulty administration, III, 232, 235;
-  over-legislation, III, 272;
-  and representative government, III, 317–23, 324, 380;
-  duty of state, III, 334;
-  and officialism, III, 395–400;
-  needful to society, III, 469.
-
-Kames, Lord, arrangement of sentences, II, 343.
-
-Kant, I.:
-  forms of thought, II, 77;
-  space and time, II, 226–7, 229–32, III, 197–9;
-  form and matter, II, 230–1, 232;
-  and experientialism, II, 234–5;
-  Max Müller on Spencer and, II, 235–8;
-  Spencer’s disagreement from, II, 238;
-  ethics, III, 192–216;
-  on lower races, III, 192–5;
-  examples of unaided perception, III, 195–7;
-  reasoning of, III, 199–203;
-  space, III, 203, 207;
-  on good will, III, 201–3, 207;
-  and evolution, III, 203–6, 207;
-  Carus on ethics, III, 206–7;
-  pursuit of happiness, III, 207–9;
-  duty and inclination, III, 209–13;
-  ethical principles, III, 213–6.
-
-Kent, W. S., on _infusoria_, I, 440.
-
-Kepler, J:
-  laws of, I, 36;
-  belief in planetary spirits, I, 108;
-  solar theory, I, 193.
-
-Kid, laughter caused by, II, 461–2.
-
-Kirchhoff, solar spots, I, 187.
-
-Kissing, obeisance of, III, 18.
-
-Kneeling, obeisance of, III, 19.
-
-Knight, the title, III, 15, 28.
-
-Knowledge:
-  common and scientific, II, 1–8, 29;
-  dependent on experience, II, 122;
-  relativity, II, 122, 220–1;
-  and word belief, II, 188–91;
-  Quarterly Reviewer on, II, 260;
-  and reasoning, III, 199, 201;
-  and political ethics, III, 225.
-
-Labour:
-  division of, I, 19–23, 283–91;
-  right to, III, 466.
-
-Lady, the title, III, 14.
-
-_Lady of the Lake_, quoted, II, 351.
-
-Laing, Mr., on railway construction, III, 105–6.
-
-Lamarck, J. B. P. A. de M., organic evolution, I, 390–1, 397.
-
-Lancashire:
-  cotton industry, I, 266;
-  effect of railway competition, III, 97, 106.
-
-Landowners, railway policy, III, 63–7.
-
-Landscape, appreciation of, I, 335–6.
-
-Language:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 23–6, II, 366–7;
-  belief in spirits, I, 311–2;
-  poverty of Australian, I, 315;
-  precedence of concrete nouns, I, 323;
-  comparative psychology, I, 365–6;
-  classification, II, 31–3, 34, 40;
-  Saxon words, II, 336–8;
-  under excitement, and poetry, II, 357–61;
-  emotional waste and repair, II, 361–7;
-  Latin, Greek, and old English, II, 367–9;
-  duality and development, II, 421–3;
-  sociology and knowledge, III, 302;
-  of subordination, III, 312;
-  evolution, III, 402–3.
-
-Lankester, Prof. E. Ray, on heredity, I, 476.
-
-Laplace, P. S. Marquis de:
-  genesis and structure of solar system, I, 128–9, 130, 131;
-  planetary axial movements, I, 132–6;
-  lunar axial motion, I, 141;
-  motion of satellites, I, 142;
-  planetoids, I, 168, 174, 178.
-
-Latham, R. G., on grammar, II, 333.
-
-Latin, Greek and English words, II, 367–9.
-
-Laugel, M., on _First Principles_, II, 118.
-
-Laughter, physiology of, II, 452–66.
-
-Law:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 37;
-  genesis of science, II, 51;
-  belief in natural, II, 123;
-  conditions affecting discovery, II, 145–8, 148–50;
-  evolution of sciences, II, 150–7;
-  prospective, II, 157–9;
-  universality of, II, 159–60;
-  religion and manners, III, 4, 23;
-  and morality, III, 10–11, 23, 50;
-  for primitive man, III, 24;
-  officialism and reform, III, 252, 258–9;
-  and over-legislation, III, 272;
-  legal verbiage, III, 273;
-  cost, III, 308;
-  representative government, III, 317–23;
-  knowledge of, and parliamentary reform, III, 375–9;
-  (_see also_ Over-legislation.)
-
-Lawyers:
-  and railways, III, 67–72, 83, 88, 108;
-  in parliament, III, 298, 303, 304.
-
-Leather, morals of trade, III, 123.
-
-Leaves, cells in, I, 446.
-
-Legislation, and social growth, I, 265–9; (_see also_ Over-legislation.)
-
-Length, morals of trade, III, 118–9.
-
-Lepchas, ethics, III, 193, 194.
-
-Liability (_see_ Banks _and_ Joint-Stock Companies).
-
-Liberalism, behaviour of party, III, 464.
-
-Liberty:
-  French idea of, II, 343;
-  traits of reform, III, 30–6;
-  social use, III, 46–51;
-  degree of, for people, III, 381;
-  in America, III, 473–4, 477, 478–9.
-
-Libraries, free, III, 370.
-
-Licensing law, failure, III, 244.
-
-Liebig, J. von, analogy from blood corpuscles, I, 293–4.
-
-Life:
-  evolution from not-life, I, 374–5;
-  plants and animals indistinguishable, I, 375–6;
-  evolution of mind, I, 376–8;
-  survival and degree of, I, 405–8, 421;
-  evolution and action of medium, I, 458–60, 460–2;
-  primitive ideas of, III, 6–11;
-  maintenance and prison ethics, III, 163–71;
-  failure of assurance act, III, 241–2;
-  sociology and knowledge of, III, 304;
-  and pleasure, III, 315;
-  and sociology, III, 325;
-  increase in longevity, III, 447;
-  Mill and Spencer on, III, 485.
-
-_Life Drama_, quoted, II, 351, 353.
-
-Light:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 37, 38, 39, 59;
-  action on bodies, I, 436;
-  and on protoplasm, I, 465–6;
-  genesis of science, II, 61;
-  polarization, II, 63;
-  effect on molecules, II, 178;
-  perception of white, III, 196;
-  (_see also_ Optics).
-
-Likeness:
-  of classification, II, 29–31, 34;
-  of language, II, 31–3, 34;
-  of reasoning, II, 33–4;
-  of art, II, 34;
-  relation to equality, II, 35–7.
-
-_Lindsay, W. S._, Admiralty certificate, III, 239.
-
-Literature:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 34–5;
-  multiplication of effects, I, 57;
-  use and beauty, II, 371;
-  contrast in, II, 373–4;
-  popularity of authors, III, 299–300;
-  and sociology, III, 376–7;
-  English and continental, III, 430–1.
-
-Littré, E., on Comte’s classification, II, 74–6, 81–3.
-
-Liver:
-  development, I, 106;
-  use and disuse, I, 419.
-
-Liverpool, and Manchester railway, III, 63, 266.
-
-Liverworts, cells in, I, 446.
-
-Locke, J.:
-  and experientialism, II, 234–5;
-  and evolution, II, 237.
-
-Locomotive engine:
-  effects of, I, 56–8;
-  balance weight, II, 383.
-
-Logic:
-  Hegel’s classification, II, 12–5;
-  implies equality, II, 40;
-  abstract science, II, 77, 81–5;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 99;
-  Bain on relation to psychology, II, 105–6;
-  Sidgwick’s criticism, II, 241;
-  Tristram Shandy on, II, 333.
-
-London:
-  and Birmingham railway, III, 63;
-  New River to, III, 257;
-  representative government, III, 289;
-  water supply, III, 429.
-
-Lord, the title, III, 12–5, 21.
-
-Love:
-  Darwin and origin of music, II, 426–37;
-  also Gurney, II, 437–43.
-
-Loyalty, and social state, III, 312.
-
-Lubbock, Sir John:
-  derivation of tribal names, I, 314;
-  _Origin of Civilization_, I, 331;
-  conscience of lower races, III, 192–3;
-  banker’s clearing house, III, 425–6.
-
-Lungs:
-  development, I, 67, 106;
-  use and disuse, I, 419;
-  relation to voice, II, 404–5.
-
-Lyell, Sir C.:
-  age of rocks, I, 204;
-  paleontological evidence, I, 205, 208–12;
-  geological hiatus, I, 220–1;
-  uniformitarianism and geological record, I, 227, 229.
-
-Lyre, increase in heterogeneity, I, 32, II, 415.
-
-Machine, and organism, III, 456–8.
-
-Machinery, disliked by labourers, III, 362, 376.
-
-Macaulay, Lord, on Post-office, III, 441.
-
-Mackintosh, Sir J., on constitutions, I, 265, 269.
-
-MacLennan, J. F., plant and animal worship, I, 308–9, 320.
-
-Maconochie, Captain, “mark” prison system, III, 175–7.
-
-Madam, the title, II, 14, 26.
-
-Magellanic clouds, Sir J. Herschel on, I, 116–7.
-
-Magnetism, abstract concrete science, II, 88.
-
-Magnificent, and the word grand, II, 367–9.
-
-Magnitudes, relation of thought, II, 252–3.
-
-Maize, transformation of, I, 434.
-
-Majority, right of, III, 89, 94.
-
-_Mammalia_:
-  evolution and heterogeneity, I, 15–7;
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 17–9;
-  temperature, I, 75, 76;
-  self-mobility, I, 76;
-  organic correlation, I, 97;
-  paleontological remains, I, 227, 238, 240;
-  imitation of evolution, II, 438.
-
-Mammary glands, evolution, I, 395.
-
-Man:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 17–9, 35;
-  multiplication of effects, I, 52–3;
-  traits of primitive, III, 24.
-
-Manchester, electors in, III, 385.
-
-Manners:
-  and fashion, III, 1–51;
-  evolution of ceremonies, III, 11–6, 23, 50;
-  origin, III, 28;
-  Swift on, III, 44.
-
-Mansel, Dean H. L.:
-  criticism, II, 221–5;
-  Grotz on, II, 225.
-
-_Marchantia_, cells in, I, 446.
-
-_Mariana_, quoted, II, 356.
-
-_Marmion_, quoted, II, 343.
-
-Mars:
-  rotatory motion, I, 135, 136;
-  number of satellites, I, 139–40;
-  and motion, I, 142;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52.
-
-_Marsupialia_, integration, I, 69–70.
-
-Martineau, Rev. J.:
-  on evolution, I, 371–88;
-  criticism, II, 250–8.
-
-Master, the title, III, 15, 16.
-
-Materialism, and evolution, I, 386–8.
-
-Mathematics:
-  things learnt, II, 1;
-  Oken on, II, 10–11;
-  Comte’s classification, II, 16–21;
-  implies equality, II, 40;
-  genesis, II, 48–50;
-  abstract science, II, 77, 84–5;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 99;
-  deals with relations, II, 102, 103;
-  Bain on nature of, II, 105–6;
-  origin, II, 151;
-  evolution, II, 156;
-  ultimate truths, II, 283;
-  exact science, III, 199–200;
-  and political ethics, III, 225;
-  mental development, III, 255;
-  and sociology, III, 303, 305.
-
-Matter:
-  discovery of laws, II, 148;
-  inscrutable, II, 247;
-  Martineau’s criticism, II, 257;
-  properties, II, 277, 315–6.
-
-Mayer, J., as physicist, II, 269, 314.
-
-Measurement:
-  origin of weight, II, 43–5;
-  of time, II, 45–6.
-
-Mechanics:
-  Comte’s classification, II, 19;
-  genesis, II, 50, 56, 59;
-  abstract concrete science, II, 85–8,101;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 97;
-  Bain on science classification, II, 112;
-  science classification, II, 117;
-  origin, II, 151;
-  evolution, II, 155, 156;
-  real and ideal, III, 222–3.
-
-Mechanics’ Institutes, representative government, III, 286.
-
-Medicine, association of ideas, I, 337.
-
-_Medusa_, vascular system, I, 79.
-
-_Megœra_, naval maladministration, III, 234.
-
-_Melbourne_, the, and Admiralty certificate, III, 239.
-
-Memory:
-  and test of truth, II, 215;
-  and emotion, II, 465.
-
-Mendelejeff, D., complexity of elements, I, 155.
-
-Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, F., character, II, 417.
-
-Mercantile Marine Act, failure of, III, 260, 276, 295.
