r* r r r r r r f r I f r f 1 » --« 'JJli^ 'W:.».-*^'?M-'g«i''
tit I 1 1 1 « i *.'^lJ%i'.A**«U^"*«Va 1
111 .«.« « A*A*«V-« l*!*!!
Vi t i t '«^
ii 1 1 t' .
1 1 11 f *
Voji.*
1 1
1
I
I
i I i t t.l.t.- l 1 1 ivA^
1. 1.1.1.. i.\S^»V«%
3f '
Plea for Liberty
An Argument against
Socialism and Socialistic Legislation
POPULAR EDITION |
|
-— |
|
%on^on |
|
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE |
STREET |
1892 |
|
Price Two Shillings |
THE ENGLISH POOR:
dtl ^Utc^ of t^cit ^ociaf anb Economic ^ietot^.
By THOMAS MACKAY.
Crown 8vo, "js. 6d.
' To any one, be he gentle or simple, who wishes to understand how deep are the problems opening before the man who would administer the poor law wisely and beneficently, we can honestly commend this book of Mr. Mackay's. For ourselves, we have derived much pleasure and not a little instruction from its perusal.' — St. Jiimes^s Gazette,
A PLEA FOR LIBERTY
Orfor5
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
PLEA FOR LIBEiri\
AN ARGUMENT AGAINST SOCIALISM AND SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION
CONSISTING OF AN INTRODUCTION BY
HERBERT SPENCER
AND
ESSAYS BY VARIOUS WRITERS
EDITED
By T PI dm as mack ay
III
AUTHOR OF ' THE ENGLISH POOR '
T
NEW AND ME VISED EDITION
LONDON JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET
1892
If every action which is good or evil in man at ripe years were to bp under pittance, prescription, and compulsion, what were virtue liut II name, what praise could be then due to well doing, what gramercy to be sober, just, or continent ?
They are not skilful considerers of human things who imagine to remove sin, by removing the matter of sin ;
Suppose we could expel sin by this means ; look how mucli we thus expel of sin, so much we expel of virtue : for the matter of them ])oth is the same : remove that, and ye i-emove tliem both alike.
.Mii.TON, Areiipagitica ; A Speech for tlie Libeitv (if Unlicensed Printing.
ESSAYS AND CONTRIBUTORS.
PAGE
IxTRODUcTiox. — Fi'oin Freedom to Bondage . . . i By HERBERT SPENCER.
I, The hnpracticahility of Socialism ... 25 By Edward Stanley Robertsox.
II. The Limits of Liberty ...... 54
By Wordsworth Donisthorpe.
in. Liberty for Labour ...... 94
By George Howell, M.P.
IV. State Socialism at the Antipodes . . .124
By Charles Fairfield.
V. The Discontent of the Working-Classes . . 17,^
By Edmund Vincent.
VI. Investment 187
By Thomas Mackay.
VII. The Housing of the Worldng -Clashes and of the
Poor . . . . . . . , ii6
By Arthur Raffalovich.
A3
vi Essays and Contributors.
PAGE
Aiii. TliC Evils of State Trading as illustrated by the
Post Office ....... 240
By Frederick Millar.
IX. Free Libraries 260
By M. D. O^Brien.
X. HeVf-llelp versus ^State Pensions .... 276
By C. J. Rauley.
XI. The True Line of Deliverance . . . -294
By Hon. Atjberon Herbert.
PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.
Two editions of A Plea for Liberty have already been printed, and it has been thought desirable to issue the present and third edition in a cheaper form. To make this possible some abridgement has been found necessary. For this reason several of the papers have been curtailed, and with great reluctance the Editor has felt obliged to seek permission from the authors to omit the articles on Free Education and Electric Lighting, the one as dealing with a temporary and limited phase of a great subject, the other as being necessarily of a somewhat technical nature.
A short paper on Self-Help versus State Pensions has been added by Mr. Radley, High Chief Ranger for last year of the Ancient Order of Foresters. The working classes naturally look to the leaders of the Friendly Society movement for guidance in all matters connected with saving and insurance, and the reader may j udge how well justified is their confidence from the very representative paper which Mr. Radley has kindly written for this volume.
viii Preface.
The preface to the original edition explains the purpose of the book, and a portion of it, with a few verbal alterations and omissions, is here reproduced.
The Essays contained in the present volume have a common purpose, which is sufficiently indicated on the title- page. The various writers, however, approach the subject from different points of view, and are responsible for their own contributions and for nothing else.
As will be readily seen from a glance at the table of contents, no attempt has been made to present a complete survey of the controversy between Socialists and their opponents. To do this many volumes would have been necessary. The vast extent of the questions involved in this controversy will explain the exclusion of some familiar subjects of importance, and the inclusion of others which, if less important, have still a bearing on the general argument. All discussion of the Poor Law, for instance, the most notable of our socialistic institutions, and its disastrous influence on the lives of the poor, has been omitted. The subject has often been dealt with, and the arguments are familiar to all educated readers. It seemed superfluous to include a reference to it in the present volume.
The introduction and the first and second articles deal with theoretical aspects of the question. The papers which follow may be described as illustrative. Mr. Howell traces the gradual advance of the working-class on the path of liberty. Mr. Fairfield and Mr. Vincent describe socialistic influences at work in an English colony and in the London streets. Mr. Mackay's paper is an endeavour
Preface. ix
to point out the disadvantage of monopoly, and the advan- tage of giving to free investment the largest possible sphere of action. M. Arthur Raftalovich may be introduced to Eng- lish readers as one of the secretaries of the Societe d'litudes Economiques recently founded in Paris, a frequent contri- butor to the Journal des J^Jconomistes, and author of an excellent work, Le logement de Vouvrier et dii pauvre. His article deals historically and from the cosmopolitan point of view with the question of the Housing of the Poor. The difficulty, he argues, is being overcome gradually, in the same way as other difficulties in the path of human progress have been overcome, by the solvent power of free human initiative. The Post Office is often quoted by persons of socialist proclivities as an example of the successful or- ganisation of labour by the State. Mr. Millar's paper points out that this department has not escaped fi'om defects inherent in all State-trading enterprises. These are tolerable when they exist in a service comparatively simple and unimportant like the Post Office, but if Government monopoly were extended to more important and complicated industries, the inherent incapacity of compulsory collectivism would, it is argued, play havoc with human progress. The attempt of Free Library agitators to make their own favourite form of recreation a charge on the rates is criticised by Mr. O'Brien as unjust to those who love other forms of amusement and generally as contrary to public policy. Mr. Auberon Herbert's paper contains a criticism on the present attitude of Trade Unionism, and proposes for the consideration of working-class associations a new policy of usefulness.
It will be seen from the foregoing epitome of the volume
X Preface.
that some of the illustrations chosen are in themselves of comparatively small importance. But the great danger in this matter lies in the fact that ' plain men ' do not appreciate the enormous cumulative effect of these many small infractions of sound principle. They do not seem to realise that all this legislation means the gradual and insidious advance of a dull and enervating pauperism. The terrible tale of the degradation of manhood caused by the old poor law was un- folded to the country in the j udicial language of the Poor Law Commissioners. A similar burden of impotency is being day by day laid on all classes, but more especially on our poorer classes, by the perpetual forestalling of honest human en- deavour in every conceivable relation of life. While this weakening of the fibre of character is going on, the burden of responsibility to be carried by the State grows every day heavier. The difficulty of returning even a portion of this burden to the healthful influence of private enterprise and initiative is always increasing.
It is not possible to be continually taking steps towards Socialism without one day arriving at the goal, and, unless we believe that Socialism is all that its advocates represent, it is well that we should pause while we can ; for it may be (and this is still the view of the majority) that Socialism is impracticable, and that a continual drifting in that direction will land us, not in Elysium, but in an eclipse of personal liberty, and in a burdensome bureaucracy, tumbling by its own weight into national bankruptcy.
If the view set out in this volume is at all correct, it is very necessary that men should abandon the policy of indifference, and that they should do something to enlarge the atmosphere
Preface. xi
of Liberty. This is to be accomplished not by reckless and revolutionary methods, but rather by a resolute resistance to new encroachments and by patient and statesmanlike en- deavour to remove wherever practicable the restraints of regulation, and to give full play over a larger area to the creative forces of Liberty, for Liberty is the condition pre- cedent to all solution of human difficulty.
T. M.
INTRODUCTION.
FROM FREEDOM TO BONDAGE.
OF the many ways in which common sense inferences about social aftairs are flatly contradicted by events (as when measures taken to suppress a book cause increased cir- culation 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 denun- ciations 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
B
2 A J' If a for JAbcrty :
meals, to our (nvu day when throiigliuut our social arran^-o- ineiits the claims of women arc always put first, we see that along with tlie 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 com- ing from ' the paradise of women,' America. A century ago, when scarcely a man could bo 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 triven 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 lonofer the exceptions, and the demand for cheap literature rapidly increased, there began the cr}' 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 it is, 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 l)arley bread, rye bread, and oatmeal, down to our own time when the consumption of white wheaten bread is universal — from the daj-s wdien coarse jackets reaching to the knees left the legs bare, down to the present day when labouring people, like their employers, have the whole body covered, by two or more layers of
Introduction. "
o
clothinir — from the old oi-a of siniJ-lo-rooined huts with- out chinnieys, ur I'ruui the ijth century when even an ordinary gentknnan's house was connnonly with(nit wainscot or plaster on its walls, down to the present century when every cottage has more rooms than one and the houses of artisans 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 con- spicuous 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 sixty years, when the amount of pauperism was far greater than now and beggars abundant, is struck by the comparative size and hnish of the new houses occupied by operatives — by the better dress of workmen, who wear broadcloth 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 uppei" 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 out- side and inside Parliament, plans to benefit the millions form the leading topics, and every one 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 proclaimed, with increasing vehemence, that things are so bad that society nmst 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 denun-
B 2
4 A Pica fo7' Liberty :
ciatioii of it increases ; and as fast as natural causes are shown t(j 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 sufferino;s 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. Unques- tionably the existing type of social organization is one \vhich none who care for their kind can contemplate with satisfaction ; and unquestionably men's activities accompanying this type are far from being admirable. The strono- 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 re- vile competition strangely ignore the enormous benefits result- ing from it — though the}^ forget that most of all 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 i'rom the under-bidding of competitors, 3'et, 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 adul- tera.tions of countless kinds ; it is answerable for the cheap imitations wdiich 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
Introduction. 5
a falsehood with a good face is hlamed ; and often it gives the conscientious trader the choice between adopting the mal- practices 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 s}stem, gives to those who regulate and superintend, a share of the total produce v.'hieh bears too laro-c 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 competi- tive system which, thirty years ago, I described and denounced^. 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 ntterl}" 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.
Speaking broadly, every man works that he may avoid 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 punish- ment inflicted by human agency. He must have a master ; but the master ma}" be Nature or may be a fellow man. When he is under the impersonal coercion of Nature, we say
' See essay on ' The Morals of Trade.'
6 A Pica for Libciiy :
that lie is frt'c ; and ^v]leu liu is under the personal coercion of some one above him, we call him, according to the degi-ee 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 bv labour, bodilv or mental, ami 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 co- operation in its wide sense, and not in that restricted sense now commonly given to it, we ma}' say that social life must be carried on by either voluntary co-operation or compulsory co-operation ; or, to use Sir Henry Maine's words, the system must be that of contract or that of .^tatv>: — that in which the individual is left to do the best he can by his spontaneous eflbits and get success or failure according to his efficiency, and that in Avhich he has his appointed place, Avorks under coercive rule, and has his apportioned share of food, clothing, and shelter.
The S3"stem of voluntary co-operation is that by Avhich, 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 directly from him, are free to stay or go as the}' please. And of its more complex form an example is yielded by every manufacturing concern, in which, under partners, come clerks and managers, and under these, time-keepers and over- lookers, and under these, operatives of diiierent grades. In each of these cases there is an obvious working tosjether, or co-operation, of employer aiid employed, to obtain in one case a crop and in the other case a manufactuivd stock. And then, at the same time, there is a far more extensive, though unconscious, co-operation with other workers of nil grades
Introduction. 7
throughout the society. For while these particuhir employers and employed are severally occupied with their special kinds of work, other employers and employed arc making other things needed for the carrying on of their lives as well as the lives of all others. This voluntary co-operation, from its simplest to its most complex forms, has the common trait that those concerned work together Ly 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 employe 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 3delding ; and in the other case he submits to a wage less than he likes because other- wise ho 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 co-operation 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 conti- nental army, raised by conscription. Here, in time of peace the daily duties — cleaning, parade, drill, sentry work, and the i-est — and in time of war the various actions of the camp and the battle-field, are done under command, without room for any exercise of choice. Up from the private soldier through the non-commissioned officers and the half-dozen or more o-rades 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 under- standing now is — ' Obey in everything ordered under penalty of inflicted suflering and perhaps death.'
8 A Plea for Liberty :
This form of co-operation, still exemplified in an army, has in days gone by been the form of co-operation throughout the civil population. Everyu-here, and at all times, chronic war generates a militant type of structure, not in the body of sol- diers only but throughout the community at large. Practi- cally, while the conflict between societies is actively cfoinsr 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, com- posed of slaves, serfs, women, &c., constituting the commis- sariat. Naturalh", 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 resist- ance, those who control the fio-litino; body will, of course, impose their control upon the non-fighting body : and the regime of coercion will be applied to it with such modifica- tions only as the different circumstances involve. Prisoners of war become slaves. Those who were free cultivators before the conquest of their countrj', become serfs attached to the soil. Petty chiefs become subject to superior chiefs ; these smaller lords 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 co-operation is the unqualified system, a co-operation 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 co-operation gradually relaxed in rigour, while the system of voluntary co-operation 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 liy the social structure produced by industrial life and appropriate to it. In prf)portion as a de-
Introduction. 9
creasing part of the community was devoted to oflensive 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 co-operation. 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 influ- enced the whole community : compulsory co-operation lapsed more and more, thi'ough money commutation for services, mili- tary 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 co-operation became the universal principle. 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. Every one knows how long-continued rest in one attitude becomes wearisome — every one 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 i-egime, and having discovered that the new rcijlmG into which it has grown, though relatively eas}', is not without stresses and pains, its impatience Vv'ith these prompts the wish to try another system : which other s^'stem is, in principle if not in appearance, the same as that which during past generatio-ns was escaped from with much rejoicing.
lo A Pica for Liberty :
For as fast as the r&jlme of contract is discarded the regime of status is of necessity adopted. As fast as voluntary co- operation is abandoned compulsory co-operation must be substituted. Some kind of organization labour must have ; and if it is not that ^vhich arises by agreement under free competition, it must bo 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 bo essentially the same in principle. In the one case, as in the other, there must be established grades, and enforced subordination of each Q^rade to the i^rades above. This is a truth which the communist or the socialist does not dwell upon. Angry with the existing system under which each of us takes care of himself, while all of us see that each has fail* 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 machinerv by which this is to be done. Inevitablv. if each is to be cared for bv 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 there- fore re(|uire from each his proportion — must tell him how much he has to give to the general stock in the shape of pro- duction, that he may have so niucli in the shape of sustenta- tion. Hence, before he can be provided fo]", he must put him.self under orders, and obey those who say what he shall do, and at Avhat hours, and where ; and who give him his share of food, clothing, and shelter. If competition is ex- cluded, and Avith it Ijuyiug and selling, there can lie no voluntarv exchano-e of so much labour for so much ]iroduce; but there nmst lie apportionment of the one to the other by appointed ofiicers. This apportionment must bi' enforced. Without alternative the work must be done, and without
Introduction. i r
alternative the benefit, whatever it may be, must be accepted. For the worker may not leave his place at will and otter himself elsewhere. Under such a system he cannot be ac- cepted 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 industr}' 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 lighting army. ' Do your prescribed duties, and take your ap- portioned rations,' must be the rule of the one as of the other. ' Well, be it so ; ' replies the socialist. ' The workers 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 Avill 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 liesh and blood, and dead wood than living nerve ; and a machine constructed of the one works in more definite Avays than an organism con- structed of the other, — especially when the machine is worked by the inoiganic 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 tifty turns out to 1)C of any service. Plausible as his scheme seemed to the inventor, one or other hitch prevents the in-
12 A Plea for Liberty:
tended operation, and brings out a widely different result from that ^Yllicll lie 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 co-operation of multitudes of such organisms'? Even the units out of Avhieh this re-arranged body politic is to be formed are often incomprehensible. Every one 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 any one can foresee the actions of an in- dividual, 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 fairly — will think as they ought to tliink, 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 sj'stem 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 Ixepul^lic, anticipated that after some generations the legislature would lapse into the hands of wire-pullers ; that its doings would turn upon the contests of ofiice-seekers : that political action would be everywhere vitiated by the intrusion of a foreign element holding the l)alance between parties ; that electors, instead of judging for themselves, would hal)itually be led to the polls in thousands by their 'bosses': and that respectable men would be driven out of public lii'e by the
Iiilyoduciioii. i •;
insults and slanders of professional politicians ! Nor were there better previsions in those who gave constitutions to the various other states of the New Woild, in which unnumhcrod revolutions have shown with wonderful persistence the con- trasts 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 Tlie Open Court — a history of splittings, re-splittings, re-re-splittings, accompanied by 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 oro-anic 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 assunies ; and in most cases the unlikeness is great — so great that kinship between the first and the last forms would bo in- credible 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 — Qgg, 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 difierence 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 chieftain-
14 A ]^ lea for Libcrly :
ship, the chief, buikling his own hut, getting his own food, making his own implements, diiters from others only hy his predominant influence. There is no sign that in course of time, l)y 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 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 militaiy 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 sj'stem which inanv are now so eager to reijlace. In its origjinal form there was no prophecy of the factory system or kindred organizations of workers. Ditlering from them only as l.)eiug 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 tiiere come employ- ment 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 oro-anizations 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 pro- ducers, like the compound families or house-communities of early ages, slowly dissolved because they could not hold their ground : the larger estal)lishments, with better subdivision of labour, succeeded because they ministered to the wants of
J n(]-oduciiou. I 5
society more effectually. But Ave need not go liack thicjugli the centuries to trace trauslbrmatious sufficiently great and unexpected. On the day when c5^'30,ooo a year in aid of education was voted as an experiment, the name of idiot would haA'c been given to an opponent who prophesied that in lifty years the sum spent through imperial taxes and local rates would amount to ..5^^io,cco,coo, or who said that the aid to education would be followed by aids to feeding and 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 j^apal assumption, the State calls education. No one, I say, would have di-eamt that out of so innocent-looking a germ would have so quickly evolved this tyrannical system, tamely sub- mitted 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. Eapidly 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 1)}' various analogies, is manifest.
A cardinal trait in all advancing organization is the develop- ment 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 appai'atus such as in our own society is required for carrying on national defence and maintaining public order and personal safety, there must, under the fegime of socialism, be a regulative apparatus everywhere controlling all kinds of production and
1 6 A Pica f 07' Liberty :
distiibntion, and everywhere .ipportionino- the shares of products of each kind rcfiuired for each locahty, each working establishment, each individual. Tnder our existing voluntary co-operation, with its free contracts and its conipctition, pro- duction and distribution need no official oversitrht. Demand and 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 with- out any other agency than the pursuit of profit. Suppose now that this industrial reghne of willinghood, acting spon- taneousl}^ is re^^laced by a regime 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 ! Imatiine, a<2;ain, the still more vast administration required for doing all that farmers, manvifacturers, 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
Introdiiciion. 1 7
and other. Join ^vith thcso the existing postal, telegraphic, and telephonic administrations ; and finally those of the police and army, by which the dictates 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 oro-anizations are more elaborate and coercive than here, there are chi'onie 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 reo-ulators rersua those of the reojulated — have at their command whatever force is needful to suppress insubordina- tion and act as ' saviours of society ' ? Where will be the actual diLCSfers and miners and smelters and weavers, when those who order and superintend, everywhere arranged class above class, have come, after some generations, to intermany 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 1 How will the individual worker fare if he is dissatisfied with his treatment-:^thinks that he has nut 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 so. The mildest penalty for disobedience will be industrial excommunication. And if an international orojanization of labour is formed as proposed, exclusion in one country will mean exclusion
0
I 8 A Pica for Libcrly :
in all others — industrial excommunication will i.ican star- vation.
That things must take this course is a conclusion reached not by dc(lnction 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 wdth but little resistance, even w^hen 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 over- whelming number of proxies sent by those wdio 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 pow^erful. Tlieir members, even when they dissent from the policy pursued, habitually yield to the authorities they have set np. As they cannot secede without making enemies of their fellow w^orkmen, and often losing- all chance of employment, they succumb. We are showm, 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 have, in many of the cases instanced, unhindered powers of asserting their in- dependence, what w^ill the supremacy of the regulators
I 11 1 reduction. 1 9
become in long-established bodies, in Iiodiis -wliieh liave
grown vast and highly organized, ;md in ]>odies wliich,
instead of controlling oidy a small part uf the unit's life, control the whole of his life \
Again there will come the rejoinder— ' We shall guard against all that. Everybody will l)e 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 ailairs the most promis- ing 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 endowinent of those sentiments required to prevent the growth of a despotic bureaucracy.
Were it needful to dwell on indirect evidence, much mio-ht be made of that furnished l:)y the behaviour of the so-called Liberal party — a party which, relinquishing the original con- ception 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 viliiies 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 ofhcialism, it will suffice to contemplate the direct proofs furnished by those classes a,mong whom the socialistic idea most predominates, and who think themselves most interested in propagating it— the operative classes. These would consti- tute the great body of the socialistic organization, and their characters would determine its nature. What, then, are their
c 2
20 A Pica for Libcriy :
characters us di,sj)la}-ed in such oi-^-.uiization.s as they have aheady formed ?
Instead of the selfishness of tlie employing classes find the selfishness of competition, w(i 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 X One does not see in such regulations any of that altruism ))y 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 social- istic society.
With passive disregard of others' claims goes active en- croachment on them. 'Be one of us or we will cut off your means of living,' is the usual tin-eat 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 free- dom of those who disagree with them is not onlv 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 A'iolence which w^ould be merciless were there no legal penalties and r.o police. Along with this trampling on the lil^erties of men of their own class, there goes peremptory dictation to the em- ploying class : not prescribed terms and working arrange- ments only shall be conformed to, but none save those belonging to their l)ody shall bo employed — nay, in some cases, there shall be a strike if the employer carries on transactions Avith trading bodies that give work to non-union men. Here, then, we are variously shown by Trades Unions, or at a)iy rate ]ty the ]iewer Trades ITuions, a determination to impose their regulations without regard to the rights of
Jiifroduclioii. 2 1
those who arc to bu coerced. 80 complete is llu' inversion oi" ideas and t^cntiuients that maintenance of these rights is regarded as vicious and trespass upon them as virtuous ',
Along with this aggressiveness in one direction there goes subinissiveness in another direction. The coercion of outsiders l)y unionists is paralleled only by their subjection to thcii- leaders. That they may conquer in the struggle they sui'- render their intlividual 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 Avhoso acts they may or may not approve, but instead, ill-treat recalcitrant members of their bod}^ who do not subscribe.
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 indepen- dent 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
I
Marvellous are tlif conclusions which the prince can sell and tlie men reach wlien once they desert the subjects must buy.' This contrast is simple principle, that each man startling enough ; l)ut a conti-ast still should be allowed to pursue the more startling is being jirovided for objects of life, restrained only by the us. We now see a resuscitation of limits which the similar pursuits of the despotic doctrine, differing only their objects by other men impose. by the substitution of Trades Unions A generation ago we lieard loud asser- for kings. For now that Trades tions of ' the right to labour,' that is. Unions are becoming universal, and the right to have labour provided ; each artisan has to pay prescribed and there are still not a few who moneys to one or another of them, think the community jjound to find -\\ ith the alternative of being a non- work for each person. Compare this unionist to whom work is denied by with the doctrine current in France force, it has come to this, that the at the time when the monarchical right to labour is a Trade Union right, power culminated ; namely, that "the which the Trade Union can sell and right of working is a royal right tlie individual woj-ker must buy !
2 2 A JHca for Ubcrty :
conniuniity, governed by their separate sets of regulators, they constitute the wliole community, governed by a consolidated system of such rcguhitors ; wlien functionaries of all orders, including those Avho officer the press, form parts of the regu- lative organization ; and when the law is both enacted and administered by this regulative oj-ganization ? The fanatical adherents of a social J^heory are capable of taking any mea- sures, 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 organ- ization has been established, the vast, ramified, and consoli- dated 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 in- terests) 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, Avith 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 content- ment 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 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 f<ociul Statics, as well as in The Study of Soriohxjy and in Politlnil Inditutlori)^, is clearly shown the desire for an organization moi'e conducive to the happiness of men at large than that which exists. My oppDsition to social- ism results from the belief that it would stop the progress to such a higher state and brino- back a hnver state. Nothino- liut tlie 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
Introduction. 23
carnl radical remedies. ' If you will but do tbi.s, the iiiiscliicf will be prevented.' 'Adopt my plan and tlie suffering w^ill 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 remoulding 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 satisfactory social state. No such nature as that w^hich 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 expe- ditions all over the world, regardless of the claims of abori- gines, while their tens of thousands of priests of the religion of love look on fipprovingly — no such nature as that wdiich, 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, v.diich at once insists on per- sonal freedom and is solicitous for the like freedom of others ; and there at present exists but a very inadequate amount of this sentiment.
2 4 A Pica for Liberty.
Hence the need for further long continuance of ii social flisciplinc which requires each man to carry on his activities with due regard to the like claims of others to cany on theii- activities ; and which, while it insists tliat lie shall have all the benefits his conduct naturall}- brings, insists also that he shall not saddle on others the ovils his conduct naturally brings: unless they freely undertake to bear them. And hence the belief that endeavours to elude tliis discipline will not only fail, l>ut 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 co-operation 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 of their ends. Under that compulsory co-operation 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 Avork save on prescribed terms, would grow and ramif}^ 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 lo, 50, ICO, ."joo, and 1000, ruled by ofKcers of corresponding grades, and tied to their districts, were superintended in their private lives as well as in their industries, and toiled hope- lessly for the support of the governmental organization.
Herbert Speacer.
THE niPEACTICABILITY OF SOCIALISM.
I ruRPOSE, ill this paper, to deal almost exclusively with the question whether Socialism is practicable. I shall confine myself, as much as I can, to the inquiry whether the means proposed are, or are not, likely to work out the end which is aimed at. I shall have to waive, in a very great degree, the previous essential questions whether the end is a- desirable one in itself, and whether justice requires that it shall bo held in view. For the purposes of the dis- cussion I shall provisionally concede the affirmative to both ; but in order to avoid all misunderstanding, I think it well to put on record here that I do so provisionally only. No such admission is hereafter to be quoted against me, as if I had accepted Socialist or Gollectivist theories upon any moral, economical, or political question. Space does not admit of my making a detailed confession of faith upon these points ; but it is open to me to state that I am not bound l)y any d priori theory. What is commonly called 'abstract justice' I confess I cannot discover in the history of any human institution. I cannot discover equality in the dis- pensations of nature itself.
This, it may be urged, pi'oves nothing. A great deal of our life consists of a conflict with nature ; a continuous effort to redress inequalities in the course of nature, and to solve difficult problems wdiich nature sets before us. True ; and that is precisely part of my case. I affirm that social inequal- ities are inequalities which may be mitigated, but cannot be redressed wholly; that social problems are problems which, for the most part, only admit of a partial solution.
26 A Pica for Liberty. [i.
Such problems and sucli inequalities exist in material nature, and the diHicuhies they present are universally ackuow- ledged. The day, in the tropics, is of ahout e([ual length Avith the night. So it is at the poles, with the ditiej-ence that the tropical day and night are al)0ut twelve hours each, while at the poles each lasts somewhere about half the year. In the sub-tropical and temperate zones, the days in summer and in winter ditier strikingly in length. In the latitude of London, the longest day is about a quarter of an hour shorter, and the shortest day about a (juarter of an hour longer, than in the latitude of Edinburgh. Such is the inequality in a merely astronomical and geographical statement of fact ; and when it comes to be applied to human afiairs, its practical effect is more startling still. It means that a working day, if it were not for artificial light, may be twice as long in summer as in winter, and may vary in length for the differ- ence in latitude between Southampton and Carlisle, and between Carlisle and Inverness. This difference in the length of the day does make a real difference in all the conditions of life, and most of all in the lives of what are usually called the working classes ; but the difference is obscured by custom, and by the feeling that it cannot be helped. It is felt to be useless to agitate against 'the stars in their courses.' So again, in India and in man}^ parts of the tropics the principal danger to agriculture is drought ; in the British Islands the danger is excessive rainfall. If rain and sunshine could be distributed in exact proportion to the wants of each region, a far greater degree of prosperity would result. As it is, in the one class of countries it is necessary to have recourse to artificial irrigation, and in the other to artificial drainage, to correct, so far as is practicable, the inequalities of climate. One result of this is that the remedies not unfrequentlv turn (Hit to contain the seeds of other diseases. In a country arbilicially drained, an unusually dry sununer brings o]i a drought for which there is no preparation, and which may even be attended by pestilence. In a country artificially irrigated, an exception?.! rainfall causes tioods, which may dest]-oy life both directly and indirectly. And even in ordinary seasoiis, there are difhculties and losses which ar(! great hardships to individuals and classes, but Avhich there is no way of obviating. All tliese things, and many others that could ])(> added to the list, are accepted as
I.] The Iiupracticability of Socialism. 27
part of the course of nature '. Nobody tliinks of agitatiii;:; against the weather, though we all grunilile at it freely. \Vc know that there is no help for it, and there is an end of the matter. Now the human race, and human society, are just as much parts of nature as the heavenly bodies and the sunshine and rainfall. The organisation of society is just as nuich a matter of natural tendency (I purposely avoid the use of the phrase naiu ral lav) as the rising and sotting of the sun, the rain in Devonshire or the hot wind of the Punjab. The ditference is a difference of simple and complex phenomena. Every one can observe for himself or herself the discrepancy in the length of the days. It is not so easy to understand fully the dissimilarities of climate and their influence upon human affairs, but once the facts are grasped, there is no longer any room for speculation as to the possibility of things being otherwise. It is perceived at once that there is no use in attempting to fly in the face of nature. We can mitigate, l)ut we cannot change. We can onl}^ mitigate, moreover, l)y playing ofr* one tendency or set of tendencies against others. It is by obeying nature that we get the mastery of nature.
Now this brings us to the points at issue between Socialists and their opponents. Socialists would (I suppose) not deny that the human race and human society are part of nature. They would not deny that human communities are what they are, and have been what they have been, in virtue of streams of tendency, more difficult to observe and to co-ordinate than the observed antecedents and sequences of climatic tendencies, but not less real, and not less certain to work themselves out. If we only knew history as we know astronomy, sociology would be an exact science. If we even knew history as we know, or guess at, meteorology, many problems would be clear which are now obscure.
But although Socialists might not deny all this in terms, they seem habitually to think, and speak, and try to act and
> I will briefly refer to one other be doubted whether more hnmnn
instance — the intluence of climate suffering i^i inflicted, e.g. by malarious
upon bodily condition. The human fever in Africa or by lung disease in
race can e.r/.si! in almost any climate ; our own islands. Volumes have been
but there is no climate in which the written on nature's adaptation of
average human being can enjoy i)er- means to ends ; but volumes remain
feet health. Every region sutt'ers from to be written on the imperfection
diseases peculiar to itself, and it may of that adaptation.
2cS A Pica for Libciiy. [i.
induce others to act, as if it were all untrue. They deal with human society as it" it were that hlank sheet of paper to which Locke incorrectly compared the childish intellect. The}' write and speak as if they thought that it only needed a conscious effort of the will on the part of any given human community to change all, or nearly all, the conditions in which it has hitherto subsisted. Tliey seem to think that they can defeat nature by a front attack.
What, then, are the complaints of Socialists against the existing constitution of society, and how is it proposed to 3'edress the alleii-ed grievances ?
In endeavouring to answer these questions, I take as my text-book Dr. SchJiiiie's Quintessence of Socidlis'ni'^ ; the most businesslike account of the Socialist position which has yet appeared. Any one who compares its calm and judicial statements with the violent, turgid, and heated rhetoric of the Fahiaih Essay a will appreciate the reasons which guided me in choosing it '^. If Dr. Schiitiie's style were a little more popular, the substance of his work would render the writing of this paper a superfluous effort. He evidently sympathises with Socialism, and is resolved to make the best case he can for its proposals. Yet every page displays the difticulties of the scheme to the intelligent reader, even when the author is not dwelling upon those difliculties. In his concluding chapter he sums up calmly and judicially, but very strongly, against the whole system of Democratic or Collective Socialism.
What then is the Socialist complaint against the existing constitution of society ? It may be summed up in the one word. Inequality. Quoting from Karl Marx, Schjiffle speaks of ' a growing mass of misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation''.' Schafile himself speaks of 'the plutocratic process of dividing the nation into an enormous proletariat on the one side and a few millionaires on the other"*.' If any one wants to l)e saturated with boiling rhetoric on this topic,
' EiiihUi edition, trnnshited l)y Socialist projects, such lus we find in
Bcrniird Bosanquet, M. A. Swan Schiiffle, with the wild rliodoniontadc
Sonnenscdiein & Co. 1889. When T of the Fahian Society, to say nothing-
quote other authorities 1 shall specify uf the still A\ilder oratory of Hyde
them, l)ut most quotations will he Park meetings, it is not so mucli
from Schiiftle. More's Utopia of which one is ic-
- Socialism is very commonly called minded, as Swift's Lopiiin. rto]uaii. But when one comjiares •■ P. 1,^.
cahn and Icniperatc stalemeuts (jf ' P. 12,
I.] The Iiupracticabilily of Socialism. 29
lit him open the Fabin n h'ssaijs at random, or dip into the pages ol" Henry George's PrugveK'^ and Poverty and Socinf Prohleins ^. Or, if the reader is in search of (jintc as good rhetoric, but tempered hv a good deal more common sense, let him carefully read through The Social Frohleiii, by Pro- fessor William Graham-, especially chapter vi, 'The Social Residuum.' .Mr. Graham does not hold that wliat he calls the social residuum is an increasing mass. The Fabian essay- ists and the Continental Socialists always affirm that it is, and Dr. Schiiffic in the quotation already given appears to accept Marx's view.
Now this view is an untrue one. It is demonstrably untrue as regards the United Kingdom. It is demonstrably untrue as regards France. It is probably untrue of every other country in Europe, with the possible exception of Russia. Confining ourselves to the United Kingdom, I afiirm that there exists, between the so-called 'millionaire' and the class described as the residuum, no gulf whatever, but an absolutely complete gradation. I need not load these pages with statistics in proof of what I say. The burden of proof is upon those who affirm the contrary. Socialist rhetoricians have no scruple in con- fusing their own and other people's ideas on this subject by their illogical use of the word ' proletariat.' At one time, it means people who have no land ; at another, it seems to signify people who have no capital ; in all cases it is used with a kind of tacit connotation of ' pauper.' We shall see presently that in a Socialist State the entire population would be one vast proletariat ; but in the meantime it may be pointed out that to have no land and no capital is not neces- sarily to be a pauper. A professional man may be earning a very handsome and very secure income, and yet may, in that sense, belong to the proletariat. But Socialist declamation about millionaires and proletariat invariably covers the in- nuendo that the world actually contains a few thousand millionaires and thousands of millions of paupers. When this is stated, it is at once perceived to be untrue ; and a very little inquiry confirms the inquirer in that conclusion. So- cialist declamation, such as Schaffle quotes from Marx — ' misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation ' — is
'■ I .1111 Ih.uii>I t(i ;iiiiiiit tliat Mr. ho writos as if lu- v.jis <iiic. Cre.iii-yc bays lie is not a Sm-ialist. '-' Kcgan Paul, Tivncli & Co. 1S8G.
But on the subject of the proletariat
30 A Pica for Liberty. [i.
only trup. if true at all, of tlio lowest residuum : iiinl that residuum is no more than a fringe on the border of society, in any country whei-o the capitalist is free. On the other hand, this is true beyond all controversy of England and of France — that between the millionaire and the worker for daily or weekly wage there are stages innumerable, which pass fi-om higher to loAver by a gradation that is Imrely perceptible. If there is anything that can be called a social gulf, it is the interval which separates the steady and fairly well-paid workers from the loal'ers and the criminals ; and that gulf is (juite as much moral as it is economic.
But even if all that is alleged were true, does Socialism offer anything that can be called a remedy ? In order to answer tliis question, we must see what the Socialist remedy is.
' The Alpha and Omega of Socialism is the transformation of private and competing capitals into a united collective capital ^" ' When, instead of the system of private and com- peting capitals, which drive down wages by competition, we have a collective ownership of capital, pvMlc organisation of labour, and of the distribution of the national income — then, and not till then, we shall have no capitalists and no wage- earners, but all will be alike, producers -.'
One more (juotation. ' In their places' (i. e. in place of private capital and competition) ' we should have a State-regulated organisation of national labour into a social labour system, e(|uipped out of collective capital; the State would collect, warehouse, and transport all products, and finally would dis- tribute them to individuals in proportion to their registered amount of social labour, and according to a valuation of commodities exactly corresponding to their avera<j-e co.st of production".'
Tins, then, is the Quintessence of Socialism. This, and nothing more or less, is what is meant by the word, and is proposed by its advocates. Socialism does not mean that property is robbery, at least in the ordinary sense of the phrase '^. Nor does it niean a periodical redistribution of private property l Nor does it mean that private capital is
' Scliiiffle, p. 20. ■• Il,i,l. ],. ^-.
■-' ll)i(I. ]). 2S jiuil i'dllowiiig. Till; ^ Jliid. ]>. 2^5.
wliolc pass.-iyc will repjiy ])cni.sal, but '- Ibid. ]). 30.
it is tiio lung to (juotc iii, c.dcnso.
I.] The luipnicticability of Socialism. 31
to )je. confiscated, aud 110 compensation matle to owners, though it does mean that all such compensation must take the form of consumable goods, and nnist liierei'ore be terminable ^ ' Nor does Socicilism. as understood by Dr. Schiidie, necessarily conflict with individual freedom. Upon this point, however, our author speaks but doubtfully, and his remarks require very careful ])erusal -. It does not even preclude the possession of a private income''. It has nothing to say to (juestions of marriage, 'free love "V or religion"'. \\\ short, Socialism, or Collectivism, relates to the possession of land and capital — the totality of instruments of production*^ — and ]iot to anything else whatsoever, whether economic, political, or social.
Now, the first and most obvious criticism upon all this is, that whereas Socialists denounce land-owning and capital- owning, because they tend to the creation of a proletariat, their scheme, as announce*! by a benevolently-neutral inter- preter, proposes to turn all the world into one vast proletariat. This is not mere juggling with words. It is the Socialists who juggle with words, when they define a proletarian as a person who does not own either land or capital, and then proceed to talk of the proletariat as if the word meant ' a mass of paupers.' If to be a proletarian is to be a pauper, then Socialism undertakes to turn all the world into a mass of paupers, including the very persons who will be entrusted with the control of that monster workhouse, the Socialist State. But I am Avilling to admit that if all the world could be freed from the curse of poverty — if the social residuum could be done away with — there would be a strong temptation to swfillow the scheme of Socialism, proletariat and all. Quit- ting verbal criticism, let us try to think out how the suggestion would be likely to work. Land and Capital are to be the property of the whole community. They are to be managed by State officials. The produce is to be distributed in pro- portion to what is described as the ' social labour-time ' of every individual worker; and this social labour-time is to be divided into units of approximately equal value. In other words, every Socialist conmiuuity is to be one vast Joint Stock
' Scliiiffle. p]). 32, 33. ' Ibid. ]>p. 110, iii.
- lliid. ell. iii. }>p. 39-45 inclu- ^ Ibid. ]). 1 16.
sivi'. "^ I'jid. p. 5. ■■ l!)id. cli. viii. pp. 97-110.
.•)-
2 A Plea for Liboiy. [i.
L'uiijpauy lor the iiuuiuiacturc and distribuliim ol' Liiin^s in general ! Now, the moment this is stated, the first difficulty of Socialism is at once sno-Q-ested. How do the directors of an ordinfuy manufacturing firm ascertain the conditions of * their business '. B}' a series of experiments, failure in Avhich means the loss of their capital. How does Socialism solve the problem ? ' The amount of supply necessary in each form of pi-()duction Avould bo fixed by continuous official returns furnished by the mana<2:ers and overseers of the sellinof and producing departments '.' This is very well upon paper, and if we accept the hypothesis that the demand for any given object always remains nearly constant. But this is evidently not the case. There is no article of consumption, not even bread itself, for which tlie demaml does not so vary from day to day that no ofHcial department could possibly provide for it in a ' budget of social production.' The existing order of things only provides such a 'budget' very roughly, and the bank- ruptcy court acts as a sort of steam-governor, when mistaken speculation sends a capitalist to waste. Even if it were admitted that the demand for food is virtuallv constant, which is mani- festly untrue, there are many other thino's for which the demand could not be foreseen by any othcial department. Clothing is a very obvious case in point. It is a necessary of life, in a great part of the world, only second to food itself. Yet could any public department undertake to say how many suits of clothes a given population Avill wear out in a given season ? llemember, it is of no use making calculations based upon decades, or even upon single years, and then striking averages. What is Avanted is to know how many suits of clothes the department ought to have on hand, in order to meet the demand day by day. AVhen clothing has to be served out to soldiers, the soldiers are put under strict regula- tion as to its use. It is all the same pattern, and thei'e is no personal choice about it. This is what makes the clothing of an army practicable ; l:)ut in civil life the conditions are wholly different. When did women ever subnut to a uniform, imless it were for religious reasons % I am prepared to be denounced, by Fabian essayists and other enthusiasts, as a cold-l»looded and frivolous pei'son, because I state such petty difficultie^; ; l^it it is very often trifles such as this which cause great projects to make shipwreck. A few ounces of iron in
» Scli.-ililc. II. ^.
I.] The Inipraciicahility of Socialisin. 33
the wruii,^" place in a ship will drraiigo the compass and bafHc the calculations of the most skilful navigator.
Perhaps tlio more extreme advocates of State Collectivism would cut this particular knot hy dcH-reeing- that people should wear uniform of some sort, and should be under quasi-military regulations in respect of the raiment served out to them. We may come to perceive, as Ave go on, that there is no real reason why this should not bo done. The principles of col- lective production, and of distribution according to ' social labour-time,' invcdve iniVingements of personal freedom con- siderably more formidable than the compulsion to wear a uniform. It may suffice to say for the present that if Socialism does not cover this contingency, th< n collective production breaks down over the article of clothing. And. of course, to break down in one point is to break down in all. A chain is no stronger than its weakest link.
One of the most remarkable characteristics of Dr. Schiiffle's work is the odd way in which he seems to ignore all particu- lars such as I have just now been calling attention to. After dwelling, as he does in chap, iii of the Quintessence, upon the vital importance of freedom of demand, which he declares to be a first essential of freedom in general, and the very material basis of freedom, he goes on to say that a complete and officially organised system of collective production could undoubtedly include at least as thorough a daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly statistical registration of the free wants of individuals and families, as under the present system these effect each for themselves, by their demand upon the market ^ But this is just what I deny, and I think I have given good reason for my denial. An instance, such as that of the clothing question, is w^orth all the d priori assumptions that any one can make. The Socialist is bound to explain how he is going to organise his collection and registration of statistics in every single department of his State-controlled producing-agency. It will be noted that Schaffle declares Socialists not to contemplate an immediate conversion of all kinds of business into State departments -. But manifestly, until all capital is transformed into collective ownership, Socialism is incomplete. If the State took over the supply of food, but left clothing to private enterprise, all the vices noAV charged against private capitalism
• Schaffle, p. 43. - Iln'l. p. 4S.
D
34 ^ Pica for Liheidy. [i.
^voul(l eo}itimu' to iiilioio iu the clotliiug trade, until it too luid ])ecii reduced into collectivo ownership.
I now pass to another branch of the Socialist scheme ; premising that the (juestion just treated and that upon which I am now al)Out to enter are so inextricahly mixed up that I may have to recur now and then to to])ics wliich may seem to have been ah'eady discussed. And I may achi another word of caution. If I seem to be almost exclusively answering Dr. SchatHe, it is simply l)ecause ho is the most tempei'ate as well as the clearest exponent of Socialism. If Socialism as ex- pounded by him can be shown to be unworkable, much more will it be proved unworkable in the hands of its most extreme projectors.
To resume then. The Socialist State is not only to produce by means of land and capital owned in common and managed by public officials ; it is also to distribute the wealth pro- duced by this social co-operation according to the proportion of work performed l)y each individual ^. Now here is one of the crucial difficulties of the entire Socialist scheme. It is not proposed to reward everybody alike. That would be a practical proposal, though not a very practicable one, because it would put an end at once and for ever to all spcmtaneity in the workers. But this is not Avhat is contemplated. An attempt is to be made to ascertain the relative values of ' social labour- time' in different occupations, whether branches of production or services not dii-ectly productive. How this is to be done we are not very clearly told. It is intimated, indeed, that Marx has estimated the • lal)0ur price ' of a hectolitre of wheat at live days of ' socially determined labour,' supposing every- body to work eight hours a day -. One very striking feature of the scheme is that there are to be no pa3'ments in metallic money or in any equivalent for coin. We shall sec presently that this introduces a new and enhanced difficulty ; but it is declared to bo an essential portion of the scheme, though there is nothing even in the nature of Socialism itself to make it so. Payments, under Socialism, however, arc to be made wholly in certificates of labour-time. Now it is abun(hintly manifest that no such equation of labour-time ooidd )>(• constructed as to bring out a unit of labour Avhich should )«! oven approxi- mately uniform. Tn tlie first place, it is totally impossible, as has been alivad}- shown, to lix the deman<l for almost any ' Schilfllo, p. 5. • Jbi.l. i)]i. 82, S3.
I.] The Impracticability of Socialism. 35
givtn article of production at a L;ivcn time. The most tliat can be done is, in tilings lor which the demand is in some measure constant, such as food, to produce a daily average ; and the production of such daily average may or may not iv(|uire an average expenditure of labour. Indeed, in the case of agricultural labour, no average day could be fixed at all. But it would seem that Socialists think they can establish some such average, not for a single department of production, but for the whole of what they call social laljour. ' If we imagined^' — this is how Schatfle puts it — 'all the species of products which are being continually produced, valued by the expenditure of social labour as verified by experience, we could find bv addition the total of social labour-time which is required for the social total production of the social total of demand.' It is difficult to strip this statement of its verbiage, but it seems to come to this ; that 4t would be possible some- how to find out how many hours a day for how many days in a year every working member of a given com- munity would have to work, in order that every man, woman, and child in such community should have exactly as much of everything as he. she, or it wanted, or perhaps more correctly, as the heads of the supply departn^ents thought that he. she, or it ouoht to want. In order to achieve this it Avould be necessarv to know the demand, which I have shown to be impracticable, in some departments at all events. It would be necessary to know^ what is the average number of hours' labour needed to produce a given quantity of a ai^'en commodity. Will anv one. I care not how skilled in agriculture, tell us how many days, of how many hours per day, it takes to produce a ton of wheat, or potatoes, or hay, or beans? How many hours per day of ' social labour' will prepare a bullock or a sheep for the market, or a milch cow to yield her daily supply of milk ? Here, again, to ask these questions is to show that they are unanswerable. The fact is that Sociali-sts invariabh^ think oi factory labour, when they are speculating about labour time. The labour spent in handlino- machinery can be timed : but there are other kinds of labour which cannot. How many hours a day ought a sailor to work, for example ; and how is the value of an hour of his work to be ascertained in comparison with the value of an hour's work of a street lamplighter, or a letter-carrier 1
' Schaffle, pp. 82, 83. D 2
36 A Pica for Liberty. [i.
Take another concrete example. How would Socialism reijulate the hours, or estimate the value. 01" domestic service % I do not mean merely the menial service of the ]"ich — what Socialists call ' house slavery ^.' The Socialist notion of domestic service, indeed, is as unpractical as the whole of the rest of their Laputa. I suppose they would class the services of a midwife under ' free professional services.' But what of the services of a nursemaid % How many hours a day ought such a person to be employed, and what is the value of her services, expressed in ' social lahour-time % ' AVhat is the value of the ' social labour-time ' of a working mans wife in childbirth, and during her subsequent withdrawal from the working strength of the community 1 Schattie says -, ' the employment of women's labour, nmn no loiKjer needed in the farnilij, would find its fitting place without efibrt.'' This appears to me the strangest of all the strange utterances of Socialism. No longer needed in the family ! If for ' family ' we read ' factory' there would be some sense in it, and perhaps, after all, the words may have been accidentally transposed. For my own part, I confess myself incapable of conceiving a state of things in which woman would not be absolutely essen- tial to the ' family ' as wife, mother, nurse, housekeeper, to say nothing of any other function. I can easily enough conceive the existence of factories without women workers ; but that "vvomen should be set free from the family in order that they may enter the factory strikes me as being a complete inver- sion of the order of nature.
The question whether 'house slavery.' in the sense Of purely menial service, could be abolished by Socialism, seems to de- pend upon considerations which cannot be discussed in this essay. It belongs to the topic of Classes under Socialism, a topic upon which Socialist literature atibrds the minimum of infornuition. I pass on now to more general considerations on the valuation of labour.
The fallacy of Socialism in relation to labour appears to lie in the assumption that lal)Our has a value of its own. in and for itself. It has no such value. No material thin;? is valu- able because of the labour expended in producing it. No service is valuable because of the labour expended in rendering it. Material things are valual)le because they satisfy wants, and therefore people will give material things which they
' ,"5cliaffle, p. 112. -' P. 113.
i] The Inipj-acticability of Socialism. 37
possess in exchange for things they do not possess. If material things came into existence ^vithout labour, nobody would talk of the value of productive labour. If a thing is not -wanted, there is no vaKie attached to the labour of pro- ducing it. Who now -would pay for the labour of producing candle-snuflers ? The thinccs have cea.sed to be useful : there is no demand for them : but it requires just as much labour to produce them now as it did a hundred years ago. But if any one possesses a useful article, he can always exchange it for another useful article, no matter whether one or Ijoth have been produced by labour or without labour. And what is true of productive labour is true of the labour expended in renderintr services, when the necessarv allowances are made. Services may be bartered for material objects of utihty. or for other services. But in either case what is paid for is the ser- vice, not the labour expended in rendering the service : and when the service is rewarded with a material object, the ser- vice is rendered for the sake of getting that object, and not for the sake of the labour whereby the object was produced. Socialists would not. I think, deny all this in terms. Schafflo shows that he is acquainted with the truth, and admits it on the Socialist behalf, when he savs that it is ' sociallv deter- mined individual labour.' not actual labour expended by indi- viduals, which is to be taken into account in estimating labour values ^. But althoucrh the doctrine I have laid down might not be disputed in terms, it is consistently ignored m the entire Socialist scheme. The entire theory of surplus- value rests upon the assumption that labour employed in production has a sort of standard value of its o-wn. The idea of regulating exchange by labour-time rests upon a similar fallacious assumption. Commodities are exchanged for other commodities because some people have what other people want, quit€ irrespective of how they got it. Commodities are exchanged for services, because he who can spare the com- modity stands in need of the service, and vicp vpi'sd ; not because it re(juired labour to produce the commodity, and will require labour to render the sers'ice.
In reply to all this I shall doubtless be reminded that although labour may have no intiinsic value, it has an insepar- al)le value, because no commodity can ]>e produced, nor can any service be rendered, without calling labour into requisition.
» Schaffle, p. 82.
38 A Plea for Libciiy. [t.
That is (juilc true, l)iit it docs not aflbct the argument. Tlio sclioine of Socialism requires that some sort of C((uation should be established, whereby goods, and services, should be mutually interchangeable, and should ])ossess values capable of being estimated in terms of labour. Under Capitalist Individualisu), \\\m\ uuder free Capitalism in general, commodities and services are first of all valued in terms of money, and then paid for in money Avhich can l)e used to pay for other connnodities and other services at the discretion of the recipient. In this way, a balance is established automatically. There is no need to construct elaborate calculations for the purpose of valuing one kind of labour in terms of another, or of establishijig a common denominator for the value of all kinds of labour. The abolition of money is not necessarily jiart of the scheme of Collective Production. It is 'tacked on' to Collective Pro- duction because Socialists have taken up the idea that money is conducive to free Capitalisui, as it undoubtedly is. But money could perfectly well co-exist with Collective Production, and tbat plan is not made in the least degree moi'e practicable by being linked with a very clumsy form of inconvertible paper cui'rency. The Sucialists themselves admit that their State would want m(;ney, in so far as it had dealings with other States which had not yet adopted Socialism ^. Put even here there is a very important omission. It does not follow that even if all the world were to adopt Socialisui, ever}' State and every connnunity would adopt it on precisely the same terms. For instance, one State may fix its labour day at ten hours, another at eight, another at six. Under such circumstances, how are social labour values to be com- puted and equated 1 Schatfle may well ask - ' whether the connnonwealtli of the Socialists would be able to cope with the enormous Socialistic book-keeping, and to estimate hetero- geneous labour correctly according to Socialistic units of labour-time.' It may here be noticed that SchJitHe all through speaks of the Socialist State as a ' close ' economic community. To me this appears to imply, among other things, a protec- tionist community. It is not expressly laid down, I am aware, by the Socialists, that favour ouirht to be shown to home laboiu" as against the labour of foreigners; but this does appear to follow Irom the general scheme. The entire Itasis of Socialist criticism on existing institutions is the jissumption 1 SciuiUk. p. -o. - r. S6.
I.] The iDipracticability of Socialisui. 39
that labour does not get its due. It is not complained that production falls short, but only that the things produced are ' unjustly ' disti'ibutcd ; and tlic ' injustice ' is dcclare<l to lie in the fact that tlu' surplus value of labour is appropriated by capitalists. Labour is assumed to have a value in and for itself. These things being so, I can well understand how the labourers in a Socialistic State niiglit be induced to demand that nothing should be imported into the ' close community' from without which could possibly be produced within. Nay, I can conceive a veto being put upon labour-saving inventions, in order that ' the bread might not be taken out of the mouths of the people.' The attack upon invention invariably pro- ceeds from labour, or from persons posing as champions of labour, and as invariably takes the form of accusing capi- talists of using inventions in order to secure an unfair ad- vantage over labour. Some Socialists, indeed, such as the Fabian essayists, attack not only patents but literary copy- right as the creation of a vicious capitalist and individualist system. One would have thought that if there was a moral basis for private property anywhere, it would underlie that form of property which is described as ' property in ideas.' That an inventor should enjoy the profits of his invention — an artist, of his picture or statue — a musician, of his music — an author, of his literary ideas — all this seems almost self-evident, when we consider that these men have actually created the invention, the artistic work, the composition, and the litera- ture. In their case, if anywdiere, labour seems to have value in and for itself, and the fruit of labour to belong of right to its producer. Yet these are just the cases which the thought- ful Socialist ignores, and the rhetorical Socialist actually assails ^. Under these circumstances, it would be futile to ask how the system of Collective Production and payment by social labour-time would equate the labour of an inventor with that of a ploughman, or the labour of a poet with that of a w^eaver. Still, one may suppose that mechanical invention at any rate would not be absolutely excluded. I will not ask what would have been the ' social labour value ' of James Watt's time when he sat v>^atching the lid of his mother's tea-kettle being lifted up by the steam. But it is fair to ask what Boulton would have done if, instead of being a private capitalist, he had been a Socialist industrial chief, when Watt
^ Fabian Essau'i, 2)p. 145, 146.
40 A Plea for Liberty. [i.
proposed to hiin to make experiments on the condensing steam-engine. Would he have had resources at his disposal % It is very doubtful. If ho were paid his salary as overseer in labour-certiHcates. mc may say certainly not. Would he have felt justified in taking up the 'social labour-time' of the workmen under his supervision in making experiments of a costly nature, which, for all he could possibly foresee, might come to nothing ?
And this raises another question. What machinery does Socialism provide for ' writing off' obsolete investments 1 Would a Socialist State ever have adopted the railway as its carrying machiner}', and if so, how would it have disposed of the collective capital invested in canals and stage-coaches?
But we need not have recourse to any conjectures or hypo- thetical cases. There are instances in abundance. I will mention one, which fortunately refers to a matter concerning which there need be no dispute as to either principle or method. No Individualist will deny that the maintenance of lighthouses is one of the proper functions of Government. Every Socialist would, I think, earnestly maintain that Government is bound to adopt every improvement which can be shown to increase the efficiency of lighthouses, and is bound also to investigate and test every alleged improvement, in favour of which a reasonable 'pv 'mm facie case can be made out. What has been the actual conduct of our own Board of Trade and Trinity House in regard to the improvement of lighthouse illuminants ? I have before me a Blue Book of 143 pages, containing correspondence on the subject of the proposed supersession of oil by gas as a lighthouse illuminant ^. On the part of the Board of Trade and Trinity House, the entire correspondence is one prolonged effort to evade and shelve the discussion. Towards the end - we read : ' The Board of Trade were not without hope that a limit might now be reached in which the whole of the lighthouse authorities could agree, as being the limit of illumination beyond which no practical advantage could result to navigation.' Well may Professor Tyndall remark upon this ''\ ' The writer of this paragraph is obviously <lisappointed at finding himself unable to say to scientihc invention. '•Tims far shalt thou go and no
' Parliniuontary rapcis, Jjinhtlidusc I llumiuaiits. 27 .laii. JS.S^. ' LctttT No. iJi, i)age 139 of Ki'])cirt. ^ Li^ttcr to 7V;//c.s-, 7th April, 1888.
T.] The I))ipracticabilily of Socialism. 41
farther." It -would liowevur, 1)0 easier to reach the limit of illuiuination in the otKcial mind than to fix the limit possible to our lighthouses.' This is the ^vay in which the officials of our own day deal with a practical proMcm which is undouhtedly within theiV province ; concerning wliich they are undoubtedly bound to seek for the most efficient appliances : and upon which they have the evidence of a man of science of the very first rank. The reason is not far to seek. Functionaries are under a chronic temptation to keep on standing upon old paths. They habitually defend the machinery and the methods to which they have got accustomed, and treat with coolness all proposals of reform or improvement. As I have abcady suggested, it seems ver}' doubtful whether Socialist institu- tio'ns could possibly admit of a Department for the Investi- gation of Inventions. To draw a hard and fast rule according to which all labour should be rewarded by a share in the actual product of other labour Avould be to negative every attempt at even mechanical improvement. As to art and literature, the position seems to need no comment. Ex- perience teaches us that everything new in art and literature re((uires, so to speak, to create its own market for itself. Under Socialism, nothing could secure a market which could not be put upon the market at once — for which, as it may be said, there was not a demand ah-eady, even before the process of production should have begun.
And this leads to a further consideration. Is a State depart- ment really a good machine for either production or distribution? The experience of State departments under existing conditions seems to answer this question in the negative. The depart- ments of shipbuilding, of ordnance, of soldiers' clothing, and many others, seem to be open to the charge of inefficiency, at least as compared with private establishments for producing similar objects. It is remarkable that the producing depart- ments are never referred to in this connexion by exponents of Socialism. The defence of the efficiency of State dejmrtments is always made to rest upon the distributing agencies, and chief among these is the Post Office. Schaffle mentions also the State i-ailway, which we have not in England, the tele- graph, and the nmnicipal gas and water supplies ^ Now the efficiency of the Post Office may bo ungrudgingly admitted ; but it must not be urged as proving more than it will bear.
^ Scliiiffle, p. 53.
42 A Plea for Liberty. [i.
In the first })]aec, tlie Post Office has always been a monopoly. There never was a time when any private agency was permitted to compete with tlie State in the work of distriluiting letters. There has therefore been no opportunity of comparing State work in that department with private work. In the second place, the work of distributing letters is, after all, comparatively simple. We are accustomed, it is true, to hear and read of feats of great ingenuity in discover- ing obscure addresses ; but these are the exceptions. It is in the department of letter-carrying, at all events, that the principal successes — it might almost be said the only suc- cesses— have been achieved. The telegraphic department is not a success either financially or administratively. The letter department largely supplements the cost of the tele- graph department. In other words, people who write many letters, but send few telegrams, are made to pay for the accommodation afforded to the senders of many telegrams. Even in the letter-carrying department, there is plenty of room for improvement. It is very well managed, on the whole, in country places ; but in London, and in hirge towns geueralh', the delivery of letters within the town leaves much to be desired. In tliis connexion I cannot refrain from noticing the break-dowm of letter-delivery arrangements which has taken place at Christmas every year since the Christmas card came into fashion. The break-down under the Aveight of exceptional complimentary correspondence is not even of our own day; for Charles Lamb, in his essay on Valentine's Day, writes of ' the weary and all-for-spent twopenny postman.' But, of course, in the vast proportions of the Christmas crush, it is necessarily modern, and the creation of the penny and halfpenny postage. One would think that if, by the mere fact of belonging to a department of Government, a preter- natural faculty of dealing Avith statistics were conferred upon otKcials, the olficials of the Post Office ouii'ht. after a brief experience, to have been able to foresee and provide for this recurring difficulty. Yet no sooner does Christmas come Avithin measurable distance, than every Post Office is placarded and every newspaper filled with plaintive appeals from the Postmaster- General to the Christmas-card desj)atching public, to • post early, so as to ensure the punctual deliA'ery of letters ! '
It is worth jioting, too, that the Post Office is not, strictly speaking, a working man's institution. It is the upper and
I.] The Impj'aciicability of Socialism. 4^
o
middle classes who keep it going. The working class, or what is commonly so called, sends few letters and no telegrams. It" Avhat are usually called ' working ' men and women corre- sponded hy letter to anything like the extent to which corre- spondence is carried on by the commercial cla.ss alone, the revenue of the Post Office would be greatly enlarged. On the other hand, it is difficult to conceive how the telegraph system could possibly be administered, if that ever h)ecame a really popular institution. As it is, letters pay for telegrams, as already stated.
The arrangement whereby the surplus of receipts for letters is made to pay for the deficit in telegrams is the really Socialistic feature of the working of the Post Office. It may or may not be an advantage that the people w^ho use the telegraph should do so at the expense of the larger public who write letters, but this proves nothing at all as to the probable success of the working of more complicated insti- tutions by State machinery. As ali-eady pointed out, the delivery of letters is about as simple a work as any organisa- tion could undertake, and next to it in simplicity is the trans- mission and delivery of telegrams. Nor should we omit to note to how 2,Teat an extent the task of letter-delivery has been facilitated by railways and steam communication. It would be safe to say that but for these aids the penny post would at best have barely paid its w^ay, if indeed it had not proved a total failure. Briefly it may be said that the success of the Post Office, such as it is, depends upon the circum- stances which assimilate it to a private undertaking, and which at the same time cause it to differ from other Govern- mental institutions.
But it is not altoo-ether fair to blame Governmental insti- tutions, merely as such, for the shortcomings which they undoubtedly exhibit. The truth is that they share these shortcomings with all institutions in w^hich industrial opera- tions are conducted upon a large scale. Every large joint stock company, and especially every company whose busmess is of the nature of a monopoly, displays tendencies which are, after all, only carried out to an extreme in Government monopolies and in Government manufacturing establishments. Every great railway company is apt to be slow at adopting improvements and new or untried methods of business. That is because, in the first place, every such undertaking is npon
44 ^ Pica for Liberty. [i.
a very largo scale, and requires the co-operation of a great many heads and hands. Things must be done very much l)y fixed rule. There is less scope for personal initiative than in smaller and more elastic businesses. But in addition, the business is more or less of a monopoly. The public must use the railway in question, or go without the carrying facilities of which it stands in need. The only check upon the arbi- trary power of the directors and other officials is the necessity of tindino: a dividend for the shareholders, and that check once taken awa}' there is nothing to hinder the management from becoming despotic. Where there is less monopoly, the manao-emont is under o-reater inducements to strive after making the business popular. But it is not until we come to individual enterprise, where the merchant or shopkeeper or other head of the establishment is brought into direct per- sonal relation with his customers, that the conduct of business l)Ccomes really elastic and automatic. It is because their per- sonal gain or loss is not directly dependent upon the working of the institution that Government officials are less efficient than those of joint-stock companies, and the latter than those of private firms; these last themselves being inferior to the partners or proprietors, when they are brought into personal relations with the customers of the house.
I may be told that this is all speculation. As a matter of fact, I may be reminded, small traders are even more behind- hand than any big monopoly. If it Avero not so. how is it that so many private businesses are now being turned into joint-stock companies? My repl}' is tliat in all these cases the business began with private eiiterprise, and that not until private enterprise had pretty fully done its w^ork did it l)ecome practicable to apply the joint-stock principle. I Avould add that this very principle is itself on its trial just now. and that it is premature to pronounce any judgment until we shall have had much larger experience. The analogous prin- ciple of co-operation would seem to be working fairly well as regards distribution, but not so well in production. We must remember also that the possession of large capital confers upon joint-stock enterprises an advantage Avhich in some measure counterbalances, though it does not wholly neutralise, the special atlvantages attaching to private management. Nor should it l)e forgotten that this capital itself has been accu- mulated under private enterprise. The private businesses
T,] The Iiiipracticability of Socialism. 45
turned into limited companies are survivals ; those that fall behind in the race are the failures of individualism, and no one atlirms that individualism makes no failures. I for my part am disposed to think that the circumstances which cause larij^e joint-stock companies to resemble Government undertakings are drawbacks and not advantages. It appears to uie that if railways could compete as omnibuses do, they would pcnform the carrying work of the country as cheaply and as efficiently as, on the whole, the omnibus services of London and other great cities perform the services which they render. Owing to exceptional circumstances, railway com- panies have to place themselves under State patronage, and therefore to submit to State control ; and in so far as this is the case, it detracts from their efficiency. Ownng, moreover, to the scale on which work has to be carried on, these large enterprises are all more or less tainted with the vice of departmentalism. To use a colloquial phrase, they are tied up with red tape. The terrible railway accident in June, 1889, in the north of Ireland, was largely due to the want of a proper system of brakes, and this want was itself due to slovenly management and a blind trust in old methods. There are plenty of railways still unprovided with fit ap- pliances, despite Board of Trade inspection. I know of one line in the vicinity of a great seaport, two of whose suburban stations have no telegraph wire between them, and the rail- road consists of a single lino running along ^he face of a crag overhanging the sea. A postal telegraph line passes both stations, and a very trifling expenditure would connect it with both, but the directors ' do not see theii- way ! '
I need not go on multiplying instances. The burden of proof lies upon those who assert that departmentalised manage- ment is superior to private enterprise. Their crucial instance, the Post Office, breaks down when it is tested. I think I have shown sufficient cause for my belief that private enter- prise docs not gain, but loses, by assimilation to State departmentalism. I may however be pardoned if I refer briefly to contemporary events. The strikes of policemen and postmen (June and July, 1890) seem to prove that a Government department is not necessarily more successful than a private lirm or a joint-stock company in securing the contentment of the people who are in its employ.
On the whole, it seems that we should be warranted in
46 A Pica for Liberty. [i.
(IraAving the conclusion that State departments are neither good producers, good distributors, nor good employers of labour, as compared with private producers, distributors, and employers.
I now come to a part of my task which I approach with some reluctance. There are certain social and economic matters which it is impossible to discuss without running a risk of offending certain perfectly legitimate susceptibilities, yet which must be discussed if a judgment of any value is to be formed on the social problem. I have elsewhere pointed out that the Collectivist community is always spoken of as a ' closed economic unit.' It is not easy to discover in tlie works of Schaftic or of any other exponent of Socialism whether they contemplate the exclusion of imported labour. If they do not, it only remains to be said that they are not honestly facing the consequences of their own system. If a collective production and distriluition of wealth is to be carried on at all. it must be on the condition that the pro- ducers know exactly how much to produce, and that the distributors know exactly how much, and to whom, to dis- tribute. This, as I have already shown, is a task beyond human power, even if the fluctuation of numbers could be to some extent foreseen. But we know that the Huctuation can ]iv no means be foreseen, ami we know the reason whv. I have endeavoured to lead up to my main question by re- ferring in the ^rst instance to the importation of foreign labour ; but that in reality is only a very minor matter. In spite of the silence of Schatlle and other recognised exponents of the system. I suspect that no thoroughgoing Socialist would shrink from prohiljiting foreign immigration. But there is an immio-ration which o-oes on dav after dav — an immigration of mouths to be fed, without, for the time being, hands to labour for food. Every child that is born is for years a helpless being, dependent upon others for its support, and incapable of rendering anything in return. Nay. more, every child renders its mother incapable of contributing to the support of the community ibr weeks, if not for months ^. The disablement of the mother may lie considered a matter of no
' I am luTO speiikiug of civilised Imt .Socialism coutemiilates a state of
couimuuitic's. I ain quite aware tJiat <-ivilisation not inferior to what now
savage women are fit to work in a ))!evails, with, it may bo presumed,
very uliort time after chilil-bearing ; a eivilised and not a savage phijmiw.
I.] The Impracticability of Socialism. 47
very great conse(|ueiice, l)ut it is certainly a sserious matter to the community to be compelled to maintain an entirely unproductive consumer for a period of some fourteen years. It may fairly Le taken for granted that a Socialist conniuinity would not exact less in the way of education than is demanded by the commmiity as at present existing. The present school age does not end until thirteen. We may be pretty sure that mider Socialism the period would not be shorter, and might be longer. Even this is not all. The young person of thirteen or fourteen would then have to be provided with a vocation. How far any liberty of choice would or could be left is a difficult question, but fortunately it does not require a detailed answer. The liberty of choice must under any circumstances be limited by the number of vocations open to the candidate : and we may safely assume that tliis number would itself depend upon the judgment of the collective authorities. So, then, these authorities would have not only to provide for all the mothers who from time to time bore children, and for all the children from birth till about fourteen 3'ears old, but also to find employment for all the boys and ofirls who lived to the age of fourteen. Kor is even that all. They would be bound, in ottering employment to each can- didate, to hold out some reasonable expectation that such employment should be a provision for life. At present, under the ordinary regime of individualism and competition, the father of a family is as a general rule responsible for the careers of his children. The children themselves have some kind of a voice in choosing a trade or a profession. If a mistake is made, the consequences may, no doubt, be very disastrous ; but as a rule, he who commits the error sutlers the consequences. Every now and then it happens that a particular vocation is, so to speak, superseded and rendered obsolete. Still more often it happens that a candidate for employment adopts the wrong vocation, or that work drifts away to other quarters, so that although the employment itself may be prosperous enough, particular workers or classes of workers are thrown out. Under individualism, there takes place a survival of the fittest, which may be very cruel to individuals and to classes. One of the aims of collective production and distribution is to eliminate this survival, with its attendant cruelty. Can it be done ?
We have seen that the more sober exponents of Socialism
48 A Plea for Liberty. [i.
declare that there i.s uo intention of interleiing with lamilv life. Even the extreme fanatics avoid the question, and seem to assume that it may somehow or other he expected to solve itself. But there are indications, underlying all the more outspoken utterances on the subject, that attempts would be made to limit the increase of the population. Curiously enough, the most earnest advocacy of artificial restraints on multiplication is to be found in John Stuart Mill's l^ulitical Eronniiiif ; and ^lill was not a Socialist or Collectivist. Mill, indeed, advocated a voluntary restriction which to most readers has seemed a quite unpractical and impracticable proposal. When we consider how other habits — that of drinking, for instance — which are admitted to be immoral an(i disgraceful, are nevertheless far too frequently and freely indulged, it is difficult to read MilFs speculations on this subject without a smile. But Mill, in spite of his enthusiasms, was a clear-headed man. He saw what the puzzle-headed latter-day fanatic does not see, that unless multiplication is to be somehow restrained, no artificial devices for promoting social prosperity have any chance of success. Whether, under a Collectivist regime, restraints on multi- plication would in the long run succeed in promoting social prosperity is another question. My belief is that they would not. We have seen already that the scheme of Collectivism implies the regulation of employment. Every child must be maintained until his or her schooldays are over. Every youth and maiden, on leaving school, must be provided with some kind of employment. How is this to be donel What government, central or local, is wise enough and strong enough to perform such a task? If we suppose it placed in the hands of a very w^idely ramitied local organisation — parish councils for example — is there not as much danger of their entering upon a course of competition as if they were private families 1
We have seen that Schiiffle explicitly disclaims any project of restrictions upon population, and that the fanatical Social- ists, such as the Fabian essayists, are completely silent upon the subject. It may, nevertheless, be worth while to refer to the only country where such restrictions are actually in force under the inliuence of a public opinion such as Mill hoped might come into eNistence. France, which Mill held up as an example, is now beginning to complain that her population
I.] The liupi'acticability of Socialism. 49
is becoming actually scanty. French statesmen are seriously talking of ottering rewards to the parents of large families. The remedies for over-population, so eloquently advocated by Mill, have done their work rather too well. But is France free from complaints of the existence of a ' proletariat % " By no means. Is France free from Socialist agitation? By no means. Germany, it is true, is just at present the headquarters of tlie movement, and it is also true that France is more free than most other P^uropean countries from the evils brought about by the presence of what Socialists call a proletariat. But France has by no means laid aside Socialism. There ai'e, it is true, no Saint Simons, no Fouriers, no Louis Blancs ; but French workmen are as fond of the phrases of Socialistic agitation as ever they were. French mun of letters, too, have by no means left of!" playing the role of eloquent Aaron to the inarticulate but suggestive Moses of German thought. .
In spite of all this — in spite, especially, of the extremely meddlesome character of public authority — France is, in two respects, extremely far from being a Socialistic nation. No- where is private property so jealously guarded. Nowhere is what we may call the individualism of the family held so sacred. However willing he may be to observe self-imposed restraints, no Frenchman would tolerate for a moment a law prescribing a limitation on the number of his children. But the more clear-headed of the English philanthropists are be- frinnino- to see that some such law there must be if Socialism, or anything akin to Socialism, is to have etlect. SchatHe, it is true, says the German Socialists do not demand any such law. The Fabian rhetoricians give the subject the go-by. But there are others who see clearlv enouo-h that it must come to such a ]a,AV sooner or later. A writer in the daily press recently proposed that the clergy and the civil registrars should have a discretionary power to refuse marriage under certain cu'cumstances to couples applying for their services. We know very well that the clergy would never exercise any such discretion. We may be pretty sure that the civil regis- trars would not do so, any more than the clergy. But suppose they did, every one knows what the consequence would be. Restraints on marriage always result in an increase of illicit unions and of illegitimate births. Are we prepared to make cohabitation out of wedlock a crime? The mediaeval Church tried to do that, and conspicuously failed. Indeed, it is won-
E
50 A Plea for Liberty. [i.
derlul in liow many instances modern Socialism is compelled, as it were, to hark l)ack to the methods of mediaeval despotism, civil and ecclesiastical.
The situation mayl)e summed up in a sentence: Socialism, without restraints on the increase of jjopulation, would be utterly i]ietKcient. With such restraints, it would be slavery.
In a word, Socialism — the scheme of collective capital and collective production and distribution — breaks down the moment it is subjected to any practical test. Considered merely as a scheme for supplying the material wants of the connuunity, it is seen at a glance to be totally incapable of adjusting the relation between suj)ply and demand. I have suggested the practical test. If any Socialist were asked, ' Suppose Socialism established now, hovr many suits of clothes, and of what (jualities, will have to be in stock for the township of Little Pedlington on the ist of next June T either he could not answer the question at all, or he would 1)0 compelled to fall l)ack uj^on the device of a uniform. Still more difhcult would it be to answer the question, ' Of the children born this year, how many boys do you propose to apprentice as tailors, and how many girls as dressmakers, in 1 904 ? ' Until Socialists can answer these ({uestions, and others of like nature, Socialism has simply no lovii^i dandi as a practical scheme for the supply of material wants. That being so, a fortiori it is valueless as a scheme for the supply of wants which are not material. To do the enthusiasts of Socialism justice, none of them even pretend to include art and literature in their projects. This is all the more curious, because the present is a time when art and literature are being cultivated for the sake of profit more, apparently, than at any previous period of history ^ But inasmuch as the Socialist exponents, sober or enthusiastic, shirk the topic, I am entitled to say that they do not expect the Socialist connuunity to cultivate art or literature.
' Some very sfrikiiig ivnuuks 011 in that diivctiou. But tlie interest
tlu^ rewards given l)y society to men of the inference lies in this; that
of letters -will he fouii<l in Professor Professor Graham emphasises very
(iraham's work, citeil above [The sti'ongly, though quite unconsciously,
Social Prohh'iii, eh. a-. ]>. iC>- et se(i<j., th(^ fact that literature is a pro-
' Spiritual Producers and tlieii- Work'). fession, and is suhjer-t in the long
I'riift'ssor (ii'ahani is not a Socialist. run to commercial influences like
thongh his opinions have .some )>ias other pi'ofessions.
I.] The Inipracticabilily of Soiiii/isni. 51
111 uiMitifiii til all this, it suoins to iiu: <i vory o|u-n t|in'sti<jn (to say tilt* least) wlictlicr Socialisiii woiiltl really inoniotc' tliii (•()inr«)rt of tin- ciitii-f \vorkiii'4 class, supjiosiiiL^f that it coiihl in; AVorketl Avithoiit the tlillieiillies 1 havi- iiotf<l. TIm- em- !■;,'( -tic workman, it may be conceded, wouM lie suecesslul iMnler Socialism ; hut then, he is already successful under Individual- ism. All workmen, however, are not cnert,'etie. What of the man wh(» is lielow the aveiai^^e. or harely up to it. in energy, hitnesty, and sobriety? \\'hat of the man who has no vices, hut whose character is shiftless, irresolute, waiitin- in "back- b(»ne?' Such a man, under In(livi<lualism. becomes a lailurc ; what would be his fate undci- Socialism ? I know of no in- faliihle prescription whereliy an idle man can lie rendered industrious, or an irresolute one steady of pur])ose, excci)t one — the sharp spur of want ! Are Socialists pre])ared to suj^gest an\- other? If thev are not. wluMvin is their svstem bett<'r than Individualism ? If they are, what is it? The prison, perhai)s, or the scourge ? If so, some one may be tempted to say con- cerning the tender mercies of the philanthropist what the ins])ired writer .said concerning those of the wicked.
It remains only to sum up what I have attempted to prove, and I think succeeded in proving.
Socialism would be totally inefHcient as a ])r<i(hicing and distributing scheme. Society is not an army, which can be fed on rations, clothed in a uniform, ami lodged in barracks. Even if it were, the task would be too much for (iovernment departnients. which habitually fail, or connnit shortcfnnings, in dealing with the special classes Asliicli they do undertake to feed, clotbe, and lodge. The army and navy arc composed of young men. and picked men. Avho are, or ought to lie. in good average health ami vigour. Vet the supply departments of both services, it is acknowledged on all hands, leave much to be desired. How nuich more difhcult woidd the task V)c of maintainiiiir women, children, the aired and the sick I
I have dealt pretty i'ully with the one department of Government which is alwavs called successful, and I have shown that the success which is claimed for it must, to say the least, be conceded subject to large (pialitications. I have shown that (Jovernment departments arc not more merito- lious as employers of labour than they arc as producers and distributors.
1 have suii-tjfested that the scheme of Socialism is wlioll\-
E 2
52 A Pica for Liberty. [i.
incomplete unless it includes a power of restraining the in- crease of population, which power is so unwelcome to English- men that the very mention of it seems to recjuire an apology. I have showed that in France, where restraints on multiplica- tion have been adi>pted into the popular code of morals, there is discontent on the one hand at the slow rate of increase, while on the other, there is still a ' proletariat,' and Socialism is still a power in politics.
I have put the question, how Socialism would treat the residuum of the working class and of all classes — the class, not speciall}' vicious, nor even necessarily idle, l)ut below the average in power of will and in steadiness of purpose. I have intimated that such persons, if they belong to the upper or middle classes, are kept straight by the fear of falling out of class, and in the working class by positive fear of want. But since Socialism purposes to eliminate the fear of want, and since under Socialism the hierarchy of classes will either not exist at all or be wholly transformed, there remains for such persons no motive at all except physical coercion. Are we to imprison or flog all the ' ne'er-do-weels ? '
I began this paper by pointing out that there are inequali- ties and anomalies in tlie material world, some of which, like the obliquity of the ecliptic and the consequent inequality of the days' length, cannot be redressed at all. Others, like the caprices of sunshine and rainfall in different climates, can be mitigated, but must on the whole be endured. I am very far from asserting that the inequalities and anomalies of human society are strictly parallel with those of material nature. I fully admit that we are under an obligation to coiitrol nature so far as we can. But I think I have shown that the Socialist scheme cannot be relied upon to control nature, because it refuses to obey her. Socialism attempts to vaiujuish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that natiu'c has a beni'ticcnt as well as a malignant side. The struggle for life provides for the various wants of the human race, in somewhat the same way as the climatic struggle of the elements provides for vegetable and animal life — imperfectly, that is, and in a manner strongly marked by inequalities and anomalies. By taking advantage of prevalent tendencies, it is possible to mitigate these anomalirs and inequalities, but all experience shows that it is impossible to do away with them. All history.
T.] The I))ipyact{cahility of Sociii/is)/i. 53
iiioroovi-r, is tlio record of the ti'nmiph of Individiialisin over soinctliintj^whicli ^v^ls virtually Socialisiuorl 'nlifctivisiii.tlioiiifh not callcil liy tluit miinc. In tarly days, an<l even at this day under archaic civilisations, the notcof social lift- is the absence of freedom. l^>ut under every progressive civilisation, freedom has made decisivt' strides — l)roa»h'nt <1 (h)\vn, as tlie poet says, from precedent to preeech'ut. Ami it has Ix-en rii^ditly and naturally so.
Freedom is the most vahuiMe of ;ill liunian po.sscssions, next after life itself. It is more valuahle. in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health : ])ut good laws, justly atlministered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the onlv thini; that law can secure, i^aw cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of ecjuality. all that law can do is to secure fair jday, which is etiuality of rights l»ut is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Indiviilualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with (hat Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we mav. is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, ami that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the almegation of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove.
EhWAiii) Stanley Robertson'.
II.
THE LIMITS OF LIBEIITY.
The power of the State may be defined as the resultant of all the social forces operating within a definite area. ' It follows,' says Professor Huxley, with characteristic logical thoroughness, 'that no limit is, or can ]je, theoretically set to State interference.'
Ah extra — this is so. I have always endeavoured to show that the effective majority has a right (a legal right) to do just what it pleases. How can the weak set a limit to the will of the strong ? Of course, if the State is rotten, if it does not actually represent the effective majority of the country, then it is a mere sham, like some little old patri- arch who rules his Lrawny sons by the prestige of ancient thrashings.
The time comes in the life of everv o-overnment when it becomes effete, when it rules the stronger by sheer force of prestige ; when the bubble waits to be pricked, and when the first determined act of resistance brings the whole card-castle down with a crash. The hoalet'er^eiiient is usually called a revolution. On the contrary, it is merely the outward and visible expression of a death which may have taken place years before. In such cases a limit can be set to State inter- ference liy the simple process of exploding the State. But wlien a State /.s (as Hobbes assumes) the embodiment of the will of the effective majority — -force majeure — of the country, then clearly no limit can be set to its interference — ah extra. And this is why Holdjes (who always Iniilt on fact) describes the power of the State as absolute. This is why he says that (!ach citizen has conveyed all his strength and power to the State.
I fail to see any a ]rrinri assumption here. It is the plain truth of his time and of our own. We may agree with
ir.] The Lituit^ of Lihcrly. 55
.liiliii l,()c-k»' tli.U tlicrc <)Ui,'lit tu III' soiiif limit to <lcspi)tisiii, Hinl \vi' may keep oii .shitting the cuncL'ntiateil I'orci* iVom tlu' haiuls ol' the Oiu' to thosi' of thu Fow ; from tlio hands of the Few to those of the Many; and fiom tlic hands of tho Many to thosi* of the Most — th(^ numt'iical majoiity. l^.ut this luindin^' aliout of tlu' powor cannot altt-r its nature; it still remains unlimited desjiotism, as Ho])hes rightly assumes. Locke's pretence that the individual citizens reserved certain liherties -svlien the State was formed is of course the merest aUegory. without any more founchition in fact than lloussoau's Cimtnd Sncia/. It is on a par with the 'natural right' of every citizen born into the world to an acre of land and a good education. We nuiy consider that nation wise which should guarantee these a<lvantages to all its children, or we may not; hut we must never forget that the rights, when created, are created by the will of the strong for its own good pleasure, and not carved out of the absolute domain of despotism by any High Court of Eternal Justice.
