, ESSAYS IN POLITICS
SOME OF THE POLITICAL QUESTIONS
OF THE DAY ARE REVIEWED
FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL AND HISTORICAL
STANDPOINT
C. B. ROYLANCE KENT, M.A.
h
LATE EXHIBITIONER OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD, AND LEE PRIZEMAN OF
GRAY'S INN, BARRISTER-AT-LAW
QS THE
[UHIVBESIT7 1
or
triply
LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Lt?.
1891
A
^\
j/6rff
( The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved )
PKEFACE
The word " Politics " may be used in two senses. It
may be used in the wide, or what I may call the
Aristotelian sense, as including all those questions
which affect the life of men, as members of society ;
or it may be used in the narrower and somewhat
debased sense, as including only those questions which
happen for the moment to agitate the different parties
in the state. It is in the former sense that I have
used the word in the title of this volume. My aim,
however, has been practical. I have attempted to
consider some of the more important questions of
modern politics from a constitutional and historical
standpoint, and to give them their due place in the
larger sphere or area of the political science to which
they belong. "No perfect discovery," says Lord
Bacon, " can be made upon a flat or a level ; neither
is it possible to discover the more remote and deeper
parts of any science, if you stand upon the level of
the science, and ascend not to a higher science." And
a 3
VI PREFACE.
so in practical politics, in order to come to any righl
conclusion whatever, it is necessary to leave the flal
or level of party controversy, and ascend to. a highei
standpoint. Never at any time was this mon
necessary than at the present moment. Some of th*
questions that the electors are now called upon, oi
will soon be called upon to decide at the polls, are o
the highest importance, and go directly to questions
of principle. Some, such as Irish Home Rule anc
Imperial Federation, are constitutional questions
which can only be rightly considered when looked a
as parts of the great subjects of sovereignty anc
federal government. Others involve the consideratioi
of such weighty matters as the sphere and duties o:
government. Such is the now important question o
the hours of labour. Others, again, involve a con
sideration of the nature and logical consequences o:
democracy. There must be many who, having beei
compelled " to embark into a troubled sea of noisei
and hoarse disputes, put from beholding the brigh
countenance of truth in the quiet and still air o:
delightful studies," will be called upon to form ar
opinion on these questions. These will have neithe]
the time, nor perhaps the inclination, to seek fo:
themselves facts and authorities, which are widely
scattered and not easily accessible. It is for these
at least, I hope, that the facts and arguments which
I have collected, and which I have decked in as fai:
a literary dress as the subject and my own power
PREFACE. Vll
have permitted, may prove of some use. I can make
little or no claim for originality ; indeed, in many
cases I have been careful to name my authority. My
aim has been throughout rather to state cases than to
take sides. Lord Houghton is said to have remarked
of Mr. Gladstone that his method of impartiality was
being furiously in earnest on both sides of a question.
I have tried to be impartial, but my way has been
rather to state facts and arguments on both sides, and
to draw only the most obvious inferences without
prejudice and without passion.
In conclusion, I must thank the Editor of the
Westminster Review for kindly permitting me to
reprint the essay on the Progress of the "Masses"
which appeared in November, 1887, and to rewrite an
article on Federal Government which appeared in
May, 1888, and which forms the basis of the essay on
Federal Government in this volume.
C. B. E. KENT.
Liverpool,
March, 1891.
CONTENTS.
ESSAY I.
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY.
PAGB
fistorical retrospect of the treatment of questions of sovereignty
by political writers from Aristotle to Austin Austin's defini-
tion of sovereignty Sovereignty in rigid and flexible con-
stitutions Sovereignty in England, France, and the United v
States Two attributes of sovereignty and their importance in
the British Constitution Sovereignty in abeyance Sove-
reignty in Oriental communities Customary law in the East
and West Legislation the mark of sovereignty in Western
communities The growth of legislative activity Its growth
in England The relations of the legislature to the Executive
The tendency of the legislature to encroach on the Executive
The division of sovereignty into three parts The conflict of
the legislature with the Executive The conflict and its issue
in England The paradox of the British Constitution The
relation of the legislature and the Executive in the United
States Constitution A contrast with the British Constitution
Congress and the President The tendency to excessive-
legislation The dislike of change in the mass of society
The injuriousness of hasty legislation Legal and political
sovereignty The growth of democracy Democracy a modern
institution How the legal and political sovereigns can be
made to harmonize Constitutional conventions The preroga-
tive Examples of its use The Beferendum Can it be in-
troduced into England ? The Royal prerogative of veto Its
transference to the people ... ,... ... 1-36
X CONTENTS.
ESSAY II.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
PAGE
The rapid development of federal institutions in modern times
What has already been accomplished Tendencies to federa-
tion observable South African, Australian, and Australasian
federation Imperial federation and Irish Home Rule Theo-
retical interest of federal institutions Distinction from other
kinds of union The origin of federal unions in external
pressure The United Netherlands, the United States, Ger-
many, Switzerland, and Canada V Other unions of a different
origin The problem implied b/ a federal union Its solution
in the United States Distribution of powers in the United
States and Canada The nature of the central government in
the United States, Switzerland, Germany, and Canada The
tendency to secession a cause of weakness Examples in the
United States and Switzerland The failures of federal unions
The division of powers a cause of weakness Sovereignty
in a federal union The judicial authority The weakness of
a federal Executive internally considered How this is met in
the United States and Switzerland The advantages and dis-
advantages of federation Some peculiarities involved in a
federal union 37-75
ESSAY III.
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND.
The Federal Union Switzerland the most democratic country
The nature of the Referendum, and how it works Analogous
institutions in other countries The Initiative The Landes-
gemeinder and their ancient prototypes The payment of
members of the legislature Politics as a profession in Swit-
zerland Economy in Swiss administration The Federal
Assembly compared with other legislatures The Federal
Council compared with other Executives Merits of the
Swiss Constitution The position of the President The
unique character of the Federal Council 70-100
CONTENTS. XI
ESSAY IV.
THE PROGRESS OF THE " MASSES."
PAGE
The distribution of wealth the great social question Political
liberty more valued in the past than personal liberty
Slavery in the ancient world The serfs and villeins of later
times The Statute of Labourers The Statute of Apprentices
The regulation of wages by statute The changes caused
by the introduction of machinery The wretchedness of the
working classes at the beginning of the present century
Legislation to assist the working classes Co-operation
Trades-unions Savings-banks The history of wages and
prices from the thirteenth century to the present time ... 101-125
ESSAY V.
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION IN ANGLO-SAXON COMMUNITIES.
Indefiniteness of the word " socialism " Definitions given What
is socialistic legislation ? Socialistic legislation in the United
States Illustrations of it Reasons for thinking that social-
istic legislation will not go so far in England Industrial
pecularities of the United States The character of the
American State legislatures Socialistic legislation in Canada
Illustrations of it Socialistic legislation in Australia
and New Zealand Illustrations of it Reasons for supposing
that socialistic legislation will not go so far in England The
character of the British working classes Their character
compared with that of like classes on the Continent Their
repugnance to socialistic theories The good elements of
legislative interference The moral element The philan-
thropic element Examples of legislative interference not
deemed socialistic The relation of legislative interference to
democracy Democratic government not " paternal" ... 126-154
ESSAY VI.
SCIENCE AND POLITICS.
The political importance of scientific discoveries The relation of
scientific discoveries to the size and stability of states The
substitution of large for small states in modern times Means
Xll CONTENTS.
PAGE
of rapid communication indispensable for large states The
relation of scientific discoveries to federation The influence
of railways in the United States and Canada The relation
of scientific discoveries to democracy Democracy formerly
only possible in small states Representation and democracy
Tyrannies now impossible The relation of scientific dis-
coveries to war The relation of. scientific discoveries to
industry The great increase of productive power Material
resources and political theories 155-182
<> > OP THB
[UNIVERSITY]
ESSAYS IN POLITICS,
I.
SOME QUESTIONS OF ^SOVEREIGNTY.
" Theee is also a doubt as to what is to be the supreme
power in the state. Is it the multitude? or the
wealthy ? or the good ? or the one best man ? or a
tyrant?" This suggestive and far-reaching question*
was asked long ago by Aristotle, and, in asking it,
he opened up one of those interesting fields of inquiry
which have justly earned for him the name of the
father of the Science of Politics. The question here
raised is one of capital importance in political science,
and one which from the time of Aristotle to our own,
has been the source of much discussion, and which
even now cannot be said to be finally settled. It is
nothing less than the question of sovereignty. What
is the sovereign body ? And where is it to be found
in any given political community ? These are the
two branches into which the inquiry divides itself.
No question probably has more occupied the minds
of political philosophers. At all periods of history,
I [ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
when any literature in political science has been pro-
duced at all, this question has been almost always
discussed. In the Middle Ages, indeed, writers were
either like Thomas Aquinas or Dante, too much
occupied with arguing the claims of the temporal or
spiritual powers, or like Machiavelli, too much involved
in working out the details of practical statecraft, to
give much attention to it. But afterwards it was
always given a prominent place. Jean Bodin, a French
lawyer of the sixteenth century, was the first to give
anything like an adequate definition of a sovereign
body, when he wrote that it is limited neither by a
greater power, nor by any laws, nor by time, and that
the prince and people in whom sovereignty resides
are not answerable for their acts to any one except
immortal God. Sir Thomas Smith, who wrote shortly
after Bodin, defined sovereignty in a very similar
manner, but he differs from him in fixing its place in
Parliament. " And to be short," he says, " all that
even the people of Kome might do, either Centuriatis
Comitiis or Tributis, the same may be done by the
Parliament of England, which representeth and hath
the power of the whole realm, both the head and body."
Next it is very fully treated by Hobbes, who has the
great merit of being the first to distinguish policy
from legality, that is to say, what is expedient from
what is legally allowed. Closely connected with this
is the distinction between legal and political sove-
reignty, of which more will be said hereafter a dis-
tinction which is of great importance, and which, if
not properly grasped, is fruitful in confusion and
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 3
misunderstanding. Even Hobbes himself is too much
impressed with legal sovereignty to always keep it
distinct. He sometimes himself falls into the mistake
which he has pointed out to others. But nothing can
be clearer than his conception of a legally sovereign
body. He imagined, without any warrant it must be
confessed, the existence of a person or body of persons
invested by contract with the power of the whole
community, and then he went on to say that " he that
carrieth this person is called sovereign, and hath
sovereign power, and every one besides is his subject."
These are words of luminous clearness for that age,
though in these days they seem simple enough. The
next writer of importance after Hobbes is Locke. But
just as Hobbes gave too prominent a place to legality,
so on the other hand Locke gave too prominent a place
to policy. But how clear his ideas of sovereignty were
may be judged from the following sentence, where he
said that " whilst the government subsists, the legis-
lative is the supreme power, for what can give laws
to another must needs be superior to him." Next in
point of time comes Kousseau, who was so blinded by
his inflated notions of the sovereignty of the people as
to declare that there is no sovereign body in the state
at all. After such insensate ebullitions as this, it is
refreshing to turn toBlackstone, who defined sovereignty
with all the precision of a lawyer. In all forms of
government, he said, " there is and must be a superior,
irresistible, absolute, uncontrolled authority, in which
the jura summa imperii, or the rights of sovereignty,
reside." The existence of a sovereign body, which
4 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Rousseau denied altogether, he makes the very corner-
stone of all political societies. Bentham, again, un-
sparing though he was in his criticism of Blackstone,
agreed with him in seeing the necessity of forming a
clear conception of sovereignty. But this occupied a
quite secondary place in his work, which was to
demonstrate the purposes for which government exists,
and the methods by which it might best attain its
ends. Lastly, Austin, in his " Province of Juris-
prudence Determined," has defined sovereignty in a
manner that has laid for all time a sure foundation
for the science of positive law.
This short historical sketch will be enough to
show how large a space questions of sovereignty have
occupied in the writings of political philosophers, and
how important a branch of the science of politics it is.
So important is it, that it is impossible to avoid
confusions and escape inaccuracies without having
first obtained a clear idea of its nature. And even
when a satisfactory definition has been reached, it will
be found that this is not all, but that many questions
arise in connection with it, although it may well have
been thought that all questions of sovereignty had
been by this time finally settled. But this is very
far from being the case, and it is some of these
unsettled questions of internal sovereignty, apart from
those questions of external sovereignty belonging to
the sphere of International Law, which it is proposed
to treat of here.
/" One of the first questions that arise is, Does there
really exist, in certain political communities, any
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 5
sovereign body at all? It will be found that there
are certain political communities where it is very
difficult to say whether there is really any actually
existing sovereign body, and, further, when it has been
found to exist, whereabouts in the community it lies.
In order to determine these questions correctly, it is
absolutely necessary to bear well in mind a clear
definition of sovereignty. The best definition is
Austin's ; it is so good that no better could probably
be framed. He says, " If a determinate human superior,
not in the habit of obedience to a like superior, receive
habitual obedience from the bulk of a given society,
that determinate superior is sovereign in that society,
and the society, including the superior, is a society
political and independent ; " and further, " to that
determinate superior the other members of the society
are subject, or on that determinate superior the other
members of the society are dependent. The position
of its other members towards that determinate superior
is a state of subjection or a state of dependence. The
mutual relation which subsists between that superior
and them may be styled the relation of sovereign and
subject, or the relation of sovereignty and subjection."
The most practically important class of political
communities, in which it is difficult to say that a
sovereign body, in the strictly legal or Austinian
sense of the term, exists, is that which is marked by
the possession of what are most conveniently called
rigid constitutions. By a rigid constitution is meant
one which is written, and which marks out in clearly
defined terms the powers of the different organs of
6 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
government, powers which cannot be altered by any
legislative body. Such are the constitutions of France
and the United States of America. They stand in
sharp contrast with the British constitution, which is
conveniently said to be of the flexible type ; that is
to say, it is not strictly set out in any document, but
can be altered at will by the Legislature. In England
the constitution can be amended or altered to any
extent by an ordinary Act of Parliament; a federal
constitution for the British Empire could, for instance,
be enacted in this way. But in France or the United
States the constitution cannot be altered a hair's
breadth by ordinary proceedings in the Legislature.
This could only be done in some cumbrous or round-
about fashion laid down by the constitution itself.
A curious result of this is that, in England, alterations
in the constitution, amounting in fact to revolutions,
have worked their way, almost unobserved, with slow
and silent insinuations. Such a real revolution is the
system of cabinet government ; and yet no one can
assign any date for its creation. In France, on the
other hand, a change of a much less sweeping kind
plunges the whole nation into the throes of a civil
disturbance. And, somewhat unfairly, France has won
the reputation of a most revolutionary country. What-
ever its defects, a flexible constitution has at least the
merits of rendering change possible without revolution.
Now, in the British constitution there is no difficulty
at all in saying where sovereignty lies. That it lies
in Parliament, which consists of the Crown and the
House of Lords and the House of Commons, may be
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 7
affirmed without hesitation. Austin, indeed, for want
of seeing the distinction between legal and political
sovereignty, went out of his way to say that in England
sovereignty lies in the Crown, the House of Lords, and
the House of Commons, or electors. He imagined that
members of the House of Commons represented the
electors merely as delegates, and that the electors were
actually, through the medium of their representatives,
a part of Parliament. There is a partial truth in this,
for there is a growing tendency for members of the
House of Commons to be returned with cut-and-dried
instructions from their constituencies. But it is very
far from being the whole truth. Parliament is in fact,
as well as in theory, so far sovereign that it can, if it
wishes, override the wishes of the people. The manner
in which the Septennial Act was passed is enough to
put the true sovereignty of Parliament beyond all
reasonable doubt. The Parliament that passed that
Act was elected for three years only, but it prolonged
its own life for seven years, and in all probability
prolonged it in the teeth of a hostile people, who
would never have elected a Parliament with a mandate
to pass such an Act. There can be no doubt, the^
where sovereignty lies in the British constitution.
And it may fairly be said of any other flexible* con-
stitution, that it would be easy to put one's finger on
th3 sovereign body with an unerring certainty. But
when we come to examine rigid constitutions, it is
ncft always apparent which is the sovereign body and
where it lies. In the case of France, and other similar
constitutions of a non-composite character, not much
8 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
difficulty is presented. In France we have already-
seen that the Legislature is not sovereign, because its
powers are limited by the constitution. But behind
the Legislature slumbers a body invested with powers
which the Legislature does not possess. This is the
sovereign body. In France this body is the National
Assembly, which consists of the Chamber of Deputies
and the Senate sitting together. But in federal con-
stitutions, like that of the United States of America
or Switzerland, the question becomes much more
difficult. In America the federal and the state
Legislatures are certainly not sovereign ; neither is
the Supreme Court or* the President. Some eminent
American lawyers are of opinion that there is no
legally sovereign body in the United States, and
Professor Dicey says that he sees no absurdity in such
a supposition. If there is a sovereign body in the
United States it must be the body invested by the
constitution, with the power of altering that consti-
tution. Article V. of the United States constitution
provides that Congress, whenever two-thirds of both
Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amend-
ments to the constitution, or, on the application of the
Legislatures of two- thirds of the several states, shall
call a convention for proposing amendments, which in
either case shall be valid to all intents and purposes
as part of the constitution when ratified by the Legis-
latures of three- fourths of the several states or by
conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the
other mode of ratification may be proposed by the
Congress. And then follows a proviso, making it illegal
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 9
to amend certain portions of Article I. prior to the
year 1808. So that up to the year 1808, at least,
there was no absolutely sovereign body in the United
States. Moreover, there is a further proviso that
" no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its
equal suffrage in the Senate." So that here there is
a check upon the action of the majority of three-
fourths of the states necessary to carry an amendment,
which to this extent derogates from their sovereign
powers, if their powers can be called sovereign. So
that whether there is even now a sovereign body in
the United States may well be doubted ; but if there
is a sovereign body, it must be a body consisting of
a majority of three-fourths of the several States at any
time belonging to the union.
There are two remarkable consequences that flow
from sovereignty which should be particularly noted
in connection with federal constitutions. One such
consequence is that, whereas a sovereign body may
delegate its powers of legislation, a non-sovereign
body may not. The maxim, " Delegata potestas non de-
Jegatur," is here applicable. The powers of the British
Parliament differ greatly from those of the American
Congress or an American State Legislature. The
British Parliament may, in virtue of its inherent
original authority, delegate powers to anybody it
pleases. It might confer direct legislative powers
upon the whole body of the electors, if it chose ; as
a fact, it has conferred such powers upon the Crown in
Council. The American Congress, or an American
State Legislature, has no such power as this. They
10 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
have, indeed, claimed such power, but the American
Courts have decided against them, and they have been
compelled to give up such pretensions. Another con-
sequence is that no sovereign body can limit its own
powers. It is of the essence of sovereignty that there
should be unlimited powers. If powers are limited,
then ipso facto sovereignty vanishes. Any attempt of
a sovereign body to limit its own powers must ulti-
mately fail* Some of the Greek republics attempted
to render some laws immutable by enacting the death
penalty for any one who proposed to repeal them.
Just as though it was not obviously easy to first of all
propose the repeal of the law enacting the death
penalty. The British Parliament is not likely to be
suspected of any wish to limit its own powers. Like
all other legislatures, it has an insatiable appetite for
authority. Yet an instance of such a wish of the
British Parliament has been pointed out by Professor
Bryce. In the Act of Union with Ireland it was pro-
vided that the maintenance of the Protestant Episcopal
Church as an Established Church in Ireland should be
"deemed an essential and fundamental part of the
Union." In 1869 that proviso was cast to the winds ;
the Protestant Episcopal Church was disestablished
without any qualms of conscience whatever.
These two attributes of sovereignty, the one positive,
the other negative, should be very fully weighed by
those who advocate imperial federation, or would
throw our constitution into the melting-pot, and recast
it as a brand-new federation of the four several parts
of the United Kingdom. For it seems to follow that,
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 11
if the British Parliament were to create a federation,
being a sovereign body, it could not only delegate
its powers to any extent, which the other provincial
Parliaments could not, but also (which is far more
important), as the possessor of unlimited powers, which
it could not cut down, it could at any time withdraw
from or break up the federal union. It would occupy
a superior position to the legislative bodies of the
other members of the union. Such a position would
contain within itself the seeds of conflict. It would,
however, be quite possible for the British people to
first annihilate their Parliament, and then to proceed
to form a federation, in which a newly created Par-
liament at Westminster would only have equal powers
with those of the other provincial legislatures.
There is one event which might happen to any con-
stitution, whether flexible or rigid, and which, if it did
happen, would make it difficult to say that any sovereign
body existed. This is the event of civil war or revolu-
tion, when the sovereign power is for the time being
thrown into abeyance. When, for instance, Charles I.
was engaged in fighting his Parliament, it would
be impossible to say that any truly sovereign body
then existed. The sovereign power is, in fact, the
subject of contention, and anarchy for the instant pre-
vails. And Sir James Stephen is of opinion that even
where there is no civil war, there may be what he calls
dormant anarchy, as was the case in the United States
before the war of secession. It was like the sultriness
of the air before the bursting of the storm.
Another case of difficulty in saying whether sove-
12 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
reignty exists has been suggested by Sir H. S. Maine.
He refers to the cases of oriental communities, botli
ancient and modern. The oriental community of
to-day bears a strong likeness to what we know of
similar communities of antiquity. So conservative are
the peoples of the East, and so bound are they in the
swaddling clothes of custom, that many things of a vast
antiquity are to this day preserved amongst them. In
looking to-day on a Hindoo village community, we see
much preserved in a full vitality which existed when
Homer sang, and when the seven hills of Kome were
still untenanted. It is with regard to these oriental
communities, where custom is all-powerful and all-per-
vading, that Sir H. S. Maine has raised difficulties and
opened up a field of inquiry of very great interest ; he
has pointed out that sovereignty, as defined by Austin,
is in many ways inapplicable to oriental communities.
It is an essential part of the Austinian conception of
a sovereign body that it should be the source of
positive law, or, in other words, that it should legislate.
Now, it has been shown by Sir H. S. Maine that in
oriental empires there is no sovereign body in this
sense of the term. In these empires anything in the
nature of law has no connection with the sovereign
body. The case of Runjeet Singh, the conqueror and
ruler of the Sikhs, in the Punjaub, is an admirable
instance. How can he be said to have been sovereign
in the Austinian sense of the term ? He doubtless
issued particular commands in abundance, and was
implicitly obeyed. He raised taxes and levied armies
and punished the disobedient with death. But he
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 13
never legislated. The saying, " Kex les loquens, lex rex
loquens," was the reverse of applicable to him. The
case of the vassalage of the Jews to Persia is another
instance. The Jews continued to live under their own
laws, but the Great King never legislated for them.
He raised taxes and levied troops, and having done
this, he was content to leave them to live pretty much
as they pleased. Another instance, which is not
oriental, is that of the Athenian republic, which raised
taxes from its dependencies, but never legislated for
them. In such communities as these, the rules, whether
they be called customs or laws, under which men live
their lives from day to day, did not have their source
ia the sovereign body, nor did they receive any sanc-
tion from it. They had their source in religion and
custom, and their sanction in public opinion and an
awe-inspiring superstition. Such works as the Koran
and the Institutes of Menu are really the statute-
books of the East. But anything in the nature of
legislation, or law sanctioned by the sovereign body,
there is not. In such matters the sovereign is gene-
rally passive. Absolute legislative inactivity is the
mark or note of oriental sovereignty. The law of the
Medes and Persians that altereth not is the prevailing
type of law in the East.
The maxim that "what the sovereign permits, he
commands " has been invoked for the purpose of show-
ing that such oriental sovereign bodies as we have
described do really legislate. There is, however, a vast
difference between the customary law of England, for
instance, and that of the East. In England the sove-
14 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
reign body would, if it thought fit, change, and as
a matter of fact often does change, the existing
common law by statutory enactment. The Married
Women's Property Acts, for instance, revolutionized
the common law that regulated the relations of husband
and wife. But in the East the sovereign body would
not dream of doing any such thing. To meddle with
the customary law would be deemed a species of im-
piety. So that, whilst the English sovereign body
clearly regards the customary law as coming within
the range of its interference, the oriental sovereign
body just as clearly regards it as being outside that
range. Professor Holland has endeavoured, in his
Jurisprudence, to meet the difficulty by suggesting
that only those customs are laws which would in case
of necessity be enforced by the sovereign body, whereas
those which might be habitually disobeyed with im-
punity are not really laws at all. There is some truth
in this, but it presents a difficulty, inasmuch as it would
be impossible to say whether a particular custom was
a law or not, until it was put to the practical test of
being habitually disobeyed with impunity. However ^
that may be, it still remains the fact that the sove- i
reign bodies of the East are non-legislative bodies, I
while, on the other hand, in the West legislation has ]
become to be considered the pre-eminent mark of
sovereignty. Legislation is part of its connotation. ,
The two ideas are inseparable. Something will J?e
said of the United States later on, but it may here be
noted that the United States in one way resembles an
oriental empire. In the latter the sovereign body
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 15
does not legislate ; in the former the sovereign body
(if it exists) does not legislate either, but delegates its
legislative powers to subordinate bodies. Moreover,
in both cases, as we have seen, it is doubtful whether
there really exists any truly sovereign body, though
the grounds of doubt are in each case different.
How it came about that legislative activity became
to be the most important mark of sovereignty is a
curious and interesting inquiry. Sir H. S. Maine
thinks that the process began with the Koman Empire,
which was the first great empire to legislate. With
the fall of the empire the Western World once more
relapsed into the old state of things, which was im-
mutable and monotonous. It was only by slow degrees
and faltering steps that legislation grew into an im-
portant part of sovereignty. It is the most notable
thing in the history of its development. The British
Parliament is an instance in point. It seems to have
been summoned by the kings in early times to impose
taxes in order to raise money to supply the king's
wants and provide for carrying on war. But legislation
(other than money Bills) was very scanty. Even the
Great Charter was deemed to be no enactment of new
laws, but only a declaration or reassertion of old laws
that had fallen into disuse. Gradually legislation
became more abundant, but it was not until the time
of Bentham that it received any great impetus.
Bentham had, however, very decided notions of the
purposes for which Government exists. In his opinion
the protection of life and property, and the carrying
on of the ordinary administrative business of the
16 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
nation, was very far from being the whole function of
Government. That function was, he thought, the
promotion of the greatest happiness of the greatest
number. The present century has been remarkable
for the legislative activity of our Parliament, and it is
not too much to say that it is largely due to his
influence. Probably no writer ever lived whose pen
has so altered the course of history.
x Since legislation has been so elevated as to have
J become almost the chief function of Government and
(the most important mark of sovereignty, it is an
interesting inquiry in what manner modern states
have made provision for the exercise of the legislative
function, and what are the relations borne by the
executive to the legislature. We have seen that in
oriental empires legislation is commonly thrown into
the background. The executive functions are every-
thing, and the legislative nothing. Kunjeet Singh
and his advisers (if he had any) formed an admirable
executive within the comparatively narrow sphere of
action to which they confined their energies. He formed
a most efficient Chancellor of the Exchequer, War Sec-
retary, and Commander-in-Chief. He was as successful
in raising funds as he was in levying troops. But here
his functions ended ; while as to legislation, he never
attempted it. A sovereign body, therefore, on its
executive side, resembles an oriental sovereignty;
whilst, on its legislative side, it is of the nature of
sovereignty in its modern and European sense. The
executive and the legislature are, putting the judiciary
aside, the two great elements of sovereignty the
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 17
former coming down from a hoar antiquity, and still
lingering on in the East in a masterful exclusiveness ;
the latter of more modern origin, but growing from
strength to strength, and, by its encroachments on the
former, winning for itself an equal, if not the first, place
in the state. It is remarkable, indeed, how constantly
the legislature tends to encroach on the executive. It
seems to have been thought by political philosophers
that the three great elements of sovereignty, the
legislature, the executive and the judicial, or at least
the two former, should be kept entirely distinct and
independent of one another. Aristotle led the way.
"All states have three elements, and the good law-
giver has to regard what is expedient for each state.
When they are well ordered, the state is well ordered,
and as they differ from one another, constitutions
differ. What is the element, first, which deliberates
about public affairs ; secondly, which is concerned with
the magistrates, and determines what they should be,
over whom they should exercise authority, and what
should be the mode of electing them; and, thirdly,
which has judicial power?" Locke says "that the
legislative and executive powers are in distinct hands
in all moderated monarchies and well-framed govern-
ments." Montesquieu was the first to make the theory
a generally accepted one amongst political thinkers,
and Blackstone follows him in laying down that
" whenever the power of making and that of enforcing
laws are united together, there can be no public
liberty. Where the legislative and executive authority
are in distinct hands, the former will take care not to
c
18 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
trust the latter with so large a power as may tend to
the subversion of its own independence, and therewith
of the liberty of the subject." This distribution of
powers into separate hands was regarded by the
architects of the American constitution as a political
maxim, and that constitution was avowedly founded
upon it. Yet the practice by no means squares with
the theory. The twin organs of Government are in
reality too interdependent to be kept apart, and where
the executive has, in the opinion of the legislature,
arrogated too much to itself, the latter has generally,
at least in the Western world, wrestled with it for
supremacy and has prevailed. It has, indeed, done
more than prevail ; it has grappled with its adversary,
and has subdued it utterly to its will. The gradual
encroachment of the legislature on the executive can
be noticed in very early times. In the old Greek
Kepublics, the assembly of the citizens not only passed
laws, but performed" executive acts, such as making
peace or declaring war, with equal facility. They
gave executive orders, or ;//7j0*<x/iara, with the same ease
as they passed laws, or vouloi. The Koraan Comitia
constantly did the same thing. In England the con-
flict between the executive and the legislature forms
a great part of the history of the country. The Crown
and its ministers formed the executive, and originally
they formed an executive of a very independent
character. But the legislature wrestled with it and
gradually encroached on its powers, and finally suc-
ceeded in bending them to its will. As a result we
now find that the Cabinet ministers, who form the real
SOME QUESTIONS OP SOVEREIGNTY. 19
executive (the Crown being reduced to a merely-
nominal possession of power), not only form part of
the legislature, but the most important part of it. It
is not only considered essential that a Cabinet minister
should sit in Parliament, but the Cabinet is regarded
as a sort of committee of a party majority for fram-
ing legislative proposals. It is now almost the sole
source of law-making. So long ago as 1848, Lord
John Bussell, in a speech in the House of Commons,
remarked upon the change that had taken place. He
said, " There have been, in the course of the last thirty
years, very great changes in the mode of conducting
the business of the House. When I first entered
Parliament, it was not usual for Government to under-
take generally all subjects of legislation ; . . . since
the passing of the Keform Bill, it has been thought
convenient, on every subject on which an alteration in
the law is required, that the Government should under-
take the responsibility of proposing it to Parliament."
Cabinets are judged much more by their success or
failure in carrying through legislation than by their
executive acts. The present Cabinet gained more dis-
credit by failing to carry through the Irish Land Bill
and the Tithes Bill than it gained eclat by successfully
negotiating treaties about Africa with Germany and
France. As Professor Bryce says, "They are not
merely executive agents, but also legislative leaders."
And, as Sir H. S. Maine says, the British constitution
is paradoxical. "While the House of Commons has
assumed the supervision of the whole executive
government, it has turned over to the executive the
20 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
most important of the business of legislation." The
legislature now executes, while the executive legislates.
