V o l . X I I , N o . 2 5 . T H U R S D A Y , A P R I L 24, 1913.

NOTES OF THE WEEK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CURRENT CANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FOREIGN AFFAIRS. By S. Verdad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MILITARY NOTES. By Romney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . THE PANEL DOCTORS. By Morgan Tud . . . . . . . . . HYGIENIC JINKS. By Charles Brookfarmer . . . . . . . . . CAPITALIST PRODUCTION. By “ Rifleman ” . . . . . . . . . NOTES ON THE PRESENT KALPA. By J. M. Kennedy . . . . . . THE CHRONICLES OF PALMERSTOWN-1’11. By Peter Fanning PRESENT DAY CRITCISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LETTERS FROM ITALY-XI. By Richard Aldington . . . . . .

N O T E S O F T H E W E E K .

In the debate on Rural Housing in the House of Com- mons on Friday Mr. Roberts of the Labour Party objected to Mr. Burns that the Government, as well a s criticising the proposals of a private member, should submit counter proposals. The objection is well taken --from the pages of T H E NEW AGE-but it lies against Mr. Roberts and his party quite as damagingly as against Mr. Burns and his. It is true that Mr. Burns is in office while the Labour Party is not ; but it is also true that the sole excuse for the existence of the Labour Party is their possession of counter proposals not only for Rural Housing, but for every other economic re- form. By the difference in their programme from the programmes of the two allied parties they stand or fall; and it is therefore an act of disloyalty a s well a s of supererogation to censure Mr. Burns for a neglect which in themselves is greater and more culpable. The alternative, as Mr. Burns clearly showed and as Mr. Roberts agreed, to the policy of State doles in relief of low wages is higher wages for everybody; and it is precisely higher wages for everybody that the Labour Party is professedly in Parliament to obtain. It is not for them to declare that higher wages are impossible or so remote that doles must be adopted in the mean- time. On the contrary, it is their business to maintain that wages can be raised a s easily a s doles can be granted, and to insist on having them raised. Mr. Roberts, however, appeared to be of the opinion that wages could never be raised, and that something should therefore be done at once on that supposition. State aid to landlords, farmers, tenants, local authori- ties, or anybody else he was willing and anxious to

LITERARY NOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A SOLAR MONOPOLY. By Fitzgerald Lane . . . . . . . . . VIEWS AND REVIEWS. By A. E. R. . . . . . . . . . . . . REVIEWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PASTICHE. By Arthur F. Thorn, J. T. Fife, “ Livy,”

T .R.L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DRAMA. By John Francis Hope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ART. By Anthony Ludovici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LETTERS TO THE EDITOR FROM Felix Elderly, Edgar J.

Lansbury, Sec, T. M. Salimon, P. Selver, Paul V. Cohn, W. L. Hare, Ashley Dukes, Hamilton Irving, Victorien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

accept without any delay. What kind of policy this would entail he would not stop to reflect. The imme- diate evil was so great that an immediate application of even a pretence of a remedy was in his opinion states- manship.

* * *

W e share the Labour Party’s view of the urgency of reform, but we do not share their pitiful beastly notions -to use Cromwell’s phrase-of the means of reform. The notion of doles, in particular, is one which, under no circumstances, save those of a great national calamity, ought to be so much as tolerated by the Labour Party, for the simple reason that with every step in the direction of doles wages are depressed and the personal liberty of the proletariat curtailed. The Labour Party may indulge the hope that by reason of their intercession with persons of quality in the clouds the laws of economics and of psychology will be sus- pended in their favour ; but their amiable superstition will not alter facts. As doles multiply, wages will fall ; and as the State is made responsible for the feeding, housing, waging and living of the workers, its control over them, to the diminution of their remaining liberty, must necessarily increase. Both the Liberals and the Tories, t o judge by their attitude, are far, indeed, from feeling any alarm at this prospect. Their easy test of progress is not the rise of wages or the enlargement of the area of personal liberty, but the national produc- tion of commodities of exchange measured by pounds sterling. So long as this amount continues to grow by annual increments of five or ten per cent., so long will the capitalist parties conclude that nothing seriously is amiss with Labour since its output shows no signs of suffering. And if, moreover, Labour’s few griev- ances-such as express themselves-can be redressed by the cheap method of doles, the upshot of such a policy is of less concern to capitalists than to the workers themselves. Why should Jacob decline to pur- chase Esau’s birthright for a mess of pottage if Esau is willing to sell? And why should capitalists decline to purchase the liberties of the proletariat at a dole apiece? W e can assure our Labour readers, if we have any, that the policy of doles on which their Parliamen- tary representatives are engaged, suits the capitalist parties very well. As profiteers they have everything

598 ~ ~ ~

to gain by collecting into their own hands the dispens- ing of the means of living of the poor. But for the Labour Party such a policy is, we repeat, disloyalty to their constitution and treachery to their class. With the strictest truth it may be said that they are selling their brethren into slavery.

* * * I t i s a strange observation, however, that every

counter proposal to the policy of doles finds. the Labour Party in instinctive, for we cannot regard it a s reason- able, opposition. The means, in fact, of raising wages are as much abhorred of the party as thle end itself is desired. W e are not discussing now th’e only certain means o f raising wages, that of .abolishing the wage- system altogether; but we confine ourselves t o thle de- clared object e f the Labour Party, th.at of raising wages under the existing system; and we say again, in refer- ence to this end alone, that every means thereto is opposed by the Labour Party. W h a t from this most ordinary view, are the means which Labour can adopt for raising its wages? They are four-strikes, emigration, Malthusianism, and the restriction of the labour market. Yet each and all of these four means, and there are no others, are rejected by the party as if they were anathema. Of thle method of the strike it is well-known that the majority of the Labour leaders disapprove with even more unfeigned spontaneity than any of the most inconvenienced capitalists. Strikes, it would seem, they simply cannot abide; and in spite of the facts that the recent rises in wages have been due to strikes and to strikes alone, and that striking on a large scale is now the settled and effective political method of the Belgian Labour Party, the English Labour Party continues its obstinate unteachable attitude of unanswering: opposition. Mr. Philip Snow- den, in particular, is brazen in his shamelessness and inaccessibility to argument a s well a s t o entreaty. Like any Bourbon or Stuart he will not abase his divine right of being wrong by, noticing the criticisms even of sympathetic writers like Mr. G. K. Chesterton.

* * *

Of the remaining: means which a re equally the object of the rooted prejudice of thle Labour Party, emigration perhaps deserves to be considered first. At one time, we confess it,. we were ourselves opposed to the notion of attempting to relieve our labour troubles by periodi- cally bleeding the body corporate of some tens of thousand sands of its proletariat. But in face of the facts of the case this attitude is no longer reasonable. T o begin with, emigration is at this moment in progress at a rate equal to that of the natural increase of our popula- tion; and no embargo on the mere discussion of the movement will have any effect upon the fact. With or without the encouragement of the Labour Party, our proletariat .are more and more taking thteir destinies into th.eir own hands and relieving the home labour market of the congestion of competition which an .excess of workers would certainly intensify. Can it be denied that labour a t home has profited by their with- drawal from the market? In place of two men com- peting for every job, there are, in consequence of emigration, only about one and a half, with the effect that wages do not owe their fall to the increase of the labour supply, but to the fact that the reduction of the labour supply does not keep pace with the creation of machinery. Emigration, in our view, should therefore be encouraged rather than discouraged by the Labour Party if their object is to increase wages a t home. The fewer men the greater share of wages ! Another consideration lies in the fact that Capital emigrates with the utmost cheerfulness; for it goes as naturally to deposits o f raw material .as worms t o a corpse. If , as we are always telling the “Spectator,” the capital created in England were compelled to find employment in England, there would be some hope that in course of time Capital would be so cheap amongst us that its rent to Labour would be negligible. But with Capital oozing from the country a t every pore, its market price

in England will never fall much lower than it now is, and the hope of raising wages by cheapening Capital is therefore vain. I t follows that if Labour must needs find Capital t o employ it, Labour must follow Capital as Mary’s Jamb followed Mary, going everywhere where Capital goes and never leaving Capital to employ itself on a lower wage basis In short, the emigration of Labour: should endeavour t o keep pace with the emigration of Capital. A last consideration is that for the English-speaking r a c e emigration from one domi- nion t o another should not be looked upon a s alienation. England, or rather Britain, in time to come, will be wherever British institutions, British character, and British traditions .and ideals a r e paramount. That England itself may cease to be the single centre of the British Commonwealth is quite upon the cards for a comparatively proximate decade. W e can neither con- tinue to pay lower wages than any of the Dominions nor persist in exporting our best artisans, leaving our- selves the worst without transforming our nation into either a rotten nut or an empty husk.

* * *

Concerning Malthusianism or the deliberate restriction of births in the proletariat class we may make this excuse for the repugnance of the Labour Party. They naturally hesitate to accept the hint, even so broadly given by capitalism, that there are far too many of their class. Yet it is not only a fact, but it is a fact that hurts them much more than it does the capitalist classes. These ‘latter, indeed, in so far as they are without taste, positively revel, as well a s see their profit, in the swol- len statistics of the birth-rate of the poor. If the poor are no longer of much use as food for powder, at least by competing with each other they keep wages low, black- legs plentiful, and the whole lot of them subservient in fear of losing their jobs. On the other hand, we should have thought that Labour itself would be the first t o see that under the existing system a powerful means of raising wages is to cut off the supply of labour at its source. And the profit from the process to their class would not be confined to wages; for in misery alone the large families of the poor are responsible for an untold amount. It is impossible for capitalists, however, who have never felt poverty, to realise either that it is as black as i t is painted or that the poor feel i t as keenly a s their leaders pretend; since the poor show not only no signs of revolting themselves, but no signs of sparing another generation the ills they endure. But on grounds of humanity a s well as economics they should be taught by their leaders what is both decent and expedient.

* * *

Failing the retrenchment of the supply of labour at its source, the most sensible means of raising the wages of the proletariat would be the restriction of their numbers in industry. One end of this device is indeed perceived dimly through Labour’s one eye; for, after long coaching and coaxing, Labour leaders now accept the raising of the school-age and the limitatiton of boy and girl labour as part of their programme. But while they are caulking a leak at this end of their vessel, they are at the same time allowing a much greater leak to be sprung at the other end. Nay, they are assisting in the scuttling of their ship. W e refer, almost need- less to say, to the Labour Party’s official endorsement of the demands of women to enter the competitive labour market. Children out and women in appears to be the new motto of Labour madness. It cannot be denied that the women have made plain enough their predatory intentions on industry. Incapable as ever of keeping a secret they have blown the gaff on the capitalist plan which is to substitute women for trade unionists and children in the cheapest labour market o f civilisation. By the pen of their leaders they avow it. W e take all labour, says Olive Schreiner, for our province ; all labour, including wage-labour ! That the women’s movement has more obvious causes than the determination of profiteers t o tap new labour re-

599

sources as the old threaten to give out, we willingly agree ; but that it has any deeper cause we deny. What- ever its causes, however, i ts effect, while the wage- system prevails, can only he to lower the wages of men.

While upon this subject of Women’s Suffrage we may remark that the cause grows more manifestly un- popular in the country and more secretly popular in Parliament. What lobbying and hobnobbing of wire- pullers has been taking place within the last month in the House of Commons we shall detail at the proper moment; but, for the present, it is enough to know that a grand reconciliation between the two front Benches on the subject of Women’s Suffrage is in prospect. The Plural Voting Bill, as our readers will guess, has played the part of quo for which the en- franchisement o f propertied conservative women is to play the part in the bargain of quid ; but more than this simple exchange of popular liberties has certainly been in the background. What reason, for instance, have the profiteers of whom the House of Commons is com- posed, for opposing Women’s Suffrage? If th,ere is anything whatever in our contention that women’s labour is to be encouraged to compete with men’s, by breaking down the taboo still on women in industry, far from having any reason to oppose the suffrage capitalists have good reason for actively supporting it. Again, it is no argument in the House of Commons tbat tbe measure of Wornen’s Suffrage is unpopular. It is true that Lord Morley once wrote that a Parliament capable o f resisting a popular conviction would be more dangerous than any other despotism ; but he and we have travelled far since 1880. The Insurance Act, passed, enforced and accepted as it was with almost no resistance from a mainly hostile popular opinion has paved the way for Parliament to do whatever it pleases, even when popular feeling appears to be most threaten- ing. John Bull, it is concluded by the Sanhedrim, can bark but he bites no longer. Servile leviathan, how- ever, as our public is, we can still just speculate on the fate of the political party that invites it to hold out its nostrils to the hook of Women’s Suffrage.

* * *

* * * To return, however. The Liberals have a plan for

raising wages of which no Labour economist ever thought : it is the plan of Trade Boards. Mr. Massing- ham is quite correct in claiming this invention for Liberalism along with the Insurance Act and several other equally objectionable measures. For the truth is that under cover of these pretences at reform the nor- mal laws of economic competition work a little more smoothly than if they were visible. Talleyrand, said Napoleon one day, is a most useful man ; when I want to appear to want something that I don’t want he is the man I turn to. The Liberal Party is the Talleyrand of our capitalists. Everything that they most appear to want to appease Labour unrest the Liberals can pretend to supply them with. The Insurance Act pretends, and only pretends, to supply the poor with security against sickness, insurance during unemployment, medical at- tention and incentives to thrift, all at the rate of nine- pence for fourpence. The thing as a “business position,” is simply not sense ; but a s a political trick it has so far proved effective. The Trade Boards, on the other hand, will take even longer to find out, For those actually in employment wages do appear in many cases to rise in consequence of Trade Boards ; but the hidden acts of subtraction, which employers of neces- sity make, more than balance the expenditure in every instance. In other words, the effect, and it may be the design, of Trade Boards is merely to veil the operation of competition in general. They do not raise wages for the simple reason that political action cannot.

* * * It is easy enough to see what must be the conclusion

of the Labour Party’s refusal to adopt any real method o f raising wages and of the Liberal’s Party’s adhesion to unreal methods. Sooner or later the former will be impossible and the latter will be found out. There

will remain then only the alternative of doles ; and this, strange to say, is already being advocated by the Unionist social reformers. The debate in the House on Friday showed clearly that the policy of doles is almost as much a Unionist method a s the policy of Trade Boards is a Liberal method ; and, on the surface a t any rate, there is even more to be said for it. I t is true, as we have pointed out, that doles, sooner than any- thing else, will bring us into the Servile State ; but it is also true that even if Voltaire and Mr. Burns do not see thee necessity, the poor must live, and if not by wages, by charity. The contest of the moment is there- fore the contest between the raising of wages by fair means or foul and the definite commitment of Parliament to the policy of State-aid or outdoor poor-relief. No other course, it appears to us, is open. I t is either more wages or more doles. Mr. Burns, we imagine, is aware that in his attitude of resistance to doles and in the absence of any attempt of the Labour Party to raise wages, he is the last of the English, the sole Minister between the pigs and the precipice. After him the doluge.

* * *

And parliament, we should say, is being prepared for it by the steady degradation of its members. In intrinsic merit as well as in prestige Parliament, for all that Mr. Balfour can say, has declined even within the last ten years. Speaking in the City on Wednes- day Mr. Balfour expressed .a doubt whether this in fact was true. If it was, he said, it is a great tragedy and the blame must be thrown upon democracy. But demo- cracy, even in Mr. Balfour’s sense of the word-the prevalence in government of the deliberate will of the community-cannot be held to blame, for, in truth, no Parliament in history has so often or so openly defied the will of the community as ,the present Parliament. It is not, we are certain from an excess of democracy in this sense that the Government is fallen into dis- repute (without, however, losing its hold upon power), but from a defect of democracy. Democracy-still in Mr. Balfour’s sense-appears to us a s i t appeared to Burke, willing to create an instrument of government more powerful that it can as yet control. ‘‘We accord,” said Burke, “extravagant power t.0 our governing autho- rities, but reserve no means of calling them to account.’’ What means has the public a t this moment of calling t.0 account the members of the Cabinet who have been investing in American Marconis? What means had we of rejecting the Insurance Act or a score of similar Acts passed in despite of the popular will? The only instruments of control left in our hands when Parlia- ment fails are rioting and the return at the next .elec- tion of the conniving party; and both are objectionable. Mr. Balfour, however, is scarcely up to date in his definition of democracy. W e no longer employ the word tu mean the prevalence of the will of the com- munity; but confine it to the negative conception of .an absence of class government. And in this sense we have so far arrived a t it politically that all our political machinery is nominally at the disposal of the three main social classes of thle State equally. Rut, alas ! we have also discovered tbat political equality without economic equality is not democracy but plutocracy. W e have pulled down aristocracy, we can even pull down the pillars of the middle-classes; but we find set up in their place, a s if it had always been there, the figure and the power of capitalism. And .against capitalism we are for the present powerless. The secret, it is now obvious, of Parliament’s will and power to govern England against th,e popular will is th’e control by Capital of Labour. Dominion said Swift, must follow property; and equally, we may add, subservience follows propertylessness. ’ Electors, said Macaulay, meet in vain where want makes them the slaves of the land- Iord. It is plutocracy that our democracy has so far resulted in, and plutocracy is more apparent in Par- liament than ever it has dared to be before Hence both the degradation of Parliament and its preparation for the coarse legislation that will be necessary to establish th,e servile state securely,

600

C u r r e n t C a n t .

“The acquisition of wealth is a divine gift.”-BISHOP J. P. NEWMAN.

“ With the ‘ Daily Mirror ’ as his text, the Rev. J . 0 . Aglionby, curate of Holy Trinity Church preached an interesting sermon to members of the Holy Trinity Brotherhood this afternoon. , . . ’The preacher went on to pay a glowing tribute to this paper : ‘ We all know the “ Daily Mirror ” very well. In i t you will occasionally see pictures of things that are bad, but they are always put in a decent way, and so these things are a force for good.’ (Photographs on page 3.)”-“ Daily Mirror.”

I ‘ We may claim that in accuracy, taste, responsibility, and sincerity the modern newspaper in this country has reached a very high level. . . . Much is condemned to the ephemeral fate of newspapers which deserves its place in the permanent paradise of literature.”-“ Daily Express. ”

“ The Bishop of Birmingham had telegraphed to the Villa, wishing them every success, and they were playing up to the wish of the right rev. gentleman.”-“ Sunday Chronicle.”

“ Liberalism has discovered a machinery for raising the lowest swamps and depressions of labour, and enabling the whole mass to reach the level of tolerable subsistence.”-H. W. MASSINGHAM.

“ I regret to inform our readers that, owing to ‘ Philan- derer’ having sailed to the United States, we have been compelled to discontinue his articles. I have, however, been fortunate enough to secure the services of a brilliant young Oxford undergraduate, who is to-day commencing a series of essays on ‘ Springtime with the Girls.’ ” - ‘ London Mail.”

“ We regret exceedingly the note of antagonism be- tween ‘rich’ and ‘poor.’ . . .”--“The Academy.”

“ What great times we live in ! And how the women must be enjoying themselves, learning about life and man, and what love really is ! . . . English Review.”

“ The working man has not forgotten all the education he has got for the last forty-five years. His grandfather knew poverty, his father knew the cause of it, and the working man of to-day knows the remedy €or it.”-WILL CROOKS, M.P.

’ - ‘

I have been greatly inspirited by the numerous messages which I have received from men of all parties. It shows how deeply the sense of fair-play is planted in the British breast.”-Mr. LLOYD GEORGE.

“ Mr. Asquith has had his hair cut. . . . (‘ Daily Mirror ’ photographs.”--“ Daily Mirror.”