-
-Mercury:
-  rotatory movement, I, 135, 136;
-  number of satellites, I, 139;
-  density, I, 144;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52.
-
-Mesoblast, embryo development, I, 453, 455.
-
-Metallurgy, genesis, II, 51.
-
-Metamorphic rocks, age, I, 198.
-
-Metamorphosis, universal, III, 458–60.
-
-Metaphor, and simile, II, 352–4.
-
-Metaphysics:
-  Comte on, II, 123;
-  reasoning of, II, 201–5;
-  relation to physics, II, 268.
-
-_Metaphyta_, origin, I, 444.
-
-_Metazoa_:
-  origin, I, 444;
-  embryo development, I, 451–8.
-
-Meteorology:
-  increase in heterogeneity of climates, I, 13–4, 35;
-  effect of American subsidence, I, 43;
-  concrete science, II, 92.
-
-Meteors:
-  constitution of comets, I, 127;
-  origin, I, 174–7.
-
-Metonymy, effectiveness, II, 350.
-
-Mettray, reformatory, III, 173.
-
-Militancy:
-  political ethics, III, 227–8;
-  and industrialism, III, 416;
-  in America, III, 484.
-
-Milky way, distribution of nebulæ, I, 112.
-
-Mill, J. S.:
-  letter on morals to, I, 333;
-  classification of science, II, 114;
-  on Comte’s philosophy, II, 143;
-  on Hamilton and word belief, II, 188–91;
-  noumenal existence, II, 191–2;
-  inconceivable and unbelievable, II, 193–200;
-  test of necessity, II, 196;
-  general agreement with, II, 217;
-  on the State and banks, III, 348, 357;
-  on life, III, 485.
-
-Miller, Hugh:
-  life and doctrines, I, 218–20;
-  terrestrial life, I, 220.
-
-Mimicry:
-  of savages, I, 364;
-  evolution, I, 396.
-
-Mineralogy, and classification, II, 64, 92, 108.
-
-Mind (_see_ Psychology.)
-
-Missionaries, development, III, 458–9.
-
-Mivart, Prof. St. George, genesis of species, I, 332.
-
-Mole, pelvis in, I, 97.
-
-Molecules, mutual action and electricity, II, 178–84, 184–7.
-
-Molesworth, Sir W., on buildings acts, III, 240.
-
-_Mollusca_:
-  great age of, I, 217;
-  circulation, I, 296.
-
-_Molluscoida_, social analogy, I, 281.
-
-_Monaclinæ_, cell membrane, I, 440.
-
-Monarchy, and representative government, III, 309–10, 310–7, 317–23.
-
-Money:
-  analogy to blood corpuscles, I, 293–4;
-  trading with bad, III, 141;
-  state tamperings with, III, 326–57;
-  and joint-stock banks, III, 347–54;
-  and free trade, III, 355–7; anomaly
-  of interest, III, 401.
-
-Monkeys, origin of music, II, 432.
-
-_Monotremata_, integration, I, 69–70.
-
-Monsieur, the title, III, 14, 15.
-
-Montesinos, Captain, prison discipline, III, 177–8.
-
-Month, measure of time, II, 45–9.
-
-Moon:
-  axial motion, I, 141;
-  heat and contraction, I, 149;
-  as name, I, 317, 327.
-
-Moquin-Tandon, A., plant leaves, I, 433.
-
-Morality:
-  _Quarterly Review_ criticism, II, 259–65;
-  and law, III, 10–11, 23, 50;
-  and awe of authority, III, 311;
-  average social, III, 359, 360.
-
-Morals:
-  and moral sentiments, I, 331–50;
-  parentage of, I, 331–4, 334–50;
-  the science of right conduct, I, 333;
-  relation to expediency, I, 333;
-  prospect, III, 30, 51;
-  average of, and trade, III, 137–40.
-
-Moray, Sir R., on Barnacle geese, II, 162.
-
-Mosses, cell membrane, I, 439.
-
-Motion:
-  of animals and plants, I, 75, 76;
-  discovery of laws, II, 148;
-  implies thing moving, II, 205–6, 207;
-  inscrutable, II, 247;
-  insensible forms, II, 266, 276;
-  Tait on laws of, II, 271–5;
-  Spencer on laws of, II, 297–320;
-  axioms and laws of, II, 298–301, 315–20;
-  relation to force, II, 310–4;
-  and gracefulness, II, 381–6.
-
-Mouat, Dr. F. J., on prisons, III, 189–91.
-
-Moulton, J. F., _British Quarterly Review_, II, 307.
-
-Mountains:
-  age and altitude, I, 13;
-  formation, I, 40;
-  as name, I, 318.
-
-Mozart, J. C. W. T.:
-  heredity, I, 406;
-  character, II, 417;
-  _Addio_ of, II, 447.
-
-Mucous membrane, effect of surroundings, I, 449, 450.
-
-Müller, F. Max:
-  misinterpretation of names, I, 315, 327;
-  on abstract nouns, I, 323, 324;
-  criticism, II, 235–8.
-
-Multiplication, various forms, I, 65–7.
-
-Multiplication of effects:
-  general, I, 35–8;
-  astronomy, I, 38–9;
-  geology, I, 39–46;
-  biology, I, 46–53;
-  sociology, I, 53–8;
-  science, literature and art, I, 59.
-
-Munich, prison, III, 171–3
-
-Murchison, Sir R.:
-  Silurian system, I, 199, 231;
-  paleontological evidence, I, 206;
-  azoic rocks, I, 228.
-
-Murder, social co-operation, III, 217–20, 224.
-
-Muscle:
-  waste and repair, I, 362;
-  evolution, I, 396;
-  size of jaws, I, 398–400, 422;
-  origin of music, II, 403–4;
-  nervous system and action of, II, 453–8;
-  laughter and action of, II, 458–64.
-
-Music:
-  origin, I, 30–1;
-  increase in heterogeneity, 31–4;
-  comparative psychology, I, 366;
-  development of faculty, I, 406–7;
-  Kantian ideas of space, II, 227;
-  contrast in, II, 373;
-  origin and function, II, 400–51;
-  originally vocal, II, 403–4;
-  feelings and loudness of voice, II, 404, 410;
-  and timbre, II, 405, 411;
-  pitch, II, 406, 411;
-  intervals, II, 406–9, 411;
-  variability of pitch, II, 409, 411;
-  tremolo, staccato, and slur, II, 412;
-  time in, II, 412–3;
-  slow divergence from speech, II, 414–8;
-  indirect evidence of theory, II, 418–20;
-  function, II, 420–4;
-  relation to sympathy, II, 424–6;
-  Darwin on origin, II, 426–37;
-  of lowest tribes, II, 433–7;
-  Gurney on origin, II, 437–43;
-  evolution of scales, II, 440–1;
-  sensational effects, II, 443–4;
-  perceptional, II, 445–7;
-  emotional, II, 447;
-  harmony, II, 448;
-  counterpoint, II, 448;
-  and evolution, II, 448–9;
-  Hungarian, II, 449–51;
-  and social intercourse, III, 41, 42;
-  sensation of sound, III, 197;
-  indirect effects, III, 245;
-  free, III, 370.
-
-Myddelton, Sir Hugh, New River, III, 257, 429.
-
-Mythology, primitive, III, 6–11.
-
-Myths, origin of animal worship, I, 322–8.
-
-Nails, heredity and negro blood, II, 396.
-
-Names:
-  origin of animal worship, I, 311–7, 317–20, 328;
-  of hybrids, I, 320–2;
-  misinterpretation of nicknames, I, 325–8, 328–30;
-  classification, II, 31–3, 34, 40;
-  and evolution of ceremonies, III, 11–6, 23.
-
-Napoleon I., and his marshals, III, 309.
-
-Natural selection:
-  essay on progress, I. 53;
-  the phrase, I, 428–30;
-  (_see also_ Survival of the fittest).
-
-Navy:
-  maladministration, III, 233–4, 247, 248, 249, 251, 252, 399;
-  officers in parliament, III, 297, 304.
-
-Naylor, Rev. B., on Norfolk Island convicts, III, 176.
-
-Nebulæ:
-  appearance, I, 118–25;
-  Sir J. Herschel on regular and irregular, I, 122;
-  origin, direction and constitution of comets, I, 125–8, 153;
-  origin, I, 153.
-
-Nebular hypothesis:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 10–11;
-  discoveries of Herschel and Rosse, I, 110–2;
-  and ultimate mystery, I, 154;
-  evolution of heat and condensation, I, 159–63;
-  essay on, I, 108–84;
-  distance and distribution, I, 112–8.
-
-Necessity, Mill on test of, II, 196–200.
-
-Negro, heredity and nails, II, 396.
-
-Neptune:
-  axial motion, I, 133–6;
-  density, I, 144;
-  heat, I, 144–8, 148–52.
-
-Nervous system:
-  of savage and civilized, I, 18;
-  integration, I, 68–71;
-  analogous to government, I, 299–307;
-  development from epidermis, I, 454;
-  Sidgwick’s criticism, II, 238;
-  muscular action, II, 453–8;
-  differentiation, III, 406;
-  sympathetic, III, 408–9;
-  and society, III, 418;
-  positive and negative regulation, III, 419, 443.
-
-New River Company, origin, III, 429.
-
-New York, government, III, 289, 291.
-
-New Zealanders, belief in another world, II, 223.
-
-Newcomb, Prof. S.:
-  nebular hypothesis, I, 121;
-  planetoids, I, 167–8.
-
-Newspapers, evolution, III, 431.
-
-Newton, Sir I.:
-  expansion of air, I, 118;
-  solar theory, I, 193;
-  gravity, II, 26–7, 291–3;
-  genesis of science, II, 59–60;
-  problem of three bodies, II, 112;
-  laws of motion, II, 271, 274, 277–88, 297–320.
-
-Nitrogen:
-  compounds, I, 157;
-  molecules, I, 158.
-
-Nod, as obeisance, III, 18.
-
-Nomenclature, genesis of science, II, 63–5, 72.
-
-Norfolk Island, prison, III, 175–7.
-
-_North British Review_, on _Social Statics_, II,  134.
-
-Nose, personal beauty, II, 391.
-
-Nottingham, Enclosure act, III, 240.
-
-Nubecula, Sir J. Herschel on, I, 116–7.
-
-Number and classification, II, 37.
-
-Nummulites, Lyell on, I, 208.
-
-Nutrition:
-  individual and social, I, 289–90;
-  process, III, 408;
-  social, III, 413.
-
-Oak, acorn and music, II, 442.
-
-Obeisance, forms of, III, 17–22, III, 25.
-
-Obermair, M., on prisons, III, 171.
-
-Object:
-  consciousness of, II, 211–4;
-  relation to subject, II, 323–32.
-
-Observation and hypothesis, II, 160–7.
-
-Officialism:
-  failure, III, 394, 395;
-  Lord Palmerston on, III, 395;
-  (_see also_ Over-legislation).
-
-Offspring, and parents’ qualities, II, 395, 398.
-
-Oken, L., classification of sciences, II, 9–12.
-
-Olbers, H. W. M., hypothesis, I, 167, 171, 173.
-
-Old Red Sandstone (_see_ Devonian System.)
-
-Omnibus, and officialism, III, 250.
-
-Oolite, age of, I, 202–5.
-
-Opium, dissimilar effects, I, 100.
-
-Optics:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 59;
-  genesis, II, 57, 59, 61;
-  interdependence of sciences, II, 66;
-  abstract concrete science, II, 85–8;
-  Bain on classification of sciences, II, 107.
-
-Orange, planet analogy, I, 133–4.
-
-Orders, signature of, III, 120.
-
-Organic matter:
-  chemistry, I, 83–4;
-  evolution, I, 458–60.
-
-Organisms:
-  differentiation, III, 405;
-  social and individual, III, 411–6;
-  and machinery, III, 456–8.
-
-Organs, rudimentary, III, 204.
-
-_Origin of Species_:
-  Huxley on, I, 389–90;
-  effect of, I, 393–4.
-
-Originality, literary style, II, 365–7.
-
-_Ossian_, quoted, II, 355.
-
-Osteology, correlation, I, 96–101.