Surely it is the absence of all these a priori vapourings, common to Locke. Rousseau, and Henry George, which renders the writings of Hobbes so fascinating and so instructive.
Shall we then sit down like blind fatalists in presence of the doctrine 'no limit can be set to State-interference?' Certainly not. I have admitted that no limit can be set t'rurn iritliovt. But just as we can influence the actions of a man by appeals to his understanding, so that it may Ije fairly said of such an one, ' he cannot lie,' and of another that it is easier to turn the sun from its course than Fabricius from tho path of duty : so we may imbue the hearts of our own countrymen with the doctrine of in- dividualism in suchwise that it may sometime be said of England 'Behold a free country.' It is to this end that individualists are working. Just as a virtuous man im- poses restrictions on the gratification oi his own appetites, apparenth/ setting a limit to his present will, and compelling a liody to move in a direction other than that of least re- sistance, so, it is hoped, will the wise State of the future lay down a general principle of State-action for its own voluntary guidance, which principle is briefly expressed in the words Let be ^
' Is it nnt a jiity t<> go to France for peculiarly English ? Tlie correct and a term t.i (b'Uute a political idea so iflioniatic Kiiiilish for hiix'H'Z-faiiii is
56 A Plea for Liberty. [11.
In liis cfFoi'fc to supply destructive criticism of u, irrlorl political philosophy, which is the task Professor Huxley set before him, it seems to me he has been a little unjust to Individualism. He has taken for granted that it is based on a 'priori assumptions and arguments which are as foreign to the reasoning of some of its supporters as to his own. The individualist claims that under a sj-stem of increasing political liberty, many evils, of which all alike complain, would disappear more rapidly and more surely before the forces of co-operation than they will ever do before the dis- tracted efforts of democratic ' regimentation.^
Of course there are individualists as there are socialists, and, we may add, artists and moralists and most other -ists who hang most of their conclusions on capital letters. We have Liberty and Justice and Beauty and Virtue and all the rest of the family; l)ut it is not fair to assert or even to insinuate that Individualism as a practical working doctrine in til is country and in the United States is based on reasoning from abstractions. Professor Huxley refers to ' moderns who make to themselves metaphysical teraphim out of the Absolute, the Unknowable, the Unconscious, and the other verbal abstractions whose apotheosis is indicated by initial capitals.' And he adds, ' So far as this method of estal)lishino; their claims is concerned, socialism and indi- vidua! ism arc alike out of court.' Granted — but so is morality. Honesty, Truth, Justice, Liberty, and Eight are teraphim wdien treated as such, every whit as ridiculous as the Un- knowable or the LTnconditioned. Nevertheless it is surely possil)le to label general ideas with general names, after the discovery of their connotation, without being charged with the worship of abstractions. And unless Professor Huxley is prepared to dispense with such general ideas as Kight and Wrong, True, Beautiful and Free, I fail to see what objection he can have to the Unknowable when employed to denote what has been so carefully and clearly deibuMJ under that term by Mr. Spencer.
At the same time I admit that we have reason to thank
Ict-be. 'Let m<! )ie,' siiys tlio hoy in T1u>it is a Ijai'liiirous ringahout Lc? r((7,
the street, protesting against inter- wliieli is ealeiilated to reflect on the
ference. Moreover, it is not only col- doctrine conveyed. For the last
loquial hnt classical. 'The rest said, seventeen years I lune always found
Let be. let lis see whether Elias will it convenient to speak of the Let-be
come to save him ' fMalt. xxvii. 49, JSchool.
II.] The Liiuits of Lihcrly. * 57
Pro lessor Huxley lor his ousjaiii^'lit on Alisohitisin in ]>olilic.s, Avlieniliy \\c has done more <^o<j(l to the cause o|" jno^iess than he couhl ever hope to <lo liy merely thihhin^' himself either individualist or socialist. When the Majority learns that its acts can ho criticised, just as other j)eo])le's acts an- criticised : that it can Itehave in an ' un'^entleinanly ' manner, as •well as in a wr(;ni;l'ul mainu'i- ; that it should be guided in its treatment of tlie minority by its conHfieiire, and not solely by laws of its own making; then there will be no scojx' for any other lorm of government than that which is based on individualism : and the Kiirhts of Man will exist as realities, and not as a mere expres.sion denoting each man's private notions of what his rights oiujld to l»e.
No one with the smallest claim to attention has been known to alTirm that this or any other nation is yet ripo ibr the abolition of the State. Some of the more ad\aneed individualists and philosophical anarchists express the view that absolute freedom from State-interference is the iioal towards which civilisation is makiiiLf. an<l. as is usual in the ranks of all political parties, there are n<jt wanting impatient jtersons who contend that now is the time for every great reform.
Such are the people who would grant representative in- stitutions to the Fijians, and who would model the (Jovern- inent of India on that of the United States of America. They may safely be left out of account. I suppose no one acquainted with his political writings will accuse Victor Yarros of backwardness or even of opportunism. Yet, says he : —
The :ilii>litiMn of tin- i-xti-nial State must ho proetdod liy the (lot-ay of tlio notimis wliicli Ijivatlu' life ami vigour into that clumsy monstt-r : in other words, it is only when the people learn to value liherty, and to understand the truths of the anarchistic jthilosojihy, that the question of practically aliol- ishiny the State looms up and a<-quires signiticance.
Again, Mr. Benjamin Tucker, the higli priest of anarchy in America, claims that it is precisely what is known in England as individualism. So far is he from claiming an}' natural right to liberty, that he expressly repudiates all such a, priori postulates, and bases his political doctrine on the evidence (of which there is abundance) that libert}' would be the mother of order. Referring to Professor Huxley's attack on anar- chists as persons who build on baseless assumptions and fanciful suppositions, he says : —
0
8 • A Pica for Liberty. [ii.
If ;ill jiuaichisls were guilty nf Midi lolly, scientific men like Professor lliixlcy i-nuld novel" 1)0 cxpictcil Id li,i\c rcsju'ct for tliciii : but tiic ]jrufessoi' has yt't to learn that tlierc are anarchists who jn'ocecil in a way that he him- self would enthusiastically ai)i)rov<' ; who take nothing for granted ; who vitiate their arguments by no assumptions ; hut who study tJie facts of social life, and from tliem derive the lesson that lilierty would he tlie mother of order.
The truth is tha,t the science of society has met with general acceptance of late years, and (thanks chiefly to Mr. Spencer) even the most impatient reformers now recognise the fact that a State is an organism and not an artificial structure to be pulled to pieces and put together on a new model whenever it pleases the efiective majorit}'' to do so. Advice which is good to a philosopher may be bad to a savage and worse to an ape. Similarly institutions which are well suited to one people may be altogether unsuited to another, and the best institutions conceivable for a perfect people would probably turn out utterly unworkable even in the most civilised country of this age. The most ardent constitution-framer now sees that the chances are very many against the Anglo-Saxon people having reached the zenith of progress exactly at the moment when Nature has been pleased to evolve Inwi as its guide. And if it must be admitted that we are not yet ripe for that unconditioned individual liberty which may be the type of the society of the future, it follows that for tlie preMid we must recognise some form of State-interference as necessary and beneficent. The problem is. What are the proper limits of liberty? and if these cannot be theoretically defined, what rules should be adopted for our practical guidance? With those who answer No limits, I will not quarrel. Such answer implies the belief that we have as a nation ah-eady reached the top rung of the ladder — that we are ripe for perfect anarchy. This is a question of fact which each can answer for himself. I myself do not believe that we have attained to this degree of perfection, and furthermore those who do believe it cannot evade the task of fixing the limits of liberty in a lower plane f)f social development. We can force them to co-operate with Its by admitting their contention for the sake of argument, and then asking whether the Russians are ready for absolute freedom, and if so, whether the Hindoos are ready, or the Chinese, or the Aralis. or the Hottentots, or the tree-dwarfs? The absolutist is compelled to draw the line sooner or later,
■■]
The Limit i^ of Liberty. 59
jiml tlifii he is liUfwisc (•(iinjx'llitl to juliiiit tliat (Iw Stati' has Ifi^ithiuiti' fuiu-tions on tin- otlur >itlc ol" thai line.
Ami lit" inu^t also adinit that in practice jx-opli; ha\f to setth' Avher<- privutp freedom ami State-action shall mutually limit each other. Benjamin Tnckt-r's last word still leaves >is in pfvplexity as to the pnietieal rule to he adopted /;o/'-. Let me (juote his words and readily emlorse them, — as far as they go:—
Tlitn lilx Tty always, say tli.- aiian-liists. No use of for.c, cxftpt against the invalid-; aiitl in IIiom- cast's when- it is diHicult t'> ti II \vli<tliir tin- all<'j;<'il (iHi'Uilcr is an iuvatU r or not, .still n<i ust- of foi(.<- c'X<ti>l wiiin- tlm nt-cfssity of inunoiliato solution is so iniporativo that we must UHt« it to savo ourselves. Anil in tliiso fi'W t-ast's whore we must use it, let »is do so frankly and s<|uarely. aiknowit di^inj; it as a matter of neressity. without seekiie^ to harmonise our action with any juditiral ideal or constructing any far-fotdied theory of a State or collectivity having i)rerogatives and rights sujx'rior to those of indi- viduals and ag'^regations of individuals and exempted from the ojieration of the ethical principles which individuals are expected to observe. This is tin? hest rule that I < an frame as ji guide to voluntary co-operators. To apply to it only one case, I think that un<ler .1 system of anarchy, even if it were admitted that there was sonu- j^rouml for considering an unvaccinated person an invader, it would he generally recognised that such invasion was not of a character to require treatment by force, and that any attemjtt to treat it by force would be regarded as itself an invasion of a less doubtful and more immediate natine, requiring as such to be resisted.
Bnt how far does this Hjest rule' carry us? Let us test it by the case selected. Mr. Tucker thinks that under a ir<jiiiir of liberty it would be generally recognised that such an invasion of the individual's freedom of action as is implied by compulsory vaccination is a greater and a worse invasion than the converse invasion of the general freedom by walking about in public • a focus of infection.' Perhaps it would be so recognised in .some future state of anarchy, but is it so recognised n<n':2 I think not. The majority of persons, in this country at least, treat it, and consider that it ought to Ix- treated, as an offence; just as travelling in a public con- veyance with the scarletina-rash is treated. And the ijucstion is. What, in face of actual public opiidon, ought we to <lo to-day ? The rule gives us no help. Even the most avowed State-socialist is read}- to say that compulsion in such matters is justifiable only when it is 'so imperative that we iiiii.-<t use it to save ourselves.' He is ready to do so, if need be, ' fairly and squarely, acknowledging it as a matter of necessity.' But so is the protectionist; so is the religious persecutor. .Mr. Tucker continues : —
6o A Pica for Liberty. [ii.
'I'lu,' <nic.sti<iii liofore us is not what lueasurts ami means of interim rencc wa arc jnstilit'tl in instituting, but which of thoso already existing wo should first loj) oil'. And to this the anarchists answer that unquestionaldy the first to go should he those that interfere most fundamentally with a free market, and tliat the economic and moral changes that would result from this would act as a solvent upon all tlio remaining forms of interfei-ence.
Good again. l)ut why? There must bo some middle prin- ciple upon wliicli this conclusion is based. And it is foi- this niidfile principle, this practical rule for the guidance of those ■who must act at once, that a search must be made. To restate the question : —
Can any guiding principle bo formulated whereby we may know where the State should interfere with the liberties of its citizens and where it should not % Can any definite limits bo assigned to State action % Where in theory shall we draw the lino, Avhich in practice we liuve to draw sumeu-herel
Surely an unprincipled State is as bad as an unprincipled man. Yet what should we think of a man who, in moral questions, decided each case on its merits as a question of immediate expediency ? who admitted that he told the truth or tokl lies just as it suited the object he had presently in view 1 We should say he was an unprincipled man, and we should rightly distrust him. An appeal to Liberty is as futile as an appeal to Justice, until we have defined Liberty.
Various suggestions have been made in order to get over this difficulty." Some people say, Let every man do what is right in his own eyes, provided he does not thereby injure others. To quote Mill: —
The principle is that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, indi- vidually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of a-ction ol' any of their niimber, is self-protection : that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exendsed over any member of a civilised comnuinity against his will is to prevent harm to others.
To this Lord Pembroke shrewdly replies: —
But how far does this take ns ? The very kernel of our ditticulty is the fact that hardly any actions are purely self-regarding. The greater part of them bear a double "aspect — one which concerns self, another which concerns others.
We might even go further; we might plausibly maintain that every act performed by a citizen from his birth to his death injures his neighbours more or less indirectly. If he eats his dinner ho diminishes the supply of food and raises the price. His very existence causes an enhanced demand for the
11.] The Liniiis of Liberty. 6i
necessavius of lite; liciic- tlu: cry against over-population. One who votes on the wrong side in a Parlianienlary election injures all his frllow-countrynien. One who marries a girl lovetl by another injures that oth<r. One who pn'aehcs ("hristiaiiity or Agnosticism (if untrue) injun-s his liearcrs and their lelatives and posterity. Oni" who wins a ganu^ pains the loser. One who .sells a lior.se for more than it is worth injmts the purchaser, and oiu' who sells it for less than it is worth injures his own family.
Taking practical (pu'stions concerning whieli there is imicli dispute ; there are advocates of State-interference with the citizen's freedom to drink what he likes, who base their action not on the ground that the State should protect a fool against the etlects of his folly, but on the ground that drink tills the workhouses and the prisons, which have to be maintained out of the earnings of the sober; and, furthermore, that drink leaves Icmcics of disease and innnorality to the third and the fourth generation. Advocates of compulsory vaccination have been heard to say that they would willingly leave those who refuse the boon to perish of small-pox, but that unvac- cinated persons are foci of infection, and nnist be suppressed in the commoii interest. !Many people defend the Factory Acts, not for the sake of the apathetic workers who will not take the trouble to organise and to defend themselves, but for the sake of the physique of the next generation. The sup- pression of gand)ling-hells is favoured by numy, not on account of the green-horns who lose their money, but because they are schools of cheating and fraud, and turn l<;osc upon society a number of highly-trained swindlers. On the whole. Mills test will not do.
Some say, 'We must fall back on the consensus of the people ; there is nothing else for it ; we must accept the arbitrary Avill — the caprice — of the governing class, be they the many or be they the few.' Others, again, qualify that contention. These say, let us loyally accept the veidict of the majority. This is democracy. I have nothing to urge against it. But, nnfortunately, it only shoves the question a step further back. How are the many to decide for themselves when they ought to interfere with the minority and when they ought not? This is just the guiding principle of which we are in search ; au<l it is no answer to tell us that certain persons must decide it for themselves. We are
62 A Plea for Liberty. [u.
jiiii(^ng>st tin; iiuiiil)cr; ^vllat is our vutc goiiiii.- to Ijc ? (Jf cuuvsG the stronger can do -wluit they choose: Imt what ought they to choose? What is the wisest course for their own welfare, leaving the; minority out of the reckoning?
Socialists say, treat all alike, and all will be well. Rut (■(juality in slavery is not liberty. Even the fox in the fal)le would not have had his own tail cut oli' for the fun of secinsr the other foxes in like plight. After the event, it was quite another matter ; and one can formve those who are worked to death for demanding that the leisured classes shall be forced to earn their living. Lock us all up in gaol, and we shall all be equally moral and ec^ually happy.
Nor is it any solution of this particular jircjblem to abolish the State, however prudent that course might or might not be: the answer to the present question is not ' No Govern- ment!' For this again mei-ely throws the difficult}' a step further back. We ma}^ put the State on one side and imagine a purely anarchic form of societ}-, and the same question still arises. That is to say, philosophical anarchists do not pretend that the anarchy of the wild beasts is conceivable among sane men, still less desirable, — though they are usually credited with this imbecile notion. Thev believe that all necessary restrictions on absolute libertv can be brouo-ht about l:)y voluntary combination. Let us admit that this may be so. The question then arises, for what ]iu]'poses are people to coml)ine? Thus the majority in a club can, if they choose, forbid billiard-playing on Sundays. Ought they to do so? Of course the majority may disapprove of and refrain from it, but ought they to permit the minority to play? If ]iot, on what grounds? The Christians in certain parts of Russia have an idea that they are outwitted and injured by their Jew fellow-citizens. If unrestrained by th(> stronger majority outside — the State — they persecute and drive off the Jews. Ought they to do this? If you reply, 'Leave it to' the sense of the people,' the answer is settled, they ought. It is, there- fore, no answer to our (piestion to say, Away with the State. It may be a good cry, but it is no solution of our problem. Because you cannot do away with the effective majority.
To reply that out of one hundred persons, the; seventy-live weak and therefoi'c orderly ])ei'sons can coml»ine against the twenty-five advocates of lu'ute-force, is uirrely to beg the whole ((uestion. Ought they to condjine for (his purpose?
II.] TJic Liniifs of Liberty. 6.;
Ami it so. wliv not I'or various other jmrposes ? \\ liv iioi I'oi- the vtTv purposes lor which they are now liandetl toj,'eth«i- in uii association cjilletl the State ?
\i)\\ rejoin. 'True, Itut it wouhl lie a \ohnitaiy State, an^l that makes all the diU'ereiiee: no one need ioin it aL,oiinst his will." My answer is, he nci-d not join it now. The existence of the hurglar in our midst is sutKcient evidence of this. But .^ince the anarchy of the wihl l»easts is out of the ([uostion, it is clear that certain arbitrary and ag,L,a-cssive acts on the part of individuals must bo met and resisted by voluntary com- bination— by the Vfduntary combination of a suttieient numl)cr of others to overpower them by fear. or. if necessary, by brute force. Ai;ain 1 ask, I'or what purposes arc these combinations to be made ?
Whether we a(h)pt despotism oi' democracy, socialism or anarchv. wo arc always l)roueht back to this unanswered (|uestion. What are the limits of ^aoup-action m relation to its units .' Shall we say that the State should never interfere with the mutual acts of willing parties ? (And by the State I ■wish to be understoo<l as here meaning the eflective majority of a group, be it a club or be it a nation.) This looks jdausible. but alas! who are the parties? The parties acting, or the parties affected? Clearly the latter, for otherwise, two persons could agree to kill a thiid. I'ut who then are the persons atlected ? Sui)pose a print-seller, with a view to l>usiness. exposes in his shop-window a numljcr of objection- able pictures, for the attraction of those only who choose to look at them and possibly to buy them. I have occasion to walk through that street; am I a party? How am I injured? Is my sense of decencv shocked and hurt? But if this is sufficient ground for public interference, then I have a right to call for its assistance when my taste is hurt and shocked by a piece of architecture which violates the laAvs of high art. I have similar ground of complaint when a speaker gets up in a public place and ]ireaches doctrines which are positively loathsome to me. 1 have a ri'dit of action against a man clothed in dirty rags, or with pomaded hair or a scented pocket-handkerchief.
If you ]-eply that in these cases my hurt is not painful enough to justify anv interference with another's freedom, I have only to cite tiie old and almost forgotten arguments for the iiKiuisition. The possible eternal damnation of my
64 A Pica for Liberty. [ii.
children, who arc cxposctl to lioretical teaching, is surely a sufficiently painful invasion of my happiness to warrant the most strenuous resistance. And even to modern ears, it will seem reasonable that I should have grounds of action against a nuisic-hall proprietor who should offend the moral sense of my children with songs of a pernicious character. This test then will not do.
It has l)cen suggested that the State should not meddle except on the motion of an individual alleging injury to himself. In other words, that the State must never act as prosecutor, but leave all such matters entirely to private initiative ; and that no person should be permitted to com- plain that some otliev person is injured or likely to be injured by the act complained of. But there are two valid objections to this rule: firstly, it provides no test of injury or hurt; secondly, it would not meet the case of cruelty to animals or young children, or imbeciles or persons too poor or too ill to take action. It would permit of the murder of a friendless man. This will not do.
May I now venture to present my own view? I feel convinced that there is no a /rriori solution of the problem. We cannot draw a hard and fast line between the proper field of State-interference and the field sacred to individual freedom. There is no general principle whereby the effective majority can decide whether to interfere or not. And yet we are by no means left without guidance. Take the parallel region of morals: no man has ever yet succeeded in de- tinino- virtue d priori. All we can say is that those acts wdiich eventually conduce to the permanent welfare of the agent arc moral acts, and those which lead in the opposite direction are immoral. But if any one asks for guidance beforehand, he has to go away empty. It is true, certain preachers tell him to stick to the path of virtue, but when it comes to casuistry they no more know wdiich /6- the path of virtue than he does himself 'Which is the way to York ? ' asks a traveller. ' Oh, stick to the York Koad, and you can"t go wrong.' That is the sum and substance of what the moralists have to tell us. And yet Avc do not consider that we are altogether without guidance in these matters. Middle principles, reached by induction from the experience of countless generations, have been formulated, whicli cannot be shown to be true l)y any
II.] The Limifs of Liberty. 65
process of doiluetion I'roin liiLrhor tnitlis. l.ut wliich we trust, siin]>lv Itccausc wc- luivf luiiiul iIkiii trustwoithy a iIkhisuikI tiiiits! iiiul «mr piircnts and Iricuds havt; safi-ly trusti'il them too. JJo not lie. J )o not steal. J)., not hurt your neighlxjiir's feelinqs without cause. And why not \ Because, as a general rule, it will not pay.
Wht'ri' is the liann in saying two and two make five? Either vou are believed or you arc dishelioved. \'i dis- liclii'vcd, you are a failure. One doi's not talk for the music of the thini;:. hut to convey a Ixdii f. If you are lielieved, you have given away false coin or a sham artich'. The rt'cipimt thinks he can buy with it or work with it, and lol it breaks in his hand. He hates the cause of hi.s disappointment. 'Well, what of that'?' you say; Mf I had l)t'cn strong enough or plucky enough, I would have broken his head, and he wouM have hated me for that. Then why should I be ashameil to tell a lie to a man wdiom I de- liberately wish to hurt ? ' Here we come nearly to the end of our tether. Experience tells us that it is mean and self-ujoaiidinii to lie. and we believe it. Those who try find it out in the end.
And if this is the true view of individual morals, it should also be found true of Avhat may be called Groui)-morals or State-laws. We must give up all hope of deducing good laws from high general principles, an<l rest content with those middle principles which originate in expedience and are verified by experience. And we must search for these middle principles by observing the tendency of civilisation. In morals they have long been stated with more or less precision, but in politics they are still unformulated. By induction from the cases presented to us in the long history of mankind, we can, I believe, find a sound working answer to the question we set out with. All history teaches us that there has been an increasing tendency to remove the re- strictions placed by the State on the absolute liberty of its citizens. That is an ob.served fact which brooks no contra- diction. In the dawn of civilisation, we find the bulk of the people in a state of absolute bondage, and even those who supposed themselves to be the independent classes, subject to a most rigorous despotism. Every act from the cradle to the grave must conform to the most savage and exacting laws. ^Nothing was too sacred or too private for the eye of the
F
66 A Plea for Liberty. [ir.
State. Take the Eii'vptians, the Assyrians, the Babyh)nians, the Persians ; we lind tiieni all in a state ui" the nio^t eompleto subjection to central authority. Probably the code of law best known to us, owing to its adoption as the canvas on which European religion is painted, is the code of the Jewish theocracy. Most of us know soniethini; of the drastic and searching rules laid down in the books of Moses, Therein we find every concern of daily life ruled and regulated by the legislature ; how and when people shall wasli themselves, what they may eat and what they must avoid, how the food is to be cooked, what clothes may be worn, whom they may marry, and with what rites ; while, in addition to this, their religious views are carefully provided for them and also their morals, and in case of transo-ression, intentional or accidental, the form of expiation to be made. Nor were these laws at all peculiar to the Jews. On the contrary, the laws of some of the contemporary civilisations seem to have been, if possible, even more exacting and frivolously meddlesome. The Greek and Roman laws were nothing like the Oriental codes, but still they were far more meddlesome and despotic than anything we have known in our day. And even in free and merry England we have in the olden times put up with an amount of fussy State-interference which would not be tolerated for a week now-a-days. One or two specimens of early law in this country may be cited in order to recall the extent and severity of this kind of legislation.
The}- shall have hows and arrows, and use the same of Sundays and holi- days ; an<l leave all playing at tennis or football and other games called quoits, dice, casting of the stone, kailes, and other such importune games.
Forasmuch as labourers and grooms keep greyhounds and other dogs, and on the holidays when good Christians be at church hearing divine service, they go hunting in parks, warr(ais, and connigrios, it is ordained that no manner of layman which hath not lands tu the value of forty shillings a year shall from hencefortli keep any greyhountl or other dog to hunt, nor shall he use ferrets, nets, heys, harepipes nor cords, nor other, engines for to take or destroy deer, hares, nor conies, nor other (jentkmen's game, under jiain of twelve months' imprisonment.
For the great dearth that is in many jilaces of the realm of ])oultry, it is ordained that the price of a young capon shall not ])ass threepence, and of an old fourpence, of a hen twopence, of a ])ulh't a penny, of a goose fourjjence.
Escfuires and gentlemen under the estate of a knight shall not wear cloth of a higher price than four and a-half marks, they shall wear no cloth of gold nor silk nor silver, nor no manner of clotiiing embroidered, ring, liutton, nor l)rooch of gold nor <if silver, nor nothing of stone, nor no manner of fur ; and their wives and daughters shall be of the same condition as to their vesture
„.]
r/ic Unii/s of Lihcrlx. 67
aixl ii]>|>ar(.'l, without any ttirniii:; up <>t- |iiii'lli' •>■■ :i|>|>ai'<'l <>r i^njil •.j|\i'i' ii"i' <>f'
stoIU'.
Bi'cau.^f that ?<iivaiit.s ami hilcurtTs will imt, nor hy a long hl•a.■^on wouM, sfi-v<- and lahoiir witiiout nutra^cMu.s ami <-\r)'.s.siv(t hin-, am! much more than hath hi'cn sivfii to .sn<'li servants ami iahouri'ra in any tiuif past, so that for scarcity o|' tht< said servants and ialioiirfrs tlic huslmnds and land-tenants may not pay their ri'iits nor live upon their lands, to the ;;reat ilama;^)- and loss as Well of the Lords as ot° the ( 'umnions, it is accorded and as->ented that tlie hailill'for hushandry shall take hy the year 13s. 31/. and his (dothiiif^ oneo hy the year at most ; tho master liind las., tht« carter las., the shepherd los. , the oxherd 6.S-. S(/., the swineherd 6.->., a woman lahourer 6.s., a dey6.s., ailriver of the ]dough lx. at the most, and every othi-r lalioun-r and servant aceonlin^ to his decree; and less in the country whei-e less was wont to he <;iven. without clothing, courtesy or other n'ward hy covenant. Ami if any give or take by covenant mori- than is ahove specilied, at tho first that they shall ho thereof attainted, as well the givei-s as the takers, sliall ]>ay the value of tin- e.vcess so taken, and at the second time of tlieir attainder the douhle vahie of such excess, and at the third time the trehle value of such excess, and if the tiiker so attainted have nothing whereof to pay the said exces.s, he shall havo forty days' imprisonment.
One can cite these extraordinary enactments by tho score, with the sati.slactory re.sult of raisinf;^ a hiugh at the expense of our ancestors ; hut before makiiio- too merry, let us examine tlie beam in our own eye. Some of the provisions of our modern Acts of Parliament, when looked at from a proper distance, are quite as ludicrous as any of the little tyrannies of our ancestors. I do not wish to tread on delicate ground, or to raise party bias, and therefore I will resist the tempta- tion of citing modern instances of legislative drollery ^ Doubtless the permanent tendency in this country, as all through history, is in a direction opposed to this sort of grandmotherly government; but the reason is not, I fear, our superior wisdoni ; it is the increasing number of con- flicting intere.'^ts, all armed with democratic power, which renders it diHicult. The spirit is willing, but tho flesh is weak.
I can imagine no healthier task f(jr our 3ie\v school of social reformers than a careful enquiry into the effects of all State attempts to improve humanity. It would take too long to go through even a few of them now. There are all the statutes of Plantairenet davs airainst forestalling; and reoTatint; and usury; there are the old sumptuary laws, the fish laws, the
' I may, however, refer to a quaint the name of our forefathers and fling
tiact entitled 'Municipal Socialism,' at the heads of those pharisaical re-
puhlished bytheLiliertyand Property formers of to-day who never weary
Defence League. Thiscapital satire on of tittering at 'the wisdom of our
modern local legislation I take up in ancestors.'
F 3
68 A Pica for Liberty. [ii.
cloth laws, the Tip|)lino; Acts, the Lord's Day ()l)Soi'vance Act, the Act against making cloth by niachineiy, -which, by its prohibition of the ' divers devilish contrivances,' drove trade to Holland and to Ireland, and thus made it needful to suppress the Irish woollen trade. Still, on the -whole, as I have said. State interference shows signs of beconiinir weaker and weaker as civilisation progresses. And this ]>rings us back to our original question, What is the rule whereby the majority is to guide itself as to where it should interfere with the freedom of individuals and where it should not? It is this: while according the same worship to Liberty in ]iolitics that we accord to Honest}^ in private dealings, hardly permitting ourselves to believe that its violation can in any case be wise or permanently expedient, — while leaning to Liberty as w^e lean to Truth, and deviating from it only when the arguments in favour of despotism are absolutely overwhelming, our aim should be to find out by study of history what those classes of acts are, in Avhich State- interference shows signs of becoming weakened, and as far as possible to hasten on the day of complete freedom in such matters.
When the student of history sees how the Statute of Labourers broke down in its efibrt to regulate freedom of contract between employer and employed, in the interest of the employer, he will admit the futility of renewing the attempt, this time in the interest of the employed. Wlu-n he reads the preamble ^ (or pre-ramble as it is aptly styled in working-mens clubs) to James's seventh Tippling Act, he will be less sanguine in embarking on modern temperance legislation.
We find the same record of failure and accompanying mischiefs all along the line, and it is mainly our ignorance of history that blinds us to the truth. By this process of induction, the earnest and honest reformer is led to discover what those individual acts are which are really compatible with social cohesion. He finds that while the State tends to suppress violence and fraud and stealth with ever-increasing severity, it is at the same time more and more tolerant, not
' 'Whereas, iiotwitlistaiiding all ennoss doth more and more abound,
former laws and jirovisions already to the great offence of Almighty (iod
made, tlie inordinate and extreme and the wasteful destruction of ( iod's
vice of excessive drinking and drunk- good creatures . . .'
II.] I'hc Limits of I.ihcrly. 69
IVoiii svjiinatliv. I'lit tVoiii ncct's^itv. df tin- n suits. LTtuxl, li;»tl. ainl iiitliJii'it lit «it' tV<f .Mntrjict iHtwcni riill-'^Muwii snin- iii«ii ainl woiiu'ii.
Ami wlitii a wt'll-wislitT to niankiiul lias (dice thorou;,'lily apprec-iatud ami tliifi'stod tiiis Lji-ncial ]»iiiicij)l(', liasod as it is on a survey of facts ami history, ami not vovon out of the (Ireani-stutr of r) pi ion philosopliy. lif will l»o content to leniove all artificial Iiindranccs to j)rogrcss. and to watch the evolution of society, instead of trying to mcjdel it accord- ini: to his own vaixuc ideas of the .lust, and tlic; Clood, and tin; I'eautii'ul.
1 wish to show that the only availa])le method of discover- ing the true limits of HIm ity at any given jierioil is the historic. History teaches us that there has heen a marked tendency (in the main continuous) to reduce the numher of State-restrictions on the absolute freedom of the citizens. State-prohibitions are becoming fewer and more definite, while, on the other hand, some of them are at the same time more ritrorously enforced. Freedom to murder and rob is more tirmlv denied to the individual, while in the meantime he has won the liberty to think as he pleases, to say a good deal more of what he pleases, to dress in accordance witli his own taste, to eat when and wliat he likes, and to do, without let or hindrance, a thousand things %vhich. in the olden times, he was not allowed to do without State-super- vision. The proper aim of the reformer, therefore, is to find out, bv a studv of historv, exactly what those classes of acts are in which State-interference shows signs of becoming weaker and weaker, and what th(jse other classes of acts are in which siich interference tends to be more rifjorous and regular. He will find that these two classes are becoming more and more differentiated. And he will then, to the utmost of his ability, hasten on the day of absolute freedom in the former class of cases, and insist on the most determined enforcement of the law in the latter class. Whether this duty will in time pass into other hands, that is to say, whether private enterprise will ever supplant the State in the performance of this function, and whether that time is near or remote, are questions of the greatest interest. What wo are mainly concerned to note is that the orc^^anisa- tiou or department upon wdiich this duty rests incurs a re- sponsibilit}- which must, if society is to maintain its vitality.
70 A Pica for Liberty. [il.
1)6 faithfully borne. The business of can yino' out the funda- inental laws directed a^-ain.st the lower forms of competition, — murder, robbery, fraud. &c. — must, by whomsoever under- taken, ])e unflinchingly performed, or the entire edifice of modern civilisation will fall to pieces.
It is enough to make a rough survey of the acts of citizens in which the State claims, or has at one time claimed, to exercise control ; to track those claims through the ages : and to note the changes which have taken place in those claims. It remains to follow up the tendency into the future. Any one undertaking this task Avill, I repeat, iind himself in the presence of two large and fairly well-defined classes of State-restrictions on private liberty; those which tend to become more thorough and invariable, and those which tend to liecome weaker, more spasmodic and variable. And he will try to abolish these unprincipled interferences altogether, in the belief, based on history, that, though some harm will result from the change, a far jnore than compensating advantage will accrue to the race. In short, what we have to do is to find the Least Common Bond in politics, as a mathematician finds the Least Common Multiple in the field of numbers.
Take these two joint-stock companies, and consider their prospects. The first is formed for the purpose of purchasing a square mile of land, for getting the coal from under the surface, for erecting furnaces on the land, for making pig-iron and converting it into wrought iron and steel, for building houses, churches, and schools for the workpeople, and for converting them and their neighbours to the Catholic faith, and for doing all such other matters and things as shall from time to time appear good to the Board of Directors. The second company is formed for the purpose of leasing a stjuare mile of land, for getting the coal from under the surface, and selling it to the coal-merchants. Now that is just the differ- ence between the State of the past and the State of the future. The shareholders in the second company are not banded together or mutually pledged and bound by a multitude of ol)ligations, but l)y tlm feu:cd vomjxdihlc triih ihe joint (d in. The company with the Least Common Bond is usually the most ])rosperous. A State ludd together ])y too many com- pacts will perl'oi'm all or most of its functions ill. What we have to find is this Least Counnon Bond. Surely it would be absurd to argue that because the shareholders should not be
II.] 'Flic Li))iits of Liberty. 71
l)Oiiiiil liy tt)(j many cuiiipiicts, LlitTrlurt! iIk'v .shoul'l nut ])C Ixninil l>y any. It is iolly to ])rt'ti'n«l that i-acli kIiouM 1h; free to witlnlniw when ami how hu choo.sts ; that lie shoiihl be iVec to j^o <h)wn into the ])its. an<l hcl]) hinisflt" to the coninion coal, in any fashion aLCrecaltle to himself, so h)ui; as hi- takes no more than his own portion, l^y taking; shares in the Mitlhind Railway Company, 1 have not liou<,'ht the right to gi-ow ]nimroses on the line, or to camp out on the St. I'ancras Station ])latfnrm. My liberty to do what I ehooso with niv share of the joint-stock is suspended. 1 am to that extent in sul)ji'ction. My fellow-shareholders, or the majority of them, are my ma.sters. They can compel me to .spend my own money in making a line of rails which T am sure will never pav. Vet 1 do not grundile. But if they had the j)ower (liy our compact) to <leclare war on the Great Northern, or to import Dutch cheeses and Indian carpets, I should not care to be a citizen or shareholder of that particular company or state.
What we have got to do, then, is to purge the great company which has long ago been formed for the purpose of utilising the soil of this country to the best etiect, froin the multifarious functions with which it has ov<'rburdened itself. We. the shareholders, have agreed that the lled-Indian system is not suited to this end ; an<l we have therefore agreed to i'orego our rights ((jtherwise admitted) of taking what we want from each other by force or fraud. This seems to be a necessary article of association. There is nothing to prevent us from airreeing to forego other rights and liberties if we choose ; and ])ossibly there may be some other restrumts on our individual liberty which can be shown to lie desiralde, if not essential, to the success of the undertaking. If so, let them be stated, and the reason for their adoption given. If, on the other hand, it can be shown that a large and happy population can be supported on this soil without ^y other mutual restriction on personal freedom than that which is involved in the main article of association, would it not be as well for all if each kept charge of his own conscience and his own actions ?
And here I should like to guard myself against misappre- hension. Individualists are usually supposed to regard the State as a kind of malevolent ogre. Maleficent it is ; but l>y no means malevolent. The State never intervenes without
72 A Plea for Liberty. [ir,
a reason, whether wo deem that reason valid or in\alid. The reasons alleged arc very numerous and detailed, hut they all fall under one of two heads. The State interferes either to defend gome of the parties concerned against the others, or to defend itself against all the parties concerned. This has nothing to do with the distinction between crimes and civil injuries ; it is more in line with the ethical distinction between self-refijardina; and other-ren[ardina: vices. Thus Avhen a State punishes prize-fighters, it is not because one of them injures the other, but because the sport is demoralising: the State is itself injured, and not any determinate person. Similarly, there are many laws punishing drunkenness, quite apart from the violence and nuisance due to it. In these cases the State alleges that, tliough no determinate citizen is injured, yet the race suffers, and rightly punishes the offence with a view to eliminating the hal)it.
Putting on one side all those acts which injure determinate persons, whether crimes or civil injuries, let us see what the State has done and is doing in this country Avith regard to acts against which no particular citizen has any good ground of complaint. We may classify the subjects of these laws either according to the object affected, or according to the vice aimed at.
Taking some of the mino]' objects of the State's solicitude b}^ way of illustration, we find that g,t one time or another it has interfered more or less with nearly all popular games, many spoits nearly the whole of the fine arts, and many harmless and harmful jjleasures which cannot be brought under any of those three heads.
In looking for the motive which prompted the State to meddle Avith these matters, let us give our fathers credit for the best motive, and ]iot, as is usually done, the worst. Football, tennis, nine-pins, and (juoits were forbidden, as I have pointed out, because the State thought that the time wasted over them might more advantageously be spent in archery, which was (piite as entertaining and far more useiul. That was a good reason, but it was not a sufficient reason to modern minds; and moreover the law failecl in its object. Some othei- games, such as baccai-at, dice, trump, and priuK^ro, wei'c put down because they led to gand)]ing. And gambling was ol»jected to for the good and ample reason that those who indulge in it are moj-ally incapacitated for steady
■>•]
The L'niiiti of Lihcrty. 73
woik. L()lLtrit..s uiul Ix-Ltiii^' come iiiiiI<t this coiismi-. < Mi.- who thinks he sees his way to make a tliousaiul jh r cent, on his eajiital in a sinixlc eveninj; ^vithout hard Avork cannot he e.\])cftt'(l to devote lunisi-lf with /.r;d to the niimite economii's of his trade, lor tlie purpose ot iiiakini; six \wv cent, iiistt-ad of li\r on the capital invested. Weahh-productiou is on the avcr.i^fc a sh)\v process, and all attempts to hurry u]> iiatun- and take short cuts to opulence are intoxicatini;-. enervatimx, disappointing-, and injurious, not only to those who make them, hut to all those who witness the tiiumjih of the lucky, without fixing their attention on the unsuccessful. Uamliling, in slitMt, is wrong ; l)ut this does not necessarily warrant the State in lorl»i<ldin<r it. Another reason alleged on Lchalf of interference was. and still is. that the simple are outwitted hy the cunning. But as this is true of all competition, even tho healthiest, it does not seem to he a valid reason for State- action. It is also said that games of chance lead to cheating and frand. But this is by no means a necessary consequence. Indeed, some of the most inveterati- gamldors arc tlic most honourable of men. Again, the State refuses to sanction betting contracts for the same reason that under the Statute of Frauds it recpiires certain agreements to be in writing: namely, to ensure deliberateness and sufHcient evidence of the transaction. I think Barbeyrac overlooks this aspect of the case in his Tvaite de Jeu, in which he defends the lawfulness of chance-games. He says : —
If I ;iin at liberty to jirnmisc ami sivo my jjinpcrty, alisohitily ami iiiic'.n- ditiunally, to wliunisoevi-r I pk-ast-. wliy may I not i>r<>ini.>?o ami give a <•( rtaiii sum, in the event of a person proving more fortunate or more skilful than I, witli respect to the result of certain contingencies, movements, or comijina- tions, on which we luul ))reviously agreefl ? . . . (iaining is a contract, anil in every contract tlie nnitual lonsent of the parties is tlie supreme law ; this is an im;ontestahle maxim nf natural equity.
l]ut, as matter of fact, the State does not prohibit, or even refuse to sanction, all contracts based on chance. It merely requires all or some of the usual guarantees against impulse, together with suthcient evidence and notification. It is true, you are not allowed to bet sixpence with a friend in a public- house that one horse will beat another in a race; you are allowed to bet a thousand pounds on the same event in your own house or at Tattersalls: but if y<ai win and do not get paid you have no redress in a (Jourt of law. But if you bet that your baby will die within twelve months, you are not
74 ^ Plea for Liberty. [ir.
only penuitted to uiakf the bet, but, iu case the contingency arises, you can recover the stakes in a Court, provided alwa^'s the gentlemen you bet with have talven the precaution to dub themselves Life Assurance Society. You may also send a ship to sea, and bet that it "vvill go to the bottom before it reaches its destination. You will recover your odds in a Court, provided the other parties are called underwriters, or some other suitable name. You may bet that some one will set tire to your house before next Christmas, and, if this happens, the Court will compel the other party to pay, though the odds are about looo to i — provided such other party is called a Fire Insurance Office. Again, if twenty men put a shilling each into a pool, buy a goose, a surloin of beef, and a plum-pudding, and then spin a teetotum to see who shall take the lot, that is a lottery, and the twenty men are all punished for the sin by the State. But if a lady l)uys a tire-screen for .^'3, and the same twenty mt'n put a sovereign each into the pool, and spin the teetotum to see who shall have the screen, and the .^'20 goes to the Missionary Society, that is called a bazaar rattle, and no one is punished by the State. If a dozen men put a hundred pounds apiece into a pool, to be the property of him who outlives the rest, that is called tontine, and is not only permitted but guaranteed by the State. If you bet with another man that the Eureka Mine Stocks will lie dearer in three months than they are now, that is called speculation on the Stock Exchange, and the State will enforce the payment of the bet. But if you bet that the next throw of the dice will be higher than the last, that is called ffamblino- and the State will not enforce the payment of the bet. If you sell boxes of totfee for a penny each, on the understanding that one 1)0X out of every twenty contains a bright new threepenny-bit, that again is called a lottery, and you go to prison for the crime. But if you sell newspapers for a penny each, on the understanding that in a certain continyvncv the buyer may net .^'100. that is called advertisement, and you go not to prison, but possibly (it you sell plenty) to Parliament. If you bet that somebody will redeem his written promise to pay a certain sum of money at a certain date, that is called bill-discounting, and the State sanctions tlie transaction ; l)ut if you bet that the same person will def(^at his opponent in a chess-match (though sin\ilarly based on a calculation of pi'obal)ilities and knowledge of his
"•]
The Li fill ts of Lihoiy. 75
cliaracttr ;iii<l ifeonl), it is a tniusaction wliicli Llic State frowns at, and ct'itainly will ni>t sanction. Who now will say that tilt' Statf ivfusfs to sanction bets? (Janililin^, speculation, ralHcs, lottci-irs, liill-«liscountint^, lilc-assurancf. lire-insurance, umlerwriting. tontine, sweeiistake.s — what are these hut ditl'er- ent names ior the same kinil (jf l)argain, — a contract based on an unforeseen contujgency, — a Itet \ And yet how ditt'erently thev are treated by the State I Neitln'r is it fair to chart'e the State with a iiuritanical bias against Lfamblinj;. Keli'^ion had nothing to do w ith anti-'raminiL; leirisiation : for the State both tolerates and enforces wager-contracts, when they are the result of mature deliberation, sutficiently evidenced, and. as in the ca.sc of life-assurance, insurance against lire, anil shipwreck, ^:c., free fron> the suspicicjn of wild intoxication.
The State has prohibited certain sports because they arc ilenioralising, e.g. prize-fighting : and others because they arc cruel without l»eing useful, e.g. cock-lighting, bear-bait- ing, liull -fights. &c. Angling it regards as useful, and therefore does not coudenni it. although it condjiues cruelty with the lowest form of lying. Agitations are from time to time set on foot for the purpose of putting down fox- hunting on similar grounds. But, fortunattdy, the rnagni- lieent etiects of this manly sport on the physi(jue of the race are too palpable to admit of its suppression. Pigeon-shooting is a very different matter. Chess never seems to have fallen under the ban of the law; but billiards, for some reason which I cannot discover, has always been carefully super- vised l)y the State.
Coming to the fine arts, they all of them seem to be re- gardetl by the legislature as probable incentives to low sen- suality. Architecture is the solitary exception. Even music, which would seem to approach nearer to divine perfection and purity than any other earthly thing, is carefully hedged about by law; possibly, how^ever, this is on account of its dangerous relation to poetry, when the two are wedded in song. When we come to the arts of sculpture, of painting (and its allies, printing, di'awing, photography, &c.), of lite- rature (poetry and prose), of the ch'ama, and of dancing, we arc bound to admit that in the absence of State-control they are apt to run to licentiousness. But whether it is wise of society, which has l)ecn compelled to abstain from inter* ference with sexual irregularity, to penalise that which is
76 A Plea for Liberty. [ii.
suspected of leading to it, is an interesting point. Fornica- tion in itself is no longer even a misdemeanour in this country. The Act 23 & 24 Vict. c. 32 applies only to con- spiracy to induce a woman to commit fornication ; ' provided,' as Mr. Justice Stephen surmises, ' that an agreement between a man and a woman to connnit fornication is not a con- spiracy.' At the same time, whatever we may think of these State efforts to encourage and bolster up chastity by legis- lation, it is not ([uite honest to ignore or misrepresent the State motive. Monogamy is not the outcome of religious asce- ticism. We have onlv to read the Koran or the Old Testament to see that polygamy and religion can be on very good terms. The highest civilisations yet known are leased on the mono- gamic principle ; and any one who realises the effect of the system on the children of the community must admit that it is a most beneficial one, quite apart from the religious aspect. Whether the action of the State conduces to this result is quite another question. All I assert is that the State is actuated by a most excellent motive.
The first observation on the whole history of this kind of legislation is that it has been a gio-antic failure. That is to say, it has not diminished the evils aimed at in the smallest degree. It has rather increased them. It has crabbed and stunted the fine arts and thereby vulgarised them. By its rough and clumsy classifications it has crushed out the appeals of Art to the best feelings of human nature, and it has diverted what would have been pure and wholesome into other chan- nels. The man who does not see everv emotion of the human soul reflected and glorified in nature's drama around him must be a poor prosaic thing indeed. But we need not go to nature for Avhat has lately been termed suggestiveness. We need not stray Ijeyond the decorative art of dress, which seems to have exercised a special fascination over the sentimental Herrick. The logical outcome of systematic rejiression of sensual sug- gestiveness is State-reirulated dress. Somethinir like this has often been attempted. In England, during the thirteenth and two following centuries, dress AVg(s both regulated by Act of Parliament and cursed from the pulpit. Eccleston mentions hov/ Serlo dAbon, after preaching before Henry I on the sin- fulness of lieards and long hair, coolly drew a hug<^ pair of scissors from his pocket after the sermon, and, taking ad- vantage of the efiect he had produced, went from seat to seat,
II ] J lie Limits of Liberty. 77
mercilessly ciuppiii}^ tlu* kiiii^ liini.sfll" ami tlu^ wliulc coiiLrre- irntiun. Till' same wiik-r, speak iii'f of llic lOaiK Kiu'lish period, tolls us that ' long toes were not entirely ahaniloinvl till Htiuy \'II. notwithstan(]iiiL( uiany a cursinLC l»y the clergy, as Well as severe legal penalties iijton their makers.' I am atraitl neither the cursing of the clergy nor the penalties ot" the law have had the desired effect, lor we must reincndier that it was not tho gold nets and curletl ringlets ami gauze wings worn at each side of the I'emale head, nor the ji-welleil stomachers, which were the peculiai" ohjects of the aversion of State and Church, hut the sensualising ertect of all over- refinement in tho decoration of the body.
If there is one thing more difficult than another, it is to say Avhere the line should ))•• drawn between letritimate hodv- decoration and meretricious adornment. When art-critics like Schlegel are of opinion that the nude figure is far less allec- tive than carefully arranged drapery, it is surely the height of blin<l faith to entrust the State and its blundering machinery to lay down the laws of propriety in the matter of dress. What we should thijik indecent in this country is not thought indecent among the Zulus, and since the- whole question is as to the eliect of certain costumes on certain persons, and since those persons are the general public in any particulai- country, one would imagine that the proper course to adopt would be to leave the decision upon particular cases, as they crop up, to that public. The public may be a bad judge or a biassed judge, but at least it is a more suitable judge than a lumbering State, working on general principles vaguer than a London
Again, recent modern attempts to 'purify' literature have brought the whole crusade into derision, and made us the laughing-stock of Europe. Yet all has been done with the best intentions — even the prosecution of the sellers of l^oc- caccio's Decameron.
But there are moral questions in which the State concerns itself, which do not f;dl under the heads of games, sports, nor fine arts, such as drinking, opium-eating, tobacco-smoking, and the use of other stimulants. These indulgences and arti- ficial aids to sensual crratifi cation have been and still are re- gulated and harassed by the State. Nor is it so long ago that the memory of man runneth not, since our own Government made stringent rules as to the number of meals to be eaten by
78 A Plea for Lihciiy. [ii.
the several 2:r<a(ies of society. 'I'ho Roman law aetuallv speei- tied the nnniber of courses at each meal. An ancient Mno-lish writer refers with disgust to the then new-fangled cookery which was coming into vogue in his day. 'all brennino: like wild-hre/ But I have yet to learn that gluttony is on the decrease. And we have it on the highest medical authority that more deaths and more diseases can be traced to over- eating than to over-drinking, even in this tippling country. Nor have the laws enacted ao-ainst sexual irreo'ularities from time immemorial up to this day diminished, much less stamped out, the evil. We empty the casinos only to till the streets, and we clear the streets only to increase the number and de- teriorate the quality of houses of ill fame. And during l)Oth processes we open the door to otticial black-mailing. The good old saying that you cannot make people moral by Act of Parliament has been, and still is, disregarded, but not with impunity. Surely the State, which has conspicuously failed in every single department of moralisation by force, may be wisely asked in future to mind its own business.
But is it not possible to fix our eyes too persistently and fanatically on the State ? Do we not suffer from other inter- ferences quite as odious as the tyrannies of the Effective ]\lajority'? Here is what Mr. Pickard said on the Eight- hours ([uestion at the Miners' Conference at Birmingham some months since. Somebody had pointed out that the Union could themselves force short hours upon the em- ployers, if need be, without calling upon the legislature. ' If,' he replied, ' no bad result is to follow trade-union effort, how is it possible for a bad result to follow the same arrange- ment brought about by legislation % ' Commenting on this with approval, Judlce, the organ of the Social Democratic Federation, says : —
This is a question which Mr. .John Mork'V and tlic rest of tlie politicians -who prate about the need for shorter working hours, while opposing the penal- ising of over-work, should set themselves to answr. Obviously there is no answer that will justify their ]iosition. If the limitation of the liriurs of labour is wrong in princi]ile, and mischievous, harmful, and destructive of our national prosperity, it is just as much so whether effected ))y trade union elfort (ir bv legislation. ■
^O'
• There is a soul of truth in this. Of course we may point out firstly that the passing of a Bill for the purpose is no proof that the nuijoiity of the persons primarily affected really desire it, Avhereas the enforcement of the system by
11.] The Liiiii/s of Lihcrly. 79
trailr-iiiiiijuisiii is strolijjj cviik-iict' tli;it tlii'V dn: juhI .sccniidly, th;it tlic li'L,fi.slut;iro cannot I'fi'cet these oltjects without sinml- tancously civatiiig "greater evils o\vin<^ to the necessary opera- tion of State niaehiiit'ry. But 1 venture to say that the central truth of Mr. Pickanl's remark lies a t;oo«l <leal deeper than this. 1 think we individualists are ai>t to fix oui* eyes too exclusively upon the State. ])oul>tless it is the greatest trans;;(ressor. IWit after all, when analysed, it is only a coni- liinatiou of numerous peisons in a certain area claiminti; to tlietate to others in the same area what they shall do, and what they shall not do. Theso numerous persons we call the ertective majority. It is preci.sely in the po-sition of a cricket- club, or a religious corporation, or any other combiiuition of men l»ound together liy rules. At the ])rcsent moment in this country a bishop is being persecuted by the majority (jf his co-religionists because he performs certain trilling rites. I would ask the Church of England whether, in 'da oiva in- terest,— in the interest of the majority of its own members, — it woultl not be wiser to repeal these socialistic rules again.st practices perfectly harmless in themselves. Last year there was a cause ee'lehre tried before the Jockey (Jlub. Quite apart from the outside interference of the State, this club can and does sanction its own laws most etiectively. It can ruin any trainer or jockey whenever it chooses, that is to say, whenever ho violates the laws it has made. These laws, for- tunately, are about as good as human nature is capable of, and those who suffer under them richly deserve their fate. But it might be otherwise. And eveii in this exemplary code there is an element of despotism which might be dispensed with. A jockey must not be an owner. Very good: the object is clear, and the intention is excellent. Of course a jockey ought not to expose himself to the temptation of riding an- other mans horse so as to conduce to the success of his own. No honourable man would yield to the temptation. ( h\ the other hand, few owners would trust a jockey whose own horse was entered for the same race. Kow I venture to submit that it would be better to leave the matter entirely to the jockey's own choice, and to reserve the penalty for the occasion where there is convincing evidence that the jockey has abused his trust. A jockey charged with pulling, and afterwards found interested as ownei- or part-owner or backer of another horse in the same race, would then be dealt with
8o A Plea for Liberty. [ii,
un<ler llic Jockey Clul) law, not before. I would strongly advise a jockey to keep clear of ownership, and even of betting (on any race in which his services are engaged), but I would not make an offence out of that which in itself is not an offence, but which merely opens the door to temptation. This has nothing wliatever to do with the State or with State law. It is entirely a question of what may, broadly speaking, be called Lynch law. I have recently examined the rules of some of the principal London clubs, and I find that they are, many of them, largely socialistic. Unless I am a member, I do not complain. I merely ask whether the members themselves would not do wisely to widen their liberties. The committee of a certain club had recently a long and stormy discussion as to whether billiards should be permitted on Sundays. In nineteen out of twenty clubs the game is disallowed. The individualists predominated, and the result is that those who do not want to play can refrain : they are not compelled to play. Those who wish to play are not compelled to refrain.
I can imagine a people with the State reduced to a shadow, — a government attenuated to the administration of a very tolerant criminal code, — and yet so deeply imbued with socialism in all their minor combinations as to be a nation of petty despots : a country where every social clique enforces its own notions of Mrs. Grundy's laws, and where every club tyrannises over its own members, fixing their politics and religion, the limits of stakes, the hours of closino-, and a count- less variety of other matters. There is or was a club in London wdiere no meat is served on Fridays. There are several in which card-piaj-ers are limited to half-crown points. There are many more where one card game is per- mitted antl another prohibited. AVhist is allowed at the Carlton, but not poker. Then again the etiquette of the professions is in many cases more irksome and despotic than the law of the land. Medical men have been boycotted for accepting small fees from impecunious patients. A barrister who should accept a brief from a client without the inter- mediary expense of a solicitor would sink to swim no more : although the solicitor's services might be absolutely worthless. Consider also the rules of the new Trade-unionism. I need not go into these. Tlie freedom, not only of voluntar}- members, but of citizens outside the ring, is utterly trampled under foot.
II.] The LiniiU of Libcrly. 8 1
Au<l tliis Idiii'Os us l)ack to Mr. Pickanl ami tlio nml of truth in his aiijfuinent. 1 atiirni that a people ini<^ht utterly aholish ami extirpate the State, ami yet remain stee))e<l to tlie lips in socialism of the most revolting; tyjie. And I think, as I have said, it is time for those of us who value freedom and detest despotism, from whatever quarter it enumjjtes, to ask ourselves what are the true principles of Lynch law. Suppose, for example, there was no State to a]){M'al to for protection against a powerful rutlian. what shouhl 1 do? ^lost certainly 1 should eumliine with others no stronj^er than myself, and overpower the rutHan l>y superior hrute force. Ought I to do this ? Ought I not rather to alloAV the survival of the fittest to improve tin' physitiuo of the race — even at my expense? If not, then ou'du 1 to cond.>ine with others against the free- dom of the sly pick-[)oeket, who through his superior dex- terity and agility an<l cool courage prevails over me, and ap]»ropriates my watch, without any exercise of brute force? Are not these i[ualities useful to the race '? Then why should I conspire with others against the harndess sneak who puts chicory in his cottee ? If I do not like his coffee, I can go and l>uy somebody else's ? If he chooses to ofter me stone for bread at fourpence a pound, an<l if I am foolish enough to take it at the price, 1 shall learn to be wiser in future, or else perish of starvation and rid the race of a fool. Then again why should I not conspii'e ? Or are there some sorts of com- bination which are good, and properly called co-operation, while others are bad, and properly called conspiracy? Let us look a little into this matter of comljiuatiou, — this aiTaying of Quantity against Quality.
Hooks and eyes are very useful. Hooks are useless ; eyes are useless. Yet in combination they are useful. This is co-operation. Where you have division of labour, and con- serpient differentiation of function, and eventually of struc- ture, there is co-operation. Certain tribes of ants have working members and ficrhtinrr members. The militarv caste arc unable to collect food, which is provided for them Ijy the other members of the community, in return for which they devote themselves to the defence of the whole society. But for these soldiers the society would perish. If either class perished, the other class would perish with it. It is the old fable of the belly and the limbs.
Division of labour does not always result in ditterentiatiou
o
82 A Plea for Liberty. [ir.
of sb'ucture. In the case of bees aiul many other insects -vve know that it does. Among mammals Ijeyond the ■well- marked structural division into male and female, the ten- dency to fixed structural changes is very slight. In races where caste prevails, the tendency is more marked. Even in England, where . caste is extinct, it has been observed among the mining population of Northumbria. And the notorious short-sightedness of Germans has been set down to compulsory book-study. As a genei-al rule, we may neglect this effect of co-operation among human beings. The fact remains that the organised ettbrt of lOO individuals is a very o-reat deal more effective than the sum of the efforts of lOO unorganised individuals. Co-operation is an unmixed good. And the Ishmaelitic anarchy of the buml)le-bee is uneconomic. Hostility to the principle of co-operation (upon which society is founded) is usually attributed by the ignorant to philosophical anarchists, while socialists never weary of pointing to the glorious triumphs of co-operation, and claiming them for socialism. Whenever a number of persons join hands with the object of effecting a purj)Ose otherwise unattainable, we have what is tantamount to a new force, — the force of com- bination : and the persons so combining, regarded as a single body, may bo called by a name, — any name : a Union, an Association, a Club, a Company, a Corporation, a State. I do not say all these terms denote precisely the same thing, but they all connote co-operation.
Let the State be now abolished for the purposes of this discussion. How do we stand ? We have by no means abolished all the clubs and comr)anies in which citizens find themselves grouped and interljanded. There they all are, just as l)efore, — nay, there are a number of new ones, suddenly sprung up out of the deljris of the old State. Here are some eighty men organised in the form of a cricket-club. They may not pitch the ball as they like, but only in accordance with rigid laws. They elect a king or captain, and they bind themselves to obey him in the field. A member is told off to field at long-on, although he may wish to field at point. He must obey the despot.
Here is a ring of hoisemen. H^hoy ride races. They liack their own horses. Disputes arise al)out fouling, or perhaps the course is a curve and some rider takes a shoi't cut ; or the weights of the j'iders are- uiie(|Ual, and the hea\ier rider
ir.] The Limits of Liberty. 83
claims to f([U}iliso the weight'^. All such niatt<'is an- laid bcfuiv a cotmiiit tec, an<l rules arc drawn u)) l>y whiih all the inciiil)cr« of the little racin<^ cluh pleilgu themselves to ho liouiiil. The cluh i^rows : other liiliiiif or I'aciiiif nn-n join it or adopt its lules. At last, so jj^ood are its laws that they ai<! accepted hy all the racin<jj Iraternity in the island, and all racinjjf disputes are settle(l hy the rules of the Jockey ("luh. And even the judg^es of the land defer to them, ami refer points of racing law to the cluh.
Here again is a knot of whalers on the beach of a stormy sea. Each trembles I'or the safety of his own vessel. Ho would ixive somcthinir to be rid of his own uneasiness. All his earl's are in one Imsket. He wc)uM ■svillincrlv distrdiute them over manv baskets, lie oilers to take loni: odds that his own vessel is lost. He re])eats tho oti'or till the long odds cover the value of his ship and cargo, and perhaps profits and time. 'Now,' says he, '1 am condnrtable : it is true, I forfeit a small percentage : but if my whole craft goes to the bottom 1 lose nothinij.' He lauirhs and sings, while the others go croaking about tho sands, shaking their heads and looking fearfully at the breakers. At last they all follow his example, and the nett result is a Mutual Marine Insurance Society. After a while they lay the odds, not with their own members only, but with others ; and the risk being over-estimated (naturally at first), they make large dividends. But now (liliiculties arise. The captain of a whaler has thrown cargo oN'erboard in a heavy sea. The owner claims for tho loss. The comj)any declines to pay, on the ground tliat the loss was voluntarily caused by the cai)tain and not by the hand of God or the kinor's enemies : and that there would be no limit to jettison if the claim were allowed. Other members meet with similar difficulties, and finally rules are made which provide for all known contingencies. And Avheu any dispute arises, the chosen unipire (whether it be a mutual friend, or an agora-full of citizens, or a department of State, or any other person or body of persons) refers to the connuon practice and precedents so far as they apply. In other words, the rules of the Insurance Society ore the law of the land. In spite of the State, this is so to-day to a considerable extent ; I may say, in all matters wliicli have not been botched and col)l>led l)y statute.
There is ancjtlie]" class of club springing out of the altruistic sentiment. Au old lady takes compassion on a starving cat
G z
84 A Pica for Liberty. [n.
(lu) uneoiiiuioii sight in tlic West Knd of l^ondon uftcr the Season). Slie puts a saucer of milk and souie liver on the door-step. Slie is soon recognised as a lienefactress, and the cats for a nule round swarm to her threshold. _ The saucers increase and multiply, and the liver is an iteui in her hutehers bill. The strain is too great to be borne single- handed. She issues a circular appeal, and she is surprised to find how uiany are willing to contribute a fair share, altliough their sympathy shrivels up before an unfair demand. They are williug to'be taxed pro rata, but they will not bear the burden of^ other people's stinginess. ' Let the poor cats bear it rather,' they say; 'what is everybody's business is nobody's liusiness. It is very sad, but it cannot be helped. If we keep one cat, hundreds will starve; so what is the use?' But when once the club is started, nobody feels the burden : the Cats' Home is built and endowed, and all goes well. Hospitals, infirmaries, alms-houses, orphanages, spring up all round. At tirst they are reckless and indiscriminate, and become the prey of impostors and able-l)odied vagrants. Then rules are framed; the Charity Organisation Society co-ordinates and directs public benevolence. And these rules of prudence and economy are copied and adopted, in many respects, by those wIjo administer the State Poor Law.
Then we have associations of pei'sons who agree on im- portant points of science or politics. They ^^dsh to make others think with them, in order that society may be pleasanter and more congenial for themselves. They would button-hole every man in the street and argue the question out with him, but the process is too lengthy and wearisoine. They club togethe]-, and form such institutions as the British and Foreign Bible Society, which has spent ^"^7,000,000 in disseminating its literature all over the world. We have the Cobden Club, which is slowly and sadly dying of nicou- sistency after a career of merited success. We have scientific societies of all descriptions that never ask or expect a penny reward for all their outlay, beyond making other people wiser and pleasanter neighbours.
Finally, we have societies banded together to do battle against rivals on the principle of 'Union is strength.'^ These clubs are defensive oi- aggressive. The latter class includes all trading associations, the object of which is to make profits by outmananivring competitors. The former or defensive
II.] The Li})iih of Lihcrfy. 85
class inclutk's all tlu* i»olitical soc'u'tios Ininnd for the purpose (jf ri'sistinj^' the State,— the most a;,'i;ri'ssivc chili in existence. Over one liundivil ot" these 'protrction societies' ol" one soil and another are now i'ech'ratetl under the hegemony ol" the Lilieity auil Property Defence Jjcague.
Mow we have agreed, for the sake of argument, that tlio State is to 111' aliolished. What is tlie result? Jleic arc \\ atch Committees tornii'd in the great towns to prevent ami to ensure aijainst burLjlars. thieves, and like marauders. How they are to l)e constituted I do not clearly know; neither do T know the limits of their functions. Here, again, is a .Mutual In(piest Society to provide for the examiiuition of dead persons before burial or cremation, in order to make murder as unprofital)le a business as possible. Here is a Vigilance Association sending out detectives for the purpose of discoverinii' ami Ivnchin;-- the unsocial wretches who know- ingly travel in public conveyances with infectious diseases en them. Hero is a journal supported by consumers for the advertisement of atiulterating dealers. And here again is a filibustering company got up by adventurous traders, of the old East India Conijiany stamp, for the purpose of carrying trade into forei'^n countries with or without the consent of the invaded parties. Here is a Statistical Society devising rules to make it unpleasant for those who evade registration and the census, an<l offering inducement to all wlio fui-nish the required ini'ormation. What sort of organisation (if any) will be formed for the enforcement (not necessarily by brute force) of contract? Or will there be many such organisations dealing with different classes of contract? Will there be a Wonum's League to boycott any man who has abused the coiifidence of a woman and violated his pledges? Hoav will it try and sanction cases of breach of promise ?
Above all, how is this powerful company for the defence of the country a^-ainst forcisj-n invaders to bo constituted? And Avhat safeguards will its mendjers provide against the tyranny of the otticials? When a Senator proposed to limit the standing army of the United States to three thousand, George Washini-ton agreed, on condition that the honourable inemlier would arrange that the countiy should never be invaded by more than two tliousand. Frankenstein created a monster he could not lay. This will be a nut I'or anarchists of the future to crack.
86 A Pica for Liberty. [rr.
And iiuw, to revert to the A'igilance Society formed for lynching persons who travel al)Out in ])ul>lie ])lae(s with small-pox and scarlatina, what rules will they make for their giudance? Suppose they dub every unvaccinatod pci'son a ' focus of infection/ shall we witness the establishment of a Yigi lance Society to punch the heads of the detectives who punch the heads of the ' foci of infection ? ' Remember we have both those societies in full working order to-day. One is called the State, and the other is the Anti- Vaccination Society.
The questions which I should wish to ask are chiefly these two: — (i) How far may voluntary co-operators invade the liberty of others ? And what is to prevent such invasion under a system of anarchy? (2) Is compulsory co-operation ever desirable"? And what form (if any) should such com- pulsion take ?
The existing State is obviously only a conglomeration of several large societies which would exist separately or collectively in its absence ; if the State were abolished, these associations Avould necessarily spring up out of its ruins, just as the nations of Europe sprang out of the ruins of the Roman Empire. They would apparently lack the power of com- pulsion. No one would be compelled to join against his will. Take the ordinary case of a gas-lit street. Would a voluntary Q-as-cummittee be willino- to lii>-ht the street without somehow taxino- all the dwellers in the street % If yes, then there is inecpiity. The generous and public-spirited pay for the stingy and mean. But if no, then how is the taxing to be accom- plished % And wdiere is the line to be drawn ? If you compel a man to pay for lighting the street, Avhen he swears he prefers it dark (a householder may really prefer a dark street to a lio-ht one. if he o-oes to bed at sunset, and wants the traffic to be diverted into other streets to ensure his peace) ; then you will compel him to subscribe to the Watch fund, though his house is burglar-proof; and to the fire-brigade, though his house is fire-proof; and to the prisons as part of the plant and tools of the Watch Committee ; and, it may logically be urged, to the churches and schools as pait also of such plant and tools for the prevention of certain crimi's.
Moreover, if you compel him to subscribe for the gas in the street, you must make him pay his share of the street itself — paving, repairing, and cleansing, and if the street, then the
„.]
riic Li)}uts of Lihoiy. S7
hi"li\v;n'; and it" the liiLfliNVav, tlun tip- luilwav, an<l tlu; caiuil, ami tlir liritl^t'S, ainl cviii tlif liarhours ainl liijlit- huuses, aiiil other coiiimoii a))[taratus of transjimt ami locu- niotion.
If \V(' arc not jroiiii; to coiin)tl a citizon to suliscriljn to com moil In-iK'Hts, fveu though he necessarily shares them, how are -sve to icmove the iiijustiee of allowing ono man to enjoy what another has earned ■ Sonu; writers' are of f)])inion that this and all .similar (|uestions can he sottlid hy an ai)i)eal to Justice, and that the justice of any particuhir case can ho extiaeted hy a do/.en jurymen. Now, in all sincerity. 1 have no conce])tion of what is cunnnonly meant liy Justice. lla])})ines.s 1 know; welfare I know; expediency I know. They all mean tile same thing. We can call it pleasin-e, or felicity, or \>y any other name. We never ask why it is better to he happy than unhappy. We understand pleasure and pain by faculties which underlie reason itself. A child knows the meaning; of stomach-ache long before it knows the meaning of stomach. And no philosopher knows it better. Expediency, in the sense in which I use the term, has a meaning. Justice has no meaninir at all : that is to sav. it conveys no definite meaninir to the sreneral understandini;-. Here is a Hat-race about to be run between a strong, healthy boy of sixteen and a delicate lad of twelve. What says Justice? Are we to handicap them ; or are we not ? It is a very simple question, and the absolutist ought to furnish lis with a simple answer. If he says Yes, he will have half the world down vipon him as a socialist leveller. If he says No, he will have the other half down upon him as a seliish brute. But he must choose. Lower }et ; — even supposing that Justice has a distinct con- notation, and furthermore that it connotes something sublime, even then, why should I conform to its dictates'? Because it is a virtue ? Nonsense: because it is expedient. Why should I tell the truth ? There is no reason Avhy, except that it is expetlient for me, as I know from experience. There is no baser form of lyino; than fiv-iishing. Is it wronix'? N^o- Why not? Because I do not ask the fishes to trust me in the future. That is why.
I have said that Justice is too vaG;ue a fMiide to the solution of political questions. We are told that, when the question is
' See Mr. Spenee's contribution to the Sijmposimn on the Land Question, p. 42, 1S90 T. Fisher Unwin).
88 A Pica for Liberty. [ii.
asked, "What is fair and just between man and man? 'you can get a jury of twelve men to give a unanimous verdict.' And • that by reasoning from what is fair between man and man wc can pass to what is fair between one man and several, and from several, to all : and that this method, which is the method of all science, of reasoning from the particular" to the general, from the simple to the complex, does gives us reliable information as to what should be law^'
The tlaw in this chain of reasoning is in the assumption that, because you can get a -it nrtwiwo-it.s verdict in the majority of cases as to what is fair between man and man, therefore vou can get a true verdict. Twelve sheep will unanimously jump through a gap in the hedge round an old quarry, if one of them will but give the lead. I do not believe that a jury of twelve philosophers, or of twelve members of Parliament, or of twelve judges of the realm, or of twelve anybodies, could decide correctly what is just and right between man and man in any one of a thousand cases which could be stated without deviating from the path of everyday life. And the more they knew, the less likelv thev would be to agree.
The same writer thinks the intelliijence of the ' ordinarv elector' quite sufficient to tell him that ' it would be unju.st to take from a man by force and without compensation a farm which he had leijfallv and honestlv boui.dit.' "Well, this is not a very complex case : and yet I doubt whether ' the ordinary elector' could be trusted even here to .see justice, and to do it. This recipe for making good laws forcibly reminds me of an old recipe for catching a bird : ' Put a pinch of salt on its tail.' I remember trvincj it, — but that is some vears a2:o. I gi-ant that, havincr once ^"ot at a sound method of deciding what is fair and right between man and man. you can easily proceed from the particular to the general, and so learn how to make good laws. Yes, but first catch vour hare. First show us what is fair between man and man. That is the whole problem. That is my difficulty, and it is not removed by telling me you can get a dozen fellows together who will agree about the answer.
Take a very simple case. T and Y appoint me arbitrator in their dispute. There is no allegation of malfeasance on either side. Both ask for justice, and are ready to accord it, but they cannot agree as to what is justice in the case. It
' Stfmpo-'iiiim on the Loud Question.
II.] The Limits of Lihcrly. 89
appears that .Vlioujjjlit a pony h<nm jide ami paiil lor it. That i.s adiiiittiMl. It turthir appears that the pony was stolen the niifht hflori' out yt' )''s )>a<Uloek. It is hard on Y to lost* his pony—it is hard on A to lo.se his n^jney. To divide the hiss is hard on hoth. Now how can Justice tell me the true .solu- tion ^ I must fall back on ex])cdiency. As a rule, I argue, the title to goods .should he valid only when derivt-d from the owner. But surely an exception should he made in the case of a honct jiili' purchaser: * for it is expedient that the huyer, l)y taking proper precautions, may at all events be secure of his purchase : otherwise all commerce between man and man would soon be at an end." These are the words of Sir William Llackstone, but they are good enough for me. There- fore (and not for any reason based on justice) I should feel disposed to decide that the pony should remain the property of the purchaser. But on further reflection, I should bethink me how extremely easy it wouhl l>e for two men to conspire together to steal a pony under such a law. One of them leads the pony out of the field by night, sells it to his colleague, gives him a receipt for the money, and disappears. Is this larce to destroy the owner's title ? What am 1 to do ? Jus- tice entirely deserts me. I reflect again. There seems to be something • flshy ' about a night sale in a lane. Now had the purchaser bought the pony at some public place at a reason- able hour when people are about, there would have been less gi-ound for suspicion of foul play. How would it lie then, I ask myself, to lay down the general rule that, when the deal takes place at any regular public place and during specified hours, the purchasers title should hold good: but when the deal takes place under other circumstances, the original owner's title should stand ? This would probably be something like the outcome of the reflections of a simple untutored mind ac- tuated by common sense. But it is also very like the law of England.
If 1 appeal for guidance to the wise, the l>cst they can do is to refer me to the Avritings of the lawyei^s, where I shall tind out all about market overt a,nd a good many other ' wise re- gulations by which the law hath secured the right of the pro- prietor of personal chattels from being divested, so far as is consistent with that other necessary policy that bona fule pur- chasers in a fail-, open, and regular manner should not lie afterwai'ds put to difficulties by reason of the previous knavery
90 A Plea for Liberty. [ii.
of the j-cllrr'.' lUit we have not got to the buttoin of the problem yet. There are chattels n n^l chattels. Tables have legs, but 'cannot walk: horses can. Thereb}' hangs a tale. Consofincntly when 1 think I have mastered all these ' wise regulations,'"! am suddenly knocked otl:" my stool of superior knowledge by a couple of elderly statutes— 2 P_. & M. c. 7 and 3r Eliz.' c. \i — wdiereby special provision is made for horse-deal injy. It is enacted that — •
o
Tlio liorsos shall bo openly exposed in the time of such fair or market for one whole hour together, between ten in the morning and suns.-t, in Hk- pnl)lie ])laee used for svu-h sales, and not in any private yard or stable ; and shall afterwards be brought by both the vendor and vendee to the book- keeper of such fair or market, who shall enter down the price, colour, and marks of such horse, with the name, additions, and abode of sncdi vendee and vendor, the latter being properly attested. - And even sucli sale shall not take away the property of the owner, if within six months after the horse is stolen, he put in his claim before some magistrate where the horse sliall be found ; and within forty days more prove such his property, by the oath of two wit- nesses, and tender to the person in possession such price as he Ixma fide paid for the horse in market overt. And in case any of the points befon- men- tioned be not observed, such sale is to be utterly void, and the owner shall not lose his property; and at any distance of time may seize or bring an action for his horse, wherever he happens to find him.
And further refinements on these precautions have since been made.
I do not say that we need approve of all these safeguards and rules, but I do say that they testify to a perception l)y the legislature of the complexity and difHculty of the question. And furthermore, if anybody offers to decide such cases ofi-hand on general principles, and at the same time to do justice, he must be a bold man. For my part,_ the more I'look into the law as it is, the more do I see in it of wisdom (not unadulterated of course) drawn from experience. The little obstacles wdiich have from time to time shadowed themselves upon my mind as difficulties in the way of apply- ino- clear and unqualified general rules to the solution ot all social disputes, are brought into fuller light, arid I perceive more and more clearly how hopeless, nay, how impossible it is to deduce the laws of social morality from broad general pri)iciples ; and how absolutely necessary it is to obtain them by induction fiom the mjriads of actual cases which the race has had to solve somehow or other during the last half-dozen millenniums.
' Blackstone.
II.] The Limits: of Lihcrly. qi
1 iv«ranl luNV-iMukintr as li\ no inrans an casv task when hascd on ('Xj)i'tlit'ncy. On tlir contran . I think it dillicult. l»ut pnutiraltlc: whereas to tleiluce j^jooil Ja\YS tVoiii tlie juiii- ei|)le of. Justice is injpossihle.
(hiewonl more ahout Justice. 1 havo said tliat to most j)e()j)le the term is al>sohitely meaniui^'less. To those who have occasional glimmerings, it conveys two distinct and even o[t|iosed meanings- sometimes one, sometimes the othei'. And it has a third meanin;.;, which is d(;linite' enoUL,di, hut meri'lv ne«'ativi' ; in which sense it connotes the elinunation ot" partiality. 1 tail to see ho\v auy political ([ucstion can in- settled by that. That the State should 1h; no respecter of persons, that it should decitle any i,'iven case in precisely the same way, whether the litigants happen to be ^4 and H or C and />, may be a valuable truth, without casting a ray of light on the right and wrong of the question.
In this negative sense of the term I will venture to define Justice as tlie Alirebra of Judjrmeuts. It deals in terms not of Dick. Tom, and Harry, but of A', Y, and Z. Kegarded in this light, Justice may properly be described as blin<l. a (piality which certainly cannot Ix; predicated of that Justice which carefully examines the competittn'S in life's arena and handicaps them accordingly. Consider the countless ques- tions which Impaitiality is incompetent tf) answer. Ought a father to be compelled to contribute to the maintenance of his natural children i The only answer we can get from Impartiality is that, if one man is forced, all men should be forced. Should a man be permitted to sell himself into slavery for life 1 Should the creditors of an insolvent rank in order of priority, or pro ntta ? Suppose a notorious card-sharper and a gentleman of unl)leuiished character are puldicly accused, untruly accused, of conspiring together to cheat, should they obtain equal damages for the libel'^
To all these (juestions Impartiality is dumb, or replies oracularlv. '\\'hat is right for one is right foi- all.' And that throws no light on the subject.
In short, it is easy to underrate the difficulty of finding out what is fair and riijht lietween man and man. To me it seems that this is the whole of the difficulty. And although I think that this can best be overcome by an appeal to expediency, I must not be understood as con- tending th£|,t each particular case must be decided on its
92 A Pica for Liberty. [ii.
merits. Wo must be guidcil, as we aiv guiilc(i in (jur own personal conduct, by middle principles wliich have stood the test of time and experience. Do not steal. Do not lie. It is by the p-radual discovery of similar middle pi'inciples l)y induction from the disputes of everyday life that we shall some day find ourselves in possession of true and useful ^uides through the labyrinth of legislation and politics.
To sum up ; I have tried to show that the right course for the State to adopt towards its own citizens — Gi'oup-m.orals — cannot be discovered by deduction from any abstract prin- ciples, such as Justice or Liberty; any more than individual morals can be deduced from some underlying law of Virtue. The rules of conduct by which States should be guided are intelligible canons based on centuries of experience, very much like the rules Ijy which our own private lives are guided ; not absolutely trustworthy, but bettei" than no general rules at all. They are usually described as the laws of the land, and in so far as the expressed laws really do reflect the nomological laws actually at work, these laws stand in the same relation to the State as private resolutions stand to the individual citizen. In law, as in all other inductive sciences, we proceed from the particular to the general. The judge decides a new case on its merits, the decision serves as a guide when a similar case arises ; the ratio decidendi is extracted, and we have a general statement ; these generalisations are themselves brought under higher generalisations b}' jurists and judges, and perhaps Parliament; and finally we find our- selves in the presence of laws or State-morals as general as those cardinal virtues by which most of us try to arrange our lives. That the generalisations made by the legislature are usually false generahsations is a proposition which, I submit, is capable of proof and of explanation. It is wise to obey the laws, firstly, because otherwise we come into conflict with a stronger power than ourselves ; secondly, because in the great majority of cases, it is our enlightened interest to do so ; the welfare of individual citizens coincidino- (^.s a ride with the welfare of the race, and tending to do so more and more. History shows that (probably as a means to that end ; though of this we cannot speak positiveh') the State's sphere of action is a diminishing one — that as it moves forward, it tends to shed function after function, until only a few are left. A\'hether these duties will pass into the hands of voluntary corporations
II.] The L'uiiits of Lihcrly. 93
ill iHiy tiiiH- Is u <iucstiuii <»t" tin- LjiTutcst intoicst ; Imt it is ol)seival)le that the hitest iunetiuns rcinainiii;^ to tho State are those which an- most lii^'orously ])eit"oniuMl. And this sccins to point to thc^ i'lituic i'lnillty of the Slate (in tiie sense ot" the sovereign power) with the wiilest voluntary association oi" citi/cns — an association liased on some common interest of the widest extent. 'J'hus it is prohahh' that even now an iiiormous majority of jH-rsons in tliis country wouM voluntaril}' forego the i-ight of killing or rol)l)ing their neigh- liouis on condition of heinLr <juaranti cd a<fainst similar treat- ment l>y others. If so, the voluntary society which Anarchy would evolve and the State which ancient Socialism has evolved, tend in the long run tf) bo one and the samo thing. The State will cease to coerce, bccau.sc coercion will no longer be reijuired.
WouDswoKTii Do.\isTiioi;i'i;.
III.
LIBERTY FOR LABOUR.
Few subjects have more profoundly exercised the minds of ])hi]()Sophic thinkers than the (juestion as to the rightful sphere of law, in its application to daily life and labour. It is, indeed, an old, old tale, the threads of which are to be found running through all the centuries of B]-itish histor}', from 8axon times to our own days, in this year of grace, icSyi. The Avarp of legal enactment Avas laid in the Ordinances of the (juilds, the weft being skilfully Avoven in by the shuttle of legislation in \'arious reigns, until it produced the fabric knoAvn as ' Statute LaAV.' The earlier conception of the sphere of laAv Avas the restraint of laAAdessness and l:)rute force. Its second development Avas the limitation of poAver and authority. Avhich had been used to limit libert}^, and restrain individual freedom. It has taken long ages to repeal the Acts passed for the suppression of personal liberty, and to restrict Avithiu reasonable limits the exercise of authority created by statute. But liberty and laAvlessness should not be confounded, one Avith the other ; they are separate aiid distinct, legally and morally. IndiA'idual liberty is consistent Avith laAA^ and oi-der, and the ideal of a State is reached in proportion to the in- dividual liberty attained, and the order Avhich is maintained, in the comuionAvealth of a free people. State regulation A\^as the third step in legislative aehieveuient, but it developed early, and ]-an concurrently Avith the attempts to restrain individual liberty; Avitli this ditierence, hoAvever, that the con- ception of regulation originated Avith the governed rather than Avith the governors, as the Ordinances of the Guilds testify. The Avork of succecdinu' ii-(.ii,>]-ati()ns has been to undo the mischiet" of State regulation ; but the present century has been distinguished also by the sultstitution of other kinds of regu- lation in the place of that repealed.