CURRENT COMMERCIALISM. “ ‘ Mackirdy’s Weekly. ’-You are invited to apply for a

prospectus of a company now being formed. A six per cent. investment. The paper will be controlled by Mrs. Archibald Mackirdy, author of ‘ The Soul Market,’ etc., founder of the Mackirdy Shelters for Women and Girls in London. A canny North Country business man writes : - ‘ Dear Mrs. Mackirdy,-Having followed your work for some years, I notice that whatever you have said you would do you have done and done well. I am sure ‘ ‘ Mackirdy’s Weekly will be a good investment in every sense. T shall be glad to take 250 one pound shares. -Yours faithfully, D. M., Edinburgh.” Thirty of the finest manufacturers in the kingdom are giving us their advertisements. Forty societies, helped by Mrs. Mackirdy for many years, are interested in the paper. One thousand five hundred one pound shares were taken by business men before the prospectus was out.”-Advertise- ment in “ Morning Post.”

CURRENT CHINAMAN. “ The difference between the heathen and the Christian

is that the heathen does good for the sake of doing good. With the Christian, what little good he does he does i t for immediate honour, profit,, and future reward. He lends to the Lord, and wants compound interest.”- WONG CHIN FOO in the “ North American Review.’’

F o r e i g n A f f a i r s ,

By S. Verdad.

T H E signing of the truce a t Chatalja is the preliminary step towards the signing of a peace treaty; but it is likely enough that as one war stops another may begin. The relations between Servia and Bulgaria are almost at their worst; and even as I write news comes of an alleged attack by Bulgarians on a Servian gun detach- ment. The excited tone of the Press in both countries does not tend to make a settlement easier Undoubtedly, the territorial dispute is difficult of solution in a way that would be agreeable to kmth parties, even if Greece were not implicated at all in connection with Salonika. The original agreement between Bulgaria and Servia was that the former should put 2oo,ooo men in the field and the latter 150,000, the captured territory in the west being ,divided proportionately. Instead of bring- ing merely 150,000 men into action, however, the Servians assert that their troops numbered more than 300,000; and from the information a t my disposal I believe that this figure is reasonably accurate. Further, the Bulgarians did not help the Servians in Albania, as had been s p e e d upon, but the Servians assisted the Bulgarians both at Adrianople and at Chatalja. In these circumstances, the Servians feel that they have a right to demand a generous share of thle conquered provinces, and they are prepared to fight their ally for it. It is just possible, however, that Russian influence will be sought by the Powers in the matter, and that a Court of Arbitration may sit at St. Petersburg to adjudge the land in dispute.

* * *

It was this difficulty with the Servians that induced the Bulgarians to arrange for the hurried truce at Cha- talja; th>e Western European talk of “useless blood shed” would not have prevented the Bulgarian General Staff from urging King Ferdinand to advance on Con- constantinople, though it would have been all but im- possible to force the Chatalja lines, even with Servian assistance.

* * *

In a letter to the “Times” of April 15 the Rev. R. J. Campbell continues a correspondence which had been going on in the “Daily News.” He urges that Monte- negro should be left free tlo capture Scutari, wants to know why the Allies are to be robbed of their dearly- bought victories, and suggests that England has gone over to the view of the Triple Alliance. As I have already intimated myself, England all along felt more in harmony with the Triple Alliance than with the Russian view which was finally forced on the Triple Entente; and the progress of the war made it clearer and clearer that England’s interests would be best served. by a continuance of ’Turkish dominion in the Near East.

* * *

Perhaps this reference to England’s interests, both diplomatic and commercial, ‘will serve as an answer to th,e Rev. R. J. Campbell’s inquiry. Speaking of the “plucky little Balkan States,” he says : “ W h y should they be prevented from, taking Constantinople? What should it matter to us? Would not the Bulgarian do as well thjere as the Turk?” Well, one reason why the plucky little Balkan States were prevented from taking Constantinople was that they could not penetrate the Chatalja lines, although here, as in other phases of the war, they outnumbered the Turks by more than two to one. But when Mr. Campbell suggests that the Bul- garian would do as well a t Constantinople as the Turk, it is time to put forward a few general facts for the c o n sideration of himself and his friends.

* * * In the first place, the rise of the Balkan States means

th’e rise and progress of the concessionnaire, the capi- talist, the exploiter-the men, in other words who could not possibly flourish to the same extent under

60 .X __

Moslem rule, with its democratic beliefs and faith in humanity. Already the Vienna Rothschilds and other great capitalists have begun to buy up the majority of the shares in the existing Near Eastern railways, and plans are now being drafted in half a dozen great capitals far the construction of new lines. Prospectors have discovered signs of lead, .tin, copper, and coal in places where it had not hitherto been known that such things were. Put raw cotton on the free list, as the United States Democratic caucus has decided to do in the new Tariff Bill, and there: you have your Lancashire duplicated in Asia Minor and Turkey-in-Europe. I s the prospect pleasing to the City Temple? Is it not realised yet that the spread of capitalism means the de- struction of the moral character (not to mention the mind and physique) of the people who have the mic- fortune to come under its influence?. Look at those hideous British factories in India for the truth of this assertion as applied to what most people still call non- civilised countries.

* * * The Moslems are an agricultural race, and they have

no love for factories and mines. They are a democratic race, t o o - I use the word in its best sense. There is a spirit of discipline and order among them ; but there is no segregation o f class from class such as we find in capitalistic Christian countries like Germany and Eng- land. You had only to cross the border at Epirus or Adrianople any time before thie war t o notice the dis- tinction-the bustling Greek, with his mind set on com- merce and the development of his business; the Bul- garian, slower and more stupid, but with an equally clear notion of “development” and “progress.” On the other side of the line you had patient Moslems, satisfied with their farms and their Koran, asking for nothing else, but taking what Allah sent to them. The commercial brains of the European, particularly the Greek, were things they despised; but Europeans were useful enough for shopkeeping purposes. I am fully aware of the disadvantages of Mussulman civilisation ; hut there is no doubt that it is more humane, more level-headed, more sane, than the Christian civilisation of our own day; and Mr. Campbell, who is usually active on behalf of the “oppressed,” should recognise that the “oppressed” hardly exist in Moslem countries at all.

* * Let me give one instance of the Christian distortion

that induces me to call Moslem civilisation more level- headed. THE NEW AGE writers have frequently quoted the phrase used so pompously by Mr. Birrell in the House of Commons, “ Minorities must suffer.” Now, why should minorities suffer? No Moslem minority is ever called upon to suffer, simply because no Moslem statesman or politician could ever go so far as to Iook upon his country as something divided into two sec- tions, the majority and the minority, the latter being calIed upon to ‘ ‘ suffer. ” This idea is alien to the race, and was not even talked about until the Young Turks returned from Paris and Geneva with odd theories of Parliamentary government.

* * * Having taken steps for the segregation of the work-

ing classes, the United States of America is now ar- ranging for the segregation of Japanese, or rather one State in the Union is doing s o If California definiteIy passes the Alien Land Ownership Bill, only American subjects will be able to hold land in the State, and the laws concerning aliens forbid the naturalisation of the Japanese. The tension between Japan and the United States has been acute for years, and it is fortunate for the peace of the world that the two countries are separated by six thousand miles of sea. If the Cali- fornian Bill is passed, Tokio will a t once ask Washing- ton to allow Japanese to become at least naturalised Americans, if they may not hold land ; and in this case we may see a dispute between the Federal and the State Government. The Italian Government is also protest- ing against the Bill.

M i l i t a r y N o t e s .

By Romney. THE folllowing are more detailed proposals for the regeneration of the Territorial Army. The activi- ties of that force fall under the two heads of (i) Ad- ministration and (ii) Training. In the department o f administration reform will best be effected by abolishing the absurd “ County Associations ”and dividing their duties between thle officers commanding units and the County Councils. Our first duty here will be to allow- a proper independence to units-an independence which the Territorial scheme has taken away, but which must be restored before any real improvement can be made. The social and administrative needs of Territorial regiments differ widely : one wants one thing and one wants another and any attempt to pro- vide for them entirely from .a centralised body has re- sulted, and will result, in failure. In the first place the centralised body is out of touch with the units in question, is not acquainted with their needs and, generally, none too anxious to learn them ; and in any case the necessity of explaining every little need to a headquarters’ official involves a n amount of harass- ing and circumlocutionary ,correspondence. In order to avoid this, regimental commanders must be en-. trusted with a grant for general purposes of training and administration t o be accounted for by them yearly, and to be expended at their discretion. If they have not discretion, they should not be in command of regl- ments. But usually they h a v e - o r a t any rate as much of it as County Associations.

* * * There are, however, certain functions, such as the

purchase of uniforms, the construction of buildings, and so forth, which there is no object in leaving to units and which can be performed more easily ‘and cheaply by centralised authorities. This part of the duties o f the County Associations should be handed over to the County Councils, who, in addition to receiving the present “grants,” should be empowered to raise a local rate for certain specified objects where expenditure is uncertain o r fluctuating, e.g., the pro- vision of drill halls. It might conceivably be unsafe t o leave the raising of funds to meet a regular and re- curring demand (such as that of purchasing uniforms), t o a local authority, who might easily get “bored” with the uninteresting item and attempt to economise on it. But where it is a question say, of the recon- struction of drill halls-where, that is, we have to appeal. every now and again to local patriotism to meet an obvious and striking deficiency, to do something more or less spectacular, the policy of leaving the matter in local hands with power to raise the funds by local taxation would probably re- sult in many more drill halls being built than is the case at present. I need not say that in the case of large cities like Birmingham and Bristol, which are organically one, the duties of the County Councils would be undertaken by the municipalities. I t is too grotesque, for example, to partition Birmingham be- tween Warwick and Worcester Finally, it must be remembered that the Territorial and National Reserve vote might be relied on to keep the local authorities. up t o scratch. In London even now, with recruiting at a low ebb, there must be 30,000 men in the two cate- gones, the majority of them with votes-which they would soon begin t o use if they found that their use made any difference to their corps. The possibilities of the military vote in England have been ignored. Already organised, it could be used with tremendous effect. I am not suggesting compulsion. But men in a corps meet, feed, walk and talk together, and will generally also vote together, if ever they come t o think about it.

* * * Once we have got proper drill halls constructed and

have some funds at our disposal, the movement will

602

begin to work itself. The next steps will be on the lines laid down in Kipling’s “‘Army of a dream ” and actually initiated by Colonel F. N. Maude at Ports.- mouth a dew years since. (By the way, it is interesting to learn that the two were to some extent working in conjunction.) The men must be attached to the regi- ment by every possible tie of interest and sentiment. Rooms, even flats, should be constructed in or near the headquarter buildings in which picked unmarried men of the corps could live, messing together if possi- ble. These would constitute a backbone to the corps and a nucleus in time of mobilisation. There are scores of such men in every unit who would be only too glad of such an opportunity, and the experiment, once initiated, would pay its way. Colonel Maude at Portsmouth conceived the idea of attaching the families as well as the men themselves to the regiment by instituting scholarships for the children of those who had served a certain number !of years, as well as by a lavish round of balls and parties, of every description. In short the regimental headquarters should be made the centre of the men’s lives as well as a mere training depot, and, by means of a proper system of honorary mem- berships, it could be ensured that once a man had served in the corps, he never lost touch with it. Such men would act as recruiting sergeants, and see that the younger generation served too.

* * * My plan is, in short, to revive all those sentimental

ties which, founded upon a proper regard for interest, are nine-tenths of esprit de corps and therefore of effi- ciency also. It is significant that it i s all this side of regimental life which the cockatoos of the War Office have recently done their best t o destroy-shriek- ing out “ efficiency ! efficiency ! ” without having the faintest idea of what “ efficiency ” is, or realising that, as I have said, esprit de corps is nine-tenths of it. But the execution of all these schemes demands money, and it is hopeless to expect to draw money from the War Office and Treasury for purposes such as these. To go to the poor, blinking, bewildered creatures who fill these establishments and to unroll and demand money for such a scheme as I outline above would be a shameful waste of time, and might result in positive harm-in finding oneself written down as a “dangerous person” with “ideas”-not sound. Well, God have mercy on them ! They are “sound” and they brought the Territorial Force down by fifty thousand men in four years, and we have not yet come to the end of their “soundness.” But there are some sparks of life and imagination in the local patritotism of our towns, and the funds would be forthcoming, a t any rate in sufficient cases to make a start. The rest would imitate success. After all, energy and enterprise are English things, and we may hope to find them-once we get out of the chilly reach of the world with whom Whitehall goes out to dinner. In my next article I propose to deal with (ii) Training.

T h e P a n e l D o c t o r s .

How men of the same spirit will congregate together ! Slaves with slaves, freemen with the free. The serf’s own doctor was in existence in these islands long before Mr. Lloyd George came to England, though He-of- the-Panels was the first to recognise that fact, and to ensure it. The Lloyd came unto his own and his own received him. T o the slaves of Great Britain he spoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, and they marvelled. Never man spake as this man ! T o their doctors he praised the Paradise of Panels, and they rejoiced Three hun- dred pounds a year ! Three hundred golden sovereigns ! Good God ! And they-they could not even call their souls their own !

But what of their wealthier brethren? Ah ! that stimulus of money ! Three hundred easy pounds ! ’Gad ! they were fools not to have seen it. Hence their panic to the panels. For your doctor is only human, and ours

is a greedy age. But 0 ! if they had only known ! Of the virtuous and wise among them there were a few. If the mob of doctors had but hearkened unto these, their natural leaders, Medicine would still have been a great profession amongst us, and her butchers and bakers and ,candlestick-makers would never have had their day. Now are they lost, indeed !

Nor were they wholly to blame, poor fools. Being little skilled in the art of making ,money, they naturally put their simple trust in the wily Welshman. Gentleman Taffy, was he not the Chancellor of the Exchequer, one of the mighty ones, a Statesman? ‘And dear old Pills and portly Potions know what’s what, bai Jove ! One really has to recognise one’s position in life, doncher- know ; Man has his place in the universe, eh? What ‘? So the dear old boys fell down .and worshipped while the Welsh Messiah rode his donkey to the New Jeru- salem. The Young Men, of ‘course, followed boldly. W h o were they to question the wisdom of their fathers? Hosanna to the Lloyd of Panels.

So the procession grew. Nor was their adoration to be so utterly unprofitable. “In my father’s house are many mansions,” said the Lloyd. “If it were not so I would have told you ; I go to prepare a place for you.” But the Lloyd was speaking unto his apostles, and dear old Pills and portly Potions, with their noses polishing the cobbles, did not see the Master’s Wink. The Young Men, of course, never understood. No hobbledehoys in all this world are less discerning. Somebody offered them lollipops, so they shouted : “Hosanna to the Lloyd of Panels ! ”

And now the appointed end of the panel-probation is at hand. And they have not made their fortunes ! Worse, much worse. The lean three-hundred-pounds- a-year has eaten up all the fat profits of their practices, and remains a lean three hundred still. For who could trust a panel doctor? Had he not to buy the cheapest drugs for the insured? Would he not use the same in private practice? Could the rat play fair? Were his rapid methods of diagnosis and treatment reserved only for the insured? Would they not affect his general conduct? Were they conducive to his clients’ health? Would the scab, who sacrificed the traditions and ideals of his profession, hesitate to sacrifice his patients too?

The panel doctors were out to make money, and they made it ! One by one their patients dwindled ; the wealthy families of the well-established practices severed their connections ; and the doctors who were not on the panels received the patients of those who were. The panel doctors earned their three hundred pounds a year (God bless them !), but the men of honour, the men of integrity, the men who kept their ideals pure, the men who jealously maintained the high dignity of their ancient profession, and spurned the Welshman’s bribes, have had their own reward. More- over, their surgeries are filled to overflowing, their visiting lists outcrowded. The terrible boycott of virtue is at an e n d and the panel doctors are left alone in their glory to minister to the damned ! Truly a wondrous re- compense, a worthier fate ! “Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven, and all things else shall be added unto YOU,” said the Lloyd. And they did ! Let the remorse of these fools be the scorn of the noble.

MORGAN Tud.

SONG ‘OF THE SUPERMAN. (Stanzas written in dejection at a Railway junction.)

What will it matter to me, When the great god Death shall call,

Whether I toiled and conquered? . . . Devil-a-bit at all !

What will it matter to me, I f for better or for worse,

I lived out what was in me? Devil a tinker’s curse !

What will it matter to me I f the Cosmos were a sham,

And. nothing the meaning of all things ? . . . I shall not care a damn!

KARL DOUGAN.

6 0 3

H y g i e n i c J i n k s . By Charles Brookfarmer-

S C E N E : Meeting at Caxton Hall to demand the “ Elimi- nation of the Principle of Compulsion from the Insurance Act. ”

TIME : 8 p.m., Tuesday April 8. UNDER the auspices of “ The Insurance Tax Resisters’

Defence Association. ” AFTER a struggle with the enthusiastic crowd in the corridors, STUDENT arrives safely at his seat, and pro- ceeds to take stock of the audience. After a few minutes’ careful survey, he arrives a t the following in- interesting fact : That while the front of the house is filled with well-dressed and aristocratic men and women (whose attitude is, to a great degree, one of amused condescension), the middle part of the building is occu- pied by what HILAIRE BELLOC afterwards refers to as “ the middle class,” a section evidently very much alive and very enthusiastic. The fringes of the audience consist of small and scattered groups of working men- awed by the display of refinement in front and by the prospect of meeting face to face two of the small band of men who set themselves openly against the present corrupt tendencies of Government.

G. K. CHESTERTON, followed by HILAIRE BELLOC and JOHN MCCALLUM, moves laboriously towards the chair, amidst an uproarious volley of cheers.

G. K. C. : “One point I wish to make very clear to- night is the fact that this meeting is in every way a meeting representative of the British public. This is a very important point. Of course the House of Com- mons is not representative. No body of men can be representative which has only one opinion on every subject. On this platform here, although we are all .agreed on this one subject-the Insurance Act-we could, with very little trouble, get up quite a respect- able shindy ; which is more than the front benches in -the Commons are capable of. Our convictions differ very much on different subjects. A sincere person with -a conviction on one subject is a lunatic. If any of the reporters in front didn’t catch that, I’ll repeat it. (Loud applause.) This platform, of which I am, so to speak, one of the thinnest planks (loud cries of “ No !”), represents the general opinion of the country on the abominable measure known as the Insurance Act. There never has been such a law passed before in this country, and, if our efforts are worth anything, there never will be one again. (Cheers.) There have been laws passed for the protection of the rich before, but there ins never been a law which decreed that some are masters and some servants ; which weeded out a portion of the population and had them ticketed and labelled, while the others were allowed to go free. This is a blow a t Democracy ; and unless Democracy can be preserved, civilisation cannot be preserved. This is our first objection to the Act. Our second is that it calls on people to gamble; that is, to put their money into a thing for which they may get benefits, or may not.