-
-Over-legislation:
-  essay on, III, 229–82;
-  individual uncertainty, III, 229–31;
-  examples of failure in legislation, III, 231–45;
-  probability of success, III, 245–6;
-  slowness of, III, 246–7;
-  stupidity, III, 247–9;
-  unadaptive, III, 249;
-  corruptness, III, 250–2;
-  fixity, III, 252;
-  officialism and trade contrasted, III, 253–9;
-  is there a sphere for officialism? III, 259–68;
-  free trade, III, 268–70;
-  negative evils, III, 270–6;
-  enervation of, III, 276–80;
-  faith in governments, III, 280–2;
-  dangers, III, 368–70;
-  and collective wisdom, III, 391–2.
-
-Ovum, relation to infant, I, 6.
-
-Owen, Prof. Sir R.:
-  evolution and paleontology, I, 16;
-  organic correlation, I, 96–101.
-
-Oxygen:
-  deductive biology, I, 77–81;
-  liquefaction, I, 160;
-  action on protoplasm, I, 465–6.
-
-Pacific Ocean, upheaval and geological record, I, 232–40.
-
-Pain:
-  expression in children, I, 339–50;
-  indications of, II, 401–3, 404;
-  loudness of voice, II, 404–5.
-
-Painting:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 24–30;
-  multiplication of effects, I, 59.
-
-Palmerston, Lord, III, 395.
-
-Palæozoic, the title, I, 15.
-
-Paleontology:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 14–7;
-  life and multiplication of effects, I, 49–53;
-  organic correlation, I, 96–101;
-  age of strata, I, 205–12;
-  past and present geological changes, I, 212–8;
-  gaps in record, I, 220–1, 226–32;
-  effect of climate on evidence, I, 221–4;
-  and of terrestrial change, I, 224–6;
-  effect of upheaval, I, 232–40.
-
-Panama Canal, III, 267.
-
-Pantheism, rejected by H. Spencer, II, 221.
-
-Paper tax, III, 243; (_see also_ Money.)
-
-Parents and offspring, II, 395–6, 398.
-
-Parabola, relation to circle, I, 5.
-
-_Paradise Lost_, quoted, II, 346.
-
-Parasites, natural selection, I, 379–80.
-
-Parkhurst, criminals at, III, 258.
-
-Parliament:
-  analogy to brain, I, 302–5;
-  railways and members of, III, 65–7, 74–7, 83, 86;
-  and parliamentary agents, III, 67–71, 108;
-  right of majority, III, 94;
-  belief in acts, III, 109, 306–7;
-  20,000 statutes, III, 232;
-  officialism and acts of, III, 258–9;
-  badly drawn acts, III, 273;
-  selection of members, III, 291;
-  members of, III, 295–9;
-  ineligible members, III, 296;
-  bank act, III, 338, 339, 340;
-  private bills, III, 359;
-  Thames water supply, III, 387–92;
-  function, III, 417;
-  (_see also_ Over-legislation.)
-
-Parliamentary reform:
-  essay on, III, 358–86;
-  apprehended dangers, III, 360–8, 368–70;
-  direct and indirect taxation, III, 370–5;
-  value of representative government, III, 380;
-  Reform Bill, III, 380–6.
-
-Passengers Act, failure, III, 241.
-
-Passion, social analogy, I, 269–71.
-
-Patent-office, accounts, III, 398.
-
-Patents:
-  failure, III, 456;
-  American, III, 473.
-
-Patterns, piracy, III, 126
-
-Pedigree, importance, I, 108; (_see also_ Heredity.)
-
-Peel, Sir Robert:
-  on legislation, III, 280–1;
-  Bank Act, III, 338, 339, 340, 357.
-
-Penal code (_see_ Prison ethics.)
-
-Pentonville, treatment at, III, 161–2.
-
-Perception:
-  relation to science, II, 1–8;
-  presentative-representative, I, 261.
-
-Perseverance, of savages, I, 375.
-
-Personal beauty, essay, II, 387–99.
-
-Perthes, B. de, flint implements, I, 413.
-
-Peru, social organization, III, 470.
-
-Pestalozzi, H. L., school name, III, 2.
-
-Phanerogams, pollen, I, 439.
-
-Philæ, granite at, I, 437.
-
-Philosophy, relation to religion, I, 60–2; (_see also_ Comte.)
-
-Phosphorus, allotropic, I, 373.
-
-Physics:
-  Comte’s classification, II, 21–3;
-  genesis, II, 57, 59, 60, 61;
-  interdependence of sciences, II, 67;
-  abstract-concrete science, II, 85–8;
-  deals with properties, II, 101, 103;
-  relation to chemistry, II, 109–11;
-  evolution, II, 152, 156;
-  _British Quarterly_ Reviewer on, II, 267–301;
-  relation to metaphysics, II, 268;
-  axioms, II, 270, 277–88, 297;
-  their origin, II, 298–301, 313–4, 315–20.
-
-Physiology:
-  transcendental, I, 63–107;
-  deductive, I, 76–81;
-  organic correlation, I, 96–101;
-  individual and social organism, I, 101–7;
-  concrete science, II, 92;
-  development, II, 423.
-
-Picnic, interest in, II, 374.
-
-Pictures, subjects of historical, II, 373; (_see also_ Painting.)
-
-Pigeons:
-  beak and tongue, I, 401;
-  heredity and variation, I, 414–5;
-  use and disuse, I, 418;
-  origin of music, II, 428.
-
-Pigs, use and disuse, I, 419.
-
-Pins, stellar analogy, I, 161.
-
-Pitcher plant, evolution, I, 394.
-
-Pity, comparative psychology, I, 368.
-
-Placards, derivation, I, 28.
-
-Planetoids:
-  origin, I, 167–80;
-  number, I, 168, 171, 179;
-  distances, I, 169, 172, 179;
-  orbits, I, 169–70, 173–4, 179;
-  distribution, I, 171;
-  magnitudes, I, 172;
-  periods, I, 177;
-  velocity, I, 180.
-
-Planets:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 11;
-  origin, I, 39, 153;
-  direction, I, 127, 129, 153;
-  planes of, and solar equator, I, 131–2;
-  axial movements, I, 132–6, 153;
-  arrangement and number of satellites, I, 137, 139–41;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52;
-  structure, I, 163–7, 182;
-  origin of minor, I, 167–80;
-  origin of meteors, I, 174–7;
-  (_see also_ Astronomy.)
-
-Plants:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 14–7, 35;
-  structure, I, 73, 76, 391–2;
-  form, I, 73, 76;
-  chemical composition, I, 74, 76;
-  specific gravity, I, 74, 70;
-  temperature, I, 74, 76;
-  self-mobility, I, 75, 76;
-  evolution and homogeneity I, 83–4;
-  heat and distribution, I, 223–4;
-  also terrestrial change, I, 224–6;
-  and animals, I, 375–6;
-  evolution and sensitive, I, 377;
-  cambium, I, 449–50.
-
-Plateau, J. A. F., fluid rotation, I, 131.
-
-Plato, Republic, 269–72.
-
-Pleasure:
-  expression in children, I, 339–50;
-  indications of, II, 401–3, 404;
-  loudness of voice, II, 404–5;
-  bodily effect, II, 454–8;
-  destroyed by formality, III, 36–46;
-  and life, III, 315;
-  social and individual organism, III, 411;
-  American life, III, 489–90.
-
-Plough, Hindoo worship of, II, 354.
-
-Plumber, action of pump, I, 425.
-
-Poetry:
-  origin and differentiation, I, 30–2;
-  and prose, II, 357–61;
-  development of epic and lyric, II, 416;
-  and government, III, 430–1.
-
-Pointers, use and disuse, I, 470–1.
-
-Police, officialism, III, 396–7.
-
-Political economy:
-  and railways, III, 101–3;
-  flow of capital, III, 264;
-  representative government, III, 303;
-  efflux of gold, III, 341–3.
-
-Politics:
-  use and disuse, I, 463–5;
-  and costume, III, 1–5, 30;
-  definition, III, 226.
-
-_Polyzoa_:
-  form, I, 73;
-  composition, I, 74;
-  not sea-weeds, I, 248;
-  analogy to social organism, I, 281.
-
-Poor law, action of, III, 244.
-
-Pope, A., literary style, II, 365.
-
-Porcupine, evolution of quills, I, 394–5.
-
-Positivism (_see_ Comte.)
-
-Post-office:
-  and officialism, III, 252;
-  and government, III, 440–2.
-
-Potato, complexity, III, 196.
-
-Poverty, effect of, III, 143–9.
-
-Predicate, arrangement of sentences, II, 342–4.
-
-Preference stock, effect, III, 86–8, 108.
-
-Prevision:
-  and science, II, 1–8;
-  origin of quantitative, II, 41–9.
-
-Printing:
-  increase of heterogeneity, I, 26;
-  analogy from press, I, 98, II, 33;
-  printer’s union rules, III, 364–5;
-  anomaly, III, 401.
-
-Prison Ethics:
-  essay on, III, 152–91;
-  relative and absolute ethics, III, 152–7, 188;
-  treatment of criminals, III, 157–63;
-  laws of life, III, 163–71;
-  self-maintenance, III, 168–71;
-  foreign prisons and reformatories, III, 172–8;
-  evils of excessive punishment, III, 178–80;
-  improved system of discipline, III, 180–7, 189–91;
-  and social state, III, 187–9;
-  Indian prisons, III, 189–91.
-
-Procter, R.A., nebular distance, I, 118.
-
-Profit, defined, I, 290.
-
-Progress:
-  its law and cause, I, 8–62, 81, III, 323;
-  current conception, I, 8–9;
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 9–10.
-
-_Prometheus Unbound_, quoted, II, 353.
-
-Promissory notes, State tamperings with money, III, 326–35, 335–47, 356.
-
-Property:
-  emotion of possession, I, 253, 263, 307, II, 421;
-  and parliamentary reform, III, 358–60, 367–8.
-
-Propositions:
-  the thinkable, I, 383;
-  ultimate test, II, 14;
-  states of consciousness, II, 205–8;
-  testing of reasoning, II, 208–11;
-  arrangement of sentences, II, 344.
-
-Prose:
-  and poetry, II, 357–61;
-  contrast in, II, 374.
-
-Protection, and officialism, III, 268–70.
-
-_Protophyta_:
-  composition, I, 74;
-  self-mobility, I, 75;
-  instability of homogeneous, I, 86;
-  social analogy, I, 277;
-  cell membrane, I, 439.
-
-Protoplasm, action of light, I, 465–6.
-
-_Protozoa_:
-  differentiation from environment, I, 73;
-  self-mobility, I, 75;
-  instability of homogeneous, I, 86;
-  social analogy, I, 277–83;
-  cell membrane, I, 440;
-  development, I, 452.
-
-Proudhon, P. J., policy, III, 417.
-
-Proxies, railway, III, 76, 78.
-
-Psychology:
-  relation of science to religion, I, 61–2;
-  _The Emotions and The Will_, I, 241–64;
-  organization provisional, I, 241–5;
-  classification of emotions, I, 245–57;
-  evolution of emotions, I, 250–7;
-  Bain’s definition of emotion and volition, I, 258–60;
-  also feeling and sensation, I, 260;
-  classification of mind, I, 260–4;
-  comparative, of man in outline, I, 351, 353;
-  mental and bodily mass, I, 353–4;
-  mental complexity, I, 354–5;
-  rate of development, I, 355;
-  relative plasticity, I, 355–6;
-  variability, I, 356–7;
-  impulsiveness, I, 357–9;
-  effect of race inter-mixture, I, 359–60;
-  effect of sex, I, 361–4;
-  imitativeness, I, 364;
-  curiosity, I, 364–5;
-  peculiar aptitudes, I, 366;
-  sociality, freedom, approbation, and acquisitiveness, I, 366–7;
-  altruistic sentiments, I, 367–9;
-  evolution of mind, I, 376–8, 381–6;
-  use and disuse, I, 463–5;
-  Hegel’s classification, II, 12–5;
-  concrete science, II, 92, 100;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 96;
-  Bain on logic, II, 105–6;
-  origin of knowledge, II, 122–5;
-  Comte on, II, 131;
-  Sidgwick on _Principles_, II, 238–50.
-
-Publishers, local integration, I, 103.
-
-Pump, action of, I, 425–6.
-
-Punishment (_see_ Prison Ethics.)
-
-Pyramids, architectural types, II, 379.
-
-Quakers:
-  intonation, II, 416;
-  nonconformity, III, 2.
-
-_Quarterly Review_, criticism, II, 259–65.
-
-Rabbits, use and disuse, I, 418.