"■•]
Libcrtv for Labour. 95
It cannot Itt' ilcnii'il tliiit inili\iilnul lihcity nt'ccssitHtoH regulation, wliicli, utttT all, moans n-stniint. I'-acli jmtsou in the Statt.' must \nt ivstraincil from inlVini^'ini,' upon, oi- intcr- fcrini^f ■with, \X\v Hl)c'rty otanothi r, all Itiing ctiuaily piotcctcil in the cxfrcisc ot" their inidoulittil ri;^'hts, constitutional and nujnjl. liut Statu Law, or legislation, cannot reach, nor should it reach, all the <letnils. trivialities, or incidents ol" private lite. Aliove and l»eyond law, there exist mutual nstraints, lor mutual protection. devrlo])cd by civilised comunniitirs, and endiodicd in what may be called a code ot" Social Laws, all the more powerful and exacting, ]H'rhaps, by reason of the fact that they are unwritten laws, similar in one respect to what is termed the ( 'onnuon Law. 'Society" is a law unto itself, as the ■ family " is a law unto itself. There are. however, breaches of the law which neither the family nor society can reach ntid ade(.]uately piniish. The Connnon Law. and the Statutr- \.;\\\, are designed to reach and jnniish offences not effectually dealt with in any other Avay. How far these should operate and extend, is a matter upon which there is great divergence of opinion among all classes. There is, however, a general consensus of opinion that law, properly so called, should enter as little as possible into the domain of everyday life. In the ])rivacies of ordinary life there is a limit which instinct seems to indicate as a kind of boundary line, beyond wliich legis- lation should not extend. The tendency has hitherto been to stop short at such point, or to deal cautiously Avitli any and every proposal to go beyond it. lieceutly, the tendency U) extend the boundary has developed enormously, to such a degi'ce, in fact, that it is doubtful whether, in the opinion of many, there should be any boundary line at all. The efi"ace- ment of the individual seems to be their aim, the merging of the man into the //*(/.>»•; the fusion of atoms into a solid con- crete body, moved and movable only by the State.
The principal object of the following pages is to deal with law as ap])lied to labour, or the interference by the »State with the individual nuin in the exerci.se of his skill, intelligence, faculties, and strength, for the purpose of getting his living, increasing his store, and promoting his own and his family's prosperity and happiness in his own way, so long as he does not interfere, dc fdcti). with his neighlioiir.
I. The earlier interference with labour in llie ol<l guilds was by mutual consent for the mutual protection of its
96 A Plea for Liberty. [iir.
ineiiibi'r.s, each hcing ivsponsiLle for oacli, and all lor all, as regards conduct, support, pr<jtectioii, and advancemout. The guild -was also rosponsiljle t(^ the State, the frank -pledge beiny- accepted in all cases. As society expanded, and newer deve]o]inu'nts arose which could not be dealt with by tlie associated members in the guild, ordinances were enatted, l>y which the members were bound to abide, whether or not they were within the district in wliicli the guild existed and exercised jurisdiction. Those earlier guilds subseijuently expanded into fraternities, generally composed of siiadar classes, each class or fraternity having objects in common, for the beneiit of all. These again extended in tlieir turn, until we find associated o-uihls, or fraternities of the same class or classes, with ramifications in various parts of the country, and sometimes even in other countries, in different p»arts of the world. As time wore on there arose separate guilds of distinctive classes, the political element finding a place in their deliberations and determinations. The earlier social o-ifild was not restricted to a class, or to a section. Tlie Merchants' Guild was an ofi-shoot, sectional and restrictive. The Burgliers' Guild contested for political rights ; they sought for e(jual privileges with the feudal barons in the govern] uent of the townships. From these sprang into existence tlie Craft-Guilds, in which the workmen sought equal rights with the merchants and jjurofhers of the towns.
Those guilds were essentially protective. They sought the welfare of the particular individuals of wdiich the guild was composed, or of the section or class to which they belonged ; and they sought to perpetuate their advantages, their craft- rights, and their privileges as distinctively as the peerage does by descent of title, of lands, and of other entailed or devised property incident thereto. The guilds were a law unto them- selves, but they enforced their ordinances and guild statutes upon others not in their own circle. Many of their objects were good, and their ordinances were excellently administered; but they had in them the seeds of decay, even at their birth. The very life-germ of their existence was exclusion; and they grcAV more and more exclusive as time went on, until they became little less than luere corporate trading associations, Avhose object was the monopoly of power and authority over all the crafts of the time, and the enjoyment of all the privi- h'ges and imni unities wl'ich tluit power and authority gave,
in.] [Jhertv for Laitour. 97
(luiti- iiiis|ucUv(' ol" all ami .sumlry nutsi<li' tin- >,Miil(l. Socinl- istic^ in tlicir orii^iu and Itirtli, tlicsf tVatcrnitics (IcLjoncmtod into intolt'ialilf imtiiopolics. fli«|Uts, and tactions, cvni tu tin* drtiancf of law, onlcr, and nistoni liciiin; ot't<-n tln-ii- own av»'ni,'rr.s in eas(i of wroni^', or sii|ipi)s<tl wronic. wrrstin<.j privi- k*i^-t'S wluTc tlu'V eonld. and ])ur(.'liasing thcni when tlu-y coul<l not, nntil tlu'ir final suppression in tho rciun of tlir Tiidors.
By such institutions, midcr wliat may Ik; dcscrihod as pritncvai conditions, in the viry infancy of society and of industry in this country, the ordinances and statutes respect- in<^ lal)Our were first hirumluted and promulgated. As tiine wori' on, and the conditions of society and of life chan<fed, those ordinances did not tit the circumstances of the times. Thev wwv Hot ex]\ansivc enough : there was no eUisticity in them. It is, indeed, extremely (h)uht!'ul whether the industry of modern England could have (h'veloped to any large extent under the jjuild system. The guilds were too clannish to be national, and too limited in their scope to be cosmopolitan. When they were institute<l they doubtless fultillcil their mission. They enlarged the family and its responsibilities to groups of families, then to a class. But diversified interests arose as soon as the expansion began; and those divi-rsified interests became more and more distinctive and accentuated with each inclusion, until the original guild split into frag- ments, which fragments established their own guild. The formulas and regulations which were accepted by the initial guilds did not completely satisfy the needs and aspirations of the coteries which the extended family embraced, and they became irksome whenever they were applied to, and were enforced upon, persons and families beyond the range of the exclusive circle by which they were instituted and promulgatinl. Secession followed ; new combinations arose ; other guilds were established, and contentions followed, as to the incidence of power and authority, in a variety of fonns.
II. The ordinances of the guilds ultimately gave birth to statute laws pertaining to labour. Tlie earlier Labour Laws, such as the Statute of Labourers, directly resulted from their action. It was but the natural outcome of regulation, the fruit after its kind. Figs do not grow^ on thorns, nor grapes on thistles — thorns gi-ow thorns, and thistles, thistles. The attempts to fix the price of labour, to limit the nuudjer of labourers in a particular industry, to regulate by ordinance or
98 A Pica for Liberty. [in.
ofKcial sanction llu' liours of work, aii<l lo restrict the indi- vidual rights of tlu' labourers, produced a reaction, ^vllich re- action found vent in counter-statutory enactment, the results of which continued to operate for centuries. For a long period, the ordinances of the guilds, and statutory enactments, ran side by side. Sometimes they had the same objects, and operated concurrently ; at other times they were opposed, the one being a check upon the other. One effect of their operation was to establish customs Avhich had the force of law. Those dual forms of regulation continued in various, and often diversified forms, until the ' dissolution of the monasteries,' and the final suppression of the guilds. It Avas not until after that date that legislative enactment supplanted the ordinances of the guilds, and usurped their functions. If the legislature of that period had resisted the prompted inducements to interfere with labour, and had restricted its action to such provisions as would have ensured freedom to all, and protection to each, in tlu; exercise of that freedom, many of the evils of what is termed grandmotherly legislation would have been averted. The modern forms of interference are the direct result, the natural and inevitable result, of conditions which Avere created by State regulation, following upon the failure of corporate regu- lation, as imposed by the craft-guilds of the middle ages.
Legal enactment took two distinct forms ; (i) the Statute Law, as embodied in tlie Statute of Labourers, commenc- ing with the 23 Echv. Ill, and continued throughout the thirteenth century by various statutes, and in the fourteenth century by further regulations, as to wages and prices and hours of labour. Those enactments reached their fullest de- velopment in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, when the laws were consolidated into what might be termed a code, and were made binding upon all the trades and industries of that time. And (2) charters, which Avere granted in some of the early reigns, and were continued down to very recent times, many of which were obtained by purchase, as iii the case of the com- panies of the city of London, and some other corporate towns. The rage for legislative regulation is an outgrowth of those earlier conditions, a reverting back to the infancy of civilised society. This tendency is always strong in pi-oportion to the lack of intelligence among the masses to perceive the true rela- tion between cause and effect, and the inevitable results of a given policy, whatever that policy may be. The history of
„,.]
Lihcrlx for Labour. 99
Stutc! rt'j^ul.it inii Mi'iii.s l)ut !i liazy <lfc;iiii In iiwisi mkii, t\cii to those tulcralilx iilucatt'd. <>r we ilmiilil timl <_rr"a("r hesitancy to ciiiliai'k till thi' sumo tri'tichoious sUvaiii.
Lrgislatioii was inauijui-atc'l liy two «listiiK"t ]»ailics: [n) l'>y tliat portion of thf conuininity opposed to thf n-sti'ictivc lU'tion of the ^uiM.s : and [}>) by the ;jjnild iVati-niitirs, in or<lcr to maintain tlicir jiowci-, ]irivil(';^es, and iiiiiminii ii -.. 'I'hc lormer conti-ndud tliat Lruild hiw, l)y ordinancr or statntc, "vvas o]i])osi'd to pnlilic. ])olicy, an<l they sonLjlit to suppress all kinds ot" associative eliorl, ;'.s niischievouH ainl danu'erous to tln^ State. The hitter desired to perpetuate monopoly liy hiw. As the IsraeHtes siyhed for th(! Ih-sh-pots of Kgypt, iliirni:,^ their journey thi-ouyli the wihlerness, so the f,nii]d-l)iotliers siL,die(l for the eontinuance and maintenance of their ])owei' and authority over the traiK-s and industries represented by theii- tjuihls. The demand for protective lav,-, by the n'uihls, maiks the period of their (h'cay. 'J'hey had recourse to legislation by statute, or rej-idation bv cliarter, lieeause they liad failed, or ^vere faihng. to enforci' their ordinances as ther(.'tolb]>'. Ihit this very failure of mutual control, by i;uild-law, is proof posi- tive that it was bad law in aciual practice, either because it ■\vas ill-timed and unsuited to cireumstaiices, not endxidyine- such enactments as those for whfjse special benefit they were fi-anieil desired, or because the provisions were in themselves vicious. Li either case the law was inellective, and in the end it was disabling,- in its operation and results.
With the suppression of the guilds, legislation took the place of guild ordi]iances and ]-egulations. As the legislature at that period was non-representative, the initial legislation was prompted by a class, for a class, as it w^as natural that it should bi' umler the circumstances. Act was piled upon Act. One trade after smother was brought within the sphere of the statute law, until all handicrafts, and nearly all kinds of labour, were subject either to statute, or to ordinances under charter. As population increased, as society progressed, and as industries grew and expanded, there arose a revolt again.st those statutes and charters. The misfortune was, however. that instead of merely repealing restrictive laws, the employers, then all-powerful in Parliament, sought to substitute, and did substitute very often, other restrictive laws, generally adverse to lal)our. The masters desired, by law, to inflict disabilities upon workmen, and the workmen similarly desired to impose
H 2
lOO A ]-lca for Liberty. [in.
conditions upon nia.stors which were intolerable. The contest thus initiated was continued for centuries, sometimes one and SOUK! times the other gaining ascendancy.
The victf)rv ultimately remained with the masters. Statute after statute was repealed, in so far as they were favourable to the workman, with the result that the latter were left wholly unprotected by law, and were; unal^le to protect them- selves bv mutual association, l)ecfiuse of the Combination Laws and other statutes. On* the other hand, most of the laws which wi^'e in the interest of the uiasters remained uiux'- pealed, thus leaving the workman in a hopeless state of de- pendence and disability. A period of transition is nearly always a desperate tiuie for the weak and unprotected. So it Avas und(>r the repealed laws referred to, ere association by workmen was possible, to mitigate the evils consequent upon the industrial changes then taking place in this country. For a long time the workpeople tried to defend the law and the institution, as their sole means of protection. The masters wanted freedom from the law^ — for themselves, l>ut with the power to prevent combinations among the men. This unequal struggle continued up to the end of the first quarter of the present century, when, in i(S25, the Couibi nation Laws were repealed. Even then, however, the Master and Servant Acts w^ere still in force, and were administered with unwonted severity. These were not finally dealt with, in any liberal spirit, until 1867.
The movement amongst the workpeople for freedom to com- bine began after all efforts to keep in force the old protective laws had failed, which was towards the close of the last cen- tury. At first, and for a very long period, the tendency w^-is to repeal disabling laws. The Statutes of Apprentices, the particular Acts relating to special trades, the old Combi- nation Laws, Acts relating to Corresponding Societies, and subsequently the Master and Servant Acts, were partially, some wholly, others temporarily repealed, until, in 187,5, after persistent efforts for nearly one hundred years, the remnant of the old Labour Laws, together wath the Master and Servant Acts, till that date suspended, were wholly repealed. At the same date the Conspiracy Laws were abolished, in so far as they applied to labour disputes. Ere this had been accom- plished, trade-unions were accorded the protection of the law l)y the Trade Union Act, 1871, and further, as regards their
111.] Liberty for Labour. loi
ruiids, l)y till' Airiciulin^jf Act of 1S76. Suiiir otluT oKsolft*? statuU'S were repcalcil la.->t session. l»y the Mast<r \\\v\ Stivant Act. i<Syo. All tliroiiij:li this Vnv^ struggle one seiitiinont was ])n(l(iniinant ; the healthy sentiiiient of tVeedoiii was ])nranionnt. The wcnkiiien in eti'ect said: We want no favour; we oidy •want fair I'hiy: and by their attitude they declared — wo will have it. The denumd was sinij)Iy for the repeal of restraining and ilisahling laws, with Jiherty to act, either hidividiially or collectively, for their mutual advantage, whichever was deemed to be best.
III. But long prior to freedom of combination being granted there tuose a denumd for protective law. And protective law, as then concedi'd, appears to have been an absolute necessity, remeudierinLT the state in which industrv was left jjy the action of the legislature, as before recorded. The system of domestic manufacture, which had been the universal practice for cen- tm-ies. under the guild system, an<l under legislation by statute and charter, had almost suddenlv changed to a form of lactorv life, in which women and young children were largely em- ploye<l in several important industries. These changes were due niaiiily to the discoveries and inventions, and the applica- tion of mt-ehanical powers and means to pi-oductive labour in the eighteenth century, whereby motive power, iirst by water, and subsecjuently by steam, was utilised to extend and increase production. The newer processes had the effect of bringing together vounu' and old, of both .sexes, to work under the new industrial system. These were aggi'egated together m out-ol- the-way places, where they were often brutally treated, abso- lutely without power of redress. The vivid pictures of that ]ieriod, as portrayed in the pages of Michael Armstrong, tell the tale of their woes ; it is further told in the Reports of the Koyal Commissions and of Select Conunittees, appointed by Parliament to inquire into these matters, not in the glowing language and glaring colours of Mrs. Trollope, but in the sober blue-book language and truth, usual in such publications of the Government. The scenes there depicted were connnon in many industries nearly to the nuddle of the present century.
With the dawn of the nineteenth century came the first Factory Act, ' for the Preservation of the Health and Moi-als of Appivntices ami others employed in Cotton and other In- dustries." The necessity for this Act had tleeply i)iip]esse<l Sir Robert Peel, himself a manufactm-er, who had made a careful
I02 A Pica for Liberty. [in.
study (if the suliject. From that date, 1801-2 to 1H78, when tlie long series of Acts were consolidated and amended, the provisions of the earlier Act were so extended as to embrace nearly all factories and workshops in which women, young persons of both sexes, and children were employed. They are no longer confined to the textile trades, but extend to all classes of work, and kinds of manufacture under the Factory and AN'orkshops Act, 1(891. The Mines Regulation Acts, in their earlier conception and application, were similar in charac- ter, and had almost precisely the same objects. For a period of ninety years there have been three concurrent movements — one for the protection of w^omen and children ; another for the protection of life and limb, and health of all engaged in industry; and the other for the repeal of old restrictive laws, in so far as they pertained to adult mali's in their daily avoca- tions in life. These have progressed side by side, all through the present century, and are still operating without cessation in nearly all trades.
Those movements were not and are not inconsistent or in- compatible one wdth the other. A politician or statesman might support any of them without violating his principles or endangering his reputation for consistency. But two opposing forces have arisen in this connection ; the one would undo the legislation of the j^ast, as vicious and mischievous, the other would so extend it as to embrace within the sphere of its influ- ence not only Avomen and children but adult males, in substi- tution for, or as going back to, the ordinances and statutes of earlier times. The action of both parties is provocative of diversified antagonism. In the struggle for ascendancy, the chances are either that the good accomplished Avill be rendered nugatory by repeals of useful statutes, or that the principles underlying them will be so enlarged and applied as to become harmful to the mass of the people. This is the danger to be apprehended, and to be guarded against.
IV. The principles which underlie the Factory and Work- shop Acts, and all similar Acts, are clear, definite, and dis- tinct. Generally, they have for their object the 'protection of women and children, who were, and still are, to a great extent, the latter Avholly. and tlie former partially, unable to protect themselves. Tf the Acts, instead of protecting, disalde, or if they are no longer needed for ])rotection, then they become vicious anil mischie\ous. But it must ])e remembered that
hi.] Liberty for Labour. 103
tlu' ^vllolo tonor of pnldic law li:is hctii Jidvci-sc, in several iiii- ])<)rtaiit respects, to -woinen. The conditions under which they lahoured were altoii;etherilirterent to those of men. (Joiidiina- tion hvAVonien wns iihiiost totally unattainaMe. Isolation and weakness were their lot, until niarnaLTe j^ave them a ']irotector. Even then the ])rotcction was nearly nil, especially when they were engaged in any occupatiim. ( )!t. 11 imleed they supi)lanted tlieir hiishnnds, nnd hecami- the Imail-winners for tin- family. The extent to which this operated is now scarcely conceivalde, certainly it is not realised or appreciated hy tliose -who oppose all such legislation. The Reports of the Royal ( 'Minmission, i<S40-4':5, give an inkling of the extent, baneful intluences and etlect, of child lahour and women labour, in various indus- tries of that time, in so far as the conditions of euiployment w^ere concerned, while the reports on the sanitary condition of the labouring population, at the same date, show the direfid results in the home-life of the people. These reports are seldom perused now, but no one can understand to what fearful deptlis of degradation greed and need pressed down the workers in factories and workshops, in collieries ami mines, ami in «)ther occupations in the industrial centres of Great Britain. Health and morals were the chief objects of the series of statutes to which reference is made, includiiig sanitation, n\eal times, separation of the sexes, number of hours worked, night work, overcrowding, itc, &c.
V. The other object sought by protective law was the safety of the workers. Sometimes health, morals, and safety were sou<rht in one and the same measure ; as, for example, where fencing of machinery and ventilation of nmies were provided for in the same Act which prohibited the employ- ment of women and children in mines; or w'herc regulations were enforced as to the employment of men and women, boys and girls in the mine or factory, under conditions pro- vocative of immorality, and where common decency con Id scarcely be said to exist. In addition to personal safety of life and limb, responsibility in cases of injury while engaged in the ordinary occupation for which the workers were hired, was added. This, however, was not a new law; it was rather statutory limitation and application of the princi)des of (,'ommon Law, derived from the Roman Law, which were general throughout Europe and America. Thus protective law, in this instance, was designed to prevent fatal accidents
I04 A Plea for Liberty. [m.
or injury, or to punish vmdor civil process those who were responsible, but who neglected proper safeguards for the em- ployes' safety.
VI. The Public Health Acts are of a different class, but their aim was in the same direction, their provisions being on more general lines. Instead, however, of being solely, or even mainly, instituted for the protection of workers engaged in a par- ticular employment, they were designed for the benefit of the whole community, of which the workpeople form but a section. Nevertheless, under the Public Health Acts, the Nuisances Removal Acts, and numerous other general Acts, all classes of workers are directly, as well as indirectly, benefited, in addition to the special protection given to them under the Factory and Workshop Acts, and other specific Acts. To this category might be added many groups of Acts of a general character, such as the Railway Acts, Building Acts, Drainage Acts, Housing of the Working Classes Acts, and others, all of which extend protection to workers, as part of the w^hole community, while some contain clauses for their especial benefit.
VII. The motives which actuated those by whom all such legislation was inaugurated and extended in various direc- tions, were good, and the objects sought were definite and generally commendaljle. The promoters assumed, as a matter of course, that the individual could not protect himself in such cases : that many of the circumstances wliich had arisen, necessitating interference by law. had been created by laA\", or were the direct or indirect results of law. The aru"ument was, and is, that inasmuch as the conditions of modei"n society are mainlv the outcome of legislation, in one form or another, those least benefited by such legislation should be protected against encroachments on their liberty of action, and of mutual association, by those who had reaped the greatest advantages from enactments by positive law. How far, and to what extent, the position thus taken up is a right one may be open to argument ; and some of the facts alleged in support of either side or view may be challenged. In an}^ case no one will contend that all such interference by statutorj^ enactment is vicious. The (juestions in dispute mainly ;n'o : when, whei'e, and how the interference shall take place ; and under what conditions and to what extent? The general view is that, i)i matters relating to labour, the line shall be drawn at adult males ; that legislation for the protection of women and
III.] Liberty Joy Labour. 105
chiMnn is justiliiil>l(', aii<l (luitf witliin tin; sphere ul' Jc;;ili- iiuiU' ami po.sitivr law. l»iit that interrereiice witli tlii> ri^'lilH ami liberties of ^^rown nu-ii is an iiiijtertiiiciiee niul a dani^er wliieh ou^'lit to ])(• ivselitetl and resisted. Sueli legislation is unddiditedly an innovation in the strict sense of the term. Imlirectly adult males have been protected by Factory and Workshop Acts, and by Mines Kegulation Acts, Truck Acts, and similar Acts. For the most part such Acts were not passed ostensibly for the protection of men, except in so far as health and safety are concerned, the one exception being the Truck Acts. In all such legislation the -whole community is concerned, as well as the workers. In this respect it was not class law for a section, but general law for the mass. The Truek Acts are of a ditVerent class, but they really aimed a IdoNV at a system of fraud, perpetrated by those who liad supreme control over the labour market, and against whom the workeis were powerless to compete. ^lany of the.se con- ditions were manifestly created by, or were the outcome of law, by which masteis were free to combine, and under which workmen were refused the right of condjination, and conse- ijuently of resistance.
VIII. The demand for an extension (d" the provisions of ])ositive law to cases not heretofore within its pale, or domain, is, it is to be feared, as much due to unwise attempts in the direction of lindtation, as to unwise attempts to run in advance of puldic opinion by its extensi(in. For instance, there was an outcry against what is called " grandmotherly legislation' by the Lalf^xez-fa'i I'e school of political economists, as they are teru)ed, with the object of restricting such legis- lation. The Liberty and Pioperty Deft.'ncc League of to-day is regarded by many as carrying to the very extreme the }>iinciple of non-interference by law in matters of ' contracts of service' in tlie realm of ]ab(mr. The adherents of this school appear to be inclined to appeal to philosophical prin- ciples only in so far as they are protective of their own interests. This is not perhaps intentional, but proceeds Jiom forgetfulness of what they owe to earlier legislation and regu- lation. They protest, and in many cases rightly, against the enactment of fresh it-straints on individual liln-rty, but they are not enthusiastically eager to part with advantages whicli earlier legislation has conferred upon the class to which the members of that school belong. For example, the State
io6 A Plea foi' Liberty. [in.
undertakes to maintain entails and settlements, and provides facilities for the collection of debts, therein conferring ad- vantages on the landowning, trading, and capitalist class. If progress is to bring with it a gradual diminution in the use of legal machinery in the afiairs of every-day life, it is obvious that these and similar agencies provided by the State must be modified, as being harmful to the development of human character, and be excluded just as much as enact- mcirts which seek to confer advantages upon, and to protect and advance the interests and status of, the labourer. Thei'o should be some reciprocity among all classes, thus showing confidence in the expanding tree of liberty as a refuge for the protection of all. Such dogged resistance to any extension of the domain of law leads the advocates of extension to discar<l all notions of limit, and in reality it re-acts in favour of the wildest conceivable schemes of Municipal and General Law, for all kinds of purposes, and for distinctive sections of the people. Both parties seem to have a very confused notion as to the true basis of law, and of the issues involved therein. They are divided into two armies, for attack and defence; they aim wildly at each other, neither havinti; a vcrv clear idea where the other is in the fray. They have no conception of a golden mean in matters of State policy, or that there is a plateau of debateable land on either side of the imaginary boundary line of legislative interference, Avhich may still be open for demarcation and delimitation. The political philosopher, and the social statist or political economist, must attempt to trace the exact line, if an exact line can be traced, where the State shall act or interfere, and where it shall be neutral, resist- ing alike all who seek to pass the boundary in whatever direction, whether by further extension of legislation, or by the repeal of legislation in force. This is now all the more necessary, seeing that ' statesmen ' and those who seek 'parliamentary honours' are subject to continuous external pressure for new legislation, on old or new lines, as the case may be. Every member of the popular liranch of the legis- lature is being forced, almost against his will, to support this or that measure, the exact bearing of which, beyond its more immediate objects, he does not in the least degree perceive. Such pi-essure is exercised quite irrespective of other pressure in a contrary direction, by another set of enthusiasts.
The rr(|uisition for leo-islation dining the last six vears
loo »-
III.] IJboiy for Lahonr. 107
lias IxTii iiiuniiDiis, it is lu'cojuiiij^ inorc jhhI iiioic invsistiMt! ami dictatorial ouch year, and it will l»c iHTinlual and •^^roNvini,'. initil some principlo of policy is formulated l»y ^vllich tliouirhtfnl men can stand. Wlutlicr or not this W. possible is u ijUi'stion for debate; but the ubseiice of a policy is dangerous to all concerned — to thu 'State, as a living or- ganism, and to the various sections of the coimnnnity of uhich it is made up.
IX. The s|)here of legislation is now sought to be extended in vaiious directions, coveiing a \\ ide field. Some of the measures demanded belong to a class which has h;id the sanction of all ])arties in the State, and also of the inajority of ecenomists. to whichever school they may lielong. There have lieen diti'erences of ojiinion as to the degree and exact extent of the legislative interference to be conceded: and some few have protested against the kinds, and the methods adopted: but actual resistance to its princi]des has been small. The particular branches of subjects embraced in the new demands may be classitied and summarised as follows : —
{ii) Acts for extending existing provisions relating to the safety of persons engaged in more or less dangerous occupa- tions'. This series of enactments is based npon principh'S which are not generally called wx ([uestion, as being in any sense an infringement of legitimate law. It is universally ad- mitted that no man has a right to contribute to the injury of another, whether the person injured is in the employ of such other pers(ni. or is a ' stranger.' not in his employ. This personal protection is indeed the essence of all ]aw\ The State exists for no other rightl'ul purpose : all else is usurpation, no matter what euphonious name maybe applied to the condition of things in which such protection is denied.
(/') t'ompeu.sation for injury is of the saiuc class, and is the natural sequence of the foregoing. The Common Law^ lias always held the person causing "the injury responsible, and liable to pay compensation. The Employers' Liability Act docs not extend the responsibility: on the contrary, it ratlier limits its application, and also the amount of compensation to l;e awarded. As a set-off to this limitation, it gives an easy remedy by summary process for the amount clainuMl. Instead of expensive litigation in the Superior Coui-ts. the County Court may assess damages up to a certain restrictetl amount. Aoainst measures of this sort there can be no legiti-
io8 A Plea for Libci'iy. [iii.
mate objection, ])rovided the}'' are framed and administered ^vith equity. The limitation of responsibility jiml liability only dates back some live and forty years, and Avas not even then the subject of positive la^v, but of interpretation by the hiofhest leiri'.l tribunal, tlie House of Lords.
(<■) The Public Heaith Acts endeavour to ensure, as far as practicable, immunity from dangerous conditions arising from unhealthy occupations, carried on in unsanitary dwellings, or premises, where the work has to be performed ; and also pro- tection to the inhabitants from the effects of unhealthy areas, bad drainage, or other defects dangerous or injurious to health. When a person imdertakes to do certain Avork he runs the risks usually incidental to such employment. But it is always understood tliat such risks are limited to those that are not preventible. To endanger a man's life needlessly is upon a par Avith manslaughter ; and the worker has a right to expect that all reaso)iable care shall be taken to lessen danger to health, and prevent accidents wherever possible. In accepting a tenancy, the tenant has the same rights as against his landlord. All this is old law, and is good law ; nor can it be abrogated without danger to the community, and to the State.
((/) The Factory and Workshop Acts constitute the special group to which exception is mainly taken. In tliis class of legislation there is a growing tendency towards expansion and extension, and of including objects and purposes not ■within thti purview of existing law. jMany regard this ten- dency with strong disfavour ; even those most favourable see in it a great danger. Demands are being daily made for the extension of these Acts. The advocates of this policy urge that such legislation sliall )k' logical, and face the full consecjUences of recognised principles, in enactments already in force. It is not always clear that the proposals made are the logical outcome of legishition now in force. And even were it so, there may be. and often are, modifying circumstances or con- ditions that prevent the application of the specific "principle' alluded to ; while there are many cases to which sucli ])rin- ciplt; docs not logically apply. Each case nuist be taken on its merits, and no man need feel any obligation, moi'al or otherwise, to su])])ort new proposals because he luis felt it incund)ent upoii liim to support similar legislatioji in other cases to which such Acts apply. Circumstances alter cases in
111.] Li/n'y/v for Lalwiir. 109
mnnbrrlrss instances iiiul ways, cortainly not It'ss in niatt('i*s of Ifirislation than in artiiiis n-latini^ t<» (•(»n<hu't, an<l <»!" «!V('rv-*lav lit"''. Those who iir|^e lej^ishition on the LCronnd of h)Lfi<'. must lit' ])i< ]>ar.'(l to tacf the ht<j[ical sei|Menec ot" their own projiosals. lioih in lite and eondiiet. and in Statute Law.
X. The n'Cent intiuirv hv the Lords' (,'oinnuttee into the Sweatiii'i' System, as it is called, has (»i^ened ui) a wider held. Not that there is anvthint; ahsoluttdv n»!W \\\ connection with it, cxcejit perhaps that it has d<'V(doped more widely, and evoked a deeper interest on tlu; part of the puhlic. Thoso who will turn to the pauses of Alton Jjocho, puhlished forty years au'o. will find that the Key. Charles Kin-j-sley laid hare the chief features of the Sweatinv,^ System. ^Ir. lienry Mayliew also, in his 'London Lal)our and London Poor,' showed to what extent it had crept into the furnishing trades, especially in all that pertained to ealiinet-niakin^" and fancy work con- nected therewith : and also into the shoemakini; and tailorini; trades, and some other industries. Those men preached to deaf eai-s. The public conscience was not touched. There was no response to the earnest appeals then made, which were treatefl either as the appeals of fanatics, or were regardeil as of so senti- mental a character as not to come within the pale of practical politics. The ' Sweating System ' in itself is hard to define ; even the Select Committee of the Lords hesitated to commit themsehes to any definitif)n. Mr. Arnold White gaye the highly philosophical descripticn of 'grinding the faces of the poor;' but the Committee felt that this definition was not sufficiently precise for legislative purposes. All the witnesses were able to adduce evidence as to the evils of the system. The Lords' Committee were deeply impressed by the volu- minous evidence given before them, as to the extent of the evils, and the baneful effects, in various ways. But they w'ere not able to formulate any plan for dealing with the matter by enactment. They advised combination, co-operative pro- duction, and sanitary inspection, the latter only being in the direction of positive law. But to be able to deal with any subject by statutory enactment, the promoters thereof should be in a position to define the objects aimed at and the precise extent of the contemplated interference. It is not sufhcient to enumerate the evils to be remedied, because these may arise from various causes, some of which are scarcely within the
iio A Pica for Liberty. [tit.
sphere of practical legislation, and some remedies miglit inten- sity rather than cure the disease.
XI. The SAveating System is mainly the outiiTowth of a domestic system of industry, but apparently not Avholly so. At any rate, it attains its highest development in trades in whicli mcmhcrs of the family can perform the work at home. This is seen in the tailoring trades, the Ixjot and shoe ti'ades, and in the cabinet-making trades ; and also in the chain- makinu', nut and bolt-inakinu" industries, in Staffordshire and parts of Worcestershire. It is almost universal in con- nection witli women's work, of all kinds, especially so where they are able to do the work at home. The 'sweater' is the outcome of many elements, the result of many causes ; some of these mit>ht come within the domain of leofitimate law, but many a.re beyond the province of positive enactment. The head of the family, the responsible bread-Avinner, has been the chief promoter of sweating. He has preferred independence and isolation as a homo worker, where he has the freedom to work when he likes, and to idle wlien he pleases. He has utilised the skill of his wife, and of his children, to enable him to produce quickly, Avhile the competition of other men, similarly placed, has compelled him to produce cheaply — too cheaply perhaps to enable him to live decently, as a skilled workman should live. The system of domestic manufacture has in recent times l)ecn carried on under such conditions as to l)ecome a positive d.anger to health, not only to those who live immediately under such conditions, but to the locality in wldeh they dwell, and often to the whole surround- ing district. This has led to the demand for i^anitaiy inspection, with power to 'invade the sanctuary of the home,' even when the family only are employed. Workers, in very despair, invoke this power, and sanitary reformers seek it as a means, in their opinion the only means, of a])ating a wides])i-ead evil, the consecjuences of which might become dangerous, or at least very injvn-ious to the Vtdiole community.
XII. The desire for legislative interference has of late been oTowinof to such a decree that it has become a passion, in many bi-easts an all-pervading passion, which is apparently insatia})le. It is with many a mere dilettante longing for some change, whicli shall bridge the gulf of classes, now sepai-ated l)y an alni'ist impassable chasm. With others it is the cry of despai]-. They feel the terrible struggle for existence so acutely,
III.] IJbcrty for Labour. iii
ami sec no po.ssiblo iiR-iUis of I'Scapi* tVoin llic iuttiisilii -l ami (iMitimious stiain, tmutally ami pliNhii-ally. tliat tlu'V l<ii>lv lo llu- StHl(! to intt rliTi', lor protvclion ami support. If it br not tlespair, it is (lecinli'uce, true nianliood iteinj; crushed out, in ko far as its lii^litr attriltutcs arc eoucerm'«l. Others, a^^'ain, seek the aid of the Stat>- out of utter idlemss, and ini^rainrd hiziness ; their idea of life seems to be n<tt to tlo anylhiiij^ for theuiselve-i, except that which they are C(jni])elled to «U) from sheer necessity. The most serious proposal in recent times, is the ajiplieation of tlie ])iineii«le of ^>tatt' int»-rference with the hibour of adult males, and tlir lixin«; of their hours of labiiur by law. The })ri>posals at present Ix'fore the country art' various; some propose to go only a little 'way, others go the ' whole hog.' Of the two the whole hog ])eople an; the most logical an<l consistent. They seek a universal law (»f Kit;ht Hours, for all sections of the people, without distinction of class or industry. The possibility of its application is (pjite another nuitter. The advocates of this 'principle' do not troubli' themselves with such trifling (|Uestions as possibilities; what they demand is the j)rinciple of a uniform day of Kight Hours: it is for the legislature to find out the way, ami the methods of its apjilicatioii. If, they say, the thing is right, I'ai-lianient should fornuilate the provisions and the means, it bring the duty of Parliament to put into language. an<l give; fxpri'ssion to, the aspirations of the p(()])le. The' sim^ilieily of this conclusion is truly astounding.
XIH. Sevei-al difinitt^ formulalid pi'oposals are now before the country, some being limited to certain employiiH-nts : but the advocates, for the most part, regard the limited proposals as only initial steps towards the grand consunnuation, by them devoutly desired. The measures suggested are:
((/) An Eight Hour day for all (Jrovernment employes. Jt is not ((uite clear whether the advocates of this policy seek to enforce eight hours' contiimous w<jrk upon all Government employes, or whether they only desire that those who work longer than eiglit hours shall In- ln-oiight within that limit, leaving those wlio work less than eight hours, the full enjoy- ment of present privileges. Upon this point they are discreetly silent.
(/>) There is a further demand that all persons employe<l by ^[unicipal CorporatioiLs, and all Local bodies and Authorities, shall lie employed for eight hours only. Here, again, it is not
1 1
4 Pica for Libcrly. [iii.
quite clear whether the rule shall be universal, or only partial, in its application. The demand is general, the advocates disdaining to descend to particulars, either as to the appli- cation of the regulations, or the limitation (if any) of their operation.
With regard to these two classes of employes, there is no kind of pretension that the}' ar<; over-worked, or that their labour is exhausting or dangerous. The contention merely is til at the State, or the Municipal Institution or Local Body, should show an example to other employers, by working the men fewer hours, and paying them the highest rates of rcnumeration. No one will contend that the State should under-pay, or over-work, its employes. But, on the other hand, few will assert that the State should so deal with labour, as practically to regulate the hours of labour, and fix its price. Yet the contention of those who seek such interference in- volves these conditions, in its operation and results. Custom has the force of law ; and a State-regulated day, and a fixed rate of wages for such working day, would in efiect govern the labour market generally, certainly for the same kind of labour, in all parts of the country.
(c) A section, and it must be admitted that they constitute a very considerable proportion, of the miners, seek for a State- reo:ulated day of Eio-ht Hours. Their various Associations have prepared a Bill for that purpose, which Bill has been introduced into Parliament. The thi-ee Parliamentary repre- sentatives of the counties of Durham and Northnmberland have, with the general assent of their mining constituents, refused to sanction the measure ; but the two miners' repre- sentatives from other districts support it. The supporters of the Bill contend that the mining industry is a dangerous occupation, and that labour in the mine is exhaustive, and, therefore, that the hours of work in the mine should l)e limited. With regard to the question of danger, the law is pretty severe at present, and any plea on the score of danger will command attention and respect. But limitation of hours by legislation comes nnder a totally different head, and this pretext ought not to be urged on behalf of State regulation. The exhaustive nature of the work is admitted, but the plea holds good in other industries. Yet the sup- ]M)rters of the Bill declare that the measure is limited to mining, and is not intended to apply to other trades. Leaving
in.] Liberty for f.a/>oitr. i i -^
tlif <|iitsti<»ii of (lan^fcr out ot" the fjilculalioii, it mii^fhl \\v ankiMl wlK'thrr iron-workers an<l steel-workers, blast-f'uniaei'iinn,;iii(l some others, could not jnit in as reasonuMe a jilea on the score of exhaustion. Icni^th of hoiirs, an»l the lahoriousness of their oeeupation. Some of those employetl on railways could also ]>lea<i hoth danger and exhaustion, and therefore the limitation jiroposed, for miners only, will !"• insufRcient. ISesidcs, no class of men in this comitry have done so much for themselves, liy themselves, as the luiners. To their credit he it said, they liave shown an example, wtn-thy of all praise, of scir-hclp, .•itid iiiiiiuiil hrlj) 1 ly associative effort, such as mi^ht lie atlvantaj^eously followed l>y the workimii of all classes in the coinitry.
((/) The Shop Assistants of the country, especially thosf? in the metropolis, have fornuilatetl denmnds for the early closing of shops, either generally, on all days of the week, or speci- fically, on certain days, with half-holidays, because, as they assert, they have found it impossible to adequately curtail their hours of labour otherwise. The fact is, however, that th(> })ressure of long hours appears not to have been felt sutHciently to induce them to combine for shorter hours, or thev would ere this have irained their ends. In manv houses tile hours of labour have been reduced considerably, without State interference, and the tendency is still further to reduce the working hours of this class of employes. Where women and young persons are employed, the law operates under existiny; legislation.
(c) But the most curious requisition of all is the demand, by a large number of Shopkeepers, that shops shall be closed at a certain hour by Act of Parliament, under Municipal or Local remilation, bv tlie maioritv of the votes of those eniraged in the particular businesses to be regulated. Sir John Lubbock s measure admits the difficulty by omitting certain establish- ments, and shops, from its operation. Those omitted are, in ]K)int of fact, the very places in which the hours are the longest, such as public-houses, hotels, restaurants, eating- houses of all sorts, tobacconists, newsagents, and some others. The exceptions prove that State regulation is difficult and dangerous. Many of those Avho clamour for the interference v.'ould resent any attempt to put in force a law prohibiting Sunday trading, yet this would give one whole day's rest in seven. All these proposals practically admit that voluntary
I
114 A Pica for Liberty. [iii.
regulatiuu is iiuL possible to tlic extent deiiuinded. Does not this imply that State regulation is im})racticable '^ Is it not an admission that statutory enactment is not re(|uired by those for -whose benefit it is ostensil)ly intended ? The power to close at a given hour exists in all places for all industries.
(/) Another of the proposals made is to insist that in all Eailway Bills and Tramway Bills, and of course, naturally, in all Bills involving the employment of labour, and requiring Parliamentary sanction, provisions shall be inserted fixing the hours of labour at eight hours per day, as a condition prece- dent to the passing of such measures. Notice to that effect was given in the session of i<S9o, but the question was not the subject of debate upon any Bill, nor was any attempt made to raise it. In i(S9i such a clause was introduced into a private Bill, but it was struck out subsequently. This mode of Parliamentary interference and regulation is perhaps the most extraordinary ever submitted to the House of Commons. The proposal bears no resemblance to the pro- visions inserted in Railway and Street Improvement Bills relating to the housing of the working-classes, as powers are given in such Bills to compel the vacating of dwellings within the area taken compulsorily, and that too without any compensation or consideration to the poor families evicted under tiie Acts. By the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890, some provision is made for the costs of removal, when the dwellings are required for demolition in order to clear the area ; but even this proviso does not really amount to compensation. There is, however, no analoo'Y whatever between the two sets of cases : nor can that enactment lie (pioted in support of the former demand, upon any logical or reasonable grounds. If Parliament is to be called upon to interfere in matters relating to labour in all Bills brought before the Legislature for Parliamentary sanction, there is an end to the resj^ective ' lights,' whatever these. may be, of capital and labour. It would be better at once to fix the hours of labour, and its wages or price, by legal pro- visions which shall be binding upon all classes, employers and workmen alike, in ail dej^artments of industry, all over the kinsjdom.
(//) The Universal Eiglit liours Bill, prepr. red by the Trades Congress Parliamentary (,'ommittee, is so concise and simple that it speaks for itself. The enacting clauses of the measure
III.] Liberty for Labour
1 1
an- as tollows: '^ i. ()nan<l alter tin- first < lay ot .January, iKty2, uo ]>('i>;<jn shall work, or cause or sutttT any otlwr person to work, on sea or land, in any capacity, under jiny contract or aijreenient, or articles lor hire of laltour, or lor personal service on sea or land (except in case ot" accident) lor more than ei^jjht hours in any one day of twenty-four hours, or for mori' than forty-eight hours in any week.' The lines and peiuilties lor any otience against the provisions of the Bill are to be in- Hictt'(l solely upon the 'employer, manager, or other ])erson subiect to his or her authoiitv or commands, or in his or her employment;' the minimum penalty for such offence is >£ lo. and the maximum ])enalty is ci'joo. No exceptions are ad- mitted except 'accidents'; the Bill is drastic an<l universal in its application ; hut it has fallen flat not only in the House, hut in the country.
XIV. There are four very serious objections to this kind of legislation, all of which must be removed before it can l^e initiated ami earned into effect. These are :
(i) The impracticability, nay impossibility, of its universal adoption and application. All laws which are partial in ope- ration are made by a class, for a class ; and class legislation is generally condemned, most of all by the workimz-classes. and rightl}" so. For more than a century we have been busily engaged in undoing the c]a,ss legislation of previous centuries — in repealing statutes, and in removing the obstacles they had created. The work is not yet completed, for the effects remain long after the statutes are repealed. Everybody whf) may be at all acquainted with the history of past legislation, admits that the earlier legislation in this direction hampered trade, hindered the advancement of the people, and operated atlvei-scly to labour. It took an entire century to repeal the Labour Laws, and some of them are not even now repealed. We are asked to revert to similar legislation; to tix the number of hours of the working-day, and to practically set up a standard of wages. Can this be done effectually for all trades ? One would like to see the draft of a measure, si.-tting forth in detail, in a schedule, all the industries of the country, with the number of hours to be worked as the normal working day for each trade, and the minimum rates of wages to be paid. In such schedule, what should govern the length of the day. or the rate of wages? Should it be skill, the exhaustive cha- racter of the labour, the cleanliness or dirtiness of the occupa-
I 2
ii6 A Pica for Libe7'ty. [in.
tiun, tlic insuniUiry cuuditious luidcr wliicli it is curried (»n. or what? It would be an interesting session in which all these t[uestions were discussed and settled, if settled they ever could be. Each class and section would have its accredited experts, whose duty it would be to show that his clients de- served to be put into this or that class, or to be exempt from this or that regulation. That time is not yet come.
(2) The inelasticity of positive law is adverse to the de- Aelopmcnt of human intelligence and skill. An Act of Par- liament is necessarily directed more to the restraint of lil)erty than to its expansion. Hence the principle upon which it is, or ought to be, conceived, is that caution is better than reck- lessness, and that it is above all things advisable to hasten slowly in matters of legislation. The great majority of people do not at all understand the nature and character of an Act of Parliament. Working-men especially seem to re- gard it merely as an ordinary resolution, registered by both Houses of Parliament, and capable of being as easily and readil}^ rescinded or amended as any resolution passed at a public meeting, or by the committee or council of the body with which they are associated, and with whose acts and re- solves they are more or less familiar. An Act of Parliament is Certainly ]iot like a law of the Medes and Persians ; it is not an enactment which cannot be abrou'ated or set aside. But it frequently takes a longer time, and involves more agi- tation and expense, to repeal an Act, even when its effects have admittedly been pernicious, than it did to place it on the statute book originall}'. It is no light matter either to enact or repeal a statute ; even to amend it often requires years of earnest and persistent effort. Of legislation generally it might with truth be said that fools rush in where ano-els fear to tread. The House of Commons is slow. fre({uently very slow, to embark on new experimental legislation : and when such is initiated the expedient of ' temporary law ' is often resorted to, requiring that its assent shall be renewed year after year, in order to see how it works before it is made a permanent statute. Many such laws are renewed session after session by an Expiring Laws Continuance Bill, an indication of the extreme caution of the Legislature in any new departure in positive cuactuient.
(3) Supposing theix! was no (Hiestidii ;is to the 'principle' of such legislatio]!, the administration of the law would fro-
III.] Liberty for Labour. 117
(lufullv involve linnlships more intolcral'li' iliaii tin- evils tliey ^vel•c nieaiil U) cure. The iiiNpectioii reijiiired, to set; that tlie laws woro eiitoiTeii, woulil iiecossitatu an uriiiy ot" inspectors, all ot" "svhoiii AvouM. ill the very nature of thini,'s, liecouie more ami more <lietatorial, inasmucli as they wouM lie the masters ol" em]>lovers ami employed alike. Labour would have to cea.se at the sound of the State gon^LC, <ii"l 'i"}' ^vork ])erioriue(l beyond the lei^islative limit would he an infraction ot' the statuti'. If the necessities of the liour i((|uiied that work should he continuetl after the fixed time, a jiermit wou]<l have to be granted by the inspector, magistrate, town council, or some other recognised authority constituted for the purpose. Overtime Avould liavi' to be abolished in all cases, except in instances of great emergency. Overtime, with a iixed legal day. would be impossible, or the legislation itself would be a farce. Those workmen who chuckle in their sleeve at the prospect of putting in more overtime, at higher rates of pay. would find that an Eight Hour Law was a law to be administered and enforced : not an r-lastic regulation, cujialile of indetinite interpretation and modilied application. Jjcsiiles which, an Ei<dit Hour Law would be a hollow sham Avhich permitted working lieyond the normal fixed day. Eight hours, and no more, must be the motto of those who seek it, if they are honest in their contention that such an enactment is needed as a means of providing work for the w^orkless. This aspect of the case is kept back by the advocates of the ' legal day' of eight hours, but it must be insisted on, as part of the bargain. One month's experience of the administration of such a law would cure many of its advocates of their phreiisy for State regulation, by a State othcial, in the ordinary affairs and conduct of every-day working life.
(4) Such legislation would fail, as all similar legislation has failed in tlie past. It is u.-eless to say that the conditions are changed — human nature is not changed — certainly not for the better in these respects. The greed of gain is as rife to-day as when Christ drove the money-changers out of the TeiM|)lc, or as it was in the Miildle Ages, when the (Jnilds regulated, m- sought to regulate, labour and wages. The history of the Guilds discloses the fact that for centuries there was an in- tensely bitter contest between the Guild members of the various fraternities for the supreme control and for ascendancy. '^I'he feuds only ended with their suppression. Tlie contests did
ii8 A Plea for Liberty, [in.
not subside. l>ut were continnod uiider tho enactments ^vllich were substituted for tlic earlier ordinances, until those were, in their tui-n, repealed. The charters i'roni time to time granted were but abuses of power, by the creation of monopo- lies and privileges, and these for the most part had either to be a))rogated, or so abridged as to be incapable of doing nnich mischief. Where they still partially exist the abuses linger and continue ; and even the advocates of h^gislative inter- ference apparently desii-e tho final extinction of (diartered monopolies and of yjower. In what way have the conditions of labour changed, or the character of workmen, to lead us to believe that legal enactment will be more fruitful of benefits now than of yore 1 Even the conduct of many of the advo- cates of such legislation belie the contention, for they are more bitter in their attacks, more unscrupulous in theii* action, and more otfensive in their conduct, than were the antagonists of a bygone age, when such labour legislation was in force, and in the struggles by which it was sought to be abrogated. Fitness for restraint is a condition precedent to legal enactment : that fitness is not discoverable in the lano-uairt! and conduct of the chief advocates of Acts of Parliament for the regulation of labour, and for determining how long a man, in the plenitude of his strength^ shall work at his trade, or what he shall earn by his industry.
XV. The advocates of furthc^r legislative interference in labour questions urge, above all things, that Ave shall be logical in the matter of positive law. They quote Acts, and parts of Acts, in order to show that the ' principle ' of interference has been adopted and applied ; and they accuse all who hesitate to extend the ' principle,^ on the lines they indicate, of cowardice in withholding assent to the newer forms of legislative action which they suggest. ' We are all socialists now,' said an eminent Parliamentar}' hand. Yes ; in a sense that is so. Some are socialists by conviction, no matter upon what inadequate grounds ; others may be re- garded as socialists by their silence, and an attitude of non- committal, because thev shrink from cond)atiuij; socialistic views and tendencies ; and manv are socialists from lack of knowledge, lack of energy, and the absence of self-sustaining power. The growtli of socialism is due to the enormous ex- pansion of our Avealth resources, the advantages and benefits of ^^ hich are shared by the comparatively few, instead of by
in.] Liberty for Labour. 119
the many, ami thi' oons.MHicnt foiitrast of poverty ami riches, wliieli iiia\- lie seen on every liand. This state of tliiiiL,'s is to he (leploreil. ami as far as practieahli- to !•<• vemeilicil ; th«' only {|Uestion is — how '. The two distinctive jiroposals j)ut i'onvard hy the Kahians and the Socialists are. firstly, the extension of the provisions of the Factor}' ami Workshop Acts to all the traih's of the country, whore only a<lult males arc enip]oyo<l, as well jis where wonnn ami eliihliiii are employed ; and they seek to a])ply the provisions of those Acts to domestic manu- facture of all kinds, wliere the family only are eiiiratred in i)ro- ductive laliour, as well as to in<histries where ])ersons are hired })y an employer. And, socondh', they seek the reiG^ulation of the hours of lahour by statute-law, generally and uniforndy, or ])artially. as the case may be, as before stated. Those two points may be said to C(n'er the present demands relating to labour.
XVI. The extension of the provisions of the Factory and Workshop Acts to domestic industries, Avhere the members of the family only are employed, will inevitaldy destroy do- mestic manufacture in all trades. Some affect to deny this, but all the better informed advocates of such extension acknowledge that such Avill be its effects and results ; and they even rejoice at the prospect. It is not necessary for present purposes either to attack or defend the s^^stem of domestic imhistry. Great evils are connected with the system, many are the natural outcome of it. It is, however, essential that all classes and sections of the community should know what is sought, and what is inevitable, if the legislation pro- posed is carried into effect. If all places and premises where work is carried on are to be inspected ; if a certain cubical space is to be insisted upon in all such rooms ; if the hours of labour, of meal-times, and the provision especially that meals are not to be taken in the work-room, are enforced, how^ is it possible for any kind of work to be done at home? The thing is impossible. This fact must be clearly understood by all who are likely to be afiected by such legislation. The sleeping room of the family will have to be as open to the in- spector as an ordinary workshop, for it is well known that in numberless instances one room serves for all the purposes of living, working, cooking, and sleeping. Are the mass of the people prepared for so drastic a measure — will they submit to it 1 And not only will the domestic ' workshop ' l)e absolutely abolished, but the small masters will have to go, just as the
I20 A Plea for Liberty. [in.
small private schools practically ceased to exist with the insti- tution of School Boards. The effect will be that industry of all sorts will be concenti-ated. in fewer hands : hucre estab- lishments will monopolise trade, and the workers will, in consequence of their own action, l^e at the mercy of a few large lii'ms, or gi'eat trading companies, with the result that in the event of being discharo;ed. for whatever reason, no other establishment will be open to them.
XVn. It might be thought that the demands of the new school of labour advocates have been exaggerated, and that the possible exdls resulting from such demands have been maxi- mised. One fact alone will disabuse either notion, if it exists. In August, 1890, the newly formed Dockers' Union, led bv men who claim to be the oricrinators of what thev are pleased to describe as the ' Xew Trade Unionism," decreed that then- books should be closed : that no new member's were to be eni'olled: that they were now suthcient in numbers to perfoi-m the work at the docks, and that any addition thereto would but impede their progress, by being brought into competition with the accredited members of the Union. Any departure fi'om this decree was to be left in the hands of the Executive of the Union. This autocratic ukase is worthv of the most unscrupulous despotic tyrant that ever disgraced the pages of history : no pai'aUel for it can be found in the annals of labour, except, perhaps, in the more degenerate days of the trading coi-porations of the Middle Ages, or possibly in some of the commercial " rincrs ' of modern times. It said, in effect : We, the member's of the Dockei-s' Union, are quite sufficient in numbers to do all the dock-work of the port of London, or other ports : we only are to be employed : no other men shall come into competition with our labour, and we will dictat^j the terms and conditions upon which we shall be employed. If you don't like it. we will stop all industry until you cave in. Supposing all other Unions adopted the same policy, and shut out all labour except that which had been enrolled in the books of the Union — what is to become of the imemployed ? Becfgai'v. or the workhouse, is to be the lot of all new comers into the field of industry, unless they can be banished into other lands. If any doctrine so abominable had been pro- pounded by employei-s the world of labour would have been up in arms. The decree was presumably withdrawn sub- sequently. Its intention as explained was to insure that
Ill,] Liberty for Labour. 121
ajtplieants lor dock laliour should be ht-altliy, al)le-lxjdi<<l mt n. Tin- Dockers' Uuion, however, makes no provision for sick lieuetit; and ostracism on the ii7-oiiu«l of health is no part of trade uuion rei^ulation.
The mere fact that such a piec^' of stupendous folly could bo seriously entertained l»v anv body of sane persons is bad enough : but that it should Ijc promulgated. an<l be treated by any portion of the press otherAvise than as the ravings of fana- tics, shows to what depths of utter imbecility, ignorance, and presumption men can be found to descend when blinded by passion, Jed by bigotry, and actuated by mere selfishness in the attainment of their objects. Men of this stamp, if once they had supreme control over the legislative machine, would annihilate individual liberty, and reduce God's image to a mere photograph of one human pattern, as lifeless as clay, to be reproduced mechanically, as the sole type of manhood in the world. They seem not to know that the Great Creator has impressed upon the human soul an individuality as com- plete, and as multifarious, as is to be found in the forms and features of the myriads of men and women which constitute- the mass of humanity; and thej'^ appear not to be aware of the fact that it is as impossible to mould the human mind to one stereotyped pattern, as it would be to shape the form and features in one iron mould, to the same model. It is not onlv impossible : it is undesirable, even were it possible. In all nature, variety is charming ; certainly it is not less so in human character than in other animate, and in all inanimate' objects. Dull uniformity realises the highest conception of life, conduct, and character in the breasts of those who have ]io clistinct individuality of their own. Absence of ' character " would seem to be the acme of perfection, according to tlie new gospel of socialism, in wliich manhood is to l)e cnished out of liuinanity, by empowering the State to regulate the desires, attainments, and needs of all, individually and in the concrete. An existence in which men rise at mom to the sound of a State fjong. breakfa-st off State viands, labour bv time according to a State clock, dine at a State table supplie<l at the State's expense, and take their rest and recreation as the State dii-ects. realises no very high ideal of life or conduct. Yet this is the di'eam of the new social innovators, whose aim is to suppress indiA*iduality. and substitute therefor State control and Municipal regulation, in all that concerns private life.
122 A Plea for Liberty. [m.
XVIII. Lest it should 1)0 thouo-ht that the foroQ-oinu- re- iiiarks are somewhat strong, as roganls th(^ leaders of the new labour movement, it is only necessary to refer to the action of some Unionists towards those who abstain from ioinino: the TTnion, or refuse to be bound l)y its rules and regulations. The claim of the pioneers in the cause of laliour Avas that no man shall be taboo-ed sociall}^ or 1)0 placed under the ban of the law, because of his belono'ino; to a trade union. This was always the plea of those who sought the repeal of the Combination Laws. That plea was for liberty to act, not for the power to coerce. Unionism has been used foj- the latter purpose of late years, to a degree which is dangerous and wicked. To what extent it mio-ht be used if trade unions, controlled by such men, were powerful enough to exercise their authority, especially if they had behind them the sanction of statute law, which the new leaders invoke, it is not possible to conjecture, but we can have some faint idea from what has taken place in various parts of the countrv. Law and libertv ouo-ht to exist side bv side, the former protecting and guaranteeing the latter. When the two are divorced, law degenerates into tyranny, and liberty into license. Progress without order is impossible, and law is simply regulation, order being its essence. The endeavour should therefore be so to regulate, that the highest and noblest instincts and aspirations of man shall have full scope for their development and exercise, in every department and condition of life. This is always difficult enough, for society is in con- spiracy against non-conformity; how much more difficult then will it be when positive law is invoked to enforce and main- tain uniformity in the domain of labour, and in the affairs of social life 1 It might be urged that the regulation of the hours of labour will not necessarily involve the abnegation of indi- vidual rights in the manner described. But we reply that, as the logical outcome of the regulation sought, it would be inevitaltle.
XIX. The domain of law as applied to lal)our may be generalh' described under two heads : (i) Protective law. the object and purposes of which are to protect the weak against the strong, as exemplified in the Factory and Workshop Acts, for the protection of women and children ; and all extensions of such law to cases w'here life and limb and health are concerned. (2) Enabling law, the aim and purposes of wliich are tore-
TIT.]
Libert V for Labour. 123
move ol>staclo.s to, ami })iovi<l(' fncilities for. tli*' promotion oi tlic wt'll-lx'ini^ and liapiiiness ot" tho iinlivi<luul. aud of the mass ot" the jK-oplo. To these mii,'lit !»»• a<lil(Ml prcvi-ntiv*- law. wliost' |)rovinco it is to interpose when any citizen, or any nmiiher of citizens, attempt to interiere with the legitimate riLrhts of others. Herein is the riirhtfiil i)rovince of law ; lievontl is ahvavs <loubtful, mostly dangerous. The nmltipli- cation of laws is perilous ; each new Act, almost of necessity, ert-ates the nei-d fc-r further legislation : it propagates itsell", until newer circumstances arise to render it ob.solete or useless. We have too much law, and too littlejustice. Additional law will scarcely tend to augment equity, in the true sense of the term. Therefore, instead of increasing the hulk of statute law, or exteiiding it in newer directions, of bringing it to bear upon labour, in the manner proposed l»y its recent advocates, the object rather should be to curtail it, to simplify it; to codify that which is u.seful and approved ; to repeal what is bad and mischievous, and to give a fuller freedom to the faculties of man in all that is noble and good. The demand fo]" more law indicates a decadence of manhood, an absence of .self-reliant, self-sustaining power. It marks an epoch of de- pendence, the sure precursor of decay in men and in nations. Labour has been strong under persecution, lias won great vic- tories in tho contiict of industrial war. Its successes seem to have bewildered many, and they seek repose under the baneful fungi of legislative protection and regulation.
GEonaE HowKLL.
IV.
STATE SOCIALISM AT THE ANTIPODES.
Knowledge, most serviceable to students and investio-ators of political, social, and economical gTowth, change, and decay, as well as to all those who practise the art or science of government, is to l)e gathered from our great self-governing colonies. In Australasia and in Canada alone have demo- cracies already given several years' fair trial to certain measures, of a socialistic character, recommended in these days to our legislators at home, but, up to the present, ahnost solelv on theoretical or abstract grounds. Althouo'h much laborious, minute, honest, and ingenious consideration has recently been given l)y thinkers in Great Britain, for example, to such ' socialistic ' remedies as a compulsory Eight Hours' Law for all industries (or for government and muni- cipal undertakings only). Free State Education (at the expense of the general tax-payer), Early (.'losing of Shops, and Local Option, the most convinced advocates of those experiments cannot do more than guess how they would work in the TTnited Kingdom. It is to 1)0 regretted that the public in this country have as yet no comjDlete, careful, and unbiassed account of important legislative acts adopted by the colonies, wliich are in advance — or pei-haps rather in excess — of cor- related Imperial Acts and of the results, already manifest in corpove v'di beyond sea\ For purposes of empiiry and com-
' Eeturns relating to colonial Icsis- main dormant, American 'results' liition — Canadian liquor legislatiuii me not very instrr.ctive. When Sir chietly — liave been ocitasionally ])iv'- .lolm Ln))l)oc]v's Early Closing of sented to Parliament. In 18S9 Mi\ Sliops I>ill was discussed. In iSSS, Bradlaugh ol)tained one return show- some reference was made to the Vic- ing the limitations of hours of labour torJan Factory Act of 1885. In ]S()o, 'in Canada and tlie United States." \\ hen Mr. (ioschen's Local Taxation l)ut as Acts of Congress are often IJill was reviewed, it was not noticed loosely carried out, or allowed to I'e- at all that the whole <|ues(ioii of
i\'.] SfaU' Socia/isjJi at the ^liiiipodcs. 125
parison men lunl woiiuii in Au.stnvlia ar<' still very like l"5rituns at home. Special forces there are. slowly fashioning out of populations of British origin a new and distinct type of citizen, with special ideas. But dee]) speculati(»ns on tlie futun^ evolution of races and nationalities are not recpiisite in order to undt'rstand the etiect either of specific laws or of State Socialism grafted on to a community, transplanted it is true, yet hearing with it institutions copied closely from our own and hased upon ideas and traditions with respect to civil and religious liherty, property, order, law, connnerce, and economic conditions generally which have been the connnon property of all liberal thinkers and legislators in this country for the lasf fifty or sixty years.
What Australasian colonists have done is specially instruc- tive, because they have been specially privileged — enjoying indeed from the start a free hand. Their reforms or ex- periments have not been thwarted by the lack of money whercAvith to give beneficence a fair trial. So vast has been the extension of credit to the Australasian colonies durinir the last thirty years, that private investors in Europe now enable Australasian governments, financial institutions, and private firms to dispose of some .^'300.000.000 sterling of foreign capital. Colonial statesmen have indeed been as happy as the hell" to a great fortune in a novel, who is able to indulge the author's briirhtest di-eams of how to better thinsrs in jreneral. Money borrowed in Europe has been, as a rule, laid out by colonial governments honestly, even if recklessly or unwisely. The honourable traditions of modern official administration in the United Kingdom have been transplanted in principle to the Antipodes, and no prominent public man there has en- riched himself by the shameful means connnon in the American Republics. Opportunist statesmen, willing to go gi'cat lengths iu order to retain power and salary and to win the favour of the ruling classes, have held office, and now hold office, in Australia ; but as far as corruption or official peculation is
' compensation ' to owners and lessees lation than about colonial. Of counso
of lir-on.stMl premises had been fnlly the official etiquette in such matters
thrashed out and dealt with in Vic- is to refer to the Agents General for
toria in 1SS4. under conditions al- the Colonie.s. But although these
most exactly similar to our own. gentlemen are always most willing
Tile British public, thmngh 'Con- to give information, they may not
Millar Reports,' know a gfiod deal more always be able to do so. al>Mut American, or Portuguesi-, legis-
I 26
A Plea for Liberty
[,v.
couccnicJ, luiiiistor.s, legislators, ami guveruiiiL'iit servants have stood the rough assay of criticism and publicity well. Beneficent legislation lias had a fair trial in the colonies, for the additiojial reasons that there is much less of that tano-led undergrowth of private interests and aeijuired rights which confronts reformers and legislators in this country to clear away, while colonial democracies liave no real knowledge of those historical, religious, or class grievances and animosities which warp and distort (juestions here, PLxcopt during an era uf artihcial and grotesque political rancour,, subseipient to the I ]th May, iiSyj, party bitterness has never flourished. It has no tap-root in the colonies, and quickly withers under the sun- rays of material prosperity. Nobody, it has l>een asserted, is ever really very angry with anybody else for more than a week together in the Australasian colonies ^.
The public in this country could have obtained fuller evi- dence with respect to the success or failure of legislation based on State Socialism, in the only pait of the world where it has realh^ had an extensive trial, were it not that, in the first place, colonists dare not now do much to dissipate the haze which discreetly veils their affairs -. Year by year the private and personal interests of classes and masses alike arc becoming more and more bound up with the borrowing policy of their governments, and with the enormous extension of commercial credit and nominal transfer of investment money from this country to the banks and linancial institutions in
' The increased prestige aeiiuireil liy tlie Lalionr. Soeialist.or Anarcliist ]>arty after tiie Loudon doek strike of iSSij, ciiuidcd with a Miljse([uent sudden restiictieu of (io\ernuient • •xpeiuliture and ])rivate ci-edit in Australia. proiUiced tliere in iSyo uiie uf tlie most savage out)>reaks of chiss liatrc'd and lawlessness of modern times. In jSyi. something like civil war I)rnkc out in Queensland ; the motive in each case being tlie afteni] t ef tlie Fi'ilerated Unions to nioue- polize wage-;>arning.
- A then mend)erof the u|i|i()sition in one of tlu' colenial legislatures — him- self an acute ii))S(iver. aide thinkir. and scathing ■< ritic in the Jjocal ^\^- sendily of the linancial. ecunnmical, and moral results of State Socialism -
visited Loudon early in 1.S90. On liis return to Australia lie assured a newspaper interviewer that he liad been careful, in conversation with ])ubli(; men in London, to refrain tr>iui mcnitioning any awkward facts which might tend to alarm investors in the United Kingdom. This I'eti- cence is significant. Yet. it is not the business of Australian celonists ill warn investors here against lend- ing them that moni'V witliout wliich State Socialism — including protected industries, faiu-y wages, short liours, I'xtravaganl educational ])rivileges. and other ' collecti\c ' luxui'ies — v/ould long since have collapsed. ('(irriil. cmj/loris a ))rinci]>le tliscreetly iiu;tdcated by colonists of all chisses.
IV.] SlaU' Socia/is/ii at the .lii/i/^odcs. i2j
the large colonial citiis. Tlu- suect'ss of the pt'iio<lifal nixl now al».s()lutely iiiilisj)L'nsulil<' Icjaiis Hoat«''l on tin- Lontlon niaiket liein«j; at present tin- iirst and most vital of Australian interests, it is consi(K're<l iinpatriotie as well as suicidal to circulate widely any statements prejudicial to governmental or Joint-stock credit'.
Many returne(l colonists residing in this country might furnish independent and valuahlo testimony on the new e.\j)i'rinients and their results; l»ut, by a curious natural coincidence, the man w-ho is capable of making and keeping a fortune can seldom describe instructively, in juint or in speech, the country, the people, or the institutions which have contributeil to his success. There is, fur instance, the typical returned colonist, possildy a wool-grower, professional man, or employer of labour on a large scale, and possibly a man of standing, experience, and powers of observation. When he first settles in South Kensintrton he mav i)atrioticallv resolve to give the British public his particular views about protective taritts, political financing, or the latest vagaries of Trade Union absolutism, in his particular colony, through the medium of the London Press. But, even supposing that he is neither a bore, a crotchet-monger, nor a mere partisan, when he settles in South Kensington our typical squatter, merchant, or man of culture is apt to become so delighted with the ways of the up-to-date Londoner, the cheapness of art-furniture, overcoats, stationery and uml)iellas in the shops, and the solemn luxiiry of West-end clubs, that he grows pleasantly confused and ultimately dumb, as far as Britons anxious for information about State Socialism in the Antipodes are concerned. We have heard of late vears somethincr about the evils of Free Trade in ]S'ew South \\'ales iiom furious protectionist partisans, hitherto in a minority in that colony : we have had some notes from ^jentlemen with a tiny Home Kule axe to grind. In the year 1886 the Sydney Protectionists, Trade Unionists, and
' Although there lia.-j liitheftu been tciested in depn-.'ssiny tliose-securities.
littK; or no speculatifin — in the Asfaras that institution ia concerned,
gambler's sense — in enlonial securi- i-olonial bonds an- t.-iken uj) and held
ties on the London Stock Exchange. in laruc l>lo<-ks. bya fVwvervridi 'joli-
and althougli no lari;<' account in Ix-i-s." who try to i-etail tlicin iiradually
thcin i>. ever open • for the fair there, to the investing jiulilic. I'rai-ticaily
an uneasy superstitio!! ]>revails in tlie the Stock Kxchange must always be a
colonies that 'the Stock Exchange • bull ' of colonial sectirities. bears ' are, somehow, habitually in-
I 28 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
Socialists paid the expenses of a special envoy to London, partly accredited by the Melbourne Trades' Hall (Jouncil, whose business it was to enlighten the Ijritish public, and to dissuade British wage-earners from emigrating to the Antipodes or spoil- ing the labour-market there. The British jjublic learns some- thing, but not much, from the third-rate literary man who occasionally voyages as far as New Zealand and back, then determines to make a book. The few journalists of ability who have made Hying visits to the colonies of recent years refrain from saying much about graver colonial questions, chicHy because they recognise that it is extremely difHcult to obtain trustworthy information, off-hand, on political, economic, industrial, or financial matters even on the spot. Australians are not demonstrative nor comnunucative to strangers, while local discussion of the serious and sinister problems accumulating behind the dominant policy of State Socialism is for various o-ood reasons economised as much as
O
possible at present. There is practicall}' no magazine or review literature in Australasia. Two or three of the great newspapers published in Melbourne and Sydney contain of course a mine of undigested facts and information al>ont State Socialism in the colonies, but they are virtually unread in this countr}'.
The notes collected by Mr. Froude during his trij) to the Antipodes in the early part of iHS', contain, like all his work, profound, brilliant, and suggestive passages. But ' Oceana ' does not profess to be more than a sketch. Baron von Hubner's ' Voyage through the British Empire ' is a shrewd and sympathetic survey, by an historical friend of England, of the self-sown Englands beyond sea. He does not otfei" to draw bi'oad deductions for us. Latelv some clerical tourists of more or less eminence have described for home readers what they saw in the colonies. It is well to remember that the various unestablished religious bodies there have from time to time received valuable grants of land from the State ; the Scots Church in Melbourne, and the First Presbyterian Church in Dunedin, for example, possess real estate of enormous value at current rates. The principal ministers of religion are therefore well paid, pros- perous, and enabled to maintain an informal standing re- ception committee, which takes travelling clerical celebrities from this country in hand, and in the true spirit of Oriental
i\.] Sfafc Soiia/isj)! at the Aiitipodi's. 129
hospitality sii[)pli( s th<iii with that kind of infonuntion as to Free State Education and erypto-socialism ^vhich is likely to •gratify tlu in. IVrsons with mines to sell, hi-nietallists, and iniiM'rial I'fdcrationists tVoin hoyontl sea njcrely darken counsrl. Kcirly in icSi^o Sir Charles iJilke caused to be puhlishcd w liandsonie l)Ook. in two volumes, wherein some of the problems confr«)nting rudderless democracy in the great self-governing colonies are noticed. The opinions on such nuitters of on«t of the most indu.strious and conspicuous of our political recluses were awaited with curiosity. Some persons t^vcn hoped that Sir Charles Dilko might, after many years of intermittent interest in the aflairs of the colonies, make democracy in Australia as instructive a text for, at all events, a ])rief liomily. as De Tocnueville made of democracy in America. But his new book leaves the impression that Sir Charles Dilke lacks, among other things, the critical insight, as well as the mental equipment generally, required in order to examine and explain for English readers those profoundly interesting problems of which he has heard. He has perhaps no political philosophy of his own, or if he has he economises it. Possibly the domination of a political philosophy, wdiicli adds so much to the symmetry and penetrating effect of French criticism, would have been inconvenient in this case. Its absence in an ambitious writer, proposing to deal in- structively Avith problems w^hich take us down to the very ]ied-rock of civil society, is in these days a defect. Sir Charles ])ilkc. it appears, has not visited the Australasian colonies for over twenty years. That is another defect. He rightly pays most attention to the colony of Victoria, but has virtually made himself the conduit-pipe through which to distribute the views of a group of cultured and interested Victorian protectionists and half-tledged socialists to the British public. A thriving and contented political party, generally describing themselves as Kadicals, exists in Victoria. The impression remains that Sir Charles Dilke pined to call the radicalism of the New World into existence to redress the balance of the Old, Accordingly he wrote for information about problems to some worthy Radical gentlemen in Victoria. And they wrote back to him in a cordial spirit, being delighted to hnd that a politician who was very much thought about in England, and had once been a minister of the Crown, wa>i prepared to accept a brief from them,
E
130 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
Yet a man will hardly travel right round the world with- out learning that there is something to learn, and Sir Charles Dilke has done one service to the reading and thinking public here by discovering, and then frankly and clearly pointing out that State Socialism entirely permeates the ruling classes in Australia, and inspires the policy of ministries and legislatures there. ' In Victoria,' he says (i. 1 85), ' State Socialism has completely triumphed.' Nearly all previous writers on Aus- tralasia have failed to see that, and have discussed colonial borrowing, Protective Tariffs, hindrances to immigration and to the growth of population, the Labour question, Free State Education, &c. as though they were so many isolated or detach- able phenomena. They are not isolated or accidental, but have all the same origin, being in their later phases merely the necessary product of half-digested socialistic ideas and theories. Sir Charles Dilke makes Victoria his principal text, no doubt because it is easier to get information, good or bad, about the finances, administration and o-eneral condition of that colony than of the others. Such facilities are 'mainly due to what might be called accident, that is to say, to the superior status and activity of the newspaper Press, in a country wdiere newspapers may exercise immense influence. In New South Wales the daily Press is virtually represented by one enormously wealthy journal, 'The Sydney Morning Herald,' which now prudently expounds a dull opportunism, as far as colonial problems are concerned. It would be harsh and almost inhuman to criticise seriously the Adelaide (South Australian) newspapers. There is a true saying in the Antipodes that ' nothing ever happens in South Australia,' although Mr. Henry George announces frequently that his views are making great progress there. The Brisl)ane newspapers perhaps cannot — they certainly do not — lead or direct public opinion intelligently. In New Zealand there is no single town population wealthy enough to support a really great newspaper, and the Press is poverty- stricken and uuinriuential. In contrast to all this, during the last twenty years the people of Victoria have chanced to be served by two daily newspapers, as ably conducted, wealthy, and powerful as any printed in the English language. Englishmen are beginning to forget that it was once asserted, with some truth, that the Loudon newspapers 'governed England.' While our innumerable London newspapers are^
IV.] Slaic Socia/isni a I the Anlipodcs. i^r
pcihaps. wisely aliaiidoninLC the Jittonipt to stt-er luiglish opinion, till' Mfllxmrnc 'Argus' ami tin- Mclhoiirn*' 'Ago' still conscientiously keep up the old fiction, ami Ix'tweun thtni do •'■ovcrn anil mis-fovci-n tho colony. Their rivalrv has hcen in many ways prohlalik' tu the colony. They make' certain blunders and abuses — allowed to pa.ss in the neigh- bouring cohjnies — inipossiVjle, and try to keep a search-light turned on to the administration. They do not (|uite sueceed. 8ir I'harles Dilke, adopting views ])ut t'orwanl l»y masters of ' bounce ' and rfrhnno here, who have done so much to finance colonial State Socialism, asserts (i. 243) that we in I'higland 'understand tho way in which they float their loans' (in N'ietoria). 'and their system of bo(jk-keeping ; . . . . and we arc well informed as to the objects ou whicli their debts (.s<V) are spent ; ' adding (ii. 230), ' that no one who knows the public offices of South Australia, Victoria, or Tasmania, can accuse them of more laxity in the management of public business than is to be found in Downing Street itself.'
I fear that our author has here yielded to the temptation to ' sit down (juickly and write fifty,' in order to make unto himself friends, at any rate among our socialistic kin Ijeyond sea. The truth is that nothing definite can bo known al)0ut the finances of the Austi'alasian colonies. State Socialism there dares not present a genuine balance sheet. As may also be said of the French Kepublic at this day, there is in Australasia no system of public accounts similar to that which prevails in Downing Street. In Victoria, New South ^^'^ales, Queensland, South Australia, and New Zealand, the control of expenditure by local Parliaments is really very weak. No attempt has been made to introduce the imperial system of simple, methodical, and exact account-keeping. Audit or check upon public expenditure is loose and ineffective in all the colonies. If we in England really understand ' the system of book-keeping, and the object on which debts are spent ' in Victoria, we know more than colonists themselves know, ^leanwhile. for years past reports of imaginary surpluses, as well as misleading and worthless ' official ' statistics, have been circulated in the Australasian colonies, and have been carelessly reproduced here ^ The statement is constantly put
* A Colonial Office Return, Si of of the State Railways since 1884 at a 1S90, 'Statistics of the Colony of Vic- fractionoverfourpi'rcent. The reality toria.' gives (j>. 50) the "net earnings' of these 'net earnings' is extremely
K 2
' .1-
A J^/ca for Liberty.
[IV.
forward, for exainple, that the Victorian State railways, wliicli are supposed to represent an expenditure on productive public
doubtful. Tlic • Fin;ui<-c Account * on p. 32 •will not bear examination. A note on tlie same page gives the ' statement ' (really an ofiicial jmris oi that year's budget) 'distributed to members of the Legislative Assembly in .Tuly. 18S9,' which showed a credit balance, or surplus, of £1,607,559. These figures, it is cautiously added, were 'not final.' They certainly were not; for by the close of the Parliamentary session, on the 21st November, 1S89, it was discovered that the huge sur- plus— which the hon. the treasurer in August had generously distributed in doles, such as £60,000 a year extra, to railway labourers ; £140,000 a year to municipalities; £250,000 bounties on exports, to already ' protected ' industries, cottage asylums, wire net- ting for the State rabbits, iivdilic huildings, &c. — had no existence.
The whole story of this bogus surjilus had already been told by Mr. Willougliby in The Anjus two months before the C. O. Eeturn in ques- tion (which reproduces it as genuine with the endorsement of the then governor of the colony, Sir Henry Loch), was 'presented to both Houses of Parliament, by command of her Majesty.' In the last hours of the session of 1889, the hon. the trea- surer announced that the govern- ment balance in the hands of the as- sociated Ijankshad fallen to£i42.ooo, that he had )>een compelled like all his predecessors to borrow from 'Trust Funds.'buttothe extent of £1,2 30, 000, and that he would require to float at once on the London market a loan for £r, 600,000 (formally devoted by Parliament to railway construction in 1S85) as well as a further loan of £4,000,000 to square his accounts. It was subsequently admitted by ministers that the surpluses of that and previous years had been mainly arrived at by the strange but, it ap- pears, time-honoin-ed book-keeping expedient of <'rediting the revenue with all money received during the
iiiiaucial year and ■ cai rying forward ' certain expenditure, or debits, to futurity. A memorandum to the Premier from Mr. Edward Langton (a former Victorian Treasurer and iinancier of aliility, who is banished from political life ))ecause he is a free trader), was published in the prin- cipal Melbourne newspaper, Dec. 4, 1889, and showed that, according to the Victorian audit commissioners, for years past, large sums had been expended without the sanction of Parliament, improperly withdrawn from the debit side of the public ac- counts and carried forward for sub- sequent adjustment. Since 18S5-6 this • charging forv.-ard ' amounted to £3.500,000. The audit commissioners, it further appeared, are powerless to interfere with this 'system of book- keeping.' It transpired at the same time tiiat no separate or distinct Railway departmental account or budget existed ; the audit commis- sioners and the railway department did not even agree as to the real amount of the railway capital ac- count ; no railway 'sinking fund,' or reserve, to meet losses, such as com- pensation to passengers for railway accidents, existed ; while expendi- ture which, by the General Post Office, or by any solvent railway, in this country, would be charged to revenue, was habitually charged to a floating capital account, to be re- couped out of future loans. The fic- tion of ' non-political control ' of the Victorian railways is reproduced by Sir Charles Dilke. It is true that (^chiefiy owing to the efforts of the 'Argus') since 1SS4, Mi-. Speight, a railway authority of great experience from the Midland Company, a born judge of work and possessed of singu- lar energy, aliility and tact, has been ' at the head " of the Victorian Rail- way department. But in matters of high State Socialistic finance the • Minister for Railways' was, until the abortive attempt to create an
IV
i
Sfaic Soi till is III at the A u I i pedes.
work.s of tlio liiilk of the luoni'V lionowe<l l'\ Llial. coliiiiv since 1S6/;, hoiK'stly cum a surplus in excess of the interest on their cost. That statement is not. and never has Ium-ii. (rue Tlie ineiiioranduni from tlie Kailway ( 'ommissioners, read •with the liudu'et statement in the \'ictorian Assembly on th(3 ■:?ist July. 1 <St;o. at last lVaid<ly admits that the earnin;4s of the State Railways fill short of the accruing interest for the year by more than £1x0,000.
Yet religions, or <loi,'n»as. which noLody can possildy comprehend do fretjuently nuike converts ; perhaps hecausu of the haze oliscurini; the financial basis of Colonial State Socialism. Sir Charles Dilko (i. 19;',) judges that ' Lord IJranuvell himself would ' find salvation, and ' bocomc a state sc;cialist if he inhabited \'ictoria.' Hi-re wc have the testimony of an absentee ' inhaliitant,' who has not set foot in the colony for more than twenty years. Sir Charles Dilke, while vaguely civil to socialists in general, hardly understands that socialism is always a most logical, consistent an<l imperative creed. He has indeed a hazy notion that there arc ' moderate European Socialists' with 'practical programmes' — set to stop as soon
liDiit^t :iiiil ttlicitnt Parliaiiiciitary Kailway C':iuiinitt('i' in 1S90. .sujircinc. Mr. S|i(it;lit has )kh-u cou:staiitly at- tatkod and tliwarted by tho lalioiir party and their political satellites, and has never really had a "fiee hand.' Chaotic as is tho condition of Vi<-torian ' ))ooiv-keeping.' matters ai-(? still niiire confused in New Sontli Wales. From February, 18S6 to Jan- uary, 1887 an Irish gentleman. Avho in the romantic garb of a disguised troubadour had won the heart of a charming colonial heiress, and thus laid tile foundation of political emin- ence, was premier of the colony. He managed, before stumbling out of ottice, to associate himself with a deficit of £j, 000, 000. wliich has since liecn stated in the local Paj-liameiit, Felt. 1S89, to havegrownto£4,o64,844. Tho truth is that no one in the colony knows how the matter stands. In Smith Australia and Queensland the •system of liook-keeping' and 'the ob- jects on whiili their debts are spent." are, as Mr. Herbert Spencer would say. 'unthinkable.' New Zealand,
the colony whose credit has stood lowest of recent years, alone has what m.iy perhaps be called a sinking fund, and managed, at least on ])ai>er, to reduce her debt by £1,383,432 in 1889-90. Irregularities and bad management in the jtublic accounts of Victoria and New South Wales might no doubt l)e remedied in time, were it not that the prosperity of the dominant class and their dependents is now inextricably bound up with the continuance and extension of reckless financing. In order to ap- ]ireciate the State Socialistic 'system of book-keeping ' in Victoria, we ought to imagine Mr. Goschen dimly suspec-ting a tleficit. drawing freely on funds in tlie hands fif the Keci'iver General of the Coui-t of Chancery in rirder to pay off incoherent issues of Exchequer l)ills ; .squaring one year's public accounts by council drafts on India — in th(^ following year ; and in the meantime distributing ' sur- ])lMses' thus obtained in bi-ibes to various j'olitical groups, suggested by the Social Democratic Federation.