.Thirdly, the Bill is servile. (Loud cheers.) The balance of benefit weighs heavily in favour of the rich against the poor. I t is a mistake to think that the capitalists have reduced the poor to servility. They have reduced them to. something much worse-anarchy. There are things in this Act which we can look upon with dis- approval, and there are also things in this Act that we can only look upon with suspicion. The right of sus- suspicion is one of the rights of man. If we are not in a position to have the full facts of a case, all we can do ‘is to suspect. A citizen, when suspicious, merely ful- fills a duty he owes to the State. When we see the names of Rothschild and the Prudential, we have a right to suspect about the attitude of the capitalist towards the Act. When we know that Sassoons are largely in- te res td in the Prudential, we begin to think, and then t o suspect. W e only suspect because we are ignorant of all the facts-because we have no proof. To root UP this corrupt measure, and overthrow its supporters, seem to me to be the only ways of recovering liberty for England and Englishmen. (Loud cheers.) . . . I

now call upon Mr. JOHN McCallum to propose the reso- lution. ”

J. M. : “ The resolution is as follows :-That this meeting demands (I) that the Principle of Compulsion be eliminated from the Insurance Act ; (2) that the em- ployers’ right to deduct the weekly tax from wages be abolished ; (3) that the Profit-mongering industrial Insurance Companies, such as the Prudential, be excluded from the working of any National Health Insurance Scheme : (4) that free Insurance be pro- vided for low-paid workers; (5) that just and reasonble provision be made for those un- fortunate persons at present thrown into the Post Office Section. (Loud applause.) I shall deal more particularly with the first two parts of the resolu- tion, The Act divides the country into two distinct classes. One has a badge, ticket, number or dog- collar. The other goes free, and is therefore legally held to be above the Former class. When Chiozza Money was questioned in the House of Commons about the right of the employers to deduct the weekly tax, his reply was : ‘ But do not employers already deduct fines from their employees’ wages? ’ (G. K. C., thun- derously : “ Ha ! ha ! ha ! ” to the enormous delight of the audience, which lies back and shrieks with laughter.) We are also asked whether we approve of the compulsion entailed in paying the Income Tax. Our answer is that we do not disapprove of compulsion on principle, but only with reference to particular cases. Besides, we have arrived at compulsory Income Tax by common agreement, and it will be admitted by any sane man that compulsion of some sort must always ex is t if only negatively in the shape of a punitive law, unless we are to get anarchy. Moreover, the Income Tax is no degradation ; it has no badge to be carried and shown on demand. When Mr. CHESTERTON writes an article, the editor to whom he presents it does not ask to see his “ Schedule D ” ; but when a navvy ap- plies for a job, it is not experience, character, or recom- mendations that are asked for, but an Insurance Card -a dog-collar. And the point is that Compulsory Insurance is a contradiction in terms. There is no weighing up the risks and the rate offered in this case : the bargain is compulsory. This is certain to lead to malingering, as is the case in Germany. Y o u need only reflect on the feeling of ‘ getting your own ’ back, when your hearth-rug is burnt by a ‘cinder, to see that. The compulsory element also destroys any incentive to study the Act. Of course Lloyd George made pro- mises, and then broke them-he could do so with im- punity because the Act was compulsory. I f it had been a voluntary Act, and the promises of the poli- ticians had proved false, people would have stopped paying. Lloyd George first details the minimum bene- fits, and then gives six ways of reducing the minimum benefits. As for your ‘ free choice of doctors,’ the country is so disgusted that half the people in London have not troubled to ask for a panel doctor. . . . In conclusion, I may say that we have worked out an Act which we are ready to put forward-a voluntary scheme on an honourable basis, to replace this odious Bill.. ” (Loud cheers.)

G. K. C. : “ I call upon HILAIRE BELLOC to address the meeting. ”

H. B. (rising amidst loud cheers) : “ Outside the dirty little circle of politicians and employers the Act is detested. I t is quite obvious to all, now that the Act is working, that the motive of the politicians was t o catch in a great net all the artisan labour of this country. (Applause, Hear,. hear !) It is all very well for us in this hall (most of us here to-night come from well-to-do families) to sit and discuss the Act from our point of view. The indignity to the working man is beyond conception. W e a r e hearing a great deal of talk about the horrors of Conscription. Well, I have suffered Conscription, but this is worse. I don’t suppose many of us here know what it is to apply t o a Labour Exchange ; to have a form and ticket attached to US; to be labelled as short or tall, thin or fa t ; to have a clerk informing bureacracy at large that we

604

stoop slightly, have grey hair, shuffle and smell of drink. I demand an abolition of this tyranny. (Loud cheers.) The present Act fails to make provision for the very ones who need it most : the very poor who cannot pay. (Hear, hear !) Now we know that every Englishman is a Conservative-at h e a r t a t any rate. Every one of them shows by his eccentricity what a true Conservative he is. For hundreds of years he clung on to old traditions of the Constitution. He can do that no longer-the Constitution is dead. W e must remake or rebuild it-we cannot recover it. 1 am no friend of the Party system, but there is one thing I can say about it-up to about fifty years ago it worked--it was not perfect, by any means, but still i t worked. But the machinery is smashed now. Politicians are in the hand of employers, and em- ployers do not want to get the Act repealed, as it bene- fits them. Last autumn there were signs that some of the more adventurous spirits of the Conservative Party (with the whole country behind them) might take steps to get the Act repealed. They had a clear mandate from the country to do so. But down came the big business men from the North, and shouted ‘Kennel.’ And the politicians put their tails between their legs and disappeared. Money talks at Westminster-it’s the only thing that does. (Applause. j If you think the rest of them can, go and listen to them. (Laughter.) As for that minor politician, Chiozza Something-or- the-other, he mustn’t be taken seriously. The Bill has got to be repealed. It cannot be done by Parlia- ment. It cannot certainly be done by the help of the Press. The Press is in the hands of the men who are heart and soul against you. The Populace is heart and soul with you, but it has no means of action. The proof that the people are powerless is the fact that the Bill was passed. I should like to ask your Liberals some questions. I should like to ask ‘ who are the largest shareholders in the Prudential, and who ‘control the opium trade in India?’ The answer is ‘The Sassoons.’ And ‘ Which of the big employers re- sisted the Act? ’ The answer is ‘ None.” But I’m not given the opportunity. There is only one other way to smash up the Act-to refuse to obey it. T o dissolve an Act of this description is not anarchy. When the law says that I am to treat certain men as my inferiors and force them to help to finance this abominable method of servitude, I refuse. (Cheers.) If I were asked my reasons by a magistrate, I would say that I could not obey a law corruptly and im- properly procured. If he asked me to substantiate the last statements I would ask to be allowed to call two witnesses : the treasurers of the Secret Party Funds with. the Party Fund Books. (Loud cheers.) But I shall not be allowed to do that. I am only too happy to be associated with the group that has been attacking the present system, and with Mr. Cecil Chesterton in particular.” (Mr. Cecil Chesterton, who arrived late, is treated to a round of cheers, a t which he ‘blinks sleepily and grunts.) “ I have fought one battle for my ideas, and I am prepared to fight another.” (Loud cheers. At this point Mrs. DESPARD and Miss DOUGLAS enter.)

Miss DOUGLAS : “ As the chairman is absent, I must introduce myself. Mr. Masterman said the opposition to the Act was dead. If that is so, why are there .three prosecutions on one day? ” (Gives three or four instances.) “ It is becoming a proud thing nowadays to be called mean by the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Hear, hear !) and t o be prosecuted for your ideas. . . . Out of three hundred meetings held by the Insurance Tax Resisters’ Defence Association, we have had hardly one dissentient. . . Our prophecies have been fulfilled. We said that the funds were not sufficient, and that the actuaries had not made sufficient provision. . . . The Act which we are prepared to put forward on a volun- tary basis would give more benefits for less money. . . . W e would give Free Insurance to those earning less than 6 1 per week who have dependents. W e would cut down about ~2,000,000 spent on inspectors. . . .

One Trade Union could smash the Act over a week-end. (Loud cheers.) The Prudential is not only an approved society; it has further obtained permission to ad- minister the affairs of other societies.” T h e speaker then went on to expose the position of the Prudential in a damning manner, after which questions were asked. In the midst of these G. K. C. informed the audience that “all healthy men spend half the night in illogical argument,” and that “ this country has generally been saved by making a big mistake,” after which he ‘called upon Mrs. DESPARD to speak.)

Mrs. DESPARD : “ I am a law-breaker, and in very good company. Not only the company of the present, but also of the past. . . . I have my ideal in a vision of a great State. . . . Votes for Women. . . . ” (The writer was so carried away by this speech that he omitted to take any notes, and he has unfortunately forgotten what it was about. The resolution being put to the meeting, was carried with “ four and a half dissentients,” as a voice in the gallery put it. The meeting ended up amidst loud cheers for everyone, especially Cecil Chesterton, who was by this time in a comatose condition. The crowd dwindled out, while the STUDENT left with regret one of the most interesting and hopeful meetings to which he has ever been.)

T h e N e m e s i s o f C a p i t a l i s t -

P r o d u c t i o n . By “ Rifleman.”

T H E Militarist writer who ventures to deal with the complex problems of Political Economy naturally does so subject to grave disadvantages. First he is handi- capped by the dense stupidity appertaining to the military profession. Everyone knows that the soldier is an intensely stupid individual who leads a purely useless and animal life, Lord Roberts for instance is so stupid that he cannot even grasp the problems of his own profession, Lord Haldane and “Colonel” Seely have told us so ! Again, the soldier is handicapped by a n uncommonly large dose of original sin; the journalist is, of course, a noble-hearted philanthropist bursting with goodwill to mankind, but the soldier is perpetually engaged in the devilish task of stirring up good, innocent, inoffensive British and German Liberals and Pacifists to cut one another’s throats and indulge in other enormities. which everyone will agree is a most wicked thing to do ! Nevertheless it is the pur- pose of this article to demonstrate that war is the necessary accompaniment of the movement of evolution of capitalist civilisation, that only by war can a system of capitalist production fulfil its natural movement of evolution; that war is the Nemesis of capitalist produc- tion.

First it is necessary for us. to form a clear concep- tion of the influences which determine exchange value or, expressed in terms of the common medium of ex- ,change, price. Here we touch upon a subject about which a great deal of controversial matter has been written and about which economists of the present day have seldom any clearly defined opinions. I t is an un- fortunate fact that if I were to hold up a pound package of Lyons’ tea, cash price one shilling and fourpence, to a collection of the leading economists in Europe and say ; “Tell me what it is has made the price of this tea one shilling and fourpence, neither one farthing more nor one farthing less,” I should in no case get a really satisfactory answer or one generally accepted by econo- mists as a body. Either I should be put off too vaguely with supply and demand or else referred t o Jevons’ formulae-which have in reality nothing to do with the matter. I have not space here to deal with the subject largely, and besides I have already done so in a work, “ The Gathering Storm,” which is to be published by Mr. John Lane. I will content myself here then by pointing out that it is necessary to distinguish clearly between abstract value and exchange value and in like ‘manner between the influences which create products

605 ~.

and the influences which determine price. Air, water, etc., have immense abstract value, but have no ex- change value because for obvious reasons they are not subject to exchange; again, as Jevons says, all pro- ducts are created either to satisfy utility o r sensuous gratification Nevertheless, these influences which create products do not determine their exchange value once created, this is in all cases determined not by mathematical formulae but by efficiency in production, in other words the exchange value of a unit of any com- modity such as a pound of tea is determined by the rate of production of such a community by its most efficient producer : if for instance the most efficient pro- ducer of tea is. able to produce tea more rapidly, quality for quality, by obtaining larger crops, area for area, than his business rivals this most efficient producer can afford to make a slight reduction in his prices to secure more trade, and his business rivals must necessarily follow suit or else lose their trade. And if by a general agreement among tea planters it is determined to re- strict production and prices i t will still be the most efficient producer who determines the rate of produc- tion and the price of the commodity, for if he ‘chooses to break such agreements nothing can prevent him from forcing prices down.

The exchange value of a unit of any commodity then is determined by the rate of production by the most efficient producer ; there is, however, a further influence at work, viz., the ratio which the production of the individual commodity bears to the general balance of production throughout the community. For i t is not merely a case of selling but also of buying, the tea planter who sells his tea is exchanging this tea for other commodities or the power to purchase such com- modities, thus the exchange value of the individual unit of tea will be determined by the rate of production of tea by the most efficient producer of tea balanced against the rate of production of commodities in general by their most efficient producers, and this general balance of most efficient producers expressed in the common medium of exchange will represent the price of tea. If then the production of tea proceeds more rapidly than the production of commodities in general the price of tea will fall, if, on the other hand, the production of commodities in general proceeds more rapidly than that of tea the price of tea will rise. And the common medium of exchange, gold, being a com- modity, like all other commodities its own exchange value will be determined by analogous influences, which cast an illuminating gleam upon the quantity theory of the gold currency a t present agitating economists.

W e have seen that exchange value or price is deter- mined primarily by efficiency of production : this brings us to a consideration of one of the most im- portant and least understood movements which has ever moulded this world’s history : the increasing momen- tum of industrial efficiency. This is itself a fruit of the increasing specialisation of industry : as the sub-divi- sion of industry becomes ever more and more minute there results a general all-round rise of efficiency pro- portionate to the increased care and attention given to the fabrication of each minute part of our industrial machinery. Jack-of-all-trades is proverbially master of none, thus it was not until the specialisatian of in- dustry permitted the workman to ,concentrate his whole attention upon a single task that any high standard of workmanship became possible, and as throughout the ages the organisation of society has become more and more complex so there has resulted the steady general rise in industrial efficiency which done made possible the invention of labour-saving machinery and the gigantic strides of the present era. And as each stride in industrial efficiency renders the next more easy of attainment this is a movement which proceeds with ever-increasing momentum.

Now this increasing momentum of industrial effi- ciency re-acts in a three-fold manner. Firstly, it cheapens products, secondly it intensifies competition, thirdly it concentrates industry into the control of

fewer and fewer industrial organisations. With each stride of industrial efficiency the less efficient producers are crushed out of independent economic existence. For it is the most efficient producers who first seize upon the increased industrial efficiency and by their superior rate of production force prices down and drive their less efficient compeers from the markets. Thus. the increasing momentum of industrial efficiency has the effect of ,intensifying competition, of forcing down prices (and incidentally wages) and of concentrating the control of industry into fewer and fewer industrial organisations. Now, bearing all this in mind let us remember that producers are divided into national groups, British, French, German American, etc., and let us remember that the Governments of all these countries represent the main economic interests of their naitonal producers and that, a s I have demonstrated in “The Struggle for Bread,” whilst there is a cross-current of economic interest between the various nations yet these are in the main economic units and in the main antagonistic economic units. There follows the ques- tion, “How long -will it be before the increasing momentum of industrial efficiency with its accompani- m e n t a n increasing strenuous competition, results in war between the rival groups of national producers?”

Present-day Europe presents some curious paradoxes to the mind of a Cadbury Press writer. On the one hand we have ‘‘booming” trade totals and a condition of UNPRECEDENTED PROSPERITY, on the other hand we have falling wages accompanied by an immense rise in food prices; on the one hand we have the great discovery made by Mr. Norman Angell. that the European nations can gain nothing by ‘war and that therefore they may a s well kiss and be friends, on the other hand, we have the great States armed to the teeth and busily engaged in piling up more armaments. The poor little Cadburyite is sorely puzzled to account for these contradictory social and economic pheno- mena : as to the rise in food prices in Free Trade Britain, although he shouts at the “tariff-caused famine’’ in Germany, he leaves it as far as possible severely alone, whilst he can find no better explanation for the policy of the European nations with regard to armaments than the charitable assumption that all Europe save the adherents of his own special creed has gone mad. And yet there is not in reality anything paradoxical or surprising in the social and economic phenomena of present-day Europe.

The rise in food prices which has affected all coun- tries alike, and the feverish competition in armaments are both the reflex action of the economic development of Europe, of the increasing momentum of industrial efficiency, which is slowly but surely driving the Euro- pean nations to war. It is the increasing momentum of industrial efficiency which has caused the output of manufactured articles to exceed so greatly the output of food-stuffs as to cause a general rise in the cost of Iiving, it is the increasing momentum of industrial effi- ciency which is a t the bottom of the furious trade- rivalry of the present epoch, i t is the increasing momen- tum of industrial efficiency which is truly responsible for competition in armaments. And the increasing momentum of industrial efficiency is an ever-increasing momentum. Food prices, then, must rise still higher, wages must fall still lower, competition must become more and more intense. How can this situation pos- sibly develop save into war or revolution? War at home or war abroad : that is the Nemesis of capitalist pro- duction

A . W a n d e r e r . I FORGE upon the bitter brine

My road. The coiled seas yawn Under my talking keel. The wind’s malign.

The tides are throx and thrawn. Tides ! ’Tis the racing of the main

Where homeless currents breed. 0 fanged and biting shore line, I were fain

T o kiss your coldest weed. ROEN.

6 0 6

N o t e s o n t h e P r e s e n t K a l p a . By j. M . Kennedy.

X X I I .-Women’s Suffrage. IT is a sound axiom that when States decline the causes should be sought at the top, among the ruling classes rather than among the craftsmen and working classes. Capable leaders can keep their followers together ; but the followers go to pieces when the leaders show them- selves to be lacking in intelligence. In the case of races and nations the process of disintegration may be slow and gradual; though once it sets in it soons spreads to all classes of society. But the ruling classes, as their very name indicates, must be held responsible €or what is wrong, unless they can definitely exculpate themselves in time by pointing to the defects of the classes below them. Even then, we shall generally be abIe to trace in the ruling classes the origin of such defects.

To take an instance with which we should all be familiar, i t would clearly be quite unjust to blame the English working classes for their agitation of the last thirty or forty years, for the rise of the Socialist move- ment and its fall, or for the particularly strained rela- tions between master and man since 190. Anyone who knows the British workman will admit that he is good-natured and unwilling to make a fuss ; making a fuss, indeed, is against the national tradition in any class of society.

When we find, then, that there is such, a thing as Labour unrest, that there are several different forms of the agitation, and that even the leaders of the movement are not united on the remedies to be suggested and advocated, we must conclude that the fault really lies with the masters, and that the Labour agitation is merely the form o f protest of a class whose interests have been neglected by a higher class which had been de- pended upon to consider the well-being of the nation as a whole and not merely a section of it. The work- men have found existence intolerable, and street-corner oratory, vague symptoms of dissatisfaction, and finally strikes, are simply crude methods of protest, the only efficacious methods which the workmen have so far discovered.

Several contributors to THE NEW AGE, including my- self, have often written about the cleavage between the upper and lower strata of society which the present economical system involves The distinction was made particularly clear in the Editorial Notes of September 12, 1912. Both classes, the masters and the workmen, are ’ suffering, the former because the control of dull, mechanical slaves always tends to coarseness and stupidity in their owners; the latter because they no longer feel themselves to be a definite class of society, with traditions, rights, and privileges, but a “kept,” servile class, deprived of the responsibility of men and left with tedious duties and a routine existence. There is still a sufficient leaven of the old order left to, make this a general statement. The Servile State is not yet actually with us, hut it looks as if only a miracle could prevent it from coming. That such a miracle is quite a conceivable factor I hope to show in a later article in this series. It is sufficient, for the present, t o note that, despite a few county families, a few surviving semi- feudal lords who take a kindly interest in their de- pendents, a few masters who consider the interests of the workmen in their charge, the Servile State is gradually approaching.

Up to comparatively recent times the brutalising effects of our economic system were confined to men- men were the masters and men were the workers ; and both suffered and degenerated under the industrial sys- tem. As it was degeneracy, in various forms, among our ruling classes which allowed the establishment of the industrial system in the first instance, so it was the degeneracy, consequent upon this system, among the male or ruling sex which led to the agitation among the ruled or female sex. In both cases the rulers became in-

efficient ; in both cases the ruled were, with relative suddenness, called upon to deal with a situation-socio- logical, economic, and artistic-for which they had had little preliminary training. In both cases, that of the workmen and that of the women, the movement stag- gered along blindly for a time and then became split into numerous organisations. The analogy is not quite perfect, I admit ; for every women’s organisation wants the vote and differs from the others only about the means for securing it, while the men’s organisations are not yet unitedly in favour of the abolition of the wage system. The movements, nevertheless, have a great deal in common : each was due to lack of intelligence, and consequent degeneracy, in those on whom the re- sponsibility for the origin of the movements rested- the masters in the one case and the male sex generally in the other-each movement fell into the hands of leaders who frequently proved themselves to be out of touch with their followers ; and in each movement the followers displayed, a t times, more energy, initiative, and daring than the leaders were prepared to tolerate.

Whatever the analogies and contrasts-and more could be mentioned we must find ourselves, I think compelled to recognise that this conclusion is reasonable : as the result of degeneracy among the masters, the workmen had to assume additional burdens a t a time when the masters, in their ignorance, with- drew from their serfs the social and political responsi- bilities which they had formerly exercised. Speeding- up, arbitration boards, old age pensions, national insur- ance, and so on, generally coincided with the concentra- tion of political power in the hands of the caucus and the closer supervision of the workman and his family -remember the Children’s Charter. In exactly the same way, male degeneracy resulted in responsibilities, without power, being thrust upon women, who have been dealt with in a manner which can only be described a s utterly illogical. I t is, apparently, the Englishman’s habit to meddle with things just sufficiently to leave them in a chronic state of chaos, so that one section or another of the population is continually in turmoil.