-
-Railways:
-  effects, I, 56–8;
-  distributing systems, I, 296–8;
-  morals and policy, III, 52–112;
-  directors, III, 52–63, 69;
-  extensions, III, 56–9, 71–2, 82–8, 91, 94, 96, 101–7, 107–8;
-  dividends, III, 57, 98–9, 105–6;
-  book-keeping, III, 59;
-  and land-owners, III, 63–7;
-  and members of parliament, III, 65–7, 74–7, 83;
-  and lawyers, III, 67–72, 83, 88, 108;
-  and engineers, III, 68–72, 83, 88, 108;
-  contractors, III, 72–4, 83;
-  boards, 77–8;
-  shares, 80–2, 108;
-  effect of competing lines, III, 97–8, 107;
-  safety, III, 99–100;
-  cause and remedy of corruptions, III, 88–96;
-  secondary organizations, III, 92–3;
-  and political economy, III, 101–3;
-  capital, III, 108;
-  proprietary contract, III, 108–112;
-  and coaching, III, 110–2, 255;
-  relative and absolute ethics, III, 155–7;
-  state inspection, III, 239–40;
-  individualism, III, 249;
-  evolution, III, 256, 266;
-  diffusion of literature, III, 262;
-  winding up act, III, 273;
-  legislature and accidents, III, 275;
-  English enterprise, III, 279;
-  maladministration, III, 285–6;
-  representative government, III, 296, 302, 304;
-  inspection, III, 399;
-  anomaly, III, 401;
-  English and French, III, 428;
-  and government, III, 437;
-  in America, III, 478.
-
-Rainbow, beliefs about, II, 154.
-
-Ramsgate, harbour, III, 248.
-
-Realism, Sidgwick’s criticism, II, 242–50.
-
-Reason:
-  social analogy, I, 269–71;
-  limited sphere, II, 221;
-  judgment of common sense, II, 243–4.
-
-Reasoning:
-  recognition of likeness, II, 33–4, 37, 40;
-  of Kant, III, 199–203;
-  of metaphysicians, II, 201–5, 208–11;
-  a testing of conclusions, II, 208–11;
-  (_see also_ Logic.)
-
-Recitative:
-  ancient and modern, II, 415–8;
-  Gurney on, II, 439.
-
-Reflection, belief in spirits, I, 310–3.
-
-Reflex action:
-  and emotion, I, 258;
-  impulsiveness, I, 358;
-  indication of feelings, II, 403;
-  examples, III, 453.
-
-Reform:
-  and costume, III, 1–5;
-  and custom, III, 31.
-
-Reform bill:
-  representative government, III, 294;
-  fear of, III, 358;
-  of Lord Russell, III, 380–6.
-
-Reformation, change by, III, 49.
-
-Regulative system, social, III, 458–64.
-
-Relative, Martineau on the, II, 250–8.
-
-Religion:
-  increase of heterogeneity, I, 20–3;
-  relation to early art, I, 27;
-  and to science, I, 60–2;
-  rudimentary form of all, I, 309;
-  object of sentiment, II, 132;
-  and science, Caird on, II, 219–21;
-  Mansel’s criticism, II, 221–5;
-  Grotz on, II, 225;
-  manners and law, III, 4, 23;
-  primitive ideas, III, 6–11;
-  and state, III, 11;
-  for primitive man, III, 24;
-  representative government, III, 301;
-  and government, III, 434.
-
-Repair, and waste, II, 362–7.
-
-Representative government:
-  knowledge of representatives, III, 300–9;
-  and despotism, III, 309–10;
-  and monarchy, III, 310–7;
-  superiority, III, 317–23, 323–5;
-  value of, III, 380.
-
-Reproductive system, and organic evolution, I, 409, 412, 422–5.
-
-Reptiles:
-  evolution and heterogeneity, I, 15–7;
-  paleontological remains, I, 227, 237, 240.
-
-Republicanism, American, III, 474–5, 478–9.
-
-Respiration, effect of emotion, II, 459.
-
-Reviewing, morals of trade, III, 139.
-
-Rhythm, in speech, II, 440.
-
-Ribbon, morals of trade, III, 127.
-
-Right (_see_ Ethics.)
-
-Roads, distributing system, I, 296–8.
-
-Robbery:
-  social co-operation, III, 217–20;
-  of Messrs. Walker, III, 439.
-
-Roberts, I., photographs of, I, 180.
-
-Robinson, F., Icarian colony, III, 457.
-
-Rocking stone, origin, I, 437.
-
-Rocks, age of, I, 198–205.
-
-_Rodentia_, transverse integration, I, 69.
-
-Romilly, Sir S., on judicial system, III, 272.
-
-Rooks, cawing of, I, 337, 338.
-
-Roots, imbedded and exposed, I, 447.
-
-Rosse, Lord, nebular hypothesis, I, 110–1.
-
-Rossini, G. A., heredity, I, 406.
-
-Royal Institution, III, 436.
-
-Royal Society, published barnacle goose myth, II, 162.
-
-Ruskin, J., effects of art, I, 59.
-
-Russell, Lord John:
-  on minorities, III, 295;
-  reform bill, III, 380–6.
-
-Russia:
-  age of rocks in, I, 200–1, 206;
-  paper currency, III, 345.
-
-Sachs, J., on cell membranes, I, 438–9.
-
-Safety, in railways, III, 99–100.
-
-Satellites:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 11;
-  origin, I, 39;
-  arrangement and number, I, 137–8;
-  distribution, I, 138;
-  number and forces, I, 139–40;
-  motion, I, 141–3, 153–4.
-
-Saturn:
-  origin of rings, I, 39;
-  rotatory movement, I, 135, 136;
-  motion of satellites, I, 137;
-  their distance, I, 138;
-  their number, I, 139–40;
-  rotation of rings, I, 142;
-  location, I, 143;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52.
-
-Saxon words, II, 336–8.
-
-Scales, unstable equilibrium of, I, 82.
-
-Scepticism, reasoning of, II, 201.
-
-Schleiden, M. J., cell doctrine, I, 443.
-
-School, Price’s, III, 256.
-
-Schopenhauer, A., ethics, III, 212.
-
-Schwann, T., cell doctrine, I, 443.
-
-Science:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 34–5;
-  multiplication of effects, I, 59;
-  relation to religion, I, 60–2;
-  establishment of causation, I, 109;
-  creed fatal to, I, 463;
-  and common knowledge, II, 1–8, 29, 71;
-  Oken’s classification, II, 9–12;
-  Hegel’s, II, 12–5;
-  Comte’s, II, 15–29;
-  progress analytic and synthetic, II, 24–7;
-  linear arrangement, II, 27–9;
-  interdependent with arts, II, 67–71, 94–9;
-  summary of genesis, II, 71–3;
-  interdependence of, II, 94–9;
-  Comte and Positivism, II, 118–22, 128, 139;
-  origin and evolution, II, 150–7;
-  “practical,” II, 151;
-  Caird on religion and science, II, 219–21;
-  exact, III, 199–200.
-
-Sciences, Classification of the:
-  Littré on Comte’s, II, 74–6;
-  characteristics of a true, II, 76;
-  abstract concrete, II, 77–8, 85–88, 92–4;
-  concrete, II, 77–81, 88–92, 92–4;
-  divisions of abstract, II, 81–5, 92–4;
-  needs three dimensions, II, 92–4;
-  concrete deals with aggregates, II, 99–103;
-  abstract-concrete, with properties, II, 101–3;
-  abstract with relations, II, 102–3;
-  Bain, II, 105–17;
-  Mill, II, 114;
-  Comte, II, 130.
-
-Scotch, dialect, II, 424.
-
-Scotland:
-  age of rocks, I, 198–205;
-  bank success, III, 348.
-
-Scott, Sir W., anecdote of, II, 466.
-
-Scrofula, heredity, II, 395.
-
-Sculpture, heterogeneity of, I, 24–30.
-
-Sea, action on:
-  geological formations, I, 212, 213;
-  upheaved land, I, 232–40;
-  shores, I, 431–2, 444.
-
-Selene, the myth, I, 326.
-
-Senior wrangler, criticism of, II, 302–5, 305–7.
-
-Sensations:
-  defined, I, 260, 262;
-  evolution, I, 264;
-  demonstration of, II, 401–3;
-  pleasure of music, II, 444–5;
-  (_see also_ Psychology.)
-
-Sense, disablement of organs, III, 116–7.
-
-Sentences, arrangement of, II, 341–50.
-
-Settlement, failure of law of, III, 244.
-
-Sewers commission, III, 238, 248.
-
-Sex:
-  mental development, I, 355;
-  comparative psychology, I, 361–4.
-
-Shadows:
-  belief in spirits, I, 310–5;
-  colour, II, 165–6.
-
-Shares:
-  railway, III, 80–2, 108;
-  directors and holders of, III, 82–8;
-  preference, III, 86;
-  depressed by rail extension, III, 94, 98–9, 106;
-  morals of banking, III, 131–7;
-  relative and absolute ethics, III, 155–7.
-
-Shakespeare, W., I, 317, III, 283.
-
-Shears, analogy from iron, I, 97–8.
-
-Sheep, English and French, II, 396, 398.
-
-Shell, use and beauty, II, 370.
-
-Ships:
-  naval maladministration, III, 233–4, 247, 248, 251, 252, 258, 259;
-  private administration, III, 234, 238;
-  and Admiralty certificate, III, 239, 241;
-  tonnage law, III, 244;
-  officialism, III, 253;
-  mercantile marine acts, III, 260;
-  screw propeller, III, 261;
-  representative government, III, 301.
-
-Shoes, removing, III, 17.
-
-Shooting stars, origin, I, 174–7.
-
-Shopkeepers, lying and believing, III, 118.
-
-Sidgwick, H., criticism, II, 238–50.
-
-Sight:
-  and exercise, II, 362, 363;
-  and state of faculties, II, 364.
-
-Signature, of orders, III, 120.
-
-Signor, the title, III, 14, 21.
-
-Signs, force of gesticulative, II, 335.
-
-Silk, trade morals, III, 120, 124–7.
-
-Silurian system:
-  age, I, 198–205;
-  paleontological evidence, I, 206–7;
-  thickness, I, 231.
-
-Simile:
-  use and position, II, 350–2;
-  and metaphor, II, 354.
-
-Singing, II, 410–4; (_see also_ Music.)
-
-Sir, the title, III, 14, 15, 16, 21, 26.
-
-Sirius, distance from sun, I, 113, 114.
-
-Skating, grace in, II, 385.
-
-Skin, action of medicine, I, 448, 450.
-
-Skull, personal beauty, II, 389–90, 391.
-
-Slave trade, former opinion, III, 141.
-
-Small-pox, effects, I, 47.
-
-Smell, sense of:
-  and eye position, I, 72;
-  in dogs, I, 470;
-  exercise, II, 362.
-
-Smith, Adam:
-  theory of morals, I, 346;
-  importance, III, 316;
-  non-university training, III, 377–8.
-
-Smoke bill, of London, III, 250.
-
-Sneeze, and laughter, II, 460.
-
-Snow, officialism, II, 249–50.
-
-Soap:
-  adulterant, III, 125;
-  tax, III, 243.
-
-Social organism:
-  the, I, 265–307;
-  analogy to individual, I, 269–72, 272–3, 277, 291–8, 306–7, III, 411–16;
-  difference, I, 273–7;
-  analogy to lower animal forms, I, 277–83;
-  division of labour, I, 283–91.
-
-_Social Statics_:
-  origin of morals, I, 332–3;
-  of sympathy, I, 317;
-  Comte and title of, II, 134–7;
-  thesis of, II, 262.
-
-Socialism:
-  compulsory co-operation, III, 454–6;
-  and regulative system, III, 460–4;
-  effect, III, 467;
-  evils, III, 467–70.
-
-Sociality, and psychology, I, 366–7, 368.
-
-Society:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 19–23, 35;
-  a growth, I, 265–9, 306;
-  the ideal, II, 131–2;
-  self-conscious, III, 141;
-  influence of wealth, III, 143–9;
-  political ethics and the individual, III, 226–8;
-  evolution, III, 263–5;
-  increasing complexity, III, 323–5;
-  average morality, III, 359;
-  and individual organism, III, 411–6;
-  regulative system, III, 463;
-  (_see also_ Prison Ethics, Sociology.)