134 ^ Plea for Liberty. [iv.
as mischief threatens. Althoug-h he finds that Now South Wales has built and managed iier railways in accordance with socialistic teaching, he seems to look forward (i. 274) to their being worked ' upon strictly commercial principles ' some day. In that case, he thinks, they could pay interest on their cost. He appai'cntly does not understand how State Socialism works, why it is popular, seductive, and under favourable financial conditions, cumulative in its action, nor why it is comliated and denounced by Lord Bramwell and other people. I take it the rough objections to State Socialism everywhere are, that it does not profess to ' pay,' in the business or commercial sense ; that, as regards Great Britain, therefore, funds to meet deficits and to keep the system going could only be obtained by levying novel and penal taxes upon industrious and thrifty people, and by plundering owners of fixed capital, either by sheer violence or by violence cloaked in hypocrisy; that even if placed, somehow, on a paying basis State Socialism weakens and demoralizes the national character, by striking at the whole conception of patient, courageous and orderly toil, struggle and endeavour — the most wholesome and ennobling conception human beings have as yet thought out for themselves.
With a sjilendid subject and a splendid opportunity before him Sir Charles 'Dilke might ha-fe told us by what agencies the primary financial difficulty has been got over in Australia. He .shirks all that, but says there is now ' no objection or resistance to state ownership of railways ' or to ' state inter- ference ' generally ; that ' state socialistic movements render Australia a pioneer for England's good,' and hints that ' the Australian colonies as regards State Socialism present us with a picture of what England will become.' He is not able to tell us liow State Socialism is affectinii- the national character, whether it is producing a nobler or baser type of man and woman in Australia. Our author has not however emancipated himself from the old-fashioned prejudice that triumphant socialism implies, sooner or later, the proclamation of the commune, the burning of public buildings and the shooting of hostages ; he is delighted to be able to report that the sky has not fallen, that hens still lay, and that tradesmen still come round regularly with provisions in the morning, in a country where State Socialism is supreme. To him it is 'an amazing fact' that Socialism • in the French or English sense,' and ' Revolu-
.v.]
Shih' Socia/isi)i at the Antipodes.
135
tioiuiiy, Kiiropeuii <ir Diinocratic ' sucinlism ;il)soliitely do not exist among tlio all-pownlul %V(>rl<ing class in the colonies; ho is so pleased Avith this a[)li(»risni that lit- icpfuts it in at least eleven dilleriMit ])laces '. lint whether State Socialism bo installed !»}' a revolutic^nary mol>. by a dictator or l»y a Parliamt'nt, is not the main point. The real ([lustion.s are: — can the thing itself be honestly made to pay, and will it give to a nation licaltliicr. wealthier, ami wiser men and women? In Europe and the Unitetl States socialism does usually suggest the idea of revolutionary, violent or terrorist methods, simj)ly because state treasuries are not easily lootabie and because tax-])ayers and owners of fixed capital there still resolutely otlVr all the resistance in their power to the very practical, and almost the first, demand made l)y modern socialists, for money to carry out beneficent plans which cannot possibly pay on their merits. Probably nobody is a Revolutionary Socialist ' in the French or Eni>lish sense ' from choice.
Victorian Trade Unionists concentrated in one or two large towns have of late years been allowed by the cowardice or apathy of all other classes in the colony to monopolize I)olitical power. Although Trade Unionists still jealously dislike to see men belonging to their special class in Parliament they have long 'owned' ministers and legislators, and thus obtained peaceable but complete control over the public purse-.
' Tj). i. 1S5, ii. 264, 265, 267, 26S, 269, 272, 279. 2S8, 296. 357.
- Mr. Matlu'W Maciio, in a i)a]>f r read bt-fore the Colonial Institute, Dee. 10. 1SS9, designed to show that the Australian colonies were crippled and restricted by lack of jiopulation, and efficient labour, says, •The operatives in Victoria are or- ganized intoa conipa*-! phalanx under leadei-s who liave suceecdr-d by dogged persistence in imbuing the cohjny witli the notion that they constitute the party which controls voting jmwer at elections. So widely is this assumption believed that candidates at a Parliamentary Election, to whom salary or political intiuence is a con- sideration, defer wMth real or aflFected Inimility to the wishes of the Trades Hall Council in Melljourne. The in- evital>le outcome cif this state of po- litical subjection .m the part of mem-
bers of the House, and in many cases of the Government also, is the injus- tice of class legislation.' Sir Charles Dilke. writing perhaps from the point of view of an 'iiihaljitant ' of a quarter of a century ago, describes (ii. 316; the great respect felt for tlie Trades Councils, and their almost invariable wisdom, moderation, sense of respon- sibility, and marked spirit of justice. Mr. Macfie. who spent several years in Victoria, and only returned in 1889, is liowever a specially valu- able witness, because he lived right in the centre of the Protectionist and Stat<' Socialist <-amp. having lieen editor of Ji ])owerful weekly journal, mainly owned by the same gentle- man whom Sir Charles Dilke styles fii. 2721 'the Founder of Australian Protection,' ailding that 'he might easily, had cliance so willed it, have made in the world the same name
136 A Pica for Liberty. [iv.
They can pledge the credit of the colony in order to finance railways and puLlic works which provide them, on their own terms, with ' State ' employment and set the market rate of wages. In the course of a debate on Protection versus Free Trade held in the Concert Hall of the j\Iell)ouruo Exhibition building before 2000 people on the 8th April, i<S90, between Mr. Henry George and Mr. Trenwith, the latter — a member of the Legislative Assembly for one of the Melbourne divisions and President of the Trades Hall Council — boasted, with truth, that ' The Trade Unionists, wanting respectable houses, with a carpet on the floor and a j^iano, as well as good clothes and education for their children, told the legislators — their servants : — '• Put a duty on such and such goods for us." ' Sir Charles Dilke notices (ii. 275), that ' there is no timidity in the South Sea Colonies Avith regard to taxation upon land,' and intimates (i. 193), that the Victorian land tax — turned into a penal enactment by the radical party after their triumph in 1877 as an act of vengeance on their opponents — ' is certain to be extended wlienever the colony is in want of money.' This tax, our author truly says (ii. 275), has caused 'a certain depression '— su Lvjective timidity perhaps. Colonial ministries now find easier ways of raising money than b}" a land tax ; but as long as the power remains of imposing taxes on large landowners, in order to pay off loans contracted and expended without the latter"s consent or approval, the setting up of barricades, burning cities, and shooting hostages will always bC;, for Australian State Socialists, works of supererogation.
If our domestic socialists ' in the French and English sense,' effectually controlled the Imperial Treasury, they might re- nounce felonious talk, cease to foment mutiny in the British Army and become Conservatives — in the best sense of the term. Sir Charles Dilke seems at one moment to realise how thoroughly practical are the aims and aspirations of the ruling class in Victoria, for he says (ii. 303), ' The Christianity that they under- stand is an assertion of the claim of the masses to rise in the
that li;iH 1)(",'U mado in lattu' days )iy so Avillcd it. liavc licc-onie the rival of Mr. Ilcury (ieoi^c, IkivIhl,' jint for- Mr. Henry Ci('<)rge, altliough ho still ward in most eloquent and jxiwerful diverts his adniir<>rs. whose pennies language tin' same j)rinei])les at ;i and jiatronagt^ are making him a mil- much i^arlier date.' In the Antii>odes lionairi', with fliea)> denuneiatiun of Evolution, of eourse, proceeds ii n- capitalisni and landlerdism, is to-day Imiirs, and the Founder of Protection the wealthiest landowner in the in question, who might, had chance colony.
1\
.] Staic Social Ism at tlic Antipodts. 137
sciilc ui liunmnity." This kind ol" Cliiistianity has hot-n iimlfi- 8too(l in the same si-nse l)y the tloiniimnt classes in all aj^es and countries — from landowners, lay and clerical, in mediaeval times, down to liritish middle-class employers and cajiitalists of a couple of j^^'uerations a<;o — who controlled the national purse strings. All those people honestly believed in turn that they were 'the masses' — in the l)est sense of the temi — and they raised themselves in the scale of humanity, at tin; pu])lic expense, nccordin^lv. Meanw'hile our author fails to ;^ee that Colonial Federated Labour or Trade I'nionism cares little for abstract ideas. It is doubtful whether British artisans any- where have hitherto cared much aljout them : ^he founders of the International and the leaders of the ( 'omteist movement in this country at all events considered it doubtful after years of experiment. Australian Trade Unionists — if occasionally given to violence and prone to break their engagements — are as good-natured, friendly, afiable and w^ell-conducted as the representatives of any dominant class of Britons that history tells of. They are fond of amusement, manly sports, and bettini; on hor.se races. The same mijjht have been said of that large class who at the end of the last century lived aii<l thrived on the Irish Pension List. Sir diaries Dilke seems further to have imagined that even if Australian working- class democrats abjured ' Revolutionary ' Socialism ' in the French and English sense,' they must at least hanker after land nationalization. He is pleased to find that they do not. Yet why should they? Unless the Australian Trade Unionist sees 30.S. a week extra for himself in any State Socialistic movement he takes no interest whatsoever in it. There is no profit, direct or indirect, for any human being in nationalization of the land, hence in Australasia land nationalizers, or single tax leaguers, are, politically, about as influential and important a body as, let us say, the Swedenborgians in this country ^. In March ] H90, ^Ir.
' Mr. Willi.im Wel)storofAI>crdcon tious <if land iiationaliztrs. cdnliscii- onct.' described to me. as evidence of tionist.s and auti-coiifiscatiunists, the the spread of tlie liglit in the colo- former heinj;. of cour.se. mere bri- nies, an ardent land nationalizer gands, the l*tter honest, but ignorant from the Colonial Little Pedlington, folk, who imagine that the mystic South Australia, wiin owned much ' .State ' can. somehow, invent money land liim>elf. It was. 1 gathered. wherewitii honestly to buy up all mortgaged, beyond its thru vahie to the frei Imld land in the world be- local banks. Now there are two sec- fore nationalizing it. The Little
1^.8
A Pica for Liberty.
[IV.
Henry George visited Australasia. He became an object of curiosity and attention there, partly because of recent years many colonial politicians, especially in Queensland and New Zealand, have suffered from a chronic indigestion of his theories. Sir Robert Stout, Mr. Ballance, Mr. Dutton and Sir S. Griffith have each tinkered, in fragmentary, mischievous and futile fashion, with the Land Legislation of their colonies on Mr. George's lines. Colonists however insisted, in 1K90, on studying Mr. George as a Free Trader, and local socialists, who are perhaps more logical than Mr. George is, refused to believe that Free Trade — which is so wrapped up with e(|ual liberty to enter into contracts, unrestricted competi- tion, self-help, cheap necessaries and other 'individualist' delusions — could work in with Nationalization of the Land, one of the most extreme developments of State Interference and State Socialism. Mr. Henry George, as an incoherent Free Trader, managed to puzzle and offend, instead of convert- ing, Australian socialists who, quite logically, are Protectionists also. The fact^ noticed by Sir Charles Dilke, that masses and classes in the colonies arc now alike deeply interested in land ' booms ' and in keeping up the value of freeholds, further explains Mr. Henry Georges recent decisive rebuff there.
High wages, in exchange for short hours of labour, do not come under the heading of uUes, but are practical things. The prevalence of the eight hours' rule in so many colonial industries is indirect, but strong, proof of the irresistible power conceded to Federated Labour. Although political depen- dents of the dominant class in Victoria at one time thought it worth their while to embody ' the eight hours ' in one or two Mining and Tramway Acts \ Trade Unionists have been of late
Pi'dlingtoii landowiRT, it seems, liad joined the auti-confiscationist section, and as liis land was quite unsaleable and a burthen to him, I ■\vas not surprised to hear that he ha<l lii;4li ho]>es from ' the State,' and was vtMy eiitluisiastic.
^ The Melbourne Tmmway and Omnibus Act (765) of 1S83, Sect. 62, says : — ' The days of labour (sic) of any person emjiloyed by the Company . . . shall be eight liours." but permits overtime, •forspecial ))aymeut.'t<>the amountof sixty hours" woriv per week. 'The CV)m- pany shiill be liable to a jK'nalty not
exceeding £5 for every l>reach of this section.' It has never been neeessaiy to enforce this peualtj'. Tlie Ref/ula- iiou of Mines Act ["jS^) of 1883, Sect. 5, says : — * No person shall I)e employed . . . for more than eiglit hours in any day, ex(-ept in case of emergency.' The penalty for a breach of this section by a 'mine owner' is £50 fine ; by 'any other person ' a line of £10. recoverable by summary process before two justic(!S. Althougli I can lind no cases of jjrosecutions under this section, it seems to have been evaded, for an Amending Act ad hoc
i\'.] S/m/i' Social ism at the Antipodes. 139
years strong enough to got wluit tlit-v want without h(l|i of tin- law ^ Iiuiet'il owijig to the non-rcpi-al of okl J^ritish Statutos againnt 'combination.' Trade I'nions were technically ilh-gal in Victoria as hite as i<StS',. Sii- Charles Dilke says little ahout the Aut.tralian ' eiirht hours' system. He seems ])uz/le(l
~ * J.
(i. -'f>) to untlerstaml how Victorian manufacturers manage to eomj)ete with foreign rivals, although 'paying <l()ulilc wages for 20 per cent, less time than at home.' i^.ut he ei^tirely underestimates the ' i)rotection " of the tariff, as well as the other a<l\antages enjoyed hy the local manufacturer, and increases his confusion by taking 'an average <luty of 1 I per cent.' on the total Victorian imports -. He says (ii. 2S6) that the eight hours' day ' according to gcneial ad- mission has been found as satisfactory throughout Australia as in Victoria,' a generalization which omits much one would like to know. • ^Ve might gradually,' he thinks, 'introduce
(883) of 1 886 enacts, solely, tliat 'no ix-rson sliall \h- einj>l'>yi'il Ix-low grniiiid in any niim- fur ni<>rc tlian oight i-onsorutivt' liours . . . from tin- time he commences to cU'scend the mini- until he is ri-lioved of his work.' . . . The l)urthi-n of proving iini"- concr of cliarjtfs nndt-r tlicse soction.-s is thrown ujmu tlie mine owner or 'titlier person.'
' A familiar argument for an eight houi-s' statute in threat Britain is that Trade Unions cannot enforce thenile theniselves. Legal agem-ifs are some- times superfluous, in the grim days when landlords Avere absolute in Ireland the legal machinery for col- lecting rents was very imperfect, actually far heiiinil that existing in England ; the Act of iS6o first gav large powei-s in that resj)ect to Irish landowners. Aware of this, I once asked a venerable Irish farmer how landlords managed to collect rent in his youth? 'Well, you see." ho saitl. 'landlords didn't want much lawyer's law in thim times. The mashther's rint-warner just wint round wid" a big cart-whip, and he f'luiid no pettvfogirin' impidimints at all.'
- Owing to steady fall in prices in Europe the " i)rotection ' given by
'sjKciiic' duties on the jnincijial imported articles, which really com- jx-te with local manufaitures. tends ever to increase. On some kinds of paper, matches, earthenware porce- lain, china and glass and on wearing apparel, it has worked out of recent years at from 75 to i_fo jter cent, ad valorem. In order t<j arrive at tin: total advantage or ' pull ' which the Victorian manufacturer enjoys, we may safely treble the nominal or ' face ' amount given in the tariff list. Ihus, a iK^minal duty of 25 per cent, ad vahirtm means that at least 75 per cent, protection is enjoyed by the local manufacturer. Victorian importers must provide two separate capitals, and pay an average of f) j)er cent, interest on at least one of tiiem ; onc^ is locked uji, perhaps for many months, in the Custom House ; the other is required [lartly in Europe to pay for goods and jiartly to work with in Melbourne. We must add freight, insurance, and lieavy port and landing cdiarges, at u port where wharf labourers get In. yh per hour for seven and a-half houi-s of work, and diflfiiulty. loss of time and interest involved in exe- cuting ordeis in a market 13,000 miles distant.
140 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
it into tlio contracts of the State and the municipalities in this country, and give it the force of a general Jaw in the case of those trades to which it would be most easily applied,' but does not tell us by what devices the inconveniences of diminished ' supply ' or production — as vv^ell as the waste and loss due to reduced efficiency of labour — are met and counterbalanced ; nor whether the conditions which make the eight hours' rule possible in Australia are to be found in Great Britain.
Short hours of labour and high wages seem to me largely convertible terms. Both are good things. The leisure enjoyed l)y colonial, workmen, their brisk, cheerful and robust appearance, and the activity and ' go ' displayed by one or two out-door trades (such as masons and house carpenters) who v7ork under the eight hours' system^ are pleasant to behold. A very high ' standard of comfort' prevails amongst Australian workers, and no doul>t. as Fleeming Jenkin argued ', the standard or expectation of comfort, and the ideal scale of living for the family maintained by wage-earners, do deter- mine the amount of effort which they will put forth to raise wages or reduce hours of labour. It is well to remember that the success of such efibrts depends upon very variable conditions, political, social, &c. The ' standard of comfort ' hrmly believed in by Australian alluvial gold diggers in 1851-3 'embraced' champagne at five guineas a bottle for themselves, gold horse-shoes, now and then, for their horses, and silk dresses at five guineas a yard, for the partners of their joys. What made that lofty standard of comfort possible ill icS-^j-Q was the easilv won o-old on Bendigo flats and other alluvial diQ-o-ino-s. What are the conditions which have enabled Australian Trade Unionists of late years to maintain a particular standard of comfort, wages, and hours ? Sir Charles Dilke does not tell us. I believe they are entirely exceptional and artificial.
The first local circumstance, or condition, favourable to the success and permanence of ' The Eight Hours ' rule in Victoria is the protective tariff". The second condition is the absence of keen competition among workers of all grades themselves. The third is the settled policy which regularly provides (lUlicrs ludionaii.r, or employment for that class which is supjjosed to be all-powerful at election
' Kerens at luUvs, Ediiib., Edinonstoii.s, 1870.
i\-.] S/ii/c Sond/isni at I lie Antipodes. \.\\
tiiiiu on .stutt' i-iiilwiiys aiitl so-ealli'd productive juil'lic works, thus ' kt'cpiriLf a market' for lal»our and creating a standard of hours and wajjfos which private enipK^yei-s cannot compete aijainst or vary. The fourth, corndated of course to the last, is the now inovitalde, financial, or horrowin^'. policy of the vaj'ious colonial LTovernments ; which re-acts upr)n local hanks and credit institutions. Colonial land Icj^islalion and the concentration of population in larj^e cities are also favourahle conditions. How nianv of these, it niav ]»o asked, exist in (Ireat 1 Britain \ •
With slight exceptions the above conditions are in Australia all within the control of the very class M'hich henetits directlv hv the eiirht hours' rule. The absence of competition is indeed mainly due to the fact that Australia is remote from the European labour market. A voyage thither means, for an artisan or labourer in search of work. ,^'i8 at least, if he be a siingle man, ami far more of course if he be married and have a family. These are, to millions of European workers, prohibitive rates, and constitute a natural or geographical protective duty upon human beings, i. e. upon competing ' labour.' We have only to compare steerage fares from Europe to T'nited States ports — as well as from Continental ports to the TJnited Kingdom — with passage rates to Australia to understand, firstly, why the eight hours' movement has failed hitherto in America and, next, how necessary it will be to stave off, somehow, the competition of Continental labour in many r)f our home industries if one of the principal elements of the success of the Australian ' eight hours is to be secured here. Except in Queensland, colonial labour leaders have compelled their political dependents to do away with that really socialistic measure, State-aided immigration. The various colonial governments have been similarly com- pelled to protest against any large immigration schemes, promoted from this side, even to remote West Australia. Every now and then Trade and Labour Councils urge governments to represent through the Agents General at homo that there is really no field for labour in the colonics, and they take the most elaborate means to circulate the same fable in this country. Where land is abundant and nature propitious workmen make work for workmen. There is an absolutely illimitable field for free labour as applied to the resources of nature in the Australasian colonies. The development of
142
4 Plea for Liberty.
[ly
that firld would of course benefit every man, woman and child now living in Australia. But the arguments used by the old school of American Protectionists (who were indi- vidualists, perhaps without knowing it) that growing popula- tion and immigration make the surest market for native industries, or home manufactures, cannot be used by State Socialists in Australia. The horrors of competition and the necessity for quelling it are their main texts. This was the lesson which Mr. Benjamin Douglas. President of the Trades Hall Council, inculcated upon Lord Posebery in ^Melbourne in 1884, and the virtual teaching of Australian labour leaders to-day is that every additional worker who lands, or is born and reared, in the colony is an additional competitor and therefore an enemy. ^Yhile the ' goal ' or ' ideal ' of the economist and Free Trader, who finds before him boundless natural resources, may be roughly described as an ' infinite ' increase in the number of workers — never quite overtaking ' infinite ' increases in the demand for labour, production of exchangeable utilities and rise in wages — the goal or ideal of State Socialists and Protectionists, so far as it can be ascertained from the speeches, writings, and actions of such persons in Australia, is one single worker^ earning all the wages paid in his own, rigidl}' protected and stationary, trade and producing an infinitesimal amount of exchangeable utilities -. This astoundino- but of course unacknowledged ' principle ' underlies the whole policy of the dominant labour party and their political satellites in Victoria. They therefore remain consistently indifferent to the slow growth of popula- tion and its actual decline in the mining and agricultural districts, to steadily diminishing exports and the neglect or decay of innumerable profitable employments for labour, such
' The Victorian Tariff Commission of 1883-4 elicited the curious fact that one lonely human Ijeing earned his living by cutting corks in the colony. Thus, for the benefit of this cherished unit, a duty of 4^. per lb. on cut corks had been maintained, which was extremely irksome and injurious to tlie Colonial wine in- dustry generally.
- The Victorian Commissioners to the last Calcutta Exliibition wore de- nounced at the succeeding Annual
Trade Union Congress in 1884 for having suggested that a market might be found in Britisli India for some A'^ictorian manufactures. They were accused of a design to reduce Victo- rian wages to the Indian level. Re- presentative Trade Unionists have recently protested against the State Technical Colleges because young Vic- tor ians learn to become 'fitters,' lathe hands, i<;c., there, and thus compete with 'Labour.'
IV
]
Stafc Socia/isni af the Antipodes.
14;
as tlio protluctiou ol' Irozcii ssiltt'd ami tiiim-il inral. iVcsli and pivservotl fruit, wiiu-, oil, toharco, »irii'<l lisli, hides, pelts, butter, cheese, condensed milk, iK:c.. lor cxixirt. As lont; as their political (lepen<lents will Imrrow money incessantly in London, spend it on so-called useful jtuhlic works in and around .Mellmurne and inerejise the tariff at re^'ulai- intervals, the labour party are well satisfied. J)ej)utations representing various trades have constantly and successfully urged govern- ment to increase the duty on tlie article they were interested in, on the general ground that unless it were raised above 25 per cent, ad valorem they would have to sacrifice the eight hours' principle and reduce wages ^
Colonial State Socialism revolves in a sort of circle, and the same se(|uence appears to present itself at whatever point we inspect it. Politicians sanction and float loans, to provide employment for their patrons on pleasant terms ; local banks and credit institutions make use of the proceeds of State borrowing to ' finance ' building .societies, importers, manu- facturers, tradesmen and private speculators, who in turn give credit to working men for goods, or for land and houses bought by them at inflation prices out of their savings. Neither shop debts, interest, nor instalments on purchases of land and houses, can be paid unless wages are good,
1 Victorian Free Traders have come to iiso arguments really borrowed from American Free Tradi-rs. fmm a country wheri' 'Protection' is merely a patch of a strange colour on a gar- ment woven throughout of ' indivi- dualistic ' materials ; contending, for example, that Protection in no u-aij l)eiietits the material interests and }iocket of the Victorian working-man. Mr. E. Jow^ett, of the newly-formed Democratic Free Trade L<'ague, in a l)ublic debate with Mr. Hancock of the Trades Hall Council, on June II, I S90, took this giound. In the United States Mr. Jowett's conten- tion is a truism, and, if we consider wage-earners as a class, and connote free trade in laboui-, no doubt it is equally tiiie everywhere. But if we consider merely those Trade Unionists now alive in Victoria, and the cir- cumstances determining * competi- tion ' among them, I think it will be
found that the high tariff, by increas- ing enormously the cost of living, has frightened away transient or cisual workers, has deterred othei-s from manying early or rearing large fami- lies, and has thus diminished 'compe- tition ' gt-nerally. Except among Jews and Koman Catholics, the birth and marriage rates in the colony are omi- nously low. Married women boiii there and living under artificial, ami in many respects unhealthy social conditions, shirk more and more of recent years the duties and exertions f)f maternity and rearing chililnn. Already the most lucrative branch of medical practice in the colony de- pends on this sinister fact. The enei-\-ating effect of the climate upon women and young children, cost of house-rent, necessaries of life, ser- vants, and even milk, in Melbourne, explain if they do not excu.se ' civic cowardice ' of this tj'pe.
144 ^ Plea for Liberty. [iv.
and woi'k on political railways and 'useful public works' plenty. These pleasant practices grow upon the community like opium eating. Ministers therefore dare not now hold their hand, calculate waj's and moans closely, or stop bor- rowing, lest the whole top-heavy fabric of State Socialism shouhi come toppling down about their ears. The expen- diture for all purposes by the Victorian government for th.e last two or three years has been at the rate of from 12 to 14 millions per annum ^ Part of this sum has been ob- tained by issuing bonds on the London Market, part from revenue. Under the existing hand-to-mouth financial policy it looks very much as though recent loans have been regularly floated to meet accruing interest on old loans ; that is, on the total bonded debt of the colony. When those Melbourne banks^ which keep the government account, require to remit money to London to cash half-yearly coupons coming off the Bonds, they can draw upon London against the proceeds of each fresh loan, instead of having to buy wool or wheat drafts in the local market, and remit them. This agreeable system appears to be never ending ; as the local phrase goes, it ' re- lieves the banks,' and largely enables them to use their de- posits to 'carry' land speculators, and to expand local credit generally. In Victoria revenue is derivecl from Customs duties mainly. Since neither coin nor bullion are in these days sent to Australia, transfers of ' money' from Europe to the colony invariably take the shape of bankers' drafts, against goods exported to the colonies ; a fact which explains the ab- normally large imports into Victoria of recent years. Govern- ment, through the Custom House, thus takes a heavy toll upon all foreign 'money' sent on private account for employment in Victoria. In addition, it levies a second toll upon any balance of new loans — -left over after paying half-j^early coupons, or interest charges in London — which ultimately finds its way (in the shape of goods) to the colony. Thus the very same 'money' may figure twice over in the public accounts ; once as the proceeds of llailway or Irrigation loans sanctioned by Parliament, a second time as 'revenue' intercepted in the Custom House.
' During tlio last soven years Go- lie and corporate flol)ts havo increased
vornnicnt expenditure has increased by £?2.coo.ooo, and annual exports
)>y 41 per cent., wliile population has of' ' produi-e and manufactures' fallen
increased by 15 2)er cent. only. Pul)- from twelve to nine millions.
■v.]
Sia/c Social is ui at the Antipodes.
M5
Tliis iiK-tlMxlic-ul .systiiii i>l' iiitlalioii, lliU Kciiiiinju^ Ml/imi Svifi'ii from Lonihsml St., is locally ho convenient and ])opular, tliat no class tVets itself over such minutiae as the ellect of the eiy-ht hours' rule in diminishing the ellicicncy of lalxxii- and r(>strietin'4 ])rodwction. There is great latitude in regaitl to ])ulilie works. The generous policy of government is con- tagious. If the estimated cost of a m-w railway or public huilding be exceeded, in practice, a supplementary vote is hustlnl through Parliament late in the session ; the whole thing is finally shaken up, sliulHed, ami discrepancies rightt-d out of the next loan. No doubt the net effect of short hours, high wages and dishonest or slovenly 'lal)our' in \'ic.toria is represented ultimately in diminishrd pioductioii of utilities for export'. Hut the Trade Unionist who has just wrung from his employer a good rise in wages, or the average citi/en, the 'consumer, who has just been told by a kite-llying land syndicate that his back-yard is worth .i'30,000, does not fret himself about dwindling pro(hiction or exports. In Austra- lasia there have been no means either of judging whether
' .\ 11 y I'lif who alti'inptf* to ostiniatc; llif cionomic effect of tlu' reduced liuurs and fain-y wages enjoyed liy I,al)oiu- in Victoria, is at once (;oii- fp. uted l.y th<- fact tliat tli.' wliole industrial or manufacturing system there is very mucli u system pouv I in. AMiile economists in Europe disiiute till' txistcnce of a "wa^ie fund,' one becomes aware in Victoria of threi' such 'funds.' a Jictitious 'wage fund." an e(jualiy fictitious ' cajiital fund," and finally a ' con- sumei-s' fund,' all miracidously sup- )ilied l>y the State and the foreign investor. The "efHciency of labour ' means something definite in the United Kingdom, where labour and capital jointly compete in 'market overt ■ Tir the world's custom, where withdrawal of capital or diminished efficiency of laliour woidd at onci^ tell xipon the nation's home trade, exports and imports. But in Vic- toria, where ever^- £i worth of local manufactures which figures in >iffi- cial returns has cost at h'ast £i lo.s. to 2>roduce, and is nevei'thi'less en- sured a forced consumption in the volony by the protective tariff, closi'
calculations as to the effect of reduced liours of labour, wages, &c., are almost imj)ossil)le.
Tlie population ofVictoria in 188,^, when nsistauce to State, Socialism virtually ceased, was 921,743, and the exports of home produce were £13,300,000. In 1887 the poi)ulatioii was 1,036,119 (estimated}, and the exports which have since risen and then declined again; £8,502,979. Thus, while population had increased some 27 per cent., exports had de- creased nearly 40 per cent. All the while the class (farmers, graziers, &(•.) Avho do produce utilities for export, actually work far more than eight hours })er diem. The diminution in the yield of gold appears however to lie largely du(i to the action of 'the amalgamated miner,' who has long enforced 'the eight hours.' Indi- rectly, too, short hours and Jiiyli wages in Melbourne affect the sujiply as well as the efficiency of labour and j)roduction generally in the colony, woi-keis being tempted to desi)ise the slow process of developing the natural resources of the colony by Jiard toil.
146 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
successive reductions in the hours of labour liave created em- ployment for ' the unemployed,' because in the first place no efficient woi'kers are 'unemployed,' in the sense sometimes legitimately used here, in tiny of the colonies ; and in the second place the Federated Trade Unions prevent 'outsiders' from obtaining employment, or even appearing in the labour market at all. Nor is any light tin-own upon the argu- ment that reducing the hours of labour in this country alone to eight would 'kill' certain trades. What is meant by the latter phrase in Great Britain, of course, is that our manu- facturers could not compete either in the Home, or in neutral jnarkets, with foreign manufacturers. A^ictorian manufacturers do not care about the great neutral markets ; they export goods (in steadily diminishing quantities, by the way) to the adjacent colonics, but manage to do tliat partly because of the subsidiary advantages mentioned above, and partly by selling goods there at a reduction— as compared with prices charged to Victorian consumers — e(]ual to the amount of the Victorian duty on such goods. The tariff, of course, protects the flank of capital and labour alike against the competition of foreign goods in the home market.
Australian State Socialists have for many years past op- posed and thwarted sales of the freehold of ' Crown ' land, — ' the national patrimony ' tbey call it — and shilly-shallying attempts have been made to force the State ' leasehold system ^ ' upon farmers and settlers. The}' have failed disas- trously; but one indirect result has been curious. The land already ' alienated,' or granted in freehold, in the colonies, is now the only land Avhich can be freely dealt in. There has bi!en, in fact, an artificial scarcity, ox official land 'corner' in Victoria, South Australia, and Isew South Wales. The quan- tity in the market being thus artificially limited, and land speculation being, witli the exception of the turf, the only one not liable to be suddenly upset by strikes and legislation ' in the interests of labour,' the most reckless real estate
* An nnfoi-tunate expression of the may not sell freeholds to willing
liite Professor Fnwcett's to the effect purchasers, the ' nation's patrimony '
that he 'viewed with alarm the is a hngx^ breeding-ground for ral)bits,
ra|)id alicnat ion of the ))ublic dimiain costing thf)Usauds of ])ounds aiinu-
iii Austi-alasia,' is constantly «|Uoti'd ally for wire I'cncing. &c., and. as lar
by I lie advocates of ' bottliim up " t he as i)ro(lui( i.m of ill ilit ics is concerned,
ii.il ion's jtalrimoiiy. Tlie u<l lesull useless, is ihat wliile the land's de]>artnients
IV,] Stafc Soiia/ism at the Antipodes. 147
•rninldiii"" iToos 011 Irom lime to time in Mciliounii'. Adclaitli', and SytJiit'\'. A ilaugcrously larLT*' propoitioii of tin' iiiNcst- inent nionoy remitted from this country of recent years, I'or employment in .Mclboinno. has i^one to sustain land ' liooms.' and is now n'prrsrnted by the ■ paju-r of hmd i;and)k'rs. hehl at fal>uh)usly inthited ])rices, hy })anks, )>uihlin<^ societies, mortgai^e, finance, and trust companies. Meantime enormous profits have l»een made hy those persons wlio 'got out at the top' of the rise in land and house values in antl near Mel- Itourne. The phenomenal and ever-increasing concentration of population in a few large towns such as Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, I'risbanc, and Newcastle of course stimulates the buil<iing and allied trades. It also swells the earnings of suburl)an railways and tramway companies, which de])end for revenue on pleasure trattic. In .Mell)ourne the heavy suburban railway traffic partly obscures the deficit which has to be faced on the interest account of the railway loans '. The concentration of population also gives to the Federated Trade T'nions innnense strateeical advantages. Nevertheless peaceable comljination among wage-earners, even when rein- forced by perhaps the most efficient, rapacious, and unscrupu- lous organization now existing anywhere, docs not seem to diminish the profits of the large capitalist — or, in other words, the market rate of earnings — apportioned to capital in Aus- tralia by economic circumstances, which in the long run are really more powerful than socialistic legislators and labour ortjanizations combined -.
Possibly ^I ill's earlier opinions on that matter were shaken by a succession of notable Trade Union victories about twenty years ago. The mountebank economists of our own
' Mr. Andrew Ilarpor. M.L.A.. Uetmc, May, 1869) tliat 'Tluiv is
• stiiiiatos th<' loss — after dcdiutiiig absolutely availalile for the paynn'iit
net earnings from interest payahle — of wages, before an absolute limit is
oil tlie .State railways ^excluding the I'caehed. not only the employer's
lliilison Bay system, the most re- cai)ital but the whole of what can
munerative of the suburban lines) at possibly Ijc retrenched from his per-
£jj;S,ooo for 1S8S-9, and the Mtl- sonal expenditure . . . there is no
boKnic Atyiis. in July, i8yo, estimated law of nature making it inherently
this loss, for 1889-90. at £500.000. impossil)le for wages to rise to the
'Working expenses' alone, it seems. point of absorbing not only the funds
having risen from 52] per cent, in which the capitalist has intemled to
1S79 to 68 per cent, in 1SS9-90. tUvote to carrying on his business,
- I saw nothing in Victoria to jus- but tlu; whole of what he allows for
tify tlie o])inion expressed by J. S. his private expenses beyond the ne-
Mill in his hitter yeai-s {Fuiinif/hthj ee.ssaries of life.'
L
->
148 A Pica for Liberty. [iv.
day assert that as State Socialism progresses, even unskilled labour in tliis country will henceforward secure an ever-in- creasino- and permanent benefit, at the expense of capital. We have had, amono- other events, the London Dock Stritce of 1 (S89, in which the police observed an attitude of neutrality ; also the triumph of a riotous and violent mob of municipal gas workers at Leeds. No doubt Irish farmers have in recent years secured for themselves a vastly increased share of the ])rofits derived from Lish land ; but that latter triumph, espe- cially, was brought about by extra-legal, barbarous, or terrorist methods. To such methods any conceivable re-adjustment of proportionate profits, at the cost of the weakest class, is pos- sible. As long however as the struggle between capital and labour proceeds peaceably according to the recognised 'rules of the ring ;' in other words, wherever civil order and civil rights are upheld by the executive, as they have l)een with few exceptions in the colonies, combination, Trade Unionism, and incessant strikes do not seem to alter permanently the value of what might, at any given epoch, be called the normal fraction representing the proportionate shares of capital and labour. Wliat we shall probably see from time to time, and under exceptional conditions of the market, will be merely numerator and denominator multiplied by a higher figure, the value of the fraction remaining unchanged. Employers and industrial firms in the colonies have been now and then crippled, impoverished, and driven from business b}^ sudden and vigorously conducted strikes. Frequently Trade Unions in Melbourne and Sydney have without any warning • gone for ' an employer, tied l)y the terms of a large contract, and. as in the case of the original contractor for the Melbourne Parliament Imildings, ruined him completely. Li order to remedy such wrongs, the Melbourne Harbour Trust in i(S86 pi-oposed to insert a ' strike clause ' in future contracts. Tlie Trades Hall Council thereupon appealed to Government to withdraw the contributions from the Treasury to the Trust as a punishment. As far back as i<S85 an Australian Steam Navigation Com- pany was driven out of business by the action of the Federated Seamen's. Firemen's, Cooks' and Stewards' Union, and this latter, helped by allied bodies, has efiectually strangled the development of the coasting trade, or of anything like an Australian • merchant navy.' The result is that the monopoly of a few old-established firms in the steam coasting trade is
w
.]
S/(i/i- Sana /is/// at the A/i(ipodis.
i-io
not clinllriii'ftl ; tlu'V char«i»' liiuh iVoi'rlit uiitl iJassciii^iT rates : life iH I'xtiviiit'ly inst'cim- on tlu-sr routes, .iinl .-cii-l.oi ne tratlc is cripjjlfil and jiaraly/tMl. It is clearly seen in the I'nitetl States that a li'i^li ])ri>lective tariti' alom- \vill not keep \\\) tlie priees of certain sta[)le articles of manufacture, in face of keen local competition ainon«^ capitalists themselves. Cutting rates, discounts, ice, help consideralily in reducing I'rom time to time the prices of manufactured gooils in I'lurnpe and the Tniti'd States. But in the rnitetl Statt's, I'actor}' Acts are not enforced, while 'lal»our.' altiiough restless and irrecon- cilalile. is utti'viy disorgani/eil. ami, as compared with labour in Australasia, impotent. Tiie lattei- country, under State Socialism, seems to me to present the ' ideal conditions i'oi- Very rich ca{)italists : ( J ) a protective tariff; (2) vexatious and in(|uisitorial Factory Acts, based on the principle that the first duty of the State and the Legislature is to favour the Trade I'lnonist : (3) an all-])owerful Trade Union organization, maiii- ])ulated by unscrupulous, nairow-minded, seltish, and ignorant men. The irresponsible desjiotism of the latter implies per- haps even more than the tariff, i or it reduces competition among capitalists themselves to a minimum. The dread of facing the insatiable ilemands and exactions of Federated Labour, and the costly and harassing provisions of (Jolonial Factory Acts, more and more deter small capitalists, beginners, or ' small masters ' as they would be called here, from rivalling old- established firms and starting new competitive enterprises; while co-operative manuiacturing does ncjt of course conunend
itself to the thriftless and liuht-hearted Australian workino;- 1
man
' A partner in one of the twogi-eat Mi'lbouriic ne\vspa])<-i-s mentioned to a t'ricnil one day that the I'nimi to Mliieh liis coniimsitors Ix-lon^fd was altinit to decree some increase nf wages or f'resli advantages for its memljers. The friend replied tliat lie was not sui-prised to hear it : and t'lii'ther <-<iiinsHllcd the emplcivcr to re- ceive a dejiutaticiii from tlie Unionists in question ; to |a;rant their demands tiracefully : in addition, to present each of them with a gold watch. ' But,' olijected the first speaker, 'why the gold watch?" 'Because.' said the fither. "the consistent tyranny and tlie never-ending exactions of
this same Union, which is ever with you. are rajiidly making your fortune, liy etfectually keej)ing f>ut fif tlie liusiness every new man with cajiital enough to think of starting a news- pajjer in this city. If you go into your composing-room you will see a sti'ange thini; ; your type-setters, in- stead (if Weiiiy iiK-stly young men. ;is in London, New Y(jrk, or San Fran- cis<-o. are mostly grey-haired men. Were Melbourne in " the States " the most intelligent and ambitious of your '' hands " would long since have got cri'dit and helj> somewhere and started news]ia])ers for themselves ; there would have been at least six
150 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
'Free, Secular and Compulsory' State Education in Victoria is noticed by Sii- Charles Dilke among his problems. The Victorian system is described in the ' OHicial Year Books ' as ' secular instruction without payment for all children whose parents are willing to accept it." It is compulsory, and truancy is punishable by fine. Sir Charles Dilke (pp. 366- 383 of his second volume) does no more than translate the opinions of two of the best-known Melbourne partisans of the Act into guarded language, yet the history of this experiment in State Socialism and the result after eighteen years' trial, ought to be carefully studied by legislators and by educators in Great Britain, seeing that it is now pro- posed, by various groups of politicians here, either to copy the main principles of the Victorian Education Act, No. 447 of 1^73, or to embark on the very policy which made that Act logically inevitable. Sir Charles Dilke truly says that ' Victorians are strongly attached to their free system ; ' that it has ' a marvellously strong hold upon their affec- tions ; ' that ' centralization is not unpopular,' and that Dr. Pearson, the Minister for Education, seems to be well content with the education policy of his colony as com- pared to other colonies. Of all State Socialistic measures Eree Education seems to be the most enticing. A political party could hardly choose a more attractive dole or bribe for the electorate. Its success, however, is cumulative, and it is only after some years' experience that parents ap- preciate thoroughly what it does for them. Cash outlay to pay for the feeding, clothing, and education of children is. to selfish and self-indulgent parents, a constant source of irrita- tion. The small sums which should go to buy bread and butter, boots or bonnets, for youngsters, or to pay for their schooling, may be much needed by the male parent ibr tobacco, drink, and perhaps ' backing horses,' while the mother constantly needs new articles of dress and amusements. Free Education, at the expense of that pillageabl'e aljstraction ' the general taxpayer.' thus appeals to some of the strongest of modern instincts. In Victoria it would now l^e absolutely
Mell)Oxirne daily morning papers — holds the field hero, you will never
four of theui making money, and have another. Meanwhile your type-
thereljy reducint;- ynur jtrofits. As it setters expect to die type-setters,
is you have one serious rival, if you while you and yoiir partners will die
have even that. Certainly as long millionaires." as the Compositors' Union absolutely
IV.]
Stafc Sofia/ is nf at (he Antipodes.
i=;i
inipossiblo for ;my Ministrv. or politicul party, to witlnlraw or curtail tlu« priviK-ifcs ami advantages given mult r tlio Ktliication Act. The tendency is to increase them anil to add to the cost of the svsteni year ])v year ^ No canrlichitc for rarlianii-nt in Victtn-ia now ventures even to criticisf th(^ system lest the cry of the 'Education Act in danger' shouhl be raised against him. In ^'ictoria, as in England, ami more often in Scotlan<h rich parents do not scruple to tliroNV th(( burthen (jf the prinuiry education of their cliil(h"en upon their less prosperous neighljours -. The excuse sometimes offered in the Colonies is that amalgamation of all classes of society in the State Schools is a democratic idea. 'J'hc actual result, hoNvever, is that, where classes and mass(\s do live in juxta- position, many State School teachers try to make their schools select and (piasi-aristocratic. In Melbourne gutter- children are edged out on any pretext, and a special school had to be set apart there for tiiis class — the very clnss on whose behalf the "free' element in the system was originally advocated. Popular as the Act is with Victorian town popula- tions, it is in the remote and sparsely-settled agricultural and mining districts \V. of long, 143, E. of long, 146, and, excluding
' Dining the di-batos on the present A.t thf late Mr. .T. ^V. Stephen. At- torney-CJeneral in the Franeis Min- istry, in cliary;e of the Hill, declared that the cost per schular iu average attendance would ne^Ver exceed £2 jx'V head. It is now close upon £5, The Elt-mentary education vote has grown from £.217,704 in i<S7J-3 to over £600, OGO in 1SS7-8. One official excuse for lavish ex]>enditure is that in niral or remote districts tlie cost of tiiving education of a high quality to all children must Ix- far greater than in the towns. All the time the rural population steadily decreases, while the town, i. e. the Melbourne, population is now over 40 per cent, of the total for the colony. In 1S61 it was 25-89, in 1S71 28-87, and in 1S81 32-Si. The school attend- ance has only grown from 184,000 in 1S74 to 192,000 in 1SS7. Apparently interest on some £1.120.000. cost of State school buildings, wear and tear, depreciation. iVc. . do not figure in the Education vote, and seem to be paid
out of the imaginary net surplus from the State railways.
■^ In 18SS a Board School teacher in C'lasgow ])uz/.led mo not a littlt; bj' complaining bitterly of some charge of trifling misbehaviour against his pupils out of school hours\ which liad appeared in a newspaper for which I was at the moment respon- sible. He feared, I discovered, that his school might lose the genteel cadttl which it enjoyed. Some of the best people in Buclianan Street, ho said, sent their children to him. There is. however, historical exiu?ir for this trait among the best people, seeing that the Scottish Board School system is in some way ' sib ' to the noble old parochial, burgh, and gram- mar school system, which for iiijih two centuries did so much, in the Scottish Lowlands, to keep alive tlie true spirit of local self-government, and to develop, brace, and stimulate the best points in the national cha- racter.
152 A Pica fo7' Liberty. [iv.
Bendigo, N. of lat. 37, that the Act has the strongest hold. Fanners and ' selectors ' who have little money to spare, amalo-amated miners, "sv ho have killed 'the sfolden o-oose' of investment in mining properties by their organized idleness and short-sighted rapacit}', are conscious that they could not possibly provide b}' co-operation, or local rating, anything approaching the educational privileges and luxuries bestowed by the central department in Melbourne. Meantime, • the general taxpayer ' has indeed become a mere mathematical, or algebraic, expression in Victoria ; he has apparently neither body, parts, nor passions, does not cry out when he is squeezed, and is not represented in the Legislature. Sir Charles Dilke is right in sa\dng that educational State Socialism is popular in A'ictoria and that the Minister for Education is well content ^.
On the other hand, it is alleged that the Victorian Act has produced the evils of centralization in their worst form ; that as soon as the State assumed the entire cost of the system ' local control ' and responsibility at once became illogical and have now completely disappeared ; that the cost of the system tends to increase iudetinitely, owing largely to the fact that the State School teachers are banded together in a powerful Trade Union, the avowed object of which is to increase their salaries and privileges by political pressure ; finally, that a distinct religious grievance, or disability, has been created by the Act of 1873. Protests against some or all of these evils and abuses have been made by colonists of high character
* This philanthropic and culturod Peai-son (anticipating the Duke in The.
gentleman, fcn-mei-ly a Fellow of Oriel Gunchliers] became a Royal Conunission
College, Oxford, and, according to limited). He however contented
the testimony of Mr. David Gaunson, himself Avith writing a thin but in-
ex-M.L.A., one of the greatest living teresting Essay on the education
authorities on the history of the question in the colony, in Nvliicli.
middle ages, may be regarded as the with rare pi-escieiice. he condi-nined
Prosper Merimee of the State Social- the evils of 'payment by results.'
istic Empire in Victoria. He entered His suggestions were entirely ignored
politics as a Free Trader, but was by his political patrons, but a fee of
speedily reconciled and received into £1000 was innd to him for his lite-
the Protectionist and State Socialistic rary labours upon tlie thin Essay,
fold. In the latter interest he stood Afterwards he was pi'ovided with a
unsuccessfully for a constituency in ^eat in the Legislative* Assembly, a
1877. On the accession of the Pro- gentleman, whose original avocation
tectionist party to power in that year was that of a brewer's traveller,
the Ministry declared a Koyal Com- having resigned his seat in order to
mission on the Education Act to l)e becoine Librarian to Parliament, urgently recpiired. and Professor
r\'.] S/alc Socialism at the A)ilipodcs. 15
antl ubility — sill of thcin, (>xco])t Mi. AicIkt. riot^'Stants — in rf.'cent years: l«y tin- lair ])r. llcani. LL.I).. ( 'liancclldi- <i(' McllMiuinc l'iii\ tisitv. -Mi". Andrew 1 l;n]iii-. .M.L.A.. Jml^o- \Vairin<4ton Ko^ors, tlie ])reseiit J^islioj) ol "Manchester, the llev. W. H. I'itehett. Professor M'Coy: an<l l»y erities sis fai- a])Jirt in tlieir Kihieational vii-ws as Sir ArchihaM Miehie, Ah-. W. H. Archer, and the present iJishop of Melhonrne. No leplv is made to these iijentlenien l)y the apostles of \'ictoiiiin State Sociah>ni. Itecause. fr(jni the point (»f view of practical politics, none is needed.
The whole patronage, finance, and administration of the State schools, down to the most miniile details, are centred in one large department in Melbourne The promoters of the present Act did their work thoroughly in 1(872 '. The late Mr. Stephen and Mr. Francis sincerely believed that it was their mission to create a benevolent Educational despotism, a Ministerial de])artnu'nt which would mould the youth of the colony into one admiral ile I'urm.and, amoni; othei- thinus, "con- trol the evil of denominationalism which had raised its head there to such a fearful extent.' Accordingly, when during the, discussion of the Bill the principle of ' free ' schooling — at the expense of the State alone— was accepted, the majority in Parliament, logically enough, rejecteil Local Option, or any claim by districts and localities to interfere with Elementary school patronage, finance, or administration. Boards of Advice were created, feeble parodies of the School Boards in this country; but they represent no fee or ratepayers, were given no power in 1872, and exercise none now. The only basis of local responsibility and control, as well as of authority, which can be chiimed hy local boards over the elementary educa- tion of the people, is local contributions, either in rates or school fees. On the other hand, if the State Treasurer be sole paymaster. Parliament insists, sooner or later, that the State shall be 'master' in every sense. Had the original promoters of the Victorian Act realised how completely it involved centralization, they might have shrunk from the prospect of that responsibility for details now forced upon Ministers in Melbourne. The action, the inevitable action, of members of
' The educational polity f>f 1S72 victories over the French to superii>r
received an impetus from the Franco- ' book-learning,' did duty in Australia
Gorman war I The classic fiction, at the time, and is repeated then- to
tliat the German forces owed their Ihi^ day.
154 ^ Plea for Liberty. [iv.
the Legislature has gradually brought about this latter state of things. Questions are asked iu the Legislative Assembly, almost daily, as to thu salaries of teachers, perhaps in remote districts, jirice of school books, supply of drinking water to children, repair of school buildings, &c. There is no one else in the colony — save the Minister of Education, who pays for all these things — to ask. It is quite useless for either ^Minister or Members of Parliament to refer back to local bodies ; the latter pay nothing and manifestly have no status, and no right whatsoever to interfere. Naturally, therefore, the living interest and the stimulus given to education by the School Board system in Great Britain (outside the metropolis) are wanting iu Australia. Victorian children are passed through the State machine, that is all the parents know. The majority of the latter may not approve of State school influences upon the morals, character, and behaviour of their children, but the whole thing, school books and materials included, costs nothing. Evils, abuses, and blunders, similar to those which liave grown up under the London School Board, abound, but in aggravated form, under the Central Educational Department iu jMelbourne — official supervision, discipline, and methods being of course defective in a colony where the supply of first-class civil servants is limited, where petty office-seeking is a growing vice, where the schools to be looked after are, in many cases, practically as remote from Melbourne as London is from the Shetland Isles. The tangle of red tape, the unmanageable accumulation of returns, correspondence, and official documents, the delay, waste, and paralysis at the centralized Melbourne office, have been often described by responsible colonists\ The Ministry, howevei-, do not require to make any reply to such charges as these. They can always borrow their way out of such difficulties, and they know that as long as electors do not pay, electors do not care. In a limited electorate such as that of Victoria, the State school teachers' vote is a serious consideration. Although they have been, since i8<S5, under the Public Service Act, which was supposed to do away with political jDatronage. they
. ' Alter tlcveii Acars' vvdiking of nunil)i.'r of cliiklreii iu avorago at-
tlio Act it was admitted iH'foi'e tlio tendaiico was still a matter of guoss-
Koyal Conimissiou of 1882-4, '^.V "^^' work. Professor Pearson, in 1S82.
cials of the department, that tlu^y described the whole school census
liad ne\er yet been able to compile system as ' confused and disorderly.' a t riislwcirthv school census, and the
IV.] Sfafc Soria/isfi! at the .btfipodcs. 155
have IVtnnttl u j)t)Wi'rl'ul Tnulf Union, which iiicrts n>«,'ulHrly in conlciencf. liko the railway servants or any otiier iahoiir Junta in the t.'oh)nv. anil thrcati-ns niinistcr.s and ic'^ishitors. 'I'he principlt' that jiolitieal inthu-nc*' should Ix- used to extort iiioin-} aiitl other hi-netits lor theniselve.s from the Treasury is as frankly ncceptr'd and acted upon hy these V^ictorian puhlic servants as it was l>v Irish horouirh-inonfjers and Scottish ' controulers " at the close of the last century. It is sai<l tliat in J.ondon the teachers' vote and intluence are jtotent at School Board elections, and fatal to the chances of candiihites suspected of a desii-e to check extravagance and waste. In the I'nited KinL(doni, however, it may be antici])atcd that under Free State Education the teachers' political vote and intiuenco would be swamped by other, and far more numerous, political groups who have miscellaneous designs upon the Imperial Treasury. Theoretically such defects as exaggerated centralization at head-(piarters, decay of local interest and of • local ' control over extravagant expenditure, are not incur- able. They might disappear in time were it not that any reformers are at once met by the money barrier. Reform would mean increase to local burthens, and Victorian colonists, useil to having their children educated ' for nothing,' or rather, at the cost of some person or persons unknown, by means of a financial leijerdemain which has enabled the State Treasurer to borrow surpluses regularly in London, are less disposed everv vear to relieve the State Treasury of its tribute. Even the perpetuation of the religious grievance, which Roman (,'atholics complain of so bitterly, seems to me mainly due to financial conr siderations. I came to the conclusion in Victoria that Roman Catholics are subjected to a wa-ong more galling, but not unlike that which compulsory payment of church rates inflicted upon Dissenters in this country. A strange state of things in a self-governing community, the vast majority of whom are of English, Scotch, or Welsh birth or parentage. I found a partial explanation in the action and language of certain ^ ictoriau politicians who supported the Roman Catholic educational claims in the past. The late Sir John O'Shanassy, one of the Conscript Fathers of the colony, and a splendid specimen of the old Tipperary yeoman stock, managed this delicate matter, and managed it badly, for years. Sir C. G. Duffy managed it so nmch worse that colonists finally refused doggedly to even discuss the Roman
i=;6
A Plea for Libcrfy
[iv.
Catholic gTievancc. Verily much can be forgiven to a colony Avliich has reckoned Sir Charles Gavan Diifty among its leading politicians, which has learnt to know him, which indeed can never forget him^ But unless the action, language, and opinions of those who complain of wrong and ask for conces- sions afford clear proof that granting their demands would imperil the lives, liberty, and property of their fellow-subjects, no enlightened conununity should be influenced by the blun- ders, follies, and excesses of the spokesmen. In Victoria it seemed to me the noxious virus secreted by State Socialism, State bribes, and State doles has already penetrated so far that colonists deliberately intiict a wrong in educational matters mainly because they have been persuaded that justice would cost a great deal of money.
Roman Catholic ecclesiastics and laymen in Victoria submit that although the State professes to provide money out of the taxes for the elementary education of all Victorian children this money is now so distributed that they, as con- scientious Catholics, cannot possibly benefit by it in any way. As proof of their earnestness they have since 1872 expended nearly ^^'300,000 in providing school buildings in which the children of conscientious Roman Catholic parents are now in- structed in religious as well as secular subjects. Some twenty or thirty thousand children are thus provided for at no expense whatsoever to the colony, the secular education given being quite e(|ual to that in the State schools. The Roman Catholic party now propose to continue to build their ovrn schools, to appoint their own teachers, subject to Government examina- tion as to efficiency in secular subjects, and ask for a jhu-
1 Mr. W. II. Archer, tho gout lest of iiK'ii ami tlie most earnest advocate of the Ifiiinan Catholic claims In \'ic- toria, in a memoir of liis friend. Sir .J(din (yshanassy <Mflb. Iier. xxxi. 243), mildly, hut firmly, repudiates the insinuation that he himself was responsible for bringing Sir C. G. Duffy to the colony. It appears that Mr. Arclur wrote to the late Fre- derick Lucas, editor of llie Tahlct, ask- ing him to come out to Austi'alia to champion the Eoman Catholic cause. When the letter reached Enijland Lucas was d<'ad, but it was jiublishcd in tlic London i»ress. B}- the next
mail, oddly enough. Mr. C. (i. Dufty arrived in Melbourne. Then he was presented with £5000. Afterwards, ac- cording to Mr. Archer. Mi-. Duffy "used an unlucky expression as to his being ••an Irish i-ebel to the backbone and spinal marrow;"' this, it seems, made the Englisli. Scotcli, and Welsli colonists angry. They did not then comprehend their Mr. C. G. Dutly. nor foresee that he would continue for many yeai's to draw tho onh- political pension accepted by an ex- minister in the colony, (julte in a loval manner.
IV.] S/a/i' Socialism at the Antipodes. 157
riijiHii Ljrant or share of the free education vote. Itnsed, as far as I understand, not on the departmental rate. l)ut rather on the actual cost per ehild umU'r their system (d" instruction (ahout one-halt' the departmental rate) for all chihli'en who ])ass the (iovernment Jnsjiectors' examiiuition in secular, or non- religious suhjccts, according to the otHcial standard tor age, &c. This demaml is refused. The replies vouchsaled to calm and iiioderate protests from hoth Protestant an<l ( "ath(dic colonists ditler in no way from the stock a[)ologies put forward for the reli<rio\is disabilities of Protestants. Roman Catholics, (^)uakers. and other dissenters elsewhere in thr j-ast. The •thin edije of the wedc:e ' ar<;ument is used. It is said that if Victorian Roman Catholics were given a /x'r cc/Hfc grant for each child <luly educated in secular subjects they would soon demand a enfant for new school buildinf;s also. It is said that the Roman Catholic religion is a bad religion and inimical to civil and religious freedom; indeed. Sir Archibahl Michie, whose sensitive conscience prompted him to write one of the few existing pamphlets on this (juestion, mentions the massacre of St. Bartholomew ami the horrors of the In([uisition, and also quotes largely from .Macaulay to prove this latter state- nu-nt. What ilacaulay says, and wliat all history teaches, about the effect of R(unan Catholic ascendency upon human societies would be much to the point if it were proposed to give the hierarchy of that religion virtual control over the civil and religious liberties of citi/ens anywhere, but hardly answers the complaint that conscientious \'ictorian Catholics cannot possibly benefit from the annual education j^rant. It is said further that Roman Catholic Governments do not give money to Protestant schools ; also that a portion of any grant given to Catholics in Victoria might be seiit as a present to the Pope, instead of l)eing used for education : also, that the alleged ' Catholic conscience ' in this matter is really a ' breeches -pocket conscience;' also, as has been said to Protestants who sought to establish schools of their own in Roman Catholic countries, that the teaching sanctioned by the State is very good teaching — if the dissatisfied ones would only think so. It is also alleged that the majority of Victorian Catholic parents now cheerfully send their children to the State schools. P)Ut that to iny mind merely ]u-oved, in some instances, that such parents are lukewarm Catholics. The fact remains that a certain percentage of Victorian parents
15S A Pica f 07' Liberty. [iv.
rightly or wrongly, consider the anti-Christian education given in the State schools pernicious. If there were only fifty such parents in the colony a gTievance would still exist under the Act. Apparently, also, Roman (Jatholic priests sometimes sanction the sending of children to the State schools, if no Koman Catholic school exists in the neighl)ourhood, possibly as a general indulgence to eat meat on Fridays is extended to sick or shipwrecked people, the inhabitants of beleaguered cities, &c., but those, I think, are matters for Catholics to settle among themselves. Mr. Sutherland, a cultured member of the Unitarian body in Melbourne, has disclosed what seems to me the most effective argument airainst the Catholic claims. In a long letter to the Melbourne Argus, of April, 1 8(S5, he states that among sensible men and women in the colony there is a strong but vague hostility to the Catholic claim. ' The object of my letter,' he says, ' is to give that consciousness a basis of figures and a more definite form, so that the nation at large may be fortified in its refusal to entertain the Catholic claim.' He then declares that ' if the Catholics ever succeed in obtaining a separate grant it would imply the closing of several hundreds of the smaller State schools.' I do not think Mr. Sutherland proved his case at all, but the vague impression that he might be correct in his view had a great infiuence with the colonists at the time, and has still.
I followed this controversy closely when in the colony, because I marvelled to see a so-called free, enlightened, and progressive democracy sheepishly furbishing up at the end of the nineteenth century rusty weapons and rusty arguments of religious intolerance. After a while it seemed to me still more significant and instructive that the desii'e of the majority to grab all the State money going should be the chief reason for this rare intolerance. Shabby selfishness and chronic mendicanc}'^ are imperceptibly, but surely, developed l)y State Socialism. Later, there follows incapacity to do a single just or liberal act. It is not denied by the partisans of the Victorian Education Act that if Roman Catholics should ever ' pocket their conscience,' as they are invited to do. and abandoji their separate schools, an enormous sum would have to be at once spent on school-buildings for the children thus thrown upon the State, while the educational vote would he at least ji'100,000 a year higher. Roman Catholics thus vir- tually take a large amount of expenditure on their own
,v.]
Siafc Soi ill/is ))i at the Antipodes.
159
sliouklers, uihI colunists uccejit an alms iVoin tin* tlciioniina- tioii whose conscientious scruples tiiov ileride. J jinl^oil tliat men and women, deirradeil l»y Statr and Munici])al borrow- in" and beeriiinir, lose natimial self-respect alt<>i,f<'tlii'i- alter a while '.
The complaints of Koman Catholic Educators in \'ictorta are worth uotin;^'. because the Education Act of 1S73 placed them under nuieii the same disabilities as Church of EuLdand, Wesleyan and other Protestant Nonconformist Educators in the I'nited Kiii''dom wouM endure if Mr. Morley's decla- ration of the 21st of February, i^<9o' weic cinlMxlicd in an Imperial Education Act. But while Mr. Morley olfered, 'on behalf of th»' Liberal ])arty.' special privileges to Roman Catholics and Jews in the United Kinplom, the Mctorian Act imposes ecjual disabilities upon all citi/.ens who believe that the teaching of the Christian reliL,aon ought to 1)0 en- couraged in elementary schools.
That which some regarded as merely a graceful ])liilo])ena- preseut liom Mr. M<n-ley t(j Mr. Sexton raised certain ho]X'sand gave a certain amount of satisfaction in other directions. Pos- sibly the Roman Catholic hierarchy, who are w^ell informed on these nuitters, did see the pitfall lying behind the otler from the so-called " Liberal party,' but some of the Roman Catholic clergy and laity in the United Kingdom must have been X)leased at the recognition by so distinguished a catechumen as Mr. Morley
' Tliclkojinrtand cvidincofiirnishod l>y till- Royal CV>iinnissiuii <ni Kdiica- Moii which sat in Victoria from early in 1SS2 to tho middle of 18S4, an* a mi no of information on the working; of free, secular, and compulsory 8cate education. I do not siipiioso tliat so much could be learnt on til is import ant subject from any other source. It i.s unpleasant reading for Victorian State Socialists, and after adopting a few trifling recommondations con- tained in the report they have quietly ignored it. A ^jm/.s- or synopsis of the minute and exhaustive evidence procured by the Commissi<')ners as well as the/ma.iority' and 'minority' rejiorts. whicli are iii>t very li-ngtliy. would have ht-lpi-d m<iiibirs of the Imperial Parliament, had • Free Edu- cation ' been seriously debated, before
being adopted, in this countrj-. Tiio ("ommissioners by a majority of one, out of eleven, decided against tlie t'atholicclaimsonthegeneral grounds that a grant to Roman Catholic schools Avinild amount to endowment of one partifular form (jf religion.
-' Mr. jMorley. sjieaking to Mr. Adand's amendment in favf)Ur ol free education, said : — 'Our position I think is this, that when a school In intended for all it sliould lie managed by tlie re]iresentatives of the wliolr community. When on the oth'i- hand the school claims to be for tin- use of a section of the community, as for example the Catholics or the .Tews, it may continue to recelvi- ]>ublic sujiport as long as it is under the management of that sect.'
]6o A Pica for Liberty. [iv.
of the claim of 'oue of the great hierarchies of obscurant- ism ' ' to dispose of an educational grant from the Consolidated Fund as they pleased. ]\Ir. John Morley has declared, too, that the educational claims of the Roman Catholic bishops and priests represent ' the black and anti-social aggression of the syllabus and the encyclical'-,' and that 'the supposed eagerness of the parent to send his child to a school of a special denomination is a mere invention ■'.... of the priests.' Some Nonconformists, as well as the whole of the secularist or anti-Christian body in the United Kingdom, may also have rejoiced at the prospect of financial vengeance upon the Church of England held out by an ex-Minister.
What has happened in Victoria shows how many of these hopes and anticipations are likely to be realised. I think there is conclusive proof that throwing the whole cost of education upon the Consolidated Fund, or ' the State,' implies secular or anti-Christian teaching, and no other kind, in ' State ' schools ; that it would be impossible permanently to single (jut one or two denominations and give to them such a grant, to dispose of as they please ; finally, that the secularist or anti-Christian party, although actually in a minority — as they always have been and still are in Victoria — will manage, sooner or later, to drive a wedge between the rival Christian denominations and to impose their own educational, or may we say atheologicpJ, ideas upon the State.
Up to the nth July, icS^i, 'the Port Philip District,' now the colony of Victoria, was a portion of New South Wales. For eleven years after ' separation ' or the grant of Autonomy, the educational s^^stem inherited from the parent colony was administered fairly well by a National Board and a De- nominational Board, disposing" between them of the Govern- ment grant '*. In August 1S63 the Common Schools Act, promoted by Mr. Richard Heales, came into operation. It Avas administered by five ijuasi-independent Commissioners of Education. The principle of the Act is alleged to have
' 'The Stni.iisU' for National Eiliica- of Enylaiul, 48 ivr i-ciit. : I'lvsliy-
lioii," r('j)riii(i'<l tVoiii till' 'Fdit iiiL,^lit ly ti riaiis. 22 i)t"i' (-I'lit. ; Wisk-yaiis, 6
Kuvk'w,']S72-77,, sceuiKliditiciii. ji. 97. )mi- cent.: Iviniau CatJiolicH. 22 per
- II). )). C13. I'c'iit. Ill tlic following \%ar ln^ says,
•■ 111. Y- ■^7- tlie latter 'ol)taiuecl a grant in ]>ru-
' 111 1S51 tlic grant for (Iciioiiiiiia- i)ortioii to tlicir real nuniciica!
tioiial scliools was, accoriliiig to Mr. strength.'
W. II. An! 11 r. t liiis d i\ i(li(|. ( liunli
IV.] S/afc Soiia/is/)i a I I he Aufipodc:^. i6i
hi'cn socular cilurHtiun, [)iiii' ami siinjik', Kut the Cuiii- inisKioncrs at hi-st made icufulations which sanoMoncd thu Miii(liii<,' (»!" rt'lit^ious with secular iii.struftif)ii in \ olmitary or ilfiioiiiiiiatioiial schools, 'i'lie latter increa«eil slowly under the Comiiiuii School.s Act. In iiSj-, when it was ivjx'ah'd, there were 40S of them in the Colony altoc^ether. which had co.st .some .^iE^iS'^.ooo to erect. Of this .sum tlu^ State had contrihutod .^'104.000. From the first there were conflicts and jealousies hetween the Ministry of the day and the Kducational ('ominissioners, who insisted on exercisinij; in- dependent patronage and control. Among the community generally the discussion of educational problems hetween ](S62 and 1H72, as well as the investiL^ations by the Koyal Commission on Public J'Mucati(jn in ] <S66, brought out like views to those connnon in this country at the time. There was the same jealousy of the ascendency of the creeds' and ' the ])arsons ' on tiic part of the Victorian average ratepayer, and the same want of cohesion and unanimity — or positive antagonism — among 'the creeds' themselves who were expected to champion the cause of religious instruction in Elementary State schools. The existing Act, No. 447, of 1873, ^^ chiefly due to Mr. (afterwards Mr, Justice) Wilberforce Stephen, a doctrinaire liberal, possessed of much industry, sincerity, and erudition, now deceased. When Mr. J. G. Francis formed a Liberal-Conservative Ministry on the loth June, 1872, in suc- cession to Ml". C. G. Duffy, Mr. Stephen became his Attorney- General, and an Education Bill, reforminrj the abuses alleged to have sprung up under the Common Schools Act of 1862, was part of the Ministerial programme. The Pro- testant clergy of all denominations thereupon held a series of conferences, beginning in July 1872, under the presidency of the late Bishop Perry, to discuss the situation. The par- tisans of secular instruction, pure and simple, consisting mainly of free-thinkers but reinforced by a few clergymen and sin- cerely religious laymen, had formed a Victorian Education League. It cannot be said that colonists generally were seriously discontented with the Common Schools Act ; but they shared the educational enthusiasm among Britons gener- ally at that epoch, and hoped also to get from a department of State a better and a cheaper system than ' the parsons ' had given them. The Poman Catholic body in Victoria, who had even hesitated to accept State aid under the limitations em-
M
1 62 A Pica for Liberty. [iv.
bodied in the Common Schools Act, at once suspected serious mischief from Mr. Stephen's policy, and prepared, in secret as their way is. to offer what resistance they could to the I'orthcoming Bill. As happened '\\\ this country when Free State Education was mentioned at the beginning of i Hqo, the Protestant denominations, clergy and laymen, were by no means iri-econcilable towards what they believed to be the Free State Educational ideas of Government. In i(S72 it was not understood how thoroughh' Mr. Stephen intended to secularize Victorian education. Actuated by that spirit of futile opportunism, Avhich to this day inspires the high strategy of so many Anglican Churchmen in the United Kingdom, the members of the conference of 1872 contented themselves with a series of moderate, neutral, and, as it looks now, entirely reasonable resolutions. They were unanimously in favour of what Mr. Morley has called ' the organic prin- ciple of our constitution,' local control of some sort over elementary education. Parents they thought should have something to sav in the choice of teachers ; the latter being permitted also to give religious instruction in State school buildings out of school hours : while Government Avould periiaps be able to draw up a Scripture lectionary, containing selected passages agreeable to all Protestant denominations. The}^ were willing that thenceforth no new 'voluntary ' schools should be established in the colony, a self-denying ordinance which, by the way, struck directly at the Roman Catholics. Two or three members of the Protestant Conference declared for free, secular, and compulsory State education in principle, arguing that religious teaching could, and ought to be, carried on quite apart from secular teaching, by the clergy or by lay helpers, instead of by State school teachers. The late Professor Hearn, the most profound and brilliant thinker w^ho has served the colony, -appears to have foreseen most clearly the economical objections to Free State Education, and he indeed predicted, in a pamphlet issued at the time, the very evils of over-centralization, extravagance, and abuse of patronage at the Central Department which the Royal Commissioners un- earthed ten or twelve years afterwards. The Education Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly by Mr. Stephen on the 12th September, 1872, in a speech of mammoth dimen- sions, yet not uninteresting reading even now, for it sets forth most of the sophistries and illusions which charmed educational
i\.] S/a/c So(ia/is//i a( the .inlipoiics, 163
enthusiasts twenty yeais ago. In those days Bucklo was not yet regarded l)y advanced J^iljerals an a fossilized tliinker, anrl traces of his inHuence crop up in Mr. Stcplu-n's intercstini^ coMiparisons ht-tween enliulitentd and ^v^•ll-(•ducated Freiicli youth, since the llevohition. and Mritish youth, still in the trauiuiels of 'the creeds.' .Mr. Hcj)worth Dixon's and Mr. Matthew Aiiiolds rococn opinions about Swiss and Prussian education all Hi^'urtMl at iuiniense lenj^'th in this speech aixl helped to Ix-nuudt the intellects of worthy colonists, at that period hovering at the sunnnit of the well-greased slide which was to carry them towards couiplete State Socialism. Mr. Stephen convinced the Legislative Assendjly that elementary education directed by a central State authority wouM ertectually purgt^ the colony of clei-icalism and religious animosities. It was his belief that in a couple of generations, throuirh the missionary influence of the State schools, a new body of State doctrine and theology would grow up, and that the cultured and intellectual \'ictorians of the future would discreetly worship in common at the shrine of one neutral-tinted deity, sanctioned by the State department. Noticing the objection that patronage would be abused under his Bill, Mr. Stephen declared that no minister would ever "dare' to appoint teachers from political motives. A few years later, when Victorian protectionists and State socialists had made an end of Conservative ministries, this Conserva- tive Education Act was used by Mr. Stephen's opponents to pension and reward their followers, and teachers of the worst character and antecedents were pitch-forked wholesale into the State schools.
The opposition to the Education Bill in the Assembly was half-hearted and feeble. Indeed, its various ' principles ' proved themselves and each other as the discussion went on. The ' compulsory ' principle was almost unanimously accepted from the first, probably because of the Prussian and alleged American examples. The old (juibble, that education if 'com- pulsory ' must be ' free,' next did service. Then, it having been assumed that the State must be teacher, it became manifest that the different groups who opposed the Bill, not being agreed among themselves, were utterly unprepared to answei* the question, ' which particular religion is to be taught ? ' The only logical solution was, 'no religious teaching at all.' The Bill passed triumphantly through committee on the
M 2
J 64 A I^lca for Liberty. [iv.
]9tli October, and came into force on the ist January, 1873. Zealous Koiiian Catholics at once rejected the new Act. The}^ refused to accept State aid on the official terms, and ' went out into the wilderness.' And there they are still. But they set to work to build new schools and to provide for the schooling- of as many children as possible ^ The Church of England. Presb^'terians, Wesleyans, and other Protestants determined, on the contrary, to give the Act a fair trial ; as some put it, they walked straight into the trap. They gave up control of theii" schools and surrendered the buildings to Government, receiving compensation for valid interests, and have made no attempt to carry on ' voluntary ' elementary schools since 1873. Mr. Morley, writing on the Victorian ex- periment at the time, gracefully describes what was done by Mr. Stephen in 1872 as 'throwing a handful of dust over the raging insects,' i. e. the Christian denominations. In the same work he < quotes the saying of an opponent: — 'religion can only be taught in elementary schools by the lay master. If taught by the clergyman it would only be regarded as an insupport- able bore.' This certainly has been the experience in Victoria. State school teachers are heavil}^ fined if they give religious instruction 'at any time.' During the last ten years earnest eftbrts have been made by Protestant ministers of religion and laymen to get together classes of State school children for religious instruction after school hours, the buildino-s being always at their disposal then. These efforts have com- pletely failed. Secularism, or what some call free-thought, is the one creed virtually established and endowed by the Victorian Education Act. It may be questioned whether neutrality is possible in this matter; children either learn some form of belief or of disbelief. In the State schools, we are told officially, ' lessons on morals and manners are given fortnightly; for the treatment of those apparently drowned
1 Mr. .1. F. Hogan, late of Mel- expenses are tlicrulpy reduced to a ))ourne, writes to me, ' In a few of the uiiuimiim. Recently neAV scliolar- Koman Catliolic primary schools in ships, new Inspectors and a irew Melbourne fees are cliarged, but in tlie curriculum have been introduced., vast majority throughout the colony ... In country' districts a few Protes- expenses arc paid by collections and tant cliildren used formerly to attend donations ... So tluit practically tlie Roman Catholic schools, retiring system is as "free" as that of the during the religious instruction half- State. The religious orders are now hour. But this is becoming rare.' largely employed as teachers, and
IV.] Shilc Socia/isi/i at the Antipodes. 165
uiiil of those liitU'H by Miaki.s, pcriudicall\ .' M-lrctic licathfiiisiM is tlio note of Static school morality in Victoria. The chiMreii an- however taught Eiii^'lish (iraimiiar, Arith- metic, and CJe(\t,'raphy very well indeed ; and the way in which they will rt-peftt the names of all mountains, cajx-s, hays. lakes--as well as of the two rivers — in Australia, perhaps suggests that, after all, U n de .si^,i>' heathenism may he ' nuieli nusunderstoud.' Meanwhile the system must continue to he extrava<rantlv costly: it is swathed in a^ld strangled by red tape; it inHiets injustice upon conscientious religious bodies ; it deposes parents iVum responsibility and the teacher from the free exercise of his noble craft ; it i)re- scribes a stereotyped form of procedure on a track where constant progress and free experiment are most essential.
In his survey of the colony of Victoria, Sir Charles Dilke (i. 24(S-52) mentions the Early Closing of Shops — under the 45th clause of the amended Factory Act (862) of i(S(S5 — among 'experiments tried' not among 'pi-obloms' of Greater Britain. But it is perhaps entitled to rank among the rapidly accumu- lating problems of Sillier Britain, seeing that Sir John Lubbock's Bill still loiters with intent round the door of the House of Commons. The readers of Sir Charles Dilke's book are led to understand that in Victoria the experiment is a success, an<l that since ]^^(S6 retail shops have been compulsorily closed at the statutory hours of 7 i'. :^r. on week- days and 10 P.M. on Saturdays, without injury to business, without protest from tradesmen or customers.
The 45th clau.se of the Act in (juestion ^ gave a species of local option to municipal bodies, and, inter alia., the power to fix the fines for sellino- o-oods after 7 i'. m. Certain munici- palities at once exercised all the powers available to mitigate the impending nuisance, thereby exciting the wrath of the Socialist party, who promptly threw over the principle of local option and complained that a beneficent measure was being defeated by a base conspiracy. Sir Charles Dilke seems to sympathise with these complaints. He mentions the unfriendliness of the
' The 45th clau.se permitted 'shops shops, witliin .... district.' It alsn
of any ])arti<idar chiss' (not sflicd- oravc iniinicipalitits powi-r to fix fines,
iilol as ••x^inpted). "on f.htaiiiins a 'I'liis )iu\v<r was takoii away liy an
lici'iis<'.' to k«■^'p opon aftfr 7 p.m. *. . ann'ndin^ Act. «il l"ic, gCyi of 1SS7,
.. on a petition oertiiifd by the muni- wliich imposed fines, from a niini-
cipal clerk as being signed by a ma- mum of los. to a niaxinmm i-i' il:. jority of the shopkeepers kee]iinfisueli
i66
A Plea for Liberty.
[,v.
municipalities and the lowness of the fines, and adds some- what inconsequently, ' the light fines have been a success, for the publication of the names of the offenders has been suffi- cient.' It was sufficient in one notable instance ' to get the fines paid fur the offender Ijy public subscription ; but that of course is not what Sir Charles Dilke means.
The story of the Victoria Early Closing law is worth re- calling. It has long been practically obsolete in the colony, and when it was (on that verj^ ground) proposed in i(S90 to enact a similar, but far more drastic, measure, the public appeared to have forgotten not only the details but even the date of the fii'st experiment.