To such an extent are the legislature and executive
now interwoven. It is true, indeed, that in foreign
affairs the executive still retains a good idea of
independence and freedom from legislative control,
because promptitude and secrecy are here indispensable,
though even here the approval of Parliament must be
virtually obtained for such important matters as
declaring war or concluding treaties. In all other
departments legislative control is complete. A vast
change indeed from the time when the executive was
the dominant power. As might have been expected,
it proved restive under the attempts of the legislature
to curb it. As the saying is, there was no love lost
between them, and the executive minced no words in
denouncing its enemy. Strafford described the House
of Commons as a "cunning and malicious hydra;"
and Charles I. characteristically remarked that " Par-
liaments are of the nature of cats that ever grow
curst with age ; so that if he will have good of them,
put them off handsomely when they come to any age ;
for young ones are ever the most tractable." But the
executive finally succumbed, and, instead of quarrelling
with the legislature, it has become, not only part and
parcel of it, but the most important part of it. They
are equal yoke-fellows under the orders of the great
British public that lies behind them. The British
sovereign body has in short lost, in a large degree,
what may be called its purely ancient and oriental
features, or rather it has assumed those legislative
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 21
features which are the mark of modern and Western
sovereignty. It is not that it has lost its executive
powers, for they are still almost as vigorously exercised
as ever. But such is its activity as a law-maker, that
its work as an administrator, which is carried on un-
ceasingly from day to day and hour to hour, is, com-
paratively speaking, allowed to drop out of notice.
The details of administration are, for the most part,
too commonplace to attract attention.
What has been said of British sovereignty may be
said also of all British self-governing colonies, and,
without much qualification, of all Western European
countries. When we come to consider the case of the
United States of America, we might reasonably suppose
that, in going westward, we should find the same type
of government prevailing, only in more marked degree.
Yet, on examination, a very great difference is found
to exist between the American and British types of
government. It is commonly supposed that the
American government is like the British, a President
being substituted for a monarch, and that it is far
more like than the French government. This is the
exact opposite of the truth, for the French government
is infinitely more like than the American. The differ-
ence between the British and American governments
consists not merely in the ildL that the United States
are a eenfedoration, though r this is of capital impor-
tance.. There is a radical difference in the constitution
of the federal or central government. We have seen
that in the British constitution the executive and the
legislature are closely united. In the American
22 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
constitution an exactly opposite state of things prevails,
of which, curiously enough, we may find an example
nearer home, in the tiny dependency of the Isle of
Man. There the student of politics may study in
miniature the American constitution, stripped, of
course, of its federal attributes. In America the
executive and the legislature are distinct and inde-
pendent. They were made so by the architects of the
American constitution partly on theoretical and partly
on historical grounds, which it would be out of place
to discuss here. It must be enough to mark the fact.
The executive in America has no place in Congress,
and has no legislative authority. The relations of the
executive to the legislature are in America the exact
antithesis of those relations in England. The difference
may be shortly summed up by saying that the British
government is a parliamentary government, and the
American a non-parliamentary one. In the first case
the legislature both legislates and governs ; in the
second case, the legislature legislates, but does not
govern. We have seen that in America Congress,
which is the legislative body, is not sovereign, for its
powers are limited by the constitution. Neither is the
President, in whom the executive authority is centred,
sovereign, for his powers are limited in a like manner.
Both Congress and the President possess, not inherent,
but delegated power. The sovereign body in America,
if it exists, usually slumbers. But if, as we may for
all practical purposes, we consider the executive and the
legislature as forming two co-ordinate branches of a .
sovereign body, it will be seen that, whilst in England
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 23
the legislature has become the supreme part of
sovereignty, in America the legislature is not supreme,
but merely co-ordinate. In England the union of the
executive and the legislature is now so complete, that
both work together harmoniously. In America, on the
contrary, there is disunion, and sometimes conflict.
The executive and the legislature are like a pair of
ill-matched horses, that cause the coach of govern-
ment to creak and sway. Congress can thwart the
President, but the President can revenge himself by
thwarting Congress. But here also, according to the
general rule before noticed, the legislature tends to
encroach on the executive. It fought with President
Andrew Johnson and defeated him. It has devised a
method of thwarting the President by tacking on to
money Bills provisions that have nothing to do with
the financial part of them. In much the same way
the French Chambers have discovered a method of
overcoming their President by the refusal of any
member to take office under any President they dislike.
President Gre>y was compelled to leave the Elysee,
although by law he was fully entitled to remain. But
in spite of the tendency of the legislature to encroach,
the American executive has much greater powers,
which it can exercise independently, than the British
executive has. The American President is, during
his term of office, a much more powerful person than
the British monarch or the French President. He
governs as well as reigns. The executive really holds
a much more important place in the American than in
the British constitution. Not that the British execu-
24 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
tive is weak, but that its real power is concealed and
swallowed up in the legislature. But in America there
is, in a sense, a reversion to the old or oriental type
of sovereignty, of which the chief characteristic is the
existence of an Executive enjoying absolutely uncon-
trolled authority. That there is plenty of legislation
in America no one can doubt. There is, indeed, more
than is altogether agreeable to the average American
citizen, who is apt to grow disgusted with the " log-
rolling " and " lobbying " that haunts the legislative
chambers. This is more true of the State legislatures
than it is of Washington. The Americans distrust
their law-makers; they agree with Charles the First,
and take care that their Parliaments do not become
" curst with age " by giving them a short lease of life,
and they try to render them powerless by dividing
them into two chambers that are likely to disagree.
M. Thiers used to say that a republic was best for
France, because it divided Frenchmen least. Con-
versely, the Americans think that two chambers are
best for them, because it divides their legislators most.
They even look to the executive to protect them from
the legislature, and admire a President who makes a
bold use of the veto. President Cleveland was liked
none the worse for vetoing a number of Bills providing
pensions for combatants in the War of Secession. But
in spite of all this energy expended in legislation or
attempted legislation, the fact still remains that in
America there stands out a clearly cut and indepen-
dent executive, which is in type more oriental than
European.
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 25
We have spoken of the distrust displayed in America
for legislative bodies. This distrust is not so widely-
felt in England, but signs of it are not wanting. The
House of Commons certainly commands less respect
than it did. In France, Mr. Hamerton, who is an
excellent judge, says that the Senate and Chamber of
Deputies command no respect whatever. It is, indeed,
quite within the bounds of possibility that means will
be devised of putting the activity of legislators under
restraint, and that a more purely executive form of
sovereignty will be reverted to. The pendulum of
sovereignty has swung from a pure executive without
legislation to the other extreme of an executive
trammelled on all sides with legislation. There are
now signs that the pendulum has begun to swing the
other way. There is good reason for believing that
democracies are not so prone to change as is generally
believed. Sir H. S. Maine has eloquently shown that
change is not only not desired, but is positively
abhorred by a great part of the human race. The
experience derived from the use of the Referendum in
Switzerland is evidence of the same thing. The Swiss
have by their popular vote rejected a surprising
number of the measures which they have been asked
to pass by the federal chambers. It is an undeniable
and unfortunate fact that many Bills are introduced
for purely party purposes. Promises are made by
candidates on the hustings which have to be redeemed
in Parliament. Bills are so much bait to catch
popular votes. Moreover, popular leaders may be
perfectly sincere and yet hold views far in advance of
fusivsasiTT
26 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
the mass of society. Some of the most prominent
of our Australasian public men hold views on land and
other questions far in advance of the people at large.
In America, as we have said, the State legislatures
make experiments that bring on themselves ridicule,
if not odium. Laws are not always there what
Demosthenes said they were the gifts of the gods,
and the discovery of sages. The law-makers at Albany,
in the State of New York, who were responsible for
Kremmler's execution by electricity, simply outraged
humanity. The feeling is beginning to grow both in
Europe and America that the more Bills a legislature
kills, the better. A small class of thinkers are
beginning to see that legislation is by no means an
unmixed blessing. Mr. Herbert Spencer, in his " Man
versus the State," quotes from a paper read by Mr.
Janson before the Statistical Society in 1873. Mr.
Janson states that of the Public Acts passed from the
Statute of Merton (20 Henry III.) to the end of 1872,
no less than four-fifths had been repealed ; and that in
the short space of three years, 1870-73, no less than
3532 Public Acts had been repealed wholly or in part
or amended, and 2759 had been wholly repealed. Mr.
Spencer further states that he has found by his own
investigation (in the year 1884) that during the three
previous sessions there had been repealed 650 Acts of
the present reign, besides many of preceding reigns.
After making due allowance for repeals due to laws
becoming obsolete, or being inoperative, or to con-
solidation, he concludes that a large residuum must
have been repealed because they were found to be
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEKEIGNTY. 27
injurious. And he goes on to say, and rightly say,
"That bad legislation means injury to men's lives."
"Judge," he says, "what must be the total amount of
mental distress, physical pain, and raised mortality,
which these thousands of repealed Acts of Parliament
represent ! " On the ground of these considerations, it is
not unreasonable to suppose that some means will be
sooner or later found for checking legislatures, and
for making sovereignty a more purely executive
organ. The Americans have made a nearer approach
to this than the British have, and some of their best
authorities are of opinion that some means will have
to be devised by us, and that soon, for rendering it less
easy to make changes that affect our constitution.
Our practice seems to them dangerously lax.
The question of legal and political sovereignty has
already been mentioned. The distinction between the
two is so important that it deserves a very full con-
sideration. It has already been said that the British
Parliament is sovereign, because it enjoys unlimited
powers. But every one knows that there is a great
deal which Parliament dare not do, which it might
theoretically do. It might declare murder legal, if
it dared. It is apparent, then, that though it is
legally sovereign, it is not politically sovereign. Its
omnipotence is restricted by what Austin calls positive
morality. There is a political sovereign behind it,
and that political sovereign is the people. Kousseau
was in a great degree right when he said that the
legislator is the servant of the sovereign people. It
may not be true of Eussia or Siam, but is quite true
28 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
of England and France. Burke said that "in all
forms of government the people is the true legislator."
That is too general a statement. It is true of many
forms of government, though not of all. It is only
another way of asserting the growth of democracy,
which is in these days a fact, whether an agreeable
one or not. From the time when Plato spoke con-
temptuously of " the many-headed " until quite
recently, popular rule has been utterly scorned. It
may be even asserted that democracy is a perfectly
modern institution. Mr. Grote, in his monumental
work on the "History of Greece," went to much pains
to defend the Athenian democracy. Yet, when it is
considered that what are now called the lower classes
were represented by slaves in Greece, it may well be
doubted whether Athens was a democracy at all. It
was a republic, no doubt, but a republic is not neces-
sarily a democracy. Democracy is simply the rule of
the majority. However that may be (putting ancient
history aside), democracy is a modern institution.
The mediaeval republics of Italy were probably more
oligarchical than democratic. Lord Bacon declared
that he hated the word " people." Cardinal Granvelle,
the ally of Spain in its conflict with popular liberties
in the Netherlands, spoke of the people as " a vile and
mischievous animal." Even Pope could write of the
aristocracy of his time
" So much they scorn the crowd, that if the throng
By chance go right, they purposely go wrong."
But at the present time, in all civilized communities,
except Bussia and the East, Sri/uog is king. It is
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 29
clear, therefore, that there have now arisen two inde-
pendent sovereignties in the state the legal sovereign
and the political sovereign. It becomes, therefore, an
important question how far these two sovereignties can
be made to work in harmony. If no means can be
found to secure this harmonious working, there will
be civil conflict and strife. There can be no middle
course, for the conduct of one can by no means be a
matter of indifference to the other. This end is
obtained in different ways in different forms of govern-
ment; and there are few things more interesting in
politics than an examination of what these different
ways are. In the British Islands, this end is to some
extent reached by the firm hold which the legislature
has taken of the executive. It is true that the
monarch, who centres in himself the executive, holds
an hereditary office. But he is only a formal head,
who acts upon the advice of his Prime Minister, who
is the real head. Now, as the Prime Minister is de-
pendent upon a popularly elected House of Commons,
the people obtain, in roundabout fashion, a control
over the acts of the hereditary monarch. The same
thing may be truly said of all constitutional monarchies,
and it is also true of such a President as the French
President, who acts upon the advice of the French
Prime Minister. In the United States, the President
is elected directly by an electoral college and ulti-
mately by the people. And though the popular will
has been largely ignored under the exigencies of the
electoral machines, still the people have a strong hold
over the President. A President who defies the popular
30 essays m POLITICS.
will bids good-bye to all chances of re-election. But
this is not all. In England the harmonious co-
operation of the legal and political sovereignties is in
a great degree secured by what are known as " con-
stitutional conventions." Their nature is admirably
explained by Professor Dicey in his " Law of the
Constitution." " Their object is," he says, " to give
effect to the will of the political sovereign ; they are
precepts for determining the mode and spirit in which
the prerogative is to be exercised." The word pre-
rogative is one of which it is not easy to grasp the
full meaning. It has a history which is suggestive of
despotism, and savours of monarchical interference.
The popular idea of it was expressed by Lord John
Russell, when he said that if the sword of pre-
rogative was drawn, it was time to be prepared with
the shield and buckler of popular privileges. The
prerogative of the Crown is still much greater than is
commonly supposed. Mr. Bagehot wrote of the powers
of the Queen as follows : " Not to mention other things,
she could disband the army (by law she cannot engage
more than a certain number of men, but she is not
obliged to engage any men) ; she could dismiss all the
officers, from the general commanding-in-chief down-
wards; she could dismiss all the sailors too; she
could sell off all our ships of war, and all our naval
stores; she could make peace by the sacrifice of
Cornwall, and begin a new war for the conquest of
Brittany. She could make every citizen in the United
Kingdom, male or female, a peer; she could make
every parish in the United Kingdom a university ; she
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 31
could dismiss most of the civil servants ; she could
pardon all offenders." It is clear, then, that the pre-
rogative is very large ; but in whatever way it was
once used, it is now used in such a manner as to ensure
the supremacy of the true political sovereign, or the
people. It is, in the words of Professor Dicey,
"nothing else than the residue of discretionary or
arbitrary authority, which at any given time is legally
left in the hands of the Crown," and is now always used
in the manner indicated. It was long before the Crown
acquiesced in this view of the exercise of the pre-
rogative, and it was sometimes supported by its ad-
visers. Lord Shelburne, for instance, said that "he
would never consent that the King of England should
be a king of the Mahrattas ; for among the Mahrattas
the custom is, it seems, for a certain number of great
lords to elect a peishwah, who is thus the creature of
the aristocracy, and is vested with the plenitude of
power, w 7 hile their king is, in fact, nothing more than
a royal pageant." George the Third strongly objected
to being nothing more than a royal pageant, and made
strenuous endeavours to govern as well as reign. But
the House of Commons put a check upon kingly pre-
tensions by affirming, in 1780, Mr. Dunning's resolu-
tion, " that the influence of the Crown has increased, is
increasing, and ought to be diminished." Perhaps the
best example of the way in which the Crown uses its
prerogative to ensure harmony between the legal and
political sovereigns is tbat involved in the dissolution
of Parliament. In 1784 George the Third dismissed a
ministry which had the confidence of the House of
32 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Commons, because he thought that the wishes of the
legislature diverged from those of the nation. He
was, as the result showed, right in his belief. In 1834
William the Fourth dismissed a ministry on the same
grounds, though events showed that his action was not
justified by the facts. The dissolution of Parliament
in 1841, though in less striking degree than the
examples already given, is a good example of the use
of the prerogative. That Parliament was elected to
support the interests of Protection, but it committed
itself to the policy of Free Trade. It was chosen to
substitute Sir E. Peel for Lord John Eussell, but it
restored Lord John Kussell to the position from which
Sir Eobert Peel had driven him. It therefore became
very apparent that the legislature and the electors
might well be at variance, and a dissolution was justly
considered necessary. The demand for triennial
Parliaments is invariably made, it should be observed,
by the party in opposition, on the ground that Parlia-
ment has ceased to represent the popular feeling. A
very strong use of the prerogative was made in 1871,
when Mr. Gladstone failed to get through the Lords a
Bill for the abolition of purchase in the army, which
had been passed by the Commons. The Queen, on his
advice, thereupon abolished the system in virtue of her
prerogative. The act was strongly objected to at the
time by the late Mr. Fawcett and others, but there can
be little doubt it tended to harmonize the legal and
political sovereigns. It is somewhat singular that in
the last session of Parliament Mr. Gladstone objected
that it was an encroachment upon the prerogative to
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 33
introduce a Bill for the cession of Heligoland, when
such a Bill might have been dispensed with. But this
really was not the case, as Mr. Gladstone's own action
in 1871 shows. In either case the political sovereignty
of the people is assured. If the House of Commons is
in harmony with the electors, there can be no objection
to procedure by Bill ; if they are not in harmony, -or if
the Lords are obstructive, the prerogative can override
them both, and the people will prevail. /ui^^^
The most direct and the simplest way of ensuring
the supremacy of the political sovereign is to be found
in Switzerland. The method in operation there is
one of the political curiosities of the world. Nowhere
else in the world can it be found in a fully developed
state. This is a device by whioh, when the circum-
stances provided by the constitution demand it, Bills
before the Federal Legislature (or the Canton Legis-
lature, as the case may be) are referred to direct
popular vote. In addition to this, in some of the
cantons the people are enabled to introduce legis-
lation by means of the " Initiative." But the Refer-
endum is by far the most important of the two. It
is obvious that in this way the people of Switzerland
get a most complete control over their legislature.
Strictly speaking, no doubt, the legislature is not
legally sovereign, for, as the Swiss constitution is
rigid, it has strictly limited powers. But, for all
practical purposes, we may consider it legally sovereign,
and if we do so, it will be at once seen, by means of
the Referendum, that the political sovereign of Switzer-
land is brought into harmonious relations with the
34 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
legal sovereign. The latter can by no means override
the will of the former; on the contrary, if a conflict
arises, the latter must automatically, so to speak, give
way.
Whether the Referendum should be introduced
into the British constitution or not, is a question that
has given rise to considerable discussion, and much
difference of opinion. Professor Bryce thinks that its
introduction would be advantageous. It would transfer
the power of dissent or the royal prerogative of vetoing
legislation from the Crown to the people. This would
be beneficial, inasmuch as it would withdraw legis-
lation from the absolute control of party political feel-
ing, make members of Parliament more independent,
and lessen the influence of cliques and sections. Pro-
fessor Bryce is, however, fully alive to its difficulties.
He sees that it would be difficult of application in a
country as large and as populous as the United King-
dom. Moreover, it would be difficult to define the
particular class of Bills to which it should be applied.
Supposing it were to be confined to Bills proposing
constitutional changes only, it would sometimes be
difficult to say whether certain changes were strictly
constitutional or not. Then, again, there are certain
measures, which are of far greater importance than
some constitutional changes, which, upon this sup-
position, would not be submitted to the Referendum.
A difficulty, also, would arise over the means of testing
separately English, Scotch, and Irish opinion. Lastly,
useful measures, which did not happen to excite general
interest, would run great risk of being rejected. This
SOME QUESTIONS OF SOVEREIGNTY. 35
is shown to have actually happened in Switzerland.
The amount of political apathy in the country is larger
than is commonly supposed. The number of abstainers
from voting can only be accounted for in this way.
Madame de Stael used to say, " Parler politique, pour
moi c'est vivre." The ordinary voter is very far from
being in a like case. On the contrary, as Conversation
Sharpe said, most men like to have their thinking, like
their washing, done out. Professor Dicey, too, makes
two far-reaching objections to its introduction. He
thinks, first, that it would lower the importance of
Parliament ; and, secondly, that it would be an appeal
from a higher class to a lower class. It is a remark-
able thing, too, that Mr. G-rote, the champion of democ-
racy, severely condemned the Eeferendum when it was
first introduced into the constitution of Lucerne.
Whether Professor Dicey 's objections are well founded
or not is doubtful. It will be answered differently,
according to the estimation in which Parliament is
held by different minds. His objections will have no
weight with those who despise Parliament, and place
the people above their representatives. If, however,
the Eeferendum should at any time be introduced into
the British constitution, it would mark the consum-
mation of a tendency that has been long developing.
This tendency is the transfer of authority from the
Crown to the people. By it the royal prerogative of
veto would be transferred to the people. At one time
this prerogative of the Crown was a very real power.
In the year 1597, Elizabeth is said to have vetoed
forty-eight bills out of ninety-three. William III.
36 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
vetoed five bills, and in 1757 it was made use of for
the last time by Anne, over a Scotch Militia Bill.
This power, has long ceased to be exercised. It is a
weapon which the Crown has long feared to use. But
by means of the Keferendum it would be transferred
to the people, who, having nothing to fear, would use
it with the same freedom that the Crown did. In the
hands of the people, the weapon that lay unsheathed
and rusty in the royal armoury would be bright and
burnished. This at least would be a change for the
better.
" How dull it is to pause, to make an end,
To rust unburnished, not to shine in use ! "
Isocrates long ago expressed an opinion that the men
of wealth and leisure should be the servants of the
people, and that the people should, in his own emphatic
words, be a tyrant. The introduction of the Keferen-
dum would still leave the opinion of Isocrates in the
realm of ideals, and a counsel of perfection. It would,
however, make doubly true the saying that democracy
is monarchy inverted. It would ensure, also, the con-
tinuance of harmony between the legal and political
sovereigns a harmony that will alone prevent democ-
racy from falling into anarchy, and which, if unattained
and unattainable, would relegate the rule of the people
to the limbo of impracticable ideals.
( 37 )
II.
FEDEEAL GOVERNMENT.
We live in an age of union. Individuals now unite
and agree to sink their differences for all kinds of
purposes, whether for private gain or for propagating
views, or attaining ends, in morals, politics, religion,
science, or art. It is a time of associations, unions, and
leagues. And so it is with states. They are in this
respect the man writ large. For one of the most
remarkable phenomena in politics of the last hundred
years is the impetus that has been given to the develop-
ment of federal institutions. There are to-day con-
temporaneously existing no less than ten distinct
federal governments. First and foremost " is the
United States of America, where we have an example
of the federal union in the most perfect form yet
attained. Then comes Switzerland, of less importance
than the United States, but most nearly approaching
it in perfection. Again, there is the German Empire,
that great factor in European politics, which is a truly
federal union, but a cumbrous one, and full of anomalies.
Next in importance comes the Dominion of Canada,
which, except the West Indian Leeward Islands, is
the only example of a country forming a federal
38 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
union, and at the same time a colony. Then come
the Argentine Kepublic, Mexico, and the states of
Colombia and Venezuela. Last in point of time is
Brazil, which first dismissed its Emperor, and then
proceeded to federate its vast and thinly peopled
provinces. It now calls itself the United States of
Brazil.
This is a very remarkable list, when we consider
that never before the present century did more than
two federal unions ever co-exist, and that very rarely,
and that even those unions were far from satisfying
the true requirements of federation. Nor is this all.
Throughout the last hundred years we can mark a
growing tendency in countries that have adopted the
federal type of government to perfect that federal
type, and make it more truly federal than before. In
the United States of America, for instance, the Con-
stitution of 1789 was more truly federal than the
Confederation, and certainly since <hp civil war we
hear less of state rights, and more of union. It has,
indeed, been remarked that the citizens of the United
States have become fond of applying the words
" nation " and " national " to themselves in a manner
formerly unknown. We can mark the same progress
in Switzerland. Before 1789 Switzerland formed a
very loose system of confederated states. There was
then little more than an alliance of Cantons, that
received and sent their own embassies. The founders
of the American union deliberately rejected it as a
model for this very reason. But in 1815 a constitution
more truly federal was devised ; in 1848 the federal
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 39
union was more firmly consolidated ; and, lastly, in
1874 such changes were made in the constitution,
that Switzerland now presents a fairly perfect example
of federal government. In Germany we may trace a
similar movement. In 1815 the Germanic confede-
ration was formed, but it was only a system of con-
federated states, or what the Germans call Staatenbund ;
but after various changes, amongst others the exclusion
of Austria in 1866, it became in 1871 a composite
state, or, in German language, a Bundestaat.
So far we have dealt with accomplished facets.
Tendencies in the direction of federation still remain,
some of them at present insignificant, and some fraught
with great consequences. We will take the minor
ones first. In South Africa attempts have been made
to federate the South African colonies and states, so
far without success. The nearest approach to it is
the Customs Union, which exists between Cape Colony
and the Orange Free State. It is said, however, to
be part of the policy of Mr. Cecil Ehodes, the present
Premier at the Cape, to try to carry out federation.
And when it is considered that the feelings of antipathy
between the Dutch and English residents are sub-
siding, that railways are spreading, and that the
Transvaal is being rapidly Anglicized, it must be
admitted that the dream is not an idle one. It is a
long way from South Africa to Central America. But
even in backward Central America federation has
been in the air, and San Salvador and Guatemala
came to blows over this very question quite recently.
The federation of the Leeward Islands has already
40 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
been named, and it is interesting to observe that these
islands enjoyed a federal union from the time of
William and Mary until the end of last century.
The union then fell to pieces, but was reconstituted
in Mr. Gladstone's first administration. Bat the note-
worthy point here is the spread of federal ideas in the
West Indies. Some sort of union already exists
between Jamaica and Turk's Island, Trinidad and
Tobago, and amongst the Windward Islands, and there
is a growing feeling towards federation. Federation
is regarded by some as the destination of the Balkan
Principalities, but the idea is at present quite without
the range of practical politics.
There remain some manifestations of tendency
towards federation of much greater importance. The
first of these is Australian federation. This has been
in a large measure accomplished. In -the year 1886
a Bill passed the Imperial Parliament to permit the
formation of an Australasian Council for the purpose
of forming the Australasian colonies into a federation.
This Council has actually been formed, but so far
New South Wales and New Zealand have failed to
come in. It is authorized to legislate directly with
regard to Australasian interests in the Pacific, Aus-
tralasian fisheries, services of process in other colonies,
extradition, and the influx of criminals. In other
matters, with regard to which the colonies themselves
can legislate, action by the Council can only be taken
after two colonies have brought the matter before the
Council, and even then, any acts passed by the Council
affect those colonies only by whose legislatures the
FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 4L
matters in question have been referred to it. This
Council has met several times, and seems likely to grow
in favour and authority. Sir Samuel Griffith, the
Premier of Queensland, announced a short time ago,
at the opening of his Parliament, that it was intended
to divide Queensland into three federal provinces, and
he went on to say that he expected that this group of
Queensland states would pass under the control of an
Australian Federal Parliament. This statement, coming
as it did from the Queensland Premier, is a most im-
portant one, and clearly shows that Australian federa-
tion is sure to come sooner or later. New South Wales
at first refused to entertain the idea, but she took part
in the Federation Congress held at Melbourne in
February, '1890. Sir Henry Parkes, the Premier of
New South Wales, is quite enthusiastic over it, and,
in advocating it to his Australian fellow-countrymen,
he reminded them of the crimson thread of their
common kinship. It seems, therefore, almost certain
that Australian federation will be accomplished. Mr.
Brunton Stephens writes the following significant lines
in the Australian National Anthem, which he has lately
composed;:
"Let us united stand,
One great Australian band,
Heart to heart, hand in hand."
Poets are sometimes the first to cateh the rising spirit
of the age, and sing the strains of prophecy. It is,
indeed, within measurable distance of consummation.
Australasian federation, which would unite not only
the Australian colonies and Tasmania, but also New
42 ESSAYS IN POLITICS*
Zealand and Fiji, is less probable, because the great
distance of New Zealand and Fiji from Australia throw-
difficulties in the way.
Australian federation leads to the consideration of
another tendency in the direction of federal union.
This is the great idea of Imperial Federation. Of this
all that can be said at present is that it is under
discussion. It presents enormous difficulties, and if
it comes at all, it is almost sure to come as a natural
growth out of present circumstances. Lastly, we hear
of further aspirations for applying the federal system,
as though there were some peculiar virtue or talisman ic
effect about it, which rendered it a panacea for all
political troubles. Some people think they see a
simple solution of the Irish question in the application
of federation, particularly the Canadian form of it, to
Ireland.
Federation, therefore, has clearly become a very
practical question for the British people, and it is
obviously necessary to clearly understand its nature.
For no one can possibly speak with any approach to
correctness on Imperial or Irish federation, unless he
understands the nature of a federal union and its
practical results.
Moreover, quite apart from practical politics, it has
a distinct theoretical interest of its own. In the first
place, it was until recently, a very rare product of.
the human mind. We only know of three well-marked
federations which existed prior to the foundation of
the United States of America. The first belongs to
the ancient world, and to the second and third centuries
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 43
B.C. namely, the Achoean League which is interest-
ing, if for no other reason than that Hamilton, the
master architect of the American constitution, longed
to know more about it. The second is Swiss, which,
taking its origin as the old league of Upper Germany
in the thirteenth century, has lasted in various forms
to the present day. The third is the United Nether-
lands, which arose at the end of the sixteenth century
and lasted to the end of the eighteenth. In the next
place, federal government is the highest and most
complicated of all forms of government, and demands
for its successful development some of the highest
elements of political morality. It is, therefore, very
interesting, when considered in the light of the natural
history of political institutions. It is the roof and
crown of things political, and forms the concluding
member of a series. Beginning with the individual
man as the first of the series, we may go through the
family, the tribe, the state, in all its varying degrees
of development, and finally arrive at that union of
states which is known as the federal union. In the
language of biology, it may be considered as the full
development of what was originally a very simple
growth. It is the final result of evolution in institu-
tions of government. The complexities of federation
are doubtless the reason why it has developed so late
in human history, and it is worthy of note that the
first example of it we meet with was the creation of
the Greeks, a people endowed with a singular genius
for politics, both in the abstract and in their practical
application.
44 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Again, it is interesting, because in it we are enabled
to watch the wheels of government moving on a large
scale. We have no need of a microscopic eye to watch
it. There is something grand and titanic ahout it,
when it is viewed working on the scale on which it
now works in the United States of America. It is not
a matter of observing the minutiae of the parish, the
township, the county, or any municipal institution,
but the more impressive acts of states, sovereign within
their own limits, combining to form a united govern-
ment. The observance of federal government is, com-
pared with the observance of merely municipal and
strictly local phenomena, what the observance of the
movements of the heavenly bodies, describing their
illimitable ellipses and parabolas, is to the observance
of the movements of bacilli through the lens of the
microscope.
Both from its practical and theoretical aspect, it is
evident, then, that federal government is well worthy
of study. And when a thing is made an object of
study, it is no unreasonable demand that a definition
of it should be given. But definition is at all times
difficult, and no wise man ever ventures to define
unless under some necessity. It is almost a hopeless
task, not unlike that imposed on the daughters of
Danaus; for it is nearly impossible to fill up the out-
line of a definition that will hold water. And the man
who defines may consider himself lucky if he meets
with no worse fate than that ancient philosopher, who,
having defined man as a " featherless biped," was pre-
sented with a feathered fowl in proof of the worthless-
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 45
cess of his assertion. And when an attempt is made
to define something intangible and impalpable, the
difficulty becomes far greater. It is better, therefore,
not to attempt to define federal government, but as
accurately as may be, to set forth its most salient
characteristics.