-
-Sociology:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 53–60;
-  homogeneity unstable, I, 83;
-  individual and social organism, I, 101–7;
-  psychical traits and social state, I, 354, 355;
-  conservatism, I, 356;
-  mental variability, I, 356–7;
-  impulsiveness, I, 357–9;
-  effect of mixing races, I, 359–60;
-  and of sexes, I, 361–4;
-  curiosity, I, 361–5;
-  imitativeness, I, 364;
-  peculiar aptitudes, I, 366;
-  sociality, freedom, approbation, and acquisitiveness, I, 366–7;
-  altruistic sentiments, 367–9;
-  use and disuse, I, 463–5;
-  genesis, II, 57;
-  concrete science, II, 92;
-  terrestrial evolution, II, 96;
-  deals with aggregates, II, 100, 103;
-  a word of Comte’s, II, 133;
-  universality of law, II, 159;
-  representative government, III, 302;
-  life, III, 325;
-  education, III, 375–9;
-  cause and effect, III, 487–92.
-
-Solar system:
-  heterogeneity, I, 10–11;
-  origin, I, 108–10;
-  Laplace on, I, 128–9;
-  evolution, I, 128–31.
-
-Solicitor, and trader, III, 139.
-
-Sound:
-  multiplication of effects, I, 37;
-  Kantian ideas of space, II, 227;
-  as illustrating crude and transfigured realism, II, 245–6;
-  velocity, II, 267;
-  sensation, III, 197.
-
-Space:
-  concept of, I, 247;
-  Hutton on intuitions of, I, 339;
-  classification of science, II, 77, 81–5;
-  Bain on nature of mathematics, II, 105–6;
-  Hamilton II, 191–2;
-  Hodgson, II, 220–34;
-  Kant, II, 220–7, 229–32, 236–8;
-  Martineau, II, 257;
-  consciousness, II, 308;
-  Kant and evolution, III, 197–9, 203, 207.
-
-Spain:
-  contracts in, III, 218;
-  representative government, III, 317–9.
-
-Spalding, D., experiments of, II, 226.
-
-Sparta, social type, III, 415.
-
-Special creation:
-  lack of facts, I, 1;
-  and evolution, I, 1–7;
-  conception of, I, 265.
-
-Specialized administration, III, 401–44.
-
-Species:
-  number of, I, 1;
-  evolution and creation, I, 1–7;
-  effect of upheavals, I, 49–52;
-  of climate, I, 221–4;
-  of terrestrial change, I, 224–6;
-  fertility of varieties, II, 397–8.
-
-Specific gravity:
-  of animals and plants, I, 74, 76;
-  of planets, I, 144–8, 154;
-  solar system, I, 163.
-
-Spectrum analysis, complexity of elements, I, 372–4.
-
-Speech, figures of, II, 350–5; (_see also_ Language.)
-
-Spencer, Herbert, propositions held by, II, 125–32.
-
-Spencer, Rev. Thomas, III, 361.
-
-Spheroid, ring formation, I, 133–4.
-
-Spine, and evolution, III, 205.
-
-Spirit, the word misleading, I, 311.
-
-Spirits, belief in, I, 311–2, 344.
-
-Sponges:
-  form of, I, 73;
-  instability of homogeneous, I, 87.
-
-Staccato, in singing, II, 412.
-
-Staffordshire, potteries, I, 266.
-
-Stage coach, III, 110–2, 255.
-
-Stars:
-  distribution of nebulæ, I, 112–8;
-  magnitude and distance, I, 115–8;
-  Sir W. Herschel on genesis, I, 129;
-  distance apart, I, 161;
-  star as name, I, 317, 326;
-  Kant’s awe of universe, III, 192, 195;
-  (_see also_ Astronomy.)
-
-State, the:
-  duty of, III, 236;
-  and religion, III, 11, 23, 50;
-  (_see also_ Over-legislation.)
-
-Statics, Comte’s classification, II, 19.
-
-Steam power, effects, I, 56–8.
-
-Stephenson, R., on railways, III, 105–6.
-
-Stereoscope, analogy from, II, 265.
-
-Stick, equilibrium of, I, 82.
-
-Stocking trade, and officialism, III, 262.
-
-Stonehenge, use and beauty, II, 371–2.
-
-Strikes, III, 362–4, 365, 383.
-
-Strings, in musical instruments, II, 415.
-
-Structure:
-  animal and vegetal, I, 73–7;
-  relation to function, I, 249.
-
-Style:
-  philosophy of, II, 333–69;
-  forcibleness of Saxon, II, 336–7;
-  and brevity, II, 337–8;
-  specific expression, II, 338–9;
-  sequence of words, II, 339–41;
-  arrangement of sentences, II, 341–7;
-  direct and indirect, II, 347–50;
-  figures of speech, II, 350–5.
-
-Subject:
-  consciousness of, II, 211–4;
-  relation to object, II, 323–32;
-  arrangement of sentences, II, 342–4.
-
-Substantive and adjective, II, 340–1.
-
-Sugar, morals of trade, III, 121–3, 125.
-
-Suicide, belief in another world, II, 223.
-
-Sun:
-  origin, I, 39;
-  distance from Sirius, I, 113, 114;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52;
-  content of, I, 151;
-  atmosphere, I, 151;
-  temperature, I, 151;
-  constitution, I, 153, 182–91;
-  duration of heat, I, 101;
-  willow-leaves and rice grains, I, 186, 188;
-  faculæ I, 186–7;
-  Faye’s sun-spot theory, I, 183–4, 188–9;
-  cyclonic theory, I, 187–91;
-  as name, I, 317, 326, 327, 328.
-
-Survival of the fittest:
-  Martineau on evolution, I, 379–81;
-  a factor only of evolution, I, 397–400, 400–5, 405–8, 421–5;
-  and heredity, I, 408–12, 412–5;
-  the phrase, I, 429–30;
-  and effect of medium, I, 444–5;
-  and nervous system, I, 457–8;
-  early action of, I, 460–2;
-  Huxley on, I, 462–3;
-  Duke of Argyll’s criticism, I, 467–78;
-  three factors, I, 472.
-
-Swift, J., on manners, III, 44.
-
-Swiss, architecture, II, 379.
-
-Syllables, style and length, II, 337–8.
-
-Syllogism, Hodgson on, II, 231.
-
-Symbolization, infrequent, I, 322.
-
-Symmetry, in buildings and animals, II, 376–7.
-
-Sympathy:
-  altruism, I, 346;
-  comparative psychology, I, 368–9;
-  and gracefulness, II, 386;
-  music, II, 424–6;
-  morals of trade, III, 142–3.
-
-_Syncrypta_, life in, I, 443.
-
-Synecdoche, effective, II, 350.
-
-Synthesis, chemical, I, 374.
-
-Synthetic philosophy, outline, II, 140–2.
-
-Tailor, morals of trade, III, 117.
-
-Tait, P. G.:
-  on natural philosophy, II, 269, 315–20;
-  axioms, II, 270, 298–301, 315–20;
-  laws of motion, II, 271–5, 277–88, 299–320;
-  ultimate scientific ideas, II, 289;
-  central forces, II, 290–93;
-  on synthetic philosophy, II, 294–6.
-
-Talent, relation to desire, I, 54.
-
-Tamberlik, E., ut de poitrine, II, 442.
-
-Tanner, Prof. E., use and disuse, I, 419.
-
-Tape, morals of trade, III, 118, 119.
-
-Taste, exhausted by exercise, II, 362.
-
-Taxes, and parliament, III, 371–5.
-
-Teeth:
-  organic correlation, I, 96–101;
-  size of jaw, I, 401.
-
-Telegrams, officialism, III, 396–7.
-
-Telegraphs:
-  analogous to nerves, I, 306;
-  private enterprise, III, 234.
-
-Telephone, in America, III, 472.
-
-Temperance society, III, 446.
-
-Temperature:
-  of solar system, I, 11;
-  animal and vegetal, I, 74, 76;
-  vegetal density, I, 144–8, 148–52;
-  solar, I, 151;
-  chemical unions, I, 159;
-  duration of solar, I, 161–3;
-  evolution of, and nebular hypothesis, I, 159–63.
-
-Ten hours bill, III, 362, 365.
-
-Tenby, sea shore, I, 432.
-
-Tennyson, Lord, quoted, II, 356, III, 314.
-
-_Thalassicolla_, instability of homogeneous, I, 87.
-
-Thames:
-  sewers commission, III, 238;
-  water supply, III, 387–92.
-
-Theft, punishment, III, 233.
-
-Thermo-electricity, what is? II, 172–6.
-
-Thermology, genesis, II, 61.
-
-Thomson, Sir W., terrestrial density, I, 149.
-
-Thomson, Sir W., and Prof. Tait, on physical axioms, III, 220–1.
-
-Thorns, protection and growth of, I, 391.
-
-Ticket of leave, system, III, 244.
-
-Time:
-  measures of, II, 45–9;
-  classification of science, II, 77, 81–5;
-  S. H. Hodgson on, II, 226–34;
-  Kant, II, 226–7, 229–32, 236–8, III, 197–9, 207;
-  Martineau’s criticism, II, 257;
-  terrestrial motion, II, 272;
-  Emerson on, II, 354.
-
-Titles, evolution of, III, 11–6, 23, 27–8.
-
-Todleben, Gen. F. E. von, III, 309–10.
-
-Totemism, I, 309–17.
-
-Town councils:
-  representative government, III, 288;
-  parliamentary reform, III, 369–70, 371, 372.
-
-Town hall, building of, III, 372.
-
-Trade:
-  localization, I, 22;
-  morals of, III, 113–51, 448–9;
-  adulteration, III, 113, 121–3;
-  bribery, III, 114–8;
-  short weight, III, 118–9;
-  circulars, III, 123–4;
-  silk manufacture, III, 124–7;
-  candle making, III, 128;
-  elastic webbing, III, 129;
-  bankruptcy, III, 129–31;
-  morals of banking, III, 131–7;
-  average morality, III, 137–40;
-  and sympathy, III, 142–3;
-  homage to wealth, III, 143–9, 149–51;
-  ethics of free trade, III, 154;
-  (_see also_ Industry.)
-
-Trade unions:
-  parliamentary reform, III, 362–8, 384;
-  tyranny of, III, 382, 383;
-  selfishness, III, 465–7, 469.
-
-Tramps, and poor law, III, 244.
-
-Transcendental Physiology (_see_ Physiology.)
-
-Tremolo, in singing, II, 412.
-
-Triangle, space perception, II, 309.
-
-Trigonometry, evolution, II, 55, 155.
-
-Truth, denial of, II, 259–65.
-
-Tyndall, J.:
-  on heat, II, 173;
-  of light, II, 178.
-
-Tzigane, music, II, 450–1.
-
-Ulcer, effects on skin, I, 448–9.
-
-Unbelievable, Mill on word, II, 193–200.
-
-United States (_see_ America.)
-
-University, training, III, 377–8.
-
-Unknowable, The:
-  knowledge of, II, 220;
-  Hodgson on, II, 234;
-  Martineau on, II, 250–8.
-
-Unstable equilibrium, of homogeneity, I, 81–4.
-
-Uranus:
-  axial motion, I, 133–6;
-  motion of satellites, I, 137;
-  their distance, I, 138;
-  their number, I, 139–40;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52.
-
-_Uroglena_, life in, I, 443.
-
-Use, and beauty, II, 370–4; (_see also_ Heredity.)
-
-Utilitarianism,  and Mr. Spencer’s views, I, 334, 338, 347–50.
-
-Valencia, prison discipline, III, 177–8.
-
-Variability, mental, I, 356–7.
-
-Variation, natural selection and heredity, I, 408–12, 421.
-
-Varieties:
-  effect of union, I, 359;
-  fertility, II, 397–8.
-
-Vascular system:
-  deductive biology, I, 78–81;
-  development, I, 285–6;
-  and evolution, III, 204.
-
-_Vaucheria_, cell membrane, I, 439.
-
-Veddahs, invocation of, I, 311–2.
-
-Venus:
-  motion, I, 135, 136;
-  satellites, I, 139–41;
-  density and heat, I, 144–8, 148–52.
-
-Vertebræ, evolution, I, 395, III, 205.
-
-_Vertebrata_:
-  evolution and heterogeneity, I, 15–7, 17–9;
-  integration, I, 68–71;
-  position of eyes, I, 71–2;
-  self-mobility, I, 76;
-  germ and instability of homogeneous, I, 88;
-  cervical vertebræ, II, 83;
-  origin of music, II, 432;
-  controlling system, III, 407.