Colonial Factory Acts profess to be modelled on Imperial Acts, but contain important variations and ' extras.' Labour being well able to take care of itself is, generally speaking, indifferent to that legislative protection which has been thought necessary for European workers under their entirely different conditions. Yet for j^ears prior to 1H85, the Trades Hall leaders, anxious to have all operatives well in hand and under discipline, had demanded, on behalf of the bootmaking and clothing trades chiefly, legislation which would drive all outside piece-workers into factories. Female hands work at these ' lisj-ht ' trades, and oirls of some refinement, aged or sick people, cripples, women -with babies to look after. &c., who dislike factory life, take work home. Male Trade Unionists in the Antipodes have always objected to female labour, being anxious to get all the wages paid in all trades into tlieir own pockets. Accordingly
' A Sho]> Assistants' League, patron- ized l)y a few political hacks, social- i.sts, and i<IIe appn>ntices, linding tliat gnvernnieiit did not care to enforce the Act, einj)loyed agents prorocalanfs (o * spot ' tradespeople selling goods aftei- 7 P.M. in the outlying sul>url)s. -wlier- evfi- thi^ niiiiiicijialities hatl lacked courage to follow the example of the Melhourne Town Council, and exercise the })0\vers of local oj)tion iinder the 45th clause. On the 23rd of August following, a groc<;r named .lohn Te- I'egrine, in tlie suburb of Prahran. was spotted ant^i linetl £i "js. for selling ' snudl (juantities of tea and soap' after 7 i'..M. The Anjus next
day commenting, in a leader, on Peregrine's conviction, said, 'this. ^ve l)elieve, is the first instance of a crime of this j)articular sort having met with retribution in any civilized community. A medal of some inex- ]>ensive substance might he struck (o commemorate this ejiocli-making event." The article wound n[) by asking, "Ai-c there any j)nblic-spi- I'ited ])eoj)h- who will subscribe to a fuiiil for the payment of these ahom- inable fines?' In a day or tv/o this ap})eal was successful, a list of sub- scribers appeared in the ]>aper, and Peregrine's line was repaid to him.
i\'.] S/aft- Socia/isfii at I he .Inlipodcs. 167
H l>(>i4;iis outcry was rai.st'<l that " tlu' sweating systonr ]>if- vailrd in tin- Mrlliouriu' l)()()t an<l cluthini,' trades, and the; politicians in 1.S82 ])ackcd a Royal ( 'oniniission to solonnly cn<|uiic into tlit> evils ot" the sweating system in a countiy where the siipply ot" well-paid labonr never aj)proachcs the demand. A Kepoi't containing various foolish and futile siiL'gfstiuns duly appeared: some of these were endjo<lied in a -Ministerial Factory VaW introduced, but dropped, in I^><S'4. In the middle of February iSiS-^ a dispute was vamped np by the Trades Hall Leaders in tbe boot trade on this very question of "giving out' piece-work. Tt lasted for fourteen weeks an<l was settlecl bv arl)itration and com])r()niise, larirelv in favour of the Trath' I'nion. In the followiuLr session the Chief Secretary, yearning to do something for 'the paper-coUar- proletariat.' introduced a nioditied Factory Bill which, in addition to so])s thrown to the Trades Hall Council, con- tainetl the Early Closing provision for the benefit of shop assistants, avIio also considered that they ought to be raised in the scale of humanity by the State. Hardly any attention was paid Ity the outside public or the shop-keeping class to the Karly Closing proposal while it was before Parliament. Victorian citizens, modest as M. Jourdaiu, arc not generally aware that they have developed such a grand institution as State Socialism. They leave such matters to politicians and geniuses. Business was not very flourishing at the end of J {^85, and small tradesmen in Melbourne, trying their best to make a living, and takinir for rfrauted that Members of the Legislative Assemblv were absorbed in their normal avocations of drawing their salaries, sqnal)bling over obscure personal matters (absolutelv uninterestimc to outsiders), and fetching and carrying for the Trades Hall Couiicil — paid little attention to the Factor}- Bill, while the one Melbourne newspaper which saw what was going to happen failed to rouse the interest of shop-keepers on tlie subject. Mendx-rs of the Legislative Council (who are elected under a more restricted franchise than Members of the Assembly and get no .salaries) insisted on tacking the principle of local control on to Early Closing when it can)e up to them and w^ould probably have rejected the clause altogether if tradesmen outside had known at first what they found out subsequi-ntly and had made some vigorous protest. The Bill quietly slipped through both Houses in Deceudjer and came into operation — after the triennial eleo-
i68 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
tions fur tliu Assembly were over— in March, itS86. Early Closing of shops got a fair trial— for a week. Tliat was quite sufficient. The powerful City Council wliich rules in Central or 'Greater' Melbourne as it is called, worthily represents many of the noble and ancient traditions of local self-govern- ment. It is independent of the politicians and the dominant class, too wealthy to require to sponge upon the Treasury and strong enough to do its duty. A few days after the ' Silly Shops Act, 1885,' came into operation the Melbourne Town Council called upon tradesmen aggrieved under its provisions to peti- tion. They were all aggrieved and they neai'ly all petitioned. The hours of closing were at once extended, and to show their appreciation of this piece of legislative folly the Town Council fixed the fines at a nominal sum. One or two of the suburban Councils quickly plucked up courage to follow the examjDle. Meanwhile tlie Early Closing Law remained in force in many districts. The results gradually developed were most remarkable and, as there was no precedent in any civilised country for a similar absurdity, unexpected. It was found that Early Closing did not operate aUke in any two districts ; even at different ends of the same street it produced quite diflerent results. It would, indeed, have been as reasonable to prescribe one uniform class, style and quality of goods for shops in all quarters of the city as to prescribe a uniform hour for ceasing to buy goods. In the fashionable parts of Melbourne, for example, the Act had no direct effect whatever, for the large shops there always closed at 5 o'clock ; the class of customers who dealt with them, living in the suburbs, all went home about that hour. It was discovered that many of the assistants in fashionalile shops kept small shops themselves in the suburbs, which practically did no business before 7 P.M. It was discovered that closing at 7 in some of the suburbs really meant, to large retail drapers and grocers, closing at 6, because all their assistants went to tea in relays at the latter hour; six to seven was in short the 'off' hour. Female servants, who in Melbourne patronise the shops extensively, began to find that they could not get out in the evening to make their purchases; by the time they had cleared away and washed up tlie dinner or tea things the shops Avere closed. A large numbei- of small retail tradesmen of course ki-pt no assistfijits. doing the whole work themselves. "Friends of Man' and Socialists had
I v.] S/afc Socialtsni at (he Anlipodci^, 169
defVuded the Early Closing' law on the plea that the down- tiodclen aswistant waiited to inipiuve his luind at night ami to attend leetuics and elasses ; hut if then^ wen' no jissistant at all in the .shop, his or her mind could hardly he improved ; still the sho}) had to close. Uusiness men, clerks, ai-ti.sans, iicc, at work all day in ^lelbourne, hepin to find out that by the time they jjjot to their homes or lodginirs iji the suburbs, had their dinner or tea and strolled out to make purchases, or even to get their hair cut, the shops were all closed. This class was obliged to lose half an hour from theii- work in the middle of the <lay to do their shopping in Central Melbourne. A vast amount of trade was therefore at once transferred from the suburbs to the shops in the centre of the town. It was discovered that a number of poor people — washer- women, dressmakers, casual workers — as a rule did not bring back work, or get paid for it, till late in the evening; when they had money wherewith to do their small shopping, they found shops closed. As the Australian winter drew^ in, the streets, unlit by the lamps in shop windows, were dismal antl deserted. The 'exempted' tradesmen^ began to find to their surprise that customers would not even deal with them when the streets were half dark ; one shop, it appears, in some way brings business to another. It had been necessarj' expressly to prohibit exempted tobacconists, chemists, &c., from selling stationery, cutlery or grocQ^ies at night, after the stationers', cutlers', and grocers" .shops were shut. !Mr. E. G. Fitz-Gibbon, the Town Clerk (jf Melbourne, stated, a few months after the Act came into operation, tliat he had received hundi-eds of letters from small suburban tradespeople complaining that they were being utterly ruined by it, and similar results were dcscribe<l in the Legislative Assembly, without contra- diction, in July i<S9C. Meanwhile the local municipal bodies one after another put the various powers given to them by the 4f)th clause into effect. A Shopkeepers' Union, (after the mischief was done.) commenced a vigorous agitation. This was met by a counter-agitaiion, comprising mass-meetings processions, rioting, breaking the windoAvs of large shops, and cowardly violence on the part of young loafers belonging to the Political Early Closing League and the Shop Assistants'
' Chemists, coffee-houses, coufee- and news-agents, were exempted tiuners. eating-houses, restaurants. under seliedule 3. greengrocers, tobacconists, booksellers
I 70 A Pica for TJiberty. [tv.
League. A great meeting of the latter had been held in the Town H"all just before the Act came into operation, at which one of the least ' serious ' members of the discredited Govern- ment of May, 1877, as well as the notorious Dr. Rose, M.L.A., and a popularity-hunting gentleman, who was just then weaning a new relisxion, made soul-ful orations. Never- theless Government hesitated to enforce the Early Closing law, almost from the first. It gradually dropped into disuse, and has long remained a dead letter in the colony. It was remarkable that some few tradesmen approved of and sup- ported it all through '. They devoutly held the socialistic doctrine that the public might be, aiid ought to be, dragooned, by a paternal Government, into shopping at certain hours ; not at the hours which suited customers but at the hours which suited indolent shopkeepers. The majority of Melbourne shop assistants, mostly young fellows born in the colony, seemed to have grasped the root principle of State Socialism thoroughly, namely that the Legislature ought to provide what Sir Charles Dilke calls a 'beautiful national existence' for them, and that it was to the State, rather than to their own exertions, that tradesmen's assistants ought to look for success, wealth, and comfort in life.
During the last twenty years professional office holders, paid leo'islators, half-educated dreamers and enthusiasts in Austra- lasia, have attempted to satisfy these new and vague longnigs ; to enact the part of a State socialistic ' stage uncle ' towards the democracy there ; but have never had sufficient thoroughness or daring to carry out socialistic or collectivist maxims and theories of govejiiment and society — maxims and theories which, at all events, are consistent, precise, and of logical obligation, if once we grant the socialist's premises. State Socialism in the Antipodes has therefore been a hybrid affair ; the tentative experiment of men who hoped to do partly, and without committing themselves too far, what thoughtful socialists and collectivists tell us they can do completely, if we will only give them a free hand. Experiments in crypto- socialism, tried upon a society at base, free, commercial, modern, Eno-lish, would lonff as-o have broken down on the
' 111 .liiuc, iSyo, tlif sul)iirl):ui iiiii- lav.-. Some 1200 snuill slio])ki'ii). rs
iiicii)ality of Hawthorn i)ftitioiied had petitioned in favour of the Bill
the Legislative Assembly to enact a of 1S85. 'nally' ciimjiulsory Early C'losini;
IV.] Sfdtc Socialism at the Antipodes. i 7 i
tiiuinciiil sidi" luul it not ln-'cii tliat the legendary repute of those lands for naliiral u.alth, such as gold, wool, a fruitful soil and a tine climate, has tempted investors in Europe to fling their mone\' at the hea«ls of Australasian liorrowcrs. j^att«'rly. as the frightful cost ami necessarily unj)roductive results of SUite Socialism became apparent to Colonial ministers, they have, to prevent a collapse of the \vhole thing, heen driven to apply for ever-recurring loans in Kinope — on false pretences. Sir( 'harles Dilke does not sei' the preti'nce, or is silent about it. The tone of his book, where State socialists and the despotic Colonial proletariat are in question, is one of deferential subserviency, sea.soned with half-genuine admiration, recalling those thir<l- rate fashionable novelists of fifty or sixty years ago, who aflectionately descril)ed the births, deaths, marriages, and occasional foibles of our ancient aristocracy. As to the money lent or the credit extended by persons in this country to Australasian governments, financial institutions, and private traders, it may perhaps some day be worth the while of a 'Council of Colonial Bond-holders' to enquire into the nature of the ' securities ' which now cover those investments. In one sense it is true that Britons have lent goods, rather than cash, to Australasian colonists, always on the implied understanding that the latter will send us back exchange- able utilities in return — as soon as the reproductive public works become productive. Public works constructed on State socialistic principles, unfortunately, never do become productive \ Australian colonists send to the foreigner fewer and fewer goods or utilities each decade ; instead, reams of pro- missory notes. Whether this system of one-sided free trade be destined to last for a long time or a short time, ceilain it is that it has alreadv wrou<dit profoun<l— but. I trust, not irre- parable — injury to colonists themselve:--. \ ictonans oi the new generation have, seemingly, come to believe that the real source of wealth is in Lombard Street, rather than in the soil and climate of their superb fatherlan<l. The subtle poison of State Socialism appears to be hui-tful to workers born in the colony especially. Their fathers roughly held that man, standing face to face with reticent Nature, is duty-bound to ask himself,
• I know that it is the private opi- vaneed by the State to local Irrigation
niun of two of tho most experienced Trusis. under the vaunted State Ini-
nieinl)ers of the late and ju-csent Vie- gatiou scheme, must he ultimately re-
toriau Ministries that tlie whole of the pudiated by the localities in question, money some £1,000,000} already ad-
172 A Plea for Liberty. [iv.
'How much is in me'? how much in my opportunities'?' and tlK'ncoibrwaitl to fight his very best to vanquish diiiiculties, perhaps in the end wrenching fame, wealth, and coml'ort from the circumstances surrounding him. Such, as we know, was the old pioneer spirit which for a while opened up a bright and noble destiny for the colony. In that kind of struggle often the pi-ize won was not so good a thing as the lessons learnt in trying to win it. State Socialism to-day in the Antipodes seems to me to preach to willing disciples the despicable gospel of shirking, laziness, mendicancy, and moral cowardice. The further consciousness among all classes there, that tri- umphant and popular State Socialism depends for its exist- ence on absorbing money from abroad, without reasonable prospect of ever being able to repay it, seems to me bad also.
Oil A K LES FaIIIFI ELIj.
THE J )L^ coy TENT OF THE WOltKING-CLASSEH.
Children in the nursery are chiddon for discontent. Imt there is a discontent of gi'own men Avliieli has in it something of the divine element. If all men -were able to satisfy con- science and ambition hv d()in<j: their duty in that state of life into which it had pleased (Jod to call the-iii. civilization would advance -with but tardy steps. It was no culpable discontent which induced George Stephenson to engage his mind upon thinirs foreitrn to his duties in the Tyneside colliery, which led the first of tin; Ilerschels to prefer the study of the stars to service in the Hanoverian Guards. In truth, there are many species of discontent. There is that which is the spur of ambition, which leads men to strive for better things, whicli causes them to rise in the social scale ; there is that which crushes them into dull and hopeless apathy; there is that which renders them prone to grumble at a fate which they do not attempt to improve by making themselves too good and too strong for it, wliich inclines them to jealousy of then* neighbours, which renders them ready to suspect that the inferiority of their position and the degradation of their sun-oundings are the results of injustice and of oppres- sion. In the discontent of the working-class all these elements are present in varying proportions. The better and more skilled workman strives to raise himself by cultivating his skill ; the unskilled labourer's discontent shows a larger measure of jealousy, albeit he too has his honest ambitions.
The discontent of the unskilled labourer is the material upon which the agitators, roughl}- described as socialists, who have been largely responsible for recent disturbances in the
I 74 A J'lca for Libcrly. [v.
labour market, exercise an increasing influence. There arises then the question Avhethcr the unskilled sections of the working- classes follow these men because they are socialists or simply ]>ocause they are useful in the struo-o-le for hifrhcr wasfes, and whether the Avorkino-class do or do not relish socialistic lesris- lation when it enters into their lives and sensibly curtails their liberties as individuals. Last comes the question wliethcr the methods adopted by the so-called socialists are of a character which can be tolerated in any -well-regulated community. And here let me say by way of preface that the word socialist is used not in a scientific sense, but to denote a class of men who call themselves socialists, Avhom other people call socialists, whom the writer, for his part, would much prefer to call professional agitators.
A survey of recent events will be useful as a foundation for a judgment upon the question whether an understanding of the theory of socialism or a desire to follow it when understood has been effectual to move men towards the ends which the so-called socialists desire to follow. In the course of the labour movements of the past fcAv years — in which the agitation among the police is not included, since the police laughed at the efforts of the social democrats to interfere in affairs outside their scope — the writer has enjoyed abundant opportunities of seeing the so-called socialists at work. They were the life and soul of the Dock Strike ; they were repulsed by the blind leaders of the blind during the Gas Works strike ; they led the men at Silvertown to their ruin ; the}^ promoted and encouraged the miserable affair at Hay's Wharf; they had a considerable share in the organisation of the Eight-hour Demonstration in Hyde Park, and they attempted to thrust themselves upon the parties to the railway dispute at Cardiff. In Scotland during the winter of 1890-1891, at Cardiff during the spring of 1891, and in London during the Omnibus Strike, the socialists were extremely busy. These movements are of considerable interest, because, through them all, the so-called socialists have pursued their aim with undeviating purpose ; yet, in spite of their pertinacity, the impression produced by them upon the sturdy common-sense, or, as they put it, the degraded selfishness, of the British Avorking-man, has been remarkably small.
The Dock Strike was, at the outset, a revolt a,gainst conditions of toil which were intolerable. In the year 1889
\ .] llic PisiOii/i'iif of Ihc ]]''orkiiio-C/asscs. i 75
the Diirctois who wt'if in iioniiiuil cduirol dl llir mass of t\\r Loiulon J)ocks I'ouikI thcmsclvos, not Ijy their own laiilts but throu^'li tlu" mistaken ])olicy ot" their prtalecessors, in a position ol" "Teat tlirticiiltv. 'I Ih'V were -wciifht'd (^^^\n 1»\' a hunh-n of ilebt iVom Nvhieh no linancial maLric couhl rrlicvc tht-m ; tiicy Avert' at the merry of their c-reilitors ; the capital vahie of their property luul been i/reatly re»hici'«l : tl»ey were in th«- position of a manufaeturer \vho, havini^ enlarged his b\iihlings and inoreased Ids ]»laiit to meet a trade which was exjx'cted to "•row. has found that tiie trade has diminished steadilN'. I'lut this was not the worst feature of theii- position. The syBtem upon which the work at the Docks was done was, and had ]>een for many years, the worst conceival>h\ The permanent start" of labourers was small: the main part of the work at the Docks was systematicallv performe<l by casual lal>ourers. There was little pickint^ or choosin<i; at the Dock Lfates ; there was no inquiry into character as a preliminary to employment ; and employmeiH. at a small r<ite of pay, it is true, but still at some rate, was almost always to be obtained. JJischarj^ed servants, convicts released from prison, agricultural labourers thrown out of Avork. nulitianien when their training was over, in brief all the mtn who. either from fault or nnsfortune, had no settled occupation, knew that at tlu; Dock gates then^ was always a fail* chance of obtaining something to do. The inevitable result followed, ^'ear after year the .stream of the reckless, the incapalde, the unfortunate men, the men who had been failures, flowed steadily towards the East End of London, and the condition of theii" lives grew worse and worse. There were more men to work than before and, if anything, less Avork required to be done ; the Avage-fund Avas spread over an increasincf number of mouths and bodies. Meanwhile the congestion of the population caused the rents of houses and of single rooms, hoAVCA'er dilapidated, to rise rather than to fall. Sanitary considerations, never held in much respect by the poor, were utterly neglected. OA^er-croAvding, squalor, poverty and immorality continued to increase without check. The AA'ages, Avhen they Avere obtained. Avere insignificant, but it is not contended here that they did not amount to an adequate remuneration for the Avork done. On the contrary, it is asserted that the work done by the average dock-labourer was barely Avorth five-pence, let alone six-pence, by the houi- to the dock-owners Avho employed him. Those who accused
I -jCi A Pica for Liberty. [v.
the (lock-owncTH of liardness of heart, because the labourers could not earn enough to support life adequately, forgot that it was the irregularity of the work rather than the inadequacy of pay for work done which caused the misery. \\\ short, there was too little work and there were too many nien to do it. The fault lay in tlio system which had encou- raged a population of men who could not earn enough to support themselves in decency to assemble and to multiply in the East End.
The result of that system was that in the summer of 1889, Burns, Mann and Tillett found in the waterside districts an undisciplined aggregation of individuals living from hand to mouth, accustomed to walk upon the verge of starvation, discontented with a lot which could not satisfy any man, passing an existence so ndserable and squalid that they had nothing to lose. It was no very difficult matter to stir this population into rebellion, and the only troublesome part of the business was to organise the mass of individuals into one body. How the Dock-labourers Union was formed, how the stevedores and the lightermen, in other Avords the skilled labourers and the monopolists, made common cause with the 'dockers,' how, eventuall}^, the members of the Joint Committee of the Docks were coerced by public opinion, based upon mere impulse and formed by amateur and uninvited mediators, into something near akin to total surrender, and into making concessions which were larger than their responsi- bilities warranted — these and like matters are foreign to the present purpose. More interesting is it to observe that the leaders of the agitation, while they were careful never to advo- cate and never even mention legislative socialism, were never- theless compelled, not only to teach, but also to enforce the first principle of communism, which may be taken to be that of equality, not natural but artificial. Trade Unionism of the new, that is to say of the militant species, succeeds by subordinating the individual to the class. The foundation upon which it rests is that the strong man shall earn no more than the weak ; and to this principle the dock-labourers, as a class, ofiered no opposition. They objected vehemently to piece-work, to that payment by results w^hich rewards the industrious and the sturdy workers, and leaves the idle and the weak to their fate : they cried out for one uniform rate for all workers. But even here there is room for doubt whether the mass of the dock-
\.] The Disiontiuf of the ll'orkiiiQ-Classes. 177
labourers accfpU-d the i)iiiici[)K' t)t" iMjualit}' 14)011 its niei-its, since the contract HyHteni has an inseparable virtue no lesH than an inseparable Jault in London and elsewhere. The Ibrt'iium. patter, or hfa<l-iiian of a j^'ang, has ahvays the opportunity of swindling his subordinates. Jle rarely loses it, and therein lies the fault of the .system: l»ut there is one point at lejist whicli is in favour of the contract system : it eneouraL,'es the eontniftor or yaffer to ehooso the most capable iiu-n, and so is eondueive to elfieieney of labour.
The coercion whicli the members of the Union used upon other labourers — and with a Lrreat deal more effect than ou^rht to have been })ermitted in a civilised community — was essen- tial to success. The idea miderlyin<,^ it was only partially socialistic, but it was the natural outcome of socialistic spirit. ' Ex luj potJio^'i ,' the leaders would say, ' the Union represents the true interests of the workers. I:<e(juitar that it is the duty of every worker to be a member of the Union. We will enforce that doctrine by preventing non-Unionists from going to work.' The whole doctrine and the manner in which it was carried out were but amplifications of the principle that the individual must be subordinated to the class; if he accepted his slavery willingly, so nnich the better for the class ; if he rebelled against it, so much the worse for him. Of intimi- dation, of the open and physical kind, some instances were detected ; but it w^as an open secret, and a fact thoroughly understood by both parties to the struggle, that much intimi- tlation existeil in concealment. Men able and willing to work were oppressed with a vague and mysterious terror that, if they worked, they would be made to rue the day. It may be answered that there was no evidence to justify this terror. The answer is that the working-men. who knew their own class, felt it; that although willing to work and spurred by hunger, fear stopped them from stepping into vacant places.
It was no matter for surprise that speaker after speaker should institute comparisons between the lot of the rich and the poor. ■ The rich man rolling in his chariot,' ' the popping of champagne corks at the Dock House' — vide the tStcw, erroneously, passhu — were naturally brought into contrast with the lot of the starving dock-labourers. Such comparisons are the weapons with which the agitator fights ; but the feeling to which these comparisons were addressed was nothing more than that vague discontent wdth existing conditions, that
178 A Plea for Liberty. [v,
desire to become rich by acquiring the property of other people, that jealous feeling of injustice which is always to be found in the lowest scale of society. At ordinary times the ashes of this jealous discontent do but smoulder ; but they are always there, and the agitator Avith his windy speech blows them to a white heat. It is a part of his regular business. Neither, if the thing be looked at dispassionately, is the permanence of this discontent a matter for wonder, nor the thing itself a mere silly feeling which can be argued away. The lot of him who is born in the lowest scale of society is hard ; it is easier to persuade him that he has been defrauded of his opportunities, than to convince him that he has missed them ; to those who would fain reason witli him, speaking of ' Laws ' of political economy, of supply and demand, and so forth, he answers that he knows no laws save those which man, who made them, can alter. The ignorance of the people, the readiness with which they accept statements and arguments of glaring absurdity, renders them an easy prey to the agitator. The agitator cries out for education. He may be well-assured that in proportion to the knowledge of a man are his desire and determination to work out his owoi destinies, to argue rather than to hght, and that if culture ever does obtain a firm hold upon the working-classes of Enirland, the result will be diminution in the number of strikes, increase and improvement of proht-sharing schemes, and the extinction of the agitator's craft. Among the better class of the working-men the agitator is even now a nonentity.
It has always seemed to me that the things which an agitator leaves unsaid, his judicious omissions, so to speak, are not less important than his spoken words. Rarely indeed in the days of the Dock Strike did Mr. Burns or any of his lieutenants allude to the possibility of legislative interference between labour and capital. Never, while they Avere agitating amongst men paid by the hour did they suo-o-est a limitation of the hours of labour. From time to time Mr. Burns would deliver himself of a tiery exhortation to the people, would allude, almost in the words of a recent preacher of note, to the 'carnal, low-lying marshes of sen- ^iuality' in which they lived, would speak to them hopefully of the millennium in which they would have more leisure for improvement of themselves so that they might be better
\-.] The Dtsconlcnt of the ]\\irk'ui!r-Clasiscs . i 79
husljiuuls, Itettcr parents, IilIIit eiti/tiis. l^ui Mr. iJiuns au»l his satellites wen- veiyNVfll nware that the h(>iie whieh hiioyed Up the people was that of obtaiiiin<^ more money, and that mere love of socialistic theories went for nothinic ; so Mr. Burns nn<l his frirnds matle a s]i(>eies of conq)r()niise, and salved their s^leiali^lic consciences l>v lUifinj/ that the Innirs of work to be paid for at ordinary rates should be few, and the hours of work to be paid at extra rates shoulil be many. (Jiveii a Certain (|uantity of work to be done ami a linuted niimbi'i" of men to do it. in proportion to the shoilness of ordinary hours and to the nuudier of ' over-time ' hours, will bo the increase in the waij^es of the earner. With refjard to other socialistic measures, prqjecte<l and effected, it will be con- venient to speak later; it will be enoui^h to say here that, durinix the Dock Strike, it would have l»een in the last dei^rce imprudent to enunciate the principles of an Eight-hours l^ill. Your casual labourer at sixpence an hour would like the legitimate day to bo as short as might lie. and the overtime, at eight-pence, to be long : but the jtrinciple of the Eight- hour movement eliminates overtime altogether: to advocacy of that purely socialistic principle a mixed crowd in Hyde Park will li.sten ; but the moment it is seriously threatened numerous sections of the working-classes, as the Tradt.^ Union Congress showed, are up in arms. A very recent incident in the history of the Dock Labourers' Union shows how little the dock labourers realise the principles of socialism. The socialists helped the dock labourers to victory in August of i88y. Twelve months later the socialist leaders, under com- pulsion from below, announced that for the future a<Jmittance to the Union would be rendered more difficult. In short, they attempted to create a monopoly of work in the London Docks for the ^2,400 London members of the L^nion. I pass Ity the attempts made by Mr. Mami before the Lal.iour Commission to explain this resolution away. ^Ir. Mann is no doubt literally accurate in saving that his books of the Union were never absolutely closed. )iut in his candid moods, and they are not rare, he would be the lirst to admit that the leading desire of the average working-man is to establish a monopoly and the lirst to protest that the desii'e in question is diametrically opposed to the socialistic principle.
The gas- workers" affair, in which the London socialists were not aUowed to play any part, was never a strike in any accu-
N 2
i8o A Pica for Liberty. [v,
rate sense of the word, for the simple reason that the would-be strikers were replaced wnthout much difficulty. The ener- getic policy of Mr. George Livesey converted men wdio said they Averc out on strike into men who were out of employ- ment, and all the talk of the necessity of arbitration or the possibility of it, all the well-meaning efforts of cardinals and ministers to interfere in the matter, w^ere entirely futile. There was nothing to arbitrate about, no mediation was possible ; the outgoing men were men who had been gas-stokers, who knew how to charge a retort or to stoke a furnace, and that was all. Their best chance of becoming gas-stokers again was to seek employment elsewhere. It is necessary to impress this point, although it is foreign to the immediate purpose of this paper, because Mr. Livesey has been much misrepresented. He has been spoken of as a merciless man who would not 3'ield an iota, whereas in fact he was a merci- ful man, r.lbeit strong of purpose, who having at last accepted a challenge to fight, took without a moment's delay such measures that, wdiile victory was certain, retreat was im- possible. The Avorld did not know at the time what the series of provocations had been ; it did not know that con- cession after concession had been followed by demand after demand, that the men, acting upon the orders issued by the executive of a Union, wdiich was and is by the confession of the secretary (see the January, 1890, number of jT/ru^) purely militant, had embarked upon a policy of aggression ; that they w^ere asking for more than was reasonable. It has learned this now^ It must also be well aAvare that the objection of the leaders of the Union to the profit-sharing scheme, which is now admitted to have been in the men's interests, was due not to any suspicion that it would be w^orked unfairly, but to a kiujwdedge that it must have the effect of (diecking the jiolicy of restless importunity upon which the ex- istence of the Union and their prosperity as leaders depended. But it is said that Mr. Livesey openly stated his intention of crushing the Union and of destroying the men's right of com- bination. As a matter of fact, Mr. Livesey made no such state- ment, but there is not a particle of doubt that he did mean to take a ccjurse that woukl result i]icidentally, l)ut none the less inevitably, in the destruction of the Union, and that from the public poiut of view he would have been entirely justified in ainung to crush the particular Union to w^hicli
v.] The Pi scout cut of the Jfoj-hiuQ-C/asses. iSi
he was o|)[>()si'<l. He saw. li<' must have seen, that this (!as-\\'(iiktis' ami ( ifncrul Lal»t)ii!"(rs' I'liioii was pur.-Iy aii<l un(lis''uisocllv a oonliscatnrv oiicjino in cvcrN thini; but nauK*. Tin- ditll'ronce bi'twoon it ami tlu^ estaldislu'd rnions may lie easily stated. The oMcr Unions, presided over hy men havin'j: some knowledLro of i)olitioal eeonomv and of tlie eon- ditiftns of trade, have a defini-d policy. They desire, when it is pos.si))le, to improve the position of the workin^j-man ; in times of eonmn'rcial prosperity they will insi.st, using his obedience to them as a Aveapon, that he shall have what they consider his fair share of that prosperity; in times of com- mercial depression they will helj) him and, in effect, they perform many of the functions of a friendly society. Ad- mission to such I'nions is a pi-ivile<ro not lightly to be obtained. This policy is stigmati.sed as degenerate by the secretary of the new l^nion. His policy and that of his Union is that of the daughter of the horse-leech ; it is a policy of continual importunity. The new Union cares not whether men are ill or well paid ; it is ever ready with a fresh demand. Concession does but whet its appetite; it claims for labour the whole of the profits made by laboui- and capital com))ined ; it aims to be the absolute dictator of the conditions of toil, to say wdio shall work and how much each shall receive. And this, be it observed, was the Union which grew from that which Burns, Tillett, and Mann created. Its development in the direction of gi'eed shows how little the socialist's rose-coloured view of human nature applies to the dailylives of men, whetherthey be employers orcmployed. This was the Union which Mr. Livesey aimed to crush, and it is here deliberately said that the endeavour so far as it suc- ceeded— and it did succeed to the extent of setting the South ^[etropolitan Gas Com])any free — was entirely to be justified. The public were largely interested in the result of the conflict, inasmuch as the position of the Gas Company was such that its shareholders could not entirely lose their money, until the increase in the cost of labour was such that men ceased to con- sume gas. Mr. Livesey therefore was a trustee, and the public were his ce.>t iii^-g ue-t rv st'' nf. He had a duty towards his men, a duty to see that they were reasonably paid ; but he was under an obligation no less paramount to see that the public was not imposed upon, as it would have been if a firm fiont had ]iot been shown to the Union. The Union wouM have
1 82 A Plea for Liberty. [v.
coerced him, if it had been able to do so, into complete neglect of the obligatioii to the public.
Let a word or two be added about recent strikes. I had the good forttnie to l)e a spectator of the last strike at Cardiff, of the .Scotch Eaihs'a\' Strike, and of the London Omnibus Strike. The first-named was merely an unblushing attempt to establish a monopoly for Unionists. In the Scotch Strike Mr. Burns constantly preached pure Socialism, but the im- pression left on the minds of those who watched the orator and his audience, was that the Socialistic appeal was addressed to deaf ears, that the canny railway workers of Scotland accepted Socialistic perorations as part of the orator's stock- in-trade, that their object was neither more nor less than to obtain a reduction of hours without a corresponding reduction of wages. The case of the omnibus di'ivers was similar. The3% like other bodies of modern strikers, saw in Burns, jVLann, Tillett, and the rest of them, useful tools for the then present purpose. The notion that the Socialist leaders could teach them anything, except the best means of obtaining better wages and of winning the struggle upon which they were eno'ao-ed. never so much as entered their minds.
Meanwhile, it is to be observed that, wherever the working;- classes are broui-'ht into contact with leo-islative socialism as an actual fact, they invariably rebel. The greater part of the socialistic statutes of recent times are simply hateful to the people whom they were intended to Vjenefit. Official enforce- ment of cleanliness, of sanitary regulations and such matters, is attended with the greatest difficulty as the promoters of ' model dwellings ' have found to their cost, because there are no people in this world more sensitive than the working- classes of this country to encroachments, real or fancied, upon their liberty. The proverbial saj^ing that the Englishman's house is his castle does but emphasize the fact that there is nothing more hateful to the averaije Enoiishman than inter- ference. He loathes the inspector and the ofiicial, but the inspector and the official are the inseparable accidents of the socialistic community, and every socialistic measure which is passed into law brings into birth new officials and new inspectors not only of houses but of persons. It is idle for Parliament to enact that chiklreii shall be vaccinated, that children shall be educated, that children shall not be set to work while they are of tender age, to formulate rules sup-
v.] The Pisioufcnf of the ll'orhiiiQ-C/asscs. 18.^
poscil Li) proscrilio tlic niiniimini nuiuliL'r ol' c.uliic I'ecL (j1" air uHuwcmI to eacli person in a house, tlio miniimim of sanitiuy convenii-uci's an<l so Ibrtli. uiilf'>s I'ailiaiiicnt also sends somebody to see whether any attention is paid to its comnmnds. Yet the pcopli^ who arc despatched u[)on these errands are uiuversally detested ; indeed, it is not more un- pleasant to 1)1' a tax-collector than an inspector ot" nuisances. It is only after socialist measures become law, or when they thicaten the interest of an intelligent class, that those whom they artect realise the position. ( )f this an excellent example ha3 lately been atibrded. The late Archbishop of York recently introduced a Bill atlecting the liberty of the working-class with regard to the insurance of their children on the ground that in some instances the liberty was abused. His proposal, received much support from the press and the sentimental public, but it created such a storm of indignation among the working-class that the Bill was finall}' withdrawn during the last session of Parliament. Again, not many months have passed since a meeting in support of the Eight-hours Movement attracted a huge crowd of more or less enthusiastic persons to Hyde Park. There need bo no hesitation in saying that the measure contemplated by the promoters of that meeting would, if it ever became law, involve the greatest possible amount of interfei-ence with the liljerty of the working-man and his freedom of contract. There are twenty-four hours in the day; it is proposed, to put the matter plainly, that no working-man should be allowed to sell to his employer more than eight hours of those twenty-four ; that the re- maining sixteen hours must be spent in compulsory idleness, or as the enthusiast would put it, in cultivated leisure. It is the firm opinion of the \NTiter that if that measure ever became a part of the law. it would, within a year, be held so intolerable bv the workinic-classes that Parliament would be compelled either to depart from the practice of centuries ami eat its own words by an immediate Act of repeal, or to stand l)y and see its orders ignored. The textile trades have found this out, but great numbers of the people support this utterly despotic movement now and will, very likely, continue to support it until they find themselves writhing under the pressure of a law which they have themselves helped to create. For the present, they are reminded that the hours of toil are long ; they are frightened with i'.llo
1 84 A Plea for Liberty. [v.
tales to the effect that their lives are shortened by excessive toil, whereas in truth the working-man's day is not nearly so long as that of the busy la'wyer, or the journalist, the doctor, or the active clergyman. But they are not told, and all but the more intelligent omit to remember for themselves, that in a world w^hich is hard and practical, a world in Avdiich buyers, whether of work or of things manufactured, will give that w^hich the thino: l^ouo-ht is worth to them and no more, a diminution of the hours of labour, unless indeed the present custom of this or that trade prescribes hours of labour so excessive as to impair a man's capacity for work, involves an inevitable diminution of the earnings of labour. Nor will they realise this until it comes home to them in the shape of bitter experience.
In conclusion upon this head let the opinions set forth in the foregoing words be summarised. The working-classes, especially the lowest among them, the men who have least to lose and most to gain, are not averse to the confiscatorv side of socialism ; nay, finding that socialism at the outset does tend to improve their position, they will honestly and in good faith proclaim themselves socialists. They would be glad to earn more and to work less. So would every man upon whom the curse of Adam has fallen : and the vision which is presented to them is that of a golden age, in which the least possible amount of work shall be rewarded with the greatest possible amount of pay. On the other hand, the}' bitterly resent all laws which are socialistic in their tendencies, that is to say, all laws wdiich interfere with their individual liberties ; but the pity of it is, that they rarely perceive the socialistic tendencies of a projected measure and the menace to their liberties wdiich it involves until they feel its pressure. Then, and not before, they appreciate the fable of the Stork. Moreover, as soon as their accidental alliance with socialists has had the effect of raising their wages, they desert Socialism altogether.
There is nothing in the nature of constant war Ijetween capital and labour, but there are — and there is no sort of use in shutting one's eyes to the truth — frequent battles. It is urged in this connection that the ends of the State are best served when the field of those encounters is most narrowly confined, when men are left alone to fight their own battles. If, to take a recent example, wdien the proprietors of Hay's AVharf are at daggers drawn' with their men, all the carmen
\.] The Pistoiid'fif of the ll'orhiii<^-C/asscs. 185
ami all llif tlotrk-hiKourei'S, stevedores, liLrhteruuii, ami coal- jtorters of JjOiulon, iiiake coiiinion cause with the iiii'ii ol" Hay's Wharf, there ean he hut one result. Masters unite, antl wcjrk- iiiLC-iiien li-arn that tluir maxim ' ruion is streiirjth ' is of uni- versal application. Jf th<' workinjjj-nu'n of tlie kin^^dom or of the worUi are to form tliemselves into one aLfi^ressivo hotly, it is almost a matter of necessity that employers in their turn shouM he (liivm into imited action for defensive pur])0ses. The n-sults of collision hetween hodics so larjj^e must he seri- ous ; even now strikes in which men are supported, not only by the money, but also by the threats of outsiders, in which masters are encouraged by men engaged in kindred enterprises to stitil'U their backs, an^ carried to such a l(nL!;th as tf) be productive of incalculable loss and to strain jniblic patience almost l)eyond endurance. In proportion to the increase of the strength of the Union of Unions, and to the corresponding development, in spite of diversities of interest, of the spirit of unity among masters, is our approach to that state of warfare bt'tween capital an<l labour in which industry and connuerce must necessarily languish and the public peace must, almost inevitably, be broken more and more often. The writer, for his part, having no confidence in the nuMlicinal art of the statesman, and having a due regard for the I'act that parliamentary efforts to deal with questions involving the relations between capital and labour have failed almost without exception, ventures to think that the Labour Commission which, after sitting for some months has sticcecded in discovering a num- ber of familiar facts and none which were nut familiar, a number of crude opinions and none which were based upon thoughtful reflection, will end, if indeed it ever ends, in futility. It is. however, the teaching of Social Science that of all these evils, good will, after much suffering and tribula- tion, surely come. Let anything approaching to a general strug- gle between capital and labour once be fought out, and the results will not be dissimilar to that of the Franco-German War. The loss and the pain to both sides will be so gi'eat. whole dis- tricts and provinces will be so impoverished, that without tlie sanction of Parliaments and without the help of Governments, men and masters will combine to establish institutions, calling them Tribunals. Boards, or Committees, and to provide for them such an efficient sanction as shall make their awards cer- tain of ettect and render impossible future conflicts of etjual
I $6 A Pica for Libci'ty. [v.
magnitude. lu short, although there are clouds iu the sky now, there is room for hope. There is no danger that the Armaged- don of capital and labour will be fought ; but there is almost a certainty that the sharp contiict all along the line is not yet over. From it labour will emerge convinced that, on the whole, without capital, it is helpless, and capital with the knowledge, Avhieh indeed it possesses already, that labour is not to be tram- pled upon lightly. Of anything approaching to confiscatory socialism there is no real danger, for two reasons. Man is not by nature socialistic. He will, as a plain matter of fact, continue to love himself better than his neighbour, to seek in the first place his own advantage. Moreover, those who have some of this world's wealth, and those who are, or deem them- selves, a little stronger, a little more skilful, a little more clever than the average of their fellows, are the greater number of mankind. To such men, to every man Avho has an3'thing to lose, to him Avho feels the dignity of honest work, to him who loves freedom, to him who hopes to raise himself, the idea of socialism, as a practical thing, is altogether odious. Such men feel that to surrender their liberty of action, to resign themselves to living upon one dead level, to lay aside hope and ambition, would be to relinquish their humanity. They will not do so, and, if they would, they cannot ; for a man can only rid himself of the individual spring of action, as he can relieve himself of his shadow, by going forth into outer darkness.
Edmund Vincent.
\I.
IXVESTMEyT.
It is a coinmon])laco of tho oMcr ])()litifal oconoinists tliat capital is the result of abstinence fi-om coiisinnption. Hut an important process of civilisation does not so readily lend itself to definition in a hrief sentence. Investment, that is the con- version of revenue into capital, is itself a form of consumption. It naturally implies ab^tinence from other ami more obvious forms of consumption. Thus by means of the process of in- vestment a man consumes a pait of his revenue in acquiring, not food which is obviously perishable, but a machine or an improvement of his land, objects which arc less obviously perishable. But the advantage thus acquired is by no means permanent, for a machine wears out and land loses its heart, and the usefulness of the expenditure, to which the name of capital has been given, disappears unless fresh doses of capital are from time to time administered. There is no such thiuLT as permanence in human affairs ; there are only degrees in the rapidity with which things are consumed.
Thes(^ considerations, though familiar enough, are of im- portance in view of the socialist projiosal for the nationalisation or socialisation of all forms of capital. We intend, therefore, to examine the operation of investment, or, as we may term it, the application of revenue to this less rapid form of consump- tion. The most enthusiastic socialist does not deny the use- fulness of capital. His grievance is the jir/catr usefulness of capital. It is not disputed that capital makes labour a thou- sandfold more productive, that mere human labour is in itself weak, that it only beconies powerful when allied with the mechanism of the inventive arts. This alliance is effected by capital, and results in an accelerated and increased production
t88 a Plea for Liberty. [vi.
of wealth. So far there is no ilifference of opinion. The socialist, how»*vei\ argues that capital should belong to nmnkind at large, to the nation, to the municipality, to a pul)He body or bodies, and not on any account to a privates capitalist. We, on the other hand, argue that capital should belong to him who has earned it, that he alone can make the best use of it, and that he alone should suffer if it is allowed to disappear in ill-considered ventures, or to waste away more rapidly than is necessar}' fur want of due leparation and care ; further, that the right of be(}uest and inheritance is at once the most economical as well as the most equitable method for the devolution of property from one generation to another ; and that the socialist ideal of the universal usefulness of capital, whicli is our ideal also, can be reached by an ever-widening extension of private ownership and by that means only.
The regime under which we live makes considerable expe- riment in both these theories of the tenure of capital. There are tendencies working in both directions, and the question, as far as it is a practical one, is — To which side should a wise man lend his intlueuce 'I Reasonable men in both camps are averse to revolutionary methods, and are agreed that change must be gradual.
An examination of the principles underlying these experi- ments in investment will afford matter for the consideration of those whose minds are still open to conviction.
I. There is a vast amount of capital invested and being in- vested under government and municipal control. The post- oflice, telegraphs, roads, sewers, and in many instances gas, water, docks, and a variety of other undertakings, are carried on by capital under State control.
II. Other enterprises are carried on by private capital under a State-granted monopoly : e. g. railways, canals, liquor trafhc, gas and water, when supplied by a private company, electric lighting, telephones, and, if we include those industries which are more or less under Government regulation, such as shipping, insurance, banking, and joint-stock enterprise generally, we might verv lar^iely extend our list.
III. Capital is invested privately by private persons in private enterprise.
With regard to this last division, it is necessary to remark that even here freedom of action is much less than is generally
VI.] Investment, 189
Hupj)o.se«l. It is impossihk' t(t druw tlu" line with any [ui-- cision bc'twc'on piivato ciii)ilal (•(jiitiulloil liy the .Statt; and capital whicli is I'lfrly ciiipKtyril. AI)s()hitL']y free oinploy- mout ut" cai»ital uiu'ncunihfn'tl liy ollicicms prot('cti(Hi docs not exist, rraciifaily this statement may apjx-ar trivial, but from a philosophical point ot" view it has an importance ■Nvhich warrants a passing remark in explanation of our meanin<T.
The enl'orcement ot" mercantile and other contract, the Ciovernment cnlbrcoment of settlements of land and personal property, its protection of endowments, its suppoit of con- tracts lastini^ more than a generation, in .some cases lor a whole century, all these, intended as they are for the protec- tion of propert}', act in restraint of the liberty of each j)assing generation in this matter of investment. We are not arguing in favour of a repudiation of conti-actn. On the contrary, though it may appear paradoxical to say so, wo have a sus- })icion that contracts are observed with more regularity when their observance is not a matter enforceable at law. Even in the present state of society it is not ditlicult to adduce in- stances of this. Any one acf|uainted with business knows that in every trade a vast amount of business is done on terms which are not coijni.sable at law.
It is notorious that a large amount of property is held by Roman Catholic trustees on secret trusts which the law does not recognise. We have never heard that such trusts arc imperfectly carried out.
The mere pressure of necessity has been sufficient to uphold the desert law" of hospitality.
Again, there are probably no debts more regularly paid than gambling debts, debts of honour as they are called, and that by a class of men who arc not abnormally sensitive to moral considerations. Indeed the ' plunger ' has little scruple in cheating his money-lender and his tradesman, but as a rule he pays his bets.
Lnder the present system, inconvenience has without doubt arisen from too indiscriminate an enforcement of the so-called rights of property ; from legislation which attempts to conserve to a man the administration of his foi-tune after his death ; which permits a pious foundoi- to stamp his educational ideals on future generations, or to endow the professional mendiciint for all time ; which enables a man to attach his jiersonal
IQO A Plea for Liberty. [vi.
debts to laud which he has once owned, and so impede that ex- changeability of property which is so essential to its value. We suffer also from the fact that dishonest men are able to defy and evade the law, and the injured, knowing the law's delay, feel helpless. These remarks are made with a view of showing that a superstitious respect for laws which guarantee to owners too extended an authority over their property is by no means a tenet in our creed. On the contrary, we believe that under a more open system human ingenuity could ulti- mately devise better guarantees for appropriate so'cial conduct with regard to property than at present exist, for by the cumbrous procedure of the law-court only the minimum of right conduct can be enforced, and yet men presume on its guarantee and enter into contracts with men of inferior character, because they think that, if necessary, they can enforce their contract. We hardly appreciate how much our own honesty depends on the exercise of reasonable vigilance by our neighbours. Under an open system more circumspec- tion would be necessary before making a contract ; there w^ould be room also for a fuller development of trade, ar- bitration, and protection societies, those equitable Judge Lynches of mercantile life, and as a result a very great com- mei-cial value w^ould be added to a well-earned reputation for honourable character. All these considerations would jilay a part in creating a weight of custom and opinion suffi- cient to enforce the due observance of engagements. Such a force is, we believe, ready gradually to take the place of legal compulsion, if by general consent the mechanical re- sponsibilit}- of the law was allowed to become a diminishing quantity.
_ It cannot be denied that those who seek to uphold the rights of property are under some disadvantage, because of the difficulty of identifying the rights of property Avhich are necessary and beneficial. The right of property in slaves is no longer recognised, the right of indelinite settlement is curtailed, copyright and patentright^ forms of property peculiar to a modern phase of civilisation, are limited to an arbitrai-y tei'm of years. Are w^e quite sure that the present legal definition of property and its rights is adequate and final ? It is not reasonable to think so. The rights of pro- ]xu-ty are those which the mutual i'orbearance of the membei-s of society finds convenient and indispensable. It cannot be
VI.] Investment. 191
said that those can hi' iinoiTinj,'ly idt-ntifitil hy hiNvs which are for the most j)art the result of class lefjjislatioii. The eompletf rehahilitation of respect for the rij^hts of property, which seem to some to he at present in dantjer, refpiires Vol until I'll an<l u iiirfrsdl refo«fnition of tiie necessity of propeitv. and it miglit seem loL,Meal to ariijaie that this recognition Avill only be given when tlie priiiii])le of ntjn- intervention hy the State is nuich moic widely acce|)ted than it at present is in any existing organisation (jf society, and this indeed is the view of j)hiloso]»hical anarchists like Mr. Benjamin Tucker of Boston. U.S.A. Ikit owners of property, who after all are the majority of the nation, are not at all (lisposed to dispense all at once with the advantage of legal })rotection for their rights ; and with the advantage, the value of which they perhaps exaggerate, they must also have the disadvantage. The disadvantage is that a certain suspicion is thrown on the whole institution of pi-ivate ])roperty by reason of the otticious protection given to it by the law, and because it has before now been detected in supporting rights which w^ere contrary to public morality and pubhc policy. This admission does not imply any doubt in our mind as to the justice and necessity of the institution of private property, but it seems to us to explain the plausil^le nature of the socialistic attack on a most useful and beneficent aiTangement which, as far as experience at present goes, has never been dispensed with in any civilised connuunity.
It is. however, only fair to admit that those who have a leaning towards the doctrine of a philoso})hic anarchy, but who, as opportunists and practical men of the world, ask for slow and gradual advance, should not complain too loudly because private warfare by means of legislative enactment has succeeded to private warfare by force of arms, and because though the weapons are changed the spirit of war is still present. We may resist the attack, indeed it is our duty to do so. We can also look forward to the anarchical millennium when parliamentary obstruction and the organisation of harasse«l industries and rate-payers protection societies have rendered the legislative brigandage of party politics impo.ssible. The neceseit}- of mutual forbearance which has induced men to forego the practice of private warfare may some day induce them to forego the practice of legislative warfare. It is uuwnse of enthusiasts to insist too much on ideals which
192 A Plea for Liberty. [vi.
are apt to bring ridicule on thtdr caiiisc. In real life wc are concerned "vvith tendencies. These ar(! coloured no doubt by the ideals wliich we allow ourselves to cherish, but it is sheer madness and. contrary to the evolutionary theory on which our whole argument rests, to ask for a full and immediate application of princij^les which require centuries for their development.
We desire to see each generation enjoy to the full the whole resources of the country unfettered by the will of dead gener- ations and by restrictions of the State placed on the free circu- lation of capital. Progress lies in that direction, for in. an atmo- sphere of liberty human character has an adaptability which •will prove equal to all occasions. And in a state of civilisation one aspect of this adaptation of character consists in what has been well called the socialisation of the will. The socialist looks for an automatic performance of social duties under the compulsion of a force ah extra. We, on the contrary, contend that individual wills which have not learnt the adaptations taught by self-control, will set such compulsion at defiance, and that the desired result can only come from the impulsion of a force ah intra. This consists in the character saturated with the motives of the free life, and in the conviction, realised by experience, sanctioiied by free choice and made instinctive by custom, that the free interchange of mutual service and mutual forbearance is the beneficent and yet attainable principle on which the well-being of society de- pends. If we believe the improvement of human character to be the true line of progress, we cannot afford to neglect these considerations, for they contain some of the most potent factors which make for the endowment of ajDpropriate social conduct. > .
To return from this digression to our subject — we may shortly sum up the forms of investment under three heads :
(i) State investment.
(2) Private investment under a State-given monopoly.
(3) Private investment which, subject to the foregoing remarks, may be popularly described as free.
We premise that the consumption or deterioration of capital may proceed from various causes. It may be in the nature of things. Thus the value of manure will be exhausted by lapse <jf time, a valuable macliine will after a time wear out. An arbitrary alteration of fashion or demand will render souie
VI.] Invcstvunt. 193
aiJparatus usi'lt-ss. Siieli u (IcU'iioration is a iiiisl'oi-tuno, <jut of whifli iu> t'onn of invt-istinent ciui (.•iitircly contract itself.
Again, deteiioratiou of capital is caiistMl l»y now invontictns. Tims capital invfstcd in stai^e coaches has vanished away, hfcause of the suix-iior couvcnit-ncL' of railway tiav<'llin<^ ; and every one itt his own experience knowa how machinery becomes antiquated, depreciat<.'d in value, and at length supei-seded by now machinery. Such process of improvement brings with it a distinct a<lvantai;e to the community.
Now how is this (question of deterioration affected by the nature of the tenure of capital ? Let us take a variety of instances.
One of the most usual forms of a State investment of capital is in a wju\ Our judgment as to the wisdom or otherwise of such expenditure will depend on our view of the justice and necessity of the war, a point which, f(jr our present purpose, we may leave <»ut of sight. Obviously private enterprise could not conduct a war for us. Whether the existence every- where of bodies who are able to carr}" on war for us is an advantage or not is another question which we need not here consider. We accept under present cu-cumstances the occa- sional necessity of war. Now expenditure on war can be provided out of current revenue ; it is then consumed like our food supplies, and there is an end of the matter. If however the war takes dimensions too large to be paid for out of current revenue, a charge is made on the revenue of the future, and a loan is created. As a matter of fact our national debt is mainly due to our great wars. In the event of a successful war, additional national prestige is gained by means of an investment guaranteed by authority, but there are no tangible assets to represent the investment : it is just as much consumed as if it had all been paid out of revenue. Now the loan is a permanent charge, as long as the nation exists or till it is paid off. It represents perhaps a reasonable expenditure, and we do not Avish to criticise adversely the conduct of our forefathers in creating these loans. It is however necessary to compare this form of capitalisation with the capitalisation of a private man who can only derive interest and profit from his invest- ment so long as it represents some present utility to his feDow- men. When this utility ceases, even the principal vanishes away. Pitt s wars, and shall we say the old service of mail coaches, were both necessary and useful in their day. Pitt's
o
194 A Plea for Liberty. [vi.
capitalisation was under the guarantee of Government, and we are still liable for it, principal and interest. ]\rail coaches, their owners and the capital and interest involved, have; long since disappeared without injustice to any one, and leaving no burden on the present generation.
As patriots we may not grudge the liabihty with which the heaven-sent minister has saddled us ; but when we come to consider the application of private men's revenue, under the name of taxes, to payment of interest on State undertakings less important than the maintenance of our national existence, we are at liberty, without fear of being accused of want of patriotism, to look closely into the assets which represent our money. To do this we ought to have accurate and intelligible accounts. Of our imperial expenditure we know something mainly from commissions appointed from time to time to consider the inefficiency of our spending departments. But with regard to our local expenditure and indebtedness we have little or no information. It is stated in every elementary handbook on Local Government 'that there are difficulties amounting to impossibility in the way of accurately ascer- taining from published returns the present total amounts of local taxation and expenditure^.' The same authority tells us that the returns are much in arrear or made up to different dates. Comparison is only conjectural, as the same local authorities perform different functions in different localities, and the overlapping of authorities is quite chaotic. Further, ' the capital expenditure on sewerage, on streets, on gas-works, and on water-supply, is not distinguished from the ordinary expenses of maintenance ; ' and again, ' imperial subventions appearing in the returns of any one year have been made in respect of the expenditure of the past year or years.' Chaos is a mild term for such a system of book-keeping.
Now this inability to value its assets is inherent in a monopoly. These monopolies represent absolute necessities of life, and whether the service be good or bad, the public has to put up with it. Competition is excluded, and the mono- polist can value at any price he pleases. The service of the Post-Office, for instance, is alleged by Mr. Henniker Heat(m to be inadequate. He conducts an agitation in Parliament ; the monopolist yields to noise, reduces his terms, and charges the
^ 'Local Administration' by Messrs. perial Parliament Scries, bv S. Bux- Eathbone, Pell ami Montague. Ini- ton, M.P.
u.]
Inz'cs/mciif. 195
(k'ticit to tin- coiiiinunitv at lur«,'('. Tin- most pcrffct svstoin of Hccoinit-kfrpini; l»y n State-tnulin^ in(iiioj)oly eun iiovci- lie satisliictory. lor. i\r /i>//H>t/ic>ii\ it has t'iiti'n'<l into a conspirat-y to prntrot its capital from (IctiM-ioratinii l>y proliiUitiiiL,' coiii- pt'lition. in tlu^ open nuukut, wlieit' tlu'ic is no iiKjiiopoiy, tlu'iL' is a i^aadnal dotorioration of capital by reason of the iniprovenients nmilf Iiy iiriohliunrs. A (lailisinaii must it- pliicc liis machinery liy improved marliinery or see his anliipiated apparatus «,Madually lieeome valueless. His atten- tion is kept lixed to this point l)y the sif(ht of custom goin;^ in other channels. No owner will aj^ree to acknowled«4;e the deteriorated value of his plant unless ho is obliged to do so. Hence Oovernment monopolies are very slow to adopt improvements. Each ulHcial is unwilling to admit the weaknesses of his own system, nor will he readily disendow his own knowledge and labour by accepting improvements which will oldiofe him to actiuire j'resh knowledije and which will render Ins present services antiquated. Competition compels private tradesmen to improve their Avays. In a monopoly there is no such force making for progix'ss, unless we so term the blind sentimental agitation which is now assailing the Post-Ottice in favour of an Anglo-Saxon penny post.
It is not easy to estimate the loss of the community through Government monopoly; at best it is only a calculation of what might have been, if private enterprise had not been stitled.
We can give one or two slight but suggestive instances. There ai'e still Government offices where all letters are copied by hand and where none of the mechanical processes w^hich give an exact facsimile of the letter copied are admitted. The rest of the clerical work of the establishment is presumably conducted in the same way. This does not of course prevent them from hiinng a man in from the street to copy a con- fidential document, as in the celebrated Foreign Office case.
Again, Mr. Stanley Jevons gives a curious instance of the slowness of Government to adopt improvement from the history of the Mint. In his treatise on Money ', he states that the present ^lint is quite inadequate for meeting the demands thrown upon it. 'What should we think.' he asks, ' of a cotton- spinning company which should propose to use a mill and ^ Sth Edition, 18S7, p. 120: the preface is dated 1875.
O 2
igG A Pica for Libcrly. [vi.
inacbinory originall}' constructed by Arkwriglit, or to drive a mill bv ono-inos turned out of tbe Soho works in the time of Boulton and Watt'^ Yet the nation still depends for its coinage upon the presses actually erected by Boulton and Watt, although much more convenient presses have since been invented andi employed in foreign and colonial mints.'
In such a case one is able to detect the inade(juacy by means of a comparison with other countries, but in the great majority of instances it is only possilde to conjecture the loss sustained by the coramunitj^ by the absence of that com- petition which forces owners to increase the public utility of their property if they wish to maintain its value.
Nor does the State trader escape from the difficulties which beset his career when he displays enterprise, as the rate- payers of such towns as Bristol and Preston might realise if they took any interest in the matter.
The Bristol Docks account shows that for the year ending- April 30, 1 890, the Corporation incurred ' a total loss on work- ing Dock Estate and City Quays combined ' of £\ <S,9i ] 46', 5'/.^ This deficiency has to be made up by a rate in aid levied on the borough and city of Bristol, and accordingly ^'20,360 was last year taken from the rate-payers. The result is that part of the expense of the shipping trade at Bristol is every year paid by the rate-payers, a large number of whom derive absolutely no benefit therefrom. We talk with some complacency of the folly of French sugar bounties and of McKinley tariffs, but the facts above given point to a state of affairs even more egregious and unjust. Either the shipping of Bristol is a decaying industry, and ought not to be bolstered up by subsidies from people living in the suburbs of Clifton, or (and this is the more probable alternative) a Corporation, even as respectable as that of Bristol, is an unsuitable body to have charge of such enterprise. In any case the money of the rate-payers is being improperly applied.
The following particulars with regard to Preston are taken from an article in the Full Mall Gdzette, 18 April, 1890: — Many years ago a company called the Kibble Navigation Company was formed, it paid no dividends, and its shares became worthless. An agitation was got up to make the town council buy up the company, improve the navigation, and make docks. The agitation succeeded, and ' it may be
' Pul)lislu-(1 in the BriHtiA Titixs and Mirror, 15 July, iSijo.
VI
.] Invc<ii»n'n(. 197
assume<l that sonu' of the netivc ])roinoters wi'i'c nut wholly (lisiiitertsted.' The expenditure was not to exceed .i'^oo.ooo ; jit the beginnlnj^f of this year .^^'7', 1,000 had already l)cen horroweil. and i'arlianient was asked to sanction further lturruwin<r i)owers of .^'220,000. • 'i'he ei<dit miles (jf ehanntd to the sea have yet to bo provided for, and the eost nuiy he. anything from .t':^oo,ooo to .^^1.000,000, as its course lies over shiftinir saml-haidvs fifteen to thirty feet deep, l^v the course ])ursued this money must he spent, or all that has been already sunk has been absolutely s(|uandei-e(l. The friendly societies, who feel the etleet of the abnoniially hiLch death i"ate (Preston, neeording to the Registrar (Jeneral. is the uidiealthiest town in p]nL,dand), have petitioned for better sanitai-y cftndi- tions, but where is the money to come from with such a burden on the back of the town ? ' At present the resources of the rate-payers ' are being squandered on a wild goose scheme to open out the river to sea-going vessels along a shifting chuiinel in sixteen to seventeen miles of sand.' 'Cei-tainly Preston has not been happy in its local rulers.' We should prefer to put it, that England had not been hap})y in allowing its municipalities to embark on such hazardous enterprises.
Again, a municipality lays dow)i millions in a system of sewerage. Science is perpetually preaching to us that sewage can be utilised, yet our towns and houses are undermined by inaccessible drains, which are really little better than elongated cess-pools. Is it a wild conjecture to surmise that if the experimental energy of private enterprise had been allowed to enter the field, our practice would not lag so far behind scientific knowledge on this subject?
As it is, an enormous local debt has been created, and a vei'y inadec|uate and unimproving service of sewerage has been obtained. Now if this matter had been dealt with by private enterprise (we do not say that it is possible, we are only using the case as an illustration) the capitalisation necessary for carrying out these works w(Aild have been made at the risk of private persons, who wouhl have had to jia}' fcjr their own failures. The coinnniiiity could have accepted each improve- ment without remor.'-e, and the deterioration of the earlier systems would have been constantly and gradually making room for improved methods. As it is, the ratepayers arc saddled with an enormous debt, and being monopolists, served
198 A Pica for Liberty. [vi.
not by experts but by boards whose inefficiency is notorious, they hesitate at expeiiinent. and there is no automatic pressure put on them to ackno\vledg"e the deterioration of their property or to incur fresh expense in its reparation or in the provision of a substitute.
George Stephenson's locomotive was preceded by that of Trevethick. Now our situation as reo;ards sewage is as if the Government had bought up the invention of Trevethick and established a monopoly. The Peases would not have been allow^ed to employ Stephenson to make engines for the Darlington and Stockton Railway: and the Government, which had sunk its money in the comparatively worthless invention of Trevethick, would have effectually deprived man- kind of the use of the locomotive engine.
It may be suggested that in the matter of sewage munici- palities have by a happy inspiration adopted an adequate and absolutely efficient system. It is improbable ; and we can make no better comment on the suggestion than to quote one or two passages from the Presidential address of Dr. G. V. Poore, M.D., F.ll.O.P., delivered in August of this year (1890), to the Section of Preventive Medicine at the Sanitary Congress. Dr. Poore has had an abstract made of the chief outbreaks of typhoid fever in this country, which have been reported on by the medical officers of the Privy Council and the Local Government Board : —
' One factor is coinmon to all thfso outbreaks, viz., the mixing of excremental
matters with water There is no doubt that whenever excrement is
mixed witli water we are in danger of typhoid. Typhoid was not recognised in this country until the water-c^loset liecame common. We doubtless manu- factured typhiiid in a retail fashion in old days, but with the invention of the water-closet we unconsciously embarked in a wholesale business. We had not been many years at this work before we recognised that the water-closet poisoned all sources of water. We have had to go far a-lield for drinking water, and the result has been that as we have left off consuming the si:»rings which we have wilfully poisoned, the amount of typhoid fever has somewhat abated. When the more remote sources get poisoned in their turn — as with our increasing ])opuhition and our nii'tliods of sanitation they inevitably nuist — the present comparative aliati'ment must, one would fear, cease.'
Such is the criticism on our present system, passed by a gentleman chosen by the Council of the Sanitar}' Institute to preside over their meeting. Dr. Poore proposes his own remedy, namely, the treatment of sewage with earth and not water. We are not competent judges, and will not assume that Dr. Poore's panacea is final and adequate, but it is clearly
\ I . ] In vest men (. 199
a iiiislortuiu' that as a uatidii wn- have eiuljarkeJ on costly systiiiis ot" soworatjfe condunmcd by so competent an authority, and tliat the ])ositiuii of each inemhi-r of the conmuiiiity is that he is a }^artu^vne^ of this inadetjuate service, ami liuit his \vht»h; interest lies in patchint^ up and not aholishing a system which in all })rul)al»ility is inherently had. Tiiis impotence Dr. Toore refers to its proper source in tlie concluding paragraphs of his paper ; he says : —
' Parliaiiu-nt lias ocin>|H<lli-cl us t.i liaml (.vi r mir rispriiisihilitics to jmlilio autlioiitics, with tlie iKiisequi-iui' that tlie individual has lost hi.s lilxTtyand iniU'jK'udt'ncf, and is drifting into a condition of sanitary inibtciiity.*
A rich man -who can pay to have his house drains insjifcted yearly, and who can pay for remedying defects, can make the present system tolerable, but to the poor the expense attending such a course makes etttciency impossil)le.
We cannot therefore gauge the loss of the communitv arising from tl»e perhaps necessar}' monopoly of sewage works in the hands of municipalities.
From another point of view monopoly has its inconvenience. It would, for instance, be an economical, and, under proper management, a profitable expenditure of money, to have subways under our principal streets for the passage of the various pipes and wires which traverse our towns. No public body, burdened as they all are with the discredit of years of unprofitable and incompetent management, dare suggest such an enterprise to the ratepayers. It is a difficult matter, and couhl only be effected by first-class financial and engineering ability. Public bodies very properly feel that they cannot experiment with rate-payers' money, or even incur expense in setting great engineer's to estimate the cost and practicability of such schemes.
We have no wish to depreciate the public spirit which undoubtedly anirfiates many, nay perhaps all, of our municipal bodies. The discredit into which after a brief period of popularity they inevitably fall, is due, not to personal considerations, but to far deeper causes. The in- terests confided to them are too large, they are a standing obstruction to the subdivision of labour and investment which is at the root of the efficiency of the services of civilised life. It is true that private enterprise shows a dis- position to organise itself on a largo scale by means of trusts and other combinations, but this new^ departure has been
200 A Pica for Liberty. [vi.
preceded by a great specialisation and subdivision of energy, and forms no precedent for the establishment of a great monopoly ^ per mltuui!
Our most obvious and primitive wants had happily been to some extent arranged for ])efore Government had been fully organised. Government has rarely interfered to help the governed in the distribution of food or in the victualling of great centres of population. Consider the marvellous world-wide interchange of service, both of labour and capital, which is involved in feeding London for a single day. This goes on day after day and year after year without any difficulty, and we are so accustomed to it that we rarely pause to admii-e. All this is done without the assistance of Government.
With advancing civilisation new wants became apparent ; the community became anxious about sanitation, about educa- tion, about gas. water, electric light, and a variety of other interests, but by this time the State was fully organised. Men in a hurry refused to wait for the satisfaction of their wants by the system of private enterprise and competitioii, and they obliged the heavy hand of the State to interfere. Thus it comes that interests which in a civilised community are not inferior in importance to our food supplies, are left as mono- polies in the hands of Government. To deal properly with the sanitation of a large town a vast subdivision of labour and management is perhaps necessary. Our public bodies are composed of very worthy persons, but they cannot discharge the functions which in a free state of enterprise would be per- formed by perhaps hundreds of separate purveyors of service, and notoriously the scientific officials of our municipalities are inadequately remunerated, and as a consequence the highest professional talent is not at their disposal. It is only by considerations such as these that we can estimate the loss which the public suffers from these monopolies. They and the bodies which administer them foi'm a huQ-e obstruction to beneficent applications of capital to the service of mankind. Capital is free to serve us in some of the most elementary needs of life. It cannot be dispensed with in more complicated matters, but it is tied about with endless restrictions and impediments ; it is taken f)om us forcibly in taxation, not freely and cxperiuientaily advciitui'cd ; it is spent timidly by a conscientious l)oard, and recklessly by a corrupt board ; if
\r.] Invesimcni. 201
Itadly spent it still ivnmina a (lol)t ii|hiii us. ami wo aif foici-fl to iiiakf the best of the l>atl aitieh' supplied : \vr caiiiKjt accept the j)ressinL; otter of inLjeiiious and seieiitilie men \\\\o ask leave to try a^^ain at their own charge and lisk to improve these most imi»oitant services ofciviliseil life.
Tho matter is not without dilliculty, hut the ])re.-ent solution — the solution of ifrantin;;; mononolies more or less com|)lete in so many of the most imjiortant services of life — is unworthy of human ingenuity and cannot he considered final. This perpetual forestalling of a free-trade solution has weakened the power of private initiative ; hut if our super- stitious reverence for (Jovernment can he shakeji. Ave do not despair of retrieving again our steps and of giving to these higher services of civilised life the vigour and elasticitv which helong to the humlder primitive services which su],i[)ly us with our food and clothing.
Such, we lielieve, are tlu' causes of the discredit into wliich local government bodies are constantlv falliui;. It is not due to personal considerations. The members of municipalities an<l vestries represent very fairly the virtues and vices of their fellow-citizens. Many of them are persons of ability and position ; some are retii'cd tradesmen who, when they become too old to attend to their own business, are kind enough to occupy their declining years in the management of ours. Others arc men still engaged in trades and [no- fessions. The employment given to thom hy their neigh) lours of free choice leaves them with soiue leisure on their hands, and, if they are public-spirited, their services prove useful for tho dischai'ge of functions which, because of their iin- portance, have been withdrawn from private enterprise and confided to municipal mono]wly. Some, again, are well-to-do persons of good-will who follow no calling. Their time hangs heavy on their hands, and they are sent out to get experience of life by assisting in the management of public business. To these of late years there has been added some admixture of lirst-class agitators. The whole is a fairly representative body rather above the average in respect of public spirit, but a good deal below the average in administrative abilitv.
It is, in our opinion, a tactical mistake on tho part of those who have an instinctive distrust of public bcjdies to abuse the />erminief of which they are composed. The constantly re- curring scandals are due not so nmch to the incapacity of
202 A Plea for Liberty. \\\.
vestiydom as to the impossible duties for which it is held responsible.
Another Government enterprise which is not a monopoly has been undertaken professedly in the interest of the working- class. We shall be accused of temerity when we say that the institution we have in our ndnd — the Post-OfHce Savings Bank — has Ijcen a very doubtful benefit. A bank is an in- stitution in which men place mone^^s either on current account or on permanent deposit. A Iwnker is an expert in invest- ment ; he uses a proportion of his customers' balances in financial operations and in investment. His customers obtain financial assistance such as their credit warrants, and a considerable portion of a bankers reserves are invested in the businesses of his customers and of the class to which his customers lielono".
The working-class, however, is served b}' a bank which gives them no such assistance. The reserves of the Post-OflBce a]"e placed in the hands of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, who in turn invest them in Govern- ment stock, or lend them for financing the various spending departments of the State. It will be said that a workman has no credit which would enable a banker to employ capital in his service. This, however, is a great misconception. We refer the reader to the paper in this volume by M. Kaft'alovich, and to the suggestions which he there throws out for the use of savings banks' reserves for promoting the erection of working- class dwellings. It is moreover the business of a Inma Jide banker to devise forms of securit}^ by means of which he can give financial assistance to his customers.
Consider what an impulse to thrift and working-class invest- ment would have been created, if the Post-Office Savings Bank had been debarred from investment in Government securities, and been obliged to invest workmen's savings in assisting schemes for their service. This is the function of the banker of the middle and upper classes. It is through the legitimate assistance of the banker and the insurance agency that the proletariate of this and other countries are to be encouraged to pass from the hand-to-mouth life of Avage-earning into the greater security enjoyed by those who rely on investment as well as on labour for their maintenance.
This Post-Oflice Savino-s Bank is therefore, in this view of the matter, one of those ' short cuts ' to prosperity of which
\i.] Invcst))icnf. 203
the civilist'tl Avorltl is vi-ry full. Tlu'V arc mlmiiahle in intention, tlu y luivi- also their {nlvantages in practice, but they forestall and prevent the higher and more useful adjust- ments of mutual service. They ure jjart of the homlagt; on the free development of character and energy which, m<»re than anything else, impedes the true progress of the working- class.
It is satisfactory to know that the National l\nny l^ank. a Itgitimate private enterprisi', is now beginning to make great progi'ess, and to pay a dividend to its shareholders. It is to be hoped that its successful competition with the Post-Otiice is onlv the be'dnnin<' of the rescue of this imhistrv fiom the hands of Government. The sU^-rilisation of working-class savings under the present system is a grave misfortune. If working-class banking was conducted by persons who had to conciliate the g<:)od-wi]l of their customers, it would become more the practice to ijivest reserves in undertakings likely to benelit the working-class. It may even l>e possible that the working-class .savings bank may one day be instrumental iu promoting schemes of industrial partnership in well- established businesses. Co-operators are fond of talking of labour hiring capital, and of reversing the present plan of capital hiring labour. From whom could the co-opera- tive labourer borrow \\ith more fitness than from the savings bank of his own class? Loans of course cannot be obtained from a bank without undeniable security, and this he would have to provide, but the ditticulty is superable, as M. Katialovich has aptly shown, by a combination of insurance and loan. If a beginning were made in the simpler matter of house property, there can lie little doubt that human ingenuity would soon extend the system to other matters, m(»re especially to various forms of industrial and co-operative partnerships.
All attempts of this kind are impossible under the present system of Government banks, for Govei-nment can only invest in its own securities. Thus the author of the article on the Post-Oliice of the United States in the Encijilopa'd'm Britannica points out that the United States cannot have post-office savings banks, because the Americans arc fast paying oft' their national del»t. ' It is plain.' he says, ' although the ditticulty does not seem to have occurred to many of the advocates in the United States of a savings bank system, that to be lasting it must be founded upon a Government debt,
2 04 A Pica for Liberty. [vi.
a condition Avhicli docs not and is not likely to exist in that conntiy.'
It is obvious that tho same line of argument can be applied in a minor degree to the monopolies granted l)y the State to private capitalists. The risk of loss is undertaken by the private adventurer, but if a success is made the public is at the mercy of the monopolist, tempered only by the expensive , and incomplete protectioii given by the State. The Board of T]-ade has recently held an elaborate enquiry upon Railway Rates. The expense of the enrjuiry has been great, and the rates which the Board proposes to fix must be to a large extent arbitrary; they have none of the cogency which rates fixed by free competition would have.
It would be rash to say that greater freedom of railway- making for the purpose of creating more competition is either ])Ossible or impossible. We need have no hesitation in saying that, if it were possiljle^, it would solve a great many, at present insuperable, ditKculties.
Our argument is that the public has been deprived of the full value of railway enterprise by the granting of monopolies. Railway companies have been able to hold on to inferior machiner}^ and to pay fancy prices for the acquisition of land, and they are unable to give increased facilities to travellers, because they are too tender of shareholders' capital inflated b(:'yond its value by causes such as the above.
If there was more freedom of trade in this matter there might well be ten times as much capital invested, and all of it represented by more efticient machinery. The experience of America in the matter of telephones and electric lighting shows that tlte mere fear of competition is sufficient to make monopolist companies reasonable.
Generally it may be said that we have much to learn from America in this matter of monopoh'. It is there that a solution of a difficulty, which all admit, is to be looked for. Protection has made the United States a dear country to live in. But, as has been recently pointed out, it is in some respects not such a dear country as it was. This fact is attributed, probably with justice, to its cheap system of ti'ansport. A railway monopoly which results in high transport charges is tantamount to a form of protection. An American railway is built and worked very much more cheaply than an Englisli railway, and the evils of monopoly are in this respect less
\ I.] Inves/iuciif. 205
ap])arent. lii Mn;4lanil we liear constant coiMplainf of tin; (litlifulty of tianspoitinj:: fish, fruit, V('<j[t tallies, and many other articles of which the first cost is low. liecrause the rates of transport prevent their lieini; bron^'ht within the rea(;h of eonsnnurs on reasonable terms. An cniployei' of lal)oui' in KnLjlantl atnl America writin*^ to TItr T'nneHoiOcioYwv 1, 1 S90, compares the Enj^'lish and American sy.stem, and aBserti-j that we in KnLrland have done nothin;jf since Stephenson to cheapen and improve our system of inland transj)ort. Th(! statement may be exagijerated but contains its n^j-ain of truth.
We hear numerous complaints of the congestion of poi)ula- tion in great tt)wns. J^ight railways are put forward as a panacea for the congested districts in Irelanfl. There are of course many causes which contribute to the urowth of large towns, and undoubtedly the high price of transport is one of them. Human ingenuity cannot altogether abolish space, but, if ])rice of transport is any criterion, it has brought America and India nearer to English ports than London is to Manchester. And why ? mainly 1 »ecanse sea transport is open to free competition, and land transport is a mono]ioly. If it were possible (it may be impossible, for some difHculties are insoluble I to reduce largely the cost of inland transport, there are many large industries which could just as well ])e carried on in the country as in the town, to the infinite advantage of our labouring population. It is noteworthy that the country factory is much more usual in America than wdth us. Our policy of protective monopoly refjuires very careful examination before we sit down meekly under our present disabilities.
Ajiother curious point has arisen in the United States with regard to the i-aihvay monopoly. Trusts are arrangements projected by private enterprise for mitigating the evils of competition, for it is not here denied that there are evils in competition. Like every other human arrangement, trusts are liable to be abused, and it is alleged that some of the American Trusts have become oppressive, and that, in various trades, monopoly has been established to the detriment of the public at large. A leading working-class member has recently defended the attempt to make a Salt Trust in England, on the logical and intelligible ground that it was an application of the principles of Trade Unionism to the aflairs of the capitalist. Free combination, so long as it respects the freedom of the uncombined, is a necessary and legitimate method for over-
2o6 A Pica for Liberty. [vi.
coming certain social inconveniences, and as a ruk' the free community has its own remedy if the combination becomes op])T('ssive. Given a lair field and no favour, an oppressive in<)]iopoly unsupported by force would not last for a week ; it would at once ))e deserted and routed by indignant customers.
It is very notew^orthy therefore, that tlio principal ground of complaint against the Trust in the United States is based on the allegation that Trusts have corrupted the raihvay monopoly, and have secured for themselves preferential rates and even induced the companies to charge extraordinary rates to outside competitors. The accusation is strenuously denied by the advocates of Trusts. The denial, however, appears to amount to this, that the preferential rates were secured by the corporations now forming various Trusts prior to their amalgamation in Trusts. It follows, therefore, that if to give preferential rates is corrupt on the part of a Railway Company, the corruption dates from a period before the era of Trusts.' At any rate, it seems to be admitted by the more moderate opponents of the Trust system that, but for the Railway monopoly and preferential rates, an oppressive Trust would be an impossibility^.
Under the present system mechanical traction has been confined to unduly narrow limits. Its extension to the uses of private life ought not to be beyond the power of human ingenuity, and here there is room for vast applications of capital. M. Raftalovich lias pointed out how closely the question of an increased and cheaper service of locomotion is connected with the sokition of the difficulty of housing the working-class.
In the case of the electric light Government has pursued its usual course. It grants a monopoly but couples it with con- ditions intended to prevent private capitaksts reaping too large a profit. At first the conditions were too onerous, and the country was deprived (jf the use of the electric light. We have many other illuminants, and it is a question whether the public required any protection in this matter at all. The most obnoxious clauses of Mr. Ckamberlain's legislation have now% at great expense and loss of capital, been repealed, and by degrees the electric light is coming into household use.
The only forc(> which can curb the pretensions of tradesmen, * See Foreign Office Report on Trusts, No. 174. p. 72.
\ I . ] Invest nil- 11 1. 207
an<l yet at tin* same time act a« an ineeiitive to I'liU-rprise, is IrcedoiTi of competition. (loverninciit can limit the <livision ot ]troHts Ity re^'ulations which astute financiers can easily evade, jiiit the process is apt to dt'LTi'atle the morals of Cftmnu-rce. or t(j drive tlu- more sensitive into <jther lields of labour, and in this way to injure the interest of the consumer, who in the last re.sort has to pay for all this hamperinfj of industry.
l^ut the most familiar instance of private capital doin*^ luisiness under the support of a State mono})oly is the liipior trattie. In the proper sense of the term a puhlic hou.sc; should be a ]mhl\c house, and as much a place of amusement as of re- freshment. The amount of capital employablt; in this trade is measure(l by the ability and willinL,'ness of the workini;--class to reward such investment. Paternal government, by creating a monopoly, has focussed oil this capital on the sale of spirituous liquor. The workman still manages to pay for his drink, but his rational entertainment and his skittles can no longer be providetl, bi-cause he has to pay perhaps eight or ten times its value for his glass of spirits or beer. This policy proceeds from a delusive hope of enforcing temperance, and not from considerations of revenue. If it were not for the supposition that it is dangerous to allow liberty in this matter it is impossible to believe that in this democratic age the service of victualling and entertaining the people would for a moment be left subject to the present burdensome monopoly. The result, as in most such cases, is the revei-se of expectation. The taxes an<l the monopoly under which the poor man s caterers have to labour have been prohibitive not of liquor, but of rational amusement, and as a result the poor man is too much V)Ound down to the one anuisement which his protectors have left to him. namely the pleasures of strong drink. Can we wonder that under such a system drink has taken too large a share of a workman's spare time and spare cash %
Every class is entitled to spend a portion of its earnings on amusement. Those who are able to amuse us are at present as handsomely paid as any other servants of the public. The public entertainer of the poor has by the inordinate taxation of one necessary item been degraded to being the mere keeper of a drinking-shop, an enterprise from w^hich many conscien- tious and enterprising tradesmen stand aloof. We do not assert that excessive ch-inking is rnv.xrd by this monopoly. Excessive drinking and excessive eating are animal pleasures,
2o8 A Pica for Liberty. [vt.
which the civillsod man soon outgrows if his opportunities of rational ontertainuiont are not unduly curtailed. Tlio poor n}an has suti'ered from this curtailnieut of the more refined methods of amusement, which would have weaned hiui from the coarser pleasures of appetite. Tlie drinking habits of the richer classes, where drunkemress is now comparatively speak- ing rare, have passed through these same phases.
We may here, as conveniently as elsewhere, say a word on the philanthi'opic employment of capital. The employment of purely philanthropic capital to giving a supply of the neces- saries of life to classes of the population at less than the market price is unsatisfactor}'. It keeps commercial capital out of the field, and attracts attention away from the cause of defective supply. In London there is a great deal of semi- philanthropic capital (for the most part it is now becoming distinctly commercial capital) employed in providing houses for working-people. It is not too much to say that its use- fulness varies inversely to its philanthropy.
It is only a minority that can be housed on philanthropic terms. Commercial capital, which is plentiful but timid, is frightened away by philanthropic enterprise; and the majority have to remain in inferior houses.
A very apposite illustration has been given to the writer by a friend who is partner in a large mill business in the North. Some thirty years ago his firm, being desirous of cultivating friendly relations with their work-people, built one or two streets of small houses. They were wealthy people, and they built a class of house rather in advance of the best artisan house of the day. The houses were readily let to their work- people, and for a time answered the purpose intended. At the present time, however, our informant states that he does not think any of his own work-people live in these houses, Avhich still belong to his fii-m. His people have found that thirty years have brought great improvements in the art of house-building, and the men who formerly lived in the prize philanthropic house of thirty years ago have migrated to com- mercially built houses, where they get hot and cold water laid on, baths, and other modern improvements. Now if artisans' dwellings were widely supplied by philanthropic effort, or if, with a view of serving not only a minority but the whole of the working-class, philanthropic investment were made com- pulsory and the matter undertaken by the municipality, it is
\ 1 . ] I lives Im en t. 209
obvious tliiit lln- -nuliuil iiiijuoN ciiii'ut ul>(>ve dcscribiMl could la-vt'i- have taken jtlacc. Tlu' huinbUs of each generation ■svould decide in what sort of houses each class should live. StuLjnation and iliscontent on the one hand, or ruinous extra va- • funce uuided oidv bv sentiment and without anv econoiuie principle to restrain it, ami ending without iloubt in a violent reaction, are the alternative horns of the dilenuna which would of necessity arise in such a state of things.
The socialists argue that Government should arrange foi- a "■ratuilous use of cai)ital to each successive generation. Jn
• ••11'
other words, Government is to organise industry, and to give to each labourer his due ; no charge is to be made for the use of capital: su])erintendenci' and iv'paration of plant must of course be paid for, but no one may rlerive any advantage from investment, but only from la))our. Let us consider this proposition more closely. Each year's increment will 1)6 taken by the State: each labourer will receive his wage, and a portion will be retaineil by the State for the reparation of capital and for making that increase of machinery which is necessary for the support of an increasing population.
In lact it will be the duty of the State to capitalise a portion of each year s revenue. Now this superintendence of capital will have to be paid fur. Inspectors and auditors will be reijuired far beyond what is necessary under the present re'gitne where most luen'are dealing with their own and not their neighbour's property. The use of capital therefore will not even lu're be iriveii ijratuitouslv. Further, it would give rise to a perpetual dispute as to the amount ot capital to be subtracted from the due meed of the labourer. The increment taken for capital i.sation and for the cost of superintendence would be regarded as a tax. and would be |)aid as grudgingly. There would be a never-ending battle between the bureaucracy and the lal)Ourcr. The former would naturally wish to increase the capital under their charge, and the labourer would resent all such deductions as a fraud on his claim. The fact is, that a gratuitous supply of capital is an absurd idea. (Capitalisation or investment is essentially a form of consumption, and is in the main directed to the purpose of freeing the investor from the inconvenience of personal toil, in a word to labour-saving. If men or Itodies of men laljour assiduously and apply part of the revenue obtained from their exertion to this form <jf consumption, they only do so because they derive advantage
p
2IO A Pica for Libcrfy. [vi.
therefrom. If tliat advantage is made to cease, this form of consumption will go out of fashion ; if the control and resulting benefit of investment is taken awav from individual men ; if the benelit of capitalisation only reaches them after it has filtered through the hands of a bureaucracy, — they will in- evitably identify their interest with the labourers' share in the division, and they will embody this view in their mandate to the organising bureaucracy. Man's maintenance, therefore, will gradually retui'n to a dependence on labour alone, and each day's revenue will be consumed by the labourer as he receives it, and application of revenue to investment will cease. Can one conceive a surer means of bringing about a return to barbarism %
We have now compared the value of private as against State investment, but we have considered it mainly from the side of the consumer. His wants, we have endeavoured to show^ will be best and most economically met by a free system of investment wherever that is possible, and we believe that it is applicable to a much larger sphere than it at jjresent covers.