It must, in the first place, be kept distinct from other
political unions, such as mere alliances of defence and
offence, of which the present Triple Alliance is an
example on the one hand, and on the other hand such
personal unions under the same crown as Norway and
Sweden, Belgium and the Congo Free State, and such
real unions under one parliament, as the kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland, and even such a union as
that of Austria and Hungary, which, to some extent,
resembles a federal union.
A federal union has its origin under very peculiar
circumstances, and perhaps the best way of arriving
at a clear conception of federal government is to
examine the causes that give it creation. " Vere
scire est per causas scire," says Lord Bacon ; and this
is certainly true here. The people who desire federal
union must be placed in peculiar circumstances; it
has been put well and shortly in this way that they
must desire union, but not desire unity. And it will
generally be found that this state of affairs arises under
extreme external pressure. The people who unite to
form a federal union find that they cannot stand alone,
and in order to preserve their independence, they are
compelled in the direction of union ; but though they
desire the strength acquired from the putting together
46 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
of common resources, they still desire to retain their
independence. The United Netherlands feared Spain.
The revolted colonies of North America feared that
their independence would fall a sacrifice to British
selfishness, and it is expressly laid down in the Articles
of Confederation that the various states united " for
common defence." Switzerland is perhaps the most
remarkable example of all. The Helvetic Kepublic
is a most notable union of dissimilar elements. One
may well ask in amazement what in common has the
French-speaking citizen of Geneva with the German-
speaking citizen of Zurich and the Italian-speaking
citizen of Lugano ? One may well wonder how it is
that the Ultramontane of Lucerne and the Calvinist
of Zurich ever came to unite at all. We shall see
hereafter that, as a matter of fact, the union was only
accomplished with difficulty. Then, again, the very
geography of the country seems to forbid union.
Torn up and divided by giant mountains, Switzerland
seems the predestined of nature for separation, and
not union. The cause is not far to seek. The Swiss,
be) 7 ond all others, love freedom and local autonomy.
They are surrounded by great and powerful neigh-
bours, who even now might proceed to its partition
but for the treaty made at the Congress of Vienna in
1815, which guarantees perpetual neutrality to Swiss
territory. It has been pointed out by a writer in the
Bevue des Deux Mondes that Switzerland is hemmed
almost on all sides by the members of the Triple
Alliance, who would not, in case of need, be over-
scrupulous in respecting this neutrality. Union is
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 47
life to the Swiss, and the very charter of their exist-
ence, and this they have fully recognized. The Union
first of all consisted only of eight Cantons, but it has
gone on increasing, and now numbers twenty-two, and,
as we have seen, has become more and more consolidated.
The same may be said of the German Empire ; for,
though it was in 1871, at the conclusion of a great war,
that the present German Constitution was formed, yet it
was the trial of the war that made the separate States
see how important union was, and made the possible
results of disunion stand out in full relief in all their
glaring hideousness. The Dominion of Canada has a
somewhat different origin. It cannot be said that the
federal union of Canada was formed under conditions
of great external pressure. It was, however, seen that
a federal union might prove a solution for the difficult
problem of governing the various Canadian provinces,
and it must not be forgotten that Canada has for a
neighbour the Colossus of the United States, taking
in at a stride a large portion of a continent from ocean
to ocean, and that the pressure of the United States
on the separate and disunited provinces of Canada
might prove irresistible. Indeed, there can be no
doubt that the mere presence of the United States
did much to create the Canadian union of 1867.
Canada seems naturally as ill-adapted for union as
Switzerland. It contains two races of different tongues
and different creeds that are fiercely opposed. These
are the French and British. The census of 1881
showed that Canada contained a population of 1,300,000
French, of whom 1,000,000 lived in the single province
48 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
of Quebec. The French Koman Catholics of Quebec
might well feel ill disposed to union with the Pro-
testant British of the other provinces. At that time,
too, when there were no railways, the commercial
interests of the different provinces were opposed. Such
trade as there was lay, not between the provinces them-
selves, but with the United States. The trade of
Quebec was with the New England States, and that
of Ontario and Manitoba with the Western States. It
became evident, therefore, that a disunited Canada
was drifting towards absorption in the United States,
and the only safeguard lay in the creation of a federal
tie. And, strange though it may appear, the French
colonists were even more eager than the British to
avoid absorption by the United States. For the
French very well knew that their racial idiosyncrasies
would receive scant attention if they were once
swamped and swallowed up amongst the vast popula-
tion of their American neighbours. As it is, they
are treated tenderly in the Dominion. French, for
instance, can be spoken in the Dominion Parliament,
but it may safely be asserted that the American Con-
gress would never tolerate that. It should not be
forgotten, however, with regard to Canadian federation,
that it is not universally deemed to be a success.
Professor G-oldwin Smith, for instance, has used his
great literary powers to demonstrate its failure to the
whole world. He has gibbeted Canadian union as a
warning beacon to all constitution-makers of the future.
This view is, however, held by quite a small minority,
and the feeling in favour of federation seems to grow
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 49
rather than diminish. The result of the blow dealt
at Canadian trade by the United States, by what is
known as the M'Kinley Act, is that the Canadians
begin to think of bringing Newfoundland and the
West Indian Islands into their federal union.
It has been said that a federal union owes its crea-
tion to external pressure. There are, however, some
instances that do not appear to have originated in this
way. Such, for instance, are the Mexican and South
American federations, or, again, the Brazilian. The
United States of Brazil were certainly not created
under pressure. The same may be said of the present
tendency to Australian federation. It is conceivable
and even probable that, if a serious disagreement arose
between the Australian colonies and the mother-
country, the colonies would at once unite to present a
common front, just as our American colonies did. It
is,\however, said, on the other hand, that Australian
federation is really a step towards Imperial federation,
because the Colonial Office would find it much easier
to deal with a united Australia than a number of dis-
tinct colonies. However that may be, there do appear
to be exceptions, where external pressure has had
nothing to do with federation. The fact appears to be
that the earliest and greatest of federal unions arose
in the manner described, but that in subsequent cases
federation was adopted as possessing obvious advan-
tages inherent in it quite apart from its origin. More-
over, it must be remembered that it is possible for a
federal union to grow up in a converse way from that
which has been usual. It may arise from a wish to
E
50 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
loosen and not to strengthen a tie. This appears to be
the case with Brazil. It has ceased to be a compact and
undivided State, and become instead a federal union.
The first condition, therefore, for a federal union is
the desire for union without the desire for unity. The
problem is, how to carry out this apparently para-
doxical desire. And it must be confessed that it is
not an easy problem. Some of the federal unions of
the world have been preceded by more or less close
alliances between the states desiring union, and then
the problem is not quite so difficult, because the ground
has been to some extent prepared, and the formation
of the strictly federal union is only carrying out to its
ultimate result a principle already tacitly adopted.
This has been the case in Switzerland and Germany.
But when there has been no preceding alliance, the
case is far otherwise, and we then witness a very
striking scene in the drama of national life. We see
nothing less than the voluntary abdication by sove-
reign states of some of the most precious attributes of
sovereignty. And this comes about from the very
necessity of the problem to be solved. The several
sovereign states voluntarily surrender into the hands
of another sovereign body that portion of their sove-
reignty which for the purposes of union they must of
necessity surrender. It is true that this sovereign
body is the voluntary creation of the several states,
but it is a sovereign body none the less. And that
portion of their sovereignty that the separate states do
surrender is always, at least, that portion which is
concerned with foreign relations ; such as diplomacy,
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 51
foreign commerce, questions of peace and war, and
naval and military affairs. The separate states desire
to present a common external front to foreign powers,
so they must of necessity each surrender the conduct
of their own foreign relations. What a reluctant sur-
render this might be can be imagined from the possible
creation of a Balkan federation under the pressure of
Russia. It would be a bitter pill for such proud states
as Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro. And after the
surrender of the conduct of foreign relations comes
sooner or later that of the conduct of internal affairs
of common national interest, such as currency, posts,
and telegraphs. But the separate states still remain
sovereign in everything else. This is well brought
out by Article II. of the Constitution of the United
States of America : " Every State retains its sovereignty,
freedom, and independence." Sovereignty must here
mean sovereignty within the limits of the constitution,
and not sovereignty in the sense given to the term in
International Law.
We now see that a federal government implies a
union of several bodies, each sovereign within its own
sphere. First, there is the federal union, sovereign
within its sphere, which includes, at least, the conduct
of foreign relations; secondly, there are the several
states, each sovereign within its own sphere. It will be
seen, then, that federal union is a matter of contract, and,
further than this, that it is a matter of compromise.
The architect of a federal union has before him a variety
of conflicting forces, some moving in one way, and some
in another. His problem is one of social dynamics.
52 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
How can he compound these conflicting forces and
make them all move together ? The mere statement
of the problem shows its difficulty. "Every great
creation," says M. Benan, " involves a breach of equili-
brium, a violent state of being which draws it forth."
And this is quite true of the creation of federal con-
stitutions. It is the reason why the Americans look
on their Constitution with such pardonable pride, and
ascribe heroic, almost divine attributes to the founders-
of it. " For myself," said Lord Chatham, " I must
declare and avow that in the master states of the world
I know not the people or senate who, in such a com-
plication of difficult circumstances, can stand before
the delegates of America assembled in general congress-
in Philadelphia."
These are high words of praise, and may seem
exaggerated, but they are not. The founders of the
American Union solved a great problem with almost
nothing to guide them, and created a federal govern-
ment which will be the model of all federal govern-
ments for the future. The task of any one who had to
construct a federal government was thenceforth com-
paratively easy, for the constitution of the United
States of America stood as a model. The Brazilians^
for instance, have adopted that constitution almost en
Hoc. With the founders of the American Constitution
it was far otherwise, for they had few and imperfect
models to follow. But they achieved a remarkable
success, for, notwithstanding the severe trials it has
gone through, the American Constitution still stands-
to-day unimpaired,
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 53
" And like a surly oak, with storms perplexed,
Grows still the stronger, strongly vexed."
The American Constitution lias some grave faults, but
it is not too much to say that some of the gravest of
them are not by any means necessarily incidental to
federal institutions.
AVe have now seen that the problem is how to adjust
aright the claims of conflicting sovereignties. What
rights are to be given to the federal union, and what
to the separate states ? Evidently it must be a matter
of compromise, and will vary with the necessities of
each case as it arises. The plan adopted in the United
States is thus described in the Federalist : (i The
powers delegated by the Constitution to the Federal
Government are few and defined. Those which are to
remain in the State Governments are numerous and in-
definite. The former will be exercised principally in
external objects, as war, peace, negotiations, and foreign
commerce. The powers reserved to the several States
will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary
course of affairs, concern the internal order and pros-
perity of the State." To put it another way, it may
be said that the powers not delegated to the Federal
Government nor prohibited to the States are reserved
to the States. It may seem a superfluity to expressly
forbid the Federal Government to do what it is not
authorized to do. Nevertheless the Americans, in ex-
cess of caution, did so forbid it. It should be observed,
too, that the powers permitted to the Federal Govern-
ment, but not exercised by it, may be exercised by the
States, unless they are expressly forbidden. But these
54 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
powers cannot be concurrently exercised by both, and
the States must always give way to the Federal Govern-
ment. The various powers in America seem to have
been distributed somewhat in this way; some have
been given to the Federal Government, others to the
State Governments, and yet a third class to both.
In the Canadian Union the powers are distributed
in quite a contrary way. The Canadian Constitution
confers upon the Dominion Government all powers
which are not assigned exclusively to the Provinces,
so that, while the American Constitution begins by
defining the powers of the Federal Government, the
Canadian begins by defining the powers of the separate
Provinces. There is nothing capricious in this ; on
the contrary, it is founded on a sound historical basis.
The American colonies were virtually sovereign states
coming freely into union, just as the Swiss Cantons
were. It was quite natural, therefore, that the semi-
sovereign states of America, when they came together,
should assign to the Federal Government as few and as
well-defined powers as possible. It was natural, too,
that they should reserve to themselves as many powers
as possible. But the historical growth of the Canadian
Union was quite different. The Provinces were not
virtually sovereign powers, like the American colonies;
they were only divisions of a single colony. Several
results flow from the principles of the Canadian Union.
First, the central or federal power is much stronger in
Canada than it is in the United States. It is much
more like that of Germany. It keeps much more in
its own hands. It regulates the criminal law and the
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 55
law of marriage, appoints the judges and the lieu-
tenant-governors. It controls the militia, and possesses
a veto on provincial legislation. The United States
Federal Government has none of these powers. Then
again it follows that, whilst in the United States the
state rights tend to increase, in Canada the federal
rights tend to increase, because in the one case the
powers of the Federal Government, and, in the other
case, the powers of the separate Provinces, are rigidly
laid down. There is a greater recognition of state
rights in the United States than there is in Canada,
and what is considered to be an inadequate recognition
of state rights is a source of dissatisfaction to some
Canadians. The Honourable Oliver Mowat, the
Premier of Ontario, some few years ago, gave ex-
pression to this feeling. The province of Nova Scotia
has a party that threatens cession from the Union
altogether. The distribution of powers, however, must
be made in either the American or Canadian way, or
in some middle course more or less resembling the one
or the other. Switzerland in this respect resembles
Canada rather than the United States, though the
contrary might have been expected.
This distribution being made, the next problem is
what sort of body is the federal government to be, that
body to which the separate sovereignties agree to
surrender powers so important and so valued as the
conduct of foreign affairs, and how are the various con-
tracting states to participate fairly and equitably in the
federal union? This is accomplished by making the
federal government a representative body, the various
56 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
elements of which are contributed by the different
states. The details vary in each particular case. In
the United States the Federal Government is divided
very distinctly into three separate authorities the
executive, the legislative, and the judicial. The execu-
tive power is invested in the President, who is elected
by popularly elected " electors " in each State. The
legislative power is vested in the Congress, which con-
sists of the Senate and the House of Eepresentatives.
The Senate is elected by the logislaturoa of the different
States, and the House of Eepresentatives by the people
in each State. This different mode of election to the
Senate and House of Eepresentatives is worthy of
note, because in the election to the Senate the prin-
ciple of the sovereignty of the State is recognized,
whereas in the election to the House of Eepresentatives
the principle of the sovereignty of the whole people
of the United States as a nation is recognized. Lastly,
the judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court of
the United States, a most important body, of which
more will be said hereafter. In Switzerland we see
a constitution something like that of the United States,
but the executive, legislative, and judicial authorities
are not nearly so carefully divided. There the legis-
lative power is vested in a Federal Assembly, consisting
of two chambers, a Council of State composed of
deputies from each Canton, and a National Council
appointed directly by the people. The executive is
vested in a Federal Council elected by the Federal
Assembly, and presided over by a President. There is
also a court which performs some of the functions of
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 57
the Supreme Court of the United States. The case
of the German Empire is peculiar, for it forms at best
-a very cumbrous form of federation. This, however,
is not to be wondered at, in the application of federal
institutions to an old country, where local traditions
and customs have taken strong root. The head of the
-German confederation is the King of Prussia, and
the post is of course hereditary. Moreover, many
of the separate states are governed by hereditary
monarchs. This shows, if proof were needed, that a
federal government need not necessarily be republican.
This many people are apt hastily to infer from the
fact that the United States and Switzerland are re-
publican. There is no reason why federal governments
should not be monarchical. Another peculiarity about
the German Empire is that all the States are not
members of the federation on quite an equal footing.
The two states of Bavaria and Wurtemberg have their
armies under the commands of their respective kings,
except in time of peace, when the German Emperor
becomes the Commander-in-Chief of the armies of the
entire empire. The Bundesrath and Keichstag, how-
ever, are the counterparts of the American Senate and
House of Kepresentatives.
The Dominion of Canada is not unlike the United
States. The legislative body consists of a Senate,
whose members are appointed by the Crown, and a
House of Commons elected by popular suffrage.
There is a Supreme Court of Canada, which is the
counterpart of the Supreme Court of the United
States. But there is an appeal from this court to the
oS ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
The executive power is vested in the Queen of Great
Britain and Ireland, and exercised in her name by the
Governor-General. The case of Canada resembles
Germany, in that its head is an hereditary monarch,
but it stands alone (with the exception of the Leeward
Islands) as being at the same time a colony and a
federal union.
We have now seen, from the rough sketch just
given, what are the essential characteristics of a
federal union, and what constitutions the four chief
federal unions of the world have provided to meet the
special difficulties of this form of government. We
are now in a position to note the consequences which
flow from it, and its special difficulties and advantages.
In the first place, we found that federal unions took
their rise for the most part under circumstances of
external pressure. It follows from this that as soon
as the pressure is relaxed, as in many cases must be
the case sooner or later, difficulties will arise ; for
the special conditions to meet which the federal
union was formed have vanished. And even in those
cases where external pressure was not the original
moving cause, circumstances may change, and render
union less desirable than it was. Now, it must be
remembered that the federal union was a compromise
between the state rights and the federal rights, and
the probability is that, on the relaxation of pressure,
these rights will come into conflict. One of the
consequences, then, of a federal union is the almost
certain tendency to disintegration, as soon as the
FEDEEAL GOVERNMENT. 59
circumstances that gave it birth have ceased to be
present. In the language of chemistry, the atoms
that make up the federal molecule tend to dissociate.
The dissociation may be arrested, but the tendency to
it is there nevertheless. This is evidently a dire
source of weakness to a federal union. It is nowhere
so clearly illustrated as in the history of the United
States of America. Even in the time of Washington
it was feared that the union would not hold together.
Washington himself wrote, "We have probably had
too good an opinion of human nature in forming our
confederation. Experience has taught us that men
will not adopt and carry into execution measures the
best calculated for their own good without the inter-
vention of coercive power." In making this remark
about having too good an opinion of human nature,
Washington touched a weak point in federal unions,
for it is the selfishness of the separate states, leading
them to prefer state rights to the union made for the
common good, which usually helps to wreok federal
unions. It may be remarked incidentally that this is
one point which shows federal governments to require
a high political morality, for unselfishness in the
separate states is requisite for its success.
The case of the American union illustrates this. Up
to the time of the civil war, there was a continual
conflict between state rights and federal rights. Even
when not active, the elements of strife were ready at any
moment to break out into eruption. So soon after the
union as 1786 Massachusetts gave signs of disaffection,
and so did Pennsylvania in 1794. In 1812 the States
<30 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
of Connecticut and Massachusetts refused to obey the
President, when he ordered the militia to march to
the frontiers. In 1832 the Ordinance of Nullification
was passed in South Carolina. All these were shadows
cast before by the coming event of the great civil
war. The fact was that each state was selfish for its
own ^interests : one wanted slavery abolished, another
wished it retained ; one wanted protection, another
free trade.
The case of Switzerland, again, forms a very apt
illustration. This is what Mr. Grote says in his
letters on Swiss politics, written some forty years ago :
" What the Cantons mostly stand chargeable with is
the feeling of cantonal selfishness, each being careless
of the interests of the other Cantons as compared with
its own." We know as a matter of fact that, in the
winter of 1846-47, some of the Swiss Cantons would
not allow provisions to pass their frontiers, although
they knew that, owing to a scarcity of provisions,
there was a starving population in the neighbouring
Cantons. Each Canton preferred its own interests to
that of the common good. M. Druey, the Deputy for
Vaud, expressed the feeling very well when he cited
in the Federal Council the proverb, t( My shirt is nearer
to me than my coat." The shirt of cantonal interests
touched the hearts of the Swiss more nearly than the
coat of the federal union. It was even considered
a serious accusation to say that a man was aiming at
unitary and not cantonal government. However, the
result was similar to what occurred in the United
States. There was continual strife; only instead of
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 61
its being a question of slavery or no slavery, protection
or no protection, it took the form of religious con-
troversy. In 1841 the dispute waxed hot over the
right to suppress certain convents in Argau, and the
final result was that seven of the Cantons, namely,
Lucerne, Fribourg, Schwytz, Unterwalden, Uri, Zug,and
Valais, endeavoured to form themselves into a separate
federal union, or Sonclerbund. And this is exactly
what the southern states of America endeavoured to
do. In neither case was success attained, and on both
sides of the Atlantic the principle of unitary govern-
ment has triumphed. It has come out of the trial even
stronger, just as a fractured bone when set is said to
gain resisting power. Nevertheless, disintegration i&
a danger which has to be reckoned with in every
federal union, and there is no good blinding one's eyes
to the fact. " Things," said Bishop Butler, " are what
they are, and consequences will be what they will be.
Why, then, should we desire to be deceived ? " Unless
the union is an agreeable one to all parties, or unless
secession is allowed, a conflict must inevitably follow,
for there can be no peace where opposing interests
clash and refuse to harmonize
" The children bora of these are fire and sword,
Red ruin, and the breaking up of laws."
In a federal union certain things must happen ; for
either the members of the union will prove well-matched
yoke-fellows, or they will not. In the first case, the
union will, in course of time, become a firmly con-
solidated and single state ; in the second case, it will
disintegrate into separate states, either by right
62 ESSAYS IX POLITICS.
of secession, or vi et armis ; or, again, although some
of the states may be recalcitrant, yet they may, by the
superior power of the other states, be welded into one
consolidated mass. In a federal union there are, to
use the language of mechanics, two forces at work,
a centrifugal force and a centripetal force. The one
force tends to make the states fly asunder, the other
to drive them together. A federal union may even be
said to be a transitory form of government. It lies
half-way between complete disunion, and complete
consolidation. Disunion will either some day again re-
sult, or complete consolidation will be the final develop-
ment. A federation may be compared, to use a rather
strong metaphor, to Saturn's rings, which seem to be
in a transitory state between disruption into number-
less satellites or fusion into one solid mass. In America
it appeared at one time as though disintegration would
gain the day, but now it must be confessed that the
tendency is all the other way. Patrick Henry, carried
away by his ardent nature, exclaimed in Congress more
than a hundred years ago, "All America is fused
into one mass. Where are your landmarks and
boundaries of colonies ? They are all thrown down.
The distinction between Virginians, Pennsylvanians,
New Yorkers, and New Englanders exist* no more. I
am not a Virginian, but an American ! " Patrick
Henry was wrong. All America was very far from
being fused into one mass. The landmarks and
boundaries of colonies were too firmly fixed and deeply
set to be swept away in this easy fashion. But the
words, though said prematurely, may some day be truly
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 63
spoken. They are almost true already. Since the
civil war, the right of secession has not only been
denied, but it is hardly even claimed. That book is,
as far as human foresight can go, for ever closed. The
American union is, in the words of Chief Justice
Chase, " an indestructible union of indestructible
states."
As federal governments take their rise under special
conditions, it follows that any attempt to create a
federal union where these conditions are wanting must
most probably end in failure. It has been even
said that the success of federal government does not
depend upon its own merits, but upon the merits of the
race that adopts it. And this is to some extent borne
out by facts. The ill success of the federal unions
of Mexico, Central and South America, is to some
extent due to the fact that federation was inapplicable
to the several countries that adopted it. Federation
probably lays more doors open to intrigue and corrup-
tion than an ordinary single and undivided govern-
ment. This has been conspicuously the case in the
Argentine Eepublic. Since the revolution there, an
examination of the finances of the provinces has
revealed a large amount of reckless waste and corrup-
tion, and the central government has been compelled to
take over their liabilities and the uncompleted public
works, which are the nominal security. At the same
time, all the political failures of South America cannot
fairly be ascribed to federation only. Probably much
is due to the inferior aptitude of the Latin races, as
compared with the Anglo-Saxon, for democracy. How-
64 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
ever that may be, federation was probably adopted too
rashly in the cases where it has not been altogether
successful. It was seen that in the United States
federal government worked well, and the American
constitution was accordingly copied. Brazil has lately
mimicked the United States in the most parrot-like
fashion. It elects its President, Senate, and Chamber of
Deputies for different periods, it is true, but the only
important difference is that the federal district of Kio
Janeiro is to be placed exactly on the same footing as
any other state or province. This reckless adoption of
federal institutions by those for whom it is unsuited, is
about as rational a thing as would be the adoption by
Morocco of parliamentary government, because parlia-
mentary government works well in England. No consti-
tution can be a success unless it is a natural growth,
and in congruity with the particular conditions of the
country which adopts it. If borrowed from other and
very different sources, it will, like some delicate exotic,,
fade away and die.
We have seen that the essence of a federal union is
a division of powers. Now, this is a palpable source of
weakness on the face of it. Divided powers imply
always a lack of strength. The powers are divided
between the federal government and the state govern-
ments. The separate states are always afraid of
having their state rights encroached upon by the
federal government. This has always been the case in
the United States. There from the first there were two
parties the party of state rights, and the party of
federal rights. The party of state rights were afraid
FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 65
of the child of their own creation, for, having helped
to form the federal government, they dreaded its
growing power.
It has been argued by some that the success of the
federal governments of the United States and Switzer-
land shows that the fear of weakness arising from a
divided sovereignty is a mere chimera. A moment's
consideration will show that this is not so. The United
States have not yet been seriously threatened by an
external foe, and so they have not yet been put to a
severe test. Even the war of independence was carried
to a successful issue, not so much by the valour of the
colonists as by French assistance and by the difficul-
ties Great Britain had to meet in opposing a foe
separated by three thousand miles of ocean. We have
already stated that in 1812 the states of Connecticut
and Massachusetts refused to obey the orders of the
President, acting as Commander-in-Chief of the militia.
Such disobedience could only have happened where
there was a weak executive. Neither, again, in the
case of the war against Mexico, was the United States
seriously put to the test. That conflict was a very un-
equal one, and could have no other issue but victory
for the United States. With regard to Switzerland,
we know that it has a guaranteed perpetual neutrality.
So that, as a matter of fact, it is impossible to say that
either the United States or Switzerland have proved
themselves to possess a strong executive, and there are
strong prima facie reasons for believing that in case of
need the executive would be found wanting. It is,
perhaps, not too much to say that if the United States
F
bb ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
had the difficulties to contend with which some Euro-
pean states France, for instance have, its constitution
could not last a day scarcely. The happy circum-
stances of the United States, and the political aptitude
of its citizens, render it a good workable constitution.
Nor is a division of powers the only source of weakness
to a federal union. For the separate states are not
only jealous of the federal government, but they are
jealous of one another. No one state wishes to see
any other state or states taking the lion's share in the
federal government. In Switzerland it is even pro-
vided that the different members of the executive
must come from different Cantons. It is obvious from
this that it might not improbably happen that Swit-
zerland would be deprived of the services of its most
capable citizens. If, for instance, it happened that
three of the most capable citizens of Switzerland all
belonged to the canton of Zurich, Switzerland would
be deprived of the services of two of them. It would
be something like this, if Mr. W. H. Smith and Mr.
Goschen were forbidden to form part of the same
government, because they are both returned by London
constituencies.
A further consequence of a division of powers is a
tendency of a federal government to split up into co-
ordinate and independent authorities, and therefore
there is an uncertainty as to what is the ultimate
sovereign body. Something about this has been said
in a previous essay, so it must be enough here to note
the salient points of the matter. In the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Ireland we know where the
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 67
ultimate sovereignty is. It is the Imperial Parliament.
But in the United States it is not so easy to point out
where the ultimate sovereignty really is. It is cer-
tainly not in the state legislatures, and it is not in
Congress. For Congress may pass a Bill which the
Supreme Court may afterwards decide to be ultra vires
and illegal. The Acts of Congress are legally exactly
like bye-laws passed by a local authority. Congress
and the Supreme Court are independent and co-or-
dinate authorities. It is provided by Article Y. of the
American Constitution, that the Constitution may be
amended by the joint action of three-fourths of the
States belonging to the union, and ultimate sovereignty
must be here if anywhere. In the Canadian Constitu-
tion the ultimate sovereignty lies, if anywhere, in the
British Crown. These ultimate depositories of sove-
reign power usually slumber, and are hardly ever
invoked. But whether they be the ultimate sovereign
powers or not, there can be no doubt of the tendency
of sovereign power in federal governments to divide
itself into co-ordinate and independent authorities, and
this is a source of weakness.
The mention of the Supreme Court brings us to the
consideration of another very important consequence
of a federal union, and that is the necessity for a strong
judicial body. Where powers are divided amongst
different bodies, each sovereign within its own limits,
it is clear that occasions must arise when the legality
of the acts of these different bodies will be called in
question. It is also clear that there must be some
third independent authority to decide whether the
68 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
acts called in question are legal or not, and that this
body must be a judicial body. This body is, in the
United States, the Supreme Court, and a very remark-
able court it is, for it is probably the first institution
of its kind that history has to show. The Dominion of
Canada has a similar court in its Supreme Court, and
Switzerland has something like it in its Bundesgericht.
But in Switzerland judicial and executive functions
are not clearly distinguished, for some points of law
are reserved for the consideration of the Federal Coun-
cil. In no country, except perhaps England, is the
judiciary kept so independent of and distinct from the
executive and legislature as in the United States.
Both in France and Switzerland the legislature claims
the right of taking its own view of the constitution,
and the Swiss Federal Court is bound to enforce every
law of the federal legislature, even though it may con-
sider the law unconstitutional. But quite an opposite
state of things exists in the United States. The
Supreme Court will declare an Act of Congress ultra
vires with as little compunction as the High Court in
England would in the case of a bye-law passed by
some insignificant town council. There is a certain
splendour about the Supreme Court of the United
States. At its bar we see pleading semi-sovereign and
independent states, for it is the function of the Supreme
Court to decide questions of the legality or illegality
of the acts of bodies sovereign within the limits allowed
by the constitution. In this way it comes about that
the constitution cannot be understood by a mere
perusal of the Articles of the constitution. For the
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 69
constitution lies as much in the Law Reports of the
United States as it lies in the Articles. The United
States had the good fortune to have its Supreme Court
early presided over by a Chief Justice of pre-eminent
strength, and the result is that the name of Chief Justice
Marshall must rank along with the names of Hamilton
and others as one of the founders of the constitution.
The weakness resulting from a division of powers
has already been referred to. But it has been treated,
so far, rather from its external than from its internal
aspect. There is, however, an internal weakness.
Suppose, for instance, a citizen of the United States
refused to obey a decree of the Supreme Court. What
happens? This is no theoretical difficulty, for it
has actually arisen. " John Marshall," said Jackson,
" has delivered his judgment ; let him now execute it,
if he can." This difficulty has been got over largely
in the United States by a provision in the constitution
that the decrees of the Supreme Court shall affect the
individuals that come under the decree personally, not
as citizens of this State or that State, but as citizens of
the United States, and that the carrying out of the
decrees shall be left to the Federal Government, and not
to the State governments. A decree of the f Supreme
Court will run against a man in exactly the same
manner in any state whatsoever he may happen to
reside. But this is not the whole difficulty, for some-
times a State may support one of its citizens in an
attempt to evade a decree of the Supreme Court, or it
may itself endeavour to evade such a decree. The
only answer to this is that a State acting in this way
70 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
would be openly in a state of rebellion. No State could
venture to act in this way and continue to profess alle-
giance to the Union. So that whilst on the one hand
no individual would dare to defy the whole force of the
Union, on the other hand a State would pause long
before it committed an act of open rebellion. And in
this way the difficulty is rather a theoretical than a
practical one. It is worth noticing, however, that in
Switzerland the relation of the Federal Government to
a rebellious Canton is theoretically different from the
relation of the American Federal Government to a re-
bellious State. The Swiss constitution allows the
Federal Government to proceed against the rebellious
Canton as a Canton. The American Constitution only
allows the Federal Government to proceed against the
citizens of a rebellious State as individuals, and not
against the State as a State. The State is not considered
to be rebellious, but its citizens are. But in both
countries the Federal Government is allowed to employ
federal troops to suppress disturbances in the various
States or Cantons. The Swiss Federal Government
lately employed federal troops to suppress a revolution
in Ticino.