-
-_Vestiges of Creation_, and evolution, I, 390.
-
-Vienna, English enterprise in, III, 278.
-
-Voice:
-  feelings and loudness, II, 404, 410;
-  timbre, II, 405, 411;
-  pitch, II, 406, 411;
-  intervals, II, 406–9, 411;
-  variability, II, 409, 411;
-  ordinary and singing, II, 410–4.
-
-Volition, Bain’s definition, I, 258–9.
-
-_Volvox_:
-  instability of homogeneous, I, 87;
-  life in, I, 443;
-  development, I, 456.
-
-Wales, age of rocks, I, 198–205, 207–8.
-
-Walker, Messrs., robbery at, III, 439.
-
-Walking:
-  effect of blister, I, 404;
-  grace in, II, 382.
-
-Waste, and repair, II, 362–7.
-
-Water:
-  compound, I, 372;
-  government carts and officialism, III, 249;
-  and supply, III, 387–92, 429.
-
-Wealth, homage to, III, 143–9, 149–51.
-
-Weapons, division of labour, I, 54.
-
-Weber, K. M. von, heredity, I, 406.
-
-Weight, measures of, II, 43–5.
-
-Werner, A. G.:
-  geological theory, I, 194–7;
-  influence of, I, 201.
-
-Whales, not fish, I, 247.
-
-Whately, Abp.:
-  metaphor and simile, II, 352;
-  political economy, III, 423–4.
-
-Whewell, W.:
-  _History of Inductive Sciences_, II, 23;
-  electrical theory, II, 62.
-
-Whirlwind, sun-spot analogy, I, 190–1.
-
-White, perception of, III, 196.
-
-Will, the:
-  social analogy, I, 269–71;
-  Kant on, III, 201–3;
-  (_see also_ Psychology.)
-
-Wills, registrars of, III, 251.
-
-Wisdom, the collective, III, 387–92.
-
-Wolf, as name, I, 312–3, 315, 316, 321.
-
-Wollaston, W. H., insect colours, I, 433.
-
-Women:
-  comparative psychology and sex, I, 361–4;
-  size of jaw, I, 398;
-  treatment of, III, 445–6.
-
-Wool, industry and locality, I, 104.
-
-Words (_see_ Language.)
-
-Workpeople, residences, III, 447.
-
-Writing:
-  increase in heterogeneity, I, 24–6;
-  derived from picture language, II, 33.
-
-Yorkshire, woollen industry, I, 266.
-
-Yours faithfully, etc., III, 16, 26.
-
-Zoology:
-  genesis, II, 57;
-  classification, II, 64;
-  discovery of laws, II, 149–50.
-
-Zoophytes, evolution of mind, I, 377.
-
-Zulus, ethics, III, 193.
-
-Zygomatic arches, and beauty, II, 390–2.
-
-
-
-
-MR. HERBERT SPENCER’S WORKS.
-
-_A SYSTEM OF SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY._
-
-
- _8th Thousand._
- (WITH AN APPENDIX DEALING WITH CRITICISMS.)
- In one vol. 8vo, cloth, price 16s.,
- FIRST PRINCIPLES.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
-PART I.—THE UNKNOWABLE.
-
- 1. Religion and Science.
- 2. Ultimate Religious Ideas.
- 3. Ultimate Scientific Ideas.
- 4. The Relativity of All Knowledge.
- 5. The Reconciliation.
-
-PART II.—THE KNOWABLE.
-
- 1. Philosophy Defined
- 2. The Data of Philosophy.
- 3. Space, Time, Matter, Motion, and Force.
- 4. The Indestructibility of Matter.
- 5. The Continuity of Motion.
- 6. The Persistence of Force.
- 7. The Persistence of Relations among Forces.
- 8. The Transformation and Equivalence of Forces.
- 9. The Direction of Motion.
- 10. The Rhythm of Motion.
- 11. Recapitulation, Criticism, and Recommencement.
- 12. Evolution and Dissolution.
- 13. Simple and Compound Evolution.
- 14. The Law of Evolution.
- 15. The Law of Evolution, continued.
- 16. The Law of Evolution, continued.
- 17. The Law of Evolution, concluded.
- 18. The Interpretation of Evolution.
- 19. The Instability of the Homogeneous.
- 20. The Multiplication of Effects.
- 21. Segregation.
- 22. Equilibration.
- 23. Dissolution.
- 24. Summary and Conclusion.
-
-
- _4th Thousand._
- In two vols. 8vo, cloth, price 34s.
- THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY.
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
-
-PART I.—THE DATA OF BIOLOGY.
-
- 1. Organic Matter.
- 2. The Actions of Forces on Organic Matter.
- 3. The Re-actions of Organic Matter on Forces.
- 4. Proximate Definition of Life.
- 5. The Correspondence between Life and its Circumstances.
- 6. The Degree of Life varies as the Degree of Correspondence.
- 7. The Scope of Biology.
-
-PART II.—THE INDUCTIONS OF BIOLOGY.
-
- 1. Growth.
- 2. Development.
- 3. Function.
- 4. Waste and Repair.
- 5. Adaptation.
- 6. Individuality.
- 7. Genesis.
- 8. Heredity.
- 9. Variation.
- 10. Genesis, Heredity, and Variation.
- 11. Classification.
- 12. Distribution.
-
-PART III.—THE EVOLUTION OF LIFE.
-
- 1. Preliminary.
- 2. General Aspects of the Special-Creation-Hypothesis.
- 3. General Aspects of the Evolution-Hypothesis.
- 4. The Arguments from Classification.
- 5. The Arguments from Embryology.
- 6. The Arguments from Morphology.
- 7. The Arguments from Distribution.
- 8. How is Organic Evolution caused?
- 9. External Factors.
- 10. Internal Factors.
- 11. Direct Equilibration.
- 12. Indirect Equilibration.
- 13. The Co-operation of the Factors.
- 14. The Convergence of the Evidences.
-
-APPENDIX.
-
- The Spontaneous-Generation Question.
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
-
-PART IV.—MORPHOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT.
-
- 1. The Problems of Morphology.
- 2. The Morphological Composition of Plants.
- 3. The Morphological Composition of Plants, continued.
- 4. The Morphological Composition of Animals.
- 5. The Morphological Composition of Animals, continued.
- 6. Morphological Differentiation in Plants.
- 7. The General Shapes of Plants.
- 8. The Shapes of Branches.
- 9. The Shapes of Leaves.
- 10. The Shapes of Flowers.
- 11. The Shapes of Vegetal Cells.
- 12. Changes of Shape otherwise caused.
- 13. Morphological Differentiation in Animals.
- 14. The General Shapes of Animals.
- 15. The Shapes of Vertebrate Skeletons.
- 16. The Shapes of Animal Cells.
- 17. Summary of Morphological Development.
-
-PART V.—PHYSIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT.
-
- 1. The Problems of Physiology.
-
- 2. Differentiations between the Outer and Inner Tissues of Plants.
-
- 3. Differentiations among the Outer Tissues of Plants.
-
- 4. Differentiations among the Inner Tissues of Plants.
-
- 5. Physiological Integration in Plants.
-
- 6. Differentiations between the Outer and Inner Tissues of Animals.
-
- 7. Differentiations among the Outer Tissues of Animals.
-
- 8. Differentiations among the Inner Tissues of Animals.
-
- 9. Physiological Integration in Animals.
-
- 10. Summary of Physiological Development.
-
-PART VI.—LAWS OF MULTIPLICATION.
-
- 1. The Factors.
-
- 2. _À Priori_ Principle.
-
- 3. Obverse _à priori_ Principle.
-
- 4. Difficulties of Inductive Verification.
-
- 5. Antagonism between Growth and Asexual Genesis.
-
- 6. Antagonism between Growth and Sexual Genesis.
-
- 7. Antagonism between Development and Genesis, Asexual and Sexual.
-
- 8. Antagonism between Expenditure and Genesis.
-
- 9. Coincidence between high Nutrition and Genesis.
-
- 10. Specialities of these Relations.
-
- 11. Interpretation and Qualification.
-
- 12. Multiplication of the Human Race.
-
- 13. Human Evolution in the Future.
-
-APPENDIX.
-
- A Criticism on Professor Owen’s Theory of the Vertebrate Skeleton.
-
- On Circulation and the Formation of Wood in Plants.
-
-
- _5th Thousand._
- (WITH AN ADDITIONAL PART.)
- In two vols. 8vo, cloth, price 36s.,
- THE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY.
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
-
-PART I.—THE DATA OF PSYCHOLOGY.
-
- 1. The Nervous System.
- 2. The Structure of the Nervous System.
- 3. The Functions of the Nervous System.
- 4. The Conditions essential to Nervous Action.
- 5. Nervous Stimulation and Nervous Discharge.
- 6. Æstho-Physiology.
-
-PART II.—THE INDUCTIONS OF PSYCHOLOGY.
-
- 1. The Substance of Mind.
- 2. The Composition of Mind.
- 3. The Relativity of Feelings.
- 4. The Relativity of Relations between Feelings.
- 5. The Revivability of Feelings.
- 6. The Revivability of Relations between Feelings.
- 7. The Associability of Feelings.
- 8. The Associability of Relations between Feelings.
- 9. Pleasures and Pains.
-
-PART III.—GENERAL SYNTHESIS.
-
- 1. Life and Mind as Correspondence.
- 2. The Correspondence as Direct and Homogeneous.
- 3. The Correspondence as Direct but Heterogeneous.
- 4. The Correspondence as extending in Space.
- 5. The Correspondence as extending in Time.
- 6. The Correspondence as increasing in Speciality.
- 7. The Correspondence as increasing in Generality.
- 8. The Correspondence as increasing in Complexity.
- 9. The Co-ordination of Correspondences.
- 10. The Integration of Correspondences.
- 11. The Correspondences in their Totality.
-
-PART IV.—SPECIAL SYNTHESIS.
-
- 1. The Nature of Intelligence.
- 2. The Law of Intelligence.
- 3. The Growth of Intelligence.
- 4. Reflex Action.
- 5. Instinct.
- 6. Memory.
- 7. Reason.
- 8. The Feelings.
- 9. The Will.
-
-PART V.—PHYSICAL SYNTHESIS.
-
- 1. A Further Interpretation Needed.
- 2. The Genesis of Nerves.
- 3. The Genesis of Simple Nervous Systems.
- 4. The Genesis of Compound Nervous Systems.
- 5. The Genesis of Doubly-Compound Nervous Systems.
- 6. Functions as Related to these Structures.
- 7. Psychical Laws as thus Interpreted.
- 8. Evidence from Normal Variations.
- 9. Evidence from Abnormal Variations.
- 10. Results.
-
-APPENDIX.
-
- On the Action of Anæsthetics and Narcotics.
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
-
-PART VI.—SPECIAL ANALYSIS.
-
- 1. Limitation of the Subject.
-
- 2. Compound Quantitative Reasoning.
-
- 3. Compound Quantitative Reasoning, continued.
-
- 4. Imperfect and Simple Quantitative Reasoning.
-
- 5. Quantitative Reasoning in General.
-
- 6. Perfect Qualitative Reasoning.
-
- 7. Imperfect Qualitative Reasoning.
-
- 8. Reasoning in General.
-
- 9. Classification, Naming, and Recognition.
-
- 10. The Perception of Special Objects.
-
- 11. The Perception of Body as presenting Dynamical, Statico-Dynamical,
- and Statical Attributes.
-
- 12. The Perception of Body as presenting Statico-Dynamical and
- Statical Attributes.
-
- 13. The Perception of Body as presenting Statical Attributes.
-
- 14. The Perception of Space.
-
- 15. The Perception of Time.
-
- 16. The Perception of Motion.
-
- 17. The Perception of Resistance.
-
- 18. Perception in General.
-
- 19. The Relations of Similarity and Dissimilarity.
-
- 20. The Relations of Cointension and Non-Cointension.
-
- 21. The Relations of Coextension and Non-Coextension.
-
- 22. The Relations of Coexistence and Non-Coexistence.
-
- 23. The Relations of Connature and Non-Connature.
-
- 24. The Relations of Likeness and Unlikeness.
-
- 25. The Relation of Sequence.