I do not refer merely to well-known absurdities, such as the illogical fact that women may vote a t municipal elections but not a t Parliamentary elections, that mar- ried women may vote a t London municipal elections, but not at provincial municipal elections, that women teachers are paid less than men teachers for the same work, that women may pass the same university (Ox- ford and Cambridge) examinations a s men and yet have degrees withheld on account of their sex. ‘These are irritants, serious, illogical, unjust ; impossible to con- ceive in other countries. But still more illogical-and, in my opinion, the key to the movement a s it will be dealt with by the political parties-is the illogical. posi- tion of the husband qua male voter under the Married Women’s Property Act. QUA man, he acknowledges his wife’s freedom in that she may hold property ; and, logically enough, the mere holding of property in Eng- land justifies political power, for all our economic laws -indeed, all our social laws and social conventions- are based on the rights of property owners. Everybody knows in what respect and even dread property is held in England, and how offences against property are treated more severely than crimes against the person. I f women with property demand a vote, the Englishman cannot justify his refusal of it by falling back upon some old acts that technically make a married woman the property of the husband : that right lapsed with the Act of 1882.

The women’s movement, a s G. K. C. once said of Mr. Wells, may seem to be advancing in all directions. But the key to any movement of this sort in England is not necessarily faith, a s we should expect to find in most other countries, but property. And if we consider it, a s a preliminary step, solely from this standpoint, we shall see why the caucuses are already preparing for the enfranchisement of -women within the next year. or so, when an opportunity arises. I am not able to prove definitely that the caucuses are actually doing SO ; but I know, nevertheless, that my statement is accurate.

607

T h e C h r o n i c l e s o f P a l m e r s t o w n . By Peter Fanning.

VII. INCLUDING 158 acres of mud the area of Palmerstown is 1,064 acres, the whole of which is practically owned by two men, Lord Northbourne and a Mr. Chaytor. The latter having succeeded t o his portion recently, may be dismissed from this record with m e remark, that since he came into possession, he has been very generous in giving land for the benefit of the town.

Sixty years ago, what is now commonly spoken of a s Palmerstown was a decrepit mid-Tyne village lying about some old colliery workings. The land at that time belonged to two families named James and Brown. The Brown porton was in pawn for a few hundred pounds, but when it was rumoured abroad that Mr. C. M. Palmer was on the look-out for a suitable site for a ship-building yard, the Brown estate was released from the hands of the money-changers and the owner sat tight to await developments.

He had not long to wait. Mr. Palmer established his works and constructed the first steam collier, the “John Bowes,” which brought him fame, honours and profit. What it brought to the landowners may be gathered, in some degree, by the census of population : 1851-3,834; 1 8 6 1 4 , 4 9 9 ; 1871-18,178; 1881- 25,270 ; 1891-33,682 ; 1901-34,295 ; 191 1--33,372. With this rapid influx of people, drawn mostly from the agricultural districts of East and West England and North and West Ireland, the glorious opportunity for landowner and jerry-builder had arrived ; and right heartily did they take the occasion by the hand. Apolo- gies for houses were flung up, regardless of drainage, sanitation, or ventilation. What matter? The people, straight from the soil, were strong, lusty, and fertile, showing a birth-rate of 45 per 1,000 inhabitants. That the death-rate was very little below it was immaterial, because new blood flowed in in a steady stream.

That, indeed, was a real golden age for those who owned and ruled the community. Mr. Brown was doing so splendidly that the plebeian name of Brown became unbearable. He got himself transmogrified by letters patent into Drewett 0 . Drewett. And then he gave a patch of land for a church; whereupon, having propitiated the deity, secured the countenance of the clerics and attained the character of a Christian, he set to work in real earnest to skin the community. The measure of his success in this direction may be judged by the fact that when he died a short while ago his estate was sworn as being of the value of &250,000.

If we bear in mind, that the land of Palmerstown has never yet produced E ~ o o for local purposes, we shall be the better able to appreciate some of the individual operations of Drewett 0 . Drewett. (What’s in a name?) Dunn Street School site, 4,840 yards, price ;G2,000. Croft Terrace School site, 5,875 yards, price E2,807. Site for public baths at the rate of L 7 , b a n acre. But perhaps his last attempt to skin must rank a s his best effort.

In the eastern part of the town was an old quarry which was used and filled in a s a common tip a few years ago. The Council made an application to Drewett 0 . Drewett that the space might be kept open for the benefit of the neighbourhood. “ Certainly,’’ said Drewett, ‘ ‘ on my conditions, which are these :-I will lease the land to the corporation for 21 years at a nomi- nal rent of A I per year. Th,e corporation shall under- take to make roads and footpaths round the land a t a cost of jG380. If the corporation desire to acquire the freehold of the land before the termination of the lease, they shall pay me 44,200.”

He wanted us to make the roads and footpaths for him and nurse the land till it was ripe for building. W e did not take him on, and the land has since been sold for ,GI,OOO.

As I remarked above, the other land-owner is Lord Northbourne (nee James). Between the two, according

I to opportunity, it would be hard to say which had plun- dered us most. Anyway, one instance will show what his lordship is capable of in this direction when the opportunity presents itself.

In the southern part of the town was a small school called the Bede Burn School, the site of which was purchased from Lord Northbourne. A few years ago it became necessary to enlarge the playground, and for this purpose the Education Committee bought the “ waste ” land surrounding the old school wall. The land was unenclosed, “ void ” on the rate book, and unproductive. But contrast the price between the first and second purchase : -

Bede Burn School, original site 3,690 yards, price A304 19s. 2d.

Bede Burn School, additional site 3,962 yards, price A I , I 22 18s. First purchase, E390 an acre ; second, A I ,500 an acre. What had Lord Northbourne done to increase the value of this land by &I, I IO an acre ? Nothing ! Absolutely nothing. On the contrary, so far as I am aware, he does not own a single brick in the town or pay a single penny in rates. Every six months a rent court is held in the ante-room of the Mechanics’ Institute, and there the ground-rents of Lord Northbourne are paid in, to be afterwards carried away to Kent, leaving not a fraction behind.

Several times I have suggested that this room should be rated, as a place of business, so that we might dock a portion of the plunder before it left the town. But, oh, no, th’e plunderer is a lord, and, therefore sacro- sanct. But were it a poor widow with a family, trying to keep herself and children from contamination with the sharks of the Poor Law by displaying a few sweets and home-made bread and’ cakes in her window, they would come down on her with the celerity of a bag of hammers and rate her house as a shop.

In addition to land and property-owners, we are bled by another respectable party-the professional Christians. Palmerstown stands upon a bed of coal and is surrounded on all sides with working collieries ; but it does not follow that we are allowed to get cheap coal. Every ton of coal gotten in this neighbourhood is subject to the imposition of a tax called “royalty rent,” and often another called “wayleaves.” These two, of course, are added to the selling price and paid by the consumer.

Now, the largest “royalty” owners’ in Durham County are a gang of Christian Sheeny-men called the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, with the Bishop of Dur- ham at their head. Over a period of years these Christian usurers have taken the money obtained by taxing our coal and have lent &zg,soo of it, at interest, to our local authorities for the purpose of building pub- lic schools. And then they have the impertinence, in pulpit and Press, to refer to such schools as “godless institutions’’ !

Another crowd of harpies who have us in their clutches is the Prudential. At various times sums amounting to 634,000 have been borrowed from the experts of Holborn Bars. As I remarked before, those who made the town originally ran it on loans, which, in the total, amount to some ;6130,000. Their motto appears to have been, ‘ ‘ T o hell with posterity.” Sure enough, posterity is getting hell. What with ground rents going to Kent and Cumberland; “interest” which goes to the Established Church and the “Pru.,” “pro- fits ” which go to the “Palmers,” and house rents which go to the slum-owners, never was a community more completely robbed of the fruits of its industry than this.

During the last few years, however, it has become evident that we are going to break down somewhere- The present conditions cannot possibly endure much longer. The last census showed that we were the only industrial community in the Kingdom to suffer an actual decrease in population during the decade 191-r I, 34,295-33,372. During our last depression, when Mr. Lloyd George and his Parliamentary echoes,

608

Mr. Money and Mr. P . W . Wilson, were assuring the country that things were not so bad, that the unem- ployed rate of trade unions was only 9.5 per cent. for the whole country, our unemployed rate for skilled workers was 51 per cent. In addition to that we had 1,050 unskilled workers clamouring t o be permitted to break stones in the workhouse, so that they might keep body and soul together. When the next depression in trade arrives, the position of this town, dependent on one factory, will be absolutely tragic.

At the monthly meeting of the Town Council held on March 13 a resolution to increase the rates by a shilling in the at lone blow was carried by the casting vote of the Mayor. What this will mean to trading con- cerns like “Palmers” and others can be easily imagined.

The property-owners, however, ‘as usual, are already taking steps to make an increased profit out of the rise in rates. They have held a meeting and decided to raise houses let a t 6s. per week by sixpence. At the first sign of depression it may be taken for granted that shop- keepers and workers will take flight. Those who re- main will get the full weight of all the robbery and jobbery of the period when those in power levied only a shilling rate to cover all purposes of local government and piled up loans for others to redeem. The methods of murder and plunder pursued here may be more re- fined than those which obtain on the Congo and Putumayo, but, in the end, they are just as effective

In these papers I have called this community by its modern industrial name of “Palmerstown,” as I felt it would be a gross outrage on the memory piety and culture of Saint Bede to call such an unholy blotch by its ancient and historic Christian name of Jarrow.

P r e s e n t - D a y C r i t i c i s m .

“JUST the same in religion as in literature. W e have most of us little idea of a high standard t o choose our guides by, of a great and profound spirit which is an authority while inferior spirits are none. I t is enough to give importance to things that this or tha.t person says them decisively, and has a large following of some kind when he says them.”-Arnold.

Rumours reach us from Philistia of genuine amaze- ment a t our failure to be impressed by Mr. Tagore, whose mysticism is just now so much the rage of a large following, and who has been s o decisively intro- duced as a profound spirit by Mr. W . B. Yeats. o u r own readers will not be surprised, however. If we go, as usual, to the sources for the spirit of whatsoever we criticise, our judgment of Mr. Tagore will not differ greatly from that we were compelled to pass on Mr. Yeats himself. Judged in comparison with the real poets and mystics of his own country, Tagore appears to us nothing more than a Bengali Yeats. Between these two men truly, shallow calleth unto shallow. There is no verse in all this volume of songs, Tagore’s “Gitanjali, ”*that Mr. Yeats might not, would not, have written had he only been born in the jungle-land instead of in the land of bogs : the matter and style are exactly after his own fancy. To us Mr. Tagore appears wordy, pathetically sensuous, self-complacent, careless of the better example of better men.

Compared with the grand poems o f India, these trifles are the songs of a n effeminate actor, whose repetition o f sacred words easily affords him a chance for self- flattery. But in fact, it is difficult to believe that Mr. Tagore is very well acquainted with Indian literature. Small sign is here of any but Western influence,

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - * Macmillan. 4s. 6d. net.)

Whitman predominating, and by no means the robust whitman. We have in Mr. Tagore by no means the turbulent, original, tamelessly adolescent, excusable anarchist, but a neo-theosophical, emotional, garrulous globe-trotting, professing quietist-a body of contra- dictions, SO startling as almost to demand instant re- construction. One’s second s h o c k - t h e first was to find a mystic busy a s a new soul in supervising publica- tion-is at the frontispiece of Tagore in the posture of meditation ! Fearsome adventures have before now overtaken Indian saints in thee act of meditation. There was that yogin whom the Mutiny challenged in vain to quit his seat. There was that other, Chyavana, over whom engaged in meditation, ants builded their hill. But what exploit of sanguinary soldier, of irreverent insect compares with the deed of sketching a man humanly defenceless by reason of his .attempted unifi- cation with the Supreme ! Th,e wretch who did the unregenerate act must have spent hours, even days, over earning bad karma. But, a s if so much were not the worst conceivable by. impiety, here is the thing rudely printed and published for the delectation of all the mixed castes. Modern mysticism ! Philistia seems its natural throne, and not the kuca mat.

“On the day when the lotus bloomed, alas, my mind was straying, and I knew it not.” Mr. Tagore is among the Hittites. But one may much easier under- stand how he might not know that his mind was stray- ing, than how the mystery was served unto a person of uncontrolled mind.

W e think that the lotus did not bloom that day ! One concludes that Mr. Tagore, like another whom we know, keeps a special and personal set of mysteries in which he has initiated himself finally and without too much help from superior powers. This “vague sweet- ness” he talks of, that made his heart “ache with long- ing,” sounds no great thing, but like the commonplace tag of a poor versifier. Mr. Tagore boasts a humility that bursts through its rags to profess itself. “Orna- ments would mar our union. My song has put off her adornments. My poet’s vanity dies in shame before thy sight.” But why not have devoted to the Master t h e hundred or so verses of this kind of protestation? “Leave this chanting and singing”-he exhorts him- self quite vainly. The wretched gift will out !

“ The smile that flickers on baby’s lips-does any- body know from whence it comes?’’ Yes ! Out of the everywhere into here.

‘ ‘ I put my tales of you into lasting songs. The secret gushes from my heart. They come and ask me, ‘ Tell me all your meanings.’ I know not how to answer them. I say, ‘ Ah, who knows what they mean ! ’ ” Really, the sympathy. between Mr. Yeats and Mr. Tagore needs little examination ! Many of these verses take the tone of an emotional nun, con- versant with all cliches ; nuptial terms come frequently. And the stroke of infantilism, from which Mr. Yeats also suffers, has afflicted Mr. Tagore. He would love you to think of him occasionally a s of a playing babe. H e speaks of himself as of some innocent whom it would be a shame to reprimand for seeming not adult. But this is only one of his aspects. He exhibits more than a trace of the pain-desiring lust which is to be recorded against so many of the modern decadents. Mr. Tagore barks about the “ ecstasy o f pain ” a t the moment of death. Who has ever seen this phenomenon?-unless in persons like the suicide, Lacomb, who, be it remembered, was capable of sadism as well a s of masochism. Perhaps one should not take too seriously a mind confessedly helpless against facile thoughts. When Mr. Tagore is not de- liciously enduring the state between grief and joy, and not flattering his fancy for a babyfied existence, he is imagining the billion-brained Vishnu to be waiting outside his doorway. He evidently interprets the universality of Brahm in the Western way to suggest that a tin, a fish and a tummy are Brahm. Salvation seems to him a s a delicate pain to be toyed with as long

6 0 9

as one dares. He will drag it out by naughtily refusing to have done with his sensuosities. Now setting his foot on the path and now drawing it back, he exclaims in two breaths : “ No, I will never shut the doors of my senses ” ; and, “ I will be wise this time and wait in the dark, spreading my net on the floor; and when- ever it is thy pleasure, my Lord, come silently and take Thy seat here.” Very picturesque. Even while imagining himself saluting God, Mr. Tagore remembers to mention his verses ! What a parody is not all this of the religious philosophy which is the source of the whole world’s inspiration ! The scholar who knows all else, and is unacquainted with the Books of the East knows but fragments. Solon and Plato professed -themselves as ignorant children in comparison with the Egyptian pupils of the masters of searchless ancient India. Let us read a little for mind’s restoration, and forget the bathos from Babu Bengal. Here are some examples from the endlessly varied Mahabharata : first a battle scene.

“Vanquished by Savyasachin (Partha : Arjuna) on that afternoon, they fled away like bulls with broken horns or snakes with broken fangs. Their foremost of heroes slain, their troops confused, themselves man- gled with arrows, thy sons, after the fall of Karna, 0 ~ King, fled away in fear. Divested of weapons and armour, no longer able to ascertain the points of the compass, and deprived of their senses, they crushed one another in the course of their flight, and looked a t one another afflicted with terror. It is I whom Vibhatsu is pursuing ! I t is I whom Vrikodara is pursuing ! thought each one among the Kauravas, who became pale and fell down a s they fled. Some on horses, some on cars, some on elephants and some on foot, mighty warriors forsook the field. Like people without protec- tors in a jungle, thy warriors became after the fall of the Suta’s son. They looked upon the whole world as if it were full of Partha.”

“‘Then Drona’s son, 0 Monarch, with tearful eyes and breathing like a snake, said these words unto the fallen chief of Bharata’s race, that foremost of all the kings on earth :-Truly, there is nothing stable in the world of men, since thou, 0 tiger among men, liest on

. the bare earth, stained with dust ! T h o u w e r t a king who hadst laid thy commands on the whole earth. Why, then, 0 Monarch, dost thou lie alone on the bare ground in such a lonely wilderness? I do not see Duscasana beside thee, or the great car-warrior, Karna, or those friends of thine numbering hundreds. ‘Without doubt, it is difficult to learn the ways of Death, since thou, 0 Lord of all the world, thus liest on the ground stained with dust. Behold the reverses of ‘Time ! ”

. “The emaciated sage said : There is nothing, 0 King,

that equals Hope in slenderness. I had solicited many kings and found that nothing is so difficult of acquisi- tion as an image that Hope sets before the mind. . . . The hope that rests upon such persons as do not, after passing their promises, do good to applicants, is slen- derer than even my own body. The hope that rests upon an ungrateful man, or upon one that is cruel, or one that is idle ; the hope of old women for sons; the hope that springs in the heart of withered virgins of marriage when they hear anyone only talk of it in their .presence-these hopes, my son, are slenderer than even -my body. ’ ’

“Covetous men are .outside the laws of good be- haviour. Of crooked hearts, the speeches they utter are sweet. They resemble, therefore, dark pits whose mouths are covered with grass. They dress themselves in a hypocritical robe of religion. Of low minds, they rob the world, setting up (if. need be) a new standard o f religion a n d virtue. Relying upon the strength of apparent reason, they create diverse kinds of schisms i n religion. Intent upon cupidity, they destroy the ways o f righteousness.” 1

“ These, then, are the diverse views entertained by men. With respect to acts, some men say that exertion is their cause, others that necessity is their cause, and others, again, that Nature is their cause. Some say that acts are the result of both exertion and necessity. Some maintain that acts flow from Time, exertion and Nature. Some say that of the three, one only and not the other two is the cause, and some are of the opinion that all three combined are the cause. Some persons that are engaged in acts say with respect to all objects that they exist, that they do not exist, that they cannot be said to exist, that they cannot be said not to exist, that it is not that they cannot be said to exist, or, that it is not that they cannot be said not to exist. The men of the Treta, the Dwapara and the Kali (present) Yugas are tormented by all doubts.”

“ If, 0 Cakra, the being called person were really the actor, then all acts undertaken for his own benefit would certainly be crowned with success. None of those acts would be defeated. Among even persons striving their utmost the suspension of what is not desired and the occurrence of what is desired are not seen. What be- comes then of personal exertion? In the case of some we see that without any exertion on their part, what is not desired is suspended and what is desired is accomplished . . By simplicity, by heedfulness, by waiting upon the wise, 0 Cakra, a person succeeds in attaining to emancipation. Know this, however, that wisdom is from Nature. Indeed everything thou seest is due to Nature . . . . What ground is there, then, for one to boast of his superior possessions?”

I s there, indeed, any topic of man’s interest that is lacking in this wondrous book? W e pass, in reading it, through the regions of the mind as through our familiar earth ways. Whether we regard the heroes as embodiments of qualities or as worshipful kings-it is all to our profit : a king may learn kingcraft, or, to rule his mind, according to his understanding. One rises from these works of the grand past with no taste for novelties. Not the veils of time or the barriers of language can hide the magnificence of that ancient order of philosophers, simple, heedful, cheerful amid the world of illusion, living as men might who were des- tined to equal the undeluded gods. By study at these sources, we learn not to be deceived by works which are none too healthful. Religion, morality, art, politics and manners are all here. Even in sentences and in mere fragments is to be found that which stands unfaded throughout time.

Looking like the very embodiment of the prosperity of Indra, the adored damsel saluted Arjuna. . .