The advantages and disadvantages of the American
federal union have been fully described by Mr.
Bryce in his great work on the American Common-
wealth; and much of what he says is applicable to
federations generally. Some of the disadvantages
have already been referred to, namely, the tendencies
to weakness in the conduct of foreign affairs and in
internal control. One source of weakness in foreign
FEDEKAL GOVEKNMENT. 71
affairs arises from the fact that what may be of vital
interest to one member of the union may be of no
interest whatever to the other members. A fishery
dispute with Great Britain might be of vital impor-
tance to a New England State, but of no importance
whatever to Nevada or California. Another source
of weakness arises from a tendency for states having
like interests to combine together. This has actually
happened in the case of the New England States, and
that of South Carolina and the Gulf States, and it
has also happened in Switzerland in the case of the
Sonderbund. Such combinations may prove extremely
dangerous in cases of war, and they may often lead to
secession. A number of states might combine to
secede, where a single one would shrink from doing
so. A less important disadvantage is the want of
uniformity in the law of the component states. No
doubt it is disagreeable to be legally married in one
state, but to be not legally married when you cross
into a neighbouring state. But on the whole the
disadvantage is not so great as might be supposed,
and it replaces a dull uniformity with a variety
which may be both refreshing and instructive. Lastly,
there is the trouble, expense, and delay arising from
the dual system of government. An American or a
Swiss owes a double allegiance to the Federal Govern-
ment, and to his own particular State or Canton. This
is a difficulty, no doubt, but it is not found to be
practically important.
On the other hand, federation presents several
advantages. First and foremost, it allows of union
72 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
without unity. It is, indeed, the only institution that
can by any means render such a thing possible.
Secondly, it gives great facilities for the development
of vast territories. Federations need not, it is true,
embrace great areas, for Switzerland embraces a very
small area. But when applied to great areas it is
particularly advantageous. Nothing can be better
than the way in which the territories of Western
America have been developed and rendered gradually
fit to receive self-government. Their example is of
happy augury for the future of Australia, should
federation there become an accomplished fact. Thirdly,
it prevents the growth of central despotic power, and
gives opportunities for local self-government. This
is an advantage very closely connected with the
second. It is clear that where powers are divided
between a central government and state governments,
the checks put upon the central government at the
same time prevent its assuming a despotic position,
and leave much freedom of action to the states. And
in close connection with this again are the oppor-
tunities for legislative experiments. This may of
course become an evil if carried to excesp, and it is
sure to arouse opposition from many. But then, as
Luttrell said to Samuel Rogers, "If some very sensible
men had been attended to, we should still have been
eating acorns." It is one of the advantages of a
federal union that it is possible to introduce a novelty
in legislation which, if it turns out to be evil, can do
no harm outside the limits of one particular state, and
which can be easily withdrawn.
FEDEKAL GOVERNMENT. 73
There are some peculiarities inherent to a federal
constitution which should be noted in conclusion. It
should be remembered that a federal union is essen-
tially a contract. Now, it is an elementary proposition
of law that a contract should be clearly defined, and
have its terms clearly set out. This, of course, can
only be done by carefully committing its terms to
writing. But anything committed to writing is
necessarily rigid. And so it follows that federal
constitutions are intensely rigid and conservative.
Where there is no written constitution, as is the case
in the British Empire, it is far otherwise; all is
elasticity. The consequence is that when a change,
however small, has to be made in a federal consti-
tution, it can only be done in special ways, and
becomes an event of extraordinary importance from
the attention it necessarily attracts. But this is not
the case where there is no written constitution.
Nothing is more extraordinary than the way in which
vast constitutional changes have taken place in
England almost unawares. Such, for instance, is
cabinet government and the present position of the
Crown. But in America the constitution cannot be
altered a hair's breadth without setting in motion the
whole cumbrous machinery for making constitutional
changes. Then, again, the fact that a central govern-
ment and state governments exist side by side prevents
the existence of a single capital of the whole union.
There is no capital in America, in the same sense that
London is capital of England and Paris of France.
Washington is only the seat of Congress, but not the
ffA^ OF THE ^^v
74 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
capital. New York has in some respects more claim
to be called the capital than Washington, but then it
is not the seat of Congress. So again in Switzerland,
Berne is the seat of the national government, but it
is no more the capital than Zurich or Geneva. This
absence of a capital operates to prevent the best men
from entering the national legislature, because there
are none of the advantages offered to them that are
presented by residence in a capital city. This is
particularly the case in a vast territory like America,
where a legislator has to travel enormous distances to
attend Congress. Moreover, the co-existence of a
central legislature and state legislatures causes a
diffusion of political interests. Neither legislature
can attract in the way the British Parliament, for
instance, attracts. A great sphere of activity and
influence is withdrawn from the cognizance and juris-
diction of the federal legislature. And similarly a
great sphere is withdrawn from the cognizance and
jurisdiction of the state legislatures. And so both are
rendered in a large degree uninteresting. This also
operates to prevent the best men from entering politics.
Then, again, the fact that the entry to the federal
legislature lies through the states produces a like
tendency. In a large and populous state there may
be plenty of men willing and able to represent their
state, but they cannot all represent their state at the
same time, and they cannot represent any other state.
And so it happens that the peculiarities of a federation
tend to put political life on a somewhat lower level
than in other countries. That this need not be an
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 75
overmastering necessity is, however, proved by the
example of Canada, where the best men do not shrink
from politics as they do in the United States. But
whatever may be the gains and losses of a federal
union, it is clear that they are eminently worthy of
attention. At no time in the world's history has
federation taken so prominent a place in political
institutions as it does at present. It is destined in the
future, for good or for ill, to affect multitudes of men.
76 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
III.
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF
SWITZERLAND.
It is said of the inhabitants of Arabia that they are
so profoundly ignorant of European affairs that they
imagine that all Europeans are of the same race, and
that their affairs are arranged by a governing com-
mittee of seven kings, who meet together in conference
by permission of the Sultan of -Turkey. Some of
them even innocently inquire of travellers whether
any Christians are now living. Englishmen are not
quite in so bad a case with regard to Switzerland,
because so many of them go there in search of health
or amusement. But it is surprising how little interest
those who do go there take in the people amongst
whom they sojourn, and how indifferent they are to
any inquiry into their political or social institutions.
The great majority of tourists, after spending some
months or weeks there, come away with more or less
vivid mental pictures of the physical features of the
country, but of the conditions of the life of its people
they know absolutely nothing. They may thoroughly
well know, if they are fortunate in the weather, the
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 77
views from the Rigi or the Gorner-Grat, but they have
not the least idea of what takes place in the Parliament
House at Berne. This is unfortunate, because there
is something picturesque in Swiss politics, just as
there is in Swiss mountains and valleys. The political
institutions of Switzerland are indeed peculiarly in-
teresting, and it cannot be doubted but that a know-
ledge of them would lend some additional flavour
and charm to the delights of a visitor to that pleasant
land.
It is hardly even recognized by many that Switzer-
land is a federation. Yet it is a fact that, though less
than Ireland both in area and population, it is a union
of no less than twenty-two semi-independent Cantons.
These Cantons, small as they are, are absolutely inde-
pendent within the limits of the powers granted them
by the constitution, and these powers are considerable.
They have their own legislatures, and make their own
laws. The tiny Canton of Uri occupies a precisely
similar position to the State of New York in America
with its five millions of inhabitants, or to the State of
Texas with its great area of 262,290 square miles.
This may seem extraordinary, but it is true. More-
over, the Swiss federation is really the most ancient
federal union there is. It took its origin in the year
1291, when the men of Uri, Schwyz, and of the Lower
Valley (part of what is now called Unterwalden) com-
bined together to defend themselves against the agents
or bailiffs of the German princes, who held a kind of
feudal sway over Switzerland. This union received
accretions from time to time, the number of Cantons
78 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
being made eight in 1353, thirteen in 1513, nineteen
in 1803, and finally twenty-two in 1815. The present
constitution, which underwent revision in 1874, dates
from the year 1848, and, after the United States of
America, forms the most perfect of all federal unions.
It is true that between 1798 and 1803 Switzerland
ceased to be confederation, and was known as the
Helvetic Eepublic. But this was a violent disruption
of the natural state of things, and if we leave out of
account this short period, as we may well do, we shall
see that the Swiss federation has attained the patri-
archial age of over six hundred years. It may, there-
fore, well claim our reverence. But old as it is, it has
not despised the modern. On the contrary, it has
adopted and assimilated the newest fashions in politics.
It has been so thoroughly recast on modern lines that
it ranks second to the United States in the logical
precision and completeness of its details. Like the
British constitution, it has gone on broadening down
from precedent to precedent, throwing off the useless
and adapting itself to the life of the present. It
commands both our reverence and respect, for it
combines the dignity of age with the freshness and
elasticity of youth.
So much has been said in a previous essay on federal
institutions generally, that it would involve much
repetition to discuss here the federal union of Switzer-
land in particular, so that we must pass on to consider
some other points in Swiss politics which are no less
interesting.
It is not generally known that Switzerland may
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 79
fairly claim to be the most democratic country in the
world. We are accustomed to think of the United
States of America as being the most democratic, but
on reflection it must be admitted that this place must
be conceded to Switzerland. And this is the more
strange because, as a rule, politics in" Switzerland
pursue the even tenor of their way so quietly that they
hardly ever attract outside attention. We sometimes
hear of the expulsion of an anarchist or the imprison-
ment of some imprudent member of the Salvation
Army. Quite lately, indeed, a revolution in Ticino
has caused a considerable stir, but little more is likely
to be heard of it. As a rule we may say of Switzerland,
" Happy is the country that has no history; " or, if
inclined to be cynical, we might apply to it a remark
of Lord Westbury on somebody, that the monotony of
his character was unbroken by a single vice. Demo-
cracies are generally noisy and blatant. It has been
said that while monarchies whisper, democracies bellow.
The uproar that the French democracy is capable of
creating is only too well known. The French people
in a revolutionary humour will raise a clamour loud
enough to reverberate over Europe, and set every
throne and institution trembling. Again, when any-
thing happens to agitate the people of the United
States, we seem to hear the distant rumble of the
conflict across the ocean. When, for instance, the
American people proceed to elect a President, what
a disturbance there is for months beforehand ! How
much we hear of the rival claims of this or that
candidate ! Or should by some mischance an English
80 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Minister at Washington be led into an indiscretion not
to the taste of the American people, what an uproar is
raised ! How in the eyes of the whole world does the
great democracy of the West delight in what it is
pleased to call " twisting the lion's tail ! " But in
Switzerland it is far otherwise. Everything there is
done so quietly that hardly any one out of the country
knows that they are being done at all. In Switzerland
they elect a President annually, instead of every four
years as in the United States. Yet we hear infinitely
more of American presidential elections than we do of
Swiss ones. Yet, in spite of all this quietness, Switzer-
land is the only country in the world where we see
democracy carried to its extreme and logical results.
It is the only country in the world where representa-
tive government is backed up and reinforced by an
appeal to the people. In other democratic countries,
t is only by some elaborate system of checks and,
balances that it is ensured that a representative
government shall truly and really represent the
opinion of the majority, and be a reality and not a
sham. In England this is done by means of what are
called " constitutional conventions." But in Switzer-
land the whole people can on occasion give their votes
individually on some question before the country.
This appeal to the people is known as the Referendum.
It forms part of the federal constitution, and of most
of the constitutions of the several cantons. It is the
Referendum which gives the Swiss form of government
its extreme democratic character, and, being unique,
it is well worth consideration. It is of two kinds
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 81
optional and compulsory. Both kinds have a place in
the Federal Constitution. It is compulsory when a
question of a revision of the Constitution is before the
country. The way in which a revision of the Constitu-
tion is introduced and carried out in Switzerland is
very remarkable. It is provided that when one of the
two chambers of the Federal Assembly, or when fifty
thousand voters demand it, then it must be referred to
the whole body of voters to say whether the question
of revision should be entertained or not. If the voters
by a majority affirm the demand, then a Bill for the
revision is brought before the Federal Assembly, and
this Bill must be referred to the voters again for
acceptance. It must be accepted by a majority of
the voters and of the Cantons before it becomes law.
The Eeferendum is optional when any Bill or resolu-
tion of a general character, not declared to be urgent,
is before the Federal Assembly. Then, if thirty thou-
sand citizens or eight Cantons demand it, the proposed
Bill or resolution must be referred to the whole body
of voters, and it does not become law unless a majority
of them accept it. The voters are the electors ; and
every Swiss who has attained the age of twenty-one
years, and who has not been deprived of civil rights,
possesses the franchise. From this it will be seen how
intensely democratic the Swiss Federal Constitution is.
Suppose, for instance, that a poll of the whole British
nation every man of full age having a vote was taken
on the Home Bule question ; if we can imagine this
being done, it will afford us some idea of the Eefe-
rendum in Switzerland. It has a place, also, in most of
G
82 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
the Cantonal Constitutions. It is compulsory in Zurich,
Bern, Solothurn, Grisons, Aargau, Thurgau, Yalais,
and one of the half-cantons of Basle. It is optional
only in Lucerne, Zug, Schaffhausen, St. Gallen, Ticino,
Neuchatel, Geneva, and the other half-canton of Basle.
The late revolution in Ticino seems to have arisen from
the refusal of the Cantonal Council to submit a ques-
tion of the revision of the constitution to the Refe-
rendum after they had been petitioned to do so by ten
thousand voters. The Referendum has a very curious
effect on Swiss politics. The people know very well
that they have in their hands an unfailing weapon and
a last resource in the Referendum. The result is that
they exhibit a certain apathy and indifference to
politics. Moreover, as the law-making lies ultimately
in their own hands, they do not mind very much who
represents them in the Federal Assembly. So long as
the representative is considered a good man of business,
they are not much inclined to scrutinize too closely his
political colour. It happened some few years ago that,
time after time, the people rejected the Bills of the
Federal Assembly. They rejected, amongst other
things, an Electoral Bill, a Bill on Currency, and a Bill
creating a Department of Justice, all of which must
have been considered useful measures by the Federal
Council. It was naturally thought that the majority
in the Federal Assembly did not represent the
majority of the people. But at the general election
a majority of the same party were returned again.
It turned out that the people liked their representa-
tives well enough, but they did not like the Bills that
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 83
they had brought in. Another result of the Eefe-
rendum is that it acts as a sort of sedative on popular
feeling. When once the Eeferendum on a particular
question has been taken, it is accepted as final, at least
for a time, and the decision of the majority is loyally
submitted to. The Eeferendum is very quietly carried
out, and it is generally considered by the Swiss that
the compulsory kind is better than the optional,
because, when it is optional, there is often considerable
agitation in debating whether the option should be
made use of or not.
The Eeferendum is so remarkable an institution that
it is worth inquiring whether there is anything in
other countries at all like it. In England the nearest
approach to it is that provision by which the vote of
the ratepayers of a parish may be taken on the ques-
tion whether a rate for creating a free library shall be
levied or not. Local option for granting licences
would, if adopted, be another instance of the same
sort. But this is only the taking of a popular vote for
the purpose of deciding whether a particular Act shall
be put in operation over a particular area, and not for
confirming the passing of the Act itself. In Canada
a popular vote is sometimes taken on the question
whether a municipality shall financially assist the
construction of railways. In the United States of
America some of the State Constitutions provide that
certain questions shall be submitted to popular vote.
Wisconsin, for instance, provides that it shall be
referred to the voters to decide whether or not banks
shall be chartered. In many local governments of the
84 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
United States specific questions are frequently referred!
to the popular vote. But all these are like the voting
for a free-library rate in England rather than the
Swiss Referendum. The use that has been made of
the Plebiscite in France has been thought by some to
be the same as the Referendum. But this is not really
so, because the Plebiscite has always been really a
fraud on the French people. They had really no
option but to vote for a particular regime that had
been forced upon them. So that the Swiss Referendum
may be fairly said to enjoy the honour of being
a unique institution.
Nor is the Referendum the only powerful weapon of
democracy in Switzerland. In some of the Cantons
there is in operation what is known as the Initiative.
The Initiative is the right of initiating legislation.
This right belongs to the people when a sufficient
number of voters, as fixed by the cantonal constitution,
demands it. The legislative body of the Canton is
bound to introduce legislation when a Bill on a par-
ticular subject is demanded by means of the Initiative.
It is found in operation in Solothurn, Grisons, Aargau,
Thurgau, the two half-cantons of Basle, Zug, Schaff-
hausen, and Neuchatel.
Although the Referendum and the Initiative may
well seem to be the utmost limits of democratic rule,
yet there is a still more democratic institution than
either to be found in Switzerland. This is what is
known as the Landesgemeinden, or the popular assem-
blies. They are to be found in Uri, the Upper and
Lower Unterwalden, Appenzel, and Glarus. In these
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 85
Cantons there is no Referendum, and for a very good
reason. It is unnecessary where there is a still more
democratic institution already in existence. In the
Cantons which we have named, the people do not elect
representatives to a governing body, but they meet
together themselves in an assembly to conduct their
own affairs and make their own laws. This is surely
the ne plus ultra of democracy, beyond which the most
ardent advocate of popular rights could not well go.
The Swiss popular assemblies are ' probably the most
ancient political institutions in Europe. It is really a
modern instance of that direct legislation by the people
which was common enough in antiquity, but which is
now excessively rare. Such assemblies are said still
to be found in the tiny republics of Andorra and San
Marino. They resemble greatly the 'EfacArjtWa of Hellas
or the Comitia of Rome. There are, indeed, few things
in politics more interesting than the Swiss Landesge-
meinden. They are more than merely interesting ;
they are positively heart-stirring and soul-inspiring.
For, as Professor Freeman says, in them we look face
to face with freedom in its purest and most ancient
form. Sir F. 0. Adams and Mr. Cunningham, in their
admirable volume on the Swiss Confederation, give a
most picturesque and graphic description of the Lan-
desgemeinden of Uri. It is impossible to refrain from
giving the following short extract :
" Uri may be taken as an example. There on the
first Sunday in May the people assemble in a meadow
at Bozlingen an der Gard, not far from Altdorf. The
Landamman, after having duly attended mass in the
86 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
village church, proceeds in procession to the place of
meeting. He is accompanied by ushers in antique
costumes of black and yellow, the colours of the canton.
There is an ancient banner, with the arms of Uri (a
bull's head on a yellow ground), and there are old wild
bull's horns which year after year are borne upon poles
by men in front. The Landamman seats himself at a
table in the centre of the meadow, with another official
(Landschreiber), and the people, standing or sitting*
range themselves around him as in an amphitheatre.
The Landamman makes his opening speech, and reviews
the events, domestic and foreign, of the previous year.
Then there is silence over the whole assembly, every
one offering up a prayer, and after that the real busi-
ness commences. Every man speaks his mind when
and for as long as he pleases. Every subject is dis-
cussed with decorum, and finally, when all other matters
have been settled, the officials for the following year
are chosen. The outgoing Landamman (who may be,
and generally is, re-elected for another year), delivers
up his charge with an affirmation that he has in-
jured no one voluntarily, and he asks pardon of any
citizen who may think himself aggrieved. The new
Landamman takes the prescribed oath, and the whole
people swear to obey him, to serve their country, and
respect the laws. Other officials are then elected by a
show of hands, and the meeting is over."
These popular assemblies irresistibly remind one of
the old Homeric dyopa. It is true that in the Homeric
dyopa the people came together to listen, and not to
debate themselves. They did, however, indirectly
.he POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 87
affect the course of the proceedings by their applause
or by keeping a sullen and ominous silence. Mr. Glad-
stone, in his " Homeric Studies," compares the ayopu
to an English county political meeting. Nevertheless
the fact of the dyopa being an open-air meeting puts
it on much the same footing with the Landesgemein-
den. The external characteristics are common to
both. Then, again, the executive council of the Lan-
desgemeinden stands in much the same relation to
those assemblies as the fiovXrj did to the dyopd. Mr.
Gladstone, in his " Homeric Studies," says that " upon
the whole the fiovXrj seems to have been a most im-
portant auxiliary element of government, sometimes
preparing materials for the more public deliberations
of the assembly, sometimes entrusted as a kind of
executive committee with its confidence." This de-
scription makes the @ov\r) not altogether unlike the
executive council that conducts the business of those
Cantons which have Landesgemeinden. We are
tempted to think, too, of the old German assemblies
that met together to consider the more important
matters, for Tacitus says of the Germans, " de mino-
ribus rebus principes consultant, de majoribus omnes."
And so well conducted and orderly are the Swiss that
the words applied by Tacitus to the Germans might
fairly be applied to them also : " plusque ibi boni mores
valent quam alibi bonse leges." Before leaving the
subject of Landesgemeinden, one curious modern in-
stance of a popular assembly should be noted. This
is to be found in Norfolk Island, which is a British
possession, and is a dependency of New South Wales.
SS ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
There once annually all male citizens of the age of
twenty-five and upwards meet together for the purpose
of transacting public business.
When we consider all these elements of democracy,
the widely extended franchise, the Eeferendum, the
Initiative, the Landesgemeinden, it will, we think, be
admitted that Switzerland is without exception the
most democratic country in the world. Kousseau is said
to have remarked that a republican form of govern-
ment is suitable to small states only. Whatever we
may think of large states, and whatever aspirations we
may have for the future of republican government in
large states, it seems clear that there is one conspicuous
example of a small state for which a republic has
proved itself eminently fitted, and that state is Swit-
zerland. It stands as a reproach to France, and de-
mands at least the respectful regard of the United
States.
There is another point in Swiss politics which must
be regarded as very democratic, because it is constantly
demanded by the Eadical party in England, and that
is that members of the Federal Assembly are paid for
their services. The system must be regarded as demo-
cratic because it is found in operation in other demo-
cratic countries. In the United States, both senators
and representatives receive 1000 per annum, together
with tenpence a mile for travelling expenses, and 25
a year for stationery. In Canada and the Australian
colonies, the members sometimes of both houses, some-
times of one only, receive payment. In Victoria, mem-
bers of the Lower House receive 300 a year. In
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 89
South Australia, members of both Houses receive 200
a year. In France and a few of the German states
members are also paid, but in Italy they are only
allowed to travel on the railway free. But the envy
of English Radicals would probably be damped if they
knew 'how slender the remuneration of a Swiss member
is. Each member receives about sixteen shillings a
day for every day he attends during the session, and
also about twopence-halfpenny for travelling expenses.
Moreover, he does not earn his pay unless he is present
when the list of names is called over at the beginning
of a sitting, unless he can give some reasonable excuse
for his absence. Further, as there are only two sessions
a year of about three weeks each, it is tolerably clear
that no member can hope to make a living out of
political life. Indeed, there is probably no country
where so little pecuniary profit can be hoped for from
a political career as Switzerland. The Swiss are a very
frugal race, and the salaries they offer to their political
officers would in this country be considered meagre in
the extreme. The President of the Confederation only
gets 540 a year, and the Vice-President 480 a year.
The Chancellor of the Confederation is rewarded with
440 a year and a house, while the President of the
Federal Tribunal, who occupies a similar position to
:the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United
States, only gets 440 a year, and his colleagues on
the bench only 400 a year. The length to which
economy in administration is carried in Switzerland
can be realized when we consider that only a few years
ago the people by the Referendum rejected two Bills
90 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
of the Federal Assembly for establishing with small
salaries two officials, one in the Chancellor's depart-
ment, and the other in the Swiss Legation at Washing-
ton. As these posts must have been considered neces-
sary by the Federal Assembly and the Federal Council,,
it does appear the very extreme of economy for the
people to refuse them. Still, the British Government
Departments might learn a lesson from the Swiss in
this direction, as there appears to be little doubt but
that there is considerable room for saving money in
many of our public offices. There is something salutary,,
too, in the arrangements for the sittings of the Swiss
Federal Assembly, which might perhaps be profitably
considered by our members of Parliament. Instead of
meeting in the evening and sitting until the small
hours of the morning, they meet at eight or nine
o'clock a.m., according to the season, and rise at about
one or two o'clock. On Mondays, however, they do-
not meet until three in the afternoon, for a reason that
gives us an insight into Swiss homeliness of character.
This hour is fixed in order to allow deputies to return
home after spending their Sundays in their domestic-
circles.
And this brings us to consider the Federal As-
sembly, or what we should call the Houses of Parlia-
ment. As in England, there are two houses the
National Council, which may be said to correspond to
the House of Commons, and the Council of States,,
which may be said roughly to correspond to the House
of Lords. A much better comparison is with the
American Congress, which, consists of the House of
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 91
Representatives and the Senate, corresponding respec-
tively to the National Council and the Council of
States. The National Council represents the people,
and the Council of States represents the Cantons.
There are several points of interest in these two
chambers. It is curious, for instance, that while the
deputies to the National Council are elected for three
years, which is the full term of the existence of any
one Federal Assembly, the deputies to the Council of
States are elected for no fixed period during that term.
They may be elected for the whole of the term or for
any portion of it. So that, in a sense, it is the con-
verse of our House of Lords, the members of which sit
by hereditary right in each Parliament during its
whole existence. Whilst a peer sits for life, a deputy
to the Council of States sits only for a short period,
sometimes not even during the whole life of the
Federal Assembly. Again, the Council of States
appears a less important body than the American
Senate, for a senator sits for a whole period of six
years, for which the Senate is elected, while the
House of Representatives is elected for two years only.
But although the Council of States differs from the
House of Lords and the Senate in these important
particulars, it resembles them in others. For instance,
there are fewer members of the Council of States than
there are of the National Council, just as there are
fewer members of the Senate than there are of the
House of Representatives. And though the members
of the House of Commons are more numerous than the
i Lords, yet the Lords are in practice usually much the
92 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
smaller assembly of the two. Again, the debates 1
the Council of States are carried on more temperate!
and dispassionately than in the National Council. I
i:he former the members address the House sittinl
and not standing up, and the debates are carried u
more in the manner of a family discussion. TM
functions of the two chambers, when considered reltt
tively to one another, perhaps more nearly resemll
the relative functions of our Houses of Parliamei
than the two American Chambers. They are abs|
lutely co-ordinate, whereas the American Senate h|
functions which do not belong to the House of Reprj
sentatives. For instance, it is the duty of the SenalJ
and not of the other chamber, to confirm treaties ail
official appointments made by the President. It md
be added that the National Council is, in popular es|
mation, the more important chamber, because i|
members sit for a full period of three years, and nj
for a period that may possibly be less. In this superij
importance it resembles our House of Commons.
The Federal Council is one of the most curious
interesting things in Swiss political institutions,
stands in singular contrast with the British Cabin
It is, at the same time, like the Cabinet, and yet V6
unlike it. It is a kind of executive committee
the beginning of every new Federal Assembly, i
elected by the two chambers for the period of the thw
years of their own existence. Its President and V
President are elected by them annually ; so that i
evidently the creature of the Federal Assembly. 1
this respect it is prima facie very unlike the Britis
i v/j
.
r
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZEELAND. 93
Cabinet, which is selected by the Prime Minister, who
is requested, in his turn, by the Crown to undertake
the formation of a ministry. But this unlikeness is
not really so great as it appears, because, in practice,
the Crown always selects for its advisers those who
command a majority in the House of Commons. The
Federal Council consists of seven ministers, who take up
different departments of government just as the mem-
bers of the Cabinet do. But the strange thing about
it is that the seven ministers need not be, and in fact
never are, of the same political party. They may be,
and sometimes are, of diametrically opposite opinions.
They form a sort of coalition ministry, a thing which
Lord Beaconsfield declared the English detested. More-
over, the Federal Council often contains a majority of
a party which is not the same party majority as that in
the Federal Assembly. This can best be realized by
imagining the Houses of Parliament, containing a
Tory majority, electing a cabinet consisting of three
Radicals, two Liberals, and two Tories. And what
appears stranger still is, that the members of the
Federal Council are generally re-elected over and over
again, until they resign or die. In this continuity of
office they more nearly resemble the English perma-
nent under-secretaries than the Cabinet ministers.
The Swiss democracy, at any rate, cannot be accused of
fickleness. It seems clear that, in Switzerland, there
cannot be much party bitterness, for otherwise such
an arrangement as we have described would be im-
possible. It would be absolutely impossible in France.
A ministry composed of Eepublicans, Koyalists, and
94 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Bonapartists would rend itself to pieces. There must
also be in Switzerland a considerable amount of feeling
of fair play and mutual confidence amongst parties,
which politicians of ot h er countries might usef u 1 1 y ponder
over. For when a vacancy arises, it is filled up with
a due regard that all parties shall be fairly represented.
The vacant post does not become a bone of contention,
which is immediately fastened on by the party that
happens to be in a majority. There is no cry of " the
spoils to the victors." When we consider the vehe-
mence of party conflict and the almost delirium of
avarice for place that actuates political parties in
England and the United States, it is refreshing to turn
to Switzerland and see, in actual fact, and as a matter
of practice and tradition, the best interests of the
country placed before party feeling. Another very
peculiar thing about the Federal Council is that its
members are not allowed to sit as deputies, or to vote
in either chamber of the Federal Assembly. But
though they cannot vote, they are allowed to speak.
In this respect they are very unlike the British Cabinet
ministers. So important is it in England that a
Cabinet minister should have a seat in Parliament,
that it is considered by his party nothing short of
a disaster that he should be defeated at the poll. It
would seem strange indeed if our Cabinet ministers
were without seats in Parliament, and could not vote
there. The Swiss Federal Council, to some extent,
resembles the American Secretaries of State, for they
have no seats in Congress. But, on the other hand,
the American State Secretaries are appointed by the
President, and cannot speak or vote in Congress.
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OP SWITZERLAND. 95
There are very considerable merits in the Swiss
system of government. It partakes of some of the
merits of the American and British systems, and, at the
same time, is without some of their defects. In Eng-
land and France there is a parliamentary government,
or government by an executive forming part of the
legislature. In America and Prussia there is non-
parliamentary government, or government by an
executive distinct from the legislature. In the first
case, the executive enjoys no independence whatever.
It is the creature of the legislature, and lives in its
breath. It must either act in harmony with it or
perish. In the second case, the executive has inde-
pendence, indeed, but then it is often in conflict with
the legislature. But in Switzerland the executive has
independence, and yet is never in conflict with the
legislature. In England, the executive, if it runs
counter to the majority of the House of Commons,
must resign unless, indeed, believing the country to
be at its back, it advises the Crown to dissolve Parlia-
ment. In America, Congress may come into bitter
conflict with the President, as it did with Andrew
Johnson. It cannot get rid of its President. He is
elected for four years, and is taken for better or worse.