This, however, is a small matter compared to the influence of investment as a factor in producing the appropriate social character in each individual investor, and to this aspect of the question we now turn. Human happiness depends very largely on two equally necessar}^ (pialities, namely, on the individual energy which is able to satisfy reamnahh;. wants : secondly on the self-control Avhich holds in check v.nreasonahle ambitions. The operation of investment has an important influence in stimulating and informing these valuable social instincts.
There is a threefold activity involved in the full ideal of civilised life. Each man is a consumer and should be a labourer and an investor. It will be found that our social troubles are caused because this threefold function is imper- fectly performed by large masses of the population. We are all of us of necessity consumers, and most of us have capacities for consumption far beyond what our means allow us to gratify.
The primitive means for gratifying consumption was labour : but Avitli the first fashioning of Adam's spade it became clt^ar that investment was a necessary complement of human la])our. Without it labour was a poor and feeble thing. We are familia]- with the principle of the subdivision of labour; we do not always rcmendier that this subdivisioii of laltouj- without
\ 1.] Investment. 21 1
H tMjiTL'spuiuliiii; MilMlivision of ilir <liity nf invostmont has producLMl a oiit'-siik'tl civilisutioii and iiiti'rtrrr<l with the thivo- t'olil economic harmony above dcHcrihtil.
Tile consumtT who is hilioiin-r tiiilv ninl not IuvcsUm" has liis ])()tontiaUties tor consumption chi't-ki-il. Tlic biink-u of sup- plvinjr the (•om])l(>uu'nt of capital necessary to an incrensini; popubition of hiltourers falls on investors who arc hy tin' service tlius rendered, enabled to subsist without laliour. The direction of this production remains with the investor, for he is the only consmner whose consumin;^^ power is still ettective. His capital and other men's labour are therefore employed in the maiiufaeture of luxuries which he only can purchase, and this on('-side(l form of consumption Ldvrs employment to silversmiths, painters, sculptors and other purveyors of the arts and luxuries of lite, while at the other end of the scale the labourer has liardy sutticient to eat and drink. Micli men might give away their supertluity. and large benefactions are from time to time given to pul)lic purposes. But ex- perience shows that rich men cannot get rid of their respon- sil)ility liy a mere scattering of gifts. For gifts thus scattered too often prove mere narcotics dulling the energy of poorer men, an<l obscuring the trutli that in a society nr)t yet become socialistic, the <luty of private investment is as paramomit as the duty of personal labour. The desire to consume, if it be not debauched by public charity, should prompt an exercise of both functions by each member of society. It is only thus that a liberal interpretation can be given to the term • reason- able." ^vhen we said above that human hajipiness, materially at all events, depends on the ability of each man's energy to satisfy his reasonable wants. A larger performance of this duty of investment would lead, we argue, to a much larger consumption, and hence a nmch larger production brought altout by an ever-increasiiKj apjilication of capital or labour- saving investment, and an ever-decreasing application of the less effective instrument, namely, human labour.
Let us turn to our second proposition, that happiness depends on self-control as much as on the gratification of even our most reasonable desires. There are ambitious which are anti- social, and there is nothing which ministers more to their repression than a knowledge that honest conduct, or what we have termc<l ap])ropriate social action, is not impracticable, and in fact that it is easier than an opposite course. The.
1' 2
2 12 A Pica for Liberty. [vi.
<lesire to consume Avill prompt au iiitii-m will to an attack on the rights of others. But a conviction of the necessity of mutual forbearance, acknowledging the justice of other men's defence of their own, renders the road of transgression prac- tically narrow. The wonderful internexus of social life which preserves automatically by mutual forbearance each man's claim, has reversed for practical purposes the truth of the adage. The social organisation which surrounds us gives an impetus towards right against which only despair can make us rebel. But here there is no ground for despair. Progress in a free atmosphere will inevitably lead men to an exercise of energy where such a course promises success, and to self-control where the conditions of difficulty are at the moment insur- mountable. This double training of character in energy and self-control is the principle to which society owes all its nicest adjustments.
The labourer, therefore, who wishes to improve his position will be impelled to investment as the necessary complement of his labour ; and, in turning to investment as a method of meeting some of the struggles of life, men's minds are opened to many salutary reflections.
Men realise that the power of labour, which from a point of view we may term man's <mly inalienable capital, is expended by mere effluxion of time, is rendered useless by sickness, and disappears at death and old age. Men. therefore, must, if they are wise, form a sinking fund by insurance or by savings to replace the J^early expenditure of their laljour capital. This desire to make ends meet has important con- sequences. It limits the rate at which men create respon- sibilities ; it proujotes the application of revenue to the slower processes of consumption ; it postpones the age of marriage, and has its influence on the birth-rate ; it keeps the growth of population automatically jiroportionate to fhe growth of capital.
The first exercise of the investing instinct will be in matters which directly minister to the wants of the investor. Thus, the investments of the working-class are placed for the most part in their own institutions, such as Friendly Societies. Trade T^nions, Building Societies, Co-operative Societies. This is the earlier stage of investment, but the full subdivision and mutual service of investment is not complete till investment passes beyond this stage. ^1 makes boots and exchanges his
VI.] I lives/ men f. 2 1.^
soi'vico fur wages ; tlnii. Kii\ iiig a coat, he pays tlic wages of />, till- tailor who iiukK- the coat, and the n^ward of ( \ the investor wlio su])]»lie(l the capital necessary to the transaction : ainl, Ije it nute(|, /)' and <' are possiltly the same persons. If .1 wishes to contriitute liis full share to the social machine, and to draw out ol' it something beyond his -wages, he is Itound to contribute to the service of investment as well as to that of labour. Nor is there any reason to limit the range of As investment. The tail(jr is not bound to invest in a tailoiinir business. So lon^r as his investment is serviceable to the icst of the coinmiiiiity he will be entitled to (h-aw a revenue from it, and with this nn'enue he can reward the investors whose ea])ital ministers more <lirectly to his wants. This is the full subdivisicni of investment which we athrm to be the necessary accompaniment of the sul)division of labour.
How, it may be asked, will this ideal affect the status and waives of labour?
t'ii-st, we urge it is the only ideal which is compatible with Freedom. State regulation of labour and State investment of capital may have charms for the speculative enthusiast. To those who have had any experience of it the regulation of bumbledom in all its grades is simply intolerable. Liberty is an essential in any elevated ideal of life.
Next, how would it affect wages, and how would it affect interest and profits?
In the first place, if there was a more general exercise of investment, each man would have in his own pocket a poten- tial strike-fund and his family and class would all, more or less, be in a position to help him. Wages nmst rule high, for the only limit on their rise would be the labourer's own interest as an investor. The investing labourer would not be indifferent to dividends, and the labouring investor would be a pennanent influence in favour of liberal wages. The gradual actiuisition of a small revenue from investment would do more to raise the economic position of the labourer than all the trade unions that ever existed, useful and beneficial as these have been.
Unfortunately for the country, the primitive instincts towards investment in our poorer classes have been so debauched by our socialistic poor-law, tliat vast arrears of work have to be overtaken in the quickening of motive and the building up of habit.
2 14 A Pica for Liberty. [vi.
Nor do wo think that tlie rate of interest and profit woukl fall. Skill and success in the application of investment would be more valualde functions than ever. The competition of capital for employment wouhl be greater than ever, there would be therefore more demand for the service of the com- petent fuircpfeneur, and his wages, that is profit, would not falL But while the competition of capital was keener, the held of investment would be vastly enlarged. First, because every man would be interested in reducing the demand on human toil, and as a consequence a powerful impulse would be given to the adoption of labour-saving apparatus. The life of a machine would be much shortei-, for none but the most modern machinery would be used. An ingenious and anti-socialistic wi'iter has argued that possibly interest will cease to be paid, and that on the contrary men would be willing to pay for the luxury of deferred consumption ^ This view overlooks, we think, two important considerations. It overlooks the willingness of men to pay for a rapid succession of labour-saving inventions, and, secondly, it over- looks a still more important item, the increased potentialities of the consumer. If consumption of necessaries and luxuries was likely to stand still, there would be something to be said for this vicAV. But all this investment and all the implied multiplication of the power of labour and production is with a view to consumption. If we look round we see everywhere restricted consumption because of the unperformed ofhce of investment. With increased investment there will come in- creased consumption. There is, therefore, a vast field of profit- able investment at our very doors, namely, in the application of capital to the uses of the poor, but it can only become profitable, as the poor learn by degrees the valuable duty of investment.
"VVe have attempted to show that the State cannot successfully perform the duty of investment for its members. State property is always ill-managed ; it does not disappear automatically when it becomes ett'ete ; and its universality would deprive citizens of the school of experience where, more than anywhere else, their character acquires the due ad- mixture of energy and self-co)itrol.
If there is to be any legislation conveying property from the haves to the have nots, we sincerely trust that the con-
' .f. II. Lt.'vy, '/'//(' Ouicomi: of JudividiiaUsin.
\ I.] Iiivcsl)iuiil. 215
veyauei' will lu- coiiipk'tc an<l liiial, and tliat as far as possihli; notliini,^ will Ik- left in the imtVnitriil [)araly>in!^ tcimro ol" the State. \\\' arc auaiiist all ronli.sfation, nut liocausc tliero is no prt'CiHlcnt lor it, or ln'causo existinj^' titks to |)roperty aro indisputalilf, I'Ut Itccause it is utterly impossible anud the larictr proportions »»t" nio<lern life to redress the injustice of earlier tinus witlnnit conHiiittin!/ fresh acts of injustice on a iiiueh lari;er scale. But even if this consideration is dis- reijjarded. it would he foolish as well as kiuivish to entrust any nioro property than we can lidji to a tenure at onco demoral- ising and unjtrolitalile.
T. Ma- KAv.
YII.
THE HOUSING OF THE WOEKING- CLASSES AND OF THE POOR.
It is a distinguishing feature of the end of this nineteenth century that human sentiment lias become more than ever anxious about the condition of the workino--classes, and has turned to a study of their position and to a search for ways and means of improving their lot.
Economists of the liberal school form no exception. They share in the universal solicitude which at the present time is assuming many forms. Some of these, whether their authors know it or not, are dangerous, some are actually harmful. Reasonable economists refuse to l)e drawn into accepting solutions too easily formulated. They know, from an industrious study of economic and financial history, that taxation and legislation often produce results the very reverse of expectation. They cannot forget, for example, the deplorable effects of the old Poor Law in England. They fear that the plans of the socialists^ whether of the study, the senate, or the street, the demands of sanitary reformers, the sentimentality of philanthropists, will infallibly lead to consequences diametri- cally opposed to the results aimed at.
By the side of the claims made in the name of the great mass of labourers, in the name of the industrial proletariate and of the poor, there has arisen during the last fifteen or twenty years a new danger. It has its origin in a false conception of the attributes and powers of the State. We refer to the claims made on behalf of a system of official and governmental h^-giene, which pretends to abolish insanitary" conditions of life, to make healthy dwellings and workshops, in a word, to take under control the private lives of the
VII.] Hoiisini^- of U'or/ciiiQ-C/iissi's a>id Poor. 217
citiziiiH. \\\ tlu: opinion of iiin.iy jaoplc at tin- |)resont «luy, the iiiodoni SUiti' should In- cnlltil on to ilctcrniinf tho rate <»!' ■\va_t;i's, the Icntijth ot" tho work inLj-" lay. tho piifc* ol" jn'ovisimi'^ ami other necessaries ot" lilr ; to tli\iile jirofits anionic tin- different l)ranches of native indiiHtry, l»y tlw aid of inmnneralih- laws, by a ]»rotectiv«' tariff, and hy nieaus of an anny (if inspect<^>rs. The Sanitai-ians ('IfyLiit'nistes' is the Frencji ti-nii). in their turn, set out a ])roi;raMinie of recjuirenu-nts and dictate the conditions under whitsh liouses are to be built and inhabited, the nature of tho materials to be used, and the luunber of the tenants.
Hygiene, as M. Ia'ou Say declared at tho nieetin!:,^ of tho 2Sth June, j(S90, at the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences, has become a science of 'much wider scope than formerly. It is not content to advise on nuitters concerning cleanliness, food, and the sanitation of the dwelling-house, but it claims to be able to prevent the spread of epidemics by carrying on an offensive warfare a^jaijist the germs of disease.
Whether these pretensions are well founded or not, they have rendered sanitation popular. It has also created a group of Sanitarians who wish State protection to bo intro- duced everywhere. M. Leon Say suggests a doubt whether people Avill be happier when the Sanitarians become master and succeed in regulating our lives to the minutest detail. In his opinion those who look at this matter from the scientific point of view should spare no effort to check this new protectionist movement. M. Leon Say has declared himself before all things a strong advocate of private initiative, all the more so because the limits of the rights of the State in tho matter of hvgione cannot be determined ^
This conception of the State, as possessed of tho attiibutes of omnipotence and providence, does not find favour A\ith every- one. But even the select minority, which condenms all this absorption of economic activity, this reduction of laltour to a state of pupilage, resists but feeljly the pretensions of hygiene, and so it comes that we find in an essay by the Comte
' Hygiene has, in fact, become an tlie tyranny of hygiene, and to risk
official career. Those who fill tlie a revolution in order to gain our
posts given hy the State, seek to make liberty of eating and flrinking, and
themselves indispensable. One of the to limit the Imsyboilydom of Saiii-
most distinguished of French doctors tarians in the concerns of our private
wrote to me recently that it will he life, necessary to make a new ■ 89 ' against
2i8 A Pica for Liberty. [vii.
iVHaussonvilk'^ the following phrase, which shows ns how far the error which we are discussing lias advanced: —
' The State, I mean by the term the power of the public which is exercised by the central or municipal authority, is primarily the guardian of the public health, of public and moral hygiene. As it is the duty of the State to take measures to prevent the Im-th of epidemics and to an-est their progress, so also it is its duty in a general way to see that the lives of its citizens are passed under conditions of good hygiene.'
The reader must not suppose from our protest against the meddlesomeness of official hygienists that we are indifferent to the very gi-eat importance of good sanitary arrangements, but we believe that there are methods of attaining our ends other and better than those put* forward by the prophets of universal interference.
Before embarking on the discussion of the Housino- of the Poor, we may here interpose a statement of the elaborate programme of the German socialists which will appear to contain the maximum of demand of this kind.
In 1873 the German socialists considered a petition intended for presentation to the Reichstag. It contained the following- points : —
(i) Every commune ought to be compelled by legislation to provide lodging sufficient for those within its jurisdiction, and as far as possible in detached dwellings.
(2) Every commune shall be authorised to appropriate lands not yet built on, whoever the proprietor may be, in order to construct dwellings and school-houses : further, it shall be at liberty to exercise this right of expropriation even outside its own territory.
(3) The State shall provide sufficient capital under the form of paper-money.
{4) This paper-money shall be secured as a charge on the lands and buildings. Each commune shall receive the neces- sary sums in the shape of an advance without interest, and with the obligation to repay after a long period.
(5) \\ hoever has claim to a dwelling will pay a suitable rent-premium and must himself inhabit the dwelling.
(6) The communes shall remain proprietors of the land and buildings. They may not however disturb any of their
' Cte. d'Haussonville, Socialisnie d'Etut et SociaUsme Clnetien. Eevite des Deux Mundes clii 15 .Tuin, 1890., p. S59.
VII.] I/onsiui^ of Wor/xhti^-C/assLS and Poor. 2ic)
ti'imnb* in the »'iiJ<»yiiK*iit <»t' tlicir jtrciniM'S, so lout; as tliu cniulitioiis of triifmc\- nro liillillf<|. As a t<'iMjM>r}iry iiifasun' cvt-ry I'oiiiMumo is oblij^a-tl to provide sht-lkr pi(i\ i>i'iii;illy lor those who hnvo none until (Uvtiiint^ are matle.
Those proj)ositions, and even the idea of petiti<»ning, were stroiiLjly <>[)]>osed. J'Jv a larijje majority it was declarrd that these pro{>ositions wen* reaetionary and altogether too moderate; that their authors \vishe<l to deeeive the people of Ik-rlin, and that the meeting rejected all such rubbish. Workmen were invited to join themselves to the association of German work- men in order to solve the Social (piestion by common action on the lines of liberty '.
To .show what is asked for in France, we may state that an administrative connnission was appointed, in i<SHj, by the I'refet of the Seine in order to study the questions relative to the creation in Paris of cht ap dwellings. A score of projects and petitions were examined by this commission, a lal)Our which has not yet home fruit. Nationalisation of the soil according to the gospel of Heniy George, and schemes for lotteries, were agi'eeably mixtd. One councillor demanded in the interest of the town oi Paris the confiscation of the soil within the cii'cle of fortifications, and the compensation of landlords by means of connnunal bonds secured by mortgage and redeemable. ]M. Lerouge proposed the construction, by the town, of three-storied houses on the land adjoining the fortifications within the walls by means of capital raised (i) by a loan of 300 millions of francs. (2) by a tax of 2 francs per head on every one coming to Paris from a distance greater than t\venty-fi^■e kilometres. The Federative Socialist I'nion of the
' M. Engels, thti' follow- worker of by the trade of agriculture alone, they Marx, aiul the pliilusopher of revolu- aie content with very small wages to tionary .socialism, has attacked what make end.s meet. This state of things he calls the • huiuLieois ' Milution of has its influence on the town-work- making the wurkman the owmr of his man, and contributes to ke«i> the rate of house. InGermany,accordingtohim, his wages very low. In time past the the number of workmen in the small ownei-shij) of his house was perhaps industries who own their liouses and a benefit to the Labourer ; to-day it is a little bit of garden, is veiy con.sider- a cause of bondage for himself and a able; none ">f them, however, receive misfortune for the entire working- anything but a miseral)le wage. It class. According to M. Engels, the is only a trick to enable the infamous insanitaiy condition and dearness of capitalist to buy his labour cheaper dwellings are the neces.saiy accom- in proportion to the extra production paniment of our present social or- of the labourer and his family on gani.sation, and will only disappear their own land. As thev cannot live with it.
2 20 A Pica for Liberty. [vii.
(.Vntro flemands the application of the surplus of the forthcoming- budi/ct to the construction by the town of Paris of workmen's dwellings, ami the establishment of a tax of 20 per cent, on dwellings remaining unoccupied for a month. We meet also many proposals for a lottery with a capital of a milliard of IVancs, for the purpose of making dwellings for those members of the Parisian proletariate whose income does not exceed a certain figure.
In England the demand made on the State varies. At one time it is for the multiplication of inspectors of nuisances and an enlargement of their duties and powers : at another it adopts the language of the Social Democratic Federation, and insists on ' the compulsory construction of healthy artisans' and agricultural labourers' dwellings in proportion to the population.' The Glasgow municipality has already made some experiments in the building of artisans' dwellings, and the Loudon County Council is proposing to l)uild common lodging-houses.
To sum up the views of these reformers, some are in favour of a nationalisation of dwellings : others demand that the State or the local authority shall build for its own functionaries, for workmen and for the poor; others wish to combat the ■vsiiry of the landlord, the excessive price sought for dwellings which are insanitary and too small.
Among the most important factors of development physical, moral, and intellectual, the Dwelling must be placed in the first rank ; it is the sphere in which the life of the indi- vidual and of the family is passed. No one denies the incon- veniences, physical and moral, of the insanitary dwellings inhabited by a portion of the working-class and by the poor. The miserable condition of their homes, the overcrowding which reigns there with its following of disease of all kinds, with its accompaniment of crime and vice, the permanent danger which results therefrom to public health and public order, all these have been oftentimes brought to light. \\e are not dealing with a curse purely local, for indeed it appears to be universal. Everywhere we meet the same melancholy phenomena, in France, in England, in the United States, in Germany, in Switzerland, in Austria, in Belgium, in Holland.
Attempts liave been made to remedy this by legislation, by sanitary regulations, and b}- the assistance of charity. Progress has been made ; but it has not been possible to ti-ansform the
\ii.] //oKsiiii^ of U'orl-iui^-C/asscs and Poor. 221
dwelliui^'S of tho Avmknien and of the poor (I speiik of tin; m'ejit iMHSs of tho waLCt'-caniiui; class) into |)i(»]K'r and com- fortahh' (|uarti'r.s : above all, it has not been possildc, oven l)y artificial means, to increase the resources and wages of the poor to any sufficient extent.
'J'ho knot of the <lifHculty is the poverty of fhose who live huddled up in infei-tious hovels, ignorant or indifferent to tho reciuirenients «if hviriene. of ni(jdestv and decenc\'. This niav he the result of circumstances or may proceed from evil habits of intemperance mid idleness, or from mere absence of desire, due to inexperienci' of better things.
All the harrowing descriptions which we have read, and which we have been able to verify, combine to make more pressing the solution of the problem — "How to improve the housing of the working-class and of the poor?' ' It is admitted that the present condition is deploralde as regards the liealth not only of the inhabitants themselves, but of the whole town, because these insanitary dweUings are the breeding- place of infectious diseases. The misery which they endure in this respect makes workmen and the poor an easy prey for the ])ropagation of revolutionary ideas ; a social danger is thus added to the physical danger. The lodging of the poor is one of the nuxst complicated subjects and most ditHcult of solution. It forms one of the branches of the entire social prolileni e(|ually with questions of food and clothing. Tho same rules and the same principles, with certain restrictions obvious enough to common sense, apply to this whole combination of ])roblems. The duty of the »State and of municipalities is clear —it is their mission to make war on the owners of insanitary dwellings and on those who are responsible for creating a public nuisance : but such action can cany us but a very little way in the solution of the problem now befoie us '.
One cannot under any circun)stances ask the State to supply dwellings or food gratuitously, or under cost price, without doing an injustice to those who do not share in these favours, and without risk of demoralising the poorer classes. Such
' Wi' aiT aware < if till' Kiigli^h law-, have l)fCJi ajipliL-'l in LuiuIkh jiiiil Bif-
<'t" 1S75 and 1885 giving to tlie local minghani. In London thejf has liccu
autliorities the power t<> improve, if spent in this way some £1,841, i jO.
noeessary to deniolisli, insanitary Tlie original estimates have always
areas in cases where tlie res])unsi- liccn exceeded, sometimes doul)]ed, or
l>ility cannot he eqnitahly fastened even trehled. 3.^,000 peiNons r-aii be
on an individual owner. These laws lodged in the improved districts.
22 2 A Plea for Liber fy. [vii.
food and dwelling at a cheap rate entail a loss on the State, •which requires the imposition of a tax to meet it. This in- crease of taxation falls on the whole nation, and falls most heavily on the poor. Such State aid has moreover a further disadvantage. It discourages private enterprise and private industry. If the State constructs, or causes others to con- struct, houses to be let below cost price, it impedes private building and produces a result the very reverse of that hoped for.
Insanitary conditions proceerl from the great crowding of human beings in buildings which were not made for the accommodation of so great a number of pei-sons. from the entire nesflect of sanitarv rules, and from the accumulation of filth.
The causes of this overcrowding are the extreme poverty of the inhabitants which prevents their seeking for houses, healthier, larger, and in consequence dearer, and which forbids any great number of them living at a distance from the place where they earn their living : the increase of population due to natural causes and also to the constant immion-ation of workmen drawn from the country or provincial towns towards the capital: lastly, the demolition of quartei's inhabited by workmen, which have disappeared to give place to new streets, railway stations, and markets, or which have been swept away for reasons connected with the health or em- bellishment of the town. For this extreme want there is no remedy. Poverty is incurable. For the cure of bad habits, in respect of cleanliness, we must aim ourselves with patience. This is a matter of education.
By the aid of an active and energetic watchfulness on the part of local authorities, we might, it will be said, prevent the existence of insanitaiy dwellings, force landlords to keep their property in a better state : we might exercise a closer inspec- tion of the construction of new houses and requii-e that they come up to a certain minimum of sanitation. But it must not be forgotten that in many countries laws and police regulations have not been vranting. that there has been no lack of weapons in the arlministrative arsenal. We must not lo;-e sight of the fact that legislation against bad sanitation requires, in order to be effective, a complicated and costly staff of in- spectors perpetually on the move : that the application of rules depen'ls less on the officials and magistrates than it does on the inhabitants themselves, who are more cUsposed to evade than
VII.] Housing of Working-Classes and Pcoi-.
— ,t
to eonionn to reo^latinn. If the poorer classes inhal'it garrets, cellars, holes and comers. Avithout light or air in houses lta«lly built and badly kept up, it is because they cannot find V»etter at a price which ihey can pay. and thi-y prefer to lodge in these hovels rather than not be lodged at all. So we are Itrought Itack to our problem the solution of which, ti say the least, is very difficult — given a great town, to furnish the p<^tor popula- tion which accumulates there, with lodging, suitable, spacious, airy, and provide*! with everything that is desirable.
Let us resolutely exclude heroic remedies, which can only be worse than the disease. We mean the remedies of socialistic formulas. There is no one formula or panace-a. It is to the progress of comfort, of moral education, of the practical in- struction of the industrial classes, that we must look for the gradual amelioration of the hygienic conditions of populous centres. Puldic administrators can without doubt caiTv out useful works and improve the general stale of .sanitation bv the construction of diaLns. and by procuring water at a reason- able rate : general iiiles also can be established for the safe- guai-d of the public health, but it is wise to think twice before allowing authority to interfere in the domain of private life, on the plea of the public safety.
It cannot be forgotten that every infraction of the liberty of conti-act carries in itself the germs of retribution. Try to protect the workman against the extortion of his landlord by the intervention of the law and we aJl know the unfortunate? consequences which result. It is useless to waste our time over projects of fixing a dwelling-house tari tF by the local authority.
Among the most efficacious means of influencing the homes of the working-class, we must .set the improvement of ways of communication and facility and cheapness of transport.
Satisfactory results have been obtained by private initiative bv the construction of model mansions, of working-class cities. The portion of the working-class who are in the easiest ciicumstances, those who eain a regular wage, have to some extent obtained their requirements from this source, and in consequence thei-e are so many the less to be brought into line with the others.
It is the business of private industiy. of philanthropic enter- prise, of associations of workmen themselves, to supply better dwellings. If the buildings set apait lor the dwellings of
2 24 -^ Pica for Liberty. [vtt.
■workmen Lrouii'lit in a fair revenue their number wcjuld at once increase. Eut I repeat, it is only by reHex action that we can hope to reach those whom the English call the residuum, the dregs of destitution. The work must proceetl step by step, stratum by stratum. Fii'st, avc must offer houses relatively comfortable and health}', Avith an option to the tenants to become owners. Here we shall l)e dealing witli tlie elite of the working-class, and with small einplui/es (these last are as interesting as the workman and have much more to complain of, for they are liable to more expense), but the indirect result of the improvement will be felt down to the very bottom of the scale.
I have insisted from the very beginning of this paper on what I might call the negative side of the problem, on the objections to every intervention of the local or national authority, and to State trading in dwellings. I have insisted on the great difficulty of the problem, on the poverty of those who inhabit crowded, unhealthy, and inconvenient rooms, and on the excessive price, in proportion to their resources, which they have to pay. The more modest the income, the more serious becomes the proportion of it ajjsorbed by rent. In the workman's l>udget the fffth or the fourth part of his wages is devoted to rent.
I have hastened to arrive at positive results in order to come in view of the bright side of my subject, and, after having displayed its difficulties, to show what private initiative has been able to undertake. Pros^ress must come from the elite of the governed acting for themselves. The weight of a sound and persistent public opinion is an essential factor, and we can all do something to keep it watchful and awake. We must try to prevent the return of those periods of apathy and indifference which follow tlie shock of a somewhat lively agitation, the revelations made by writers, or the close of an epidemic. But, even during these periods when attention wanders to other objects, philanthropists or economists, re- formers or capitalists follow their voluntary mission, seek to educate the rich and comfortable classes, and to call them to a recognition of the social duties which they have to perform.
We may be permitted t(^ ])a}' a compliment to the Academy of the Moral and Political Sciences, which for the last forty-one years has devoted much serious attention to
VII.] I/ousim;- of 11 '()//,-/ /{i;-C/(issiS and Poor. 225
thiH ^q-avn pruItU'iii. Tlu! Society ol" Social Kcoiiomy. iindor tilt! intliitiuc of MM. Picot iiml (iuyssoii, has di'votctl mauv sittinj^'s to tlu' lJUl•^tioll, and, takin;,^ (jiic .stt'p I'urtlici', has hy iiu'aiis ul" |)iivate initiative organised an on(|iiiry ami addresbed an appeal to men of ])ul)lie spirit. It carries out, in ita own origan La Rf^furnir ^'o<'/t//<^, the publication ol' the leports ^vhi(•h it has colU'c'tt'd.
'riie Knglish |)arlianientary entjuiries are well loiown, as is also the private en(|uiry made in Clermany hy the care ol" tho 1 ''etel II fill' iS'oc Iu/jkiI it ik.
J)uring the Universal Ivxhihition of 1889, a Coni^resa on chea}) dwellings was held at Paris, which voted, among other resolutions, to reconnnend the f<jrmati(tn of natiijiial societies. It should he the ohject of these bodies, by means of conferences, publications, collection of information, to encourage the indus- trial and working-class in the construction of healthy and cheap houses, by the help of co-operation or local associations. It recommeuded also the formati(^n of an Liternatioual Society for the study of (piestions relating to the improvement, sanita- tion, and construction of cheap dwellings.
At the Conclusion of a conference held on the ist February i<Syo, at Paris, the French ^Associdtioii des habitations a bou marclie,' was foumled. It numbers more than 300 members, and has control of a coiLsiderable capital. It does not itself engage in building, but makes it its business to stimulate pul)lic opinion by lectures and by pamphlets, and to assist with advice and information, those directly interested (the wage-earning and working-class), as well as the capitalist class, in the construc- tion of houses to be let at low rentals. Its action has already made itself felt in France. Here in truth is an example of private initiative worthy of imitation outside of France.
The collection of works dealing with the housin</ of the w^orking-class and of the poor would already till a liln-ary, and it increases every day '•
Great successes have been achieved on a practical basis. They have been gained where the matter has been treated on a business footing, not as a matter of charity pure and simple. It is of the highest importance to prove that the capital en- gaged in the construction of sanitary dwellings is not lost, that it has obtained a fair remuneration, and that it has every
' A liilili'^grnphy* lias beon puh- let,- clipz Ronuiiv rt C'if>, l^Miti-urs, lished by MM. Raftalovich and Rouil- Paris.
Q
2 26 A Pica for Liberty. [vii.
chance of security. Proof of this is indispensable, if other capital is to be attracted. It has been proved to demonstra- tion in England, in Franco, in the Ignited States, in Belgium, in Denmark. The capitalists, who liave either turned builders themselves or subscribed to joint-stock companies, or bought and repaired old houses, have, it is true, limited the remunera- tion of their capital to a sum lower than that which some owners derive from the purely commercial development of their real estate.
The}' content themselves with a return of 4 per cent, in France, in England, and in Germany, and. of 5 or 6 per cent, in the United States. They have got rid of the charitable character of their enterprise, which is humiliating for those who profit by it. People do not appreciate a gratuitous benefit equally with that w^hich they have gained for themselves at the cost of personal exertion. To be complete we must add another category, namely philanthropists, like Peabody, Michel and Armand Heine, who have devoted large sums of capital to the inauguration of the work, leaving the rents to accu- mulate for the extension of the operation. The tenant in such cases enters into an ordinary contract, and, as far as he is concerned, the transaction is of a purely commercial nature.
If this supply of healthy and relatively cheap dwellings has not brought about a lower rate of rent it is because the supply is still limited. We know, however, of places where rent has decreased in the immediate neighbourhood of these more comfortable houses, notably at Lyons. Even when it is not possible to supply accommodation at a price appre- ciably lower than the market rate, it still remains that new dwellings, built in a spirit of progress and philanthropy, present conditions of health and convenience far superior to anything to be found by their side. In this way, the means of having a real home which will keep together the members of the family, and prevent them from seeking outside for unwhole- some distractions, is placed within the reach of the working- class, particularl}^ of the elite of that class.
Long ago the question of working-class dwellings has been solved, as far as concerns the part of the population which works in factories established outside of the towns. For the most part in tlie great mining and mineral industries, as well as in the country factories for spinning and weaving, &c.,
VII.] //oiisi)ii^ of U'oj-/:iiiii-C/asscs and Poor, 227
uluTt' a tfroat mnnhfi- of Moikiiion ait* rctrulurlv ciniilovcfl, tlnj (IwrlliiiLrs necessary lor the workiiian ami liis laiMily have hctn aiMi'il as an an nc.i-r.
This creation of such villa;^os as aro to be seen in tlie iu'liis- trial reu:ions of the north, east, ami west of Fmnco, forms jiart of the iioiiiiai outhiy of eaj»it;il reijiiired from hiri^e employers of laliour. The <'mj)loyeis have an inti-n st in uttnietinLC ami retaininir in the nei'fhliourhood of their woi'ks the lahonrers whom they require, ami in si'ttliiej; them thei'e undt-r conditions favourable to their health and to the moral and material welfare of their families. It is this clear understandin;jj of the interest of industry which has created these groups of workint;- class dwelliny;s, and which makes the extension of the system certain, especially where the nature an<l importance of the estalilishment render it possil)le.
For France we may (piote the case of Anzin, le Creu/ot, Connuentrv, Idanzv, Heaucoiu't, Noisiel. In the coal <listricts of the north in iNy^ eighteen firms out of twenty-three had built 7000 houses, at a cost of eighteen million francs. Tlio rent of these was very considerably lower than the ordinary rent of such houses. In England many instances of this kind can l)e quoted; the best known are the establishments of the Salts at Saltaire, Messrs. Hazell, Watson & Viney, printers, at Aylesbury, Messrs. Cadbury Bros., cocoa manufacturers, at Bourneville, Messrs. Unwiu Bros., jtrintcrs. Chihv(»rth, Messrs. Courtauld & Co., crape manufacturers, Halstead, and the many colliery villages belonging to large-minded employers of labour like the Peases of Darlinoton. In America the Indus- trial village is more familiar, and the best example is furnished by the American Watch Co. in the village of Waltham, wdiich has now the largest watch factory in the world. Li Prussia seventy industrial firms have built 529 houses, of which their workmen may become owners; 1141 have built H751 houses for letting. Out of 4850 industrial firms 34 per cent, have provided, directly or indirectly, for the lodging of their work- men (1878). In the coal basin of Saarbruck 3742 houses have been built. The miners' banks have contributed 2.062,000 marks, the State, the proprietor of the mines, has advanced 1,897.000 marks, of which, in 1874. 814,000 marks had been redeemed. At the Silesian mines, in 1872, 450 houses had abeady been built, containing house-room for 1800 families. The most important experiment was that of Krupp at Essen,
Q 2
2 28 A Pica for Liberty. \\\\.
where out of a staft' of 65,776 personB, 18,698 in 1881 were living- ill houses belonging to M. Krupp.
Those few fiii-nres sliow that it is in their own best interests that employers have been prompted to provide foi- the ] lousing of their workmeii. In a certain number of cases they have in addition given facility to their men to l)ecome owners of tlieir houses by payment of annual sums, calculated so that the purchaso-money is met by payments spread over a more or less extended period.
Very great importance rightly attaches to the possibility of turning the workman or the petty emijloye into a landed pro- prietor. It is the best moans of encouraging the spirit of order, of economy, and of inculcating the all-valuable st^nti- ment of personal responsibility.
Among the institutions which aim at the creation of cheap dwellings we must distinguish the different objects which each has in view.
(i) Those which aim at building small houses, with facility given to the tenant to become owner by means of annual in- stalments. Such l)uilding can be done by associations of working-men and small capitalists, by joint-stock companies, or l)y individual capitalists.
(2) Those which aim at building largo houses with accom- modation for many tenants.
(3) Those which seek to improve old houses.
These objects are pursued l)y a variety of organisations, viz. : I. Building Societies. Those who attach a great value to individual action, to self-help, and to the co-operation of indi- vidual eflbrt, will understand why we put Building Societies in the first rank ^ Their name of building societies indicates the primary object of these associations, but .it no longer de- scribes their present mode of operation. They no longer build (at most they finish the construction of houses left unfinished by liorrowers). They are essentially loan societies, their capital comes from contributions paid as a rule month by month, but their advances are only made on the security of real estate, land or houses. The peculiarity of these advances is that they are repayable, capital and interest, by monthly payments. It
' According to <lic definition of tlio to their members on real property by
law of 1874, Building Soeioties are way of mortgage. Some also make
estal)lislii"d for tlif eolicction of funds advances on shai'es, but this is the
or ('a)iital in oriU r to make advances exception.
VII.] IfousiiiQ- of H'o) /cinii-C/asscs and I\hv. 229
f()lln-\vs that as tlicKo sooieticH rt'C«.'i\f a jioitioii nf ilnir capii;)! at oneti tlu'y ari^ aMc to make a<lvaiircs iiiiicli laiL^" r in |'r<i|ii»i-- tiou to tlio actual valiuj ol" tlu; iiioit,i;a;,frtl propi-ity than an onlinary civditor. Tliis mode otadvam-f is very advniita^cous to ]Hrson» of small fortuiu'. The Nvorkniaii raniiiiL,' a ;j;o<)il Ava^c, the clerk, the small shopkeeper, althoii;.;li he has hut a small disposalile ca]>ital, is alile to buy his house, and often l)ecomes owner of it at the end of twelve or fourteen years, for a total sum not much in excess of what ho would have had to pay in rent alone.
h\ tlie Ignited Kingdom, oil iJec. ]i. 1<S.S6, there were ^079 jocicties, of which ii;ty2 "svere in England, 46 in Scotland, and 41 in Ireland. Their mortgage property amounts to .^'53,101,000. They owe '^'i^ millions to their shareholdeis and .3£'r";,(S 17,000 to other depositors ^
A huilding society often works in alliance with an estate or land society, which j)urchases at a low^ price large areas of land and re-sells them by lot with the extra profit which the building of a city gives.
In many instances also the J^nglish co-operative societies have orgjinised building departments, or have atliliated them- selves to building societies-.
The number of co-operative building and loan associations spread thronghout the great American republic may 1)0 iixed at between 30CO and 3500. The savings accumulated during forty years in the shape of houses and laml and paid by the occupants and their families must certainly exceed one hundred millions, reckoned in English money, and reaches ]>ei-haps one hundred and sixty millions. For the last twelve } ears in Philadeljdiia alone these accumulations of capital are reckoned at twenty millions sterling, and the yearly deposits at more than one million. At the present time the deposited savings amount to forty millions sterling for this town alone. In the "svhole countiy there are six times as many building societies as here.
In Philadelphia, out of a population of 900,000 souls,
' 111 Loods, a tuwji uf 320,000 in- X'i66. In iS,S6, 9400 weiv ini>rty;i.^'il,
linbitants, two .societies account to- of wliich 3000 Ix'longcd to workmen,
gethcr for 11,000 imnibfrs. In tlic In Newcastle, r.irniinghiun, and Hiis-
last twenty years nir.re tli;ui 18,000 to), we find tlic same ia<-ts as at I^eeds.
liouses have passed thnaiiili tlie )i;inils - Sixty societies liave sj)ent more
of the Leeds Permanent Building So- than £500,000 in tJie l)uilding of cot-
ciety. Theaverage vahie of a house is tages.
230 A Pica for Liberty. [vii.
1 8 5,000 were workmen, and out of this number it is calculated that 40,000 to 50,000 workmen were owners of their own houses. It is true that at P]iiladel})hia the land on which the town is built permits an unlimited extension, and each year the city surrounds itself with a new ring of neat little houses of red brick, each of which forms the home of a siugle family. The public healtli is better at Philadelphia than at New York. From the point of view of poor-law and charitable relief the comparison is cijually favourable, for with its 900.000 inhabitants Philadelphia hardly spends more than Boston, which has a population of 360,000. Workmen are not afraid to go for lodging to the suburbs and to make a railway journey of an hour or three-quarters of nn hour twice a da}". The system of street railways is nowhere so fully developed as at Philadelphia. In New York l)uilding societies have made great and sudden progress. From January to September, i88(S, more than 15,000 persons be- came members.
We may congratulate ourselves on this rapid development ; we have here the proof that, with the aid of suitable associa- tions, persons earning two shillings per da}^ can create a capital and can lend it to others. At the same time it is not neces- sary to deny the dangers which may result fi'om ignorance of the most elementary rules of finance and account-keeping, and from a tendency to speculate among those who lead and form the membership of these societies.
The system of building societies is certainly one of the best contrivances to give birth to a spirit of economy among persons who have but a very small income to spend. It offers a gTeat attraction to those who pay rent for house or boarding-house accommodation and who wish to free them- selves from it. Borrowing, which so easily demoralises a workman. Ix'comes in this case a stimulant to thrift and wise household economy.
Outside of the Anglo-Saxon countries we meet with associa- tions for building in Denmark. At Copenhagen an association has been founded, in 1865, by the workmen of the firm of Bur- meister and Wain. It numlwred, in 1884, 13.500 mend^ers ; it has aided in the construction of '/m houses to the value of five and a-lialf million francs, and inhabited by 4381 persons. A quarter of the sums advanced has been repaid, and 200 new houses arc being built. Similar societies exist in niany Danish
VII.] I lousing of Working-Classes and Poor. 231
towns ; in Switzfrl{iiid(n<»t:il'ly at Ijak'); in (It-nimny imdt r tho iiilliiciicc of Si-lml/i'-lJflit/.scli, tin- j,'rc'at promoter ot" the co- opiTutivu inoveim-nt in CJoriiiaiiy, j^ivat iiiiportanff lias always laen utUiched to tlie co-oporation ot'sniall capitalists lor the ])ur- p08e of conibiiietl action in the construction and purchase of hon>os ; liut it docs not sccni that this inovcinciit, which has produced such remarkable rtsults in En<^land and the United States, has been eijually fruitful on the other t-ide of the Khine. Instances are to be found at Listerbur^^ Halle, Flensburg. In iiS(S6 a society <»f this kind was formed at Berlin (Eerliner l)augenossenschaft). The system adopted is that (jf a weekly deposit, giving a right to a share of a jc francs. When any one has been member for six months and owns at least one share, he may lay claim to a house when its building is finished. If there are several candidates, lots are drawn.
We shall speak later of the permanent s(jcicty of Orleans. At Reims, the real estate union (L'Union Fouciere) was founrled, in J 870, by the employee and workmen of the town. It is a co-operative society for the construction of working-class dwellings, and connnenced its operations in 1S73. Members of the society are required to pay an entrance fee, which is not returnable, and to contribute an annual deposit of twenty-five francs at the least, bearing interest at five per cent. The society pos.sessed some years ago forty-eight houses, each of which had cost from 4500 to 6000 francs. The yearly instal- ment to be paid by those who mean to become proprietors in twenty years varies from 2.50 to 450 francs.
At the risk of seeming to lack method, we must here inter- pose a word in passing on the co-operation of Savings Banks, led as they are by the thrift of the poorer classes. In Italy and in the United States they employ a part of their funds for mortgage loans, to facilitate the construction of cheap houses. Men whose opinion is entitled to respect have urged the same duty on the Savings Banks of France. Thanks to M. Aynard of Lyons and to M. Rostand of Marseilles, a first step has been taken in this dii'ection^
II. We come next to the Joint-Stock Company (Societe anonyme), whose business it is to build cheap houses and to sell them by means of yearly instalments to workmen. The
' See Les Questions d'Economie sociuk dans une grande rille populaire, par Eugene Rostand.
232
A Pica for Liberty
[V,I.
list is hapjiily a very long oue, and we caimot pietend to set it out in any completeness.
In the tirst rauk^ on the contijient^ -we nuist mention ' Lci Bociete den Cites Ouvrieres' of Mulhousc. With a capital of some hundred thousand francs, to which arc added loans guaranteed by the Society, 1200 working-class houses have been built in the space of thirty years ; a thousand of these houses have been paid for by purchasers by means of a deduc- tion from their wages, the amount of which has not been much in excess of the ordinary rents paid in other parts of the town-^. At Paris we find 'Z'< fSociete anonijme (/c'« habitations
^ At Mullioust', in 1S77, the Ikhiso with a story was sold for 3400 marks ; JiiHises witli a ground-floor only, \\crv sold for 2600 )uarks. The j^rices have to-day risen to 44S0 and 2760 marks. The priee of the storied lioiise had thus risen 32 per cent, and that of the single- storied house only 6 per cent. ; and the rise represents the rise in the })rice of labour, and in the value of the land. This one-storied house has not beeii Iniilt since 1S86 ; workmen jirefer the storied liouse, and it has been found neeessaiy to enlarge the dimensions. This in jjart explains the advance in price ■which is due to the increased value of the ground, tlie expense of liuilding, and to the im- Iii-ovements added to theoriginal phi ns.
M. de Lacroix, in a report on tlie Institutions of Public Utility in La liaute Alsace from 1S7S to 18S8. a.sks if tiiis house of 4480 francs, whicli has now taken tlie phice of that valued at 2760 francs, and which up to this date had been generally built, was not too dear for a working-class family who.se income has not increased in the same projiortion.
'It appears that it is not so. and the cause is not that wliicii we could have wished. The ground-Hoor cot- tage w'ith its kitclien and two little rooms could fmly with difficulty l)e made to serve for more than one family. It was not in faf-t liuilt foi- this purpose, and it would have licen desii'able tliat it should never be diverted from its original use. 'J"he
laws of hygiene would liavi- been better observed. But the purcliasei's in their anxiety to discharge their debt sought too often to ci-eate a source of revenue by letting a room or even a small tenement ; and it is this cause which lias given ri.se to all the irregular gable ends and addi- tions, which the Societj' cannot jire- vent, and which gives to the parts of the towns occupied by one-storied dwellings an aspe<-t so odd and un- seemly. Once embarked on this road the woi'kman sees that the storied house lends itself better to this trade, and liis demand is therefore for that class of house. The .Society supplies his demand, and it is thus that the new storied house of 1SS7 aj)})eared. But what happens ? the owner makes three tenements of his house. One on the ground-floor, one on tlie first floor, and another in the attics. He occupies one himself, generally the ground or first floor, and lets the two others — one at ten or twelve marks l)er month, the other at four marks ; and in this way he gets nearly five per <-ent. interest on the )inrcliase-money remaining due after his fii'st deposit of 240 marks has been made. But at theprice of howmuch inconvenience ? This house, which is intended to shel- ter one family of five persons, slielters three families of perhaps ten ortwelve l)ersons — and all the rules of hygiene are set at defiance. Too often these liouses, without the possibility of ob- jection on the part of the Society, and
VII.] I/oiisiiiii of Jl'or/jiiii^-C/iissjs and Poor
oHvriereK ifr ]'u.^.^i/-Aii.lenH' loinnli'il with a caiiitiil of 200,000 francs. Tliis sot-itty has liniiti'd tlic iiiaxiuiiiiii iiitt'icst J»ay- al>lt' on its capital to 4 jti-r ciiit. \kv annum. Jt lias tlius Ircu altlc to fix the rent of its houses between 43<S ami 4H0 francs (all instalments of i)urchase-m(jney included), in adilitlon to a sum of -,00 to 1000 francs payaMe on entrance.
At [.lille ^ Ln Com iHHinic t iinintJulii'rt' tie LiUr, fornidid in 1867. with a c^ipital of 100, oco fi-ancs, which was increased \i\ a gratuitous subvention given by Na])olc'on 111, lias Imilt 301 liouKcs, t)f which 201 are sohl to their occuj)iers. Tlie price of each of these is about 3C00 francs; one-tenth is payable in advance aloUL,^ with the cost of registration, the balance by instalments, monthly or fortniglitly. during a i)eriod of fifteen years as a maximum, with })ower to ])ay at an earlier date. Since the origin oi" tlu; society the annual interest of 5 per cent, has been regularly paid to its shaic- holders.
At Saiiit-Quentin 'La Societe anonyine Saiid-QuentuioUe' has its home. The price of one of its houses is 2500 francs. At Annens ^ La Socu'ti' (ivovijmc des riKiisoiiK onvrihr.^,^ foundeil in J<S6j, with a capital of 300,000 francs, has created a new (juarter, built eighty-five liouses, soM at a price below the usual price of the neighliourhood. The price of liouses
Avitli'jut, ill iii;in\' iiistancos, its kiiow- It'dgo, j)as.s into tin' liands of spcfu- lators w)io tin not inlialiit tliem, ami who have no otlicr ol),J€'ct in vit-w Imt to (Tiiwil tiii'in as much as i)ossil»lc in ordi-r to ilorivu a hirgiT rovcnue tVum tlit'in."
M. do Lacidix adds, sadly. tJiat tlio great idea dreamt of by tlie foundfis of th<^ Permanent City of Mulhouse lia.s not yet home all its fruit. ' If on the one hand we liavo succeode(l in awakening in some tlic instinct of tlirift and family life, our success in .solving the iiioblem of healtliy and cheap dwiUings is still very imjier- feot. It is trui^ that the Society could have .succeeded completely in this second part of its task if it had re- tained own«M'ship and merely ht its houses. This is done in tlie country, and in many foreign centres of in- dustry. But tlif arrangement is not without its ditliculties. Ihiw js ;i
.society to he financed wiiidi ni>v<r realises? Wliat substitute can t.c found for the moralising stimulus of thrift which takes possession of every man who pos.sesses a corner of land or a moi-s.l of stone ?'
AVe have felt oV>liged to make this less encouraging quotation. It shows how difficult is the task of imj)roving the duellings of the poor. Things would not go better if the houses were built at .-i loss by the State or by tlir- niunicij>ality. 'i liere are in this matter difficulties which are inherent in all human affairs. English societies have had the same experience; at Shaftes- liuiy I'ark ])articidarly, I understand. There, attciiijit lias been made to I'e- ))urcha.se the liouses from the owners in order to "prevent the abuses d<'- scribed. It is on this account that sonic AVell- informed persons recommend buildiii'' for lease and not for sale.
2 34 ^ Pica for Liberty. [vii.
is about 3523 and 2762 francs^ payable by monthly instal- ments of 20 fj-ancs in fifteen years. Nine-tenths of the capital has actually been repaid ; interest at 5 per cent, has throughout been earned for the shareholders, and there remains 170,000 francs profit, which is to be used for the estabJishment of a school of domestic economy and apprentice- ship ^. We have spoken above of the Union fonciere of Keims. At Nancy La ^Societe iinmohiliere, with a capital of 200,000 francs, has built fifty-seven houses, costing from 4500 to 7000 francs, all sold to workmen. It has always paid 5 per cent, to its shareholders until i<S84, since then 25 per cent., and is now in liquidation. At Havre a company, 'La iSociete Havralse des Cites Ouvrieres,' was formed in 1871 with a capital of 200,000 francs under the direct influence of the Mulhouse association. It has built 1 1 7 houses representing an expenditure of over 5,oopco francs. In 18(84 it had sold ah-eady fifty-six houses, of which thirty-eight were entirely paid for ; conditions of sale, — first deposit 300 francs, complete purchase in fifteen years by monthly payments of 24 francs, in twenty 3'ears by monthly payments of 20 francs. The interest is limited to 5 per cent. At Bolbec there is a Societe ties Cites Ouvrieres with a capital of 100.000 francs.
At Orleans, in 1879, two workmen resolved to create the 'Soriete' irnrnohilierc' whose object it is to develop the spii'it of thrift by giving facilities for the acquisition of property. It had built 220 houses in 1887, all of which had found buyers who are paying off" the purchase-price in periods of twenty-five years.
In Eelgium wc may mention 'La l^oviete Vei'vie'toise' (of Verviers) for the construction of working-class dwellings ; 'Xa Socie'te Liegeoise des inuisons ouvrieres,' with 425 houses, of which 237 are sold.
In England, there is the Artisans, Labourers, and General Dwellings Company, whose object is to supply at a very low price a house for each family; it was instituted as a reaction against tlie system of barracks.
Not being able to build in London itself, it has gone into the country to seek for large areas. Up to t88i it endeavoured to encourage workmen to become proprietors. But at the present time the company is buying back the houses in order to avoid the evils of sub-letting and over-crowding. The
' Soo Lck Maisons ourriircs d'Amiow. par Elic Floury.
vii.] HoiisiuQ- of ll'oj l:i/ii^-CIas!:cs nm/ Poor. 2;, 5
coiiipnjiy lins civntod ivgular little townH. 6cco lioustH. Its cajiital is about .t£ i.2'>0,oco ; thf dividi'iid Ih ', per Cfiit.
111. We iKJW Conic to ourthird catcwrv, to those institutions whose ohject it is to Ijuild lionses fur a lar<j;e nuiidxT of tenants, ])ut witli j^ood sanitary arrani^ementK and a hif^her de<;^rec of condort. In tins class \vr must put the vari<jus societies and f<iun<latinns which exist in L<Midon. These havi^ spent nearly four nullions, and house 70,000 pei*sons. Wc can only naute the Metropolitan Association, the Pcaltody Gift, the Iniprovetl Industrial Dwellini; Company, the Society for Im- proving the Condition of the J^ahouring Classes'. The capital em])loyi'd is remnnerati'd at the rate of 3 to 5, per cent. In tlie case of the iValjody legacy there are no shareholders and the revenue is employed to extend the work. An inter- esting enterprise, which is less known, is that of the Suney ]iodge Estate. f(;und(Ml under the auspices of ^liss Cons, who lives in the midst of her tenants, and pays 4 per cent, to the shareholders.
In Paris, thanks to the nuinificence of the JMessieurs Heine, ^ La tSoriete jiJiildiidu-n/nijne' has built its first block of dwellings, Rue Jeanne d'Arc, in the middle of the XIIP'" ar- rondi.ssement. The buildiuLT contains seventy-seven rooms divided among thirty-five tenancies -. Two other blocks are to be erected in difi'erent parts of Paris, in quarters where healthv dwellimrs are most rare. A dwelliniz with forty-five tenements has been begun in the boulevard de Ureuelle.
At Rouen (December, 188,5). .300,000 francs have been raised, and six sc parate houses built containing ninety-five tenements.
At Lyons, in June 18S7. tenants took possession of the first group of houses built liy ilM. Ayuard, Mangini, Gillet. These gentlemen have contributed from their own pocket 200.000 francs, and to this has been added a loan of 150,000 francs from the reserves of the 8avins:s Bank. The remuneration of
* According to a table prepared by action. If the "SocielephihiuUnopique" Mr. Gatliffe, during the last forty earns 4 ]>er cent, on tlK- capital em- years uj) to 1SS6. 26,643 families, or pbiyed. it i-efutes the wild notions of J 46,809 pel-sons, have pmfitid from the Socialists who exjK'ct everything the improved dwelling movement in from the State, and wlio demand that London. the Commune.s should » mploy muni-
- M. Picot delivered an eloquent eipal resources, and that the State
address on the occasion of the oj)en- should use the liudget of France for
ing of these dwellings. 18 .Tune, iS88. the constmction of houses for the
' It is a social triumph, for it shows proletariate.' to the iiTesolute the possibility of
236 A Pica for Liberty. [vii.
the capital is guaranteed at 4 i)er cent. The promoters of the enterprise at Lyons having thus obtained a solid base of operations and those definite results, founded a company -with a capital of a million; 200.000 francs deposited by themselves, 300,000 francs to be raised in shares, 500,000 francs advanced from the reserves of the Savings Bank. They then bought 7300 moties for the building of twenty houses. At Alarseilles, thanks to the efforts of M. Jlostaiid, the Savings Bank of the town has been authorised to give assistance to a similar enterprise. It is only just to make the savings of poor people flow in this direction. Since i(S82, the Savings Bank of Strasbourg undertook to devote 392.000 francs from its reserve to the cou.struction of working-class houses. In Italy, the funds of Savings Banks and of the Societes de secours mutuels, are employed in the building of small houses.
At Brooklyn, we find the In^.proved Dwellings Company, founded by Mr. White, which pays a dividend of 6 per cent. At New York there is the Improved Dwelhngs Association, which divides 6 per cent., and a more recent enterprise, The Tenement House Building Company, which limits its dividend to 4 per cent.
To Miss Octavia Hill belongs the merit of inventing a s^'stem of her own, of which we cannot speak with too much respect. Her aim is the improvement of the housing of the poor by the purchase of insanitary houses, which are then put into a good state of repair, and managed economically in such fashion as to obtain a fair return upon capital. an(l all this without a suspicion of charity or socialism. In place of a dole, time and personal service is given, and there results much beneficial influence from intercourse between the tenants and their landlords or rent-collectors, who are all actuated by a spirit of well-considered philanthropy. In itSHj, Miss Octavia Hill and her imitators were owners of fifty-seven buildings of the value of .^'31 1,767, and affording accommodation for 1 J ,582 persons.
Miss Octavia Hill has founded a school not only in London but even in the United States, notably at New York and Boston, in Germany, at Darmstadt; and at Leipsic. At Berlin a company has been formed ; its council numbei-s M. Gneist among its members. It purchases houses, repaii's them, lets or soils thoiii. and seeks to develop in thom hal)its of order.
\ii.] Ifous'nii^ of U'orkiiiii-C/iissis aiul Poor. 2; 7
The authoriMMl eapitul is om- million iiinrki', of wliicli ^4S,ogo iiiiirl;s arc suhscriluMJ.
we must lu'ir ask j)L'niiis.si()n to ivitr to the .sclniinr nl" 'tenant tlnit't' {f'/)" lynt' iocutive), ■which M. C'osti^ has cxplaint'd in his a<lmiral>lc ^^■ol•k Lch questions ttnciules roiitemjxirai iif.s, iS,S6, p. 430. It consists in a \)h\u lor the i^'rathial acijuisition of morttra''*' bonds whieli conl'fr a ri<dit ol' lease and a contijict lor sale oi' the house occupied l)y the teiuuit, with a "gradual reduction ot" the amount of rent. Would it not be possiljle for insurance companies to make advances to workmen for the ]iui-j)ose of helpin^C them to bi'come owners of their houses? Workmen desinjus of owninLT their own home couM easily take out a policy from a life insunuice c<jmpany suftieient to give a reasonable security for the rcHjuired advance. There could be no investment more secure than the loan to a Avorkman on the security of the house in wliich he lives ^.
I have now arrived at the close of my survey, and it may be interesting to set down the resolutions propo.sed by me, and adopted by the Liternational C'on^^Tess held at Paiis during the Universal Exhibition. 1889: —
( 1) The problem of the supply of healthy and cheap houses, owing to the complexity of mtiuences at work, does not admit of an universal and absolute solution.
(2) It is for individual enterprise or for private combination to find the appropriate solution in each case.
' I Inivc received from the kindness (>f M. C'hoysson the following note. Lot us take I'lir our example the head of a family, aged 35, and a cottage, value 6000 francs. The Society let it with a contract for sale by instal- ments, payable in twenty years witii interest at 4 per cent.
Rent 240 francs.
Instalment of purchase- money 2CI ,,
Total yearly payment 44 1 „
The Society contracts with an In- surance Company a policy stipulating that, if the workman dies before twenty years, the assurance com- pany instead of his heirs will pay the instalments still due. The an- nual premium for such a policy would be
8S-20 francs. Add to tliis the rent 441 ,,
Total 529-20 „ Under these conditions the head of the family does not leave debt behind him if he dies. The house is free on the day of his di-atli, and Ipccomes the property of his heirs. This pre- mium is equal to 1-5 per cent, of the price of the house. If instead of availing himself of this additional security for pun-hase. the father of the family devoted this sum to the mon- rapid extinction of his debt, he would be able to complete his pur- chase in fifteen instead of twenty years. Which is liest for him, to complete his purchase, if he lives, in fifteen or t%vent\- years, or free him- self from all fear of an interruption by death of the process of purchase ?
238 A Pica for Liberty. [vii.
The direct interference of the State or of the local autliority with the market, for the purpose of competing- with private enterprise, or fixing the rate of rent, ought to be excluded from consideration. It is only admissiMf when the matter in hand deals with means of communication, sanitary police, and the equalisation of rates,
(3) The development of the construction of cheap houses in the outlying parts and suljurbs of towns is closely connected with a service of fre(|uent and economical transport (that is, reduced tariff on railways, workmen's trains, means of access into towns, tramways, steamboats, &c.).
(4) Among the resources to which appeal can be made, it is fit to mention the reserves of savings banks.
The intervention of savings banks in the development of the housing of the poor is legitimate and useful under conditions of reasonable precaution. The legislature can and ought to favour such intervention, by giving more liberty of investment for the deposits and trust funds of savings banks, and by reducing the burden of taxation.
(5) In order to reconcile the liberty of the purchaser with the obligations by which he binds himself in the contract for the purchase of a house, and in order to lighten, in case of death, the liability which falls on his heirs, it is worth while to consider carefully various combinations, e. g. clauses for the cancelling of contract and for the repayment of instalments, life insurances, mortgages, &c., &c.
To the above I add the resolutions passed at the same Congress on the motion of M. Picot, Member of the Insti- tute :—
( 1 ) Wherever the economic conditions permit of it, separate dwellings with little gardens should be preferred in the interest of the workman and his family.
(2) If the dearness of the ground or some other cause makes it necessary to build in the centre of the towns houses in which many families are accommodated under one roof, all the conditions of independence ought to be carefully preserved in order to minimise the contact between them.
(3) The plans should be conceived with a view of avoiding all occasion of meeting between the tenants. The stair land- ings and the staircases should be well lighted, and ought to be considered as a prolongation of the public road. Corridors and passages of all kinds should be carefully avoided.
VII.] I/oiisi/t'^ of irori-i)i:i-C/asscs and J'oor. 239
Kiieli tt'iieiiK'iit sliouM liuvf ins'nlr u w. c, n'Ci'iviii^ its li^lil from outside ainl providoil with wntrr.
(4) For t'umilics with cliildnn ot" (lifii-n-iit sexes a tlivisioii into three rooms is in<lisj)eiis;ililt'. in order to permit separation of the sexes.
{,',) Every restriction by whieh in';iiiy mi'.,dit In- <l<ini' to tin- complete independencu of thi' tenant and his family ought to !)(> ]trohiliited.
1 think this rapid survey of facts justitios our contcniion that althou<^di the tlifficulty is very groat, rapi<l ])rogrcss is being made in its solution, that the main obstacles to be rem(jved are : —
( i) The doubt that investment in wcjrkiiig-class houses may not prove remunerative.
(2^ The oftentimes destructive habits of poor tenants,
(3) An inconvenient system of land tenure prohibitive of free trade and enterprise in buiMing operations.
(4) The uncertainty caused b}' the threatening attitude of municipal socialism.
The tirst three of these we have shown to be superalde; the last can only lie cured l)y a healthier tone of public opinion, and by a fuller appreciation of the success which has attended private initiative.
AUTIILU R.VFF.VLUVICII.
YIII.
THE EVILS OF STATE TRADING AS ILLUSTRATED I'>Y THE POST OFFICE.
Out of the multiplicity of affairs with which the State Imsies itself, not one can be instanced in wliich it has been thoroughly successful. The reason of this is not far to seek. Years ago Mr. Herbert Spencer pointed out the positive and negative evils consequent upon the State frittering away its time and energies in schemes with which it should have no concern. Admittedly the main duty of the State is the defence of citizens against aggression ; it is manifest that this duty must be ill-discharged if the State undertakes other functions. ' It is in the very nature of things that an agency employed for two purposes must fulfil both imperfectly; partly because while fullilling the one it cannot be fulfilling the other, and partly because its adaptation to both ends implies incomplete fitness to either \' It is therefore quite natural to find that when the State undertakes to do those things which it ought not to do, it does them badly; and that its conduct of affairs which are foreign, as well as those which ai'e germane, to the discharge of its primary duty, is character- ised by bungling, extravagance, and inefficiency.
Although most people admit the superiority of private enterprise and administration to State-ownership and control, an exception is generally made in favour of one particular de- partment in wdiich it is contended the State has succeeded as a trader. That department is the Post Office, and socialists, who advocate State-ownership and control of <n-ery thing, instance that department as showing wliat the State can do
^ Essay on ' OviT-legislation.'
VIII. I The Jii'i/s of S/iiU' Tradiui^: 2.\i
Avln 11 it lakes the place ol" |»iiv!ite enter|)ri.se. uii<l lliey cniitriiil that it coiilil undertake the (li.strilintii»ii of ^ooils, cluthinn', I'nod, iscc, just as well as it undeitakes the dis- triluitinii ot" c'onespondeiice. Mrs. Hesant's advice to 'anyone \vhu thinks such distrihution iinpossijile' is to "study the ])ostal system now existing' '.' From the Jn<lividualisfc point of % lew nothinu" could he lietter. It" ])i'opl(^ would nuike themselves accpiainted with the fads connected with the eenci-al working" of tiiis socialist ideal, the I'ost ()tiice, tlio socialist huhhle woidd soon burst. To artbrd them an opportunity of actinj^" upon Mrs. Besant s advice is the object of the present essay, the writer l)eing persuaded that the best ri'futation of the specious theories of Socialism lies in the fact of their utter and disastrous failure whenever and wherever they have been put into practice.
If the State had ori^'inated and developed the present postal system one could rea<li!y iin<lerstand the uidimited ju.iise which is fre(|Uently bestowed upon it by the average member of the community, who looks merelv at the surface of things, and who. when he contemplates this colossal concern, with its facilities for the collection, distribution, and delivery of letters and telegrams and ]')are(ds, is filled with wondering awe. But when we consider that not one of the numy benefits connected with the system originated with the State, Imt that all have been forced upon it from without, and generally after long years of rfgitation and pressure, and that oven now the most ijuportant part of the work, that of conveying the mails, is done by private enterprise, there is no a})parent reason why we should feel indebted to the State for whatever advantages we happen to enjoy. Indeed, we have reason to complain that in consequence of State monopoly we have not a more l)erfect system than the one in existence. < )ver two hundred years ago private enterprise had established a peiuiy post in i^ondon. ' To facilitate correspondence between one part of London and another,' says Macaulay, 'was not originally one of the objects of the Post Office. ]jut in the reign of Charles the Second, an enterprising citizen of London, \\ illiam Doek- wray, 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 timeB a day in the outskirts of the capital. The improvement was, as usual,
Moilerti Hocialhw, pp. 29-30. 11
242 A Pica for Liberty. [vin.
strenuously resisted. . . . Tlu" utility of the enterprise was, however, so gi-cat and obvious that all opposition proved fruitless. As soon as it became clear that the speculation would bo lucrative, the Duke of York complained of it as an infraction of his monopoly ^ and the courts of law decided in his favour -.' Mr. Herbert Spencer, commenting upon this fact, says that if we judge by what has ha])pened in other cases with private enterprises that had small boginuiiigs, we may infer that the system thus connuenced would have developed throughout the kingdom as fast as the needs pressed and the possibilities allowx'd".
The very monopoly enjoyed by the State in the carrying of letters is in itself a tacit acknowledgment of its inability to contend with private enterprise. It has been urged that if it were not for the monopoly, companies would step in to take the profitable fields in the great cities, and would leave the rural districts to be worked by Government at a hea\-y loss. But the inevitable result from such a state of things would be to drive the Government completely out of the field, and the companies would then be compelled to deliver letters as they came into their hands. There are few businesses of which some portions are not more profitable than others, and if a company contracted to give postal service to such and such an area it Avould have to make the profitable deliveries in crowded neighbourhoods pay for the unprofitable ones in country districts, in just the same ^\'ay as railway companies have to do in the case of parcels. By the Act i Vic. cap. 33, the Post Oftice acquired the exclusive privilege of conveying from one place to another all letters, and of performing all the incidental services of receiving, collecting, sending, (k'spatching, and delivering the same. Certain exemptions IVom this exclusive privilege are made. For instance, a person may send a letter by one private friend to another, or by a messenger on purpose, concerning the private affairs of the sender or receiver thereof; letters of merchants, &c. may be sent out by vessels of merchandise : or letters concern-
' At the lu-.>t<iriitioii tlic pi-uwcds Ihm'ii })aid, wiTC bcttlcd oii tlic i>iike
of tlie Post Office ('.-I rude ;ind im- uf York.
perfect cstaldisluneiit of ])..sts f<ii- (lie -' m.-hiii/ K/KiKjIaii'l. \n\. i. pp. 3S5 G,
convej-arico of letters' s.^t iij. Iiy ;ni edition.
rharles I, s\ve]it ;i\vay liy (lie Civil ■■ Kssay 011 'Specialised Admiiiis-
War, and ri'suined under (lie (_'<.in- Iratiou.'* monwealth). after all expenses had
VIII.] The Evils of Stale Tindim^. 24^
iiig goods or iiiorchuinlise, sent l»y cnmiinni known carrifis to 1)1! tk'livt'rtMl \\\i\\ the trooils wliu'li such k'ttiTs coiifi'iii. iiiav !••; sent, |)n)vi(K'tl ncitlier hire, nor reward, ikm- other |irolit, nor udvantuge ho reei'ived for rcccivini; and (hdivcring surh Icttcis. Kxcfpting thc'.^o (.'Xi'nijitions fioni the I'-xehi^ive privilege of the Post Office, it was enacted hy 1 ^'ic. cap. 36, that —
ilvi TV |H inmii w In. sliiill convey iillKrwisi- than l>y (Ik- |>i>-t ;» jittir. . . . sli;ill I'lir cvrry Ifttcr (nrffit £-., i\\u\ cvfi'v pfiN.in wlm sli.-ilj Im- in tlir prarliir nfsn cnnvfyini; li-tttTs .... siuill f<ir<-\<-ry wfik Wiirin;; wliii-h the jirai-tii-c .shall hi- continiii'ii fi>rl'i'it £100 ; and c-vcry |>'T>iin who sliall jn'rlnrni nthi'rwisc tlian hy tlic jtust any siTvii-os in<-i(K-ntal (o cunvfyinf; It-ltiTs fnini placi' to phicc. wlu'thcr hy n'(^i'ivins <>r hy taking nj» or hy roUcctin;; nr hy onh-riny IT hy lii'.siiatchin;; "i- hy cairyin;^ or hy rc-carryinj; i>r hy ih-iiviTy. a IrldT. . . . sli.'iji hirfcit (or (•\cry htter i.';. ami fvery |nM>ion wlio .shall Ix- in tin- prartici' of NO iicrforniin;; any such inciilontal scrvici-s shall for every week (Iiiiin:,' which the j)ractii.e shall he continued forfeit £100 ; and every i»erson who siiall semi a Jettt-r .... otlu-rwiso than hy tlio iiost, or shall cause a letter .... to ho si-nt 'ir I'onveyed f>thenvise than hy the post, or shall either tender f)r deliver a lettei- in order to he sent otherwise than l>y the post shall forfeit for eveiy letter £5 ; and every ])ersoii who sh.ill l)e in the juactice of couiiuittin;^ any of the acts last mentioned shall for e\ery week durin;j; which the jiractice shall he continued forfeit £100 ; and every i)erson who shall make a collectiou of e.\emj)ted letters for the purpose of conveying; them or sending; them other- wise than hy the ]»ost. or hy the post, shall forfeit for every letter £5 : and every person who shall l>e in the jiractice of making a colh'ction of e.\em]ite(I let tei-s tor either of these jiurposes shall forfeit lor every week during wliich such jtractii'e shall he continued £ico : . . . . ;ind the ahove jienalties shall he incurred whether the letter shall !•<■ sent singly or with anything else, or such im^;identjil service shall In- jierfornied in res|H'ct to a letter either sent, or to Im; si'ut. sin;;ly or together with som'e othei- lett4'r <ir thing ; and in any prosecu- I ion hy action or otherwise tor the recovery of any such penalty the onus shall lie upon the party i>rosecuted to ]>rove tiiat the act in I'esjtect of wjiich the jMMialty is allegi'd to have hi^cn inciiiTi'iI \\ms done ill conformity of the I'ost Oltice laws.
It will be Seen that under such restrictions and prohibitions any attempt on the part of private enterprise to compete with the State in the carrying and <le]ivery of letters is out of the ijuestion. Some time ago the Postmastcr-Oeneral discovered that certain of the public, dissatisfied witli the facilities olfered by the Post Office, were forwarding letters as parcels by the various railway companies. ]\ranv small provincial newspapers, whose proprietors could not aifoid to })ay for press tt'legiams. were receiving' copy' from their Lomlon cor- respondents and agents in this way. Immediately the matter came to the knowledge of the Postmaster-General he addi-essed a letter. date<l April ist, J<SS7, to the vari(ms railway com- panies, pointing out to them that they Avcre infringing upon his exclusive privilege, and requesting tliem to discontinue
R 2
244 ^ ^^^'^ f^'' Liberty. [viiT.
the practice, wliicli, he stated, was imperilling •' the privileges conferred upon him by law for the benefit of the public,' and endangering the public revenue.
It is ditiicult to get people to realise that a tiling which for the most part only costs a penny is yet much dearer than it need be. But such is undoubtedly the fact. It was cal- culated by Sir Kowland Hill that the cost of conveying a letter from one point in the United Kingdom to any other was TiV of a penny. Suppose, then, we assume that the cost of collecting, stamping, conveying, and delivering a letter posted in London and addressed to Glasgow to be one^sixtli of a])enny, it will be seen that an enterprising postal agency would be able to carry a letter for which we now pay the State a penny lor a halfpenny, and even for a faitliing, and realise a handsome profit. We do not argue that a penny postage is a colossal grievance, for many people have been heard to exclaim that a reduction of the rate of postage and a consequeiit increase of correspondence are a prospect which they cannot regard with ecpianimity. This of course is the reason of the loug-suifering of the public in this matter. But our object is to point out that a Government monopoly charges at least double what would be charged under an open system, and to ask the reader to believe that the effect of enlarging the sphere of Government monopoly would be to double the cost of living- all along the line. As to our foreign and colonial lettei-s, .Mr. Henniker Hcaton, M.P., has shown that, assuming one-sixth of a penny to represent the cost of conveying an ordinary letter froni London to Southampton, the total cost of conveying a letter from London to New Zealand •would 1)0 a farthing, one-twelfth of a penny being allowed to cover the cost of carrying from Southampton to destination, which is more than twelve times the highest rate for the most precious goods. Yet for this service, which could 1 »e performed at a handsome profit at a penny per letter, the State has all along been charging sixpence ; and it was only during the last session of Parliament that the Government, in respoiise to a strong and indignant feeling in the country aroused by the member for Canterlmry. whose exposures of Post Office ex- travagance, bungling, and inefficiency have attracted so much attention, virtually confessed that the public liad been o^■er- charged all along, nnd that henceforth a uniform rate of two- pencedudfjxnny i'or letters wuuM be instituted between
\ 111] The fii'i/s of S/(j/l- Tradiiii;;. 245
Kiigland ami litr coluiiii's. Tin- avenigi' citi/.m will iliiulilK-ss Itlcss tlic Pest ( )ttico i'l-r the icMluctioii. imcoiiscioiis of the fact that 111- has Ix'cn ovtTcharj^tjd thiimLrhoiit the past, ami tliat tho ' «)\ t-rcharj^a' will eontiiun- at the rati- oi'thn-c-haHpciicf ]i<'r Irttcr until tho ]i(ista<^i* is rcijuct'ii to a jx'imy. Meichants. iicws- ]ia})t r proprietors, and othfis who ha\t' hccii aware of this, liavt' fvailed jiavnicnt l-y postiiij^ their letters in France oi- ( lerinany. whence the late to nearly all parts of the world is -,o pel- cent, cheaper than it is fioni I'lngland ; and it has been stated that one Jjundon firm alone saves .L'\\oo jier annum Ity posting; its letters in France for India and ( 'hina, where the rate is twopencedialfpenny as against live- iience char'a-d in KuLrhind. When it is considered that a letter posted in New York for Singapore, and carried there via Kngland, /;/ one of our imiil sti'(i)iirrs, costs twopence- halfpenny, Avhereas a letter posteil in l-lngland I'oi- Singapore is charged fivepence; that the cost of letters from Kngland to Shanghai, if sent throngh the French or CJerman Post Oltice there is twopence-halfpenny, hut if through the English Post ( )tlico at the sanae place the charge is fivepenco per letter, and that the same is the case in Zanzibar and other places ; that nullions of samples of English merchandise are still being sent from London lo be posted in Pelgium back to every town in Englaml at half the rates which are charged if posted in l^ng- land ' ; and that these and other facts stated above are merely samples, taken at random, of the multitudinous anomalies of our State postal system, some idea may be formed of the enormous saving to the community, especially the commercial section, to whom this matter is of serious consideration, were the present State monopoly abolished and replaced l)y private enterprise.
We do not .share ]\Ir. ]Ienniker ITeat(»n"s opinion that the Post Office will ever prove an efficient machine while under State management. The Postmaster-General, how^ever, has confessed to the justice of his complaint, and has yielded to criticism in Parliament a reduction of rates which would lon<j: aii'o have reached the })ublie under a s^-stem of private enterprise.
What a public nusfortune it would be if we were dependent for all reductions of price in articles of daily consumption on the successful badgering by private members of the minister
* Vidv Mr. IItunik>r Ili-at'in's P^>f.t(il l.'ifonn. and liis Ifttt-r in Tuuts, Sept. nth, 18S9.
246 A Pica for Liber ly. [\ hi.
in cluij-gc. The present plaii ueems to 1)0 to put up tlic rate of postage an<l lower the rate of telegrams <|uite irrespective of cost price, and merely according to the wliiiu of some hard- pressed rostmaster-Oeneral.
The principles upon Avliieii this State monopoly is conducted are of anything but a business character, and are such as if adopted by any private firm or company would result in speedy ruin. Its periodical accounts, says Mr. Hcnniker Heaton. are of such a nature that no one can fuul out what the gross receipts and net profits are within three-quarters of a million of money; and it has been stated that they are never properly audited. Its revenue is hundreds of thousands more than is represented in the estimates, the amounts being paid away in contracts with foreign Governments which have never been submitted to or sanctioned by the House of Commons. For the use of the Brindisi route it has been fre(|uently pointed out tliat it ought not to pay more than .5^31,200, yet it actuall}' pays ^,^'84.000, or .,^52,800 more than is fair and necessary. Its stationery contract with Messrs. De la Rue and Co. lost the country from .^''60,000 to ..^70,000 a year, making a total loss to the British public of ..^'f^oo.ooo on the ten years' contract ; yet the Postmaster- General repeatedly stated in answer to (piestions in the House of Commons that ' the contract was a positive boon to England.' In a letter published in the Thuox on September 11th, 1889, Mr. Henniker Heaton says: —
The extraordinary method is pursued of paying out of the current revenue of the Post Office the cost of hind and buildings required for Post Office pur- poses, and tlirougli tliis means tlie Postmaster-<Teneral owns alreatly land to the value of more than two and a quarter millions in London alon*'. Ko husiness man in the world would conduct his affairs in this manner— taking no account of the money ho expends in landed property and Iniildings. Yet this very department, that trifles with hundreds of thousands of pounds, refuses to allow a local postmasti'r in my ccmstituency to expend is. dd. in mending a lock of a door, but insists on despatching- an officer from the Board of Works to the scene at a cost of £3 los-. This I 2)rovcd before the Select t'onimittee.
From what other cause than a systematic looseness in appointing its ofticials is it due that the abstraction of postal orders is of almost daily occurrence ? During the year 1 887 the Postmaster-General stated that the abstraction of these orders 'reached portentous dimensions.' During i88g, 32,', dishonest letter-carriers were found guilty and di^uiissed
VIII.] The Evils of State Tradiiv^. 24;
tor iircj,'uhiritic'.s, ami on an aw-rage moi'- than tliict' oiru-ials por Wftk were t-onvictcd ami sentenc*i'<l to l-ii^j terms ot" imprisonment lor .stealini,^ letters, ami a large nnmlior eaulioned for suspieions eon'lnet or earelessness '.
\Vlu» has not suttered under the dirtcourtesy ot" the otiieials, lioth mall- and temale. em[)l()yed l»y tlie I'ost OtKce to attend to the wants ot" its eu!>tomers \ W'lio, residinii; in a subnrl) in winch tiie I'ost ( )tViee is inside an ordinai'v haker's. grocer's, or ehcMUst s shoj), has not Iteen amioyed win 11 tlic shojtkeeper, after hiandly asking them what tliey reijuired. and lieing tohl it was a j)enny stamj). ahiuptly turned to wait upon their own eust(>niei-s first.kieping tlie States customers waiting until thev had time to serve them I J)urin'' the middle (jf the year icS^o the relations between the young hulies of tho Lndgate Circus Post Ottice and the general jjuldic became so strained that the l\)stmaster-(Jeneral was compelled to remove the whole stati'and replace it l>y one of males. One does not tind such a state of affairs existing in any private establish- ment. A customer enters a drapers, tailor's, or other shop, and meets with courtesy and pleasantness, and is served with ]»rom])titude, A spirit of discourtesy in such places would (hive customers away. But in the Post Otlice it is different: the customer has no remedy; he cannot go elsewhere to o:<-t his postal wants supplied, 'i'he officials know this, hence their attitude towards the helpless public. Let the shopping public contemplate what shopping would bo under socialism, when eveiy article would have to b(^ purchased in establishments conducted in the same discourteous manner as the Post Office, and their bias will be anything but socialist.
The arbitrary and t"re([uently impmlent nuiinier in which tho Post Ottice treats its custonieis foims tho subject of hundreds of letters which annually appear in the public press. The victims of what Mr. Herbert Spencer calls 'the stupidity, the slowness, the perversity, the dishonesty of officialism ' in the Post Office, finding they have no remedv for the wrongs that they have been subjected to, give vent to their wtdl-founded in- dignation in tho columns of the T'iwch and other papers. Thus we read of a firm of merchants in Edinburgh complaining that through the admitted carelessness of a Post Office tele- graphist a telegram addressed to them was never delivered,
' Mr. Henniker Heaton's Pos^rt? i?f'/o»»', p. 14.
24S A Pica for Liber {y. [viii.
and they sustained a loss of .^'joo. When they sent in a claim to the postal authorities they were told that ' the department is not lei;-ally responsible for the delay complained of,' but that it would refund to them the sum of ']\d., being the amount paid for the transmission of the telegram ! Com- mercial men and others lose thousands of pounds every year by delay and wrong delivery of letters and telegrams. Valuable goods are damaged, lost, or stolen when sent through the parcels post, and the complaining owners receive nothing but a stereotyped expression of regret from the officials, and a disclaimer of all responsibility. In the case of the parcels post the public have only themselves to blame. If parcels sent by private carriers — who, as will be presently shown, carry them quicker and cheaper than does the State — are damaged, lost, or stolen, or even dela3'ed, the owner receives full satisfaction for any loss sustained. So that if people are foolish enough to ^ slight the good and faithful servant, and promote the unprofitable one,' they must put up with the consequences. We find other victims complaining that while the Post Office imposes a fine in the event of the face of a postcard bearing any words in addition to the address, it almost invariably disregards its own part of the contract and defaces the letter on the back of a post-card by affixing its official stamp upon it. During last August, the writer, \^dlilst staying in a little town on the Norfolk coast, received four post- cards in three days, and each card was defaced in the manner described, several words in two of them being completely ob- literated. A protest against this breach of contract elicited from the Secretary the consoling reply that he regretted the cause of complaint, and that the special attention of the postal
officials at C had been called to the matter. If a private
firm repudiated responsibility for its blunders and carelessness, Ave should regard the fact as disentitlino- it to our custom. Can the systematic repudiation by the State be regarded in any other light % Again, others write to protest against what they justly term 'the contemptible trick,' 'a breach of trust and confidence,' — the opening of letters by the Post Office. What could Ije more contemptible than the trick recently peri^)rmed by the Post Office upon tlie Postmen's Union ? At eleven o'clock on the morning of Saturday, August J 6th, i(ScyO, one of the officials of the Union posted in the Finsbury distiict several postcai'fls ad<li'essed to clubs in the immediate neighlmurhood,
VIII.] 'I'/ic Jii'i/s of S/a/c Tradini:;. 249
askiii;r tluiii to irct voluiiteri"s to canv collcction-ljoxcs on tlu^ rollt»\vin<; tlav (Siiiitljiv) at tin- dockris' (Iriiioiistration. on lirlialf ot" the postuu'ii disiuissiil duriiit; the vccnit ])ostiiH'ii s strikt'. TlH'Sf postcanls should liavc Ixtu di'livrinl Ik rori- (^ I'.M. on the sanif day at the hilf^t, hut ihry wric kepi ha<dN l»y th»> Post ( )rtirf othc-ials and not drlivertMl till the Mon<lay, too late lor the purpose tin y \v< ].■ intended lor.