-
- 26. Consciousness in General.
-
- 27. Results.
-
-PART VII.—GENERAL ANALYSIS.
-
- 1. The Final Question.
- 2. The Assumption of Metaphysicians.
- 3. The Words of Metaphysicians.
- 4. The Reasonings of Metaphysicians.
- 5. Negative Justification of Realism.
- 6. Argument from Priority.
- 7. The Argument from Simplicity.
- 8. The Argument from Distinctness.
- 9. A Criterion Wanted.
- 10. Propositions qualitatively distinguished.
- 11. The Universal Postulate.
- 12. The test of Relative Validity.
- 13. Its Corollaries.
- 14. Positive Justification of Realism.
- 15. The Dynamics of Consciousness.
- 16. Partial Differentiation of Subject and Object.
- 17. Completed Differentiation of Subject and Object.
- 18. Developed Conception of the Object.
- 19. Transfigured Realism.
-
-PART VIII.—CONGRUITIES.
-
- 1. Preliminary.
- 2. Co-ordination of Data and Inductions.
- 3. Co-ordination of Syntheses.
- 4. Co-ordination of Special Analyses.
- 5. Co-ordination of General Analyses.
- 6. Final Comparison.
-
-PART IX.—COROLLARIES.
-
- 1. Special Psychology.
- 2. Classification.
- 3. Development of Conceptions.
- 4. Language of the Emotions.
- 5. Sociality and Sympathy.
- 6. Egoistic Sentiments.
- 7. Ego-Altruistic Sentiments.
- 8. Altruistic Sentiments.
- 9. Æsthetic Sentiments.
-
-
- _3rd Edition, revised and enlarged._
- In 8vo., cloth, price 21s., Vol. I. of
- THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
-PART I.—THE DATA OF SOCIOLOGY.
-
- 1. Super-Organic Evolution.
-
- 2. The Factors of Social Phenomena.
-
- 3. Original External Factors.
-
- 4. Original Internal Factors.
-
- 5. The Primitive Man—Physical.
-
- 6. The Primitive Man—Emotional.
-
- 7. The Primitive Man—Intellectual.
-
- 8. Primitive Ideas.
-
- 9. The Ideas of the Animate and the Inanimate.
-
- 10. The Ideas of Sleep and Dreams.
-
- 11. The Ideas of Swoon, Apoplexy, Catelepsy, Ecstacy, and other forms
- of Insensibility.
-
- 12. The Ideas of Death and Resurrection.
-
- 13. The Ideas of Souls, Ghosts, Spirits, Demons.
-
- 14. The Ideas of Another Life.
-
- 15. The Ideas of Another World.
-
- 16. The Ideas of Supernatural Agents.
-
- 17. Supernatural Agents as causing Epilepsy and Convulsive Actions,
- Delirium and Insanity, Disease and Death.
-
- 18. Inspiration, Divination, Exorcism, and Sorcery.
-
- 19. Sacred Places, Temples, and Altars; Sacrifice, Fasting, and
- Propitiation; Praise and Prayer.
-
- 20. Ancestor-Worship in General.
-
- 21. Idol-Worship and Fetich-Worship.
-
- 22. Animal-Worship.
-
- 23. Plant-Worship.
-
- 24. Nature-Worship.
-
- 25. Deities.
-
- 26. The Primitive Theory of Things.
-
- 27. The Scope of Sociology.
-
-PART II.—THE INDUCTIONS OF SOCIOLOGY.
-
- 1. What is a Society?
- 2. A Society is an Organism.
- 3. Social Growth.
- 4. Social Structures.
- 5. Social Functions.
- 6. Systems of Organs.
- 7. The Sustaining System.
- 8. The Distributing System.
- 9. The Regulating System.
- 10. Social Types and Constitutions.
- 11. Social Metamorphoses.
- 12. Qualifications and Summary.
-
-PART III.—THE DOMESTIC RELATIONS.
-
- 1. The Maintenance of Species.
-
- 2. The Diverse Interests of the Species, of the Parents, and of the
- Offspring.
-
- 3. Primitive Relations of the Sexes.
-
- 4. Exogamy and Endogamy.
-
- 5. Promiscuity.
-
- 6. Polyandry.
-
- 7. Polygyny.
-
- 8. Monogamy.
-
- 9. The Family.
-
- 10. The _Status_ of Women.
-
- 11. The _Status_ of Children.
-
- 12. Domestic Retrospect and Prospect.
-
-
- _2nd Thousand._
- In 8vo, cloth, price 18s. Vol. II of
- THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY.
-
- (_Containing the two following divisions, which may still_
- _be had separately._)
-
-
- In one vol. 8vo, cloth, price 7s.,
- CEREMONIAL INSTITUTIONS.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. Ceremony in General.
- 2. Trophies.
- 3. Mutilations.
- 4. Presents.
- 5. Visits.
- 6. Obeisances.
- 7. Forms of Address.
- 8. Titles.
- 9. Badges and Costumes.
- 10. Further Class-Distinctions.
- 11. Fashion.
- 12. Ceremonial Retrospect and Prospect.
-
-
- In one vol. 8vo, cloth, price 12s.
- POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. Preliminary.
- 2. Political Organization in General.
- 3. Political Integration.
- 4. Political Differentiation.
- 5. Political Forms and Forces.
- 6. Political Heads—Chiefs, Kings, etc.
- 7. Compound Political Heads.
- 8. Consultative Bodies.
- 9. Representative Bodies.
- 10. Ministries.
- 11. Local Governing Agencies.
- 12. Military Systems.
- 13. Judicial Systems.
- 14. Laws.
- 15. Property.
- 16. Revenue.
- 17. The Militant Type of Society.
- 18. The Industrial Type of Society.
- 19. Political Retrospect and Prospect.
-
-
- _2nd Thousand._
- In one vol. 8vo., cloth, price 5_s._
- ECCLESIASTICAL INSTITUTIONS.
-
-(_Being Part VI. of the PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY._)
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. The Religious Idea.
- 2. Medicine-men and Priests.
- 3. Priestly Duties of Descendants.
- 4. Eldest Male Descendants as Quasi-Priests.
- 5. The Ruler as Priest.
- 6. The Rise of a Priesthood.
- 7. Polytheistic and Monotheistic Priesthoods.
- 8. Ecclesiastical Hierarchies.
- 9. An Ecclesiastical System as a Social Bond.
- 10. The Military Functions of Priests.
- 11. The Civil Functions of Priests.
- 12. Church and State.
- 13. Nonconformity.
- 14. The Moral Influences of Priesthoods.
- 15. Ecclesiastical Retrospect and Prospect.
- 16. Religious Retrospect and Prospect.
-
-
- _5th Thousand._
-
- WITH AN APPENDIX, CONTAINING AN ADDITIONAL CHAPTER, AND
- REPLIES TO CRITICISMS.
-
- In one vol. 8vo, cloth, price 8s.,
-
- THE DATA OF ETHICS.
-
-(_Being Part I. of the PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS._)
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. Conduct in General.
- 2. The Evolution of Conduct.
- 3. Good and Bad Conduct.
- 4. Ways of Judging Conduct.
- 5. The Physical View.
- 6. The Biological View.
- 7. The Psychological View.
- 8. The Sociological View.
- 9. Criticisms and Explanations.
- 10. The Relativity of Pains and Pleasures.
- 11. Egoism _versus_ Altruism.
- 12. Altruism _versus_ Egoism.
- 13. Trial and Compromise.
- 14. Conciliation.
- 15. Absolute Ethics and Relative Ethics.
- 16. The Scope of Ethics.
-
-
-_OTHER WORKS._
-
-
- _5th Thousand._
- In one vol. 8vo, cloth, price 6s.,
- EDUCATION:
- INTELLECTUAL, MORAL, AND PHYSICAL.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. What Knowledge is of most Worth?
- 2. Intellectual Education.
- 3. Moral Education.
- 4. Physical Education.
-
-
- _Also, 20th and 21st Thousand,_
- _A CHEAP EDITION OF THE FOREGOING WORK._
-
-In one vol. crown 8vo, price 2s. 6d.
-
-
- _Library Edition (the 9th), with a Postscript._
- In one vol., price 10s. 6d.,
- THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. Our Need of it.
- 2. Is there a Social Science?
- 3. Nature of the Social Science.
- 4. Difficulties of the Social Science.
- 5. Objective Difficulties.
- 6. Subjective Difficulties—Intellectual.
- 7. Subjective Difficulties—Emotional.
- 8. The Educational Bias.
- 9. The Bias of Patriotism.
- 10. The Class-Bias.
- 11. The Political Bias.
- 12. The Theological Bias.
- 13. Discipline.
- 14. Preparation in Biology.
- 15. Preparation in Psychology.
- 16. Conclusion.
-     Postscript.
-
-
- _10th Thousand._
- In wrapper, 1s., in cloth, better paper, 2s. 6d.
- THE MAN _VERSUS_ THE STATE.
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. The New Toryism.
- 2. The Coming Slavery.
- 3. The Sins of Legislators.
- 4. The Great Political Superstition.
-    Postscript.
-
-
- _4th Thousand._
- In two vols. 8vo, cloth, price 16s.,
- ESSAYS:
- SCIENTIFIC, POLITICAL, AND SPECULATIVE.
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
-
- 1. Progress: its Law and Cause.
- 2. Manners and Fashion.
- 3. The Genesis of Science.
- 4. The Physiology of Laughter.
- 5. The Origin and Function of Music.
- 6. The Nebular Hypothesis.
- 7. Bain on the Emotions and the Will.
- 8. Illogical Geology.
- 9. The Development Hypothesis.
- 10. The Social Organism.
- 11. Use and Beauty.
- 12. The Sources of Architectural Types.
- 13. The Use of Anthropomorphism.
-
-CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
-
- 1. The Philosophy of Style.
- 2. Over-Legislation.
- 3. The Morals of Trade.
- 4. Personal Beauty.
- 5. Representative Government.
- 6. Prison Ethics.
- 7. Railway Morals and Railway Policy.
- 8. Gracefulness.
- 9. State-Tamperings with Money and Banks.
- 10. Parliamentary Reform: the Dangers and the Safeguards.
- 11. Mill _versus_ Hamilton—the Test of Truth.
-
-
- _3rd Edition._
- In one vol. 8vo., price 8s.,
- THIRD SERIES OF
- ESSAYS:
-
-CONTENTS.
-
- 1. The Classification of the Sciences (with a Postscript, replying to
- Criticisms).
-
- 2. Reasons for Dissenting from the Philosophy of M. Comte.
-
- 3. Laws in General.
-
- 4. The Origin of Animal-Worship.
-
- 5. Specialized Administration.
-
- 6. “The Collective Wisdom.”
-
- 7. Political Fetichism.
-
- 8. What is Electricity?
-
- 9. The Constitution of the Sun.
-
- 10. Mr. Martineau on Evolution.
-
- 11. Replies to Criticisms.
-
- 12. Transcendental Physiology.
-
- 13. The Comparative Psychology of Man.
-
-
- Price 2s. 6d.,
- THE FACTORS OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION.
-
-
- DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLOGY; OR GROUPS OF SOCIOLOGICAL FACTS, CLASSIFIED AND
- ARRANGED BY HERBERT SPENCER,
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY
-
-DAVID DUNCAN, M.A., Professor of Logic, &c., in the Presidency College,
-Madras; RICHARD SCHEPPIG, Ph.D.; and JAMES COLLIER.
-
-EXTRACT FROM THE PROVISIONAL PREFACE.
-
-Something to introduce the work of which an instalment is annexed,
-seems needful, in anticipation of the time when completion of a volume
-will give occasion for a Permanent Preface.
-
-In preparation for _The Principles of Sociology_, requiring as bases of
-induction large accumulations of data, fitly arranged for comparison,
-I, some twelve years ago, commenced, by proxy, the collection and
-organization of facts presented by societies of different types,
-past and present; being fortunate enough to secure the services of
-gentlemen competent to carry on the process in the way I wished.
-Though this classified compilation of materials was entered upon
-solely to facilitate my own work; yet, after having brought the mode
-of classification to a satisfactory form, and after having had some
-of the Tables filled up, I decided to have the undertaking executed
-with a view to publication; the facts collected and arranged for easy
-reference and convenient study of their relations, being so presented,
-apart from hypothesis, as to aid all students of Social Science in
-testing such conclusions as they have drawn and in drawing others.