Whatever he does, he will remain in office for that
time, unless he commits acts which render him liable
to impeachment. But in Switzerland the Federal
-Council does not resign, if the Federal Assembly does
not agree with its policy. Neither does it come into
conflict with the Federal Assembly, because it is
-elected by that body, and represents all shades of
96 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
opinion. In short, the executive is at once indepen-
dent and in harmonious relations with the legislature.
Nor is this the only merit of the Swiss constitution.
It has stability, both constitutional and administrative.
It is not every state that has stability of both kinds.
The United States, for instance, enjoys constitutional
stability in the highest degree. Its constitution is
of cast-iron rigidity, and is exceedingly difficult to
change. On the other hand, partly owing to the
strongly marked separation between the executive
and the legislature, and partly owing to a certain
dissipation of authority inherent in a federal system,,
the administration is weak. The troubles in South
Carolina, in 1832, and in Kansas, 1855-6, put the
executive severely to the test. In France, that labo-
ratory of political experiments, the constitution,
though of the rigid type, cannot be called stable. It
nearly fell a victim to the machinations of that
feeblest of would-be heroes, General Boulanger. It
is also administratively weak. It is unusual for a
French Cabinet to last for more than a year. But the
Swiss constitution is stable, and its administration is-
independent, fearless, and firm. It suppressed the
revolt in Ticino with an admirable promptness.
The position occupied by the President in the
federal constitution is interesting. The position of
the President of the Swiss confederation probably
carries with it less distinction than that of any other
head of a state. It is idle to compare him with
crowned heads, but it is not uninteresting to contrast
his position with that of the presidents of other im-
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZEELAND. 97
portant republics. The contrast between him and the
President of the United States is the most startling
of all. There are probably few men who possess such
immense powers as the American President. He may
not be as powerful as autocratic monarchs, but he is
less trammelled than a constitutional monarch. He
chooses his own ministers, and can dismiss them at
pleasure. He has the patronage of an immense
number of appointments, and has the whole of the
executive in his hands. He has a veto over the Bills
passed by Congress; he appoints the judges of the
Supreme Court, and is Commander-in-Chief of the
army. Quite lately he has been invested with quite
extraordinary powers under the McKinley Tariff Act.
He is empowered to forbid all imports from countries
who refuse to admit American cattle after inspection
by American inspectors. On the other hand, the
Swiss President is little more than a chairman of an
executive board. He is only elected for a year. He
is even a less important person than the French
President, to whom belongs the privilege of neither
reigning nor governing. Most educated people could
probably in a moment name the French, or American
Presidents, but how few there are who could give off-
hand the name of the Swiss President ! This is a very
fair test of his insignificance in the eyes of the world.
But, though holding this modest position, he occupies
an important place in the executive, and does a great
amount of very useful work.
The Swiss Federal Council is the only example of a
plural executive, or an executive council. When the
H
98 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
architects of the American constitution were discussing
the form their executive was to take, they considered
the Swiss plan of the executive council. As a con-
stitutional king was for them out of the question, they
had the alternative of creating a president or a council.
The latter plan they deliberately rejected, thinking
that party differences in the council might paralyze
the executive authority. Whether or not this would
have been the case in America must always remain
doubtful. But they were probably right. But it is
remarkable that in Switzerland no such paralysis has
ever occurred. In other countries the executive is
really or nominally placed in the hands of one man.
In constitutional monarchies it is placed nominally in
the crown, but really in a popularly elected prime
minister. The monarch reigns, but does not govern.
In the United States it is placed really as well as
nominally in the President. He governs, but does not
reign. In Fiance it is placed nominally in the
President, but really in a popularly elected prime
minister. The French President neither reigns nor
governs. In autocracies it is placed really and
nominally in the monarch, who both reigns and
governs. There are, indeed, other conceivable forms
of the executive. The King of Sweden, for instance,
has partly the position of a constitutional monarch,
and partly the position of a president of the American
type. The old elective Kings of Poland and the
Doges of Venice had a somewhat similar position,
But they were rather monarchs than presidents. In
Switzerland alone do we find the executive, so tc
THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND. 99
speak, placed in commission. The Federal Council
(and not its President) occupies the position of a
monarch or a president in other countries. The Swiss
constitution, therefore, offers but little scope for the
abilities of its President. It provides no room for a
Washington or a Lincoln. Neither, on the other hand,
does the mode of election lead to the choice of such
mediocrities as a Polk or a Pierce. Both in America
and Prance it is often dangerous to elect the best
man. As was long ago said by Swift, the quality of
being the fittest is fatal to any candidate. The best
man is often the worst candidate. In the last French
presidential election M. Carnot was elected. He was
not, however, nearly so well known as M. Freycinet,
M. Jules Ferry, or M. Floquet. But he divided
parties_ leas-L The Swiss President is almost sure to
be the best man for the post, but the best man for the
Swiss presidency is not the brilliant orator or forger of
great ideas in policy, but merely one who can best
carry on the ordinary affairs of government in a
business-like way.
The political institutions of Switzerland are well
worth studying. They are in many ways interesting,
and at least in one point, the Keferendum, unique.
Then, again, what is there in modern political life at
all comparable for picturesque colouring and dramatic
action with the Landesgemeinden ? The Federal
Council again, both in its constituent elements and its
relations to the Federal Assembly, presents many
interesting points, and stands in remarkable contrast
with the British Cabinet system. Swiss political life,
100 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
too, has in some ways reached an almost ideal rectitude
and loftiness, and must stand as an example and a
model to other countries. There is probably no
country where party feeling is so much subordinated
to patriotism, or where there is less political bitterness.
There are few statesmen who do so much hard and
honest work for so little reward as the men who form
the Swiss executive. Altogether the impression left
upon the mind of the student is that the Swiss deserve
well of fate, and that there is a purity and loftiness in
their life and character which harmonizes well with
the eternal snows of the mountains, the limpid streams
and lucid lakes, amongst which they live.
( 101 )
IV.
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES."
Nothing so much exercises the mind of many at the
present time as the social questions arising from the
unequal distribution of wealth. The causes to which
this fact may be ascribed are mixed, and it is difficult
to say which has been the most powerful. First, there
is the extension of the franchise, and the consequent
increased power of the people to make their voices
heard; secondly, and closely connected with this, is
the readiness of political agitators to find out real
grievances or invent imaginary ones for the newly-
enfranchised the mob service, in short, of the cour-
tiers of the people; thirdly, there is the growth of
education, which, as a great writer has said, "is not
the equalizer, but the discerner of men ; " and directly
consequent upon education is the quickening of the
imaginative faculty, that " mighty priest and prophet
to lead us heavenward, or magician and wizard to lead
us hellward." And directly consequent upon the
larger imaginative faculty (and through it upon educa-
tion) is the increased power of sympathy, "the uni-
102 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
versal solvent" that eats away the barriers dividing
man from man and class from class.
Whatever the causes, the facts are patent, and it
would be easy to indicate, did space allow, the extent
to which social questions are "in the air," producing
in some that pessimistic spirit which wrung from the
lips of the great Lord Shaftesbury, shortly before his
death, the saddening remark that he did not like to
leave the world with so much misery in it. Yet there
are many hopeful signs in the situation which any one
who will admit the cogency of facts and figures must
be compelled to admit.
And first of all, a rapid glance at the history of the
labour question will teach us that the labouring classes
have only recently emerged from a state of slavery.
The very word " servant " suggests slave by its de-
rivation. "It is familiar," says Mr. W. 0. Holmes in
his treatise on the Common Law, " that the status of
a servant maintains many marks of the time when he
was a slave. The liability of the master for his torts
is one instance."
We hear much of liberty in this country ; we boast
of it ; our historians laud it, and tell in impassioned
words by what manner of men and by what efforts and
self-sacrifices it was won ; our philosophers write
treatises upon it, and our poets dedicate odes and
sonnets in its honour. Yet this much-glorified liberty,
valuable though it is, is liberty in the political sense
only ; and as, in the words of Hobbes, political liberty
is political power, the liberty we praise is the power
to participate in government, and the struggles by
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 103
which that power was gained were the struggles made
in removing the restraints that forbade men to grasp
it. Yet all this time liberty, in the fuller and truer
sense of the word that is to say, liberty of the person
was comparatively neglected. This liberty of the
person has been classed by philosophers and jurists
among "primordial" or "natural" rights. Yet from
the way in which it has been regarded one would
rather be inclined to say that, so far from being
"primordial," it was one of the last rights to be
granted to suffering humanity. It is a remarkable
thing how men have fought and suffered for political
liberty, while they have only lightly estimated
personal and individual liberty. The Athenians, who
commemorated in song Hartnodius and Aristogeiton,
exhibited a callous indifference to the great slave
population bowed down beneath their yoke. Brutus,
in his love of political liberty, stayed not his hand
from the murder of Caesar, but raised not a finger to
relieve the numberless slaves that formed so large a
part of Koman society. When Thrasea Poetus opened
his veins, and as the blood flowed cried, "I pour a
libation to Jupiter the Deliverer," he had in his mind
the deliverer from political tyranny rather than the
deliverer from the tyranny of the slave-master. In-
deed, we cannot help saying with Hallam, that "we
lose a good deal of sympathy with the spirit of freedom
in Greece and Rome when the importunate recollec-
tion occurs to us of the tasks and the punishments
which might be inflicted, without control either of law
or opinion, by the keenest patriot of the Comitia or
104 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
the Council of the Five Thousand." When Rousseau
said that man was born free, but was everywhere in
chains, he was thinking chiefly of the reign of the few,
for whieh he wished to substitute the rule of the
people, The descendants of those Catholics who,
flying persecution at home, sought religious liberty
in another clime, and founded the States of Maryland
and Virginia, did not hesitate to impose on the negro
a yoke of slavery far more cruel than any oppression
their ancestors had suffered. Nay, more; during the
Civil War in America a large number of Englishmen
were found to express their sympathies with the slave-
holding states of the South. Of them J. S. Mill re-
marked that their action disclosed "a mental state in
the leading portion of our higher and middle classes
which it is melancholy to see, and will be a lasting
blot in English history." It is indeed remarkable
that Englishmen who had unbounded admiration for
their forefathers, who had done so much in the cause
of political and religious liberty, should have looked
with sympathy on those who were endeavouring to
perpetuate an institution which denied the boon of
personal liberty. But we revere the memories of Pym
and Hampden more than those of Clarkson and Wilber-
force.
We have remarked that it is only comparatively
recently that the condition of the labourer has approxi-
mated to freedom. It is indeed too true that slavery
has been the almost universal custom of the human
race. That all the ancient civilizations were slave-
holding states is notorious; the flight of the slaves
THE PEOGKESS OF THE "MASSES." 105
from Athens during the Peloponnesian war, the cruel
murder of the Helots in Sparta, and the cold and
callous way in which the Greek philosopher spoke of
the slave as a living tool, testify to the extent of
slavery in Greece. The ruinous system of " ergastula,"
the provisions of the Roman law, which hardly raised
the slave above the position of the domestic animal
(for it was not until the reign of Antoninus Pius that
it became homicide to kill a slave), the Servile War,
are a few examples out of many that show the magni-
tude of slavery as a Roman institution. The pyramids
raised by the bloody sweat of tens of thousands beneath
the lash are an everlasting monument of Egyptian
bondage; and we need scarcely be reminded of the
Israelites, whose lives the Pharaohs made " bitter with
hard bondage in mortar and in brick, and in all
maimer of service in the field." These examples,
taken at random out of many, must suffice to show
how widespread and terrible was the curse of slavery
in the Old World states. Well might St. Paul divide
men into bond and free!
In the Dark and Middle Ages things were scarcely
better. The Roman Empire has been described by
Mr. John Morley as a vast imperial state with slavery
for a base. The word " slave " is a bit of fossil history.
It tells us that the Slavs were reduced to the condition
suggested by the word "slave." Christianity, it is true,
by inculcating the duty of manumission, did some-
thing to ameliorate the hard lot of the slave, but so
late as the seventh century Pope Gregory the Great
was constrained by his sympathies to do what he could
106 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
to wipe out an institution so incompatible with the
precepts of his faith. Mrs. Jameson, in her work on
the Monastic Orders, relates a beautiful story of St.
Baron and his enfranchised slave. That the lowest
ignominy, the lash, and the prison, were the lot of the
slave in the seventh century it eloquently and pathe-
tically testifies. "Throughout these ages" savs
Hallam, "servitude under somewhat different modes
was extremely common." Besides slavery iu its most
absolute form, there were various degrees of serfdom
and villeinage. In England, in the reign of Henry the
Second, there was a class of villeins who could hold
no property and were destitute of all means of redress ;
and so late as the reign of Elizabeth predial servitude
undoubtedly existed. In France predial servitude
existed down to the very days of the Revolution; and
La Bruyere, in glowing and impassioned words, speaks
of " certain wild animals, male and female, scattered
over the fields, black, livid, all burnt by the sun,
bound to the earth that they did till with unconquer-
able pertinacity ; they have a sort of articulate voice,
and when they rise on their feet they show a human
face, and are in fact men."
Confining our attention to England, we find that
by degrees serfs and villeins developed into hired
labourers, but that the legislators did what they could
to render their freedom a mockery. This is well
shown by what happened after the dreadful pestilence
of 1348, which greatly reduced the number of
labourers, and consequently enhanced the price of
labour. What happened was the passing of the
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 107
famous Statute of Labourers, which J. S. Mill justly
says was intended to prevent the labouring classes
from taking advantage of diminished competition to
obtain higher wages. " Such laws," he says, " exhibit
the infernal spirit of the slave-master, when to retain
the working classes in avowed slavery has ceased to
be practicable." By this statute, passed in the year
1350, it was exacted that every man in England, of
whatever condition, bond or free, of able body and
within sixty years of age, not living of his own or by
any trade, should be obliged when required to serve
any master who was willing to hire him at such wages
as were usually paid three years before. The price of
labour was actually fixed, and no more than the old
wages was allowed to be given or asked for. The
labourer, too, was forbidden to leave the parish in
which he lived in search of better-paid employment.
A law more oppressive to the labourer can hardly be
imagined. That it ended in the great Peasant Kevolt
cannot be wondered at. We can well understand in
what spirit the burning words of John Ball, the mad
priest of Kent, would be received words in which he
contrasted the lives of the employer and the employed :
"They are clothed in velvet, and warm in their furs
and ermine ; while we are covered with rags. They
have wine and spices and fair bread ; and we oat-cake
and straw, and water to drink. They have leisure and
fine houses ; and we have pain and labour, the rain
and the wind in the fields. And yet it is of us and of
our toil that these men hold their state." They might
well have echoed the despairing words of the Hebrew
108 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
preacher, that there was no profit in their labour
under the sun. Nor was this the only statute enacted
in order to restrict the freedom of the labourer. By
a statute passed in the twelfth year of the reign of
Richard the Second, no servant or labourer could
depart, even at the expiration of his service, from the
hundred in which he lived, without permission under
the King's seal ; nor might any one who had been
bred to husbandry up to the age of twelve years
exercise any other calling. By a statute passed in
the seventh year of the reign of Henry the Fourth, any
one who did not possess a certain property qualifica-
tion was forbitlden to put his son or daughter as an
apprentice to any trade in a borough, and the House
of Commons about the same time unsuccessfully
attempted to prevent villeins sending their children
to school. So beneficent was the rule of a Government
of employers ! They had yet to learn the truth of the
inscription on the tomb of Bahran-gor : " The hand of
Liberality is stronger than the arm of Power." These
statutes affected chiefly the agricultural labourer ; but
the artisan of the town fared but little better. In the
fifth year of the reign of Elizabeth was passed the
famous Statute of Apprentices, which almost equals
the Statute of Labourers in its oppressive restraints.
By this statute justices of the peace were enabled to
fix the rate of wages; artisans were compelled to
remain in the same trade in which they were appren-
ticed, and were only allowed to leave the place in
which they lived under certain conditions; a fixed
number (a minimum, not a maximum) of hours for
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 109
work was imposed; women might be compelled to
enter into service. These were some of the provisions
of the Act. Fortunately for this country it was
judiciously decided that its provisions only applied to
trades actually existing at the time of the passing of
the Act, and not to newly discovered occupations. So
long as agriculture was the staple employment of the
people, the sphere of the operation of the statute was
comparatively small, but with the growth of this
country as a manufacturing and mercantile community
it became much more important. From time to time
it was supplemented by statutes passed to regulate the
rate of wages and hours of labour in particular trades.
For instance, in 1720 a statute was passed to regulate
journeymen tailors; in 1725 the wool-makers, in
1749 the hat-makers, in 1777 the silk-weavers, in
1795 the paper-makers, were respectively made the
subject of similar legislation. In 1799 a general Act,
following similar Acts of the reigns of Edward the
Sixth and Charles the Second, was passed to suppress
combinations to force an increase in wages. By this
time the question of the legality of such combinations
had become very important, and in the years 1800,
1824, 1825, and 1871, the Legislature made various
attempts to deal with it, and it was not until 1875
that it was put on a satisfactory footing by the Con-
spiracy and Protection of Property Act. It was not
until then that the spirit of the old Statute of
Apprentices was finally eradicated.
During the latter part of the last century the
invention of the spinning-jenny and the mule and
110 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
that of the steam-engine began an industrial revolu-
tion that completely altered the condition of the
English labourer. With the growth of factories a new
class of workmen arose into importance. In two
directions the introduction of the spinning factory-
worked at first to the disadvantage of the labourer.
In the first place, the agricultural labourer suffered ;
and in this way : Formerly it w T as customary for the
family of the peasant to eke out their small wages by
working at the spinning-loom at home. After the
introduction of the spinning factory this form of
domestic labour became no longer profitable, and the
wages of the peasant remaining as low as before, his
condition became more wretched than ever. In the
next place, the introduction of the factory system
enabled the factory owner to exercise over the opera-
tives ifc his employ a power that was often oppressive.
The reader of Lord Beaconsfield's " Sybil " will re-
member the graphic words in which he described what
he felt to be at once a danger and a disgrace. During
the early part of this century in England the condition
of the working classes was indeed a wretched one.
The late Mr. Arnold Toynbee, in one of his lectures
delivered in London, in St. Andrew's Hall, Newman
Street, in 1883, stated that it is well known by those
qualified to judge, that the condition of the workmen
in England was one of civilization compared to what
it was forty years ago. He tells us to turn to the
memoirs of the Chartists, Samuel Lovett and Thomas
Cooper, to read of men who clamoured to be sent to
prison that they might not starve, and of labourers
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." Ill
who burnt ricks, and asked when the fighting was to
begin. The lot of humanity has been tersely described
in these words : " They are born ; they are wretched ;
they die." And indeed, when we direct the light of
history down the corridors of time, and look into the
obscure nooks and crannies when we look beneath
the tinsel of courts and princes, and the glamour of
wars, that make up so large a part of history, a state
of things is disclosed to us that constrains us to believe
that this has often been a too accurate description.
When one thinks of these things it becomes easy to
understand how men of keen sympathies, men like St.
Simon, Fourier, and Karl Marx, should have devoted
their labour and their genius to devising systems for
readjusting and recasting society.
But with the present century, and more particularly
during the last fifty years, a brighter day has dawned
for the labourer. The misery indeed that darkened
the first part of this century was a shadow thrown by
a relentless fate, rather than the offspring of legislative
oppression. It was one of those cataclysms like an
earthquake, or a plague, that occasionally overwhelm
society. The remark of the Persian writer, that the
angel who presides over the storehouse of the winds
feels no compunction though he extinguishes the old
woman's lamp, seems applicable to a time when the
hand of Fate fell heavily on the poor and helpless.
If we except only the corn laws, of which Sir E. May
says that in order to ensure high rents it was decreed
that multitudes should hunger, the misery was engen-
dered by causes that were inevitable. The revolution
112 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
in the methods of labour that always follows the intro-
duction of machinery, combined with a number of bad
harvests and the Napoleonic wars on the Continent,
and the consequent scarcity of food, to cause all the
misery. But for all this, with the beginning of the
century the seed of a veritable revolution in the position
of the labourer, at least in England, began to be sown,
and since then his condition has steadily improved.
This improvement may be traced in a variety of ways.
First, let us take the legislative measures passed
expressly to assist the labouring-classes. Formerly
the legislator only busied himself, if he thought of the
working man at all, with devising means of putting
restraints on the rights of the workman. The Statute
Book was disfigured with such statutes as the Statute
of Labourers and the Statute of Apprentices. But
during the present century the legislator has wearied
himself, with an ever-increasing activity, to cram the
Statute Book with laws of real or supposed advantage
to the labourer. It is as though, smitten by remorse
and lashed by the scourge of an avenging conscience,
he was impelled to make haste to redress the wrongs
of centuries. The statutes passed to regulate labour
in factories alone occupy a considerable space. Be-
ginning with the year 1802 we have the Health and
Morals Act, 42 Geo. III. c. 73. Then we have the
following series of Factory Acts : 59 Geo. III. c. 66 ;
6 Geo. IV. c. 63 ; 1 & 2 Will. IV. c. 39 ; 3 & 4 Will. IV.
c. 103 ; 5 & 6 Vict. c. 99 ; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 15 ; 13 & 14
Vict. c. 54 ; 23 & 24 Vict. c. 78 ; 30 & 31 Vict. c. 103 ;
30 & 31 Vict. c. 146 ; 37 & 38 Vict. c. 44 ; 41 & 42 Vict.
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 113
c. 16. In the year 1842 an Act was passed prohibiting
women and girls from working in mines or collieries.
In addition to these Acts we have had many other Acts
passed to assist the labourer. There is the Truck Act,
1 & 2 Will. IV. c. 37 ; the Act to secure the payment
of wages without stoppages in the hosiery manufacture,
37 & 38 Vict. c. 48 ; the Merchant Shipping Payment
of Wages xlct, 43 & 44 Vict. c. 16. The various Com-
bination Laws and the Conspiracy and Protection of
Property Act we have already referred to. Then there
is the Trades Union Act, 1871, and the Employer and
Workmen Bill, 38 & 39 Vict. c. 90 ; the Employers'
Liability Act, 43 & 44 Vict. 42, and the alterations in
the Law of Partnership made to render Co-operative
Societies possible. Then there are the Acts relative
to the Housing of the Working-Classes, namely : the
Housing of the Poor Act, 1868 ; the Housing of the
Poor Act, 1875 ; the Artisans' Dwellings Amendment
Act, 1879. The agitation with reference to the hours
of labour in shops must be fresh in the minds of every
one. Then, again, there are a series of Acts relating
more particularly to sailors, namely : the Unseaworthy
Ships Bills of 1878 and 1882, and the Merchant
Shipping Bills of 1871, 1872, and 1876. The Friendly
Society Act, 1875, and the Education Act, 1870, may
be said to have been passed more particularly for the
working classes than any others. Amongst other Acts
passed in favour of the labourer may be mentioned the
Public Libraries Act, 1866, and the Cheap Trains Act,
1883. These Acts, it will have been observed, relate
almost, if not entirely, to the artisan and factory
I
114 ESSAYS IX POLITICS.
classes, and not to the agricultural labourer. He has
been neglected in comparison with his brethren in the
towns ; but amongst Acts affecting him may be named
the Agricultural Gangs Act, 30 & 31 Vict. c. 30, and
the Agricultural Children Act, 1873.
Two series of measures which perhaps more than
anything else have ameliorated the condition of the
poor remain to be mentioned ; first, the Acts repealing
the import duties on corn and other articles of food ;
and, secondly, the Acts extending the franchise.
The first have bestowed cheap food, and the second
increased Parliamentary representation ; and, taken
alone, they mark a great advance.
It was the great mission of Sir Eobert Peel to in-
augurate freedom of trade. Between 1842 and 1846-
he repealed altogether the duties on about five or six
hundred articles, and reduced them on a good many
articles besides. Then came the repeal of the Corn
Laws, and with it the certainty of cheap bread. In
1853 Mr. Gladstone repealed many duties, including
that on soap, and reduced those on many other articles,,
including tea and fruits, and in 1861 that on paper - T
and this policy he continued, so that, whereas in 1842
there were 1052 articles subject to import duty, by
the Budget of 1860 the number of such articles was
finally reduced to forty-eight. And though it may be
said that all classes have benefited by the consequent
lowering of prices, yet the poor undoubtedly have
benefited the most by a fall in price of the necessaries
of life. Of the extension of the franchise it will be
enough to note its initiation in 1832, and its final
stai>e reached in 1884.
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 115
We have seen in what a variety of ways the Legis-
lature has within the present century been active to
remove the grievances of the working-classes. This
agency of the Legislature may be classed as one work-
ing from without. Let us now turn our attention to
one of a more spontaneous character, for it surely
must be deemed a step in advance that the working-
classes have learnt to take an independent standpoint.
The agencies of this character may be described as
regulated self-help. The working-classes have undeni-
ably combined together to help themselves, and have
succeeded in some respects in a remarkable degree.
It is true that they have received some Government
assistance in the alterations of the law, which have
rendered trades unions, co-operation, and the invest-
ment of savings possible. Still, the broad fact remains,
that the working-classes have done much to aid them-
selves ; and this they have done chiefly in the three
ways already briefly indicated namely, by the creation
of trades unions, of co-operative societies, and the
investments of savings. And of these three, co-opera-
tion has been by far the most successful, and merits
special attention.
Co-operation has had a remarkable history in Eng-
land. So far back as the year 1777 we hear of a
co-operative workshop of tailors at Birmingham, and
we know that Barrington, the Bishop of Durham, in
1795 set up co-operative stores at Mongewell, in
Oxfordshire. In 1816 the " Economical Society " was
formed at Sheerness. During the early part of the
centurv, too, Owen established the principle of co-
116 ESSAYS IN T0L1TICS.
operation amongst his workmen at Lanark with much
success. By the time the year 1830 was reached as
many as over 300 co-operative stores were set up in
different parts of the country ; but, owing to the then
state of the law relating to limited liability and defec-
tive management, many of them failed. In 1844 the
Society of Rochdale Pioneers came into being, and
from small beginnings it has developed to remarkable
proportions, and given an impetus to co-operation all
over the country. In the first year of its existence its
members numbered 28, and no profits were made ;
whilst in 1876 they numbered 8892, and the profits
amounted to 50,000. Rochdale took the lead, but
other towns soon followed. The co-operative stores at
Leeds, for instance, had in 1886 no less than 23,000
members, and in that year made profits of 59,000 ;
while the two co-operative societies at Oldham in 1886
had between them about 23,000 members, and made
a profit to the amount of 90,000. These are some of
the largest and most successful of co-operative societies,
but the extent to which the movement has spread
amongst the labouring population can only be esti-
mated by looking at it in the aggregate all over the
country. Taking England first, we find Lancashire
leading with 196 societies, and Yorkshire second with
187 ; the total number in England is 591, with 674,602
members, making profits to the amount of 2,331,055.
Taking Scotland next, we find that Lanark leads with
64 societies, the total number in Scotland being 305,
making profits to the amount of 523,823. Next
comes Wales with 23 societies, making profits to the
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 117
extent of 26,580. And lastly, Ireland, with nine
societies, making profits to the amount of 2008.
Altogether, co-operative stores in Great Britain and
Ireland number about 12,000, with 900,000 members,
receiving a total profit of 2,500,000. Such are the
figures returned for the year 1886, and no one can
deny that they exhibit a capacity for self-help and for
union, a self-reliance and a thriftiness, which mark
at distinct advance in the condition of the masses.
They are no longer, one and all, isolated and helpless
units, as they were a hundred years ago, but many of
them form a strong phalanx, united both in heart
and mind, and sustained by considerable pecuniary
resources.
The next form of regulated self-help that claims our
attention is trades unionism. Here again we can mark
a great improvement in the condition of the masses.
It is true that trades unions, by ill-judged strikes and
by indefensible actions, have at times hindered rather
than advanced their cause. Yet on the whole they
have enabled the labourer to be no longer at the
mercy of the employer, and in so far as they take the
form of provident societies they have stimulated thrift
and self-dependence.
Another form of regulated self-help is the saving of
money by investments in the savings-banks. Invest-
ment of savings is not merely in itself an advance, but
it indicates an advance by showing that the amount of
wages received is large enough to allow a surplus
beyond what is spent in obtaining a bare subsistence.
It must not be forgotten, too, that a saving of money
118 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
must have been made in order to support trades unions
and co-operative societies. But here we are particu-
larly concerned with savings-banks. Government
assistance must also here be recognized. It was in
the year 1817 when saving-banks first received Govern-
ment recognition, and in 1827 and 1828 they re-
ceived further Government assistance. The amount
of money saved, and the rapidly increasing way in
which it has been saved, will be made apparent by
a glance at the following figures, which are given on
the authority of Professor Leone Levi: In the year
1831 the capital of savings-banks in England amounted
to 13,719,495 ; in 1841 to 24,475,000; in the year
1850 to 28,931,000 ; and in 1878, taking into account
the sums deposited in Post Office Savings-Banks, to
74,705,000. These figures speak for themselves.
We have now spoken of legislation and regulated
self-help. There yet remains a third way of estimating
the progress of the people, and that is by estimating
and comparing the amount of wages received formerly
and now, and by estimating and comparing the effec-
tive or purchasing power of those wages; that is to
say, their real, and not merely their money value.
This can be done only by examining the history of
prices side by side with the history of wages. This it
is possible to do with more or less accuracy at various
periods in English history ; and though statistics are
often repellant, here at least they will repay perusal.
Professor Kogers has investigated carefully the wages
and prices prevailing in our earlier times, and he has
arrived at the following figures for the thirteenth
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 119
century. Taking agricultural labourers first, he finds
that the average wage for a man was 2d. per day ; for
a woman, Id. per day ; and for a boy, ^d. per day.
Allowing for deductions for Sundays and holidays, the
total wages for a man is estimated at 2 lis. 8d. per
year. But during harvest-time wages were doubled,
so that the total wages for a man may be put down at
2 15s. a year. Sometimes a hind was hired for a
whole year, and paid by receiving a quarter of corn
(valued at 4s.) every eight weeks, and 6s. in money.
This would amount to 1 12s. a year ; and if he was
boarded, as was sometimes the case at harvest and
exceptionally busy times, reckoning the cost of board
at \\d. a day for six weeks, the total wages would
.amount to 1 15s. 8d. a year. The wages of artisans
for the same period next claims our attention. Taking
carpenters, for example, we find that on the average
they received from 3d. to 3JtZ. a day, and that a pair of
sawyers received Id. a day, and sometimes more. At
the building of Newgate Gaol, in 1281, the carpenters
received M. to 5 \d, a day ; the sawyers, 9 ^d. a day ;
and the masons, bd. a day. Professor Eogers estimates
the average wages of artisans in the thirteenth century
at 4 7s. bVZ. a year in the provinces ; and in London,
where wages were higher, at 6 17s. 6d. a year. Then
as to prices, in order to avoid the burden of figures, it
will be enough to quote Professor Kogers, who says
that " all necessaries in life in ordinary years, when
there was no dearth, were abundant and cheap," and
to note that the average price of wheat from 1261 to
1310 was 5s. ll\d. a quarter, ranging from 2s. 10^d. to
120 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
16s. a quarter. In ordinary years the price ranged
from 4s. 6d. to 6s. 6d. a quarter.