With rei,'<ird to the leeiiit strikes aUK^njf the p(j>tinen, it would he ^vell that the wurkini,^ classes to wlntui the sjK-eion.s doetrines ot" soeialisni are heinj; ])reached should realise the change lor the worse that would take place in their position as workers in the event of the ]jresent industrial system heinji; repLieed hy oni' of a socialist character. With the ' \ew 1 nioiusiii ' which seeks to enslave the lahourer under a new form of tyranny, we have no sympathy whatever. At the same time it must be borne in mind that the riMit of voluntarv eondtination fur the le^'itimati- jturpose of nnti^MtinLC l»y lawful means some of the evils of competition is one of the mo.st cherished ])rivileLres of the J']n<dish wurkin*' class. It is true that in asking its servants to forego this privilege the Post (Mliee oH'ers pensions and other a<lvantages which to some mi'dit seem an adequate substitute. This, however. riLrhth' (U' wrou'dv. is not the view of many Post Office servants. And even though it nuiy be reasonable to ask the labourers in oik- or two industries to contract themselves out of their right of comliination, it is (|uite unreasonable to ])ropose that the whole of the workiiii; class shouhl abdicate their liljcitv of action in the way retjuired by the Post Office officials. Put this is really the proposal of the S(jcialists. It is very probable that Mrs. I;esant is rioht in thinking- that the Post Office officials have a comfortable lierth, ])ut the fact does not ]-eeoncile them to the restraints imposed upon their libeity. and we are not disposed to blame them. The socialist or- ganisers of the strike spared no effort of rhetoric in enlarging on the servile condition, as they firmed it, of thr State servfints, and the secretary of the Union descriljed tlie P(;st- ma.ster-Genoral ' as a task-master worse than the vilest East End sweater.' ^'et this is the institution which Mrs. Besant quite correctly puts forward as the most nearly successful exan>ple of State socialism which the world has ever seen.
We pronounce no judgment on the merits of the quarrel between the Postmaster-General and his servants. We point
250 A Pica for Libci-fy. [viii.
out, however, the anoinaly that when u labourer takes service in a State monopoly he is called on to surrender his right of coin])iTiation with his fellows. There is, of course, justice in this: the Post Othcc has prevented competition, and is bound to protect the public against a cessation of the letter-carrying service. This it can only do by introducing a species of military law, a condition characteristic of all socialist institu- tions, which workmen should bear in mind.
Attention will now be called to a few facts in connection with certain attempts on the part of the Post Office to com- pete with private enterprise.
Tlie Parcel Post. This department of the Post Office was established a few years ago with the object of the State becoming exclusive carrier of small parcels. This attempt to compete with railway companies and other common carriers has been financially a signal failure. In the matter of rates we find those charged by the railway" companies and carriers about 50 per cent, less than those^ charged by tlie Post Office, the former collecting and delivering the parcels within ordinary limits without additional charge. Instead of a person carrying his parcels to a Post Office, where he has to wait and get them weighed, and where he is compelled to pre- pay the carriage before they are received, a railway company collects them without charge, and it is optional whether the carriage is paid by the sender or the consignee. If parcels are handed over to the Post Office they are sent by certain trains only during the day, whereas if handed to a railway company they are despatched by the first passenger-train after receipt. The Post Office receives parcels up to a limited time on!}', whereas the railway companies receive and despatch them by the latest transit, including midnight service, thus ensuring a very speedy delivery next morning without any extra expense. In the case of parcels handed to a railway or carrying company being damaged or lost the owner is entitled to full compensa- tion without having to pay any charge beyond the ordinary carriage, whereas if they are handed to the Post Office ' The Postmaster-General will (not in consequence of any legal liability, but voluntarily and as an act of grace) . . . give compensation for loss and damage of Inlaiid parcels' not exceeding j£' \ where no extra fee is paid, not exceeding .^^5 where an insurance fee of a penny is ]>aid, and not exceed- ing .^'10 where an insurance lee of twopence is paid. 'Tn
\iii.] 'riic Jii'i/s of S/a/c Tradiui^. 251
no t-a^t' Avill a larL,'»'i' aiiioiiiit of fompcnsatioii than .i'lo be ]iaiil '.'
i<ui'\uiit<. Hank. 'I'lic J'ost OHicf Savinii^s l^ank was cstali- lislu'tl lor the mcouiau^fiiu-nt <»1" thrift aiiioiiLj the workini^ classes. With its aluiinlant lacilitifs for the I'cccipt jukI payment of money one would imaijine that the Post OHicrc! wonhl he certain to meet all the l)anking re((uirements of the woikinLC classes, ami make it almost im])ossihle for ])iivate enterprise to compete with it in this particuhu' liehl of indus- try. Such, however, is not tho ca.se. Not only doe.s the Post ( )tiice lail 111 meet those re(juirenients, hut its l)usines.s as workin^j-class hanker is conducted Avith that lack of enter- prise which is characteristic of all (Jovernment depai'tments, antl in point of convenience and advantage to customers it compares very unfavoura1)ly with working-class hanl<s eoii- dueted hy private i-nterprise.
The Post Ofhce Savings Bank receives deposits of fine shilling, or any numher of shillings, but a person is not allow(>d to deposit more than ^^'30 in one year, or j^i.^o in all, exclusive of the interest of 2^ per cent, per annum for each complete pomid. The. hours during which offices are open for the receipt and payment of money are the very hours dm-ing which the workinir classes are engaged at their work, and during which the Post Office clerks are busily engaged in discharging their ordinarv duties. There are, however, certain offices open on Friilay and Saturday (evenings till 7 p.m. or iS P.M.. but only for receiving deposits. When a depositor wishes to njake a Avithdrawal from his account he is compelled to call at a Post Office and obtain a notice of withdrawal form, which he must fill up and post to the office of the Savings Bank Department, fiom which he will in the course of a day or two receive a warrant upon his hjcal Post Office to pay him the sum required. He has then to pay anotlu r visit to the Post Office, antl after presenting his pass-book and signing his name to the warrant in the presence of th(( postmaster or other Post Office official and satisfying the said postmaster or other ofKcial that he is really and truly the person in whose favour it is made, he succeeds in obtain- ing a withdrawal from his account. If a depositor is sick or abroad, or by any cau^^e pi evented from presenting the waiiant in person, payment is made to ' the bearer of an or<ler under
' Vide Vosial Gidde.
-5- A P/ca for Liberty. [viii.
his hand, signed in the presence of any officer of the Post Office other than the paying otlicer, a minister of any re- ligious denomination, a justice of the peace, a commissioner to a(hiiinister oaths, or, in case of sickness, the medical att(>ndaut. If the depositor be resident abroad, the signatu)'e must })e verified by some constituted authority of the place in which he resides, or a notary public \'
It is obvious tiiat these al)surd regulations are most incon- venient to working-class de])ositors. and a source of consider- able annoyance aiid irritation. j\[any accounts have been wliolly withdrawn, or transferred elsewhere in consequence. ^ If we compare the general working of the Post Office Savings Bank with that of a banking business conducted by private enterprise, the comparison will be very favourable to the latter. Take the National Penny Bank for example. This was established in 1875, having for its objects to promote thrift by afibrding facilities for the exercise of thrift, to establish a permanent Penny Bank, open every erenliK/, and to make such Penny Bank absolutely safe, self-supporting, and on a commercial basis. It has a head office at West- minster, a city office, and branch offices in various parts of the metropolis and the London suburbs. These offices are open during each evening to receive deposits from one penny upwards to any amount, and to pay witlidraifah on demand. Interest is paid at the rate of 3 per cent, per annum on complete pounds left in the Bank for complete calendar months. Depositors may wlthdram money hy post by simply sending a written application accompanied by pass-book, and, if the depositor so desires, an amount will be sent b}^ cheque to any person named by him. The Bank also advances money to working men to enable them to purchase their own iiouses, charging interest at .5 per cent, per annum.
The growth of this National Penny Bank is most encou- raging, and its success depends on the facilities which it otters to its customers. We could wish that the directors could find it possible to overcome the obvious difficulty of expense, and to imitate the collecting insurance companies, so that these advantages and opportunities for saving could be brought to the door of every working man. The Bank is now paying a dividend, and has proved that working- class banking can be made a profitable industi-y. There can
' Pust 0()i(e (hililc, p. yjQ.
VIII.]
The Evils of Si ale 'fradiii'^.
O C '^
lie littU' tloiibt that banks of tliis sort will soon supcrscdt' tlir Tost Otiico.
liisarnuci' Di imrtiiii III. Tlie above is no nioiv assumption : lor in the allied in(bistry of insiirancf tlir Imsinrss tloiic liy ]>rivate C'nt(.'Vi)risc far surpasses that done by the I'ost OMiec, aitlfd thoui^h it is by its uluciuitv and the uudcniabh" nature of its security. The folhrniui:- tabK- will <dye an ant com- ])arison of the busiui'ssof the I'ost ( Xliec as aij:ainst the business of one company, viz. the I'rutieiitial Assurance (.'ompany as shown by the latest returns : —
i'i»r < >i 1 1. 1..
I N<>. of Contracts in I'xi.sU'uee.
Tiisiiiiiii'-i- 6jio
It.f.liv.l
Aiiiiuilu'N loi^
(Industrial
PKfDExrrAi, (Ordinary .
177,208
*' Increase ill tin- 10 Annuities 19,625
3.V746 i -^'^-^^W
^i-0->(>u-\^ £l,S4y,J02
£904,915 i;6ii,3i3
Tr/cfiriip/is. When the po.^sibility of conveying intelligence instantane(nis]y for Jong distances was dcmoiistrated, and when Cooke and Wheatstonc patented tlicir magnetic needle telegraph in 1S3;, the State did not avail itself of the inven- tion, but remained satisfied Avith the old semaphore. The new invention was worked by private enterprise for thirt}- thrce yeais, and ' during this period,' said Sir Charles Bright in his address to the Society of Telegraph Engineers and Eli'cti-ieians in if><S7. 'those enu"aw<l in the undertaking hatl provideil the capital, incurred all the risk, and developed the telegraphic sy.stem into a highly lucrative business, iVom which the profits were steafldy increasing, so nmeh so that the net earninu's of the two lari^est eomriaiiies ranged from 14 to iH per cent, per annum.' When the State realised that the business was a iinaneial success, it took steps to acquire all the telegraphic undertakings in the kingdom, and in i H6H an Act was passed entitling it to do this, and in the following year a further Act Avas passed which gave to the Post Office the monopoly of telegraphic
2 54 ^ Plea fo7' Liberty. [vin.
coimiiunication. From tliat time till now thr i('U'gra})h,s ill (lie hands of the State, while they have remained very stationary in respect of public utility, have heen a Unancial failure, the annual deficit fre(iuently exceeding half a million, as was the case in 1886-87, when the deficit for the year was .-i'540,527. Yet the Submarine Telegraph Company has been conductinsx the communication between Eno-land and the continent under the C'hannel with great efficiency, and at moderate rates, and has deservedly been reaping a profit for its usefulness, and paying a dividend of 15^ per cent. The telegraphs' deficit is made up of various items, the principal representing interest on capital, the outcome of the l)ad l)argain the State, with characteristic stupidity and short- sightedness, made at the ovitset with the private companies, and the rest representing unprofitable management of the business, and s(juandering of money in large salaries to useless officials. If a private company conducted its business in such a loose manner it would be classed as a dead failure, and would speedily terminate its existence in bankruptcy proceedings. But as the business is a State monopoly the taxpayers are compelled to give it a Avhitewashing to the tune of half a million per annum, and to allow it to pursue its career of wasteful inefficiency.
For the purpose of comparison it may be stated that the various railway companies in the kingdom annually receive, transmit, and deliver over their own respective systems hundreds of thousands of their own private telegrams at a cost of a mere fraction of a penny per telegram ; while the State experiences a loss upon every telegram that passes through its hands, aMiou^'h the mininunn charo-c for sending a telegram is sixpence. The following figures, published during January, 1887, speak for themselves. The Post Office within an area of twelve miles from the General Post Office sends a weekly average of 290.027 telegraphic messages over its wires at an average cost of eightpence per message. The United (now the National) Telephone Company, witliin an area of five miles from the same centre, in one week of December, 1886. tfans- mitted 449.696 telephonic messages at an average cost of three farthings each. It may be added that while the Post Office has an amuial deficit of about half a )ninion, the Natiomil Telephone Company at its meeting in July last declared a dividend of 6 ])er cent., and reported an increase in the gross
VIII.] The Evils of Slalc 'J'radiuo^. 255
icviiiiir. ;i rlicTi-asL' ill the wnrkiiij^' i'X|»en.si's, ami a larLC aililitioii tit tilt' rosrrvr I'iukI.
Tlir only laaiirh of the jtostal service wliicli is a liiiaiicial siicci'ss is tliat of ifttcr-caii-N iiiLj. Asaliva<ly shown, lln'uc'tiial cost of an onlinaiy iiihiiitl Idtrr is .,V of a jK-nny: all (he rest is clear ])r()tit. The heavy losses sustained in every other hrancli of the postal srrvice have lo be covered by the |irolits realised bv the penny ]»ost. It will jteiliaps be as well to hear what the J'ostniaster-Cjeneral has to say in reference to these matters, lieplyin^ to a deputati(»n from the Wolverhani])ton Chamber of ("omnierce, which waited upon him on danuaiy 27th, i<S<SS, to call attention to several anomalies connected with the ])ostal ami teleLCraph reL;ulalions. and to com- ]>lain that orders to manufacturers and others sent by the lialfpenny post Avere charged letter-i'ate if any note was added, and to request that documents of a commercial character — orders, invoices, shipping' instructions, bills of lading, is:c. — should go through the halfpenny ])ost, and to seek some reduction in the charges for sending telegrams from Post Ortices through the telephone to their destination, and (o ]>oint out that private firms were producing and selling post- cards at 6^r/. per dozen, while the Post Ultice charged "^d. per dozen, the Postmaster-Ucneral said, —
Tliat t" make arraiitiomoiits l"'>r mattor not onclo.siil to !>< can i<<I I'or '//. iii^t«'a<l of \il. rnuld not lie done. It wnul<l have an cH'fct iijhiu tlio rfv<'nu<' wliieh i.<>ul(l not bo contcnii>lateil Avitlioiit honor. Tlio pt-nny ])ostago farntcl an iiu-onu' wliicli hail to Im- exj)fn(l((l on other Jd'anclus of the .strvice. 'I'lli'Uraph-! were a lusiii'j: Inisin^ss. aii<l thi' <l<-fii-i<'n<-y was jiaiM hy tiif jx-nny jiiistagr. Thi' i-arriaiji' of ni'wsjia])crs also involvcil considi-ralilc loss, an<l Ww halfpenny iMi-,t was ratlii'P a losing than a ])ayin;j; concern. Anything which largely shiftcil corresjioinUiiec IVoni thf pinny to thi^ halfjitiiny ia'.<' might ai'tnaliy distnrh the cquilihiiuni of the revenue ; therefore anything that
struck at the jienny i>ost could not he entertained As to postcards,
when they were sr)ld atSf/. jier dozen and jirivate firms could ]trnduce Iheni for 6i'/. there must he srinie unsatisfactory jiractice. He had infurmat inn i.u that subject which he hoped t<> utilise for the public benefit '. Hesjiectiiig tele- phones U irxs unsrtiixfmtonj iha( the Uorenimont hail to compete with private Jinvx. and Ijefore long the system must be taken U]> by the Government and telephones
' Tiie manner in which the Post- firms selling at a lower rate than the
luaster-tieneral has utilised his • in- Post Office he has increased the rate
formation '' fi>r till- )>ul'lic benefit ' is for stamping juivate ]>ostc;irds fr.Mii
Worthy <d' notice. He has caused the is. Cyl. to 2.s. (id. jier quire, tliM-> im-
P'lst Office to issue postcarils of a ]><>siug .-i fee of joo per cent, above
similar quality to those hitherto jir<>- the ]»rice at which any jtrinter would
iluced and s"ld at a profit by j)rivale execute tin- work I I'/'/', Mr. Ilenniker
firms for 6','/. per do/en at 6'/. for IIeaton"s 7'iw^«i i.V/i>//;(. ))p. 12. 13. ten, and in order to prevent private
256 A Pica for Liberty. [\iit.
placed on tlir samr fontiii,;^ as tult-grajihs, and Ik^ cuiiUiillid aUugttlu'r l)y the (iovorniiii ii( '.
Socialists -will agTce \vitli their friend, tlie Postinaster- (-ieiicral, that it /.s unsatisfactory that the State has to compete with private enterprise. If the State could suppress private enterprise, if it could eliminate the factors of human progress, commercial success, and national jireatness, it would enable socialism to take the place of civilisation ; but while private enterprise enjoys its present freedom, which will be as long as men value liberty, socialism has no chance of success.
Whether or not it is the intention of the State to take over the telephone, it sliould nut be forgotten that it did its best to obstruct its introduction, and prevent the use of that ingenious and novel invention in this country. Although the telephone was not invented and brought to this country till i<S77, it was found to be embraced by the wide-mean- ing terms of the Telegraphs Act of i(S69. The Post Ollice declined to use it or to allow private enterprise to do so. The State having become a trader in the conveyance of intelligence electrically, was afraid that by allowing private enterprise to use the telephone the telegraph monopoly would be seriously interfered with. But this dog-in-the-manger policy was of slunl duration. The ])ublie. fully alive to the advantages to Ijc derived by such a cheap and handy means of conniiunication ai> the telephone would aflbrd. demanded that some concession should be made by the Post Office. This was eventually done, the telephone companies being permitted to establish com- nuinication in certain places, providing they handed over to tlie Post OtWcQnnc-fciif/i of their (jross rereiptf^. Thus the National Telephone Company supplies a customer Avith a telephone for the use of which it charges <^'2o per annum, jk'2 of this going to the Post Office, 'simply as black-mail," says Sir Frederick Pram well, and the public are kept out of the use of this important means of communication unless they submit to tins monstrous tax.
It is, indee<l, sad to rellect that in tliis England of durs, which boasts of its freedom, a Ciovemment de])artment should be permitted to restrain and hamper the development of this cheap means of conniiunication, which has really become one of the necessities of conniiereial life. Tlie fact tliat we have the present liuiited mc;nis of telephonic communication (the
' ';7. Jrt/,((s'o 0'.t.Ulh, Jujic J7tll, iSSS.
Mil.] Tlic livils of Slate Tiadim:^. 257
miiiiluT of inbtruiiionta iiinltT rcnbil in England being 99,oco, wliilf in America at the beginning of tho present year there were ^22,4^0, bi'ing an increase of 16,67-, over the number in iSSy) is (hie entirely to the bull-dog ]»ertinacity. the watchful care, and the courageous energy of the telephone c()nii)auies in resisting the Post Ollico in its endeavours to u])h()ld its retrograde position.
U])on the occasion referred to above, the Postniaster- Cioneral said that he 'should be glail of any suggestions which wnuM assist in placing the whoh^ system of telephon- ing in this country on a satisfactory Imsis.' But there is really ono way in wdiich the State could assist in (h)ing this, and that is, bv removing all th(f restrictions whicli it has jilaced upon the development and extension ol tele- phonic communication in this country, in order that tho public may enjoy the full benefit of the telephone, which has been well referred to as one of the most ingenious inventions that ever was made \
Notwithstanding the very profitable nature of the letter- carrying monopoly, it cannot be said that, at times of great press of business, the public is served with that absence of fuss and effort which ou<dit to characterise a givat and wealthy corporation. At (,'hristmas-timu the Post Office is com],)letely disorganised. Its customers are pitifully implored not to pay exclusive regard to their own convenience, and to despatch their packages and letters according to a time- table drawn up by the Post Office to suit its own con- venience. But despite these precautions, the deliveries turn out irregular or break down altogether, and although the same disorganisation reappears each succeeding year, just as if the stress of business which causes the breakdown had never occurred before an<l was (juite outside the ffeld of human prevision. This disorganisation and breakdown commences a week or ten days in advance of Christmas, and even on the
' Sineo tho appoarancf f>f tho first privato entoi-priso lias ostahlishotl in
ami second iditions nf this work, tlie niotropolis. for supplying; a loii^
another very striking illnstration of felt piililiu want. Had it nut been for
the power for evil possessed by the the fact that the press and the puhlii;
State Post Ottice has been given. We strongly denounced the iniquitous
refer to the ineffectual attempt on behaviour of the postal authorities,
the part of the Postmaster-General the attempt would doubtless have
to crush the excellent and de^ervedlv been successful, popular boy mes!,enger service whicli
258 A Pica for Liberty. [viii.
15th of December tlie block and muddle have been so well developed that it has taken a letter two days to travel between the S. W. and E. C. districts ; a book posted in London for Paris has occupied four days in transit ; and within the metropolitan district telegrams have laboured along at the rate of one mile in twenty minutes. For a few days previous to Christmas the first delivery of letters falls two hours in arrear, and by the 24th it has been known to break down altogether. It may be said that private trading com- panies sometimes break down under a foreseen stress of business, and that the railway companies at Christmas allow their train-system to get disorganised. This, no doubt, is true ; but we are searching (in vain it may be) for some point in which the State monopoly shows its superiority. It may, however, be pointed out that private carriers do not cry to be let off, but rise to the requirements of the occasion, provide additional facilities, and all the time by prodigal advertisement solicit rather than deprecate the patronage of the public. It should, moreover, be borne in mind that the services most liable to break down at times of pressure partake more or less of the nature of monopolies. The Post Office and the railway system are liable to break down, but the ordinary services which are bought and sold in the open market do not break down. The moral is obvious. Let us have no more monopolies than are absolutely necessary. Let human ingenuity do its best to make free exchange of service ever^^where the rule. It is difficult to see why this rule should not apply to the Post Office.
Again, the cessation of postal deliveries during the recent partial strike of postmen furnished a powerful warning to the commercial world against encouraging a monopoly by the State of the means of carrying passengers and goods. To-day all our large commercial centres are supplied by several separate railway companies competing with each other for pul:)]ic patronage. In the event of a strike amongst the servants of one of the companies running, let us say, between Manchester and London, goods and passengers would be carried by the others with but small inconvenience to the public. On the other hand, if all the means of communication were controlled by the State, all the railway servants of one employer would have interests in common, and a strike of underpaid and overworked railway servants would, in such a case, paralyse
vni.] The Jivils of Stale Trading. 259
the tiH<li' aiiil (•iiiimii'ici- of tlir coiiiitiy. ainl widt'spn-jul mill aiul disaster wmiM (Ihii.- Itetbn^ the stu[)i(lity ami ^v(K)(|(■Il- hojuledness of StaU- ollicialism could be Ijrouijht to realise the situation and dt-vise a rt'iiicdy.
UusiiR'ss wliieli must hi' done undt'i-i'Vcr-sarx iiiLT eomlltioiis, cannot bo well done under a restraining power which moves slowly amid the complications of septennial parliamentary elections, and the exigencies of ]iarty politics. An aLjency which has to act must have a i)erfectly free initiative, and must be spurred into constant activity ])y the fact that its very existence is dependent upon its ability to provide constant ami ade(|uate satisfaction of public wants. In the liL^dit of thes(> self-evident ]>rinci{)]i'S, the State Post Oftjcc and State trading of all kinds stands self-condemned; and every State monopoly which has ever existed has but served to prove that progress and ultimate success are inevitably founded and maintained by private enterprise.
Frederick Millar.
s a
IX.
FBEE LIBB ABIES.
A Fkee Libkary may be defined as the socialists' continu- ation school. While State education is manufacturincf readers for books. State-supported libraries are providing books for readers. The two functions are logically related. If you may take youi* education out of your neighbour's earnings, surely you may get your literature in the same manner. Literarj- dependency has the same justification as educational de- pendency; and, no doubt, habituation to the one helps to develop a strong desire for the other. A portion of our population has by legislation acquired the right to supply itself with necessaries and luxuries at the cost of the rates. The art of earning such things for themselves has been rendered superfluous. Progress therefore halts because this all-important instinct has fallen into disuse. At a point the rates will bear no more, and those who depend on them for their pleasiu-es are doomed to disappointment. The identity of principle exemplified alike by compulsory education and compulsory libraries, logically involves the justification or condemnation of both; and, let us disguise the unpleasant truth in as many sounding phrases as we please, the fact remains that the carrying out of this socialistic principle means pauperism pure and simple. Have we forgotten the evils that resulted from the application of this principle under the old poor law 1 or do we imagine that when an evil changes its outward appearance it changes its inner essence also? The harm done to the national character by a policy of this nature varies in intensity in proportion to the necessity of the want supplied. If the thing supplied at public cost is really
IX.] Free Libraries. 261
necessarv ami eagerly acccptcMl ]>y the people, it becomes more readily a potent cause of tlepcndency, ami u lit';i\ y ainl at lenjj^th an insnp])(»rtiil>le ehargf on the ratepayers, 'i'liis was the ixj)crieiice of the old poor law. The cost (jf national utlucation is fast approaching to the same state (jf things, and the problem will one day have to be faced: 'How is the burden of the cost of education to bo returned to the shoulders of those who are responsible for it?' In this jiajier wc an- concerned with a smaller ipiestion. A very inconsiderublt; section of the people ri'ally want the Free Library; the fpiestion at the polls is generally treated with apathy, and only a very small proportion of the ratepayers record their votes one way or the othei-. As a matter of fact the Free library is forced upon tlu' pulilic by a number of doctrinaire believers in the superhuman value of a mere literary education. It is not a popular want. The vast nuijority of people have still a gn-ater faith in the training which results from practical contact with the real facts of life, and still only regard book- learning as a useful supplement, easily obtainable by those who really desire it and are likely to profit by it '.
The history of the Education Acts is very analogous. The literary classes became alarmed at the ignorance of the poor, and instead (^f allowing the etiorts of philanthropists, aided by the growing appreciation of education amongst the labouring class — already giving great promise of providing a true and voluntary remedy for tlie supposed evil — to work out a system of education on natural and healthy lines of spontaneous evolution, a course which would have added dignity and stability to the domestic life of the parents and given a real
' • Useful and instructive tliougli
\z. 1 roadin^ Ite. it is yet only one
jU'xle of cultivating the iiiiiul ; and is uiucli le?.s inthiential than jiractical experience and good exarnjile, in the formation of character. There were wise, valiant, and true-hearted men lired in England lung Ix-fore the ex- istence of a reading public. Magna C'harta was secured l>y men who signed the deed with tlieir marks. Thougli altogetlier unskilled in tlie art of deciphering the literary signs l>y which pirinciides were denomi- nated u]ion paper, they yet under- stood and appreciated and lioldly contouded for the things themselves.
Thus tlie foundations of English liberty Were laid liy men who. though illiterate, wi're nevertheless of the very liighest stamp of character. . . . Many of our most energetic and useful workers have been but sparing readers. Briiidley and Stephenson di<l not learn to n^ad and writ" until they reached nianli<iod. and yet they did great works and livid manly lives. John Hunter could barely read or write when lie was twenty years old, though lie could make chairs and tables with any cari)enter in the trade." ^vlf-Uchi, by Samuel Smiles, i>. 273.
262 A Pica for Liberty. [ix.
and technical system of education to the children — instead of tliis, the hasty politician rushed forward crying, ' The people do not want education, so we must compel them.' The compulsory and demoralizing character of the means reacts on the otherwise advantageous nature of the end, and the result is a mind -destroying system of cram for the childi-en ; summons, fines, and police for the parents. This is how the politician makes education a lovely and desirable thing. It is almost impossible to over-estimate the evils resulting from the State not allowing teachers and parents to adjust the educational arrangements so as to meet the felt requirements of the case. This comnmnal despotism strikes at the very foundation of personal virtue, viz. the home, the instrument by which natuie lifts human character above the non-moral sensuousness of the animal world. Let us never forget that the hinnan mind is made up of lower and higher elements, and that the removal of personal duties — the practice-ground of the virtues — favours the development of the lower factors of character at the expense of the higher, of weeds at the expense of flowers.
What else can possibly result from the carrying out of a principle which means the public feeding, clothing, and lodging of children under official superintendence and control? Will it be contended that State officers can know better than parents what is really needed for children ? Yet this is Avhat our Free Educationalists are leading us to. The system which robs the parent of one of the noblest motives to effort — -the desire to give a good education to his children — which weakens the sense of duty and takes away a wholesome stimulus to the mental and moral faculties, is only the beginning of an evil that menaces civilization and threatens to swallow up all natural distinctions and relationships in a low and promiscuous communism. This brilje of parental irresponsibility — this patent method of shirking duties — which the politician offers us in exchange for our manhood, is a scheme for encouraging the race to cast itself forth into the moral darkness of a world where the parents are all childless and the children all orphans ^.
1 Dealing with tliis ufcpcct of the the order of Nature and tn substitute
([uestioii in a recent numl)er of the an order of their own devising. All
7'rtH il/rt« 6«rc»f, Mr. Herbert Spencer life on the earth ha.s risen to its
says:— 'It is surprising with what present lieight under the system of
light hearts people are led to abrogate parental obligation. Throughout, the
■ X.]
Free Libraries. 26
Tliu Five l.iliiaiy. howuvtr, litis not ytt ivaclu'd tliu saiiio degree of coinpulsicjii as the Five School. A majority of the local puhlic must vote for it before it can be estal)lishtMl ; or rather, ^ve should say, there must be a majority favourable to it amongst tUom wJio do take the troulde to reeord their votex: usually only a very small pro])ortion of the electorate think it worth while to cross the street in order to pay a visit lo the poll. When the Library is estal>lished, its. real })opularity is to be measured by the fact that its books are borrowed !»}• only al)out one per cent, of the population. We make l)old to say that if it ever becomes popular, it will be an extremely mischievous institution. As vet it is merely a plavthinir for a number of well-meaning busyl>odies, and an occasi<jnal convenience to a few middle-class readers. The limited amount generally spent upon it prevents it from doing any- thing more than minister to the sensational indulgences of a very limited section of the reading public. If the working classes of the country ever really become students, it will l»e impossible to supply them with adeqiKite store of books from the rates : if this is attempted, it can only be at a time when books will be but a small item in the expenditure which a dominant State Socialism seeks to lay on the public purse. On the one hand will stand a class whose only plan for satisfying their wants is the imposition of a new tax, and on the other by a harried remnant of ratepayers, both soon to be ovenvhelmed by the near approach of national bankruptcy.
Want is the spring of human effort. Self-discipline, self- control, self-reliance, are the habits which grow in men who are allowed to act for themselves. The meddlesome fore- stalling of individual effort, which is being carried into mis- chievous excess, is going far to bind our poorer classes for another century of dependence.
Let us run, as rapidly as possible, through a few of the pleas set up by the advocates of this form of municipal socialism. Good books, it is said, are out of the reach of the working
process has so worked that the best years liave worked so beneficially,
nurtured offspring of the best parents may with advantage be replaced by
have survived and maintained the public sentiment working through
race ; while offspring inadequately' State-machinery I I hold, contrari-
nurtured have failed to leave self- wise, that the replacing of parental
sufficing posterity. And now it has responsibilities by social responsibili-
come to be thought that these strong ties will inevitably cause degradation
parental feelings, whicli in billions and eventual extinction.' of creatures throughout millions of
eazL i( ,: "tie scppdinjeii fcy nine saiZ'cS. E^arii & ^ria^ ' ~":.
■!Dn<i)^^s2s eaan Ibe €;it:'Eai3ii©'i friim tike •^s.^th^'^ wiiLosktiss fyf zhr&t- ]:*2njSEr pis' sI'SEy: "wisiaiL TT^mm sm ^jDne sQiGire&- anv - ".'-e~
to sffiT fc/n;f.a ike- Ti'esE iisiti «£ Essrasacnr is^ ~r~~^ .'
Ai'Tinaai^niiJa <3hl fesilsaieBS aisti ©ttkiffir inEXiE3aie&. TVrte car &igsr
my aL'itiijgiL vz sue t*6s: Iiifir25i33--r tw __..i : , . _ _.. :
is tine pitrasETc t£) ctfe <3tgi3irea frt'im iemtjiEj^ of girrin^c m t£>' » iziiSE*!. ^Siii iTaf aii^^ygpcf-^'g iiie loaas. <3r ^;iis cf iiiis ia r-" " :'i
*:»S!aiJiac!i eLiueisiiiiL <:■£ nzniji^sniiir ■jn-'sr..^^. L*>ji£i exsiss "
is $. -Zas. iiof ilijg: ircrxi pixrjjIiiirBisd. im CaiasfeU* 2'»&5ic~ :__
doe -cariri iriMai line r.rizreiiJiae cc & s^tsnd htxik. iarrolT^adi somie
-ibrsrjl Hsr-e ar& iK>^ of tins irorM"* fc»a£tt " '
ii -wTufHiLkd t*t a. ir^sSic ■;€ ixaiec: zo sire- tine- ssisirs S*" ' '
-siwz^mt&l ^siffiMij-LS* 3i!a,y f:*i taSiesL H-sr-r ar% tine E?
XiSLfijiiMiSL. LiiosaaiL i-eausili'iaL Toilsiiffibe- ijoi^asaKSiroo- ijiQ^edM. a»»i i_iesffisn^ — im Eai'^Styi- 'i^ ©iiiErsi- Msare i* W^Tt-''!^'* "Oijc
.j_], Fru Lihriiri££. 265
auQid 'Eesj. Hfgg art 'S'(sk& 1>t Booke. ^
DkJcer ^. " ~
.vt, ': il as '" tto * r'
»<(» 133 raJC»55 _ t(E»rIT
Ms; f'iniav
t » til' ■ : M
Thai
."t •^Sf ii _ - T 'Oil
laiies. X©^ar. to lasijGn tio til 'satrt-f of Frf-e
pcioi Fjree li'ta^ainr, _ T-ear 1 ^^7— ^- sax : —
266 A Pica for Liberty. [ix.
' Works of liction and light literature enjoy the greatest degree of popularity, each book circulating eleven times in the year, while iUe more iiidructive hooks hi the other clcsses circulote only once diirhig the same period.' According to this Report, out of a total average daily issue of 150 volumes, 137 are works of fiction and light literature. The average issue of history, which is the next largest item, is only 9 per diem.
No wonder is it, after such results as this, that the Committee should express the opinion ' that the rich stores of })iography, history, travels, and works of science and art which have been added in recent years arc deserving of greater attention than has hitherto been given to them.'
In the Lending Library at Cambridge from icS^cS-iSHg the total number of books issued has been 1,591,209 : of this total 1,073,584 were novels. In Norwich from the year ]87(S-i888 the issue from the Free Library has been 497,264 ; of this total 346,662 represented fiction.
We subjoin, on the following page, tables which show both the amount paid and the work done for it in different parts of the country.
The rate is limited by law to a penny in the pound. There are, however, various devices by which it may be raised. The most usual is to smuggle a clause into a ' Local Improvement Act ' or ' Omniljus Bill.' The following letters were received in reply to an inquiry on this point: —
WiGAN Fhee Public Library,
Febriumj iith, 1890.
Dear Sir, — The clause we Jiave obtained f(ir increasing the rate to 2d. was contained in a local Act (or omnibus Bill), which included as well naany other matters relating to other departments of the Corporation. The Mayor of Wigan took the chair at a public meeting of the ratepayers, and the Bill was approved l)y a majority of those present. No jioU was taken or asked for. Very few libraries are rated at less than id. in the £. I do not believe they could work at all successfully on less except in the case of very large centres, producing a lai-ge return. I do not know of individual cases of libraries on less than a id. rate.
I am, yours truly, M, D. O'Brien. II. T. Folkard.
Town Hall, Pkeston, February 11 Ih, 1S90.
There was no ]inll cu tlic Bill wliith contained the jiower to increase the Free Ial)rary rate lo lid.
II. Hamei;, M. D. O'Brien. ' Town Clerk.
,x.]
Free Li dray its.
267
o
u
•^■ao »« r'5'^i-.'..i-J. |
... 1 - . ... j\ 0 - 10 - 0 •»; "h "1 |
|
>S *«• « 0 '■*• 1 - ■«» — "V ■*! 1 |
CO •». 0 I-M.X •r.cc CO I*" »_<■. f^ |
|
CO - '(-.cc 6 «'- «r. f^. is 6 ( |
06 QC CO ~ 0 «^. C\ '<■. OvO MOO |
|
•-1 — ■ |
u, 1000 0 »•• U'.VO CO t-* u> >•« »>.0O |
|
e *^ |
V: 1^ r*. 0 '■" '^ C^ Trf ** fO |
1 c« i«« 1 ,. r<-. v; On 0 < ^ "j CV "". f<"< •-< |
lis |
||
00 VC I'.X 0 f -^ '<■. r* •^ ' |
||
' " s |
1^ l>.vC X 00 ►" 0 VC C* f» |
1 f w. T IT TvVC 1^ — «^CO r'S "f-VS |
rCO VC 0 l>.r^O rC «". «0 j |
1 u-.o -"t-vo 0 't- trj I'-o «r U-. If CO |
|
i"i |
«« M lA t» (T) iTjoo r>. 0 « |
- .'-•fjfJ.MOOv' .00 |
VO l->OI^- '« l-.»0 M |
0 ■ 0 "■.«! • -«-vo « o* • "riOo |
|
*^ .** |
MNrC'f'^. «fJ«MP« |
«» • -« r.-; « • ro rf. M M • « CC |
""■< |
1 |
|
■a-j |
•f>"«iOQ0000«OCT\O> 1 |
M re lO « 10 0»<0 0 »-• OS "*" « CO |
\0 ir, If- « ^ t^ f* ''< ''« vo *'■- 0 ''V |
||
•r. 0 <^ f^. 0 "-.ys •<■- CMC |
I-, -"t- 'r.fj 1^ 0 0 0 -f-cc 'O CN f |
|
P |
i^ -^ r< X i~. -r - X ir, -^ |
-• '1 0 "^ 1 -vO '< 'n Cs >c. rf, rt 0 |
1^00 0 fO C\ wi c^o \o <o |
O\ON>/iOCOCO0C00 1-VO I'-O — |
|
*^ IH |
M "^ |
|
0 1- -l-oo 0 1^ ►- cc 00 r- |
coo MO t^!3\-*l-.(?\" nco 0 |
|
-O'x Of^O'io 0 c\ |
— 0 •r-'» 0 '1 rr-. rfi <S\ -i- f> r* l— |
|
4 — ^ |
C\ •M 0 0 -^ -^ "f.-C M rr. 0 r^. Vj |
|
-> 0 «>.:c •-< "fio 1 - 0 0\ |
0 'O f^.X -1- -f- - ir. « - «-. -1-0 |
|
p"_5~ |
^ ri « -^ -4 |
e^M^ri M.*Hi.^i-ii-i»Hr4 |
M |
||
" V |
o< ^^ 0 0 v: >r. 0 • • • |
0C0t-.-*-i-ii~00 ■ -t rfi ■ T4 |
^ ? |
t^ 0 1 ^ 0 <■• ->: ov : : |
0 00 ir. r'; 1-0 r^. 10 CN I C> O . V. |
C .- |
0-00 >r.o « • : : |
i^O c« C/: <■< -t- -ri CN ■ "". " : 0 |
H w |
« 0^ -"l-O 1-. rfj « : . . |
C«M«f^r<Sr<-. core .C\0 • f' |
a |
i-( iM |
|
• -• |
||
ooi-ooooo<^. 0 |
00000 '<•<■. O-OOr^O |
|
cj - 0 <■■-- -^ 0 -"l- 0 0 — M ^00 T) 0 C\00 fOCO MOO |
i^ -^ ro 0 " — ■.«- C> r» in M — lO |
|
t; — ^ |
0 i--0 "-i 0 On 0 ►- OnOO in 0 0 |
|
" - ^^ |
1-^ M |
« 1.^ w t-t |
w «« |
||
i |
0 — I'-.'o 0 t-- r^'-r ON 0 I |
0000000000000 |
•noooooooooooo |
||
— T |
0 -l-?sZ) -^0 "f'Orj 0 |
00 ""-0000000000 |
— .— |
0 Tj rccc 1^ •0 0 -rvc 0 |
m - 0 t^ 0 0 ►- ir, 0 1^ 0 00 |
;a- |
"1 0 -^O uj M 1-1 N i« ir. |
If. -r -r t-^ »o "~. Oi OiO mo 00 m |
►1 « |
||
_i— • |
rH 'M -J< Tl t^ t^ m 00 -* 1^ |
1 CO 10 t^ IM 1^ iH 1^ © vr; CO r: Ci 'X> |
s 3i |
00 0 CO 1^ 1^ I- 00 l~ !•-. CO |
»^mi-.aoao«^>Ojui-i-.irt-i>>D |
o030cocOoOcocoooaoco |
cooococooooocooocOiOcooo<o r |
|
H |
X ii a j= |
— a |
fc; .i ■ |
||
■ ' ' ' ' = « ■;? |
||
■^^ |
— • - . ~ b" - . |
, ....*'... .-i • G |
0 |
J. ;; x ^ t. ^ = |
1 . .J. .t.-^ J-s |
c*-i |
J •£ s ^ >> J :s i i'^ =^ 3 1 |
|
£: - 1; -3 ^ 2 = ■? 5 .« 1 :^ :3 ^ 1 i^' -i > > > -S |
1 _^ . * __ |
|
^ |
■y^ |
|
w h « g |
||
> 0 -£ t. |
\l ^ C u. |
|
E 5 i 5 =^^ ' ;s f- y =: rt |
5 ^ •^ r ^' « « 55 « i < ^ S s^ S f- S 5S --* |
|
0 <:h == |
0 -« — ;i |
if
CC
.3
r«5
s |
|
3 |
|
0 |
|
pia |
|
c |
|
s |
. |
eg |
fl |
0 |
|
"C |
|
a |
0 |
s |
« |
0 |
d |
v |
■f» |
.s |
a; |
*» |
|
^J |
m |
>^ |
i) |
?-a |
|
0/ |
■*> |
£ |
ei |
C3 |
V |
u |
|
X |
0 |
01 > |
_a |
0 |
>> |
C |
■3 |
"S |
|
>1 |
to |
a |
s |
rt |
0 |
^ |
> |
01 |
^ |
« |
•--^ |
c
2 68 A Plea for Liberty. [ix.
Oldham,
Febnianj I2(h, 1890. •Sir, — Tlu: Council (if tliis borough olihiiiicd iiower to levy ;i higher rate than Id. in the £ through an IinjH-ovement Bill, which, I believe, jjasyed the House of Commons in 186;.
Yours faithfully,
Thos. W. Hand, M. I). ()'13hien. Chief Librarian.
Fkee Libeary, NorriNGiiAJi,
Fchnianj nth, 1890. Dear Sir,— Our libi-ary rate is only kL in (he £, though we get a separate allowance from the Council of £1500 per year for support of nine or ten reading-rooms in different parts of the borough.
Yours truly, M. I). O'Brien. Thomas Dent.
Leicester Free Public Library,
Fehrnarij nth, 1890. Dear Sir, — A poll was not taken when the liln-ary rate was increased to 2d. in the £. The present levy is i]'?., which is allotted l)y the Council to three committees, P'ree Library, Muscuni, and Art Gallery. When the rate was in- creased a clause was inserted in the local Act.
Yours faitlifulh\ M. D. O'Brien. C. Kirbv.
Reference Library, Bibmingham.
FiliriKn-ij 20th, 1890. Dear Sir,— Tlie Free Libraries' rate in Birmingham for last year (18S9) was i-2'7(t. in the £.
Youi-s trulv, M. D. O'Brien. .1. I). Millins.
Thus again although the nominal and frei^uently exceeded limit is now one penny in the pound, there is no knowing- how soon it may be raised. Already one of the members of the Library Association of the United Kingdom, a body composed to a considerable extent of librarians whose bureaucratic instincts naturally impel them to push their l)usiness by all possible means, has awarded a prize of ten guineas for a draft Library Bill, which, among other things, permits -a twopenny instead of a penny rate. ' But,' says the D<n'/if Xeu'.^ of Oct. 4th, i^Hg, ' the feeling appeared to be unanimous that it would be uu'tvit<e to put this forward as a part of the Association's programme, as it would enormously increase the ()i)position to the adoption of the Act in new localities.' No regard for the ratepayers' pockets holds them ])ack ; but only a fear of injuring business by frightening the bird whoso feathers are to Ijo plucked. Were it not for this
,x.]
Free Lib) arii'i^.
•69
the l>ill woulil !>«' puslu'd lorwanl. an<l tlioso ratqiaycis wlio have voted tor thf luloptioii of tlio Act in tlic liclid' tluii no more than one penny can In- levied, would have the into suddenly douliled oVer their heads without knowing,' it. Perhaps, alter all, it would serve thcni rii^ht'.
The intervention of this Association in the con<luct of the agitation for Free Liliraries is instructive, and points to thf tact that if we admit the ])rinci])le tliat the wants of the jioon-r classes generally are to he sup{)lied I'roiu the rates, it is not the poorer classes themselves who are allowed to say what form the gift shall take. On tlie contrary the law is maniptdated hv a nundier of amiable enthusiasts who succeed in foisting their own fad on the public charges. If the working class(!3 w»'re allowed to choose the application of nl. or 2*L in the pound it would not go to Free Libraries.
tliat till- aigiiinonts against it would liave iH'fu strong in<l<'(Ml ; but wcconi- ]«'lh'(l pooplt' to read, sonic oi" whom • lid not want to, and lii' considcn-d it a cruel thing to civati.' a want lli.' country was not ]>rcpar<-d to Mijiply. \\y lnid that to make it ••oin]iulsorv to I'staijlish fret' libraries was tlu- logical outcome of the Education Act, Thf risohillon jros lugnlin'il hijfoiir rotes — 33 to 29. A few more MacAlisters scattered about the country, and people will begin to see what a weapon taxation is to put into the hands of logical fanatics, starting from a false premiss. In some parts of the world there is a law obliging a man who has a vote to record it; perhaps Mr. MacAlister will jiropose presently that we should \)n obliged to read the books in his libraries.
' What is interesting to observe in all tlicM- matters is that th<' com- pulsion-fanatics have given up the idea of the people choosing for them- selves what is good for them. That pretence is worn out and thrown on one side, and whatever the Inisy- bodies think good for bodj- or soul, that is to be established forthwith. How ludicrous this reign f>f busy- bodydom would be, if it were not for the rather dismal fact that so few people take the trouble to fight the busy-bodies resolutely.'
' Fire I»/f of loth Oct., 1S90, illus- trates the attitude of officialism in the following : —
' The Full MitH Gazette reported (Sei>- tember 20 that, at the Library Asso- ciation at Reading. Mr. Ma<Alister proposed, *• that in the opinion of this association t he t ime has come when the essential necessity of puldic libraries as an extension f>f the compulsory national education lieing recognised, the question of establishing libraries l>e no longer left to a plebiscite, and that the establishment of a suitable library in every district as defined under the Acts be conipiihonj." He expected that the resolution would be lost, as on other occasions, luit he should move it year after year till it was carried. Mr. Tedber said they wouKl be laughed at if they passed such a resolution just now. Mr. Mac- Alister said he was aware of the objections and the dreadful things that would be .said if tliey j)assed the resolution, but it seemed to him absunl that libraries should be the only institutions whose establish- ment depended on a popular vote. It seemed to him a reproach to civilisa- tion and to the latter end of the nineteenth centuiy that such should be the case. If he had moved such a resolution before compulsory educa- tion was adopted he could undei-stand
270 A Pica for Liberty. [ix.
The enormous amount of light reading indulged in by the frequenters of Free Libraries leads us to expect that these places are largely used by well-to-do and other idlers. And this is exactly what we find. Fi-eo Libraries are perfect ' god-sends ' to the town loafer, who finds himself housed and amused at the public expense, and may lounge away his time among the intellectual luxuries which his neigh- bours are taxed to provide for him. Says Mr. Mullins, the Birmingham librarian, ' No delicacy seemed to deter the poor tramp from using, not only the news-room, but the best seats in the reference library for a snooze. Already the Committee had to complain of the use of the room for hdtinri, and for the transaction of various businesses, and the exhibition of samples, writing out of orders, and other pursuits more suited to the commercial room of an hotel.' And referring to another Free Library, the same authority continues: — 'In the Picton Room of the Liverpool Library, alcoves were once pro- vided with small tables, on which were penSj ink, &c., but it was found tliat pupils were received in them by tutors, and much private letter-writing was done therein ; so that when a respect- able thief took away .^20 worth of books they were closed^.'
After the nonsense usually indulged in by the officials of literary pauperism such candour as this is positively refreshing. It is seldom the high priest allows us to look behind the curtain in this fashion. As a rule, the admission is much less direct, and can only be gathered from a careful analysis of the statistics. According to the Bristol Report for last year, there were 416,418 borrowers during the twelve months preceding December 31, 1889: of these 148,992 are described as having ' no occupation.' The Report of the Atkinson Free Library of Southport informs us that out of the 1283 new borrowers who joined the library last year, ^^6 are written down as of ' no occupation.' At the same town, in the years ] 887-8, there were 641 who, according to the report, were with- out any occupation, out of a total of 1481, According to the annual Report of the Leamington Free Public Library for 1888-9, 187 made a return ' no occupation,' out of a total of 282 applicants. In the Yarmouth Report for the same year, out of a total of 3085 new borrowers, 1 044 are described as of
' Report of a Confeixnce in Bir- in the Bii/ish and Colo7iial Statio7ier, 6th mingliam of the Library Association Oct., 1S87. of the United Kingdom, })ublished
IX.] Free Libraries. 271
'no occupation'; tlio report fur tlic previous year states tlie proportion as follows: — Total of borrowers, 2813; 'no occu- pation,' lOjS; in the year before that the total was — 3401 ; ' no occupation," i^OiS.
Some reports give a fuller analysis of the ditlen-nt classes of people who use the libraries to which they refer, in ilie Wigan Report for last year we are told that 13,336 people made use ul' the reference library in that town duriuu: i<S(SS-9. The largest items of this amount are <fiven as follows: — Solicitors, 1214: clergy, 903; clerks and book-keepers, 1521 ; colliers, 961 ; schoolmasters and teachers, 801 ; aichitects and surveyors. 418: engineers. 490; enginemen, 438. At New- castle-on-Tyne, last year, there were 1 1.620 persons used the reference library, an<l only 3949 of these Avere of 'no occu- pation.' Yet, notwith.standing the numerical weakness of the latter, they managed to consult nearly half the books that wore consulted durinuf that year. The total number consulted was 36.100; and i6,8co were used Ijy people who had "no occupation.' And this is legislation for the Working Classes !
There is little doubt that at least forty-nine out of every fifty working-men have no interest whatever in these in.sti- tutions. For one penny they can buy their favourite news- paper, which can lie carried in the pocket and read at any time ; whereas if they wanted to see a paper at a Free Library they would generally have to wait half an hour or an hour in a stuffy room, without being allowed to speak during the time. The foll(;wing sensible remarks are from the pen of one who has risen to an honourable position from a very humble beginning without the aid of either Free Libraries or Free Schools : —
Not long ago a conference of working men was lickl at Salford to con.sidcr the question of rational amusement, when, in reply to a scries of questions, it was stated that Free Libraries were not the places for poor, hard-working men, who liad sf>cial wants which such libraries could not gratify. It was argued that people who went to work from six in the morning till six at niglit did not want to travel a mile or so to a Free Libraiy. Music, gymnastics, smoking and conversation rooms, and other things were suggested, but in summing up the majority of replies, it appeared that amusement rather tlian intcllietual improvL-miiit. or even reading, was what was most wanted Ijy men after a hard day's toil. This appears to have been realised in the erec- tion, according to Mr. Besant's conception, of the Palace of Delight in the east end of London.
The truth is that a Free Library favours one special section of the community — the book-readers — at the expense of all the rest. The injustice of such an institution is conspicuously
272 A Pica for Liberty. [ix.
apparent when it is remembered that temperaments and tastes are as various as faces. If one man may have his hohby paid for by his n»'iL;'libours, why not all % Are thoatre'-goers, lovers of cricket, bicyclists, amateurs of music, and others to have their earnings confiscated, and their capacities for indulging in their own special hobbies curtailed, merely to satisfy Muttons of o-ratuitous novel-reading? A love of books is a great source of pleasure to many, l)ut it is a crazy fancy to suppose that it should be so to all. If logic had anything to do with the matter Ave might expect to hear proposals for compelling the attendance of working men at the Free Library. But surely in this nineteenth century men might 1)0 trusted to choose their own amusements, and might mutually refrain from charo-ins: the cost thereof to their neighbours' account. This pandering to selfishness is bad for all parties, and doubly so to the class it is specially intended to benefit.
The following imaginary dialogue will perhaps serve to show the inherent injustice of literary socialism.
A and B earn is. each by carrying luggage. Says A io B: 'I am in favour of circulating books by means of a subscription library; from this i.s. I therefore propose to deduct k/. in order to compass my desire. There is my friend C, who is of the same opinion as myself, and he is willing to subscribe his quota to the scheme. We hope you will be willing to subscribe your mite, but if not, we intend to force you to do so, for. as you know, all private interests must give way to the public good.'
' Perhaps so,' replies B, ' but then, you see, I have my own opinions on the subject, and I do not believe that your method of supplying literature is the best method. Of course I may be wrong, but then I am logically entitled to the same freedom of thought and action as you yourself are. If you are entitled to have your views about a " Free" Library and to act upon them, I am equally entitled to the same liberty, so long as I don't interfere with you. I don't compel you to pay for my church, my theatre, or my club ; why should you compel me to pay for your library ? For my own part I don't want other people to keep me in literature, and I don't want to keep other people. I refuse therefore to pay the subscription.'
' Very well,' rejoins A, ' if that is the case I shall proceed to make you pay ; and as I happen to represent a numerical majority the task will be an easy one.'
'But are we not man and man,' says i?, 'and have not I
.N.]
Free Liliraries.
tho saiiif lij^'ht to speiul my enniiii;;s in my own way as yuii liavc to spoml yours in your way \ Why sliouM I l»r compflKMl to sjH'ud as yt)U spnid ? Dtm t you scr that you an* chiimin}^ moro for youisL-lf than you aiv aHowin;^; to mr, and aiv >uj)- ph'mcntinjjj your own liherty by rulibing me of mine? Is this the way you promote the public good? Is tliis your boasted flee hbrary? I tell you it is founded upon theft and upon tlu; vio- lation of llie most sacred thintr in this world— tlu- libertvof your fellow man. it is the endjodiment of a gross injustice, and only realises the selfish purpose of a cowardly and dishonest majority.'
'We have liearil all this before,' re|dies >l,'but such con- siderations must all Lrive wav before the iiublic cfood. We arc stronger than vou are, and wo have decided onee aii<l for all that you shall pay for a "Free" Library; don't make un- necessary resistance, or we shall have to proceed to extrcmitieB. *
An<l. after all, the so-called Free J^ibi-ary is not really fi'ce — only so in name. If the penny or twopenny rate gave even the shabbiest accommodation to anything like a fair proportion of its compulsory subscribers, there would not bo standing room, and the ordinary suljsci'iption libraries would disappear. According to Mr. Thos. Greenwood, who in his book on ' Free Libraries ' has given a talde of the daily average numljcr of visitors at the diti'erent Free Libraries distributed up and down the country, there is only one per cent., on an average, of visitors per day of the i)opulation of the town to which the library Ijelongs accommodated for a rate of one penny in the pound, — some- times more, sometimes less ; — but the general proportion is about one per cent. Now what do these facts mean ? If it costs one penny in the pound to accommodate so few, what would it cost for a fair proportion to receive anything like a share that would be worth having? Even now it is a frequent occurrence for a reader to wait for months before he can get the novel he wants ^ Says ]\Ir. George Easter, the
' This is licit null' theory. I havi- Ittfoic mo a letter from a friend in whieli he says he lias ceased to borrow liooks from the Sheffield Libraiy lie- cause 'if yovi wanted anyjx'pular fic- tion you had great difficulty in yetting it.and often. if you did get it. the books were in such a dirty condition as tf) detract from the pleasure of reading them.' On oiie occasion when the Shef-
ii<ld Central Lilirary was opened :ifter a holiday, the books having all been called in for insijoction, there were about half a dozen people at the door ready to rusli in and get the latest pojiuiar novels liefm-e the rest of the pul>li<; could secure th<ni. The dif- liculty of getting any particular novel is so great.
2 74 ^ Pica for Liberty. [ix.
Norwich librarian : — ' Novels most read are those by Ainswoith, Bdllanhine, Bezant, Braddun, CuUins, Craik, Dickens, Fcnn, Grant, J/nffgcrd, Herdij, C. KhKjdcy, Kingdon, Edna Lyall, ^lacdonald, Marryat, Oliphant, Payn, Reade, Reid, Verne, Warner, Wood, Worhoise, and Yolukj; of those underlined (in italics) the works are nearly always out \' The fact is, the Free Library- means that the many shall work and pay and the few lounge and enjoy; theoretically it is free to all, but practically it can only be used by a few.
While there is such a run on novels, solid works are at a discount. At Newcastle-on-Tyne during i8(So-(Si we find that 2 1 CO volumes of Miss Braddon's novels were issued (of course some would be issued many times over, as the whole set comprised only thirty-six volumes), while Bain's ' Mental and Moral Science ' was lent out only twelve times in the year. There w^ere 1320 volumes issued of Grants novels, and fifteen issues of Butler's 'Analogy of Religion '; 4056 volumes of Lever's novels were issued, while Kant's • Critique of Pure Reason' circulated four times; 4901 volumes of Lytton's novels Avcre issued, while Locke ' On the Understanding ' Avent eight times. Mill's 'Logic' stands at fourteen issues as against Scott's novels, 3300 ; Spencer's ' Synthetic Philosophy' (iS vols.) had forty-three issues of separate volumes; Dickens' ]iovels had 6810; Macaulay's 'History of England' (10 vols.) had sixty-four issues of separate volumes. Ouida's novels had 1020 ; Darwin's 'Origin of Sj^ecies' (2 vols.) had thirty-six issues ; Wood's novels, 1481. Mill's 'Political Economy' had eleven issues; Worboise's novels, 1964. Smith's 'Wealth of Nations' (2 vols.) had fourteen issues ; Collins' novels, 1368.
' No worse than in other libraries,' it may be said ; ' knowledge is at a discount : sensation at a premium every- where ! ' Perfectly true ; but are people to be taxed to give fcicilities for this? Novel readino- in moderation is good: the endowment of novel reading l;)y the rates is bad — that is our contention. And when it is remembered that any book requir- ing serious study cannot be galloped through, like a novel, in
^ A few yonr.s iigi.i tlic autlioritifs in iiiaiiy casi's are issued at 31s. 6rf.
liad ti) lake stiMiiy iiieasui'es in the the set of ihi'i-e VDhnnes. And it
intercstsdfstudentsa^^aiiist the novel- amist be admitted that lheri> is some-
i-cading users of the British Museiiiu. thing very ai'l)itrary iii taxing (ho
It was found that vast numbers of g(>neral public for a library, and then
people used the lilirary only to get at i)rcveuting them from seeing the only
the newly published novels, which books they care to read.
,x.]
Free Libraries. 275
the week or fomtei'ii days allowfd tor ilsc, it becoincs at onco evidi'iit that this gratuitous kiiding system is only aihipted lor the (.-ircuhitiuii of sensation, and not for tlir aci|uirrni('nt of real knuwlcdgt.'. And this is the sort of thing pcoph; allow tlu'Uisi'lves to l>e rated and taxed for! This is prugresHive Ic'dshition. and its opponents are backward and illiberal !
Free Libraries are typical exanii>les of the conipidsoi-y co-operation everywhere gaining ground in this country. Like all State socialism they are the negation of that libej-ty wludi is the goal of hunum progress. Every successi"ul ui)position to them is therefore a stroke for human a<lvance- ment. This mendacious appeal to the numerical majority to force a demoralising and pauperising institution upon the ndnority, is an attempt to revive, in municipal legislation, a form of coercion we have outgrown in religious matters. At the present time there is a niiijoiity of Protestants in tliis country who, if they wished, could use their numerical strength to compel forced suljscriptions from a minority of ('atholics, for thu support of those religious institutions which arc regarded l)y their advocates as of quite e([ual impoi-tance to a Free Library. Yet this is not done ; and why ? Decause in nuitters of religion wo have learnt that lilterty is better than force. In political and social questions this terrible lesson has yet to be learned. We deceive ourselves when we imagine that the struggle for personal liberty is over — probably the fiercest part has yet to arise. The tyramiy of the few over the many is past, that of the many over the few is to come. The temptation for power — whether of one man or a million men — to take the short cut, and attempt by recourse to a forcing process to produce that which can only come as the result of the slow and steady growth of ages of free action, is so great that probably centuries Avill elapse l)efore experieiice wall have made men proof against it. But, however Ions: the conflict, the ultimate issue cannot be doubted. That indispensable condition of all human prtjgress — liberty — cannot be. permanently suppressed by the arbitrary dictates of majorities, however potent. When the socialistic legislation of to-day has been tried, it will be found, in the bitter experience of the future, that for a few temporary, often imaginary, advantages we have sacriliced that personal freedom and initiative without which even the longest life is but a stale and empty mockery. ^r -jx q-jj^^jj^v,-
T 3
X.
SELF-HELP VERSUS STATE PEXSIOXS.
In any con8i<leration of the attitude, of the State towards the provident an<l economic organization of the population, there is fortunately an intelligent, coherent, and properly formed volume of opinion which should, and may with advan- tage, be considered. I allude to the opinions of the bulk of the members of the friendly societies of the United Kingdom. It will be remembered that these societies have a position which renders their testimony of considerable value, for they are enabled to speak with the knowledge of experience at once as to the merits of independent voluntary effort, and the advan- tages (or the reverse) of a certain degree of State control. It is less than twenty years since the Royal Commission on Friendl}^ Societies concluded its important and exhaustive work, and laid down, in a mannerthen regarded as authoritative, the limits up to which State interference was desirable or justified in connection Avith institutions comprising a large proportion of A\hat may be termed the domestic providence of the population. The Report of the Commission was a practical commendation of the voluntary principle and virtually en- dorsed the policy of trusting the financial future to the develop- ment of self-effort among the members. At the same time, it was admitted and enforced that the State had duties to perform toward a movement of such importance to the Avelfare of the community, and an attempt was made to define and limit their scope. The lines laid do-wn w^ere that friendly societies and kindred voluntar}^ institutions should conform to certain rules confining their work to legal and constitutional objects ; transact the more commercial part of their business on prudent lines ; consent to a certain amount of supervision, and furnish such periodical returns, &c., as might be useful to the nation and retjuisite for theii* own ultimate soundness.
x.] Self- Help VcrsiK State I\iisj'on^.
1 ~ ■"
In ruturn l'(»r tins they wiTo to enjoy certain |ii ivilei^cs iiinl immunities tVoni the ordinary law ami taxation.
It is interesiini; to inquire -wluthei" experience of tlie workim; f>t' this phm has letl the veiy laii,re atid intellii^ent iiu-mhershiji ot" these societies to lavour further interl'i-rcnco ami control, ami to covet aid Irom the State, or it" thty have hecu induced to continue to rely I'or material supjiort on their own unaided etiorts. To some extent between two forces, have the societies been inclined by experience— the best of teachers — towards State aitl or voluntaryism?
Fortunately the answer is readily forthcoming. an<l ])rac- tically unanimous. Expeiience of the two forces has abund- antly convinced the mend)ers of the strentrth of one and tlici Weakness and imperfections of the other — and the opinion is nearly general that less rather than more State interference and control is desirable, and that anything in the shape of State aid should certain!}' be rejected because (among other reas(tns) it implies further State interference. An attempt may be made to weaken the force of this opinion by pointing out that the friendly societies are admittedly still imperfect, to some extent owing to defects of developiuent — and as the State .system is in some degree controlling and detective, it is therefore unpopular — much i]i the sense the police would be unpopular with law- l)reakers. This contention will, however, not bear examination. If it were true, the aversion to State interfereiice would be in proportion to the faultiness of the institution whose memlters entertained it. The reverse is. however, the fact, and the more perfect societies — naturally those with whose internal ari-angements the Registrar has least occasion to interfere — are. almost in direct propoition to their efticiency, the strong- est in their opposition at once to State interference and to State aid. The broad fact remains, and is worth recording ami remembering, that any attempt by the State to assume new responsibilities in this direction will, if ventured upon, be undertaken in opposition to. rather than agreement with, the wishes of that part of the population whose opinion should be of value, being founded on knowledge and experience.
Probably the general opinion in favour of voluntary effort has been confirmed, and the opposition to State interference strengthened by the movement to 'nationalise' provision against sickness and old age, under the scheme submitted to a Select Committee of the House of Commons, and described as
278 A Pica for Liberty. [x.
'National Assurance' There is little gratification in slaying the slain, and reference to this would scarcely be requisite, but for its sequel, and because it contained some errors of principle Avhich are typical and may be repeated. Among these may be noted one common to many movements of a more or less socially despotic character — namely, collecting and colouring the faults and failures of a minority of the population (and frequently a very small minority) and deducing from the ]-esult the neces- sity for some sweeping measure that shall appl}- to all. In other words, punishing or coercing the whole community in order that the improvident or the vicious may not escape. Another specious and common fallacy^ in the proposal was the misleadino- misuse of the term ' Assurance.' Ihidor the cruise of ' National Assurance,' a scheme was propounded which did violence in almost all its details to the true principles of as- surance. These may be summarised as equitable payments made by a number of persons to meet stated risks, the premiums ])eing so proportioned to risks as to be just to all. Yet here was a scheme proposing to bring together at one common pre- mium, the infirm and the healthy, the lame, blind, and afflicted, and the intelligent and vigorous, the virtuous and the profligate, the drunken and the temperate, the industrious and the idle — and guarantee them equal advantages in times of sickness — under the delusive title of ' Assurance.' In fact, to apply a naine properly used to descril)e a delicate sj'stem of ecjuitable a<ljustment to what would have practically been a return to the antiquated and discredited plan of a poll-tax.
But while this plan as a whole was pronounced impractic- able by a Committee of the House of Commons, and condemned by pultlic opinion, it has left its offspring in a kindred proposal — orgroup of proposals — which seek to commit the State in some form or other to a new and large provision for the population. The provision for sickness as a ' National' scheme has been given up — ostensildy owing to difficulties of detail. There remain the proposals — at present indefinite as to details — to commit the State to the provision of ' old-age pensions for the people.'
A little consideration will show that the latter proposals are clearly off-shoots from the larger and preceding one, and that all have a common origin. They appear to have arisen i'rom a consideration of the number of persons — and especially tlie aged — who are relieved under the Poor Law or, in other words, depend to a lesser or greater extent on resources created
X.J Si If- Help I'lrsf/s S/ci/r /\'nswn.<!. 279
l»y thfcoiuimmity aiul not l>y their own fH'oil-s. 'I'lic |ironiin«nc(* jjiven to this matter ivsts lari^oly on a return furnished to the House of ("oninions some ten years ai^o on the motion of Lonl l.ymint,^ton (now I.onl Portsmouth), an<l several somewhat simihir >ul'se([Uent tahuhitions. It may at onee hea«lmitte<l — after makinijf considerable allowance for the method of col- lect inj; the infoi-mation — that these statistics are of a ijrave and mournful nature, and furnish food for unpIcaNunt relleetiftn. Such retlectiun sugj^ests the »iucstion.however.as to how far they are a correct index to the future. The answer to tiiis involves consideration whether the condition of the population has im- proved or deteriorated, and whether more or less provision is lieiniT nuide for the tuture than was done voars aijo — as on this nuist tlepend to what extent those who are to become aged will repeat the experience of those who have already done so. A review of the facts materially lightens the out-look, for there is no room to doubt that the community generally, and the working classes especially, have made great progress in providing for themselves during the past fifty years, and arc continuing to do so, by voluntary and chieHy self-managed means. This is evidenced by the great growth of deposits in the various savings banks, tiie creation and extension of the liuilding society and co-operative system, and pcrhai)s most of all by the growth antl efficiency of trades unions and friendly societies. Taking the friendly societies alone — their system has only been consolidated into true efficiency during the past half-ceutury. and in that period the nuinlier of members has multiplied tenfold, and the growth of accumu- lated funds, and extension of useful activity have been even more marked. The latest Report of the Chief Registrar shows that in the decade between iHj6 and i<S(S6 the num- ber of members increased from 3,404,000 to 6,700,000, and the reserve funds from M'(),^c^y,coo to .^20,352,000 — addi- tions at the respective rates of 97 and 118 per cent.
Although these facts do not indicate any direct provision for old age by means of pensions, they cover considerable payments to infirm and sick aged members, and go to prove that those who are at present young w^ill probably be better prepared to meet the wants of later life than those already aged.
After due allowance for all this, however, it must be admitted that a considerable, though greatly diminished.
2 8o A Pica for Liberty. [x.
amount of pauperism and helplessness among the aged may be looked for in the future. It may be further admitted that comparatively few of the population are, or are likely to be- come, provided with what are described as ' old-age pensions ' — in other words, secured annuities commencing at a given age.
It must notj however, be assumed that the absence of the provision of annuities arises from w^ant of opportunity — on the contrarj'j it is almost entirely due to want of will. The plain fact is that old-age pensions are not popular. The State has endeavoured to popularise them through. the post-office, and signally failed. The two great afiiliated orders — the Foresters and Odd-fellows — have each instituted well-devised and sound pension funds ; and they are monuments of com- pleteness in everything except members, the numbers at- tracted being absolutely insignificant. Nor does the ordinary middle class experience materially differ; the return of life in- surance premiums foriHyogiving a total of nearly .=^'15 000,000, wdiile those for annuities are but .^'1,220,000. These figures do not distinguish betw^ecn immediate and deferred annuities, both descriptions being included. As the former are far the more popular and general, a separation, if possible, would reveal results even more strikino-.
It is interesting to examine, in passing, the reasons for this, and to in(|uire wdiether, after all, they are not well founded, as is so often the case with clearly defined popular predilections and aversions. Is it quite so certain, as is frequently as- sumed, that an assurance for a pension at a given age is the chief or even the best provision for old age ? In the first place the uncertainty and suddenness of risk, which is frequently the incentive to other forms of insurance, does not exist in any large degree. In case of fire, of sickness, or of death, a con- tingency is provided I'ur wdiich may arise almost at any moment. With old age the number of years before any given point can be reached, is a fixed and measurable period, and thus a definite interval exists during which to provide. Again, a sound annuity fund can only return to its members the result of their own savings at a given — and usually a low — rate of compound interest, minus the expenses of adminis- tration, which are frequently heavy. Obviously a prudent person, with sufficient self-control, can obtain tins i-esult by investment of his own savings at compound interest, often at a higher rate, and witlmut the costs of management. There
s.]
St If- Help ycrs/zs S/d/r Pensions.
2S1
arc as well thr choice of a minilicr id' «.tli(i" iikxK's of |>nt- vision, such as the purchase of a house to live in throu|^rli n. hiiil. ling society (a far more reniunenitive cliannel lor thrift), or the invtstnieiit f>f savinLCS in the ]>tirchas(' of a small Imsi- noss for the ('m[)l(»ymfnL of wife ami ehilihcn, or v\y\\ wise oxj)en«liture in providing higher e«lucation for proujisingsons or ilani;htei's. All these channels have the charm <if coin- ])arati\e ecrtaintv. ])ro<lucf the ]>l(asur(^ of possession, ami give a srnse of individual r('sp(»n.siliility and control that largely iu'lps to constitute character.
There remains ono other argument necessary to he ilcnlt with in order to arrive at a true appreciation of the circum- stances— namely, that the working classes, at all events, aic ' unalde ' to nuike provision for pi'usions in their oM age. < >! course, if this contention be true in a limited sense, and of some special and poorly paid industries, the question will arise as to the proper mode to meet such a state of thingf>. Is such an economic con<lition to he accepted as chronic and stereotyped, involving the <luty of the State to step in with what wouhl practically be the payment of a ' rate in aid,' or does it not rather call for reform in an indefensible state of things'? To recognise it as final and permanent, would be an impotent suiTcnder of some at all events of our countrymen to perpetual pauperism. It is unnecessary, however, to pursue such a discussion — for there is evidence at hand which renders it superfluous. This is to be found in the yearly payment requisite to secure a pension of ^.v. per w^eek, commencing at the aije of sixtv-five. The fiirures ijiven are taken fiom the Foresters' Table, but do not differ materiallv fi'om several othei*s that are published : —
At Age |
! Per Year. i |
Per Week. |
j £ .-■. il |
'/. |
|
20 |
1 0 iS 4 |
4} |
24 |
\ ?, 2 |
■::+ |
27 |
1 I 7 11 |
6| |
?.o |
1 I 13 10 |
n |
35 |
2 8 0 |
II |
It would be a bold position to assert that these rates are impossible to the ordinary wage-earners of the country — even
282 A Pica for Liberty. [x.
if consi(lerati(;ii ]>f confined to that class. On the contrary the figures prove to demonstration that the iioglect of annuities arises from want of will, not lack of means, and that such a mode of assurance is unpopular rather than im- possible.
The position may then be narrowed down and briefly stated as follows : — (i) A prospective amount of pauperism among the aged population, chiefly wage-earners, which is being dimin- ished by voluntary effort, and is likely to continue to diminish. (2) An unwillingness on the part of the population to pro- vide themselves with annuities at rates- which ai-e within their means, if they desired to assure by them. (3) Vague proposals that the fState should provide, or assist to provide, annuities for a section or the whole of the population.
If these propositions be examined, the novel and dangerous nature of the changes which are being too lightly spoken of will be at once apparent. It is well to indicate some of these dangers and anomalies ; to enumerate them all would be difhcult indeed.
It is desirable at the outset to dispose of the ordinary illusion that is growing up around the terms • State-aided ' and ' free ' as applied to ' national ' plans for providing for the real or imaginary wants of the whole or sections of the population. The State, or its Government, has obviously no income or property except that raised from and belonging to the peop]o as a whole. The Budget surplus, of which so much is heard from time to time, is but the result of an over- estimate of expenditure, or an under-calculation of income in the previous year — and means simply the return to the community of an amount unnecessarily obtained. Thus any funds used for providing or supplementing old-age pensions can be but the product and property of the nation, however much this may be obscured by expert finance. The only power the State has in 'giving aid' is to return to the whole or part of the population the revenue drawn from the whole or part of the people, to which all will probably contribute directly or indirectly. Such return is not, indeed, even a full I'epayment — inasmuch as the fund has been depleted to the extent of the frequently large cost of collection and disbursement.
With refei'ence to any provision that may be made, a little examination will show tliat if old-age pauperism is to
x.] Self-IIclf^ Versus State Pensions. 283
Ik? removed — ami this is admittotlly the ronicr-KtolK; of the whole cditioo tho pension system must ho pomj)ulsoiy nud •jenernl. It is imp()ssil)l(' otherwise to certainly provide in vouth tor all the itrohahilities td" old aLT''. The vouthl'id <d" jimitetj means may hy their own exertions Ix-como iiidep(.-ii- dent hefore old age; the comparatively well-to-do in youth, or even niid<lK' age, may Itc rendered poor by recklessness or mislortinie. V>\\i to otter provision for the whole population in this way. would hi; to do what in the great nuijoiity ol' cases is wholly unnecessary, at a most extravagant cost. As a help to the poor such a plaii would he the merest delusion. It would mean the suhstitution of a poll-tax — viwatious, costly, and demoralising — for the poor-law, the cost (;f which is met by taxation l)ased on a far more e(juitahlo adjustment of liemands to the means of the taxpayers.
Apparently from recognition of these difficulties, some sort of limitation of the recipients of 'assistance' has been sug- gested. Here again the dithculty of predicting tlic probable wants of old age from present means presents an obstacle. Further, to give 'assistance' to any except those absolutely unable to provide for themselves, would bo at onco unjust and impolitic. Unjust, Ijocause it would compel those excluded under any selection to help others fi'e(|uently little if any worse oft" than themselves, in doing what they are able to accom- plish l)y their own ortbrts ; impolitic, because it would substitute State-aid for self-reliance in many cases where couiph te inde- pendence at present exists and is prized.
Even assuming that it were possible to select the class just able to maintain itself but unable to pay the annuity premium (a task obviously beyond the ordinary Government official), giving help on this plea of partial destitution would eiitail supervision of a costly character, and nuxko the recipients paupers in all but name. Dependence of large numbers of the population throughout life would thus be substituted for the present pauperism in old age of a compai'atively few. To attain a merely nominal limitation of pauperism, that condition would be forced on a large number at present free from the evil, and for a long series of years, in order that the surviving minority might be relieved from the evil for a shorter period.
To otl'er part payment or an increase of allowance to tho.se who have voluntarily paid or subscribetl for pensions — a sort of bribe to be provident (as has been suggested), would be
284 A Plea for Liberty. [x.
immoral and unjust, and further foredoomed to failure. It will be remembered that the fund from which such bribes would be drawn niust be raised by taxation, and provided directly or indirectly by the whole of the population. The injustice of using it to the disadvantage of those who prefer independence and freedom for their savings, and the profit of those who will only be virtuous under Government patronage, and at a given price, is obvious, while the immorality of the sys- tem is even more self-evident. Such a plan, moreover, regarded as a cure for pauperism, is almost ludicrous. The most limited experience, equall}' Avith the most extensive, teaches that it would attract but a small percentage of the really improvident or the very poor. The careless cannot now be induced to join organizations of a provident nature from which almost immediate benefit may be obtained ; what likelihood would there be of any inducement that could be offered causing them to exercise present self-denial for the distant prospect of benefit 40 3'ears hence % The really poor are too much engrossed in providing for the pressing necessities of to-day to be able to set aside part of their scanty means as a provision exclusively for old age. which the hardship of their lives makes it unlikely they will ever reach. Are they not, as well, right in this ? Is it not their first duty — and indeed, their best chance of providing for old age — to preserve health and strength in the present, and, as far as a hard lot will allow, make some preparation for sickness, slackness of work, the claims of family, and the many otiier risks which in time and importance are prior to old age.
Attempts have been made to overcome the difficulties of limiting State aid to appropriate recipients by suggesting that it should be confined to wage- earners. In other words, in the cause of the prevention of pauperism, it is proposed to bring the great, active, and organized wage-earning popu- lation into the receipt of enforced bounty from every other class. The law has long, and with good policy, deprived paupers — as persons compelled to subsist by the exertions of others — of the exercise of political rights. Now, by a curious process — the nation having justly endowed the workers with full political rights — it is cahidy proposed to make wage-earners tlic recipients of unsolicited State doles, without, of course, interfering with their rights of citizenship. In otlier words, to confer on one particular class the per-
X.] Self-Help Wrsus Slalc Pensions. 1:85
(|uisitcs of tin.' pHiiprr ainl tin- privilfties (}{ the indo-
This proposnl tor tin- special ciifldWiiniil ul \saL;i-ciiiiii'r,s calls fur eaiffnl cxaminaiioii. Tli'- iilcu appears to lie a hasty imitation of the Oennau ])lan — ajipaiviitl}' on the assumption that Avhat is now foinitl likely to i'ail wouM surely succeed. In<leeil this arhitrarv selection is saiil to be already pro<lucin<^' active discontent in Germany, and it is easy to untlorstand it must eventually do so. The course in ipii'stion is evidently an attempt to escape from the settlement of a ditlicult antl delicate detail by adopting a rou,iL!:h and ready and non-iuitural test. For "why should wa,i]^e-earnini^ per sc entitle to selection for State bounty unless it can be accepted as proof of real or comparative need ? It cci-tainly atlbrds no such proof. It is easy to point to large nundiers in the com- nuniity whose average ineon\e is not more, and frcfpiently less, than that of an ordinary artisan, and whose anxieties and struggles are often far greater. Disappointment is, as well, certain to be evoked by such a plan — when the wage-earner learns, as he has already done in Germany, that a change in the method of earning his income, possiljly without in any way increasing it, aniuils his claims for a pension, and deprives him of his provision for old age.
In fact any effective State discrimination as to the means of the reci]nents of the proposeil doles would l)c practically impos- sible. The ditHculty is not alone one of income. Experience in such matters teaches that the comparative poverty or wealth of an individual depends nearly as much on the legitimate demands upon him as the amount he receives. In other words, you can- not arrive at a true balance by contemplating the income side of the account onl}^ To appreciate in some degree tlie difficulty of any tioistworthy test, let it be borne in mind that with a stricter standard (one of absolute destitution) a limited number of cases, and large local knowledw, guai'diaiis of the poor find this discrimination intricate and difficult, if not impossible. Substitute an indefinite and elastic test, eliminate local knowledge, and largely multiply the number of cases — and it is not difiicult to foresee that the W'Ork would be one the State would be quite unable to perform efficiently.
There is another consideration worthy of careful attention — namely, the unec[ua] nature of the advantages proposed to be given. Examination will demonstrate that even assuming
2 86 A Pica for Liberty. [x.
apparently equal advantages were offered to all or to a given class — say, for example,, 'wage-earners' — the division of the State bounty would by no means bo an equal one. The benefit would depend on length of life. Thus it would be a substan- tial endowment to the strong, the healthy, the well-fed and com- fortaldy housed, and the rural population. To the poor, the ill-fed, the docker, the river-side labourer, the weather-tor- tured hawkers, bus-men, and cabmen — it would be a mockery and a delusion ; for to them the annuity age is a promised land they can scarcely hope to enter.
Nor has this view entirely escaped notice. One represent- ative, at least, of the less fortunate classes (Mr. Ben Tillett) has already openly said in efieet — ^ We do not want old-age pen- sions ; our men die of hardship before old age arrives. What we want is to make their short lives more livable and com- fortable.' Is not the inevitable conclusion plain and easy to read. Once admit the principle of State aid to supplement income, and not merely to relieve destitution, and the question naturally and fairly arises — ' Why should all the ]»uunt3^go to the old age of a certain section? Let those for whom 1 ate has written " a short life and a hard one " have their share of the good things which they need at least as much as others.'
If, however, State aid for old-age pensions to a limited class is impracticable by reason of difhculties of detail, there remains yet another plan. This is the provision of old-age pensions for all — partly or wholly by the State — and, of course, inider a compulsory scheme. The adoption of such a plan is so improljable — not to say impossible — as to call for but brief examination. Would it, after all, be better — or oven as good — as the Poor Law system it has become fashionable to con- demn? Under that system the maintenance, or part-main- tenance, of the destitute is borne by the rest of the commu- nity, the means being found by taxation fairly proportioned to the position of the taxj^ayer. Under the new plan all would help to provide the funds — each individual probably having, indirectly or directly, to contribute a nearly equal amount. If all were allowed to participate in the benefits, rich and poor would divide, as survivors in a sort of tontine, the revenues forced from those who had died earlier. If the ])Oor oidy were allowed to receive pensions, pauperism would still exist as now, for the recipients would be but
X.] Sclf-Hclp I't/sus S/ti/t Pnisi()fis\ 287
l)aupeis under aiKjthor luum-. In iiny case the eflect wouKl be to relieve wealth of some of its i))esoiit burdens, anil to distribute them more generally among those less able to bear them — a curious outcome of a movement which luus for its avowed objeet a totally opposite result.
Brietly put, these are some of the reasons against a scliemo for devoting the funds of the State— the common property of the whole community, held in trust for all its meinl»ers, — to providing or partly provi<ling old-age pensions for the people or any section of them : and they are urged in defence of the plain principle that it is the duty of the individual to pro- vide for himself so long as he has the power or the means, and the duty of the community to come to his aid only when these fail. It is worth while, however, to consider the subject from another point of view. Let it be assumed— at all events for argument's sake — that the objections of principle were overridden, say, by political pressure : those of detail removed or overcome ; and tlie adoi)tion of a plan had become ]ossi))le, or even probable. Granting this assumption — a very large one it is true — it will be interesting and useful to consider what would probably be some of the results, and their effects on the character of the population.