The resolves of the gods, the comprehensions of intelli- gent persons, the humility of learned, men, and the destruction of the sinful, may fructify in a single day.

Dull persons who may happen to be asked to assist clever persons, regard themselves, after doing very little, as clever.

The lowest orders are laughing and dancing and singing, thus indicating direful things.

Bishma, him who was an island unto persons sinking in the fathomless ocean of their endeavour. . .

In hitting the aim in hitting it from a distance, in light- ness of hand and force of stroke, 0 mighty car- warrior tread in the track of thy sires and grandsires !

He looked resplendent, like the mind contending against the five senses.

I t was through wrath that Arjuna, like a vulgar person, addressed the preceptor’s son in such unworthy, in- decent, bitter and harsh language.

Never have I seen all the people of a country act un- righteously.

That which I have resolved is hurrying me towards its accomplishment. . .

Know that mind is only an attribute of knowledge. He that reads of this great battle, which is like unto a

A man need know nothing of the Mysteries to profit by reading this book. The great men of the East used to say that it is true in all worlds.

Sacrifice. . . .

6 1 0

L e t t e r s f r o m I t a l y .

XI.-POZZUOLI, POMPEII.

I HAVE already made enough moan in these notes con- cerning the beastliness of the weather, Tramontane, etc., etc. For which reason I only went to Pozzuoli for one day. It was not so bad; in fact, I rather en- joyed it. I had heard so. much of the importunity of Pozzuoli touts that I was determined not t o be van- quished by them. When I gut out of the tram I was accosted, assailed, besieged by offers of services I did not want and vehicles I could not afford to hire. Sternly and nobly I strode forward, not knowing in the least where I was going, getting horribly lost in twisting little streets. I regret very much that I could not see my- self; it would have given me great pleasure t o observe my own stolid disregard and noble indifference. But a t least I had the joy of watching the defeat of the touts; they waited behind me, .a chorus of Italian old men,, “M’sieur, M’sieur, ssst, ssst ! wan’ a guide? wan’ a carrige?” And I won ! They fell off, slowly, tenta- tively, “as if the snow should hesitate, and murmur in the wind, and half turn back.” They were defeated, routed; it was Leipsic, it was Sedan ; Ichabod, the glory was departed from Pozzuoli !

When I had finally “shooed off” the last damned little gamin, with his “un sold’, signor, un sold’,’’ I began to enjoy Pozzuoli. I visited none of the “sights,” not even the amphitheatre. Most amphitheatres are dull after the Colosseum; and I had no particular wish to walk in the crater of the Solfatara, which is a half- extinct volcano. You must take it for granted that they are there I just sauntered through the vineyards in the sunlight, saying “ Buon giorno” to peasants, who said “Saluto,” which I take to be their way of saying “ Ave.” And so I came to the base of a long rocky hill, and scrambled over boulders and up through bushes and tall pink sprays of flowers, whose name I didn’t know, and finally sat down near some olive trees. There I remained and ” thunk,” and ate my lunch, and looked over the blue water to Ischia and to Baia. You can see the whole thing if you go into the Tate and look at the Turners painted near Naples. I t is ridiculous to find how indebted nature is here to that popular artist. And I suppose I should have thought of Nero and Poppaea and Messalina, but it never struck me till I was nearly back in Naples that I had been looking a t the scene of some ancient pomp and merriment. If one were really outrageously bored it might be amusing to decoy with horrid phrase one’s near relatives on to a ship, and then sink it. Everyone knows that Nero’s artistic sense was highly developed by his instructor, Seneca, and by his intimacy with the latter’s poetic son. The Emperor’s musical and poetic abilities, his en- thusiasm for Greek culture and athletics, even his emerald monocle, are famous examples of hi5 a r t sense. How easily, then, can we imagine the lord of the known world, blase jaded, dejected, with that sense of disappointment which a fine critical mind discovers in contemplating its own, creations ! And with such a weight of boredom upon him, how excusable, how even admirable, are those “jeux d’esprit” which the cen- soriousness of a puritan bourgeoisie has stigmatised as “impious crimes” !

Pompeii gave me a great deal of pleasure. The first day was warm and the journey along the base of Vesuvius delightful enough. The tram. passed through solid streams of cold l a v a broken and jagged in the most amazing way. I felt then some of the unpleasant- ness of an eruption. The second time I went by train, which runs along the sea-shore, where the very blue sea breaks in little waves, and fishers drag shell-fish off the rocks with poles-the water is so clear.

My two days there were similar, except that I saw different parts of the town. There is no particular gain in rushing through like an American, because all the best pictures (which I don’t like) are in the Museo at Naples, and when once you have seen a large

“domus” like that of Pansa or the Domus Vettiorum, you have seen the type of them all. My plan was simply to wander as the whim took, without caring much how many cubic centimetres of culture and archaeology I absorbed. There is a distinct influence in Pompeii, unique, powerful, like the scent of some rich flower. I noticed that it put me in exactly the same mood o n both days. I t is not that one sentimentalises over the dead city, but it brings a kind of placidity or rather Attic calm, which is very pleasing to me.

Curious how one remembers that feeble book of Bulwer Lyttron’s in Pompeii; and what a feeling of superiority it gives ! I couldn’t help recollecting that the house of the Tragic Poet was that of Glaucus, and that Pansa was aedile of the city in his time. And when I passed the little temple of Isis how could I forget that sinister aristocrat, Arbaces, and his “tool,” Iona’s brother? C’est amusant.

But Lytton has faintly indicated something of Pom- Pompeii. The exquisite situation of the town must have made life delicate and luxurious. The number of large houses shows how popular it was. with the wealthy, and the bronze ornaments found in their atria are sometimes, so beautiful that I feel even these fat “bankers and politicians” must have had some love for t h arts.

One could wander for days through the city, along the streets and narrow lanes, where the ruts from the wagon-wheels are still worn in the large flags. ’ I am puzzled t o know how the horses passed the big stepping stones which nearly fill the road at street-corners. That, by the way, is an ominous sign that Pompeii was not so “fearfully jolly”-if the roads hadn’t been full of slush and filth, why the necessity for the stepping- stones? But, you pass houses and shops, where the marble counters have been built up, and you come t o the Strada di Nota (perhaps), where you are suddenly startled to find half-a-dozen skeletons in the basement of a house. Or you g o towards the Herculaneum Gate, out to the street of tombs, where, among the cypresses, you see the tombs of wealthy Romans who were buried before the great eruption. Or,. yet again, you wander down into the Forum, and sit on the steps of the Temple of Jove, o r look at the bronze figure of the Far-Darter in his temple. And as the afternoon draws on, you turn up some little lane, beyond the two theatres and the Triangular Forum and the old Doric temple, to one of the houses looking over the sea. You sit down on a broken mossy wall; the lizards jerk though the sparse herbs or bask motionless on the grey stones, and for a few moments, in the silence, you know something of the peace that passes all under- standing. Across the bay the wonderful blue hills rise and fall towards Sorrento, the sea hardly ripples in the still air, and a faint cloud of steam drifts from the cove of Vesuvius. Wha t a city ! Thank God it is unin- habited.

RICHARD ALDINGTON.

THE SIMPLE LIFE. According to Caliban

(‘‘One must live simply in order to write simply.” -Present-Day Criticism, January 9, 1913.)

My life is finding bread and meat, I am none of the world’s eli te I spend my days and wonder why I came into a world to die. I keep a wife and grimly breed Because I must : because I need Some outlet for my thwarted hours, Some field to exercise my powers. I am just a thing-more strength than will, I covet ease-I drink my fill- Do my work and take my wages Here on the threshold of new ages.

To the world a paradox I give. To live simply, I just simply live !

W. Y. D. (Australia).

6 1 I

L i t e r a r y N o t e s .

THE remarks on Irish poets made on this page a fort- night ago have irritated a member of the “ Daily Herald ” staff who seems to be a strong supporter of the spook school. W e said, justly enough as it seemed to us, that “modern Irish poetry has fallen into the throats of banshees,, whence it reissues in mournful whimperings that may be compared to nothing but the wailing of ghosts.” Commenting on this, the “Herald” writer says : “ Probably the reviewer could not read a line of modern Irish poetry. The poets he refers to write in English only, but even applied to them the statement is wild nonsense. There are Irish and Anglo-Irish poets who live nobly as well as sing ardently and clearly. It was an Irish poet who founded and inspired the Gaelic League, and it was an Anglo- Irish poet who breathed a spirit into the co-operative movement.”

* * *

Dr. Douglas Hyde interests us as a scholar rather than as a poet, and it is as a scholar and the leader of a movement, we feel, that he will be remembered. W e cannot be accused of belittling the work, poetical or poli- tical or sociological, of Mr. G. W . Russell ; for “A. E. ” has contributed to our own columns and has been praised in them. But Mr. Russell is an exceptional figure among modern Irish poets, and when we expressed our dissatisfaction with the school we say frankly that we never had him in mind for a moment. No; we realise well enough that our offence consists in this : we have attacked Mr. Yeats (for which we shall never be forgiven), and certain of his avowed or attributed followers, such as Mr. Masefield and Mr. James Stephens,. It was to these people, the Yeatses, the Stephenses, the Seumas O’Sullivans, the Lady Gregories, the P. O’Learys, the Mecredys, and so on, that we particularly referred, and to this school of leprecaun-inspired poets, Mr. Russell certainly does not belong ; even though chronological and topographi- cal conditions will it that he shall live among them.

* * * Since the “Daily Herald” writer has flourished his

shillelagh a t us, we may a s well take the opportunity of going into the question of modern Irish poetry rather more fully than we have yet done. But we must premise that poetry is, to us, something to be judged merely as poetry, and our blood is not stirred by political associations. There have been two great cultures, two great civilisations if you will, in this world. One is Asiatic, the other European. Of American culture as shown in the works of the Incas and the Aztecs, both scholars and scientists know too little to dogmatise; and the culture of Egypt is Asiatic rather than African. Th.e spirit o f Asiatic culture is to be seen-or rather is still to be feIt-in the marvellous writings of the Brahmins, and the wonderful examples of sculpture and architecture they have left us. Similarly, the spirit of European civilisation,, o r culture, is Graeco- Roman. The spirit of the Greek and Roman artists is the standard for Europe for all time.

* * * Now, in spite of Scandinavia and Germany and

Ireland, in spite of Balder and Thor and Diancecht, all poets, all scholars, come back in the end to Zeus and Athene and their kindred. They are more inspiring, more uplifting, than the others; they are less rough, more finely conceived, more shapely, graceful, charm- ing. And Ireland and Irish poets must realise this. Irish writers there may be, and plenty, for each nation has its spirit of nationality and its gods and heroes; but Irish writers cannot be good writers until they follow the line of European tradition, and this tradi- tion comes t o us from Greece and Rome, not from Tara’s halls.

* * *

Ancient Gaelic literature, a s we do not merely admit, but emphasise, is a very precious contribution to Euro-

pean civilisation-as precious, let us suggest, as the Scandinavian sagas, and more precious than the less rich poetry typified in the Finnish Kalavala or the Ger- man Niebelungenlied. But we know-and the fact is worth writing down and pasting on the walls of every Gaelic League class in Ireland-that the very men who left us this Gaelic literature sought their inspiration in Greece and Rome and that they accomplished splendid tasks of scholarships before the Englishry were bap- tised.

* * *

Ireland suffered in the vicissitudes of conquest for centuries; her traditions of scholarship and her lan- guage began to die out. A few songs and legends lin- gered among the peasantry. Not that we can adduce political reasons only for the change ; for Poland, sub- jected to at least as harsh treatment as Ireland, has retained her language ; and neither French nor Spanish has replaced Basque. To the dispassionate observer the cycle had run its course ; Gaelic had served its purpose, and it was time for it to die. And Gaelic was on the point of dying until adventitious causes-the patriotic feelings aroused by the two Home Rule Bills in the later part of the nineteenth century-galvanised it into artificial life. How artificial the movement ini- tiated by Dr. Hyde and his followers in 1893 was, may be judged from the fact that in 1851 more than 300,000 people in Ireland spoke Gaelic and nothing else, while by 1901 this number had shrunk to twenty thousand- and these twenty thousand were mostly peasants, who insisted on their children learning English so that they might not be handicapped when they went out into the world !

* * * Undoubtedly there is a feeling in Ireland that it would

be a pity to let Gaelic die out ; and one can easily understand this feeling acting as a spur to a poetic people. A nation will give up power, wealth, posses- sions, authority ; but it will cling to its language. More ; it may have a foreign language forced upon it, but it will incorporate in that foreign language many of its own idioms in a grotesque translated form--we have had occasion to comment on one used by Mr. Mecredy-- so that it spoils the foreign language even to some slight extent in the very process of absorbing it. But this is done unconsciously by the common people ; and poets ought not to follow the example. Style and words are a poet’s instruments ; and it is not his duty to pro- duce a hybrid vocabulary and syntax.

* * * Now these Irishmen will see, let us hope, why we do

not praise them. Gaelic literature is gone for ever, and it is embedded in one of the most difficult languages in Europe. We, too, have been seized by the fever ; we have gone carefully through our O’Growney and our Joyce and spent sleepless nights over texts. But we were disappointed, and not even the pleasure of reading about the Hound of Ulla in the original could induce us to continue. W e preferred to do what the Irish poets of modern times should have done, that is to say, we preferred to go to the sources of European culture, and not merely to a tributary of the main stream.

* * * This is not the end of our indictment. W e have

referred to ancient Gaelic literature a s a precious con- tribution to European civilisation. But when one hears “Gaelic literature” .referred to now, one thinks almost instinctively of th’e forced, artificial, immature produc- tions of the new school of which we have been speaking. Far from restoring the glories of ancient Gaelic, there- fore, the epigones are gradually ruining it. They have spoiled our taste for it; we want to avoid it instead of taking an interest in it. As for the modern Gaelic plays and stories of Dr. Douglas Hyde and his friends, we fear they bear the same relationship to real Gaelic literature as Milton’s Latin letters do to Cicero.

But before the “Herald ” presumes to set as right about Mr. W. H . Davies, or Mr. Yeates, or any other poet, let it mend its own ways. A paper which ca r serve

* * *

6 1 2

up regular “ Reflections,” by G. R. S. T., and bits of alleged wisdom by Sollomon II has really no right to criticise. In the issue of March 31, for instance, we find G. R. S. T. laying down the law about the per- fection of literary style and endeavouring to justify the use of words like “beak” and “cops” and “quid,” because “the perfection of literary style is th,at which says what it wants to say in the clearest manner, with- out waste of a single word.” The “ Herald,” if we may express G. R. S. T.’s view as bluntly as it should be ,expressed, simply reserves. t,o itself the right to be vulgar. One notices examples of this in its columns every day. For example, the very first paragraph of the issue of April 13 is. an intimation that “The Bel- gian strike has given the Majesty of England a severe biff in the jaw. ’ ’ W e must decline to acknowledge this as the perfection of literary style, even a s defined by the “Herald.” It is merely an attempt to .emulate the slang that on? finds so often in American newspapers.

* * *

Nobody will deny that American newspaper slang is often vigorous, hard hitting, efficacious; but it is a natural product, the product of a young, raw, unlicked nation, and it adequately expresses the crude beliefs and opinions of a large section of the people. But English slang is different; it has developed in a different and more refined way, and such slang as the writer may, on sufferance, be permitted to introduce into his work will necessarily lack the raw vigour of its Ameri- can equivalent. I t is not in the English nature, in fact, to follow the American example with success. The “Herald’s” “ biff in the jaw” is nearly as vulgar as Mr. Davies’s poetry, though no mere journalist could sink so low as a super-tramp. A headline in the same issue, referring to doctors who prescribe patent medicines without knowing th,eir composition, boldly tells us “ Doctors deal out dope in the dark.” This is ,entirely American, and would not look out of place in a Chicago newspaper; but in a n English newspaper it is incongruous. And the “ Herald” cannot keep it up, while the American papers can. T o show how this sort of thing ought to be done, and how far the “Herald” falls short, let us quote from ths “Literary Digest ” an account of Billy Sunday’s evangelical cam- paign in Columbus, Ohio-the account is taken from the “Ohio State Journal.” Billy, a well-known character in the States, does not approve of the old methods of

.,appealing t.0 the sinner to reform, and I quote a passage giving his own views : -

“You must be willing to do things in a different way to move the unconverted towards salvation, to sacrifice your own personal prejudices for the sake of the folks on the outside. . . . If I were a pastor of a church I’d have .a brass band in front of the church every Sunday to let the devil know there’s something doing down there. There’s a verse in Scriptures on ‘Feed my lambs,’ but in some instances it ought to read ‘feed my giraffes,’ be- cause some folks put the fodder so high that nobody can reach it. I never aspire to be a heady, throaty, intellectual preacher. I ,am satisfied to put the Gospel in such a way that the foundryman at the fires and the toiler in the ditch will understand it and be led to re- pentance. I don’t care three whoops this side of perdi- tion whether any gang in this town likes it or not. . . . I know what some dirty whelps will say if some of these converts slip and fall. They’re just a s good as the old .,converts. . . Goliath was an old stiff who went strutting u p and down blowing about his height and his bravery. David called his bluff and soaked the giant in the COCO between the lamps. Then he took his sword, chopped off his block, and the gang skidooed.”

The “Daily Herald,” we repeat, cannot maintain the level of this admirable performance, so characteristic of what our contemporary appears to be aiming at. W e are glad to think so, for, what with Mr. J. M. Barrie’s Scotsmen, Mr. Phillpott’s Dartmoor murderers, Mr. Neil Lyons’s Cockneydom, and the Irish poets’ de- generate Celts, the English language has already met .;with sufficiently harsh treatment.

A S o l a r M o n o p o l y . (A Poetical Romance.) By Fitzgerald Lane.

THERE was an unmistakable air of bustle all over the little farm, so unusual that even the sheep browsing in the top pasture looked down in amazement. Winter had by no means passed, and yet every bottom acre was being turned up and sown, including the water meadow, where kine lazed in the summer. Each ploughman drove his furrow furiously, as if he was to be paid for work done instead of by the day, then paused at the fence 90 long, watching yonder mechanics at their crazy job, that his horse peeped round to see if he had really fallen asleep. From almost every lattice in the old farmstead itself some pretty face stared out at the strange telegraph-poles, o r flag staffs, which were being erected at intervals down the boundary brook to west and south, and along the hazel hedge which bordered the road on the east. Never before had the meticulous housewife known her daughters and dairymaids so eager to polish window-panes and scour the front door- step. Her own curiosity was disguised anxiety, and she drew a jug of ale that she might have an excuse for going after her eccentric husband.

Adam Strachar was a tall, spare man, who wore his slouch hat askew on th,e back o f his head. H e had the bent shoulders and straddle legs of a farmer and rider, but his face showed the animation of a lively thinker. As his men hoisted each metal shaft with its fan-shaped top, till it stood upright in the ground, a hundred and fifty feet high, it was like a safe ascent into heaven, to judge by his expression and moist brow. H e gazed up rapturously a t his contrivance of glass.-like discs, which were surrounded with long spurs of the same material, and were joined by opaque rods with lustrous bobbins.

In the mighty Radsnoid Forest, which the brook entered a furlong below, the Duke of Gorba blew his horn as he hunted the wild boar; while all around Earl Brochstad and his party were shooting over the game moors. Th’ese sounds distracted Adam from his vain exaltation, and he ’began to sow the hot-house melon seeds which, along with grape stones and orange pips, he had in small packets attached to his belt.

“Ours is warm work, master,” said one of his men a s Mrs. Strachar approached with the frothy beer-jug.

“ You’ll won be warmer, mates,” answered Adam with a knowing wink at the sun.

Glancing at one another they tapped their heads and rattled their pockets, as .much as to say that a maniac’s ‘money was easily earned. Mrs. Strachar observed the insult to her husband, and when he declined the drink, emptied it on the ground under their noses.

“ Malt and hops are not a manure, my dear,” re- marked Adam.