Let us next take the period from the year 1400 to
1545, which Professor Kogers calls " the golden age ""
for the English labourer. He says that at this period
an ordinary artisan would get 6d. a day, and an agri-
cultural labourer 4d. a day ; and in the year 1495 he
calculates that an agricultural labourer could earn at
the then prices three quarters of wheat, three quarters
of malt, and two quarters of oatmeal by fifteen weeks 7
work, and that the artisan could earn the same by ten
weeks' work. From this time onward prices began to
rise, so that in the year 1564 Professor Kogers calcu-
lates that it would take the agricultural labourer forty
weeks, and the artisan thirty-two weeks, to earn the
same quantities as they did in 1495, while in 1593 not
a whole year's labour would suffice.
In 1597 and 1610 things were much worse even than
this. We have the authority of Sir W. Petty for a state-
ment of the rate of wages for the seventeenth century.
He puts down the wages of the agricultural labourer
at 4cZ. a day with food, and 6d. a day without food.
During the latter half of this century we find the
justices of Warwickshire fixing the rate of wages at
4s. a week without food, except from September to
March, when it was 3s. 6d. In 1682 the justices of
Suffolk fixed them at 5s. a week without food in winter,
and 6s. without food in summer; and in 1661 the
justices of Essex fixed them at 6s. a week without food
in winter, and 7s. without food in summer. At this
time, too, the workmen employed in manufactures
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 121
received not more than Is. a day, and often only Gd.
a day. When we consider that the average price of
corn from 1673 to 1685 was 50s. a quarter, it will be
apparent that the wages of the labourer had much less
purchasing power than they once had.
For the latter part of the eighteenth century we are
indebted for some valuable figures to Arthur Young.
Speaking of about the year 1767, he put the wages of
agricultural labourers at the rate of 18 per annum in
Hertfordshire, and 17 in Northamptonshire and
Derbyshire ; whilst with regard to artisans, taking
various trades, he puts the wages of colliers at 15s.
a week ; of ironworkers, at 13s. 6d. a week ; of porce-
lain-makers, at 9s. 6d. a week; of weavers, at 10s.
a week; of wool-combers, at 12s. a week; of carpet-
makers, at 12s. a week ; of pen-makers, at 15s. a week ;
of steel-polishers (at Woodstock), at 42s. a week; and
of blanket-makers, at 12s. a week. Then as to prices :
he puts bread at \\d. a pound, butter at 6J<2., cheese at
ohd., and meat at 3cZ. a pound. But after the year
1780 wheat was hardly ever below 50s. a quarter,
and in 1795 it was double that price.
Coming now to the present century, we know very
well that during the early part of it the condition of
the agricultural labourer was miserable how miserable
we may infer from the statement of Mr. Giffen, that
the agricultural labourer's wages have risen 60 per
cent, since the period before the corn laws. A con-
siderable rise in his wages has taken place since I860,
for in that year they were (according to Professor
Leone Levi) Ss. 8d. a week in Kent and 15s. in Cumber-
fX^ OF THE^^\
322 ESSAYS IX POLITICS.
land ; while in 1872 they were 26s. in Kent and 20s. in
Cumberland. Nor was the condition of the factory hand
any better, if we may judge from the wages of the
weavers, who, though in 1802 they received as much
as 13s. a week, in 1817 only received 4s. d^d. a week.
It must be borne in mind, too, that during the early
part of this century the price of wheat was abnormally
high. In the year 1801 it touched the enormous price
of 156s. 2d. a quarter, and from 1800 to 1820 it averaged
98s. Qd. the quarter.
During the last fifty years there has been a contem-
poraneous increase of wages and decrease of the prices
of commodities. In the case of carpenters, bricklayers,
masons, miners, weavers, and spinners, Mr. Giffen esti-
mates the rise since 1826 at over 50 per cent, in most
cases and at over 100 per cent, in some. In the case
of seamen's wages, he estimates the rise since 1850 at
60 per cent., and in the case of agricultural labourers,
since the time preceding the repeal of the corn laws,
at 60 per cent. Taking particular trades, we find, on
the authority of Professor Leone Levi, that hands in
cotton factories who in 1839 received 7s. and 16s. a
week respectively, in 1877 received 17s. 6d. and 36s. ;
that hands in woollen factories, who in 1837 received
12s. and 21s. a week respectively, in 1877 received 35s.
and 28s. ; that whilst in the linen trade in 1855 some
hands received only lOd. and 4s. a week respectively,
the same class in 1877 received 8s. and 33s. ; that in the
earthenware trade, between 1857 and 1877 there was a
rise from 3s. 6d. a week to 33s. a week ; that whilst in
-the building trade wages were 5s. a day of ten hours,
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 123
in 1877 they were 9d, an hour ; and that seamen's
wages have risen from 40s. and 55s. a month in 1848,
to 70s. and 80s. in 1878. In addition to this increase
of wages, Mr. Giffen believes that there has been a
considerable shortening of the hours of labour, amount-
ing to 20 per cent, in the textile, engineering, and
building trades.
Then as to prices, we find that, whilst wheat averaged
58s. Id. a quarter between 1837 and j 1846, it averaged
only 48s. 9cL a quarter between 1876 and 1886. Then
in most other things there has been a considerable fall.
For example, in 1840 sugar cost 68s. 8d. per cwt. ; in
1886 it cost only 21s. 9d. In 1840 cotton cloth cost
5cZ. per yard ; in 1886 it cost 3Jc/. per yard. But the
most remarkable results are obtained by comparing
the amount of foods consumed per head of the popu-
lation. Professor Leone Levi finds that in 1820 sugar
was consumed to the amount of eighteen pounds per
head, and tea to the amount of one pound three
ounces ; whilst in 1870, of sugar forty-one pounds, and
of tea three pounds were consumed per head. Mr.
G-iffen gives some remarkable figures, and from them
we may infer that between the years 1840 and 1881
the consumption per head of bacon and ham has in-
creased thirteen times, of butter six times, of cheese
five times, of eggs seven times, of potatoes twelve times,
of rice twelve times, of sugar four times, and of wheat
five times. It is true that meat has gone up in price,
but then meat was during the early part of the century
hardly eaten at all by the poor. House rent, too, has
increased according to Mr. Giffen, 150 per cent. ; but
124 ESSAYS IN POLITICS,
(putting aside an improvement in the houses in many
eases) the increase of rent would not by any means
swallow up the gain obtained in other w r ays.
Looking at the history of wages and prices generally,,
we may infer that, in the thirteenth century, and
during the period which Professor Kogers calls the
" golden age," though wages were excessively low, yet
this was more than compensated for by the exceeding-
cheapness of food. Again, there can be no doubt that
since that time, until within the last fifty years, the
condition of the labouring classes has been wretched in
the extreme. In the words of Professor Rogers, the
wages of labour have been a bare subsistence, constantly
supplemented by the poor-rate. Professor Eogers is
of opinion that the condition of the labouring classes
during the earlier period compares favourably with
their present condition. It is true that food in average
years was cheap; but even Professor Eogers admits
that in bad years numbers perished from hunger. It
avails little that a man can get food for almost nothing
one year, if in the next he must starve. Professor
Rogers admits, too, that the food was coarse ; he might
have added that it was sadly wanting in variety.
Putting aside such things as tea, coffee, and sugar,
there were wanting even such simple things as potatoes
and cabbages. But whatever view we may take of
these early times, we must be forced to admit that, as
regards the amount of wages and their purchasing-
power, the condition of the labouring classes is now
immensely superior to its condition at any time for
nearly three hundred, years.
THE PROGRESS OF THE "MASSES." 125
Note. Since this essay was written in 1887, a number of Acts have
been passed to ameliorate the condition of the working-classes. More-
over, labour questions seem to engage the attention of Parliament in
un ever-increasing degree. The question of the hours of labour in
particular is becoming very important, and even now sways voters at
elections as much as the Home Rule question. It should be observed,
too, that the increased working expenses of railway and other com-
panies point to the tendency of the rate of wages to move upwards.
Neither does the cost of necessaries bear more hardly than it did.
Rather the contrary. The reduction in the duty on tea, for instance,
has made that commodity appreciably cheaper.
126 ESSAYS IN rOLITICS.
V.
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION IN ANGLO-
SAXON COMMUNITIES.
Socialism is a subject which at the present moment is
very much in evidence. It is discussed in every re-
view, and debated at the meetings of every religious
and scientific association. But it is one of those terms-
which is apt to be used by different persons in different
senses, and to convey different meanings to different
minds. It eludes the grasp with a Protean slipperi-
ness. Nothing can be more important, however, in dis-
cussions of this sort than to see clearly what socialism
means, and to pin it down, so to speak, to one particular
sense. The word has, however, been used so differently
by writers of authority, that it is difficult to do this.
Communism and socialism have been inextricably
confused. Nevertheless, the socialism of the present
day is generally held to be a socialism only to be-
realized through the action of the state. Professor
Flint defines it to be " the government of all by all
and for all, with private property largely or wholly
done away, landowners got rid of, capital rendered col-
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 127
lective, industrial armies formed under the control of
the state on co-operative principles, and work assigned
to every individual and its value determined for him."
Schaffle, in his " Quintessence of Socialism," says,
" Critically, dogmatically and practically, the cardinal
thesis stands out collective instead of private owner-
ship of all instruments of production (land, factories,
machines, tools, etc.), 'organization of labour by
society,' instead of the distracting competition of
private capitalists ; that is to say, corporate organiza-
tion and management of the process of production in
the place of private businesses ; public organization of
the labour of all on the basis of collective ownership of
all the working materials of social labour ; and, finally,,
distribution of the collective output of all kinds of
manufacture in proportion to the value and amount of
the work done by each worker." Mr. Eae, in the Con-
temporary Bevieiv, has described it succinctly somewhat
in this way. It is, he says, the progressive nationaliza-
tion of industries with the view to the progressive
equalization of incomes. These descriptions give a
very clear idea of what is meant, at any rate, by state
socialism. But socialism itself is often confounded
with what are really only tendencies towards it. The
alarm is sometimes raised that socialism is, so to speak,
thundering at our gates, whereas there really exists-
nothing else than a flow or tendency, which would, no
doubt, if it burst into a tempestuous flood, carry us
into socialism. This tendency is government inter-
ference, or legislative interference, or socialistic legis-
lation. Socialism is a system, which would exhibit
128 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
government interference in the fullest operation. It
is the zenith of that state interference which would
make the hand of government felt in every hour and
every act of the individual's life. Any legislation,
therefore, that extends the power of the government
to interfere in private life, is rightly called socialistic.
It brings us one step nearer to the goal which is the
hope and dream of every socialist. Every Act of Par-
liament that gives the government new interfering
powers marks a milestone passed upon the way. It
is legislation of this sort which the Liberty and Pro-
perty Defence League has been formed to combat, and
against which Lord Bramwell and Lord Wemyss so
stoutly protest.
There can be no doubt, indeed, that in the British
Islands the tendency of legislation has been for some
years past, and still is, in an increasing degree, in the
di rection of Government interference. It may be further
asserted with some confidence that democracy, in
Anglo-Saxon communities at least, the stronger it
grows, the more it demands such interference. The
more the franchise has been extended in England, the
greater has been the demand for interference by the
legislature. To demonstrate this would be to go into
the history of legislation for the last fifty years or
more. But there can be no doubt of the fact, and in
order to see how far legislation of this sort is likely to
go, it is worth inquiring how far legislation in other
countries tends to move in the same direction. An in-
quiry of this sort will perhaps throw some light upon
the question whether legislative interference at home
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 129
is likely to recede or advance. It is on the whole,
perhaps, better to confine our attention to Anglo-Saxon
communities. Arguments drawn from foreign nations,
where the whole conditions are different, are often mis-
leading. Democracies of the Latin races, for instance,
act quite different from Anglo-Saxon democracies.
The argument from analogy is not safe where condi-
tions are very different, and the conditions of Anglo-
Saxon communities are much more sure to be like
those at home than those of foreign races.
The great Anglo-Saxon communities of the world
besides the British Islands are the United States of
America, and the colonies of Canada and Australia,
We will consider the case of the United States first.
The United States demonstrate even more clearly
than England that democracies tend more and more to
demand legislative interference. And this is the more
remarkable because it is one of the fundamental dogmas
of the American people that the less of such interfer-
ence the better. The strength of the tendency of the
American democracy to demand legislative interference
may be estimated by the fact that in America legisla-
tion has gone far beyond the limits theoretically im-
posed upon it. The practice has prevailed over what
is at once philosophic theory and popular maxim.
A brief examination of the facts of American legis-
lation will show this to be so. Professor Bryce, in his
" The American Commonwealth," has classified legis-
lative interference under the following heads :
1. Prohibitions to do acts which are not in the
ordinary sense of the word criminal.
K
130 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
2. Directions to individuals to do things which it
is not obviously wrong to omit.
3. Interferences with the ordinary course of law in
order to protect individuals from the consequences of
their own acts.
4. Directions to a public authority to undertake
work which might be left to individual action, and the
operation of supply and demand.
Now, " in every one of these kinds of legislative inter-
ference," says Mr. Bryce, " the Americans, or at least
the Western States, seem to have gone farther than the
British Parliament." It would be difficult to find a
case, where the British Parliament has interfered, where
the legislature of some American State has not inter-
fered also, and where the latter bodies have interfered,
they have generally done so with a heavier and more
far-reaching hand. A few illustrations taken from
several classes of government interference will suffice
to show this. In the first place, the United States are
strongly protectionist in policy. They have lately
carried protection to an extreme degree by the new tariff
provided by the McKinley Act. Protection is really
a very gross form of interference with individual
liberty, because it is nothing less than compulsion
applied to consumers generally to buy at high prices
in order to benefit particular manufacturers. This is
one broad and general instance, which is common to
most other countries besides the United States. Let us
consider more particular instances. Under the head of
public health, take the case of the manufacture and sale
of oleomargarine. The Federal Government has put a
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 131
heavy tax upon manufacturers of oleomargarine, while
the State of Pennsylvania forbids its sale altogether.
The State of Georgia compels proprietors of public
houses to notify to their guests by public notice or to
mention on the bill of fare if oleomargarine is used at
their houses. Take, again, the practice of medicine.
The State of Illinois has provided that itinerant vendors
of any drug or nostrum, and persons publicly professing
to cure disease by such means, are to pay a licence of
100 dollars per month. Take, again, the question of the
regulation of the liquor traffic. Interference here has
gone much further than in England. Some States, as
Kansas and North and South Dakota, have prohibited
the sale of intoxicating liquor altogether. Others have
adopted various forms of local option. Other and
more novel provisions are to be found in some States.
In the State of Illinois, for instance, liquor-dealers are
held responsible for damage done by persons who have
become intoxicated on liquor sold by them, and the
owner or lessee of the premises is also held responsible
if he knowingly allowed such sale to take place. In
the State of New York, the sale of liquor to an Indian,
minor, or habitual drunkard after notice is given, is
illegal, and a similar responsibility to that in the State
of Illinois is imposed on the owner or lessee. In the
State of Georgia, a person taking out a licence must
execute a bond conditioned on keeping an orderly
house, and not supplying minors without the consent
of parents or guardians.
Turning to another class of cases, we find that banks,
insurance companies, benefit societies, and railway
132 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
companies are more strictly regulated than in England.
In many cases the accounts are subject to inspection by
government officials, and returns must be made to the
government. Then, again, regulations affecting labour
are more far-reaching. In England children under ten
years of age are not allowed to be employed at all, and
those under fourteen years not more than half-time,
while minors under eighteen years and women of any
age are not to be employed more than ten hours a day.
But in Pennsylvania children under thirteen years of
age are not allowed to be employed at all, and minors
under sixteen years may be employed but nine months
in the year, and then only on condition that they
attend school during the rest of the year. In the State
of New York, children under thirteen years cannot be
employed at all. In the State of Georgia, the hours of
labour in cotton, woollen, and other manufacturing
establishments, and in machine shops, are, for minors
under the age of twenty-one years, from sunrise to sun-
set, with the customary hours for meals, and contracts
with parents for such services for a longer time are
void. In the State of California, children may not be
employed for more than eight hours a day except in
agricultural or domestic work. In the States of Penn-
sylvania and Illinois, eight hours constitutes a day's
work when no contract exists to the contrary. There
are, however, many exceptions to this. In the State of
New York, eight hours constitutes a day's work when
no contract exists to the contrary, except in farm or
domestic labour, and this provision applies to all
mechanics, working men, and labourers employed by
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 133
the State or by municipal corporations for the perform-
ance of public works. In the State of California a
similar law prevails. In the State of Texas, it is pro-
vided that where a contractor becomes bankrupt, the
labourers employed by him shall have a right of action
against the company or person for whose benefit the
work on which they were employed was done; while
the State of Minnesota enacts that all labour performed
by contract upon a building shall be a first lien thereon.
Some States have succeeded in establishing boards of
arbitration for labour-disputes. Both the States of New
York and Massachusetts provide that the Governor
shall appoint yearly a board of arbitration consisting
of three members. In Massachusetts the board decides
disputes directly, but in New York it only hears ap-
peals from local boards chosen by the disputing parties
and licensed by the county judges.
There are, moreover, many minor points of legisla-
tive interference, which, by their curiosity and novelty,
illustrate more pointedly the question under considera-
tion. The following examples have been picked out at
random. The State of New York, for instance, pro-
vides that no guest shall be excluded from any hotel
on account of race, creed, or colour. The State of
Georgia orders railway companies to put up a bulletin
stating how much any train already half an hour late
is overdue, while the State of Minnesota prescribes the
character of the waiting-rooms to be provided at
stations. The State of Maryland has instituted a state
Board of Commissioners for practical plumbing, and
licences for plumbers. The State of Texas makes it a
134 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
misdemeanour to deal in " futures," or keep a " bucket-
shop " for dealing in " futures." The State of Georgia
puts a tax of five hundred dollars a year on dealers in
"futures," while the State of Ohio punishes any one
who offers to sell options, or quotes the prices of
"margins," "futures," or "options." The State of
New York punishes any one who shall send a letter
with intent to cause annoyance to any other person.
The State of Nebraska prohibits the sale of tobacco to
minors, and the State of Iowa punishes the giving or
selling of pistols to them. Both the States of Ken-
tucky and Minnesota have enacted laws which are
interesting as embodying provisions somewhat similar
to those which have been demanded here with regard
to mural advertisements. The State of Kentucky pro-
hibits the sale of any book or periodical, the chief
feature of which is to record the commission of crimes,
or display by cuts or illustrations of crimes committed,
or the pictures of criminals, desperadoes, or fugitives
from justice, or of men or women influenced by stimu-
lants. The State of Minnesota similarly prohibits the
sale of books and papers devoted to the publication of
and principally made up of criminal news, police
reports, or accounts of criminal deeds, or pictures and
stories of deeds of bloodshed, lust, or crime. Then,
again, many states contain provisions against usury, while
some create far-reaching exemptions from attachments
and executions. Indeed, to such an extent has this
been carried that it has been said that the tendency
in America is " to require the repayment of debts only
when it can be made out of superfluous accumulated
capital."
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 135
Now, it must be admitted that the tendency towards
Government interference at first sight seems irre-
sistibly strong. It may well be thought that, if such
things can be done in America, where the people are
so energetic and self-reliant, and where it is almost
a popular maxim that a man knows his own business
best, and should be allowed to do it as he pleases, the
prospect of restricting Government interference at
home must be faint iudeed. But on looking somewhat
closer into the matter, it will be found that certain
allowances must be made, which somewhat alter the
aspect of the matter. It will be found that certain
conditions exist in America, which do not exist in this
country, and that, in the absence of these conditions, it
would be rash to infer that Government interference
in England must approximate to such interference in
America either in kind or degree. Indeed, it will be
found that the opposite is the case. Much as Great
Britain and the United States resemble one another,
there are well-marked differences between them. Now,
one of the great differences is this. In Great Britain
the various industries are on the whole tolerably well
scattered about in various directions. Manufacturing,
mining, and agricultural pursuits are frequently carried
on in the same county, and even where a county is
devoted to a single industry, this counts for little
when counties are, comparatively speaking, so small.
But in America it is far otherwise. There are found
not merely whole states, but whole groups of states
that is to say, districts vastly larger than England,
devoted to particular industries. There are, for
136 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
instance, the corn-growing states, the cattle-raising
states, the mining states, the timber-growing states,
and so forth. Now, when we come to examine the
statute-books of any state which is the home of any
particular industry, we find that it is largely made up
-of provisions for the protection and encouragement of
that particular industry. Take, for instance, the great
corn-growing and agricultural State of Minnesota.
There we find a great mass of legislation for the pro-
tection of farmers. The railways have been forced to
make all sorts of concessions to the farming industry,
loans of grain seed are granted, agricultural bureaus
and fairs are established, lecturers on agriculture are
sent round, homesteads are exempted from executions,
State Dairy Commissioners are appointed, and the sale
and manufacture of oleomargarine narrowly restricted.
And so on mutatis mutandis with the other .states. So
that it is evident that a great deal of Government
interference is interference with the object of protect-
ing and encouraging the particular industries that are
centred in the several states. This is, no doubt, at
best a questionable policy, and it is a selfish and short-
sighted policy where it is detrimental to the practice
of other industries. But, whatever its merits or de-
merits, the important thing to remember is that such
a policy would be impossible for Great Britain, with
its many and diverse interests, with its various in-
dustries scattered in all directions. To put Great
Britain on similar conditions with many of the
American states, we should have to imagine Great
.Britain a countiy devoted wholly to one particular
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 137
industry. We should have to suppose it an entirely-
agricultural or mining community, just as the State
of Minnesota is an agricultural, and the State of
Nevada a mining community. But this is very far
from being the case. So that clearly the industrial
conditions of many of the American states are quite
different from those of Great Britain, and one of the
causes that impel so many of the American states into
legislative interference is found to operate there only
by reason of the peculiarity of their conditions, and
would be inoperative where the conditions are entirely
different. Here, then, is one reason why Government
interference is unlikely to go as far in this country as
it has done in America, for >we have found to be absent
here a cause which is there fertile in consequences.
Then, again, another reason why Government inter-
ference has gone farther in the American states is to
be found in the difference in character between the
British Parliament and -the average American State
Legislature. So long as we have men of the type of
the Duke of Argyle and the Earl of .Derby in the
House of Lords, and Mr. Goschen in the House of
Commons, there is not much fear of the British Parlia-
ment venturing on legislation like that which is the
product of many of the American State Legislatures.
Of these latter bodies, Mr. Bryce says that in them the
American people " possess bodies with which it is easy
to try legislative experiments, since these bodies, though
not of themselves disposed to innovation, are mainly
composed of men unskilled in economics, inapt to fore-
see any but the nearest consequences of their measures,
138 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
prone to gratify any whim of their constituents, and
open to the pressure of any section whose self-interest
or impatient philanthropy clamours for some departure
from the general principles of legislation. For crotchet-
mongers as well as for intriguers there is no such
paradise as the lobby of a state legislature. No re-
sponsible statesman is there to oppose them, no warn-
ing voice will be raised by a scientific economist/'
It is obvious, from this description of the American
State Legislatures, that they differ widely in character
from the British House of Commons, and that they
are much more prone to plunge into legislative caprices.
What kind of legislation they are capable of may be
readily inferred from the illustrations which have
already been given. What they might be capable of
in the future may be gathered from Bills introduced,
but which did not become law. Here are two examples
from the state of Minnesota. In that State in 1885
a Bill was introduced to prohibit the two sexes from
skating at rinks together, and another Bill to license
drinkers instead of liquor-sellers! We might almost
exclaim with the writer in the Anti- Jacobin
" Primordial nonsense springs to life
In the wild war of democratic strife."
Sir H. S. Maine has expressed an opinion that the
provision of the United States Constitution (Article I.
sec. 10), which prohibits any state from passing a law
impairing the obligation of any contract, has operated
to check socialistic legislation. This, no doubt, has
prevented certain legislation of a kind that has
appeared on the British statute-books. It would have
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 139
rendered impossible the passing of some of the Irish
Land Acts, and certain provisions in the Agricultural
Holdings Acts, which enables a tenant to violate his
contract with his landlord. But probably this part of
the American Constitution has produced very little
effect on the whole. But we may fairly conclude,
however, that legislative interference is unlikely to
go as far in England as it has done in America,
because, as we have se^n, the American State Legisla-
tures differ so much from our own, and because, in the
next place, the industrial conditions of many American
states are peculiar, and differ greatly from those of
England.
Turning from the Anglo-Saxon community of the
United* States to the British Colonies, in Canada and
Australasia we find that legislative interference has
gone further than at home, as it has done in the
United States. Take the case of Canada first. It is
in the first place protectionist, which, as we have seen,
is really a great piece of Government interference.
Then, again, the state and municipalities largely assist
railways. But it is with regard to the regulations as
to the sale of intoxicants that interference has gone
farthest. In many parts of Canada the sale of intoxi-
cants is forbidden altogether, and in some parts it has
been forbidden, but the restriction has subsequently
been removed. This is as far as interference can
possibly go. It does appear a great interference with
liberty of action to be forbidden to purchase wine,
beer, or spirits. There is Sunday closing nearly every-
where, and in many places it is forbidden to sell liquor
140 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
to minors and Indians. In Ontario there is in opera-
tion what is known as the Civil Damages Clause in
the United States. It is provided that if a man in
a state of intoxication dies through suicide or some
misadventure, damages may be obtained against the
seller of the liquor by the friends of the deceased.
Then there is a provision in some provinces that no
liquor is to be supplied to any person whose relatives
declare before a magistrate that he is wasting his
means or interfering with the happiness of his family
by drinking. It is clear that these provisions must,
in matters of drinking, tend greatly to restrict indi-
vidual liberty. The Factory Acts of Canada are not
quite so advanced as in England. In Ontario and
Quebec the Acts are not strictly enforced, because
they are not the same in both provinces, and each
province fears the competition of the other if it puts
its own Act in force. Truck, too, prevails to some
extent in the maritime provinces and Newfoundland.
There is no legal working day, but ten hours is, in
practice, the working day, with many exceptions.
One curious piece of interference should in conclusion
be noticed, and that is, that in Ontario there is some
severe local legislation against Sunday excursions.
This must surely be where the Scotch colonists pre-
dominate. On the whole, therefore, the conclusion
seems to be that Canada has gone further than England
in Government interference.
Turning next to the Australian Colonies and New
Zealand, we meet with a very striking state of things.
Sir Charles Dilke, who can speak with authority, says,
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 141
in his " Problems of Greater Britain," that " democracy
and state socialism have completely triumphed in
Victoria," and further, that "indeed, the strongest
disposition exists in Victoria, and, though in a less
degree, throughout Australia generally, to think that
the state is able to influence the prosperity of a country
to a larger extent than is believed possible by us in
Great Britain, or by our descendants in Canada or the
United States." Professor Play fair once remarked
that the activity and perseverance of mankind are
continually defeating the folly and caprice of their
governors. The Australians, on the contrary, seem to
think that the folly and caprice of mankind can be
checked or rendered innocuous by the wisdom of the
state. At any rate, their domestic policy seems to bear
out this view. The colonies are all in the first place,
except New South Wales, protectionist. Victoria is
so most strongly, and even New South Wales now
shows an inclination to recede from free trade. The
railways in Australia are everywhere in the hands of
the state, but New Zealand now allows them to be
built by private enterprise, and gives grants of lands
in aid. It must be admitted that the results of the
state ownership of railways are admirable. Most of
the Australian Colonies assist charities and hospitals,
and New South Wales has given work to the unem-
ployed. Most of them, too, assist elementary educa-
tion and the universities. In Victoria elementary
education is free. In New South Wales, South
Australia, and Tasmania it is not entirely free, but
it is compulsory. In Victoria state aid is given to the
142 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
study of botany and astronomy, to schools of mines
and designs. State encouragement is also given to
mining, and to experimental work in horticulture and
agriculture, and prizes are given for fruit and many
other products. In Victoria, too, the state helps to
construct parks, and assists municipalities in making
tramways. Quite lately it has undertaken a great
system of irrigation. Victoria, too, curiously enough,
prohibits tbe sale of Sunday newspapers. The ques-
tion of an eight-hours working day has attracted much
attention in Australia, but the law has nowhere yet
interfered to make it compulsory, though it has gone
very near doing so. In the Victorian Parliament, an
abstract proposition in favour of an eight-hours legal
day has been adopted. In Queensland an Eight-Hours
Bill was passed in 1889 by the Lower House, but it
was rejected by the Upper House ; and the very same
thing happened in South Australia. In Victoria, how-
ever, an Act was passed in 1885 to make compulsory
early closing in shops. The power of putting the law
in force was left to municipalities, and was at first a
failure ; but public opinion was so strongly in favour
of it that it is now completely successful. In Victoria,
too, eight hours is the working day fixed for labour on
Government works. All the Australian Colonies have
excellent factory laws, and laws directed against sweat-
ing. Whether the anti-Chinese legislation must be
classed as State interference is doubtful, because it
is directed against foreigners. But, on the other hand,
it might well interfere with the liberty of those who
might wish to employ Chinese labour.
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 143
Turning our attention to State interference as it
affects the liquor trade, we find it to be very vigorous
indeed, almost as much so as in Canada. There is a
local option law in force in Queensland ; but no com-
pensation is allowed to owners of houses that are closed.
In Victoria, on the other hand, compensation is allowed.
In South Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand, a
drunkard may be put under notice before a magistrate,
in the same manner as we have seen to be the case in
Canada. Sunday closing, too, is common.
In New Zealand, the state has undertaken functions
which have not yet been undertaken by the state in
any other country. The most important of these is
the Government Life Insurance. This has been extra-
ordinarily successful in New Zealand, and private in-
surance offices have been left quite behind. The other
is the Public Trust Office, which is also successful ;
but not so much so as the Life Insurance Office.
It is clear, then, that State interference has been
invoked in the Australasian colonies and Canada much
more than it has been at home. And it must be
admitted that, unless the conditions prevailing there
differ widely from those at home, it is probable that
English legislation is likely to tend in the same direc-
tion. The only well-marked difference is that the
colonies are new countries in process of development,
and that they are peopled with a race in the full blush
and vigour of youthful life. There can be no doubt
that legislation may be proper and necessary in a new
country, which would be quite unjustifiable in an old
one. So that we need not expect all colonial legisla-
144 ESSAYS IX POLITICS.
tion to be acceptable at home. Then, with regard to
the character of the colonial legislatures, it is no dis-
paragement to them to say that at present they cannot
hope to produce as many capable legislators as the old
country. Some of their statesmen would, of course,
adorn any assembly ; but it is contrary to reason to
suppose that a small population can produce as much
ripe wisdom as a large one. So that we must expect
colonial legislatures to go further than our own House
of Commons would think desirable.
There is another good reason for believing that
socialistic legislation is not likely to go far in England,
or, at all events, that socialism of a revolutionary type
will not be embraced, and that is the character of the
British working man, a character which no doubt
belongs in some degree to the Anglo-Saxon of America,
but which is pre-eminently the mark of the working
man in our own islands. The character of the Anglo-
Saxon in America must have become largely modified
by the enormous influx of population from the Euro-
pean continent. But at home it is not so, and there
the fact must be at once noted that socialism in any
form is utterly alien to the genius of the British work-
ing man. He is decidedly TrpatcTiKog and hard-headed,
and has plenty of what the Greeks called avrapKua.