The material and economical effects likely to follow may be usefully considered, and the first point for examination is one of chief importance in this connection — namely, the cost. Any centralised and national plan will surelv. whether State-aided or merely State-managed, be a costly one as compared witli intelligent and well-arranged voluntary sectional organisa- tions— even if the costliness of administration be for the present left out of consideration. Such a conclusion rests on bases that barely leave room for contention. It is admitted — ^ and, indeed, laid down as an axiom — by the advocates of State action, that the rate of interest used in calculating the cost of pensions must be fixed at the niinimum rate at which the credit of the State permits it to borrow — namely. 2^ per cent. This is merely following the principle accepted in the German plan, which has inspired a passion .for imitation too hasty to recognise that the scheme is at present but an experi- ment, the success of which is by no means assured. In Ger- many the State rate is taken, but, national credit being weaker there than here, this has been assumed as 3^ per cent.
288 A Pica for Liberty. [x.
The State rate, in our ease, being deteiinined at 2\ per cent., the question naturally arises — what would the voluntary rate be ? At tirst sight this seems a difficult (|uestion. Fortunately, it can he ansAvered with at least approximate certainty — and on a scale sufficiently extensive to be trustworthy — from the published records of voluntary work. The Foresters and Odd- fellows Societies have together funds of almost Twelve Millions, and the Hearts of Oak Society One Million. The two large Orders earn an average interest late of over 3I per cent., the smaller centralised society about 4 per cent. Reference to the average rate earned on vast Life Assurance Reserves, by a large group of organisations, gives an even higher rate. Not to overstate the case, liowever, Jet it be taken that the ditfci'ence between mechanical (State) investment and intel- ligent (mutual co-operative) investment would be one per cent. A pension fund at the lower as against the higher rate means a great national waste — which, however obscured by clouds of misleading terms, is a loss from national resources, and must ultimately fall on the community as a whole.
A cursory consideration may lead to the opinion that the difference is a minor one, and of small importance. More careful examination will, however, contradict any such conclusion. The influence exercised by this factor will be best explained by the statement of a few plain instances. Taken on the plan of a yearly payment — .^'i per year for 40 years, at i\ per cent, compound interest, will produce ^'67 H,s. ; if in half-yearly payments ,5£'6(S ly. In 50 years the amount by yearly paj^ment would be ^'97 9-s., and by half-yearly .^'98 los. At 3? per cent., the produce in 40 years would be ^^''84 j i,s'. on yearly, and ^85 1 86'. on half-yearly payments; while at 50 years it would be .^^131 on yearly, and -^'133 7s. on half-yearly payments. In other words, the difference of one per cent, causes a loss on the capital fund of 25 per cent, in 40 years, and 34 per cent, in 50 years. If the basis used be a capitalised present payment in lieu of pay- ments spread over a term of years, the difference is even more substantial. The following hgures, showing the present pay- ment re(juisite, at given ages, to secure an annuity of ,^'io, commencing at age 65, at 3 and 4 per cent, interest (a differ- ence of one per cent.), exhibit this so forcibly as to render com- ment superfluous : —
Self- Help I't'/'siis S/(7/r Pensions.
289
3 Per Cent, |
4 IV |
r r.nt. |
|
At Aji-- |
£ >-. (/. |
£ |
5. d. |
30 |
10 7 0 |
(i |
6 0 |
25 |
13 90 |
1 |
ly 0 |
30 |
I-l 00 |
10 |
I 0 |
35 |
iS 4 0 |
1 .> |
«.i 0 |
40 |
2260 |
i^) |
S 0 |
Thus it will be seen that even to the intliviiliial the advau- tai,'c of a con.si«leral)h' State grant in ai<l. would lie neutralised Ity the necessarily low rate of interest, while the loss to the nation as a whole would Ije large indeed.
If then it can be shown that State aid must of necessity be financially wasteful — may it not be urged with eijual cogency, that thr expenses of administration will probaldy be extrava- gant \ Experience demonstrates that organisation by a Govern- ment department is always more expensive, and generally less efficient, than when undertaken locally, and under detailed supervision. Indeed, one of the problems of to-day — the de- spair of the earnest financial reformer — is how to reform and cheapen the departmental establishments which have become more really powerful than the Ministers who nominally control them. With these facts in view, and the contemplation of the enormous work of listing, checking, and indexing even the 'wage-earners" alone of the population, a defined and disagree- al )le prospect is revealed. This prospect is the creation of a fresh army of officials, to be sustained out of the wealth created by the producers ; an aildition to the burden of non-proiluctivc; pro- fessional and clerkly machinery, for regulating the community — already so great, as probaldy to form one of the causes of the poverty and pauperism now proposed to be cured. And with the creation of this army will no doubt be repeated the dreary defects in State machinery — scanty pay to the workers in the lower grades, extravagance as the scale ascends, and a further crop of patronage to be divided among the relatives, friends, and dependents of political ' friends of the people.'
xS'or is this the full sum of the evil. If precedent may be accepted as a guide, with the growth of the new department would be repeated the multiplication of routine and the vex- atious delay and intricate official formalities that have done
u
290 A Pica for Liberty. [x.
much already to render even the present Government .super- vision unpopular with the friendly societies.
A further point for consideration is the possible effects of a very large amount of money — probably at least tens of millions — being placed under the control and numagement of the Government and Parliament of the time beine:. Who would venture to forecast what bold strokes a daring financier, with a pliant majority behind him. may not attempt under these conditions? Such conjectures have, at least, some justihcation in facts already accomplished — as, for example, the recent reduction in the rate of interest on the National debt. This was made possible by the confidence reposed in Government investments — the savings banks balances giving the control of funds requisite for the ' operation.' As a result, those who held the simple faith that the best disposition of their re- sources was to lend it to Government, by buying Consols — the believers in the ' sweet simplicity of the Three per Cents.' — have been rewarded for their constancy by a reduction of one penny in the shillihg in their interest fund, and the pleasant prospect of a fall of another penny in a given number of years, while their capital has been decreased in value by £^ in each hundred. The bases of the new pension fund will — as were and are the conditions of Government Stock — be subject to future Acts of Parliament. Is it not, at least, possible that histor}^ may once again repeat itself, and that those who part with the savings it should be their privilege, as it is their duty, to preserve, may find them used as a weapon against their own interests?
The probable financial and material results of the change are certainlv not encouratrine:. It will be interesting to examine the influence it is calculated to exercise on national cliaracter and the habits of the people, more especiall}^ in reference to thrift and self-respect.
In this connection one consideration immediately presents itself. Will the alteration tend to increase or decrease prudent provision for the future? To answer such a question satis- factorily, it is requisite to analyse the reasons which give rise to a habit of saving among the less wealthy of the com- munity. These may fairly l)e taken to be a dread of want, lirst in the near future, antl then in old age, and a desire to be free from dependence on othei-s. Such motives aiv un- questionably the first cause for habitual and continuous
X.] Self -Help \\')'ius Slate J\)isions. 291
selt-tlcniiil ill the prcsciiL in order to seciiro uccuiiui- latioiLs for the riiture. But the huhit thus cultivtited is an active virtue wliich -grows with what it i'eeds on.' It brings in its train the pU'Usures of possession, tho respect of society, and an aintreeiutiuu of the true vahie of independence — and so it conies about that what l»egaii with a dolinite and limited object is continued long after that has been attained, and is not iufret|uently extended as far as making some pro- vision for the next generation. It is a grave ([uestiou, whether the assumption by the State of regulating and controlling this provision, will not always deaden, and fre(|uent]y destroy, this first impulse unto ])rudence. Tiie ilanger of want will be removed by mechanical means, not l)y individual etibrt ; the in- ducement to extend the good ^vork will disappear : and what is freijuently now but a tirst step on the puth of duty an-l usefulness, Mill liecome the final one. Of course, it may be argued that the reverse eftect will arise, and that those who have been relieved of one burden through State agency, will be encouraged to voluntarily provide for other possible wants. This, however, is extremely unlikely. The conscious etibrt which by exercise grov.s into habit will not be aroused, and there is too much reason to fear that the automatic provision of pensions by outside agencies would cripple, rather than develop in youth and manhood, those inclinations towards thrift and self-reliance on which progress so much depends. In short, there is danger that the prescription by the State of a given amount of saving will be regarded iu many instances as also the final limit.
Whatever opinion may be entertained on this point, there is a further effect, as to which it seems there must l»e almost common agreement. This is, that so far as a State plan would supersede, or prevent, voluntary organised coanbinatious, there would be a complete loss of the present moral, and educative influence of such work. The history of the friendly societies, trades unions, and other popular organisations of a similar character, has only been half read by tho.se who recognise theii' material and financial results alone. Eloquent as ai-e the great array of figures that represent the work of such societies, they are but the chapter headings to the real book. These figures indicate at once the result and the cause of intelligent work, w^hich leads to the diffusion of knowledge among the masses, and frequently the awakening of adminis-
u 2
29;
A Pica for IJhcrty. [x.
trative ability, till then latent iu individual members. With this too come recognition of the necessity for law and order, comprehension of the inherent difticulties of government, and tlie almost unconscious acceptance of pi'inciples which do much (particularly in early youth) towards the formation of clia- racter. 80 far as relates to the ground to be covered by the new proposals, all this is to be deliberately sacrificed. In place of cheerful work and earnest self-denial, with its ultimate pleasant and independent reward, is to be put the payment of a tax (perhaps sugar-coated by a delusive subsidy), and the ultimate receipt of a dole.
.Vuother consideration, although of a more delicate cha- racter, presents itself, and demands attention, uamdy.the future political etiect of such a plan. As previously pointed out, the system nnist rest here — as does the German system— on parlia- mentary authority. Already, and before it has taken definite shape, it has been experimentally exploited on political plat- forms. Is it not, therefore; reasonable to expect that its adop- tion would certainly lead to its ultimate use for party purposes'? Once induce given sections of the communit}' — who are also electors — to look for State subsidies, and it will follow; as a natural and very unpleasant sequel, that parties in the heat of rivalry will descend to bid against each other in modifications of the extent and nature of such subsidies. In fact a similar process can be already contemplated in full operation in protectionist countries with an extended electorate. Such a result — probable as it is — seems an almost ludicrous per- version of principle, especially as the fruit of a movement to substitute providence for pauperism. Individual bribery has been practically destroyed. It will l)e curious to have it replaced by the bribery of whole classes of the population, in the name of thrift and virtue, and with payment drawn, not from the pockets of the bribers, but from the enforced taxation of the conununity.
In treating the whole sul>ject, attention has been directed exclusively to the merits or defects of the proposals— or rather to the general principles which must underlie them when they come to be put in definite form. This has not arisen from any lack of recognition of the existence of poverty and need for improvement in the methods by which it is dealt with, or from want of sympathy with well considered plans for their allevi- ation. The I'oor Law needs reform and improvement in eoni-
\.] Sclf'IIclf^ I '(-rsfis Sfa/c J\ii<{on<. 29;
iiioii ^villl, hihI iiiuii- uigiully tluiii, iiiaii} (jI' mir iii.stitutions. This may perhaps be etH'ctcMl l)y contuniiii,^ wi«h'r powers on those entruste<l with its a<hninistration, to he carufuUy usocl in rccoL^nisinn' unsucfN-ssful eflorts at self-help, and penalising [)ersistent ami will'ul thrit'tlessness. But the question is a I'ar- reaehinir oni', whieh has ohviously no place in this tliscussion.
The present examination has l)een made in oi-der that .^ome at least of the future probabilities in connection with jtro- ])os:ds for State pensions, may be more eliarly comprehended. There is danjjer that a forciMe and exaf'wrated statement of existing evils may lead to the hasty adoption of proposals for remedy, without requisite care and vigilance being exer- cised as to their real nature and efi'ect. Caution must be used to make certain that the gravity of the rlisease does not induce us to accept the first curative treatment suggested, without ascertaining whether it will really remove or actually aggravate the evil. It is well to avoid attempting to remo\ e one* defect in our national life bv creatini; irreater ones.
Tt) many there is a fascination in large and sweeping measures, based on novel principles and the invocation of the power of the State. Let these pause and reflect that the growth of economic virtues (as of constitutional liljerties) is a slow one. but rendered more firm and secure from its gradual nature. Thrift and independence rest— as do liberty and law^ — on the aggregation of successful individual ettbrt and intelligence, ami on the recognition ami fulfilment of his duty by each member of the community. l^>y these means, and these means alone, the true fijrmation of national character is secured, and the material well-being, as well as the morality and happiness, of the community attained. Attempts to hasten progress unnaturally b}' substituting legis- lative enactments for a sense of duty, must lead to the de- gradation, and ultimately to the oppression, of the people. Bribes and subsidies from the State can but increase, instead of removing, the weaknesses of those whom it is proposed to benefit — at the expense, and to the detriment, of a great majority of their fellow-countrymen.
Charles Joi'N li vI'Lev.
XT.
THE TBUE LINE OF BELIVEBANrE,
Most evils, even those which in the end may destroy, have a remedial character in the earlier sta^'es. Thev are the use- fill, though often unpleasant, instruments of bringing us ])ack into the true path, if vre have left it, or of stimulating us to new endeavours, in seeking for it. Amongst these scourges, dis- agreeable for the moment, but useful as regards the future, the New Unionism, with its crude doctrines of sheer force, con- straint of anyliody or everybody who stands in the way of the immediate end, limitation of numbers and excessive prices built up on monopoly, ingenious dovetailing of political action into unionist action, universal federation with rigid centralisa- tion, and strict dependence of all parts on the centre, must take • its place. Few people of clear insight are ready to suppose that good of the truest kind is likely to come to the workmen en- rolled under these principles. Centralisation, coercion and mono- poh", alvv^ays have been the advance guard of eventual failure and suffering, and always will be : though indirect good, by way of experience and healthy reaction, may come from them. No man raises, in a country that is not in decadence, the banner of retrogression, Avithout influencing others to raise the banner of advance. Evil, it is true, provokes evil, but it also provokes good ; and perhaps the New Unionism has its own special service to perform by leading workmen to reconsider the whole question of trades-unions, their relation to capital, and to that better future on which we all fasten our eyes. The old Ti-ades- unionism, like many another movement, has been useful in its day to the woi-kmcn, even though founded on shaky principles. It came into existence in a bitter time, when probably no truer system could have lived ; it was to the men a first lesson in association, developing powers of administration and responsi- bility; it has done much in the way of benefit services ; it gave
XF.] The 'fnte Line of Pclivo-aucc. 295
a s])irit ot" iiiili["ii>liiici', jiinl yi't wns an ant i-rcvoliitioimrv tbroo ; ami it has taui,Mit capital tho sliarj* losson wliicli was nrcdcd. at all events during; oin- jx'rioil of its liistniy, (Imt uiiK'ss tiio Tail- claims of the nun wore rcspceti'd. Trades- unionism could throw the wholi' thing out of gear, and make a general mess for everyhotly concerned. Hut hu\ing said so much, it must l)e confessed that the old Trades-uninnism- \vith its many excelK'ut points — has hi-en, as regards great results, a failure, and that the new Vnionism comes to help to make that failure evident. Let us stM- exactly wliat is happening now. The old Trades-unionism, so far as it was restrictive, represented a dam. On the one side of it was skilletj laliour, organised and well paid ; on the other side unskilled lalxnir, unorganised and badly paitl. As long as that state of things lasted. Tra<les-unionisni was in a soit of a way a success — for the tra<les-unionist. He was, as was sometimes r(>proa('h- fully said, the privileged class, the aristocracy of labour; and of course the more a union could restrict the admission of members into the trade by limiting the num]>er of apprentices, or in other ways, the more it could for the moment (for there are always reactions in these things) keep up or raise its rate of wages. But the time was sure to come when the effort would 1)0 made to raise the waters on the other side of the dam, and then of what use would be the dam? If the unskilled labour could be ors^anised and its price raised, that would mean (employers' profits remaining the same, as they are likely to do, being dependent on causes very haid to tight against, and adjusted in each trade by what olitains in other trades), that the skilled unionist labour wouhl get a lower reward, so far as his wage depended not upon his liigher skill, but on Trade-union action. The effect of all restriction is to diminish production and raise prices. The trade which previously had a dam. when other trades had not, was at an advantage; for it was exchanging its restricted production against the unrestricted pro<luction of other trades, — a state of things, which was good for it, but bad for all others. It was taking; more and ijiving less. For this r(\ason. as the New Unionists restrict production, the oM trades will suffer. To give an example,- — the effect of the Dockers' monopoly is to lessen for all othei- trades the ad- vantage of Free Trade. Imported articles will be dearer in price, and the labour of other trades will exchange for less.
296 A Plcii fo}- JAbcrly. [xi.
To-day the New Uiiioiusts are betteriny; the teachiug of the Old Unionists ; and,nmch as my sympathies go with tlie sober part of the Old Unionists. I should lie obliged to confess that the New Unionists are right, if the iniderlying principles of Unionism itself were right. Let us see what the New TJuionists appear to be aiming at. All trades are to 1 )(> unionised, — the unions being sufhcicntly strong to disregaid and coerce, when necessary, the outside labour, and yet not too large so as to depress the price of labour in the trade itself. Those whom it is desirable to bring into the union will be brought in by summary methods; those whom it is desirable to leave out- side will be left outside. But as these outsiders are always a menace to the unionist, measures will be taken to provide at least for a part of them. Of course it is obvious that the common rule of a minimum wage acts harshly both on old labour and on second-class labour ; since both these classes lose all employment where the minimum can be universally enforced. It is then at this point that the action of the State is rather cleverl}^ brought in to make good the gap which Unionism fails to cover. Workshops are to be provided by munici- palities and County Councils for the inefficient labour, which, left in the employers' hands, would only drag the union price down. What is to be done with the product of such labour, which would be produced irrespective of demand, and inde- pendently of market price, is a problem which, as far as I know, is not yet solved. At the same time the State is to be made to serve another purpose. Municipalities and County Councils are to pay union price in all their contracts, thus giving the key-note of wage. An ordinary employer might not be screwed up to the true pitch. He or his customers might decline the article at the union price ; but the municipality or Council which has once been captured, can be made to undertake certain work, and in doing it to strike almost any key-note that is desired. The body which spends public funds is independent of the market rate, and is therefore admii'ably suited for forcing the pace.
The crown of the system is the federation of the unions. When once federated, the power of all will be lent to one ; and the area of subscription being made coterminous with the whole country, and the boycott being duly systematised, both the non-conforming employer and the non-conforming work- man will be satisfactorily reduced to submission.
\i.] ///<• Tntc Line of Jh-iiirrancr. 297
Tlir (Inaiu ;^ocs still rurtln'i-. What is to bu tloiif in t.m.' country is to lie done in all eountiits ; antl ju.st as the tra<lt*H of a country arc to l>c linkcil toL,M'thcr as a wIkjIc, so arc the countries themselves to l»c linkt'<[ toL^other. Whrn that is (lone, then unci theiv lici'ins the niillcnniuiu oflahoui-.
Now it is a L^reat advantage in criticising separate mea- sures, when we are ahle to see lict'orc us the perfect whole, into which tile st'parate measures are some ilay to he comhineil. For I'xample, wo should never judge our socialistic I'uture rightly, if wi' persisted in scanning each measure, tiiat leads towards it, separately by itself. It is the same with the details of I'liionism. We must not simply hjok to the detached struggles of to-day between lalioiir and ea})ital, as expressing what Tnionism is, but rather to the system in its triumph, as it Mill be when, complete in all its pai-ts, it governs the world.
Having said so much, before reviewing what perfect I'nionism would mean, let us try and solve the simpler problem l»y seeinir what I'nionism means in the detached and uncon- solidated ft)rm in which it exists to-day. Before doing so we may all start on the same road. Unionist or non-unioidst, we are agreed that labour has to win for itself a ditiinent and a betti-r future. The smooth places of the world are not permanently reserved for some of us, and the rough places for othei-s. Enormous is the amount of insincere speech that flows from the lips and pens of our generation upon this subject. The subject is a protitable one in the political market of our time, and therefore, as we may be sure, receives its full liomage from politicians and professional ])hilanthropists ; but still no amount of insincerity can alter the great truth, written in the destinies of the world, tliat for everyl)odv s sake the labourer has to clind)
*■' ».
not only to competence and cond'ort, but to the knowledge, re- finement and higher civilisation, which at present are so much more easily reached by those who do not labour with their hands. That is the work we have to accomplish : the question is. • in what manner '. '
There are two roads, and only two roads, which offer them- selves to us. One is the road of restriction, ref'ulation, monopoly, and absolute power entrusted to the leaders who have to win the successive positions, and defend them when won ; the other is the road of free action, uidimited com- petition, and voluntary association. Now I want to contrast these methods, because I believe it only wants time and full
298 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
discussion to convince the greater nuniljor of our Avorkraen, Avitli their strong instincts in favour of ]il)erty, that all the methods of restriction, whether perfect or imperfect, whether ]iew or old, are wrong, and will only end in disappointment aftei- a grievous loss of effort and time. I believe that the weight of argument is strongly on the side of lil)erty of action and unrestricted competition, and that we lovers of liberty can win the l)attle, into which w^e are entering, if we only plead our cause efficiently. The coercionists of every kind can offer the bribe of immediate results ; but we have in our hands the ap- peal to the truer reason and the higher motives, and the battle must at last make for us, if we know how to use our weapons.
Before comparing the two methods, one word as regards the Unionism of the past. I have abeady said how much I think we owe to it ; and personally it is pleasant to me to recall my friendship in former years with some of the old leaders, Mr. Chiile, Mr. Allan, Mr. Applegarth, Mr. Howell, Mr. Broad])urst and others, whom it was my privilege to know, and of whom I shall always think and speak with kindness ; but in forming a deliberate judgment upon the subject, I can only say that the past is not the present, and the circumstances that once made Unionism, in the old depressed days of labour, of use to the workmen, are so wholly changed, that it is our dut}' now to preach a reformation in the unions themselves, and a change in the direction of the efforts and hopes of the workmen.
The question to face is, can Unionism, as we know it, achieve the new future of the workmen ? I answer, no, because, speaking of it as a whole, it is fotuided on distinctly wrong principles. If we examine ordinary Unionism and the full development of the new Unionism as we have sketched it, we shall find the same principles running through both. Unionism essentially means the sacrifice of one section of the labourers to another Si'ction — it means this in more than one sense ; it means the setting aside of the desires and the judgment of the individual f(^»r the sake of a connnon end ; it means tempta- tions to coerce ; it means regulation, restriction, and centralisa- tion, with all the evils that flow from these fatal methods.
Let us take the simple example of 1 00.000 workmen in a trade negotiating with their employers. Is there any reason Avhy the workmen should not act in a body as regards their wages'? Every lover of fair play would Vie inclined to say, certainlv not; and if (he neo'otiation wi're reallv for the whole
XI.] rill' True Line of Pclivn-aucc. 299
1»()(1\. all tin- tinits of which were (iiiitfi vohniiaiih' iictiii" t()<^» 'tiler, one st-rious part at least of \\\iy prcsont mischief of Knionism woiiM <lisa])j)i'ar. But the unionist only hnrLjains for a part of the 100,000. A union is forin<Ml ^Yitll a retain sul'sciiption in preparation for onirrgencics ; ami from that moment, although certain common interests continue to exist, there begins to be a divergence* of certain other interests l)etween those who are in tlie union and those outside the uniuu. The union, intent on raising wages, finds it mu.st tix a minimum of pay below which its members must not go. But either this minimum is so low that it is of no service, or else it cuts off from employment the old worker and the second-class Avorker. These men are naturally behnv the minimum. Then, as a minimum tends always to be a maximum, it cuts ofl" the best ■worker, who naturallv looks for a larger return from his skill and in<lustry. These three classes, however, are not so important from the unionist point of view as the class of ordinary workman who for many ditierent reasons prefers to be outside the Union. He is a real danger to the unionist, as when any quarrel occurs, he may take his place. He therefore must be brought in, until the number outside the Union is sufficiently reduced so as not to be dangerous. Here begins the temptation to coerce. The (juickest way of seciirinor this end is to make life uncomfortable for the outsider Avho works in the same shop with unionists ; finally, unless he joins the Union, tools may lie thrown down, and the employer have to choose between .standing by a few men on principle or finding himself involved in a strike. But wdiilst it is necessary for the stability of the Union to bring a certain proportion of the ordinary outsiders into the Union, an artih"- cial rate of wages cannot l)e maintained, if labour flows freely in the trade. Therefore the inflow into the trade must be restricted — it must be borne in mind that what I am saj ing applies only to certain trades, and that it would be an unfair description of many other trades — and this can be done by declaring that only he who has served. his appreiiticeshi}), — or worked for a certain number of years successively in the trade, — can be admitted, whilst at the same time the number of apprentices taken into a shop is limited'. Here — as so often
^ Mr. Howell — always, I think, a Labour, p. 2 74\ statos that about lo fair and just writer — in his interest- per cent, of Trade Unionists luive ing book /rhe Conflicts of Capital and served their apprenf icesliip.
o
OO
A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
happens with restrictions — there arises a diiliculty, not easily got over. If only those who have served their apprenticeship or worked so iiiauy years are admitted into the union, the man ■\vho has not done so, remains as a thorn in the side of the unionist ; if he who has not fulfilled such conditions is admitted, the unionist has lost one important means of controlling the entrance. That the New Unionism has other means we see by the action of the dockers, who simpl\\ after limiting their own numbers, refused to allow any man to work who diil not possess the Union ticket.
But then what does this control of the entrance mean % It means war on other kinds of labour. Just as the Union means a kind of war upon those in the same trade whom it is im- portant to bring in, and yet wdio themselves do not wish to be admitted, so it also means war on outside labour. It means that the labourers in other less w^ell paid trades cannot find free access to the better paid trades, that the dam is preventing the true level being found, and that those inside the dam are profiting by keeping others out. Now that is a bad arrange- ment for all concerned. It is certain that artificial privilege works badly in the end for those who possess it, and carries in itself the seed of its own decay ; but this arrangement works badly not only remotely but also immediately and directly. In a restricted trade a parent may be unable to introduce his own child into the shop wdiere he works ^ The thing which of all others he would most wish to do, to have his boy near him, under his eye, learning his trade, is the thing that is made difficult to him, where a system of restriction exists, — a re- striction that is increased at present by the stupid interference of our education laws. Never was a heavier price paid for a possible improvement of w^age than this sacrifice of this most natural and healthy arrangement. But so it always is. The restriction we forge against others is always to our own grievous hurt. What I want to press upon those Trade Unionists, whose minds are open in this great matter, is that all systems of restriction hurt more than they advantage; that even the better forms of Unionism are always lending
1 Mr. Howell states that many by the masters (who can be just as
existing restrictions about ajipren- restrictive as the men\ In many
tices are not enforced. Tliough par- trades only trade-skill, health, &c',
tially enforced in some large trades, are insisted upon as conditions of
till y are generally ci.nlined to smaller luenilH'rship, which in view of the
trades, and in these cases favoured l)enetits to be paid is quite reasonable.
XI.] The True Line of J^c/ivcrance. 301
theinsc'lves to a certain amoiint of restriction, if tiny air to In* frt'i'ctivo ft)r raising,' wai^'t'S. Wo sec that rnioiiisni may intan intcrlbrenct' and cnt-rcion as iffrnnls certain outside lal)our in the same trade; that it tends to cut i»H' from itself the most ])ushin«; and the best men ; that in some cases it dams back the hi]>our that -svould tlow into the more hii,dily )»aid trades from less highly ]iaid oc('U]);itions : (hat it }>uts ditKeulties in the way of the instruction b}- the lather of his son in his own trade ; but besides these there are numy other forms of restriction which arc apt to sprin<; up whenever men begin regulating foi- each other the conditions of their laboui-. The close delimitations of the laliour of each trade, the ri<dd boundaries between mason, Inicklayer, i)lasterer, and carpenter, often leading to mucli inconvenience and cxpeuKc, — such as •we sec in the case of the carpenter, who was lined because he was seen cnlarj^intr the holes in the wall in which his joists were to })e placed ; the rule, that existed in one })art of England, that bricks laid in a distiict should be made in the same district, a rule that has stopped work for want of bricks, thou^di bricks in abundance were to l)e had close by; the rule, that stone dressed in the (juarry must be dressed only on one side; that stone already dressed must be del'aced and dressed over again by the men employed at the works ; the rule, that an employer building in another town nnist take half the men from his own town, — even if he cannot wt them ; lules regulating what the bricklayer's assistant may do, an<l i'or- bidding his rise, however competent, into the rank above him ; the rules forbidding piece-work, the rules forbidding Certain methods of work and payment, which are not the authorised method, even if those in the factory or shop prefer the method in (piestion and are earning more money under it; the rules enforcing a rigid uniformity in the method of doing Avork ; the rules that a man is not to run, or to sweat himself in his employers time; rules against besting his fellows; — all thi'sc are examples of how thick and fast restriction is apt to grow when once men begin to employ it as their instrument, it is only what we ought to expect. Restriction will always breed restriction; both because the first ivstriction is found t(j be incomplete without the second, and the second without the third ; and because men who once lend themselves to restriction acquire the temper of betaking themselves to restriction to help themselves out of every difficulty.
o
02 A Plea for Liberty. [xi.
A list of such Union sius — aucl let it be well iniderstood that they ouly apply to certain trades, and some at least, I hope, are growing obsolete — is to be found in j\ii-. Thorn- ton's interesting book on Labour (p. y^^). He himself con- siders that all such restrictions are not of the essence of Unionism. That may be true in the sense that they are principally found in Unions which have something of the nature of a monopoly. In trades, such as the cotton trade, where there is keen foreign competition and intelligent appre- ciation of the position amongst the workers^ such re?^trictions ai^c likely to be at a minimum ; but the moment you have entered the path of restriction, you may be sure that all further restrictions, which are necessary to make your first restrictions efficient, wall presently be employed. That is the danger of all restriction ; there are so many steps waiting to succeed to the first.
Let us look quickly at some other faults of Trades Unions. It not only surrounds a man with restrictions, which every frank person will admit to be an evil, even if an evil accom- panied Avith good, but it does much harm by disregarding natural variety, by tending to throw men into one class, and treating them as if they were all alike. Men are not alike in strength, endurance, or character ; and it is much happier and better for them wdien these dinerences find free ex- pression. There are some men who prefer long hours and slow work ; some who prefer few hours and sharp work ; some who prefer long hours and shai-p work, receiving for it the his'her reward : and it is a wrong and cruel svstem wdiich ignores all these difierences and dictates the same uniform work and same uniform pay to all men. If the life of labour is to be a happy life, one of the principal things to be done is to give every opportunity that is possible to the worker to follow his own manner and hours of work. At the British Association this year Professor A, Hadley men- tioned an interesting fact. In America he found that in one factory, where the hours v\^ere longer, less work was done than in another factory where the hours were shorter. Why % Because the slower workers could not live the pace of the (juicker workers, and preferred to work longer liours at the pace that suited them. Tlius a natural sifting took place, which adjusted the work of the men accojxling to their own lildnus. This is Avhat the workers have to aim at. 2s ot
XI.] I he True L'nii of Deliverance. 305
ri^iil unifoniiity, iiut an o.staldishotl nuiiiljiT ol" liour.s, or «»iic oitluHlox iiictlioil, but iiilinite variety, lat't'thii,' tin- varying; wants t)l' (liHeivnt natuns.
Lt't it l)c renu-nibrivil that tlu-io is no li\ in</ man who can uieasuru the full ivsult of irstiictiuns. 'liny aro clumsy thinj^s. and thouL,'li a part ol" tht-ir results can !»•■ iorcsocn, they always protluee some startliiiLC ami unoxjxctetl I'esults. In the case of Tratles I'nioiis they interfere rudel}' with the motives that intluencc a niau's desire to do his best. Where piece-work is forbidden, the better worker, as we have seen, has to adjust himself to the j>ace of tin- slower man, he has to thiid-: whether or not he will dtj more than his comrades consider right. Most of us are more or less familiar wilh ex- amples where diHieultics wiUi Tnions have checked attempts, on tin.' part of enterprising manulacturers, to take a special branch of trade out of the hands of com])eting foreign C(Min- tries, by impeding adaptations that were necessary for the pur- pose ; they are apt to lead to centralised management — cue of the greatest cur.ses in the world — placing the arrangements of the men in a ])artieular shop with tiie em|iloyer at the mercy of some estaltlished system and tlie othcers who enforce it; thev sometimes hanrj like a thundercloud over the head of the ablest employers who desire to try new paths ; and they are apt to destroy the possibility of a close alliance and jiart- uership growing up between such employers and their men, and thus to prevent the energies of the country being freely given to production.
r am not bringing these charges, which for the most pail are very old. because I think in lalxHir disjiutes the men are wrong and the employers right. I only bring them because these evils seem to me the necessary result of restrictive methods. I think all restriction — wherever and by whom- soever employed — works out l)adly; and I feel sure that the workmen will never gain the inheritance waiting for them as long as they seek to advance along that line.
Ahead a still graver evil lurks as regartls these restrictions. As I have already said, no person who once enters the road of restriction ever stands still. P^ither, conquering all former scruples, he goes on supplementing the old restrictions with new restrictions in order to make them eflicient, or, disgusted with the odiousuess of compelling men to act against their own wishes and of reducing them to cyphers by regulation,
304 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
he throws up the whole attempt and retraces his steps. We are now reaching a point where unionists must make their choice. If they arc to persevere in the path f)f restriction, they must be prepared to put themselves and their brother- workmen under a system in which their own individual wish, a,nd even the wish of their own particular trade, can count for almost nothing-. You cannot fonn the lo^o^h or -o^th part of a huge lighting system, and keep any real control over yourself. The necessities of the system as a whole will govern your action, and you will be carried forward with the general movement, whether you approve or disapprove. I ask Unionists to judge present Unionism, not simply Ijy what we see to-day, not simply by the restrictions and coercions which they are occasionally tempted to employ towards their fellow- workmen either at the moment of a strike or when it is thought necessary to force men into Union, but l)y the threatened developm\'nt of Trade Unionism, — all trades being federated into one body and negotiating with all employers, federated into another body. I ask them if they a,re willing to help forward such an organisation of society into these two hostile camps. I ask them to think of the tremendous power that must be lodged in a few hands; of all the countless struggles and intrigues to obtain tliat power; of the worthless men who will succeed in obtaining it; of the fatal mistakes that will be made even by good and true men, holding this power in their hands ; and of the harsh unscrupulous use that will Ijc made of this power to destroy all individual resistance that is inconvenient. I ask them if this is an ideal to which they are ready to devote such part of their lives and energies as still remain to them, — to organise society into two great armies, always watching each other, and always preparing for bitter struggle; and I ask them, even if, after the struggle, labour were to prove successful, if employers and capitalists were thoroughly worsted and obli<i-ed to take such terms as might be dictated to them, would such a defeat be good for labour itself, would it make for its progress and its happiness? Does not the sense ot absolute power in the end wreck all those who possess it; are there any amongst us who are not destined to be corrupted by it, more surely than by any defeat or reverse that can happen to us '\
Now let me turn to the economical side. Can a s\'t^tem of re-
XI.] The True Line of Pctivcrancc. 305
strictions really luiitr thf im n's positinn ' can it iiupiovf wngos? can it take from the riiiplnycrs ami jjivc to tlu' men % I vcnturu to say that tho mass of I'vidi'iico is distinctly ai^'aiii.st any true and permanrnt ln-ttt-rinj^ of tlif nun's position hy such means. ( 'iTtain things may bf conct-dcd at once. 1 tliiid< it was Mi-. .Mill who summed up the power of Trades I'nions in alt(rin<^ wajTos, by saying that they could brin^' about the rise of wage (juicker. and delay the fall somewhat Ioniser; and a ilidland mamdacturer has lately (Free Life, 24 Mhv) ])ointed out theii- (•(pialising and averai,nng effect. Under their inlluence small masters on the one side, and some of the men on the other, do not L,Tiisp at every little turn of the market that takes plac(! in their favour, tlrant also, as ^fr. Thornton points out, that if tremendous battles have been lost by the men, still they have led to after-concessions on the part of the masters in order to avoid a recurrence of such struggles; and that there has lieen this good effect in certain strikes, that they have allowed ovi'r-large stocks to be decreased. Grant also that where a trade is in the nature of a monopoly, as in th<i case of the London Dockers, or in a less degi-eo the building trades, that wages may be pushed up for a time considerably higher than they would liave gone^ or than they can healthily go, as regards the trade itself; grant all this, yet is tins a sufficient compensation for the state of war that is established between men of the same trade, between different trades, and between employer and employed ; for all the individual inconvenience and restriction, and the loss of individual free action ; for all the arbitrary things done by those in power, and the temptations to coerce others ; for all the sums that go daily and hourly in war-subscriptions; for such sums as the ..i'427,cco of wages lost in the great Preston strike, or the .^■'32,>oco of the London building labourers in 1869, or, as the Economist reckons it, the millions that have been lost, all things counted, in the late Australian strike ; for all the time and energy of the men spent on the Unions ; and, last of all, for the coming perfection of T^nionism. when society will ]»e split into two sections, living, like i'rance and Germany, in the highest state of tension towards each other 1 If it can be shown that ITnionism cannot permanently alter the wage of labour^ and that economical injury constantly results from its action, would it not be wise and right for every L^nionist to reconsider the whole matter, and ask himself if he cannot spend the very
X
J
06 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
limited ainouiit of time aixl energy, that each man possesses, to serve the cause of labour in some other fashion '\
It has been often said by economists that, as Avagcs are paid out of that part of capital called the wage-fund, the true method of increasing wages is to increase the wiiole body of capital. This doctrine has been bitterly attacked, but it has never been substantially shaken. It is true that some part of wages may be deferred, and not paid until the product of labour has been realised, but that only means that the wages fund at a given moment may be looked on as consisting in part of new capital as well as old capital ; it is also true that some products of labour may become capital in a few days or weeks ; it is also true that at certain moments the capital that has been produced may be increased from what has already gone into consumption, as if everybody who had tliree coats determined to put one of them into the market ; but the all-important fact — which in reality is a mere truism — remains, that only as the methods of production are improved and more is pro- duced at less cost, can more be divided between employer and employed. Let it be clearly seen how the worker is benefited by increasing production, and by better and cheaper methods of production. Wages may remain the same; em- ployers' profits may remain the same ; and j^et the labourer's condition be wholly changed by better production. Suppose that the employer and workman divide the product in the proportion of three to seven, tlu-ee to the employer and seven to the workman, and suppose that the day's work to-day produces four, where yesterday it produced one. Then both the employer and workman get the advantage of seven and three multiplied by four instead of one. It is only necessary for this improvement in production to affect all articles used by the workman, and then as regards all such articles, his wages in money remaining the same, he will be better off as four to one [see note A at end]. A clear perception of this method by which labour is benefited, shows us several great truths ; how fatal is all protection ; how unfair to the rest of labour are any forms of restriction and monopoly in certain trades, inasmuch as these trades take more and give less in the general exchange ; and how uuAvise are the deadly struggles over the ratio or proportion in wliicli the product is divided, when the matter of prime importance is to improve jDroduction, and thus increase the share falling both to employer and employed.
XI.] The Tnic Line of Dc/ivcrancc. 307
TIh' i|ii(>ti'm will Ikiwcvci- \»' i\s\<vA. in faco oi' iiindcin iiuliistruil iiii[»rovoiiicuts, Why tlun an- imt our lulKHiivrB iK'tttT i)\\l Amongst (itlicr ivjisoiis, tlic lirst ami loit-moMt reason must l)c that ca|»ital is not |iro»luctHl last enough, or econoniieallv enough, which itself arises from various reasons, as for instance, ])ecause of the stupid struggles hetwcen lalunn* and ca])ital ; of the far too great luxury on the part of numy of the rich, ami their lavish expenditure on perishahle articles, which when destroyed leave the world n(j richer, — an ex- peniiiture, which, as they <1() nut porcuive, employs l)ut wastes hiliour, i'or if every rich person would religiously invest in imlustrial concerns .i'l fer every .i'4 spent on himscdf, the change in our prosperity would he enormous ; of im{)erfoct systems of saving amongst the workmen; of imperfect free- trade in several directions, especially in the matter of land ; of the restrictions and jealousies of Trades I'nions ; of the impin-fect diri'ction of joint-stock enterprise, which is as yet only young in the world; of considerable (juantities of badly trained laliour. — our reformers not paying enough attention to offering facilities for third-class men to improve themselves; of the present fashion of otHcial reforms. ap|)lied uniforndy and compulsorily, and the neglect of the individual int«Higence of the people, on which far more depends ; of the imperfect development of our moral (jualities in every class, which leads to l>ad and untrue work of every description and to waste ; of the meddling and muddling of big and little Governments, which send capital abroad^ hinder the workmen leanung how to associate for their own purposes, waste an enormous amount of energy in political struggles, and weaken the pr(iductivo machinery of the nation, on which everything depends ; and, lastly, — though many other reasons might be given,- that many of our ablest men do not go into trade, which is one of the best and noblest occupations, partly because we have foolish superstitions in favour of the professions, partly because Government exactions and restrictions.joined to lal)our trouliles, nol only lessen the reward of the- employer, which is naturally but small in an old country and age of sharp competition, but tend to deprive the trade life of its enjoyable character.
Is it therefore worth while, I w^ould ask of all open-minded Trade Unionists, to be quarrelling aljout the proportion in which the product is to be divided, when the great aim must be to make the course of production easier and smoother, get
X z
3o8 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
more brains an<l invention devoted to the work, and every- where increase the points of concord and lessen the points of friction? T^ni versa! TTnionisni would not help matters; for successful production depends upon the willingness and, so to speak, good temper of capital,— its readiness to run risks and try new methods, — and the theory of universal Unionism — if candidly stated — is to get capital into a corner, and make a mere labour's drudge of it. Partial Unionism — even if effec- five — is only the momentary (not the permanent) bettering of certain trades at the expense of other trades. Of course a Trade Unionist might reply that the advance of wage may be taken, without raising prices, from the profits of the em- ployers. But that is in itself unlikely to happen, and not permanently profitable to the men if it does happen. The profits of one trade are in strict relation to the profits of another trade, — the reward of capital, just as of labour, always tending to an equality, and every trade expanding by the inflow of capital when profits rise above the ordinary leveP. It may be replied that this is true, allowing for a lapse of time ; but that the profits of the employer begin to rise the moment that some tu]-n in the market favours a special trade. That also is true; but let us see what happens, first, if no Trade Union interferes ; and secondly, if it does interfere. Let us suppose that the price of pig-iron advances, that trade becomes brisker, and more iron is manufactured. The first result of this is that unemployed men are brought in, and half-time becomes full time for the employed men. Good for the men in either case, even tliough for the moment there is no rise in wages. But increased j^roduction means lower prices, and though these lower prices check the employers' desire to produce, they also enlarge the demand of purchasers, so that we may suppose that the trade still goes on expanding. But this second expansion must result in higher wages. The un- filled cisterns have now been filled, and there must be an overflow. The unemployed have been brought in, and the competition amongst the masters for the men must carry 'the w^age up. And notice in this instance that the rise has come about in a perfectly healthy natural manner. There have been no disputes ; contracts have come in and been accepted ;
^ This does not mean that tlie etntage is always bahinced by dia- same percentage of profit exists in advantages of various kinds, all ti-ades, but that the liigher per-
XI.] The True Line of Deliverance, 309
till- tradf has ixjijin<K<l an<l cuiitmcti-il uccortliii;^ to natural r»((iiiit'UKnts ; whilst in the case of the men, the uneiiii>loy('d have first Ix-eii brought in. and then wages have niove«l slowly but sun'ly up with the expanding trade '. Supjiose also that the nun have not at first secured the whole rise that ought to come to them. Are they injured \ No. For if the profit of the ma.sters is at all in excess, it produces the very thing that is most in the interest of the men. They Itorrow ea].ital and enlarge their turn-out. whilst, if the upward movement siems likely to last, new employers begin to enter the tra<le.
Now. take the other example. The same favourable move- ment of trade has taken place ; but this time the Union, on the alert, has insisted on a rise of wages. This risr of wages, perhaps slightly in excess of what the rise in prices justities, may check the enterpri.se of the employer. De[)rived of a part of the extra profit, he i.s less inclined to enlarge his business ; he is puzzled al)0ut the future action of the men as regards the contracts which are ofiered him : at the same time the risi- in prices following upon the original increased denja)id, an<l favoured by the subsequent rise in w'ages, is checking con- sumption and therefore checking the expanding' condition of the trade, although so far as it exceeds the rise in wagrs it is tempting the employer to enlarge his operations.
Now I think it is hardly possible to review the two processes, remendjering how all strain between employers and employed checks production, remembering the unwise things that will l»c done on both sides, the mistakes made on both sides, the waste of time and energy on both si<les in otiensive and defensive preparations, and the fatal effect of a fight at tlie moment when trade is becoming favom-al»le, without be- lieving that the workman would actually gain more in wages (I do not speak of a trade where there is a monopoly, wdiich stands on a different footing) if his UnioJi abstained from all interference in the matter. The Union is so liable to make mistakes ; the market, left to itself, will not make mistakes. I suspect the Union often acts like a fisherman, who snatches the bait out of the fish's mouth, in his hurry to secure his prize, instead of w^aiting for the fi.sh to pouch it. The first rise in a trade is the bait to the employer to enlarge his business,
' Of eotnso. to a cortain oxtent, the (.oiKlitioii tlie <iiii>loyin(iit "f (he two movements liave been taking uneniployefl would tend to lie tlie place together, Init in an unregulated first movement.
310 A Pica for LH):rty. [xi.
put on iiKjTf hands, and accept contracts. When he has once taken those steps, the wage must rise ; even if the workman's share in tlic profit does not come to him quite as qnickly as, strictly speaking, it ought, he has no occasion to repent it. It is probal)!}' the very Lest investment that he could have made. It is ground-bait, and with moderate patience will l)ring far more to his basket than what he loses at the moment.
But it may be urged that all this danger may bo prevented by the sliding scale. The sliding scale has many virtues, as it removes to a great extent that uncertainty from tlie mind of tlie employer which is so fatal to successful production. But the sliding scale has special difficulties of its own, as, for example, where different elements are concerned in the price, so that a higher price may not mean a higher profit to the employer.
Of course, Trades Unions have a power to raise wages for a time in trades Avhich arc a monopoly, as in the Dockers' Union, or in trades which are partly a monopoly, as the l)uilding trades. But this power is l)oth hurtful to others and limited in its own extent. In the first place, such extra wage is taken from the pockets of their fellow-labourers. It is in fact nothino- but warao-ainst labour. Takinij advantage of their position, these monopolists accept the lal)Our of their fellow-workmen at a lower price, whilst they charge a higher price for their own. And does it profit them 1 The trade is pinched and starved by the high prices ; there is perpetual war between employers and employed, wasting the extra gains of labour; capital arms itself at all points, and retaliates; quick brains begin to devise new methods of circumventing the monopoly and working through other trades or through other channels ; whilst the men succumb to the universal fate which overtakes all those, poor or rich, who are artificially protected, and begin to deteriorate in their own character. There is also another consideration. The men not only hurt themselves as consumers, by restricting their own trade, but they may throw out of gear other allied trades, and by depressing the production of these other trades still further, hurt both them- selves and all other workmen by reducing the general product. Under a free-trade system, it is impossible to measure the amount of disturbance that may l)e caused by even one dam beii\g thrown across the supply of some ])articular labour. It is the interest of all other trades, as well as of the public, to
XI.] The 'Fine Line of Deliverance. yw
discoura^f all such tlaius. and to make tlio frco-trado tooting universal lor nil. 1 <lo nut mean that .1 and H HJioidd accept 'svork on any tenns other than those that they theni.selveH approve; l)ut that they shouM throw n<> dam round their hi])our by proventin<.f (' iVom takhij^" a siiare in their work or from acceptinjx terms which tliey decline. That is the truo labour principle, universjil iudividiuil choice, antl no pressure exerted u})on others.
.Mr. Thornton (On Labour, p. ^Si) has supposed that in several cases the pressure of Trades Unions can pennancntly raise wages. ^Vhil.st I respect much that he has written, I do not think he has thouLcht any of tliese cases thorouLjhly out. Excluilinii: a monopoly or half-monopoly, and takinic the case of expaniUuLC trade, or of an increased product, it can be shown that under a free system the extra profit must even- tually come to the men, whilst the restriction or the pre.<ssuro, employed to gain that profit, is likely in the end to destroy the extra profit by lessening the vigour and expansion of the trade. In the case of a universal rise of wage, he argues that capital would have no choice, no power of helping itself; but a universal rise in wage, without a universal rise in price — which latter rise would beuetit noboily, but leave us all, with some momentary exceptions, as wc were— is very unlikely to take place. The fact that capital goes so largely abroad shows that, as things are, wc are near the margin of profit ; and a slight unfriendly pressure exercised upon capital, a slight discouragement to its investment, wouhl probal>ly do far moro in reducing wages by reducing the amount of capital employed, than in raising wages by raising the proportion of the product which comes to the labourer. Independently of this, the truth is, that the greater becomes the pressure of Trade Unions, the greater tends to be the rate of profit demanded by capital, in order to recoup risks and inconveniences, just as the existence of usury laws drives up instead of lowering the rate of interest ; whilst the less the pressure and interference of the Unions, the lower tends to sink the rate of profit. Lastly, Mr. Thornton instances the case of large capital invested in buildiuL's and plant, which could be nipped safely by the union because it could not lie with- drawn without great loss. Lut that is profit for the moment at the cost of saci if icing the profit of the future. 'Once bit, twice shy.' The capital which is so treate<l avoids the
o
12
A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
trade in question, like a plague-infested district, and the trade suffers grievously instead of profitiug by such folly. Nor is it right to say a Trades Union could permanently raise wages in the case of increased product. If such increase were general over the whole field of production, all the labourers would profit, with or without Trade Unions, for there would be a larger product-fund to be divided amongst them, and each man's labour would exchange for more. It should however be remarked that an increased product in one trade, other trades remaining undeveloped and inactive, would not directly benefit the labourers of that trade, — except so far as they consumed their own product — since they would receive only small quantities of the products of other trades in exchange for their own larger product. It would, hoAV- ever, benefit them indirectly, for it would imply that their trade was in a vigorous and expanding condition, and was probably in the hands of a higher and more efticient class of employer. Mr. Thornton also says (276) that if in an expand- ing trade with rising prices, the employers were to raise wages, then there would be no need for capital to come in (and thus reduce prices and presently wages, by restoring the balance of supply and demand) ; but that then the employer would go on receiving only normal profits, whilst the trade remained stationary. He forgets, however, that the labourer, having got the whole rise, is at once placed in an abnormal position, and that other labourers would be attracted to his trade. The consequence would be that the labourer with the extra profit must either dam back by some artifice the inflowing labour, or lose his extra profit. He therefore would not be profited except at the expense of other labour.
Moreover, at the same time Mr. Thornton ignores the meaninji: of the rise m price. The rise in price almost always indicates greater demand, in some form, and as all large Avorks pay better when fully employed, the production tends at once to be increased and new capital to be necessarily brought in. Each cmploj^er in such case would know that another em- ployer would begin to run full time ; nnd if he did not, it would be at the expense of the whole public, who would run short of their supply, and pay higher prices than they need pay.
Perhaps here it is right to say one word about high wages. They may be the truest sign of national health and vigour; or they may ]te just the reverse. If tlicy are the result of
XI.] 'Jlic Tnic L'uic of Deliverance. f^l^
inunu])(^ly, because in some sjiecial liild l;il»ttur lias curnere<l capital, and 1)V \ iulence lias driven other laitour out of eoni- petition. or the result of hii,di juices existing' under a pro- tectivt- tariff", they only imlicate unlu-althof the body economical, ami are sure to be aecom])anied or followed by disturbances of various kinds ; if they are the rcBult of perfectly free competi- tion existing everywhere, then they are the truest sign of liealtli, for they show that ca])ital is abundant; that being sate anil unharassed. it is content with a small i"eward ; that the labour itself is of hitdi (lualitv and therefore ri'ditlv connnands a hiirh reward, and that the i)roduct which is being turne<l out is sufficient to give this high reward to the laliourer. Blessed Avould l)e such a countrv; for one coulil snfelv say of it, that the good sense, the self-restraint, the fiiiMidline.ss between classes, and the intelligence of its people were as fully expressed in those liigh wages, as its adherence to that perfect free-trade and perfect competition which are the only equitalile conditions for all.
Here however it miLrlit be urjjed, as it would be by some economists, that all this is true, demonstrably true, that it is only a truism to say that the labour of the country never can obtain for itself, except at the expense of other labour, more than the free and o[)en market wdi yield, but that such a regulation of wages belongs to a state of perfect compe- tition ; that competition is still very far from perfect; that the lal)0urer cannot take his labour to the }>cst nu\rket and make the best price of it ; that often ignora)\ce on his part and other difiiculties stand in his way; that there is amongst employers that ' tacit combination ' of which Adam Smith spoke ; and therefore that the Vnion of the workman is the necessary answer to the imperfections of the market [sec note B at end]. Granted, if you like ; granted, that competition is not perfect, that there are many obstacles in the way of the labourer obtaining the perfectly just rate — ju>^t as declared by competition — in the open market, yet what is the true course to follow { To turn our backs on the method which must be pronounced to be the true one, because it is still imperfect, and plunge into an interminable morass of restriction and regulation, through which we can only make our way ])y guess-work and reckless adventure ; or, instead of this, press steadily on in what we know^ is the true direction, and gradually remove the obstacles in our way ? What we have
314 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
to fear is not competition, but imperfect competition. No man, whether he is street-sweeper or writer of the highest philosophy, can reasonably claim more than what his work is worth to his fellow-men. Suppose that every man's work could be put up at a national auction, and sold with the whole nation as bidder, could any man reasonably complain of the result ? He Avould have obtained the highest that his fellow- countrymen were willing to give ; he has no title to more ; and if by any device he succeeds in extracting more, he is behaving with something that is very near to dishonesty, since he is forcing this higher price at the expense of others.
Now let us sec how far such perfect competition as I have sketched, a competition, under which men could realise the true value of their labour according to the wants of their fellow-men, is possible. In old days it was not j^osslhle. When villages and country towns lay cut off from each other, and ignorant of each other's doings, there could only be local not general competition. Now all is changed. Now-a-days we have both publicity and mobility. The spread of the press, the post that penetrates everywhere, the railways that link us together, all these are making it more and more possible for men to know the value of their labour and to offer it in the best market. Of course there are still loft many restrictions and impediments, and many things still left to do to perfect the free labour mart — that outcome of a very high civilisation. Amongst these restrictions are the restrictions of trades-unions, at which I have already glanced, which may limit the numbers engaged in a trade, which may disallow the non-unionist wx>rking with the unionist, and prevent a man acquiring a trade at any moment of his life. Till these restrictions are done away with, there can be no true labour mart. To get rid of these restrictions must be the work of a reforming party within the unions themselves ; Avhilst the employers go on steadily with their present policy of opening registers of what is called ' free-labour,' and then of organising the free- labour men into unions for their own protection. To be weak is miserable indeed, and the non-union men will only take their proper place by acting together. But when these restrictions are re- moved, there is a good deal to be done. Every place should weekly report the state and the wants of its laliour market, — one statement being made by employers, one by the men ; the Gazette of the Unions might contain notice of every shop and
xr.] TJic True Line of Dcthcraiice. 315
tlio numlxr <il' men einployetl in it, with noU'S l»utli l>y (Ih' nun and the iiiiployer as to wn^cs otiV'iod an<l the claws of luljonr wanted. Union.s nii^lit also probaltly do soniothin;,' in the way of owniiiLT and littin^r lodL,dni,'s for their own nitMnlurs in st'uirh of Avork ; and ditU-n-nt trades could he condjined for the sanie purpose. Once the jifreat n)a.ss of our -workmen re- coLidse that the true and fair pnlicv lt»r all is makiiiLT the lahour-market as free of access as possible to all, of diH"usin<^ the widest information, and leaving every class of labour in the sametraiio to accept its own rate of pay and work its own number of honrs, much can l)e done to help this object. The needful thini; is to ijet effort into the risxht direction. To niako it char, let me sketch what would be the attitude of the men undi'r the new state of things, and the part which their unions would play. They would stand on this ground. They would leave every man free to settle his own price of labour, just as every shopkeeper settles his OAvn prices, though all juices would be published an<l some might la- recommended. They would let every man follow his own inclination as to the numlier of hours he worked, or the character of his work, — the result of which would be that a natural diU'erentiation would take place, some worksho]is running lunger, some shorter hours ; some con- taining the pick of the w(jrkers. some the second-class and some the third-class men. They would break down every fence that prevented a man acquiring a trade for which he had an apti- tude, and there would be nothing to prevent clever men. as happens even now in a limited way, following ditierent trades at different times. There would l)e no nunimum of v/age, except such as each man chose to fix for himself, and there would be no strikes, such as exist to-day. In the case of a serious disagreement l)ctween an employer and his men, the union would remove all such men as wished to leave, giving them an allowance for somany weeks whilst they were liuding new employment. But there would be no effort to prevent the employer obtaining new hands. All that had happened would he stated in the Union Gazette, and it would lie left for those who chose to engage themselves at the vacant shop, to do so. There would be no strike, no picketing, no coercion of other men, no stigmatising another fellow-workman as ' scab,' or 'knobstick.' or ■ blackleg.' because he was ready to take a lower wage. — all this would 1 10 left ])erfectly free loi" each man to do according to what was right in his own judgment.
3i6 A Plea for Liberty. [\i.
If the employer had behaved badh', the true penalty Avould fall upon him ; those who wished to leave his service would do so ; and the facts of the case would l:)e published. That would be at once the true penalty and the true remedy. Further than that in labour disputes has no man a right to go. He can throw up his own work, but he has no right to prevent others accepting that work.
Under this system there would be no unions of exactly the present type, but there would be far more association amongst the men. The probability is that almost every man would belong to some form of union. Information woidd be the first great purpose. Information would not only be supplied aljout labour and the state of tlie market, Init about the character of the shops. The employers would state their terms and the quality of the labour they required. Publicity would be an important agent of improvement ; those workshops in which the comfort and health of the worker were specially cared for would be described, and the effect of their good ex- ample would be to bring others slowly up from their lower level. At the same time the men, now that they had ceased to pile up great funds, which might at any time be dissipated in war, would invest far more in remunerative undertakings. The Union being no longer a war-machine would serve many great purposes. One great object that lies before every work- man is to have two sources of revenue ; his labour earnings, and his return from industrial investments. If all the money wasted in labour-war had been invested in industrial concerns, wages would be highei- than they are now, and the men would lie part-owners of a considerable amount of the indus- trial machinery of the countr}^, having gained the increased wealth, the business knowledge, and the influence, which would follow from such part-ownership. Making investments for their members will be a leading function of the new unions. By means of the weekly subscriptions they will be always buying shares in the industries of the district, in water, gas, omnibus, tram-car, dock and railway companies, in tlu; great industrial concerns where their members work, and then passing these shares on to the individual members, as the small weekly payment comes up to the recpiired amount. So also with land and houses. The Unions would act as housc-ljuilding societies, building or purchasing houses, and then jjassing them on in return for small monthly payments to their members. Those
XI.] T/ic True Line of Pdhcrancc. ■; i 7
nienilK'rs who <li«l ii<>t wish to piiiehnsc woiiM hire ilircot fVoiii thr I'liiiiii, whicli wutiM itself lii'CDiiH' ;i lai'L,^f (twiicr ol" house IMopcity tor this purpose, ot" a hcttrr anil iiiort' coiivt-nifnt oliaractcr tiiau thoso houses in which workim-n now live. Moir thitn this. (Very I'nion of town-workt-rs would have its laiiii ill the counti'V.- — lu'M in ^ood l'r('-siiiij)li'. aiiil nni iinilii- any inipt'rCoct laml-nationalisation tt'iiure, — wliich would j)i-o- vidc ph'Rsant and licalthtul cliani,'!' for its nu'mlicrs in tuin. Menihers would erect their own wooiU-n rooms I'oi" the sunnner ; there would he a sanatorium, and possihi}- certain ai-ticles, like IVesh eggs and milk, would be regularly supplietl to those who cared to make such an arrangement. The I'nion would also otter ci-rtain training advantages. When work was slack and men were unemj)loyed, workshops wouM he open where men would ac((uire a facility in the use of certain tools, anil the power of taking up other kinds of work. It is hardly too much to say that every man would he more independent in life if he were up to a certain point a carpenter. At times of ilepression there are many simi)le tilings for his own domestic u.se that each man might make: and just as so many Norwegian farmers work in silver or nuike hoats during the long winter evenings, so should the great hulk of p]nglish workmen have otlu-r occu])ati(jns to fall hack upon in times of non-employment. Besides the workshops, there would be educational opportunities, so that no nnemployed man would let his time bo wasted, as so cruelly ha]fpons at present. The New I'nion, like some of the London workmen's clubs, would have nuiny ditferent funds, — each purpose, at which I have glanced, having its own fund, to which each member would subscribe or not as he cho.se ; the out-of-employment fund, tlie benefit fund, the intelligence fund, the investing fund, the house-owning fund, the land- owning fund, the educational or w^ouksliop fund, and such other funds as were found desirable. Those who had chosen to subscribe to the educational fuml. miglit in a serious time of depression be altogether withdrawn for some months from the labour-market, — a voluntary levy from the other workers being added to their own fund.
I cannot follow any further, as I should like to do, the use- ful operations which the New Union would perform for the men. Once relieved from the miserable duty of figliting the employer, its energies would be called out in many directions, which are scarcely in the region of imagination at present.
3i8 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
There is no want, intellectual or physical, wliicli they would not strive to supply, often in competition with the open market, — as can Le seen to-day from what the hest of the London clubs are beginning to do for the men. Sometimes, perhaps often, they would ])e beaten by what the trader offered, sometimes they would beat the trader ; but the outcome would be for the ever-increasing advantage of the men. That is the true use of co-operation, to act as another competitive force, and thus to improve, not to replace, the competitive forces that are already in existence, whilst it is itself continually improved by them. Such would be a part of the result of the abandonment by the men of their war-organisations. The whole result I cannot sketch here ; I can only lay stress upon the vast effect of transferring the energy and intelligence that are spent to-day upon war-purposes to the direct purpose of reconstructing the circumstances of the workman's life. Now let us look in another dii'ection,— at the effect upon capital of substituting peace for vv^ar. Capital relieved of all attacks and of all mis- givings would become intensely active. The same wise spirit in the men which had led them to abandon all attacks upon it through their organisations, would also lead them to put a sharp curb upon the mischievous activities of the politician, and to prevent his happy-go-lucky interference with it. Capital would thus have that sense of complete security, which is beyond all value to it. It would know that under all circum- stances it v/ould receive its full market reward, however small it might be. The consequences would be that this country would become the home and storehouse of capital. Capital, which now so largely drifts abroad into very specvilative enter- prises, because in so many matters it feels uncertain about the future, would prefer to develop new home enterprises ; and not only would wages rise, but many useful commercial undertak- ings would be carried out on behalf of the workmen which now are left undone. In two senses the workmen, if they so choose it, may become the masters of capital. They may encourage capital to such an extent, that the competition of capitalists will drive the reward of labour up to the highest point, and the reward of capital down to the lowest point ; and secondly, being the largest body of consumers, they may have capital at their feet, trying to find out and discover their every will and pleasure. We have had lately a significant example of this new disposition of capital in railway travelling. The
XI.] The True Line of Deliverance, 319
tlui'l-class passi'iim'i* i.^ tuiiinl to lif <•! inorr iiMportaiici- to thu ittilwuy company tliau aiiy other passun<.,'or ; huneet'ortli his coii- vt'iut-'ucc Jintl his pk-asiiru will be more and more appreciiiUtl, whilst the lirst an<l second-class passenger will sink in tiie scale of consitleration. Then the ready intlow of ca^jital tloes so mnch to keep all trades in a healthy and vigorous condition, and thus to raise the general product, and thus to raise wages. With capital come in new 1 trains, new methods, new machinery. The old, cramped ami perhaps unwholesome factory, with its obsolete machinery, cannot live alongside of its new rival, and is gradually weeded out. The second-class employer and iiu- tluifty manager is removed in the same w^ay. 'J'hus both ellici- ency is always obtaining, where capital ilows freely in, and the product is always tending to increase. Let it be saitl again and again that upon the increase of this product depends the prosperity of the workmen, as a body. If this product is small, no earthly ingenuity, no organisation, no government systems, no grants in aid, no form of protection, can make the general condition of the labourers good. It is altogether past praying for. If, on the other hand, this product is large, and goes on steadily increasing beyond the increase of population, because all industrial processes are being improved in them- selves, nothing can prevent the material prosperity of the workmen. Of course, as happens with every class, we may through mental and moral deficiencies throw away a large part of such prosperity; but with time will come the develop- ment of the qualities that are still lacking. One thing however — before alluded to — is worth repeating. A special trade may be working on free- trade principles and producing largely, and yet its members may not be better off than the mendjers of other trades. They are not better ofi' just because other trades are cramped and restricted, are repelling capital, are not doing their duty in the general work of production. The lii-st trade gives bountifully to the general wealth, but receives in poor proportion from the others ; these others profit by its large production, whilst it itself suffers from their re- stricted production. It is the workmen's interest therefore that no trade-monopoly should exist anywhere, that every trade should be free from restrictions, should be attracting capital, should be producing largely and efliciently, so that in every direction where each man exchanges the product of his own' labour, he should receive much in return. Moreover, the
320 A Pica for Liberty. [xi.
efficient direction of labour and the efficient production which take place where capital flows in freely help the workman in another manner. The middleman tends to be chminated, and then there is more to l)e divided. He can only be safely eliminated by natural processes. Sometimes he is of real use and helps production ; sometimes he is not ; but this cannot be decided by a Ijlind strike, but only by allowing the forces of competition to act upon him.
The point then that I urge upon Trade Unionists and all work- men is the same point I should urge upon nations. Seek to get rid of war. Seek to get rid of the war-organisation, which is a terrible hindrance to all developments of a higher kind. Give up attacking capital. Leave capital to reduce its own reward, which it will do far more effectually than you can do, by competition with itself. Create for it the most favourable atmosphere. Cultivate with all the better employers friendly personal relations. Disregard stories of excessive profits. Here and there some men, possessing powers of a very high order, and excelling in commercial judgment and aptitude for or- ganisation, may build up great fortunes. Don't grudge such men a single penny of their wealth. They are the true servants and helpers of all. Remember that all ordinary profits are tending to fall. Indeed some economists go so far as to believe that in the future money will cease to pay interest. Be this true or not, let us suppose for a moment that by giving up Trade Union war the workmen should see, if it were only for a time, a large profit left in the hands of capitalists, whilst no rise took place in their own wages ; would that be an unmixed evil for them % The answer must be ' No.' Because not only, as we have seen, would such trade be in- creasingly prosperous, but because the high profit is the very stimulus that is wanted to develop the workmen's co-operative and joint-stock association. The difficulty that now stands in the way of these associations is that small trade profits are not very easily made, and large trade profits only with difficulty. If a large profit could be made easily in any trade, workmen's combinations could at once come into existence. Thus, looked at in every way, the workman has the ball at his feet, if onl}- ho will not kick it away from him. As the wealth of the country increases, larger and larger shares of it must come to him. He has only to let the natural processes go on, to resist all temptation to fight, or to rely upon artificial
xi] The True Line of Deliverance. 'X2\
protection U^x liis laliour, ami tlius to shield himself fiom the stimulus which we nil want to keep our good (|u:iiitiis free from rust, — whilst he turns his spare energies in the dintction of c<ii'ryiiiLr out the things which most afhct his comfort and haj)j»iness, and puts all his spare cash rdii^iously into industrial investments, — to become, as he is prohably entitKid to be, the true owmr of this world and all that therein is, — with a few spare eonu-rs ptrhaps left for the rest of us literary idlers. Honestly, ha])]iily, with no hurt and no o])prrssion <;f others, ho can obtain all that the State-»Soeialist vaiidy [)romises at the cost of useless crime and revolution, — useless, since crime and revolution will not bring it — they are instruments that tlefeat themselves, — and far more, for he can ol)tain it. whilst he preserves that priceless gift of remaining the master of his own actions, and of not being under the regulation of other men [see note C at end].
A few last words. Of course this abandonment of industrial war on the part of the workmen would be nearly in vain, if the politician is still allowed to play his usual high antics upon hLs own stage, if capital is to be harassed by ill-considt ivd laws, its reward filched from it. and thus the growing inclination to invest is to be checked, if land is to be rated in such fashion. that the tenth part or the fifth part, or more, is taken of its yearly value, if it is to be tied up in a new form of settlement by such stupidities as compulsory compensation for improve- ment Acts, if everybody who climbs to power is to indulge his fancies and speculations at the expense of other people, if public departments are to spend without any real control from the public, if every new interest is to have its own department and its own minister, \\\i\\ the special office of securing to it a share of the public doles that are going, if the number of officials is to mount higher every year, and the area of regimentation is to grow larger, if municipalities and county councils are to be encouraged to undertake trade on their own account, and to be the instruments of preserving mono- polies for certain favoured bodies of workmen, if local debts are steadily to increase, with little or nothing to show of permanent value in return, if splendid salaries are to be the politician's dazzling reward, if huge show^y reforms, affecting only the outside of things, are to be encouraged, and all the healthy con- ditions for pei-sonal improvement to be made light of by the law- makers, if free arrangements between employers and employed
Y
322 A Plea for Liberty. [xi.
are to be prevented, and schemes like Employers' Liability (with all the mischief of uniformity about them) are to be forced on the whole nation, if lawyers and doctors are to enjoy monopolies, with all the vices and but few of the excuses of trades-unions about them, if every blessed occupation in turn, including accountants, teachers, journalists, and I presume at last street-sweepers, are to ask for charters and are to regulate their own numbers, under the flimsy pltra of saving the public from incompetence, if the workmen's thoughts and energies are all to be given to these worthless political methods and to the barren struggle for power over each other, if the lies, self-seeking and hypocrisy of party warfare are to reign supreme in our hearts, — then the immense gain which would come from a cessation of industrial war will be neutralised both by other forms of monopoly and by the continuance of political war. Both kinds of war are equally mischievous. Both in due time will destroy the nations that give themselves up to them, for both are opposed to the great principle on which alone happy and progressive society can be founded, — the unflinching respect for every man's will about his own actions.
AUBEKON HeKBERT.
XI.] The True Line of Del her am c. 323
NOTES.
Note A, p. 306.
As Professor Cairnes i)oiiite(l out, whilst all iinproveTnonts in niaimfiictures help the workman, what tells against him is that his special article of consumption, food, gets dcurcr, as ])()j)ulation in- creases, and lower-class soils are called into requisition. Against this, however, a good deal has to be set off. We have probably nearly as much room left for new knowledge and improvement in method, as regards the growth of food, and the use and preparation of food, as there is in other directions. Wc have ozily to think of unsettled questions, as regards sewage, the possibilities of certain plants storing up nitmgen from the air, and the growth of vegetarianism as a diet, to realise what changes the fo<id question may undergo. Moreover, the workmen's wants are now extending in so many directions. Clothing, literature of all kinds, implements, better house accommo- dation, materials of culture and amusement, locomotion from railways to bicycles, and many other things, now begin to form a regular part of his budget ; and as regards all these articles, he takes his enlarged share that results from improved production. The effect of modern yeai'^ has been to call into existence an increasing number of articles, which are of increasing importance to him.
Professor Cairnes also laid stress upon another point adverse to the workman. A large quantity of capital in a manufacturing country tends to take a fixed foim, to be invested in machinery and buildings; and such fixed capital represents the profits of employers, and a permanent tax, therefore, that has to be paid to tliem. It is true ; and lor that reason I so earnestly desire to see a regular organised movement amongst workmen for investment, so tluit they might gi'adually become the part-owners of this fixed capital. Every work- man should religiously invest something, if only 2d. a week, for this object ; and every workman should belong to a Union that would make the investment i'or him. One other point, however, of an opposite tendency should be considered. As capital flows plentifully
Y 2
324 A Pica fo7' Liberty. [xi.
into a trade, bringing with it better machinery and better buildings, at first tlie owner of sucli better ccjuipment obtains a higher profit than the owner of second-rate working inateriah He is like the owner of a better soil, who gets the difference of profit that exists between the two soils. But presently in manufacture the second-rate man tends to be eliminated, and the competition is then between men, who once were the best men in the trade, but after a few years only represent the average, — having yielded the first jilace to later comers, who in their turn bring in later improvements. The consequence of this is that j^roduction is improved, the whole product is increased, and all concerned — except the manufacturer, who once led, but ba.s fallen from the first to the second place — get a larger quantity as their share. The workman's share of the jiroduct is not increased in proportion (as regards the emjiloyer), but it is increased in actual quantity, because the product itself is increased. In this way fixed capital is on the side of the workman ; as a tax, it is always tending to disappear, the inferior and old-fashioned industrial apparatus tending to go out of existence at the capitalist's expense, thus lessening the cost of production, and giving larger amounts of the product both to the emplojer and the emj^loyed, though the proportions that go to them respectively are unchanged. Here lies the whole gist of the matter. The workman has simply to care about the increase of the product, leaving the market to ari'ange the proportions that come to him. They will be increasingly in his favour. It is indeed to the workman more than to any other person that free-trade is of vital importance. The man who wants to be protected is the second-rate employer, with backward methods, who feels that he is being squeezed out by the better methods. One can only be very sorry for his position, which is often a hard one ; but to protect him is to sacrifice general prosperity.
Note B, p. 313.
As regards combinations of masters, it must not be forgotten that it is in the interest of masters in some trades to preserve a state of restriction and monopoly ; since, partly owing to the restricted numbers of the men, trade secrets, &c., they are able to make it difficult for new capital to enter such trades. It is in these cases that combinations of masters for settling wages are likely to be successfully carried out. In open trades the new employer is unlikely to enter into any such com- bination. He brings with him the advantage of all new improvements, probably has considerable capital beliind him, and is determined to get good labour, even if he pays a slightly higher price than the market price. If the men would resolutely determine in their own general
XI.] The True Line of Deliverance. 325
interest to discountenance a closo or restricted trade nnywiiere, they mii;ht depend, uiuler the circumHtances of to-day, upon the inHux «>t' new caiiital lor makinfj any eoniKination of masters in tlie lonf,' run untenable. Sliould such conihination be inaintaine<l, no better lielil couhl be found for u co-operative association, or a joint-stock company, run by the men.
Note C, p. 321.
It might be well to summarise here tlie two tilings which seem of paramount importance to the workmen. First, the carrying out of u reform within the Unions, in the ilirectiou of giving to each man a much wider choice as regards his own conduct. For example, n(» central authority should override the terms which any shop chooses to make with the employer; and only those who individually wish to strike should do so. Secondly, the abandonment of struggles with capital as regards wages. It must be remembered that everything turns upon the willing temper of capital. Capital stands on this vantage-ground, that to set production going, or to increase it, it must be attracted, eager, and filled with confidence. We have therefore to insist upon these general tniths, — that all war between capital and labour is fatal to the general good ; that it cannot permanently increase wages, seeing that higher wages can only permanently come trom larger and cheaper production, and that capital mus^t be coaxed, not bullied, into the perfect performance of its true service ; that capital should be thoroughly secure and at ease, so that on account of this ease it should be content with a lower reward, it.self by compe- tition with itself reducing that reward ; that no violence or threat of violence from any quarter should be offered it ; that employers should be constantly tempted to invest their profits in their business, thus enlarging their operations and increasing the fund that gives employ- ment ; that a certain part of the capital that now goes abroad should Ijy this increased sense of security be kept at home ; that the fullest encouragement should he given to employers to introduce improved processes and improved machinery, no employer being afi'a id to invest* the largest sums of money permanently in his business ; that by such improved processes all articles should be manufactured at the lowest possible price, thus ensuring to the workman the highest return from his wages, and thus favouring this country as regards the expoi-tation of articles ; that in no trade should there be any restriction or monopoly, seeing that the higher prices derived from such restriction and monopoly are obtained at the expense of other workmen, who only receive free trade prices for their labour, whilst themselves paying to such monopolists protective prices ; that all labour should
o
26 A Plea for Liberty. [xi.
be free to move in such channels as best suited it, and that efforts should be directed to ])erfect the competition of the open market, as offering both the truest and justest return for the lal)our of each, — such return being measured by the wants of the public ; that work- men should be more and more induced to invest in industrial concerns, thus becoming the owners of the fixed capital of the country, and thus possessing a second source of income in addition to wages ; that in- vesting Unions should be formed for this purpose ; that no foolish legislative steps should be taken to restrict or impede joint-stock enterprise, and thus to throw fresh difficulties in the path of the workman becoming possessed of capital; and that the politician should not be allowed either to come between the employer and the employed, in the arrangement of their affairs, or to interfere with the profits of the employer, upon which the whole fabric of production rests, and with it the prosperity of the workmen.
THE END.
llnivorc^itv^ ]£itcnc>ion ni>nnuali5.
Edikd by rROF-EssoR Knight.
The Series will include the fojlowiiifj Works : — The Daily Life of the Greeks and Romans.
W. Anderson, Oriel Collcj^e, Oxford, and Professor of Clas-ic^, Firth College, ShclTicld.
The History of Astronomy.
Arthur Hkrry, Fellow of Kinfj's College, Cambridge,
.Tnd of University Collccjc, I-ondoii.
Shakespeare, and his predecessors in the English Drama. F. S. IlOAS, Balliol Colle.t^'c, Oxford. The English Poets, from Blake to Tennyson.
Stopford a. Brooke, Trinity College, Dublin. The Fine Arts. With Jl lust rations, y. 6d.
Baldwin Brown, Professor of Fine Arts, University of Edinburgh.
The Physiology of the Senses.
John McKendrick, Professor of Physiology, Uni- versity of Glasgow, and Dr. Snodgrass, Physiological Laboratory, Glasgow.
Comparative Religion.
Allan Menzies, Professor of Theology and Biblical Criticism, University of .St. Andrews. The Realm of Nature : An Outline of our Knowledge of the Structure, Laws, and Forces of the Earth. With 1 9 Coloured Maps and many Illustrations, 5 j. Hugh Robert Mill, University Lecturer, Edinburgh. Logic, Inductive and Deductive.
WiLLLVM MiNTO, Professor of Logic and Literature, University of Aberdeen.
The Elements of Ethics.
John H. Muirhead, Balliol College, Oxford, Lecturer on Moral Science, Royal Holloway College.
The English Novel, from its orig^in to Sir W. Scott. W. A. Raleigh, Professor of English Literature, University College, Liverpool.
Outlines of English Literature.
William Renton, University Lecturer, St. Andrews.
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEiMARLE STREET.
JJjiiversity Extcnsio7i Manuals {contimicd).
Studies in Modem Geology.
R. D. Roberts, Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge, Secretary to the Cambridge and London University Ex- tension SiiTidicatcs.
English. Colonization and Empire. With Coloured Maps ajid Diagrams. 3,?. 6d. A. Caldecott, Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge.
An Introduction to Physical Science.
John Cox, late Warden of Cavendish College, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge ; Professor of Natural Philosophy, McGill College, Montreal.
The Use and Abuse of Money. 3^-.
W. Cunningham, D.D., University Lecturer, Cam- bridge.
Outlines of Modern Botany.
Patrick Geddes, Professor of Botany, University College, Dundee.
The Jacobean Poets.
Edmund Gosse, Trinity College, Cambridge.
The Literature of Prance.
H. G. Keene, Universities of Oxford and Calcutta.
(1) An Introduction to Philosophy.
(2) The Philosophy of the Beautiful. 2>^. 6d.
William Knight, Professor of Moral Philosophy and Political Economy, University of St. Andrews.
British Dominion in India.
Sir Alfred Lyall, K.C.B., K.C.S.L
The French Revolution.
C. E. Mallet, Balliol College, Oxford.
Problems of Political Economy.
M. E. Sadler, Senior Student of Christ Church, Oxford, Secretary to the Oxford University Extension Delegacy.
Psychology, a Historical Sketch.
Andrew Seth, Professor of Logic and Enghsh Literature, University of St. Andrews.
Mechanics.
Professor James Stuart, M.P., Trinity College, Cambridge.
The Study of Animal Life. With jnmiy Illustrations. J. Arthur Thomson, University Lecturer, Edinburgh.
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.
MURRAY'S
UNIVERSITY EXTENSION MANUALS.
Edited by PROFESSOR KNUHIT, of St. Andrews University.
1! :oV:^ to tlmw out the powers of the mtnH raihrr thnn to load it with n mn«<. of iinr?i;c«te(l
, , , ,,
I i
The following W 'orks are now ready : —
THE BEAI.M OF NATXTBE : A Manual of Physiography. I3y High Kui:kri Mill, University of E'liiiliuryh. With 19 Col-aircd Nfaps and 68 Illustrations. ;3So pp.) Crown Svo, 5^. On Jan. 5th, 1892.
THE PIWE ABTS. By Professor BALDWIN BROWN, University of Lkiinburgh. With lilu>tratii lis. Crown Svo, 3^. 6i/. llie author ' has compressed into a small volume more real thought and suggestion on the
»ii)ii»-. f t'l.t) \i f iifft-n )w>.i IM I'lr.'rT i^r m ir»' iin-f .■■ir i. iti^ \Tf-^x\^f^ W r' rnitvT i- \ Tir#- v<. ni|f
.1
Nuch a cuinpreiiciiMvc aiiU philusupiiic spirit. — iiutuitr.
EirOIiZSH COItOSTZATZOBT AVO EMPZHE. By A. Caldecott, Fellow >>f .St. John's Collci;<.-, Cambriii^'C. Coloured Maps and Plans. Crown 8vo, j,s. 6d.
'Alike in ereoiti'^" it' .!•— i^.i If ;« v , '1 nl Vi ;rrfnr,-.-irK->l.l... We regret that we have nDt >l.a.-c I J . '.It!!;!',- VA 'liant book, to trace the variriis
stcj- i:j thu l.i^t TV ' wort of the kind that the wori J
has ever seen, to show huw, littic by iiulc, the k;reat fabric was buiil up, till at last it attained to its well-ni.^h colossal proportions.' — -Coimtics atui India.
THE USE AND ABUSE OF MONEY. By Dr. W. CUNNINGHAM, Fellow of Trinitj' College, Cambridge ; Professor of Economic Science, King's College, London. Crown 8vo, },s.
"To bring political economy down from the region of abstraction as Dr. Cunningham iIoe<. .t J to make it applicable to individual conduct^ is not only perfectly legitimate but a most fruir,.! and u.seful form of study. The whole book is worth reading, but especially the last chapters. ' — }iriiisk n\ckiy.
THE PHILOSOPHY OP THE BEAUTIPUL. By Prof. Knight, University
of St. Andrews. Crown Svo, .y. dd.
' All will learn much from Professor Knight, whose knowledge especially of recent English and .American literature is remarkably complete.'— .V/i«£A«/cr Guardian.
The following are at Press, and nearly ready : —
THE ELEMENTS OP ETHICS. By JOHN H. MuiRHEAD, Ealliol College, < J.xfortl ; Ltciurcr on Mural .Science, Royal Holloway College.
PSEHCH ZaTEBATUSE. By H. G. Keene, Wadham College, Oxford ; Fellow of the University of Calcutta.
THE STUDY OP ANIMAL LIPE. By J. ARTHUR THOMSON, University
of Edinburgh. With many Illustrations.
Other volunus will folloiu at regular intervals; for full particulars apply to the Publisher,
JOHN MURRAY, Albemarle Street.
Ojcfori
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
V«
■M M M
Arc
" -^d^i
;«n#
rijs
i .«:
P:^'^{
^^ w
flK'
c f r f I »^»
r f f f f < f ' '^
I I «
r f
r r
M
rVVrlrlflr'r^r f r rf^i
"f t"r f t f .« J« 1 I I
{ f t i -• 'i ^
r i r i
♦ C i I
» I i -I *.i.*:,i J, • '
€ I 1 1 ■■ *' • • * ■ MM. MM.. t 1 t f
i I 1 ij t f it
, i. I t^t t 1 i t
111 It
1 1 r I J. 1 1 1
I lilt. i.i,ri VSt W'ljiVi^^
i !
i « t « i ^1 "i lt M. x •i ■«. *- t- *-j»'jf
tit 1 lit
Ttt. 1 t 1
L L V t.*-,*--*-.*--** 1 1 1 1 1. 1, i i I « '«*-.■*■•*
C^SS^^tS Alt iV^i 'ttw^
t,.*
6 |
^ |
E |
^ 1 |
||
H H H |
||
H 1 H |
||
1 IM |
||
' ■ 'Mm
lit*
I
'vV
W- V' m^