“ You say tropical plants only need special treatment in this climate,” answered his wife.

“ Ah, still sceptical, Anna,” still sceptical ! ” “ There are limits, Adam, to the ,credulity of the most

admiring wife. Why, your own men laugh at you to your face, and you don’t see it.”

“ I am too busy laughing up my sleeve at the duke and the earl, my dear. In one pocket I have their ne- newal of my lease, in the other my patent rights., ana still they are content to be idle sportsmen, as you can hear. I have established magnetic command Over sun- beams and will make their lordships shiver at mid- summer.”

Mrs. Strachar retired indoors and got out the strait-waistcoat which she had brought from her father’s house as part of her marriage portion. Quiet as he still was, her husband would burst forth with the suddenness of the explosions which had occurred in his laboratory and workshops.

The next morning Adam stealthily rose before dawn and went to the most easterly of his poles along the highway. By means of internal wires he was able to adjust the discs till, with the first streak of light, the bobbins began to move to and fro with a faint rhyth-

6 1 3

mical murmur. In the same way he set each apparatus going, obtaining a better response every time. When the sun appeared the resuit was a buzz from every in- strument, even the most western. Nothing more re- mained to be done, so the happy inventor lit a pipe, and waited for those wonders which would convince his family and the world, particularly his landlords.

The first noticeable change was the warmth of the east wind, and Adam was glad not to be held r e s p n - sible, since all the milk turned sour, and with it his wife. Then, the unusual weather caused the ewes t o ean early, and day and night for a week all the farm-

hands were busy shepherds, including the women, who reared several lambs in the kitchen. Still nothing was attributed to the mad farmer’s humming-tops, as pun- sters called them. When, however, in less than a fort- night it was observed all the crops had sprouted several ‘inches, rice and tobacco as well as wheat and rye, and that vineyards and orange groves were springing up, folk were awestruck. What was even more astounding was the contrast everywhere across the boundary. Whereas the farm had bright sunshine, a peculiar twi- light hung all around. At first the phenomenon had not been realised, since the brighter the day the darker the shadow cast by the overhanging forest ; but presently it was perceived that light and darkness prevailed side by side as formerly tin Egypt. And this was not all. The brook, which had never been known to freeze in the depth of winter, became a solid sheet of ice, while the herbage and trees beyond lost their fresh greenery and daily grew whiter with hoarfrost.

The duke and the earl, who had left their estates for the town, received such disquieting reports that they hurried back to their country seats. Informed that their tenant Strachar was a wizard, they set out in their fur ulsters and with lanterns, through the cold and dark, which extended for miles from the farm. On the way they found their birds and beasts frozen to death by the score, and coming to the brook, beheld their fat trout like images in glass. W h a t they saw and heard on the other side literally took their breath away, so that thley had to sit on the hard ground to recover it. Already the crops were full grown ; flowers and fruit hung in clusters; and altogether the vegetation of the place had a tropical luxuriance.

Their lordships gave a bound of wild fury, but they were congealed to the spot, and ripped their coats in freeing themselves. Feeling dreadfully tattered, they abandoned their lanterns and proceeded along the dip- pery road to the farm-yard, where they were met by Adam, who had seen them coming.

“ Won’t your lordships come in out of the cold? ” he said, flinging wide the gate as if it was his front door.

They stepped in, and were amazed at the sudden glow. In order to hide their feelings they gazed up nonchalantly at the magnetic machine a t work in the sky right over their heads.

“ Just a little heating apparatus of mine,” observed Adam, equally offhand.

“ It is deuced chilly outside,” snapped the earl, who was more irascible than the duke.

“ The contrast is certainly very striking,” agreed Adam. ‘ May I help your lordship to remove your coat? ”

Fuming, the earl suffered the politeness, which the duke took care to anticipate. As their host led them through a banana plantation, they spoke carelessly of Jamaica. On the table outside the porch Mrs. Strachar had spread fruits which no money could buy out of season, and in place of wine there was the most delicious cider, which was rather heady, however, being freshly brewed from spring apples. In fact, the drink very soon served to lend the parties candour.

“ You know, this is beyond a joke, Strachar,” said the duke.

“ I hope it is, your grace,” answered Adam. “ If you mean to be impertinent, sir, you will find

out your mistake,” cried the earl.

“ Come, come, Brochstad, not so fast,” protested the duke. “ If Strachar wants us to lease him more land, no doubt we can oblige him, subject to gaming conditions.”

“ T o a free right to trespass and trample my crops ! ” suggested Adam indignantly. “ No, thank you; the farm is amply large enough with a tropical sun.”

“ And d o you think to break up the Feudal system before your lease runs out?” asked the earl with a sneer.

In answer Adam. smiled so mysteriously that their lordships quaffed the rest of their cider, gulping down their uneasiness.

I appeal to you on moral grounds nay, on private ones,” resumed the duke, a s if it were condescending of him to ask a favour. “The duchess and her daughters are confined to th,e house with chills, and can’t enjoy the park. Is it your intention to penalise helpless ladies ? ”

“ Many a labourer’s wife has gone stark mad be- cause she couldn’t feed her children on her husband’s wages,” answered Adam with swelling emotions.

“ You employ ploughmen; we own the land,” re- torted the earl curtly.

“Own the land ! ” echoed Adam, springing to his feet. “ W e l l I own the sun n o w

“ I t is n,o use arguing with him, Gorba,” said the earl, apostrophising the duke. ‘ ‘ W e must resort to stronger measures, I see.”

“ W e have received your hospitality unwittingly, Mr. Strachar,” said the duke, pitching a crown on to the table.

“ I t never rains but it pours,” quoted Adam, failing to show proper pride. “ May your servant help you into your coat? ”

Their lordships treated their overcoats as things of his imagination, and actually left them behind with him.

Life on the farm continued to prosper more than ever. The cereals were all reaped ; fresh ones were sown; and a second period of pleasant indolence suc- ceeded. There were some drawbacks, such as swarms of pestiferous flies, and the poor creatures which came in search of food, but there was enough for man and brute. Then, the frozen stream no longer afforded any protection against beasts of prey like wolves, which got more lambs than usual. Also, the sheep and cows, in- stead of seeking the cool uplands, would try to cross the ice, and break their legs sliding or skating. Even these losses ceased, however, when some wet weather se t in, and the surrounding country became one dense snowfield, which increased the incongruous outlook t’en- fold.

Meanwhile tohe real struggle had begun in earnest. Their lordships consulted their solicitors, who found it difficult to make out a case, but advised an application for an injunction. In the duke’s fur coat, which had been repaired, Adam went down through t.he snow to Zenven, and conducted proceedings himself. He re- served his defence proper for the lawsuit itself, and eerely pointed out that it would cause a flood to stop his solar instruments just then. The petitioners were furious at their helplessness before such godlike powers, and tried to instigate a popular revolt. They dismissed their gamekeepers and stewards, and turned their tenants out of doors, but all found work and shelter on the farm, idling half the day and sleeping f a r prefer- ence in the open. The landed gentry joined their two distressed brethren, and instituted a general agricul- tural stoppage; but Adam, who had previously orga- nised a Farmers’ Union, and recommended mortgages instead of leases to its members, now supplied each of them with his instruments, which he had manufactured in his sheds without intermission.

radiant fecund patches, between which were cold, dark expanses reaching even to the towns. Th,e slums became wretched beyond endurance, and crowds sought the sunny oases, where the laziest found existence to their liking. The nobility went about like wealthy Esqui- maux, smiling bravely as if Providence could not de-

The whole country became a series of the most

6 1 4

sert them indefinitely. There was no longer any ques- tion of legal rights, for the populace now had a conspicuous hero; while any interference with the Patent Office seemed even more inexpedient.

Adam was elected t 3 the Diet, and discovered what it was to be a representative of the people. His trouble was no longer with the few great landowners, to whom he could have dictated terms, but with the numerous small o n e s many of them of his own making, who now desired no land reform thanks to his instruments ! They could make their fortunes more easily and quickly as things were, they said, since Lupania was a State in which a patentee was granted the sole rights in his invention t,o the day of his death. Adam protested that his life was not worth a farthing, the proof whereof was the enormous premiums which insurance companies de- manded on it. In answer he was provided with a Body Guard, and was reduced to the humiliating position of a powerless prince. When hims lease expired he felt no better than a pampered puppet in the palace wherein they installed him. His family, on the other hand, were so suited with their royal honours that he dare not sell his instruments to lords and squires in revenge. The risk of the assassin’s knife soon seemed to him far prefer- able to idle homage, and at last, in disgust, having had his day, he committed suicide; whereupon his chemical secret became public property, and in consequence was useless among competitors, leaving only its memory as a lesson to both parties.

V i e w s a n d R e v i e w s . * HUXLEY has told us in an amusing passage, how the word “Agnostic” was invented. “This was my situa- tion,” he said, “when I had the goad fortune to find a place among the members of that remarkable confrater- nity of antagonists, long since deceased, but of green and pious memory, the Metaphysical Society. Every variety of philosophical and theological opinion was represented there, and expressed itself with entire open- ness; most of my colleagues were ‘ ists ’ of one sort or another; and however kind and friendly they might be, I, the man without a rag of a label t,o cover himself with, could not fail to have some of the uneasy feelings which must have beset the historical fox when, after leaving the trap in which his tail remained, he pre- sented himself to his normally elongated companions. So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of ‘ agnostic.’ It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the ‘ gnostic ’ of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant; and I took the earliest opportunity of parading it at our Society, t o show that I, too, had .a tail, like the other foxes.”-It is certain that the difference of name was not indicative of a real difference from the ‘other members : the sub- jects of interest were identical for all concerned, the methods of dealing with them probabIy had a single origin in the process of logical reasoning, and so far as the other members did not renounce the logical con- clusions of their reasoning, i t is probable that Huxley’s dubiety was not unshared by many of his colleagues. The name may have expressed a distinction, or even a degree of difference; but scarcely a difference itself.

Something of the sort, I imagine, must have happened a t t h e Rota Club. I believe that the Rota Club was founded by Mr. Hilaire Belloc, who has differentiated himself from the Collectivists by the idea of the Distributivist State : a difference real and funda- mental. But I am quite s u e that th,e writers of these essays, the first of the Rota Club, have not successfully differentiated themselves from anybody else. They attempt to snap up the partially considered trifles of everybody else, and t o combine them in a new formula : th,e Associative State. There is little to distinguish this state from the Voluntarist State of Auberon Herbert, or the spasmodic federation of the Communist anarchist. The Associative State,

* ‘ ( The Real Democracy.” By J. E. F. Mann, N. J . Sievers, R. W. T. Cox. (Longmans. 4s. 6d. net.)

like these other two, derives from some abstract rights of man, the symbol and security of which is concrete property.

The authors say in their preface : “ The characteristic virtue of property can be retained only in a State where property is possessed by at least so many as a deter- mining majority of the citizens, and by each of these in severalty.” In other wads, although th,ey insist that the wage-system must be abolished, and that it can only be abolished by a re-distribution of property, they make provision fur its continuance. True, they draw a distinction between the wage-relation and the wage-system; but that distinction is fatal to the dictum just quoted. For if the wage-system differs from the wage-relation in this respect, that the worker under the system cannot withhold his labour to enforce his rights, because he has no property on which to sub- sist, then a nondetermining minority in their Associative State is, ex hypothesi, condemned to the wage-system. From this dilemma there is no escape, unless property does not mean what it does mean ; and the authors are at pains to tell us that they mean by property what everybody else means. “Political power; in a nation- State like England,” they say, “necessarily depends on economic resource. Therefore, although there are other kinds of property, each of them capable of ful- filling a human need it is for Property in the Means of Production that Englishmen to-day shouId keep their immediate and most definite concern.” In the chapter on “Property” they argue that an estate in fee-simple “is near enough to the sort of relationship I desire to see widely distributed in England.” In sho r t a de- termining majority of the citizens shall be in full pos- session and enjoyment, without restriction as to waste and with full rights of disposition by deed or testament, of the means of production; and they shall hold this property in severalty. That, I may remark, is the law of the land to-day, and it has resulted in the establish- ment of the wage-system.

Industrially, the suggestion is absurd. Need a car- penter hold in fee-simple a piece of land on which grow the trees which he will use for his productive work? Need, a sculptor own a marble quarry, or a bricklayer a portion of clay? Who, it might be asked, will own the cornfields, the farmer or the baker? I need not continue the questions : the suggestion is patently absurd.

So far as agriculture is concerned, it might seem that the authors can made out a better case. “Re-open thy Arthur Young,” they exclaim. “The magic of property turns sand into gold. . . . Give a man the secure pos- session of a bleak rock, and he will turn it into a gar- den ; give him the nine years’ lease of a garden, and he will turn it into a desert. ” Really, it is marvellous what Property can inspire-in rhetoric; but let us look a t some facts. Taine has told us, speaking of the French people, that “towards 1760, it is said, that one quarter of the soil had already passed into the hands of the agricultural workers.” The glorious revolution of 1789 occurred, and feudalism was overthrown and a century of free-trade in land begun. How much of the French soil is now owned by peasant proprietors, by men who cultivate their own land? According to Toubeau, who was secretary of the International Congress of Land Reformers, only one-tenth of the soil is now owned by the people who work it. Whether France is a garden or a desert, I do not know ; what I do know is that “the magic of property” has reduced the holding of the workers from one-quarter to one-tenth. In this coun- try, where private property in land is still permitted, from 1870 to 1900 the number of farms under 100 acres. increased by 60 per cent., of farms above 100 acres by 413 per cent. The number of farms above 500 acres increased during the same period by 763 per cent. We might correct the dictum of the authors, and say : “The characteristic virtue of property cannot be retained in a State where property is possessed by a number of the citizens, and by each of these in severalty.” An- other curious fact has been revealed by the working of the Small Holdings Act in England, and Mr. F. E-

615 - -

Green said in his “Awakening of England” : “ W e learn, too, that only 1 . 8 desire to purchase land, which proves that with security of tenure freedom can be pur- chased more economically a s tenant than as owner.” In America, only one-tenth of the whole cultivated area ‘is in the hands of peasant proprietors ; and the land there, within living memory, was practically thrown open free of cost to those whom “the magic of pro- perty” might allure.

If the proletariate State, as the authors call it, has ’broken down, and has shown that it fails to do what ‘it pretends to do, v i z supply the wants of the people, it has none the less proved that a man’s right to do what he likes with the means of production has, resulted in his having no means of production with which to do as he likes. Begin with the rights of man, and you end with wage-slavery : for History is not ‘really a sound aristocrat. History is the economic. man. If the authors had not been so young (they must be young, for they speak of “ a community of twenty-five citizens, of whom eight are performing Beethoven’s Fifth Sym- phony, and all twenty-five are enjoying the per- formance ” ; italics mine), they might have realised that incompatibles are incompatibles, that private property is consistent with the freedom of a man but not with. the freedom of men, that the wage-system is not t o be abolished if most men have property in the means of production, and the wage-relation is still per- mitted. But they are young, and they are critical; and among the objects of their criticism is Guild Socialism, which they spell, of course, without the first vowel.

It is a rule of safety never to criticise unless you know, and, as “knowledge is of things we see,” according to Tennyson, Guild Socialism is scarcely ripe for criticism. I do not want to seem captious, but there is scarcely a point made by the authors that is not demonstrably wrong. In the first place, Guild Socialism is not, as the authors imagine, the invention of Mr. A. R. Orage, however ably he may defend o r expound it. I have the authority of Mr. Orage for stating that Guild Socialism is, and will remain, the policy of THE NEW AGE, whoever may be the editor. More than one person is concerned in thle writing of the articles, and others of the staff, including myself, are Guild Socialists. I t may seem a small matter, but there is a considerable difference in value between a personal invention and a logical deduction. For in- stance, had Darwin invented the theory of evolution by natural selection, it might not have had the world-wide application that we know it obtained ; but, as Huxley said, if Darwin had not discovered it, palaeontologists would have been compelled to invent it, to make their facts intelligible. I t is true that Mr. Orage collaborated in the preliminary work of Mr. A. J. Penty on ‘‘The Restoration of the Guild System”; and contributed an article on the subject to the “ Contemporary Review” seven years ago; but it is the contention of T H E NEW AGE that Guild Socialism is not the creation of these two men, any more than the theory of evolution by natural selection was the creation of Darwin and Wallace. The logic of events cannot be gainsaid ; and the failure of Labour politics, the experience of Col- lectivism in action, and the rise of Syndicalism, would compel practically everybody who was not branded with one of the other isms to adopt Guild Socialism. Let it be understood that Guild Socialism is not Mr. Orage, although Mr. Orage is a Guild Socialist, that it has the authority of events, not of a person, and would remain a justifiable alternative to the present system even if Mr. Orage recanted, and no misconception of its nature need arise.

But if criticism of Mr. Orage cannot be accepted as criticism of Guild-Socialism, neither can Guild-Social- ism be criticised yet. The series of articles is mani- festly not complete; and all that has been done so far may be easily summarised. W e have postulated the possibility of abolishing the wage-system; we have &etched an alternative and shown that it is practicable (the article on the Panama Canal should not be for-

gotten) ; and we have desiderated the intelligent action of the trade unionists not t o accept our suggestions and conclusions, but to work out the idea for themselves. Therefore, when the authors of this book ask three questions, we are not obliged to reply, and cannot reply in a responsible manner. “What degree or sphere of government is to be allotted to either partner?” they ask. Personally, I am not inclined to think that any allotting will be done for some time. If th,e Government can make a contract with the Marconi Company to provide a national service, it could also make a contract with a trade union to supply commo- dities. Let the trade unions be organised not a s wage- earners, but a s producers, and they will be able to make terms with the Government. The “allotting” will come later.-“Is this to be the predominant type of industrial government, or the sole type?” is the next question. If 1 were King of England-but I am not. I t will be the sole type, if it can ; for types always tend to be tyrannical. Otherwise, it will be the predominant type, or the sub-dominant type, or the non-existent type. “If the partners disagree, who is to be the arbiter between them?” This is easy, for we have a n arbitrative genius amongst us. Mr. Lloyd George will arbitrate. But there will be no need for arbitra- tion; the service, ex hypothesi, will be necessary to both parties, and they will only haggle over the prim. These questions are simply debating questions.

I venture tso suggest that no one except a member of the Rota Club would ask : ‘‘Does ‘industry’ include such services as the Army, Navy, and Police?” I t was the argument of the preliminary series on the abolition of the wage-system that these serv vices * we’re not of that nature, that pay was not wages, and service not necessarily “industry.” The authors are probably too young to know that even agriculture is not “in- dustry,” and that if the reservation “ for industrial purposes only” is vague and difficult, it was only made to simplify the inception of Guild-Socialism. For Guild-Socialism, it cannot be too often repeated, is an alternative to the wage-system, and is most applicable where the wage-system, as defined by us, now flourishes. Services other than those of industrial production may be susceptible of Guild organisation; the writer of the “ Miscellaneous Notes on Guild-Socialism” sug- gested that the doctors had the best qualifications for trying the new plan, then the National Union of Teachers, and next the postal unions; but it is to the trades that we look for the full benefit of the alternative to the wage-system.

The authors of this book cannot have read the series, so far as it has gone, with any close attention; and it would seem that they have not, in spite of their debating sk i l l understood the nature of their own case. f o r they begin by demonstrating the impotence of P a r k - ment and end by proposing legislation. In the process of repossession, tliey argue that “the first step is to stir up opinion; the second to devise some scheme of legislative remedies which may at any rate begin to embody it.” Economic power precedes political power is their axiom, a s it is ours ; and they rely upon opinion to inaugurate repossession. Really, it is wonderful what the “magic of property” will d o

1 suggest, in conclusion, that the authors should really discover what they mean. They a r e a t present, SO determined to dissociate themselves from everybody by their “Associative State,” that they are not con- scious of the contradictions in which th,ey have involved themselves. If Guild-Socialism is open to objection, why adopt the guilds in the associative state? Can there be Guild-Individualism? If private property in the means of production ‘is the only guarantee of free bargaining, why not demand it for all, and not for a “determining majority”? If th,e wage-system must go, why retain the wage-relation? If Parliament is power- less, why expect it to work wonders in response to opinion? In short, how can everything be changed if nothing must be altered? Think it out, is the advice I would offer to th,ose first essayists (should we call them rotaries?) of the Rota Club. A. E. R.