He is not easily led away by an idea, and possesses
that " sullen resistance to innovation," and that "un-
alterable perseverance in the wisdom of prejudice,"
that Burke so admired in his countryman. Socialism
never has nor ever will take deep root in England.
The great socialistic thinkers have been foreigners,
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 145
like Marx, Lassalle, St. Simon, and Fourier. Socialism
in England has never been more than an ephemeral
growth. And this is the more remarkable, when it is
considered that in no country in the world has the
power of capital been so great as in England. It
almost seems to challenge by its very bigness the
violent opposition of the wage-earning class. Yet the
fact remains that it is in this spirit of independence
and self-help that the British labouring-classes differ
most from those classes on the Continent. This diffe-
rence has lately been brought out with remarkable
force and clearness by Dr. Baernreither, in his impor-
tant work on " English Associations of Working Men."
For it was this difference in character that impressed
him more than anything else. In one place he writes,
"The free union of individuals for the attainment of
a common object is the great psychological fact in
the life of this people, its great characteristic feature."
Again he writes, " Much that in England can be left
to the self-help of the classes concerned, can only be
accomplished on the Continent by the more vigorous
intervention of the Government. Yet on this very
point the study of English institutions should act as
an antidote against any exaggerated idea that a Govern-
ment, by its mere action, can at once remedy every
defect. The consideration of working men's relations
in England should convince us that State action
should merely resemble a prop which supports a build-
ing, so long as it is in course of construction, but which
is intended to be removed directly the building is com-
pact and complete. The necessity and duty on the
146 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Continent of taking care, -wherever the action of
Government must step in, simultaneously and syste-
matically to awaken and educate self-reliance and
spontaneous activity, this is the great lesson which we
should derive from the study of English relations."
In another place he remarks that the state on the
Continent "is continually developing into something
outside of and above the nation, entrusted, nay, over-
burdened with the task of supporting the whole com-
munity, and acting as the political and economical
guardian of the masses ; " and he declares that, while
"on the Continent we perceive an enlightened abso-
lutism penetrating deeply all relations of society, in
England we see a people who, whether in larger or
smaller centres of administration, are essentially self-
governing," and, further, that under the Continental
system " the spontaneous energies of the people must
necessarily be stunted." These statements, coming as
they do from such an authority as Dr. Baernreither,*
carry great weight with them. They are in the highest
degree significant, and pregnant with suggestion, and
throw a strong light on the character of the British
working-classes, their independence, self-help, and
associative spirit. A French writer, M. Julian Decraix,
has lately remarked on the same thing in an article
in the Revue des Deux Mondes. In a description of
Liverpool, he is led to dwell on " the advantages of
private initiative, in an age in which it has become
* This work by Dr. Baernreitker has been translated into English,
and contains a very appreciative preface by Mr. Ludlow, the chief
registrar of friendly societies.
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 147
the fashion to call at every moment upon the State
for intervention, which is generally useless." The
English working -classes have, indeed, already become
in a large measure their own insurers, through the
agency of the different classes of friendly and pro-
vident societies, their own protectors in trade dis-
putes by means of trades unions, and to some extent,
capitalists by means of co-operative societies. In
these departments they have greatly surpassed their
fellows on the Continent. In Germany quite recently
a great scheme of insurance for sick, aged, and infirm
workmen has had to be undertaken. Unlike the
Frenchmen or the Germans, they do not keep impor-
tuning with useless prayer the legislative idol, nor do
they give point to the saying of Polybius, that men,
though apparently the wisest of animals, are really the
silliest, because they persistently have recourse to
devices which have often failed them before. This
very spirit of independence, however, tends to bring
trouble with it. No one can commend what is called
the new trades unionism, with its new-fangled theories,
and utter disregard of the different conditions that
prevail in the various fields of labour. No one, again,
can do anything but condemn the violence shown
towards non-unionists, or the inefficiency of the work,
which shipowners say exists at the London Docks.
The working-classes of Canada and Australia must
be credited with quite as much self-reliance and power
of self-help as their kinsmen at home. Friendly
societies and trades unions flourish there exceedingly
well. Co-operative societies, however, have not taken
148 ESSAYS IX POLITICS.
much root, partly, no doubt, owing to the prosperity
of the colonists, which makes them indifferent to the
small savings to be gained by co-operative distribution.
Much as they are inclined to call for State intervention
they have not forgotten the value of self-reliance.
Nothing, indeed, can be farther from the mind of the
colonists than extreme socialistic ideas. Extreme
views on the land question, however, have been held
by colonial political leaders. Nationalization of the
land, which was promulgated as a theory in Victoria
long before it was taken up by Mr. Henry George,
is advocated by some, but it makes no way amongst
the people.
Then, again, there is one element in much of the
Government interference as developed in England and
the colonies, and particularly in America, which to
some extent renders that interference less objectionable
than it otherwise would be. This element is the
endeavour to make law and morality more nearly co-
incident in their spheres. This endeavour is, at least,
healthy, though it may, and sometimes does, go beyond
what expediency allows. Examples of this sort of
interference are common enough in America, Such
are the laws of the States of Texas, Georgia, and Ohio,
which are aimed at gambling in stocks and shares, and
that of the State of New York, which punishes any
person who shall send a letter with intent to cause
annoyance to any other person. In England, too, an
Act has lately been passed by Parliament, the object of
which is to check misrepresentations by promoters and
directors of companies. It is, of course, a mere truism
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 149
to say that men cannot be made moral by Act of
Parliament. But in so far as they indicate a determi-
nation on the part of the community that men shall
be punished for doing what right conscience condemns,
such laws are absolutely good. They at least show a
healthy feeling to be prevalent in society, and they
demonstrate to a possible wrong-doer that public
opinion is against him, and that is an opinion which
he shrinks from outraging. It is only when law goes
so far in advance of practical morality, that it can only
be enforced with difficulty or not at all, that the
tendency to make law and morals coincident becomes
mischievous. This element in Government interference
is, then, as far as it goes, a good one, and it makes
Government interference wear a less sinister aspect
than it otherwise would do. There is one other
element in Government interference, which is near
akin to what may be called the moral element, and
of which much the same may be said. This is what
may be justly termed the philanthropic element. A
very considerable portion of legislative interference is
really due to feelings of philanthropy. Men see much
suffering about them, and they grow impatient at the
sight. They are unwilling to let natural causes pain-
fully and slowly work out what is probably the only
remedy. Their feelings are outraged by the notion of
" the struggle for existence," and " the survival of the
fittest," operating as causes without restraint in human
society. All this is good in itself, and philanthropy
only becomes bad when, iu a fit of irrational im-
patience, it adopts a remedy which may be worse than
150 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
the disease. Moreover, attempts to invoke the aid of
the Government to cure the evils that prevail in
society are useful in two ways. They pointedly call
attention to evils that might otherwise pass unnoticed
by the great mass of society, and they sometimes indi-
cate the direction in which the remedy must be sought ;
and in so far as they do this, they are far from being
useless. And when it is considered that it is the end
of all legislation to promote human happiness, it will
be at once seen that any step that tends to further this
end in any degree, however small, is not without its
value.
It should be remembered, too, that legislation has
interfered with individual freedom upon all sorts of
grounds, political, moral, and religious, and such
interference has been considered natural, and no one
ever associated them with socialistic tendencies.
Sunday trading has been forbidden on religious
grounds, yet it is a gross interference with the liberty
of the atheist. It is not permitted to use dogs
for drawing light carts, because it is considered cruel.
Tobacco can only be grown under stringent regulations.
Posts and telegraphs are made a State monopoly.
These are a few instances of the many ways in which
the State interferes to limit freedom. A man is re-
stricted in all sorts of ways, purely on grounds of
general convenience. What the difference in principle
is between many legal restrictions which are considered
reasonable and proper, and some of the modern legis-
lative acts, which are condemned as socialistic, it is
difficult to see. Legislation within the present century
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION 151
lias increased by leaps and bounds, because it is more
and more believed that wherever law can ameliorate
the conditions of life, it may be rightly invoked.
This is the working theory, if it may be so called, of
practical legislation, and though it may have a
socialistic tendency in restricting liberty, it certainly
is not socialistic in aim.
Lastly, the feeling of objection that is shown against
Government interference arises in a great measure
from a radical misconception of the nature of the
democratic system of government. So long as govern-
ment is in the hands of a few, the great majority of
the people having no part therein, then indeed the
governors and the governed stand apart ; and when the
governed clamour for some sort of legislative inter-
ference, they are asking for something from a class
standing apart from and above themselves. But in a
democracy it is far otherwise. Then the governing
body is really the servant or agent of the people, and
when the people demand Government interference,
they are no longer in the position of suppliants to a
superior body, but rather in that of masters command-
ing a servant, or principals an agent. Government
interference looked at from this point of view wears
a very different aspect. For when it comes from a
superior and separate body in answer to the demands
of the people, it is something in the nature of a favour
granted; it is, so to speak, the extended hand of
protection, and merits the epithet "paternal." But
such interference, when it comes from a body popu-
larly elected by a majority, is in no sense "paternal,"
152 < . ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
for it really comes from the people themselves. A
whole people cannot any more than an individual
exercise a "paternal" government over itself. And
this consideration really removes much of the ground
of objection to Government interference. It is con-
tinually said that such interference is "paternal," is
"grandmotherly," and saps the spirit of self-help and
self-reliance. But where the Government is popular,
it is difficult to see how this can be so.
It has been already suggested that Government
interference tends to grow with the advance of
democracy. Now, why this should be so becomes
clear when the true nature of democracy is considered.
Professor Bryce puts it very well, when he says,
"And in some countries, of which England may be
taken as the type, the transference of political power
from the few to the many has made the many less
jealous of Government authority. The Government is
now their creature, their instrument why should they
fear to use it ? They may strip it to-morrow of the
power with which they have clothed it to-day. They
may rest confident that its power will not be used
contrary to the wishes of the majority among them-
selves." Why indeed, one may well ask, should they
hesitate to use the instrument, to obtain which whole
nations have suffered the bitter pangs of revolution ?
And in this way, a democratic form of government
may resemble a " paternal " form of government. But
it will be a resemblance merely, for the two are in
reality very different, though the results may appear
much the same. So that Government interference in
SOCIALISTIC LEGISLATION. 153
democracy may not be so objectionable as is often
supposed. For if the majority think fit to apply the
sanctions of the law to enforce the carrying out of
that which they already approve, why should they not
do so ? It is really only a wider application of what
is done every day by a trades union, or some other
body where the majority impose their will. If it is
not objectionable that a trades union should restrict
the hours of labour for its members to eight hours a
day, why should it be objectionable that a majority in
the state should restrict the hours of labour to eight
hours for all labourers whatever? It cannot be
objected that legislative interference would tend to
protect the interests of some at the expense of others,
'because the legislative interference is invoked in the
interests of the majority ; and it is part of the theory
of democratic government that the majority must
prevail, but that the minority must give way.
For the reasons, then, which have been indicated, it
is unlikely that socialistic legislation will go as far in
England as it has done in America and the colonies.
For the conditions which are there favourable to its
growth are here largely absent. That the law will be
called in aid more and more to ameliorate life is,
however, very probable. That legislation will some-
times fail in its objects, or even prove mischievous,
is also in some degree probable. But even legislative
failures, injurious as they are, may be forgiven. For
legislative interference is often at least healthy in
origin. It tends to widen the sphere of morals, and
unlock the fountains of philanthropy. Moreover,
151
ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
when looked at from the point of view of the theory,
that underlies the rule of the people, it seems to har-
monize with and to be the complement of that theory.
It may be that sometimes the majority may err in
the means they adopt to gain an end right in itself,
and interference based on wrong methods must of
course be bad. We can then only say with Cicero,
" Male judicavit populus, sed judicavit." But the sort
of legislation that is likely to be adopted in England,
though it may be rightly called socialistic, is a very
different thing from revolutionary socialism. That,
indeed, is about the last thing likely to find favour
in England. On the continent of Europe it may well
be otherwise, because it is customary there to look
more upon Government a9 a sort of deity. It is a
Pandora with a box full of gifts for men, and, if that
box can be opened, all will be well. In England, on
the other hand, Government is rather looked upon as-
an instrument which, if carefully used, may sometimes
be employed with advantage. This difference in the*
conceptions of Government is at the root of much
divergence in legislation. The laws of a country may,
indeed, be called its physical expression, like the
features and movements on the human face. They
tell us something of the character of the people. And
just as the laws of England show the love of its people
for individual liberty, so the character of the people
proves that they will tolerate no law that will deprive-
thein of that liberty.
( 155 )
VI.
SCIENCE AND POLITICS.
It is a commonplace remark that scientific discoveriesv
and their practical application to the wants of every-
day life, make the present century more remarkable
for material and utilitarian progress than any that
have preceded it within human memory. Other
periods of history have been marked by the rise or
fall of empires, great revolutions in political institu-
tions, discoveries of unknown continents mysterious
with destinies as yet unrevealed, or by a vigorous
awakening of art and literature. But when we ask
ourselves what it is that in the nineteenth century has
most affected human affairs, we at once think of such
things as the railway, the steamship, and the electric
telegraph. They affect different minds in different
ways. To the young, who have been brought up in
the midst of them, and to the careless and indifferent,
they are hardly more than objects of wonderment, if
indeed that. In their minds the express train, and
the fast steamers that knit together the outlying parts
of great empires, and the globe-girdling wire that
156 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
flashes its messages from continent to continent, the
telephone, and the like, excite at best only a bewilder-
ing amazement, but strike no deeper note. Their very
familiarity breeds, not indeed contempt, but apathy
and indifference. To the man of science and the
engineer they are fraught with vast interest. They
at once testify to the great wealth of fruit already
garnered in by past labourers in the field of science,
and are rich with promise for the future. They teem
with problems as yet unsolved, and with unknown
possibilities for future discovery and improvement.
In many ways they present ample food for reflection
to the mind of the man of science. To the political
philosopher and the statesman they have an interest
of a kind different indeed, but no less profound. To
their minds they are full of pregnant suggestion.
While the physicist is thinking of heat-expansion, the
mechanical equivalent of heat, conservation and trans-
mutation of energy, and other kindred subjects, the
political inquirer is impelled to think of the effect of
these scientific discoveries upon, and their practical
application to, forms of government, federation, the
size and growth of states, and other human institutions.
Professor Freeman has put forward a doctrine, which
he says may seem a paradox. He says "that the
great practical discoveries of modern science, the use
of steam, electricity, any other natural powers, in the
various forms in which we have " learned to apply
them, are above all things valuable for their political
results." A paradox indeed it may at first appear.
But when it is remembered that man is, as Aristotle
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 157
said, a political animal, and that his political relations
are, excepting only his religion, the most important
thing that concern him, the seeming paradox will
vanish. Eeligion deals with a man's relations to God ;
politics deal with his relations to his fellow-men. And
as the main part of life is concerned with our relations
to others, it is clear that scientific discoveries, like
literature and the arts, are in truth only important as
they affect those relations. The hermit may indeed
contemn them, but then, he is only in the world, and
not of it ; he communes with God, and not with man.
But for the remainder of mankind all that affects
human intercourse, all that affects political life in the
broadest sense, must of necessity be of great concern.
It will be, therefore, useful to see in what manner, and
to what extent, scientific discovery and material pro-
gress influence politics and society.
In the first place, it is worth noting the influence of
improved means of travel and communication upon
the size, stability, and growth of states. One of the
lessons of history is that in the earlier ages of man-
kind states were often small, sometimes very small
indeed, and that when they were large, such states
were eminently unstable and liable to decay. The
most important examples of small states are of course
derived from the history of ancient Greece. This is
one of the most striking things that present them-
selves to the students of Herodotus and Thucydides.
In reading their pages, he becomes aware that the
Greek state was little more than a city. The Greek
politician was, as the word " politician " implies, strictly
158 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
one who concerned himself with the affairs of his city.
80, too, it was with Borne for many years. The Eoman
state for long remained conterminous with the Koman
city, and it was only by a process of very gradual
expansion that the city became the centre of a widely
extended empire. On the other hand, empires of wide
area almost always contained within themselves the
seeds of dissolution, and were usually transient. The
empire of Alexander the Great is an instance in point.
When deprived of the guidance of his masterful hand,
it fell to pieces at once. It faded like an "insub-
stantial pageant," leaving " not a rack behind." The
Persian Empire is another instance. It is curious
what devices the kings of Persia had to resort to, in
order to keep together their territory, which, compared
with some modern states, was not very large. The
outlying portions of the empire had to be entrusted
by the central government to provincial governors or
satraps. The satraps were an everlasting source of
anxiety. Far removed from the control of the home
government, and the jealous eye of the king himself,
they were apt to arrogate to themselves positions of
semi-independence, and sometimes aspired to carve out
for themselves kingdoms from the territory of their
royal master. In order to check such lofty preten-
sions, all sorts of ingenious devices were adopted. The
satrap was entrusted with civil powers only, military
authority being placed in other hands. He was
induced, if possible, to espouse a daughter or some
near relative of the king, in order to win his allegiance
to the royal house. And so, by devices of this sort
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 159
the Persian nionarchs were tolerably successful in
preventing rebellion and keeping their heritage intact.
Borne, again, affords us an example of the difficulty of
maintaining the great empires of antiquity. As in
the case of Persia, the government of the provinces
had to be entrusted to governors. They took advantage
of the absence of central control to rule with a high
hand, and to extort and oppress, when they did not
rebel. But it was in the time' of the Emperors that
this absence of control was most fruitful in its results.
Then, indeed, legions in the provinces actually pro-
ceeded to change dynasties, and to impose some
successful general as Emperor upon the helpless citi-
zens at the capital. Otho, G-alba, Yitellius, and
Vespasian alike owed the imperial purple to the
allegiance of the provincial soldiers. In a memorable
passage the historian Tacitus relates that on one
occasion two common soldiers undertook to transfer
the crown, and that they succeeded in their under-
taking. The Koman emperors were continually appre-
hensive of the conduct of their provincial governors.
Domitian, for instance, recalled Agricola from Britain,
though he was perhaps the most successful commander
and explorer of his time, and probably most unjustly
suspected. It rarely happened that the relations of
the emperor with his governors were as friendly and
intimate as the relations between Trajan and the
younger Pliny. And finally the great Koman Empire
broke up entirely, and Kome herself became, as Byron
calls her, " the Niobe of Nations."^ And in compara-
tively modern times the tendency for widely extended
160 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
empires to fall to pieces is still noticeable. The-
empire of Charles the Fifth, in its full integrity, was
not of long duration. France, Holland, Spain, and
Portugal have all tried to extend their territory by
acquiring colonial possessions, but they have all lost
most of what they gained.
It may be said, then, generally that, until quite
recently, the successful states of the world have been
the small ones, and not the large ones. It is the small
ones that have most influenced the destinies of man-
kind. Athens, Judsea, the Italian republics, the
Netherlands, and the British Islands were all small,.
but they have made a great mark in the world.
Eome may appear an exception, but Kome too had
more of the essential parts of greatness before it
reached its greatest area. When largest in size it
was least in soul. But the great states have had com-
paratively small influence. They have not been able
even to sustain themselves. China indeed has for
centuries maintained a huge empire. But as far as
influence on the world is concerned, it might just as
well have been situated in one of the fixed stars. But
the last hundred years has seen a reversal of what
seemed to be a universal law. States have begun to
grow enormously, and they seem destined to retain
their bigness. The British Empire is a great example
of this. The United States and Bussia, again, are also
both examples of vast areas subject to a single power.
The United States may by this time have reached its
ultimate dimensions, but it has grown enormously by
such additions as Florida, Louisiana, Texas, and Alaska.
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 161
Bussia steadily receives accretions in Central Asia,
and looks patiently towards an increase of territory in
South-Eastern Europe. Though she never hastes, she
never rests. It is impossible to believe that she has
yet reached her full limits. There is also a correlative
tendency to sink small states in large ones. The
Grand Duchies of Tuscany and Parma, the Papal
States, the kingdom of the Two Sicilies, have all been
merged in the kingdom of Italy. The petty German
States have been merged in the German Empire.
Poland has been efface'! from the map of Europe. The
present century is marked by two streams running
side by side in international politics. The one stream
tends to suppress and merge small states, the other to
create and consolidate large ones. This is to some
extent due, no doubt, to the desire to make races and
states coincident. But even to this some limit must
be put, as Signor Gispi has had to forcibly remind
the Irredendists of Italy. But however that may be,
the old order of things is reversed. The future of the
world is with the great states, the world-empires, as
Professor Seeley calls them. The British Empire, the
United States, Bussia, and probably China, are the
powers of the future. The days of small states, of
even moderately large states, are past. Of this the
European countries are fully aware, and hence the
feverish avarice of the scramble for Africa. M. Pre-
vost Paradol, in his " La France Nouvelle," gave the
French an emphatic warning, and strenuously insisted
on the French acquisition of a great territory in
Northern Africa. It was not out of caprice that M.
ffTTHIVBRSITT)
162 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
Jules Ferry sent expeditions to Tonquin and Mada-
gascar. Neither is it caprice that has sent the Germans
and Italians to East Africa. It was plain to French,
German, and Italian statesmen that, without acquisition
of fresh territory, their countries were doomed to a
future of petty insignificance, which was not a thing
they could complacently dwell upon. Whether even
now these countries will ultimately succeed is doubt-
ful, but they are at least alive to the fact that they
cannot merely stand and mark time, but that they
must either expand or prepare to retire gracefully from
the rank of the great Powers.
Here, then, is a great reversal, a great revolution in
human affairs. And the cause of it is not far to seek.
It is scientific discovery and its practical application.
It is the railway, the steamship, and the telegraph.
The want of means of rapid communication between
the different parts of wide empires was the real cause
of the facility with which in earlier times these
empires fell to pieces. It was all but impossible for
a central government to keep an efficient control over
far distant lands. All manner of untoward events
might take place there before the home authorities
could become aware of them, much less prevent them.
It was little use for a Persian king or Roman emperor
to sit in Susa or on the Palatine concocting admini-
strative measures, promulgating edicts or fulminating
denunciations, when in the far distance his satrap or
proconsul, acting on the proverb, " procul a Jove, pro-
cul a fulmine," was either setting his authority at
defiance or sapping his power. Their commands or
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 163
rebukes were often hardly more efficacious than a
Pope's sentence of excommunication on a British Prime
Minister would be. But all this is changed now.
Where the railway and the steamship are, there space
is practically in part annihilated. A man now can go
from London to Canada in about the same time it
used to take him to go from London to Edinburgh,
and he can reach the Antipodes in a shorter time than
he once required for crossing the Atlantic. Even so
short a time ago as the time of the American civil war,
it took forty days for the British Cabinet to receive
an answer to their ultimatum to the United States on
the Slidell and Mason incident. It is obvious, there-
fore, that it is possible to bring the distant parts of a
great empire practically into close contiguity with one
another. They become one great neighbourhood, and
the whole can be kept well under the control of the
central government. The telegraph, too, is of immense
importance. A colonial governor has not any longer
to wait for weeks or months before he can receive
instructions from home. They are flashed out to him
almost in a moment of time. And, conversely, his acts
are instantly made known at home, and are usually
made objects of common knowledge through the dis-
seminating power of the press. It is not too much to
say that had a fleet of swift steamers been sailing
between Liverpool and New York in 1776, the Decla-
ration of Independence might perhaps never have been
signed. But when it took weeks to cross the ocean,
the British colonies in North America were practically
much further away than they are now. The delay
164 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
that occurred over the interchange of views between
the home and colonial authorities led to all sorts of
misunderstandings, and events that were in their in-
ception small, by lapse of time became gigantic evils.
It was difficult for both sides to come to any accord.
And not only was the distance then practically greater,
but this distance affected the imagination. It seemed
natural that two countries so far apart should be inde-
pendent of one another. Nay, it seemed unnatural
that they should be yoked together. Why, it was
argued by the colonists, unite in irritating bonds coun-
tries that the hand of nature has placed apart ? Why
place together what God has put asunder ? But at the
present day it is quite otherwise. Now that far dis-
tant countries are brought within easy distance of one
another, it does not seem unnatural that they should
be united. On the contrary, it is usually thought that
such a union would be mutually advantageous. And
surely with reason the same causes may be ascribed to
the failure of France, Holland, Spain, and Portugal, to
keep their important colonies. It has been fortunate
for England that she was able to keep so many of her
colonies in hand, until the introduction of the steam-
ship and the telegraph. As it was, she lost the
United States, and had these scientific discoveries been
longer delayed, she might by this time have lost many
other of her colonial possessions. Thanks, however,
to the practical application of scientific discovery,
the British Empire ranks amongst the first in the
world.
Closely connected with this topic is the influence of
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 165
scientific discovery upon decentralization and local
government. The difficulties that were formerly en-
countered in making provincial governments adequate
and safe have already been referred to. Owing to the
lack of home supervision, such governments were either
timidly constructed and therefore feeble, or else en-
trusted with wide powers which were often abused.
But in modern times it is possible to decentralize, and
that with impunity, owing to the vastly improved
means of communication. Decentralization is a pro-
cess continually going on. Most of our colonies are
now entrusted with parliamentary institutions, and are
hardly at all interfered with by the home government.
Quite recently Western Australia has been made a
self-governing colony. And within the British Islands
decentralization still goes on. The railway has brought
all parts of the country so near together that this can
now be done with ease and safety. In 1888 an im-
portant Local Government Act was passed for the
counties of England, and in 1889 one was passed for
Scotland. And a great party are anxious to bestow
a large measure of self-government upon Ireland.
Whether it will ever be obtained or not is for the
present uncertain. But if it is ever obtained, it will
be because rapid means of communication will have
rendered it safe to grant it.
The relation borne to federation by scientific dis-
covery is of great importance. Much has been said in
a previous essay upon federations generally, so it must
be enough here to note the great development of
federal institutions within the present century. It is
166 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
a most remarkable thing that this great development
is contemporaneous with the great practical scientific
discoveries. There is surel) T something here more than
mere chance. Then further it is noteworthy that just,
as large states have supplanted small states, so large
federations have supplanted small ones. The Achasan
League, the United Netherlands and Switzerland, are
pigmies when compared with the giants of the United
States, Canada, the Argentine Kepublic, and the
coming Australian Federation. Switzerland is, indeed,
now the only small federation. She is a sort of sur-
vival of the past, and may be placed in the museum
of political curiosities, and catalogued as the dwarf
confederation. When it is considered that a federal
government is at bottom a compromise between the
conflicting interests of different portions of territory,
in order to meet common dangers and necessities, it
becomes clear that it is for the most part likely to be
adopted over wide areas. For it is over wide areas
that conflicting interests are most likely to arise. But
without good means of communication such a union of
distant territories would be difficult, if not impossible.
There can be little doubt that the great network
of railways now spread throughout the United States
has made the American Federation infinitely easier
than it otherwise would have been. There is always,
in such countries as the United States, a danger of a
dissolution of their constituent parts. It is impossible
to think of the history of the United States without
seeing that this is so. The great American civil war
will stand as an example and a warning for all time.
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 167
But with the lapse of time and the growth of the rail-
way system, the tendency to dissolution tends more and
more to a vanishing-point. Never were the United
States more united than they are to-day. It is not
Ion? since they celebrated the centenary of the inaugu-
ration of their first President, and so much enthusiasm
was shown in all parts of the great republic that it
may now be said with some confidence that it has an
assured and well-consolidated unity. This beneficent
result must surely be ascribed in a large degree to the
railways and the telegraphs. The various states have
been brought so near together that their interests are
more bound in unison, and are more nearly identical.
They are becoming more and more necessary to one
another's welfare, and the closer they unite the more
advantageous the union becomes. It is the avowed
object of the new Tariff Act to make the United States
one great neighbourhood, self-sufficing and indepen-
dent of foreign imports. Bret Harte, in one of his
poems, relates what two locomotive engines are fanci-
fully supposed to have said on meeting face to face at
the opening of the Union Pacific Kailway, after travel-
lino- from the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards respec-
tively. But though they are made to boast of much,
yet they pass over in silence the greatest boast of all.
They might have boasted how they were rendering
the Federal Constitution more and more stable. They
might have boasted on the fact that they were cement-
ing the union in indissoluble bonds, relegating the
horrors of civil war to a dark and nearly forgotten
limbo, and assuring in the future a lengthened pros-
168 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
pect of peace, founded on neighbourly good-will and
identity of interests.
The influence of railways on the neighbouring con-
federation of the Dominion of Canada is remarkable.
Upon no country have railways had so beneficent effect
as upon Canada. For a long time it seemed as though
Canada, or at least parts of it, were destined to absorp-
tion into the United States. Before the introduction
of railways, the Canadian north-west provinces were so
distant from the eastern provinces that they practically
had no connection with one another. Winnipeg was
much more closely connected with St. Paul and Min-
neapolis than with Montreal and Quebec. British
Columbia was much more in communication with
California and Oregon than with eastern Canada.
Emigration in Canada flowed, not westward, but into
New England and New York. Bat the introduction
of railways, particularly the Canadian Pacific Kailway,
has altered all this. For the future Vancouver will
be as closely connected with Quebec as San Francisco
with New York, and the Canadian emigrant will press
forward to develop the riches of the north-west instead
of crossing over to the already crowded states of New
England. And, with regard to Australasian federation,
it should here be noticed that it is distance, and dis-
tance only, which even fast steamers cannot sufficiently
abridge, that keeps New Zealand from coming into a
federal union with the Australian colonies.
The relation of scientific discovery to democracy is
a subject that is full of interest. Bousseau did not
hesitate to declare his opinion that democracy was
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. ~ 169
incompatible with a large state. He considered that
the great states of his time were far too big in area,
and he wished for a return to the model of the old
Greek city. What he would have said to the present
British Empire or to the United States it is impossible
to say. But if he were alive now, he would have to
retract his opinion that democracy can only live in a
small state. Montesquieu too seems to have thought
the same thing, but he had the foresight to see that
the difficulty might be got over by federation. And
here again it is from the means of communication that
we have to note the most important consequences. It
will become apparent on reflection that, where com-
munication is difficult and the area large, the demo-
cratic form of government is by its very nature not
easy of application. For what does democracy con-
note ? Government by the people, or participation
by all in governing. But where distances are great
and communication difficult, the obstacles to the par-
ticipation of all in governing become immensely
augmented. And so democracies first arose in small
states, and we have to go to the small Greek cities
for the first examples of this form of government. In
the large states like Persia, Assyria, Egypt, we find
that the monarchical form of government existed,
varying in different degrees from a mild paternal rule
to an oppressive and dark despotism. But it was in
the small Greek cities that democracy flourished, for
there it was possible for each citizen to come to the
Assembly and listen to the wild harangues of a Cleon
or the flowing eloquence of a Demosthenes, and to
170 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
signify his pleasure as to the policy for his country to
adopt. The citizens and the actual administrators of
government lived in close propinquity to one another.
It is almost as though the whole body of electors to the
British House of Commons lived beneath the shadow
of Westminster Hall. So that for small states demo-
cracy was natural and easy of adoption, and we can
understand that # it was no wild statement of Pericles
when he said that the Athenians accounted a man use-
less who took no part in public affairs. But in the
large states democracy was impossible according to the
then known political methods, for representation was
a device not then discovered.