-
-The Work consists of three large Divisions. Each comprises a set
-of Tables exhibiting the facts as abstracted and classified, and a
-mass of quotations and abridged abstracts otherwise classified, on
-which the statements contained in the Tables are based. The condensed
-statements, arranged after a uniform manner, give, in each Table or
-succession of Tables, the phenomena of all orders which each society
-presents—constitute an account of its morphology, its physiology, and
-(if a society having a known history) its development. On the other
-hand, the collected Extracts, serving as authorities for the statements
-in the Tables, are (or, rather will be, when the Work is complete)
-classified primarily according to the kinds of phenomena to which they
-refer, and secondarily according to the societies exhibiting these
-phenomena; so that each kind of phenomenon as it is displayed in all
-societies, may be separately studied with convenience.
-
-In further explanation I may say that the classified compilations and
-digests of materials to be thus brought together under the title of
-_Descriptive Sociology_, are intended to supply the student of Social
-Science with data, standing towards his conclusions in a relation like
-that in which accounts of the structures and functions of different
-types of animals stand to the conclusions of the biologist. Until there
-had been such systematic descriptions of different kinds of organisms,
-as made it possible to compare the connexions, and forms, and actions,
-and modes of origin, of their parts, the Science of Life could make no
-progress. And in like manner, before there can be reached in Sociology,
-generalizations having a certainty making them worthy to be called
-scientific, there must be definite accounts of the institutions and
-actions of societies of various types, and in various stages of
-evolution, so arranged as to furnish the means of readily ascertaining
-what social phenomena are habitually associated.
-
-Respecting the tabulation, devised for the purpose of exhibiting social
-phenomena in a convenient way, I may explain that the primary aim
-has been so to present them that their relations of simultaneity and
-succession may be seen at one view. As used for delineating uncivilized
-societies, concerning which we have no records, the tabular form
-serves only to display the various social traits as they are found to
-co-exist. But as used for delineating societies having known histories,
-the tabular form is so employed as to exhibit not only the connexions
-of phenomena existing at the same time, but also the connexions of
-phenomena that succeed one another. By reading horizontally across a
-Table at any period, there may be gained a knowledge of the traits of
-all orders displayed by the society at that period; while by reading
-down each column, there may be gained a knowledge of the modifications
-which each trait, structural or functional, underwent during successive
-periods.
-
-Of course, the tabular form fulfils these purposes but approximately.
-To preserve complete simultaneity in the statements of facts, as read
-from side to side of the Tables, has proved impracticable; here much
-had to be inserted, and there little; so that complete correspondence
-in time could not be maintained. Moreover, it has not been possible
-to carry out the mode of classification in a theoretically-complete
-manner, by increasing the number of columns as the classes of facts
-multiply in the course of Civilization. To represent truly the progress
-of things, each column should divide and sub-divide in successive ages,
-so as to indicate the successive differentiations of the phenomena.
-But typographical difficulties have negatived this: a great deal has
-had to be left in a form which must be accepted simply as the least
-unsatisfactory.
-
-The three Divisions constituting the entire work, comprehend three
-groups of societies:—(1) _Uncivilized Societies_; (2) _Civilized
-Societies—Extinct or Decayed_; (3) _Civilized Societies—Recent or Still
-Flourishing_. These divisions have at present reached the following
-stages:―
-
-DIVISION I.—_Uncivilized Societies._ Commenced in 1867 by the gentleman
-I first engaged, Mr. DAVID DUNCAN, M.A. (now Professor of Logic,
-&c., in the Presidency College, Madras), and continued by him since
-he left England, this part of the work is complete. It contains four
-parts, including “Types of Lowest Races,” the “Negrito Races,” the
-“Malayo-Polynesian Races,” the “African Races,” the “Asiatic Races,”
-and the “American Races.”
-
-DIVISION II.—_Civilized Societies—Extinct or Decayed._ On this part of
-the work Dr. RICHARD SCHEPPIG has been engaged since January, 1872. The
-first instalment, including the four Ancient American Civilizations,
-was issued in March, 1874. A second instalment, containing “Hebrews and
-Phœnicians,” will shortly be issued.
-
-DIVISION III.—_Civilized Societies—Recent or Still Flourishing._ Of
-this Division the first instalment, prepared by Mr. JAMES COLLIER, of
-St. Andrew’s and Edinburgh Universities, was issued in August, 1873.
-This presents the English Civilization. It covers seven consecutive
-Tables; and the Extracts occupy seventy pages folio. The next part,
-presenting in a still more extensive form the French Civilization, is
-now in the press.
-
-The successive parts belonging to these several Divisions, issued at
-intervals, are composed of different numbers of Tables and different
-numbers of Pages. The Uncivilized Societies occupy four parts, each
-containing a dozen or more Tables, with their accompanying Extracts.
-Of the Division comprising Extinct Civilized Societies, the first part
-contains four, and the second contains two. While of Existing Civilized
-Societies, the records of which are so much more extensive, each
-occupies a single part.
-
- H. S.
- _March, 1880._
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 18s._,
- No. I.
- English.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-JAMES COLLIER.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 16s._,
- No. II.
- Mexicans, Central Americans, Chibchas,
- and Peruvians.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-RICHARD SCHEPPIG, PH.D.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 18s._,
- No. III.
- Lowest Races, Negrito Races, and
- Malayo-Polynesian Races.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-PROF. DUNCAN, M.A.
-
-TYPES OF LOWEST RACES.
-
- Fuegians.
- Andamanese.
- Veddahs.
- Australians.
-
-NEGRITO RACES.
-
- Tasmanians.
- New Caledonians, etc.
- New Guinea People.
- Fijians.
-
-MALAYO-POLYNESIAN RACES.
-
- Sandwich Islanders.
- Tahitians.
- Tongans.
- Samoans.
- New Zealanders.
- Dyaks.
- Javans.
- Sumatrans.
- Malagasy.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 16s._,
- No. IV.
- African Races.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-PROF. DUNCAN, M.A.
-
- Bushmen.
- Hottentots.
- Damaras.
- Bechuanas.
- Kaffirs.
- East Africans.
- Congo People.
- Coast Negroes.
- Inland Negroes.
- Dahomans.
- Ashantis.
- Fulahs.
- Abyssinians.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 18s._,
- No. V.
- Asiatic Races.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-PROF. DUNCAN, M.A.
-
- Arabs.
- Todas.
- Khonds.
- Gonds.
- Bhils.
- Santals.
- Karens.
- Kukis.
- Nagas.
- Bodo and Dhimals.
- Mishmis.
- Kirghiz.
- Kalmucks.
- Ostyaks.
- Kamtschadales.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 18s._,
- No. VI.
- American Races.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-PROF. DUNCAN, M.A.
-
- Esquimaux.
- Chinooks.
- Snakes.
- Comanches.
- Iroquois.
- Chippewayans.
- Chippewas.
- Dakotas.
- Mandans.
- Creeks.
- Guiana Tribes.
- Caribs.
- Brazilians.
- Uaupés.
- Abipones.
- Patagonians.
- Araucanians.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 21s._,
- No. VII.
- Hebrews and Phœnicians.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-RICHARD SCHEPPIG, PH.D.
-
-
- _In Royal Folio, Price 30s._,
- No. VIII.
- French.
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED
-
-BY
-
-JAMES COLLIER.
-
-
-MR. HERBERT SPENCER’S WORKS.
-
-_A SYSTEM OF SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY._
-
- FIRST PRINCIPLES                       16_s._
-
- PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY. 2 vols.         34_s._
-
- PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY. 2 vols.      36_s._
-
- PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY, Vol. I.       21_s._
-
-          DITTO           Vol. II.      18_s._
-
-(_This Volume includes the two following Works, which are at present
-published separately._)
-
- CEREMONIAL INSTITUTIONS                 7_s._
-
- POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS                 12_s._
-
- ECCLESIASTICAL INSTITUTIONS             5_s._
-
- THE DATA OF ETHICS                      8_s._
-
-
-_OTHER WORKS._
-
- THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY           10_s._ 6_d._
-
- EDUCATION                               6_s._
-
-   DITTO      _Cheap Edition_      2_s._ 6_d._
-
- ESSAYS. 2 vols.                        16_s._
-
- ESSAYS (Third Series)                   8_s._
-
- THE MAN _versus_ THE STATE        2_s._ 6_d._
-
-     DITTO       _Cheap Edition_         1_s._
-
- REASONS FOR DISSENTING FROM THE
-     PHILOSOPHY OF M. COMTE              6_d._
-
- THE FACTORS OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION  2_s._ 6_d._
-
-[For particulars see end of the volume.]
-
-WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
-
-14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON.
-
-
- ALSO MR. SPENCER’S
- _DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLOGY_,
-
-COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY
-
-PROF. DUNCAN, DR. SCHEPPIG, & MR. COLLIER.
-
-FOLIO, BOARDS.
-
- 1. ENGLISH                              18_s._
-
- 2. ANCIENT AMERICAN RACES               16_s._
-
- 3. LOWEST RACES, NEGRITOS, POLYNESIANS 18_s._
-
- 4. AFRICAN RACES                        16_s._
-
- 5. ASIATIC RACES                        18_s._
-
- 6. AMERICAN RACES                       18_s._
-
- 7. HEBREWS AND PHŒNICIANS               21_s._
-
- 8. FRENCH                               30_s._
-
-[For particulars see end of the volume.]
-
-WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
-
-14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON.
-
-Harrison & Sons, Printers, St. Martin’s Lane.
-
-
-
-
-TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE
-
-Original spelling and grammar have generally been retained, with
-some exceptions noted below. Original printed page numbers are shown
-like this: {52}. Original small caps are now uppercase. Italics look
-_like this_. Footnotes have been relabeled 1–45. The transcriber
-produced the cover image and hereby assigns it to the public domain.
-Original page images are available from archive.org — search for
-“essaysscientific03spenuoft”.
-
-Page 81. The table rows headed by “The Company’s soliciter” and by
-“Ditto in joint account with another” had a large “}” on the right side
-of column 3, covering both rows. In this edition, table cell borders
-have been drawn so as to indicate the combination of information.
-
-Page 157. Inserted “of” into “dictates abstract ethics”.
-
-Page 198n. “Pyschology” was changed to “Psychology”.
-
-Page 409. Changed “coödinations” to “coördinations”.
-
-Page 471. A left double quotation mark was added before ‘The earlier
-paragraphs of the conversation’.
-
-Page 487. Changed “with many Americans joined with regrets that my
-state of health has prevented, me from” to “with many Americans, joined
-with regrets that my state of health has prevented me from”.
-
-Page 493. The index covers all three volumes of this series of books.
-Volume II is available as Project Gutenburg ebook #53395; all editions
-of Vol. II display the original printed page numbers, corresponding to
-the index entries herein. Volume I is available as PG ebook #29869.
-Unfortunately, ebook #29869 displays the original page numbers only in
-the html edition. With a little html coding skill, however, one could
-modify the epub version to display page numbers if that is desired.
-
-Page 501. In entry “Great Western Railway:” changed “III, 9;” to “III,
-94;”.
-
-Page 509. Changed “Philae” to “Philæ”, to agree with Volume I.
-
-Page 510. The entry “_Polyzoa_” was moved below “Politics”, to
-conform with alphabetical ordering. Likewise, “Pope” was moved above
-“Porcupine”.
-
-Page 513. Under entry “Social organism . . . analogy to individual”,
-changed “III, 411–6” to “III, 411–16”.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Essays: Scientific, Political, and
-Speculative, Volume III (of 3), by Herbert Spencer
-
-*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ESSAYS: SCIENTIFIC, POLITICAL, VOL III ***
-
-***** This file should be named 54076-0.txt or 54076-0.zip *****
-This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
-        http://www.gutenberg.org/5/4/0/7/54076/
-
-Produced by Josep Cols Canals, Adrian Mastronardi, RichardW,
-and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
-http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
-generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian
-Libraries)
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-
-START: FULL LICENSE
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-
-  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
-  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
-  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
-  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
-  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
-  are located before using this ebook.
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that
-
-* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
-  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
-  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-  Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
-  works.
-
-* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-  receipt of the work.
-
-* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org
-
-
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-
-For additional contact information:
-
-    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
-    Chief Executive and Director
-    gbnewby@pglaf.org
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org
-
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-