6 1 6

R E V I E W S . The Pa ren t s ’ Book ; Answers to Children’s Questions.

To call this book a “child educator” is to deny the very meaning of the word education. Encyclopedias never educate, and this is only an encyclopaedia : they are the means whereby questions ‘are answered, en- quiry suppressed by assurance, and the mind burdened by an over-weighted memory. They are always authors authoritative, and errors are stated as emphatically as facts. We are told in this one, for example, that “the earth is always moving around the sun without stopping or ever getting slower in its motion” ; which is simply not true. Nor is it accurate to say that “the earth is not a perfect round, but is flatter at the poles than at the equator ” ; for there is considerable evidence to prove that the earth changes in shape from an oblate spheroid to a tetrahedron, and from a tetrahedron t’o an oblate spheroid. I t i s cer ta in too, that many of the bio- graphical sketches are unnecessary in this generation : no child is likely to ask : “ Who is G. Bernard Shaw ?” The volume ranges so widely, from wireless tele- graphy to women’s suffrage, from macadam to Mere- dith, that we can only warn parents that many of the subjects here dealt with are very debatable, and that the gospel truth is not always to be obtained by a simple process of question and answer. f o r example, speaking of Marconi, it is asked : “Who, even a few years ago, could have dreamed that a message could be launched into empty air, and that thousands of miles away an instrument could catch the invisible floating message again, and translate it into symbols and words? Yet this Marconi has accomplished.” I t is quite certain that any fool might have dreamed this, and it i s equally certain that Marconi has not accom- plished i t ; indeed, Guglielmo Marconi would be the first to repudiate this description of the process of wireless telegraphy. For the air is not empty, and the message does not float, and, the receiver does not trans- late the message into “symbols and words.” W e make the quotation not to disparage the Marconi system : that may be left to trade rivals; but to w h o that not everything in an encyclopaedia can be understood even by parents, and that the chances of children benefiting by such teaching are about a thousand to one against.

The Greatest Life. By Gerald Leighton. (Duckworth.

There is danger of blasphemy in the attempt to square religion with science. So far as the religious man will admit the prevalence of law, he will assert that the rule is : ‘ ‘ As above, so below. ” The inversion of this axiom of the alchemists is perilous, if a writer wishes to treat religion seriously. Professor Drum- mond, whom Dr. Leighton follows so earnestly, argued that natural law must prevail in the spiritual world, that spiritual experiences must be governed not by analog- ous but by the same laws that govern the rest of the universe. But this is a presumption as unwarrantable as any made by a theologian, What is not known scientifically cannot be explained scientifically ; what natural laws are there that will explain, for example, “ th,e peace of God that passeth all understanding ’’ ? “The Kingdom of Heaven is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy,” said Chris t ; and how these absolutes can be explained by any observed sequence of relations in phenomena not even a modern scientist could explain. If i t could be shown that natural law were everywhere and always valid there might be some reason for the contention; but unsup- ported bodies do not always fall to the ground, there is the phenomenon of levitation. Natural selection is not the only condition of evolution; probably it is the law of the corollary decadence, and mutual aid, as Kropotkin argued, the only real explanation of evolu- tion. But admitting, for the sake of argument, that the rule is : “ As below, so above,” we may well ask what sort o f religious experience will be induced by the application of the principle. Certainly, Dr. Leighton’s

(T. C. and E. C. Jack. 3s. 6d. net.)

2s. 6d. net.)

~ -

thesis will not lead to any exaltation. H e abuses the theologians for not presenting their truths in a manner tolerable to the biologist; and he makes the attempt himself. He argues that sin is a disease, and is there- fore subject to the laws of disease. Therefore, by the same methods that immunity is obtained from ordinary disease, immunity from mora; disease may be obtained. Some people are born immune, they are saints ; others achieve immunity by carefully graduated inoculation, they are normal people; others are gifted only with the power of recovery from attacks of the infection, they are ‘backsliders. W e have discovered that we cannot allow the scourges of God tlo work their own sweet will among us : the ravages are too awful, and the effects in the cases of recovery are sometimes disastrous. W e must therefore destroy the causes and conditions of the plague. Inoculation with the virus is too dangerous : we have discovered that immunity may be conferred with less danger if the virus is first passed through another organism ; Christ took our sins upon himself, who knew no sin, let us inoculate with Christianity. When we come to think of it, Napoleon referred to his Concordat as “la vaccine de la religion” ; but the new method of inoculation is not likely to have the effect on religion that Napoleon’s crude attempts failed to pro- duce. Of course, all the other conditions of a healthy spiritual life, such as eugenic breeding, scientific edu- cation, etc., are advocated ; but the great thing is inoculation with the Christian serum. But suppose that sin is an insanity, and not amenable to serum- therapy or prophylaxis? Then the whole of Dr. Leighton’s thesis collapses, as it deserves to collapse, for it is based only on a figure of speech. In conclu- sion, it is only necessary to say that this book is badly written. I t is sentimental, it is long-winded, and abounds in tautology ; and it does not do what it at- tempts to do, it does not induct a natural law into the spiritual world. I t deals only with the sphere of morals, in the bastard jargon of a quack. It is neither medicine, nor morals, nor intelligible social reform ; but a mixture of all three in proportions that are not assimilabIe by a normal constitution.

Woman in Modern Soc ie ty . By Professor Earl

Professor Barnes has written a tract to prove that men and women are diverse and complementary, and find their fullest expression in the bonds of matrimony. Therefore, he proposes that women should not be ex- cluded from participation in any of the activities of men, but that, in consideration of their bearing the burden of maternity, the stress of competition should be decreased and women should rank a s the most favoured individuals in the State. Otherwise, he argues, sex antagonism will grow, and fewer of the perfect unions will occur ; the whole biological process of differentiation will lead to race suicide instead of to race perpetuation, and there will be a pretty kettle of fish ! Already, in America, the women have the educa- tional system in their hands, with the consequence that the boys are becoming effeminate and the girls are ba- coming emancipated From this he deduces that we ought to give women the vote, re-organise marriage so that women may be paid for domestic service, motherhood, and have a half-share of inheritance, facilitate divorce, remove every barrier from the pro- fessions and industries, and, in short, let women do exactly a s they like while we accommodate ourselves to their vagaries.

With th.e Turks in Thrace. By E. Ashmead-Bart-

The value of t’his work from the military or historical standpoint is small, as the author (himself would be the first to acknowledge, although some value attaches to the vivid descriptions of t.he confusion and rout of the Turkish forces. Considering, however, that Mr. Ashmead-Bartlett undoubtedly saw a considerable amount of fighting, it is a pity that he does not attempt to throw some light on the innumerable problems of

Barnes. (Cassell. 5s. 6d. net.)

lett. (Heinemann.)

6 1 7

minor tactics which await solution. Perhaps, like so many other correspondents, he did not know what to look f o r

But if we read the book merely as an account of exciting adventures and difficulties overcome by a dis- play of real determination and pluck, we shall be better rewarded. H e and Mr. Donohoe, his partner, merit the reputation which they earned. The photo- graphs are excellent but, for some reason, invariably depict the Turkish forces in a better light than the letterpress. For instance the “ Turks retreating from Lule Burgas ” (p. 302) seem happy enough for defeated troops and in excellent o r d e r and the same applies to the “Turkish artillery leaving the field of Lule Burgas” (p. 212). The same is true of nearly all the photos of that retreat sent back from the seat of war. Personally we believe that many of them were really taken upon other occasions. If not, the demoralisation of the re- tirement has been grossly exaggerated.

F ine Books . By Alfred W. Pollard. (Methuen. 25s.

“ Fine books,” unfortunately, does not mean fine literature, but books that have become vaIuable for their rarity and beauty of production. Finely printed and illustrated books is the theme that Mr. Pollard ex- pounds, and, to save his book from the tediousness of a sale-room catalogue, he introduces some amount of biographical and historical matter. He writes in the jargon of the bibliophile about founts and formats, colo- phons and the comparatively abominable collotype ; and the book is very nearly readable by one who is not a connoisseur. But the illustrations make amends ; they are plentiful and well-reproduced, and the publisher, a t least, has done his best to make the book worthy of its subject. On the other hand, a reader of modern books will suffer much from envy when he sees the glories of past printing, the beauty of the type, the exquisite pro- portion of the page, and the beauty of the illustration. No such books have been produced since the printer became of less importance than the publisher, except a s semi-private ventures such a s Morris’ Kelmscott Press ; and the matter is one for regret.

Adventures of War with Cross and Crescent . By Philip Gibbs and Bernard Grant. (Methuen. 2s.)

This is a collection of those “ chatty stories from the front ” referred to in a previous review. As such they are interesting enough, but they have no military value. The authors did not know what to look f o r having no military experience, and, indeed, might just as well have stopped in England for all that they have been able to tell us. The photos are interesting enough.

Cold, Prices, and Wages . By J. A. Hobson.

Against the theory that the recent rise in prices is due to the increased output of gold, Mr. Hobson argues that gold is only one, and that one not the most im- portant, of the causes of this increase. H e shows that bank credit is not based mainly on gold, that the ex- tension and perfection of banking systems and the growth of joint-stock industrial concerns, have enabled a largely increasing proportion of property to figure a s security for bank credit. If this means anything at all, it means that the bankers, in return for the money they do not lend to us, have obtained a larger lien on the very instruments of production. He argues that the increased supply of gold has not flooded our money market, but has flown into new countries, such as Argentina, as a basis for bank credit there. He argues that there it has been used for purposes of development, for purposes, that is to say, not immediately produc- tive ; and that, in consequence, there has been a re- tardation in the growth of world wealth. H e quotes many figures in support of his arguments, but fre- quently he has to piece out his figures with abstract arguments. Naturally enough he pleads’ for more figures, and asks the Governments of the world to supply them.

net .)

(Methuen. 3s. bd. net.)

P a s t i c h e .

SOLID FACT. Scene : G. N. Railway business train (morning) Letch-.

worth to London. First-class carriage. FIRST PASSENGER (am out-and-out Tory of the new Social

Reform type) : “ Have you seen the new w e e k l y ? SECOND PASSENGER : “ No ! What is it called? ” FIRST PASSENGER : “ ‘ The Statesman.’ It’s really a

brainy paper and quite respectable. Not one you need be ashamed of being seen reading.”

SECOND PASSENGER : “ Who publishes i t ? ” FIRST PASSENGER : “ The Fabian Society. Shaw and

Webb edit it. Of course, it’s not like the usual Socialist rag, but really quite reasonable. I was greatly interested. As a matter of fact, I find I’ve been a Socialist for 20 years without knowing it.’?

F. W. R. THE NUDE STATESMAN CONFESSES.

My body is naked-no Jaeger I wear, My eyes they are bleary-my brain it is bare. My pen is past mending-my ink it is pale, My soul is a clockwork soon destined to fail. I stand in the Strand with a tract in each hand, But my words are as chaff-and my policy-Sand. One idea I’ve got left, if i t isn’t too late- With ‘ ‘ Everyoldman ” to amalgamate. Then. we’ll hobble in pairs, up Dent’s beautiful

And dream that old crocks are young men of affairs stairs,

ARTHUR F. THORN.

MODERN MIRACLES. Modern man, the great magician, ever trying some-

Places miracles before us such as Moses never knew.

For he gives to us as butter compound strange that looks

Made of fat and cotton oil, and scraps with slightest

thing new,

like it,

greasy bit ;

Manufactures milk from water with small aid of goat or

Jams he makes that have no fruit unless that turnips be cow ;

fruit now;

Wines of every kind produces, whisky, brandy, gin and

Out of “taters” or their skins, with added dash of coal- rum,

tar scum ;

Woollen, cotton, silken garments he creates from dust or

Leather goods that ne’er saw hide, just paper pressed for rags ;

boots and bags ;

Turns out nutmegs from old tables; oat-cake meal from

Sells “ home beef ” that as an ox ne’er walked knee deep out saw-mill ;

in British rill ;

Scottish mutton that as sheep ne’er bounded up the rocky,

Irish pork that as a pig ne’er grunted in an Irish pen.

Greater efforts he makes now with latest of machinery To create, as Moses tells of, something from vacuity.

Makes machines that make machines without a help of

Will yet make all things we need, nor fear the strikers’

Ben ;

human hand,

brawling band.

Rut he’ll reap the whirlwind harvest, for he now has.

Strikers settled; but alas ! for soon is ousted all mankind.

For I dipt .into the future, and the vision here I tell : Man, grown obsolete, had perished, yet the work went on

sown the wind;

pell-mell,

Grinding out commodities, with not a man to sell or buy; Turning out machinery that worked havoc on all nigh,

Till there wasn’t left a single shred of good old Mother

But was incorporated by them; yet there came no dearth. Earth

6 1 8

Mad machines tore at the goods, and made them all

Finished that, they on each other practised worse than

Soon the globe was all composed of howling, whirling

Sparkling dynamos and motors, working by the solar

Caused the world to hurtle sunward for new food to fill

But the awful vision vanished ere I saw them start to

machinery ;

felony.

wheels ; and worse,

force,

their maw.

gnaw. * * *

Men, my brothers, ye the workers, bliss will be the bitter

Tho.’ our newer scientists tell us of a later, greater trend.

For the atom has now given up the ghost to energy; And we’ll waken up some morn and find ’tis all illusive

ON CIVILISATION. Pippatada, being asked by a favourite chela why the

people of the West were so barbaric and materialistic, replied : -

“ No people, my son, is materialistic in whom there is possible the birth of a soul. Nor is the manifestation that thou speakest of a mark of anything inborn in the people of the West. From what thou hast told me theirs is a hard task at the plough, the earth yielding of her fullness -only after much toil. With us the good Mother smiles her blessings upon us whether we be diligent or no. But mayhap there is some solace in store for the karma of these people that thou didst overlook in thy stay among them.’

“ Nay,” answered the chela, “ I saw few signs of grace. But these people possess coal and iron in great abundance, and these enable them to get great riches.” Pippatada smiled.

“ The great Mother of us all,” went on the master ‘ ( is kind even unto the rudest of her children, and coal and iron have been given to these rude Northern people in great abundance, as thou sayest, that their lot may be lightened on the great Wheel. Having a plenty in these things, they can exchange for the things they need with them that have less. Thus all are nourished and the Wheel goes on. Was that not so, my son ?”

Rut the chela answered not, nor could he think of words, save those that were a pollution to the ears of the master, to describe how these same churlish people, being possessed of a wealth which came to them. as the Ganges at flood, yet suffered an untold number among them that were destitute, and defiled in spirit. ‘ ( LIVY.”

end,

play l J . T. FIFE.

EPIGRAMS : MANNERS SERIES. To the “ Daily Telegraph.”

What do I read upon this slip of paper sent me by some wight friendly to my satirical diversions 1 0 ye that were of old conceived of as young roaring lions, how are ye translated so to appear as young asses bray- ing over a white slave novel ! “ The last chapters tore at our heart-strings.” Oh, lay bare the particular strings ! Were they Lawson’s ? Can the sufferer be Le Sage ? Is Courtney prostrate ?

To the ‘ ‘ Daily Herald.” Do not ’ ‘ Oh, ’Arry ! ” “ Haw, Cholly ! ” so impudently

at every scholar who happens to pass the top of your alley : by so behaving you do not make your literary fustian appear the less shoddy. If the mere existence of .men of superior learning hurts your conceit so much, consider that abuse from your quarter cannot destroy them. When you feel inclined to hate a man for his possession of Greek and Latin, you set yourself to have at least the rudiments of English, and your hatred will begin to be assuaged.

To the “ Daily News.” It is unreasonable for you to condemn the besotting

cinema exhibitions while your own columns display sen- sational pictures. That these are less disgusting than the films, and less than those in your Carmelite con- temporaries, is no excuse for you, who profess to a higher state of humanism. Deprive your numerous enemies of a weapon which it is not to your credit that they should hold. If your readers are, as is generally concluded of them, a different type from the Yellow Press public, surely their taste can only be dissatisfied and shocked by pictures which delight the vulgar. T. K. I,.

D r a m a .

By John Francis Hope.

‘ ‘ Hang out our banner on the outward wall,

WHAT is drama? As a child, I was taught that, in parsing, if a word was not anything else, it must be an adverb. This definition by elimination seems to be the rule in writing : if it is not anything else, it must be a play. By no other rule can I justify the publication of such a work as the one under consideration. There are people I know who, when reading a novel, skip all the descriptive passages, and read only the conversa- tion. They are, I suppose, embryo playwrights, of the kind that write for this series of “Plays of To-day and To-morrow.” But even conversation has its degrees of excellence : there are ways of saying things, or not saying things, that are as indicative of character as the most decisive action. Hamlet did nothing but hesitate until the end of the last act, but we know him perfectly, and would like to know him better. George Tremayne makes “the great refusal,” resigns his directorship .of and his profits from the business of Tremayne and Son, cigarette manufacturers, to become a retail newsagent in Notting Hill, and finally subsides into the comfort of a home at South Kensington. W h o wonders and who cares?

The fact is that Mr. Fox (there is a wig-maker of that name, too, so the author is, to some extent, in the theatrical tradition), is incapable of the creation of character ; so as he gives a generic title to his play, I suppose tbat it is meant to be a satire. How he does lash the follies of the time ! One would think that he were still in his childhood, playing at horses ; unfortunately tunately, his theme lacks even the semblance of novelty. I t was Bacon who said : “ He that hath wife and children hath given hostages to fortune.” St. Paul said : , “ He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord, but he that is married careth for things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.” I dare say that the Mahabharata,’ or the Puranas, or the Vedas, have even more profound utter- ances on the subject than these ; but I do not want to dignify “ This Generation”* beyond recognition. Let it suffice that Nietzsche said that “ a married philosopher is a figure of comedy,” and we can see how far short of his predecessors falls Mr. Fox.

The example that Mr. Fox has in mind, by explicit statement in the text, is Tolstoy, that person who, a t the age of forty, discovered the Sermon on the Mount, and gave his wife the opportunity of taking thought for the morrow. Of George Tremayne and his wife, it is said : “She reads the Sermon-he strives to live it.” He is supposed to be a Socialist, although there is no evidence of the fact; he is simply that sort of lunatic who strives to reduce the profits on his business, and when he fails to do that, hands over the business to his less scrupulous partners, and tries to get a living by making picture frames and selling newspapers. On the point of fact, there never was such a Socialist ; even Tolstoy the exemplar, who was not a Socialist, although he made boots (bad ones, according to report), never attempted to earn his living in this way.

But George Tremayne beggars himself and moves from Holland Park to Notting Hill. His wife, who

The cry is still : ‘ They come.’ ”---Macbeth.

* “ This Generation.’’ By S . M. Fox. (Fisher Unwin. 2s. 6d. net.)

619

loves him and disagrees with his opinions, goes with him, the children are sent to a Council School ; and the second act takes place in the parlour at the back of the shop. Although they keep a maid, the wife and children are supposed to be underfed-the children in danger of becoming lousy, and the business on the high road to bankruptcy. The wife’s father calls (he is .a rich man, of course, a financier), takes away the

‘wife and children ; and George is left to his own de- vices. Third act is a working men’s club at Fulham. George makes a speech (a bad speech) on brotherhood ; various sorts of working men hint a t Socialism, and people treat each other to cocoa. George, it seems, is now earning a living by writing and speaking : his wife’s father has died, and left her a lot of money, but, so far, no reconciliation has taken place. At the end of the act, that occurs ; and George goes back to luxurious slavery. The fourth act shows George sur- rounded by every comfort, protesting against it, and finally succumbing to it. ‘‘I mean to make you so snug and happy at home, ” says his wife. “ I mean to spoil you in future.” And this is supposed to be a play “for to-day and to-morrow” !