One of the most curious and interesting spectacles
in ancient history is the difficulty that Rome met with
in the later republican period in adjusting her political
institutions, which were becoming less and less oligar-
chical, and beginning to assume a democratic appear-
ance through the widening of the franchise of Roman
citizenship. This privilege, which was originally con-
fined to the dwellers on the Seven Hills and the
immediate neighbourhood, was gradually extended over
the Italian peninsula, and finally much further than
this. But how to enable the Roman citizen to exercise
his powers as a citizen, and so become a factor in the
wheels of government at Rome, was a problem that
vexed in vain the minds of her most acute statesmen.
The possibility of some means of representation either
did not occur to them, or, if it did, they did not see
their way to putting it into practice. It is only in
comparatively modern times that representation has
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 171
been introduced. It is an almost necessary incident
of parliamentary government, bnt until quite recently
representation even in small states has been carried
out so timidly, and on so limited a scale, that it has
been rather oligarchical than democratic in its nature.
Until the great Keform Act the British Government
was largely aristocratic in character, and certainly
oligarchical. But within a period almost coincident
with the introduction of a great railway system, it
has become democratic. Is this merely a fortuitous
circumstance ? Surely not. [Representation has be-
come easier in consequence of a greatly improved
means of communication. The influence of railways on
democracy and representative government can hardly
be over-estimated. Not that even representation is a
full equivalent for a democracy in which, every citizen
can personally take part. Parliaments do not always
faithfully represent the views of the people. More-
over, where areas are large, representation becomes
correspondingly difficult. It is no light matter for a
Member of Congress to travel from [San Francisco or
New Orleans to Washington. It would be quite im-
possible for a member of a British Imperial Parliament
to attend from New Zealand or Australia. Bepresen-
tative government in any case has only become possible
on any great scale since the discovery of rapid means
of communication, and it is for this reason that the
wonderful impulse given to demoeraticjnstitutions has
accompanied the no less wonderful application of
science to the conveniences of life, which is the special
glory of the present century. It is clear that demo-
172 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
cracy was at first only possible in small communities,
but, thanks to scientific discovery, representation has
been made easy. There is now practically no limit to
the area over which the democratic form of govern-
ment can be successfully applied. The most remark-
able instance is the United States. That a people
numbering over fifty millions, and scattered over an
area of about three million square miles, should be
subject to one of the most popular governments in the
world is surely an amazing fact, and one worth thinking
over. There are few more dramatic incidents in
modern affairs than the casting of votes over this vast
area by this great people for the election of their
President, and that too in a single day. It should not
be forgotten, too, that the telegraph and the press have
in a degree contributed their influence to make repre-
sentation easy. Eepresentatives are now subjected to
the glare of " the fierce light " of popular gaze, and
cannot escape the vigilant criticism of their constituents.
The people place the more trust in the representative
system, because, knowing as they do, their representa-
tives' every word and act, they are well aware that
they have them well in hand. In a word, as Professor
Freeman says, the great practical discoveries of modern
science have " enabled large states to rise to the politi-
cal level of small ones." These words are a seeming
paradox, but they are profoundly true. It has not
been until quile recently that any but small states
were capable of sustaining democratic institutions.
Large states could not come up to their political level.
Now they can do so, for scientific discovery has ren-
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 173
dered democracy on a great scale possible. And to
have clone this is as great an achievement as any that
the world has yet seen.
And just as democracy has become more possible, so
in a corresponding degree has the tyranny either of a
despot or an oligarchy become less possible, putting
aside those oriental countries as yet untouched by
European influences. The easy methods of travel, and
the conveniences afforded by the railway, the post-
office, the telegraph, and the newspaper, for the trans-
mission and distribution of information, have made
tyranny increasingly difficult. Personal inaccessibility
and secrecy have always been, and probably still are,
necessary for successful tyranny. Surely the notion of
"the divinity that doth hedge a king" must have
arisen at least in some degree from a certain awe
begotten by the withdrawal of the monarch from
popular gaze. It was essential that the populace
should have little opportunity of witnessing the human
frailties of their ruler, or of getting that familiarity
that breeds contempt. The story of the Pseudo-
Smerdis who succeeded in winning for himself the
Persian crown, on the false pretence of royal descent,
is full of suggestive meaning. He carried the habit
of secrecy to an almost incredible extent. But then
it was essential to the maintenance of his position.
He kept himself closely confined to his citadel, and
his very appearance was unknown to -those about the
court. His features were as little known as those of
the man with the iron mask. Unluckily for him, his
personal aspect one day became divulged by an artful
174 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
contrivance on the part of those who suspected a fraud,
and there was soon an end of this adventurer's career
as a king. Again, there is a certain grim darkness
and mysterious secrecy that seems to shroud the life
of the Boman Emperor Tiberius, in the island of
Capreas. And when we read of Philip the Second of
Spain, sitting in the Escorial at Madrid, weaving the
web of destiny, penning prolix and wearisome de-
spatches with an untiring industry, constant only in
duplicity, and hurrying to early and mysterious graves
a Montigny or an Escovedo, it is impossible to avoid a
shudder at the inscrutable gloom that enshrouded him,
which a lapse of three centuries has not entirely dis-
pelled. It may be safely asserted that the march of
western civilization has become too rapid to allow the
recurrence of such incidents in human affairs as these,
unless, indeed, some step of retrogression is reserved
for us. For the present, at any rate, we may be sure
that there is little chance of secrecy, hardly of privacy
even, reserved for those uneasy heads that wear the
crown. And if there is little chance for the tyranny
of a single man, there is much less for that of a
group of men. The insidious workings of a Venetian
oligarchy are vanished, let us hope, for ever. When
the railway makes travelling easy for all, and when the
telegraph and the newspaper bring information to all
who can read, nothing at least that is at all likely to
shock popular feeling, or outrage humanity, can be for
a moment veiled from popular view. Science is indeed
the twin brother of Liberty.
The bearing of scientific discovery on the conduct
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 175
of war and prospects of peace is noteworthy. Perhaps
the most interesting aspect of this question is the
relation of warfare, as modified by our modern inven-
tions, to the comparative sizes of states and forms of
government. In the first place, it must be remarked
that war has become enormously costly, and. is likely
to become more and more so in an increasing degree.
The military and naval budgets of Continental nations,
even in times of peace, have reached appalling dimen-
sions. Almost every year sees some addition to them.
The cost of a first-class ship of war and its guns may
well disquiet the mind of the poor tax-payer. No
European country can afford to be without such
weapons of offence as torpedoes, colossal guns, and
rifles and swords of the newest and most efficient type.
But this security is gained at an enormous cost. No
wonder that Europeans are beginning to think that
their countries are being "run" for the advantage of
America. It seems, therefore, a natural consequence
that the richest countries are likely to be the most
successful in war. Of course this need not necessarily
be the case, because a nation may be rich and yet too
devoted to the pursuits of peace to give the necessary
attention to external defence. Eiches can never quite
compensate lor unpreparedness. France was richer
than Prussia, but, as it turned out, quite unprepared.
And Sir Charles Dilke has expressed his opinion most
emphatically on the unpreparedness of Great Britain
to meet a sudden attack. In such an event our riches
would only form a great prize to our conquerors. And,
again, it seems to follow that the largest countries, in
176 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
so far as mere greatness of extent brings them wealth,
would be the most successful. But here, again, it is
obvious that a wilderness however extensive, or fertile
acres however many, if left untilled, fannot profit at
all. So that a small state, if rich, could cope on equal
or superior terms with a poor but vastly larger state.
However that may be, it is certain that mere hardi-
hood, endurance, and courage cannot count for as much
as they once did. They are valuable still, no doubt,
but no amount of courage can stand up against the
raking fire of a machine-gun. The Mahdists in the
Soudan campaign fought with unsurpassable bravery,
but they were cut down like grass. The people who
bring into the field the most efficient weapons must
win, if they handle them with the necessary skill.
The Dutch peasantry in the sixteenth century would
sometimes arm themselves with all kinds of impromptu
weapons, and would give a good account of themselves
against the trained battalions from Spain. But it
would be little use for any people to attempt any such
daring in these days against the soldiers of a modern
state. It would be little use for an Alva or Don John
of Austria, with all their skill and intrepidity, to direct
insufficiently armed troops against a German battalion.
No Drake or Howard could have any chance of success,
if he relied on mere daring, in the face of a first-class
man-of-waiv So that it seems almost certain that the
richest country has, if it chooses to take advantage of
its wealth, the best chance of success in war under its
modern conditions. How far, and in what manner, the
relations of the different forms of government to war
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 177
are affected by modern inventions is a different and
more complex question. One thing, however, seems
certain, and that is that tyranny is not likely to derive
much advantage from the increased costliness of war.
It would be strange indeed if a tyrant should be rich
enough to supply these costly inventions out of his
own private purse for use against his subjects for pur-
poses of oppression. And he could hardly expect to
derive the necessary money from his subjects by a
process of taxation. In former times a tyrant could
grind down his subjects by means of a body of troops,
small, but attached to his person by self-interest. But
that he could hardly do now, at any rate for any length
of time. On the other hand, parliamentary govern-
ment, and the newspapers together, are inimical to
successful war. Secrecy from the enemy is one of the
elements of success, but at a time and in a country
where every item of news is bandied about from mouth
to mouth, secrecy, even on the most vital points, is all
but impossible. The power of the press is at all times
most remarkable, in both domestic and foreign affairs.
Not only does it make secrecy in war difficult, but in
times of peace it overrides the efforts of diplomacy.
Lord John Russell, in his Speeches and Despatches, has
put on record how the English press precipitated war
between Denmark and Germany on the Schleswig-
Holstein dispute. It seems that the British Cabinet
had proposed terms of compromise which the German
powers were willing to accept ; " Denmark," says Lord
John Russell, "would likewise have accepted them
had not a large portion of the English press, including
N
178 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
the Times and Morning Post, two powerful organs of
public opinion friendly to the Government, inflamed
the passions of the Danes, and induced them to think
that they would be defended by the arms of England
against even the most moderate demands of Germany,
and against the well-founded complaints of the
oppressed inhabitants of Schleswig. Thus excited,
they refused the proposed terms."
One other point remains, and that is the bearing of
the application of scientific discovery and invention
upon industry and economical questions. And here
we are concerned rather with such inventions as the
machinery employed in the various kinds of manu-
facture rather than with the railway or telegraph.
Now, the most remarkable and important aspect of
this question is the wonderful way in which the power
of human labour has been multiplied. The power of
producing the means of subsistence has been augmented
enormously. Although population increases, produc-
tive power increases much more. The Malthusian
theory is put largely at a discount. A few illustrations
of the multiplication of productive power will do more
for the realization of this important fact than anything
else. The cotton industry may be taken as an example
Sir Lyon Playfair, speaking at the National Liberal
Club on this subject, remarked that "the application
of machinery in the cultivation, harvesting, and clean-
ing of cotton has been so great, that while in 1873 a
given amount of labour produced 3 J million bales in
America, a much less amount of labour in 1887 turned
out 6 1 millions of bales. The economies in its manu-
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 179
factured products are still greater. In 1873 spindles
made four thousand revolutions in a minute ; they now
make ten thousand. In the last fifteen years the
population of the world had increased sixteen per cent.,
while the production of cotton goods had increased
eighty-six per cent." Again, it has been calculated
by Professor Leone Levi that if all the yarn which is
now spun in England in the course of a year by the
machine which spins a thousand threads simultaneously,
were to be spun by hand, it would take a hundred
millions of men to accomplish the task. Again, it is
stated that whereas pig iron can be converted into
malleable iron by the Bessemer process in twenty
minutes, it formerly took, under the old process, nearly
a fortnight to put the iron through the necessary
refining and puddling. It becomes apparent, from
these instances, that the productive power of human
labour has been enormously increased. It seems as
though the power of supply had altogether outrun any
possible demands. And here, too, the power of rapid
locomotion and distribution lend their aid by placing
the products of all parts of the world within the reach
of all. "A cube of coal," says an American writer,
" which would pass through the rim of a quarter of a
dollar will drive a ton of food and its proportion of the
steamship two miles upon its way from the producer
to the consumer." A marvellous achievement ! And
again says the same writer, " The wages for one day's
work of an average mechanic in the far East will pay
for moving a year's subsistence of bread and meat a
thousand miles or more from the distant West." So
180 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
that not only are the products of human labour
enormously increased, but the power of bringing those
products within the reach of all is enormously increased
also. Nor does the influence of the practical applica-
tion of science to industry end here. It has brought
about a revolution in industrial methods, which has
in its turn brought us face to face with social questions
of a most pressing kind. The relations of capital and
labour, and the life and status of the industrial classes
have been altogether changed by it. And, indeed, for
the last fifty years the legislators of the world have
been endeavouring to cope with this new order of
things. The abolition of the corn laws, the intro-
duction of free trade, the various Factory Acts, the
laws affecting trade combinations, the rise of trades
unions, have all had their origin in the difficulties
created by the change. Scientific discovery has given
birth to an entirely new class of social and political
questions, and if it had done nothing else, it would
have provided questions of great and increasing
interest for the political philosopher and the practical
statesman.
There is a story of an agricultural chemist in South
Carolina, who, shortly before the civil war in America,
was shown the Ordinance of Secession, and was asked
what he thought of it. He replied, " That's not what
South Carolina needs ; she needs manure." That
chemist expressed by his answer the change that has
come over the world. He clearly thought that the
practical application of science in South Carolina was
much more important than any question of forms of
SCIENCE AND POLITICS. 181
government or political institutions. And he was in
a great degree right. It may be said that theories
and ideas in politics are now forced into the back-
ground. Such notions as " the divine right of kings,"
"social contracts," "natural rights," ''rights of man,"
are of small account. Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, and
Rousseau are, in a sense, no longer the heroes of
political philosophy. We are beginning to set up on
the thrones which they have vacated, Watt, Ark-
wright, the Stephensons, and Wheatstone. We do not
now so much ask whether this notion or that theory or
idea is prevalent in a certain country, but rather what
railways it has, whether it has the latest mechanical
inventions in manufacture, whether it has many news-
papers, and a thorough telegraphic communication at
home and with foreign countries. In considering the
condition and prospects of a nation, we instinctively
feel that such inquiries are more important than an
investigation into the political ideas of its people.
That they should have true and lofty ideas on the
great questions that agitate man is well indeed, and
likely to redound much to their advantage ; but, with-
out the physical and material means to put those ideas
into practice, the possession of them is useless, and to
talk of them is like the empty tinkling of a cymbal.
It is not every one who can proudly say
" Content with poverty, my soul I arm,
And virtue, though in rags, will keep me warm."
The want of physical and material means is an ill
school for virtue, and promises but poor nourishment
for great ideas and noble thoughts. But the intro-
182 ESSAYS IN POLITICS.
duction of the railway and the telegraph, and all the
other marvels of applied science, lends them powerful
aid, and often sweeps away the hidden things of dark-
ness. In politics science is often as beneficent as it is
potent.
INDEX
Achsean League, 43
Adams, Sir F. O., and Cunning-
ham, on Swiss Confederation, 85
Africa, partition of, 161, 162
Agricultural Holdings Act, 139
labourers, Acts passed to
relieve, 114
Andorra, Republic of, 85
Anne, Queen, her use of the veto,
36
x\lexander the Great, empire of,
158
Argentine Republic, federation
of, 63
Aristotle, on sovereignty, 1
on the elements of sove-
reignty, 17
Athens and its dependencies, 13
as a democracy, 28, 170
, influence of, 160
Austin, John, his definition of
sovereignty, 5
, his idea of sovereignty in
the British Constitution, 7
on positive morality, 27
Australasian Council, 40
Australia, legislative interference
in, 141-144
, Western, self-government
in, 165
, protection in, 141
Australia, co-operation in, 147
Australian and Australasian
Federation, 40, 41, 49
Austria, union with Hungary, 45
B
Bacon, Lord, his views of the
people, 28
Bagehot on the prerogative, 30
Balkan States, federation in, 40
Ball, John, his contrast of rich
and poor, 107
Baernreither, on the English
working classes, 145
on State intervention in
England and the Continent,
145
Barringtonintroduces co-operative
societies, 115
Bavaria, position of the German
confederation, 57
Beaconsfield, Lord, on coalitions,
93
on factory system, 110
Bessemer process in iron- working ,
179
Bentham, on sovereignty, 4
, impetus given by him to
legislation, 15, 16
Belgium and the Congo Free
State, 45
184
INDEX.
Blackstone on sovereignty, 3
Blackstone on division of the
Executive and legislature, 17
Bodin, Jean, on sovereignty, 2
Boulanger, General, 96
Bret Harte, on Union Pacific Kail-
way, 167
British Constitution, sovereignty
in, 7
formerly aristocratic, 171
Bryce, Professor, on the British
Cabinet, 19
on the introduction of the
Referendum into England, 34
on federation in the United
States, 70
, his classification of instances
of State interference, 129, 130
on American State Legisla-
tures, 137, 138
on State interference in
democracies, 152
Brazil, United States of, 38, 49,
50
Burke, on popular legislation, 28
on English Conservatism,
144
Cabinet, the British, 6, 19, 94
Canada, federation of, 47, 48, 54,
57,58
, population of, 47
, distribution of powers in
Union of, 54
, central power in, 54, 55
, State rights in, 55
, Supreme Court of, 68
, State interference in, 139,
140
, railways in, 168
Cape Colony, Customs Union of,
with Orange Free State, 39
Capital towns in federations, 73, 74
Central America, federations in,
39,63
Charles I., his conflict with par-
liament, 11
Charles I., his description of the
Commons, 20
Charles V.. empire of, 160
Chase, Chief Justice, on the
American Union, 63
Chatham, Lord, his opinion of
the founders of the American
Union, 52
China, 160, 161
Chinese, legislation against, in
Australia, 142
Civil Damages Clause in United
States, 140
Cleveland, President, 24
Colonies and scientific discovery,
163, 165
Conspiracy and Protection of Pro-
perty Act, 109
Constitutions, rigid and' flexible,
5, 6, 73, 96
Constitutional Conventions, 30
Co-operation, 115-117, 147
Comitia, 2, 85, 18
Crimes, legislation in United
States against books on and
pictures of, 134
Crispi, Signor, on Irredentists, 161
Customary law in East and West,
14
D
Dante, his political writings, 2
Debts, exemptions from attach-
ment for, in the United States,
134
Decraix, Julian M., on State in-
tervention in England and on
the Continent, 146
Delegation of powers by sovereign
body, 9
Democracy, growth of, 28, 171
in Switzerland, 79, 80, 84,
85,88
and State intervention, 128,
129, 151-153
Demosthenes, his description of
laws, 26
Despotisms, 169, 173, 174, 177
INDEX.
185
Decey, Professor, on constitu-
tional conventions, 30
on the prerogative, 31
on the introduction of the
Referendum into England, 35
Dilke, Sir Charles, on socialistic
legislation in Australia, 140, 141
on English unpreparedness
for war, 175
Directors' Liability Act, 148
Druey, M., his saying on the
Swiss Confederation, 60
Dunning, his resolution on the
influence of the Crown, 31
E
Elizabeth, Queen, use of veto by,
35
Egypt, slavery in, 105
Economical Society of Sheerness,
115
P
Factory Acts, 112
in Canada, 140
in Australia, 142
Fawcett, Professor, on the pre-
rogative, 32
Federation Congress at Mel-
bourne, 41
Federations, history of, 43
, origin of, 45-48
, basis of, 50, 51
, dangers of, 58, 59, 65, 71
, conflicting forces in, 62, f 6
, sovereignty in, 66, 67
, judicial body in, 67, 68
, advantages and disadvan-
tages of, 70-72
, peculiarities of, 73, 74
, political careers in, 74, 75
, size of, 165
, relation of scientific dis-
covery to, 165-168
Federal Council, Swiss, 92-94
Ferry, M., colonial policy of, 162
Fiji, position of, towards Austra-
lasian federation, 42
Flint, Professor, his definition of
socialism, 126
France, reputation of, as a revo-
lutionary country, 6
, sovereignty in, 8
, constitution of, 6. 8, 95, 96
French President, 98, 99
Free library vote, 83
Free trade, beginning of, 114
Freeman, Prof., on the Landes-
gemeinden, 85
on the political importance
of scientific discovery, 156, 172
G
Gambling, laws in the United
States, restricting, 134
George III., on the position of the
Crown, 31
, dismissal of a ministry by,
31
Germany, federation of, 39, 47, 57
, State insurance for workmen
in, 147
Giffen, Mr. R., on wages, 121, 122
, on food consumption, 123
Gladstone, Mr., his use of the
prerogative, 32
on Homeric popular assem-
blies, 87
on free trade, 114
Golden Age for labourers, 120
Greece, popular assemblies in, 18,
85, 87
, small States in, 158
, democracy in, 169, 170
, earliest federations in, 43
, slavery in, 103, 105
Granvelle, Cardinal, his view of
the people, 28
Grevy, M., ex-President, 23
Gregory the Great, Pope, his
efforts to suppress slavery, 105
Griffith, Sir Samuel, on Australian
federation, 41
186
INDEX.
Grote, Mr., on Athenian de-
mocracy, 28
, on the Keferendum, 35
, on Swiss politics, 60
H
Hallam on slavery in the ancient
world, 103
Hamerton, Mr., on the French
Chambers, 25
Hamilton, the architect of the
American Constitution, 43, 69
Heligoland, cession of, 33
Henry, Patrick, on the American
Union, 62
Helvetic Kepublic, 78
Hindoo village community, 12
Hobbes on sovereignty, 2, 3
on political liberty, 102
Holland, Professor, on sovereignty
in the East, 14
Holmes, Mr. W. O., on status of
the servant, 102
Homeric popular assemblies, 87
Housing of the poor, Acts regulat-
ing, 113
I
Imperial federation, 10, 42, 49, 171
Initiative in Switzerland, 84
Ireland, disestablishment of Epis-
copal Church in, 10
, application of federation to,
42
Irish Land Acts, 139
Isle of Man, constitution of, 22
Isocrates on the rule of the people,
36
Italy, kingdom of, 161
, medissval republics of, 28
Jackson, President, 69
Jameson, Mrs., story of St. Bavon
106
Janson, Mr., on repealed legisla-
tion, 26
Jews, captivity of, in Persia, 13
Johnson, President, 23, 95
K
Koran, 13
Labour, laws in the United States
regulating hours of, 132, 133
in Canada, 140
in Australia, 142
La Bruyere on serfage, 106
Landesgemeinden, 85-88
Leeward Islands, federation of,
37,39
Legislation, the mark of sove-
reignty in the West, 14
, increased activity of British
Parliament in, 15
, injurious, 26
Legislature, encroachment of, on *
the Executive, 18-20
Leone Levi, Professor, on Savings
Banks, 118
, on wages, 121, 122
, on food consumption, 123
, on increased power of pro-
duction, 179
Liberty and Property Defence
League, 128
Limitation of powers of sovereign
body impossible, 1
Liquor traffic, laws in the United
States regulating, 131
in Canada, 140
in Australasia, 143
Local government, 165
Locke, on sovereignty, 3
on division of executive and
legislative powers, 17
M
Machiavelli, character of his
INDEX.
187
Machinery, changes caused by in-
troduction of, 110, 178-180
Maine, Sir H. S., on oriental
sovereignty, 12
, on growth of legislation, 15
, on the paradox of the British
constitution, 19
, on popular dislike of change,
25
s , on legislation in the United
States, 138
Married Women's Property Acts,
14
Marshall, Chief Justice, eminence
of, 69
May, Sir Erskine, (Lord Farn-
borough), on the corn laws, 111
McKinley Act, 49, 97, 130, 167
Medicine, laws in America regu-
lating, 131
Menu, Institutes of, 13
Mill, J. S., on English sympathy
with slaveholders in the United.
States, 104
on statute of labourers, 107
Minnesota, as a corn -growing
State, 136
Montesquieu, on division of ex-
ecutive and legislative powers,
17
on democracy and federa-
tion, 169
Morley, Mr. J., his description of
the Roman Empire, 105
Mowatt, Sir Oliver, on State
rights in Canada, 55
N
Nationalization of land in Aus-
tralia, 148
Newfoundland, federation of, with
Canada, 49
Newgate Gaol, wages at building
of, 119
New Zealand, position of, in
Australasian federation, 40, 41,
42, 168
New Zealand, Government life
insurance in, 143
, Public Trust Office in, 143
Norfolk Island, 87; popular as-
sembly in, 87
Nova Scotia, position of, in Cana-
dian Union, 55
Norway and Sweden, union of, 45
Oleomargarine, laws in United
States regulating, 131
Orange Free State, Customs Union
of, with Cape Colony, 39
Owen starts co-operation at
Lanark, 116
Parkes, Sir H., on Australian
federation, 41
Parliamentary and non- parlia-
mentary governments, 22, 95
Payment of members of parlia-
ment, 88, 89
Peasant revolt, 107
Peel, Sir Robert, inaugurates free
trade, 114
, dismissal of his ministry, 32
Pericles on Athenian citizenship,
170
Persia, kingdom, difficulties of
governing, 158
Petty, Sir W., on wages in seven-
teenth century, 120
Philip II., of Spain, 174
Plato on democracy, 28
Playfair, Sir Lyon, on increased
power of production, 178
Ple'bescite, French, true nature of,
84
Poland, Kings of, 98
Polybius, remark of, on human
folly, 147
Pope on the aristocracy, 28
Prerogative, 30-32
188
INDEX.
President, American, 23, 29, 97-
99
, French, 23, 29, 98, 99
, Swiss, 80, 97
Press, power of, 177
Prevost Paradol, M., on French
colonial policy, 161
Prices, history of, 118-123.
Pseudo-Smerdis, 173
Purchase system in the army,
abolition of, 32
Queen, prerogative of, 30
Queensland, federation of, 41
11
Eae. definition of Socialism by,
127
Penan, M., on creations, 52
Referendum, Swiss, 33, 80-85
, institutions analogous to,
83, 84
, introduction into England,
34,35
Representation, 170-172
Rhodes, Mr. Cecil, on South
African federation, 39
Rochdale, co-operation at, 1 16
Rogers, Professor, on history of
wages and prices, 118-120, 124
Rome, slavery in, 103, 105
, original smallness of, 158
, growth of, 170
, difficulty in maintaining,
158, 170
Rousseau, on sovereignty, 3
on the sovereign people, 27
on republics, 88
on democracy in large States,
168
on liberty, 104
Runjeet Singh, rule of, 12, 16
Russell, Lord John, on the British
Cabinet, 19
Russell, Lord John, on the prero-
gative, 30
on the press and the Schles-
wig-Holstein war, 177, 178
Russia, extent and growth of, 160,
161
S
Saint Bavon, story of, 106
San Marino, republic of, 85
Savings banks, 117, 118
Scientific discovery, political im-
portance of, 155, 166, 167, 181
, relation of, to decentraliza-
tion, 165
, , to representative
government, 171, 172
, , to war, 175, 176
, , to size of States, 162-
164
, , to productive power,
178, 180
, , to industrial con-
ditions, 180
Septennial Act, 7
Serfage, 106
Sh'affle his definition of Social-
ism, 127
Sharpe, Conversation, on think-
ing, 35
Shelburne, Lord, on royal pre-
rogative, 31
Shipping, Acts regulating, 113
Shaftesbury, Lord, on human
misery, 102
Slavery, long continuance of, 103-
105
Smith, Goldwin, on Canadian
federation, 48
Smith, Sir Thomas, on sovereignty,
2
Socialism, definitions of, 127
, alien to the British, 145
Socialistic legislation, moral and
philanthropic elements in, 148-
150
Slidell and Mason incident, 163
Sonderbund, 61, 71
INDEX.
189
Sovereignty, legal and political,
27, 29, SO
Soum Africa, federation in, 39
Spencer, Herbert, on injurious
legislation, 26
Stael, Madame de, on politics, 35
States, large and small, 158-164,
172
, superior influence of small,
lbO
, small, merger of, in large
states, 161
Statute of Labourers, 107
Statute of Apprentices, 108
Stephen, Sir J., on dormant an-
archy, 11
Stephens, Mr. Brunton, on Aus-
tralian unity, 41
Stratford, his description of the
Commons, 20
Sweden, Kings of, 98
Swift on candidates, 99
Switzerland, federation of, 38, 43,
46, 77, 78
, neutrality of, 46, 65
, Federal Assembly of, 56,
90-92
, conflict between cantons in,
60,61
, judicial body in, 68
, position of rebellious cantons
in, 70
, democracy in, 79, 80, 84, 85,
88
, President of, 80, 97
, political careers in, 89
, economy of administration
in, 89, 90
, Federal Council in, 92-94
, merits of government of, 95,
96
Tacitus on the Germans, 87
Thiers, M., on the French Ee-
public, 24
Thomas Aquinas, the character
of his political writings, 2
Thrasea Poetus, saying of, 103
Tiberius, the Emperor, tvrannv
of, 174 J
Ticino, revolution in, 70, 79, 96
Toynbee, Mr. Arnold, on the
condition of the working
classes, 110
Trades-unions, 115, 117
Transvaal, future of, 39
Triple alliance, 45, 46
U
United States, sovereignty in, 8, 9
, executive and legislature
in, how related, 22-24, 95
, State legislatures of, 9, 24,
26, 137, 138
, sovereignty of the states in,
51
, distribution of powers in,
53, 54
, central power in, 53
, State rights in, 38, 55
, Congress of, 9, 23, 56
, conflict of State and federal
rights, 59, 60
, Supreme Court of, 67, 69
, position of rebellious State
in, 70
, State Secretaries of, 94
, State intervention in, 129-
139
, protection in, 130
, industrial peculiarities of,
135, 136
, consolidation of, 63, 167
, railways in, 167
Union Pacific Bailway, 167
United Netherlands' federation
of, 43, 46
Veto, royal prerogative of, 35, 36
Venice, Doges of, 98
, oligarchy of, 174
190
INDEX.
W
Wages, history of, 118-123
, statutes regulating, 109, 113
Warfare, modern, 175, 176
Washington, his opinion of the
American Union, 59
West Indies, federation in, 40
. federation with Canada, 49
Wheat, prices of, 119, 121-123
William III., use of veto by, 35
William IV., dismissal of a
ministry by, 32
Working classes in England
character of, 144
, statutes passed to aid, 112-
114
Wurtemburg, position of German
confederation, 57
Young, Arthur, on wages in the
eighteenth century, 121
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BECCLES.
FOURTEEN DAY USE
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED
R This book is due on the last date stamped below, or
on the date to which renewed.
Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.
170ct'55RE
RECO LD
~ *J0T-j M955U1
JAN 4 1fbb L
igg :RHRRARY LOA1
29Apr'58J
ICDecftOft)
RFCrv "3
REC'D LD
DEC 19 r^d
MAY 11958
*W] in >$2Ki
#W
&0 1
O LD
B
iu 14 1961
_ RCC'D LD
ft
MAY 2 9 I960
NOV
SmsfEZPY
Bio
^98t
28 0CT'60RT
13Nov'68SM
LD 21-100m-2,'55
(B139s22)476
General Library
University of California
Berkeley
(
2<4
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