I warn Mr. Fox not to expect too much of posterity. “Why, I’m posterity-and so are you ; and whom do we remember?” queried Byron ; and, in the circum- stances, it is well to remember that there are various sorts of fame. In the Dictionary of National Bio- graphy, not everyone who is treated at length is a person of intrinsic interest or merit; some murderers have more space devoted to them than many artists. Would Mr. Fox like to go down to posterity a s the man who could not write a play, but could get “This Generation” published? I grant Mr. Fox all his good intentions. Folly should be reproved, nobility of character ought to be able to exercise itself, and the love of a woman is fatal to the workings of the soul ; but all these excuses do not justify the perpetration of the worst play in the world. Mr. Fox does none of these things. “This Generation” is simply banal, re- vealing not even a trace of understanding, a touch of feeling, or the slightest appreciation of what drama demands.

Yet Mr. Fox is no tyro : he has done it before on two occasions, and if I protest now, it is because I object to the waste of paper and ink implied by the publica- tion of this play. Shaw at least had something to say, and knew how to say it; but Mr. Fox has nothing to say, and cannot even say that with any skill. Even a s an awful example of the realistic method, the play is a failure. These people are not real; they are common- place. They are the cliches of every Cockney wit, from the office boy downwards. Their conversation is the merest repetition of various catchwords from politics, and the allied insanity of sociology. 7 hey do not even converse; they wait for a favourable oppor- tunity to repeat their shibboleths, and then subside into the silence from which they should never have emerged. They shut up as easily as a collapsible boat, and are as useless in that condition. Technically, the play w h o s not the slightest perception of what a play should be. There is no climax, no crisis; the characters are the same at the end of the play as at the beginning, all that has happened is that we have seen them in four different scenes. There is no dramatic necessity for the last three acts of the play. Lucy simply would not have gone to the shop at Notting Hill, she would much more probably have called in a doctor to, certify that her husband was not responsible for his actions, and have obtained a power of attorney over his estate. There is even less unity than continuity in the play for each same is laid in a different place, and Mr. Fox allows six months or three months to elapse between his acts, as though time and space did not limit his understanding a s well as that of everybody else. “This Generation” will go down to posterity, if at all, as a proof of the utter incompetence of the playwrights of the twentieth century.

A r t .

T h e International Society of Sculptors, Painters and Gravers.

By Anthony M . Ludovici. WHATEVER may be thought of the International quality of this exhibition of pictures at the Grosvenor Gallery, one thing, a t least, is certain, that it contains a larger proportion of interesting works than we have seen for some considerable time from this group of painters. If it were only for the beautiful torso by Bourdelle, the trilogy of the Matterhorn by G. Sauter, the exquisite Alfred Stevens, and the Renoir, this exhibition would well repay the trouble of a visit. For nowadays we have to be content with much less, and we do not often find so many needles in a haystack.

The puzzling feature about London galleries, how- ever-the feature, that is to say which must always amaze the general public, who are not aware of the manner in which these things come about-is the ex- traordinary number of utterly inferior pictures which seem always to find their way somehow into exhibitions of this sort. What a pity it is that a body of good artists cannot club together, and appropriate one gallery to themselves, and remain independent of this kind of foil to their works. I t is disturbing, and even annoy- ing, in a show where one can see the pictures and sculpture enumerated above, to come across such ex- hibits as that by C. Milcendeau (No. 137) for instance, or No. 140 by E. Blanche, or No. 142 by Edith Starkie- Rackham. Why, too, are Douglas Robinson, Ethel Walker, Spencer Pryse, D. Y. Cameron, S. M. Curtis, Olga de Boznanska, and Renee Finch included in this exhibition? For my part, a picture like No. 180 by Renee Finch is quite enough to dispel all the pleasure I have had on contemplating the better class work hanging in the other rooms. One assumes that the Council of this Society is possessed of a certain modicum of taste, and, indeed, they show it not only in their choice of some of the foreign members’ pictures, but also in the work exhibited by some of their own body. What excuse can they offer, then, for showing such a picture a s “ The Woman and the Fawn ” (No. 135) by Ethel Walker? This sort of thing is surely a great mistake. For the International Society has a distinguished tradition ; it is almost pledged to exact a high standard from those who exhibit on its walls. Neither can it say that it has too much room and must accept mediocre work in order to cover the space at its disposal. Compare the hanging of the exhibition at the Grosvenor with that of the Balli Collection at the Goupil Gallery, and then ask yourself whether the former has too much room. I t certainly would be a great blessing if a t least one group of painters in Lon- don would resolutely refuse to hang anything which, even according to their own lights, was not considered as of high quality. One thought the International was prepared to do this. And yet, I feel perfectly sure that not a single member of the Council could honestly say that all the work at the present show was selected on that principle.

But let me turn to more pleasant considerations. I suppose, after all, there is some answer to my objec- tions, though I emphatically decline to believe that, even a s a foil, it is worth while to hang some of the pictures that I found in the same sacred atmosphere with an Alfred Stevens, a Renoir, and a Bourdelle.

It was a real delight to see Professor G. Sauter’s three Matterhorns (Nos. 147, 148, and 149). If you grant that under certain treatment a mountain may be a fitting subject for a painter’s brush, what could be more interesting than the three moods of this Colossus, full a s they are of the artist’s moods as well? And there is no small measure of skill displayed in the execution of this work. The effects are obtained by simple straightforward methods, and are without doubt the outcome of long and conscientious observation. Their simplicity has nothing of that specious slickness which

620

characterises so much of the work of modern painters a la Connard ; it is clearly the result, as all fine simpli- city invariably is, of the thorough digestion and com- prehension of a subject’s complexities. I have never seen anything that pleased me so much, from this artist’s brush. If Professor Sauter were not such an ex- perienced and tried student of his art, one might almost feel that he had found himself in his communion with this imposing monster of snow-covered rock.

How different are the results obtained from a kindred subject by Fra Slicko-Slicki-I mean Mr. Lavery. !Nos. 82, 84, and 89). There is a freshness and a directness .about these canvases which certainly arrest attention ; but how far above mere impression- istic transcription do you suppose they are? Where is the loving, earnest, patient and sympathetic observa- tion of the true artist in these pictures? I fail to see any purpose in proving any longer to the world that these rapid, smart and jejune impressions can be seized in this. facile and unembarrassed manner. W e know once and for all that a certain degree of technical skill is essential to such productions ; but we also know how little of an artist a man need be in order to produce them.

With regard to Mr. Glyn Philpot’s “Feast of Bel- shazzar” (No. 83), cela ne laisse froid. I never was and never shall be impressed by a transformation scene at Drury Lane, or by a grand living picture at His Majesty’s. One is too well aware of the object of such a scenic effect, and of the means employed in producing it-not to speak of the quality of the artistic inspiration behind it-to be seriously moved by these gruesome black backgrounds, and these weird figures, all illu- minated by limelight of the same colour, especially when they are made the subject of a painted picture Mr. Glyn Philpot is a romanticist. A big muffled drum is beaten mysteriously in the mind’s ear of the specta- tor ; the curtain rises in his mind’s eye ; and lo ! the “Feast of Belshazzar” stands unrolled before him. There is a murmur of applause, again in his mind’s ear -applause for the art, nay, the astounding histrionic artfulness, of this wonderfully lurid scene of barbaric indulgence ; and then a sigh rises in his throat. The spectator is tired. The stage scene must be changed or else he will rapidly be bored. Fortunately on the stage, such a scene would quickly change. Blue and violet limelight, merging to green, would flash upon the figures. They would move and the play would begin- or end !

But here, in this painted picture, everything will re- main the same for ever and ever-the black background and the crushed strawberry limelight not excepted !

I think, perhaps, I have mentioned before in these columns that Auguste Rodin, w h o a s everyone knows, is the venerable and exalted President of the International Society, never quite liked Renoir’s drawing. He always used to say to me that he admired Renoirs colour, but not his draughtsmanship. I was, therefore, not a little surprised when I saw “The Bather and the Griffen” (No. 143) ; for, hitherto, I must say, I had been inclined to agree with the great sculptor on the subject of his old friend’s work. Surely, however, there is little fault to be found with this superb lady and her dog ! I was simply astonished. How terrible some of the more modern work looks beside it 1

The Alfred Stevens (No. 93), although only an un- finished sketch, is also a great treat. The public should attach particular importance to such a work. It almost supplies the inexorable and uncompromising canon that one requires, in order to measure the merit of the mor-‘ modern work. Among the other painters who arc pleasing, without, however, leaving any deep impres- son, are Mr. Festus Kelly (save in No. 139), Mr. Alexander Jamieson (No. 95), Miss Constance Rea (No. 134), 17. H. Newberry (especially in No. 137), and IV. B. E. Ranken (No. 182).

And new let me conclude with a humble prayer to the Council of the Society. Let them in heaven’s name use a more severe standard of criticism in the selection of he bulk of the pictures which go to make up their

biennial shows. I do not suggest for a minute that there

is any undue nepotism practised; but let them be ruth- less in regard to all painters, even members, who fancy that they can afford to send in mediocre work, because they are “bound to get hung.” After all, this would be something new in the graphic arts. But it would be something th.at, in the end, the public would heartily appreciate.

L E T T E R S T O T H E E D I T O R . OMNIPOTENT PROLETARIAT.

Sir,--You interesting contributor, Mr. Finn, is very proud of having made a convert of Mr. Chiozza Money to his views of the impossibility of the proletariat ever having an effective voting power, and elatedly looks round for more worlds to conquer, for more adherents to his banner. On the other hand, Sir, your complacency at your share in that memorable conversion seems to be dashed with a considerable dose of despondency. And TO wonder. For the more hope you have staked on your theory of Guild Socialism, the more disheartening i t must be to be told, on such high authority, that your dream is unrealisable. “ Monotony, dullness, dreariness, hopelessness,” seem to you to be the inevitable con- comitants of the predicted international capitalism, on which-surely strangely-Mr. Finn, like another Nero wishing the Senate had only one neck, pins his faith.

What is the good of all these theories-Socialism, Syndicalism, Anarchism, Henry Georgism, whatever 7 - c u call them? They all presuppose a change in human nature A Government official under Socialism is to be 9, perfectly different person from the present parasite. Why? Your Guild Socialism, Sir, is just as bad in this respect as any other. Even were the ‘ ‘ means of produc- tion ” acquired by the State-which Mr. Finn, now backed by Mr. Money, tells us is impossible by vote, im- possible by force, and which you yourself say i t would be idiocy to attempt by purchase-do you seriously expect us to believe that greed, envy, laziness, cowardice, bully- ing, would. all vanish, leaving only beatific virtue in the world ? Virtue, in that case, might just as well go hang

foreman of a gang of navvies building a railway, say, under Guild Socialism, be constitutionally immune from u . . attacks of impatience, let us say, to put it mildly, if he found some of his underlings-so-called co-operators--- shirking their work ? Would these navvies all be in- inspired by a lofty sense of duty or zealous love of manual labour and give no cause for the foreman’s . . . ah, im- patience ’? Would, by some miraculous means, the office of foreman become unnecessary

Mr. Wells, again, has suggested a Conscription of labour; every man of us is to be compelled to do a cer- tain number of years of work, and then be free to retire on the proceeds, on the general proceeds, that is. Quite a happy thought, thrown out a’s a jest to enliven conver- sation, but folly when taken and pursued seriously. imagine Mr. Wells himself his Fancy roaming beyond the moon, among the stars !-“ Hi, my fine fellow ! Come down out of that. Shoulder your pick there, and open up a mile or two of road, to lay gas pipes,” or what no t Take a budding Beethoven and set him to clean our sewers ; or chain a would-be champion runner or airman to a counting-house stool and bid him type out invoices for a few years ! Is this making a joke of a serious matter ? Upon my word, I don’t think it possible to look on any of these schemes for the amelioration of the world in any other light than as a joke. See how “ Mr. John Smith,” of the Engineers’ Guild spends his Saturday afternoon. He draws his IOO guilders (pay, mind you, or salary, if you like, not wages-a fico for the phrase!) puts five in his pocket to go to a football match, buys an ounce of baccy on the way, and indulges in a “mid- day meal,” gets his weekly papers on the way home on a free tram-car, and then writes out cheques to the amount of 35 guilders laid out by Mr. Smith-of frugal mind- on household purchases. He saves 60 out of his 100, having a: foreseeing eye to his holidays as well as on an exceptionalIy good piano. “ Thus week by week he accumulates guilders (fairy gold, not Dutch metal ! > and they lie to his credit at his Guild bank.” It is the touch- ing story of the good young man who d i d , and may be read in extenso in THE NEW AGE of November 28, 1912 the joke is none of my making.

And all this bliss is put off now, we read till the year A.D. 3000, or thereabouts, by which time Mr. Finn’s solitary capitalist’s head will be chopped off I the mil- lennium will have come, and the NEW AGE will h a ^ ceased from troubling, its day’s work done.

I must confess I take no interest in the politics of that date. Doubtless, I am a hard-hearted monster who thinks

her herself too--her occupation would be gone. Would the

62 I

everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds, but, meanwhile, I see Margaret Hamilton is harrowing us, in ‘ ‘ Everyman,” with pictures of the sweated worker, and the Fat Man is daily gibbeted for us in the “Daily Herdd.”

You will say, perhaps, that I don’t know anything about the subject. Frankly, I don’t. And the moral of my tale is that you, Sir, and Mr. Finn are up against a more difficult task tha.n the conversion of Mr. Chiozza Money, for you have to convert me, thirty millions of me, according to Carlyle, before your millennium can be realised. FELIX Elder ly

* * * WORKING WOMEN AND THE VOTE.

Sir,-You will not thank Mr. H. T. Scott for the com- pliment to your readers’ judgment conveyed in his letter of April IO. No doubt, Mrs. Thurtle’s letter received what attention it deserved even amongst such as were unaware of the writer’s parentage. “ In a few, short, clear sentences ” Mr. Scott seems to have hit very severely the wrong nail on the head. What are the facts? Mrs. Thurtle went to America some months. ago, and, under various influences, became a, Syndicalist. Her arguments, therefore (as anybody can see by looking up her letter) are not so much against votes for women as distinct from votes for men, as against votes for anybody at all-which i s all very well for those who have arrived at Syndi- calism. Mr. Scott seems to say : Mr. George Lansbury’s daughter has gone to America and become a Syndicalist ; in the sacred cause of family unity, I demand that he shall bring her back, or go and do likewise.”

Mrs. Thurtle no longer believes in votes for women because she no longer believes in votes for men. Her father, like a few other people, still believes in the vote, but for women as well as men. So that if father a,nd daughter were to enter the ring at all it would be, not to settle the vexed question of ‘ ‘ women’s emancipation,” but to fight out the old battle of political versus indus- trial action-and life is so short. No doubt, Mr. Scott and I would be interested in the encounter, possibly edified; there are thousands however, who would be neither. Therefore, I feel that Mr. Scott will be dis- appointed of the spectacle of a father butchered by his own daughter “ to make a Roman holiday !

I t seems to be overlooked that while the Syndicalist seed is fertilising the political mill keeps grinding-- women as well as men-under the direction of 3 male caucus. Even could we all agree that for constructive purposes the caucus was useless to democracy, I am quite sure that we should not agree that the caucus was power- less for evil. Syndicalism and Socialism are growing, no doubt-meanwhile, we have, among other things, the Insurance Act.

Mr. Scott’s idea of a father’s duty is amusing, to say the least. If he knew the Lansbury tribe he would appreciate the humour in the suggestion that the father should first “ save ” his own family before offering to save Mr. Scott-and by “ save ” he seems to mean sub- ject them to some sort of process which will make them all think and say the same things. There are eleven in the family, and I can tell Mr. Scott, from my own know- ledge, that no two of them agree about anything, let alone religion or politics.

I suppose Mr. Scott agrees with his father about votes for women. Indeed, i t would not surprise me to learn that he agreed with his grandfather on the question.

EDGAR J. LANSBURY. * * * FEMINISM.

Sir,-If I may trespass on your valuable space, I should like to ask if any of your correspondents can suggest a solution of the chief difficulty in connection with the feminist movement-the preponderance of women over men ?

These “ odd women ” number both the physically at- tractive and the physically unattractive. Some of both classes must, under existing laws and circumstances, remain unmarried. There are certain working women of the middle classes, and women of private means, who prefer a single to a married life, not because they are unsexed, but because they are averse to loveless marriage, and, unfortunately for themselves, have been unable to return the love of the men who have singled them out. There are others who, through lack of charm or oppor- tunity, have never had an offer of marriage. The exist- ence of these women may signify race degeneration, but the point is, what is to be done with those who have no means of their own? Are they to remain as parasites on their extremely unwilling male relatives? Or, possess- ing none, shall they depend on public charity? Shall marriage be enforced, and the polygamy of the East become legitimate in the West? Shall a certain number

of female infants be exposed yearly ? Or shall we, taking a hint from Swift, serve up the least prepossessing of these infants as food for the submerged tenth, and thus improve the condition of the lower classes without im- posing an extra burden on the ratepayer?

SEC. * * * EDUCATION.

S i r , - I enclose a paragraph cut from the “ University Correspondent.” Manifestly there does not lack intelli- gent discontent among educationists with the present educational system. Whether such discontent will find effective expression at the right time is yet: to be seen.

“ Criticism of the last great Education Act is reviving now that a new Act seems imminent. Durham University Union Society at its March meeting carried a resolution condemning the 1902 Act as futile and urging further legislation, the debate being rendered notable by the speeches of Mr. Fabian Ware and Dr. W. H . D. Rouse. The former urged that secondary education in particular required such reorganisation as would make i t ‘ at least equal to that provided by any of our foreign rivals ’ ; and Dr. Rouse not only lamented that the secondary schools had suffered for ten years from being put into the hands Of the ignoramuses of the country, but regretted the result of earlier elementary school legislation. They Could no more expect good legislation for schools from Politicians, he said, “than they could expect good legislation €or the medical profession from politicians. Education was costing them more money than any parent wanted to pay for it. In his opinion elementary educa- tion was quite inefficient, as it did not lead up to a n y thing. It killed the natural faculties of the child, and he thought if Mr. Forster could come to life again he would bitterly repent ever bringing in the Act which stood to his credit.”

T. M. SALMON

* * * NIETZSCHE-STRINDBERG LETTERS.

Sir,-since translating the selection from the Nietzsche- Strindberg letters quoted in ‘ ‘ Das Literarische Echo y, for March 15, I have obtained a copy of the “ Frankfurter Zeitung ” for February 9, in which the first instalment of these letters originally appeared. Karl Strecker, to whom their publication is due, mentions in connection with them certain facts which merit consideration.

Th’ere is no need to enter into the details concerning the preservation of the manuscripts and the reason why their publication has been so long delayed. I t is, however, noteworthy that while Strecker possesses the originals of Strindberg’s letters, he had to be content with accredited copies of Nietzsche’s. Another important fact is that Nietzsche’s letters are In German, Strindberg’s In French. When I translated them, I supposed that Strind- berg had written in German, as I had no indication to the contrary. But i t appears that Strindberg was at this time unable to write German, and even while at Berlin in 1892- 93, he at first corresponded only in French or Swedish. My translation, therefore, is an English version of a Ger- man translation from a French original, and during this double process of translation a few inexactitudes may have crept in. It would certainly be interesting to examine Strindberg’s French original.

Nietzsche first became acquainted with Strindberg through Georg Brandes, who, on April 3, 1888, wrote to him : “ I f you read Swedish, I draw your attention to August Strindberg, Sweden’s only genius. When you write about women, you are very similar to him.” On October 6, Brandes refers to Strindberg again. He had sent him “ The Case of Wagner,” and writes that he had completely won Strindberg over to Nietzsche’s side. “ He is a true genius, but a little crazy like most geniuses (and non-geniuses).” On October 20 Nietzsche asked Brandes for Strindberg’s address, as he wished to send him his 6 ‘ Twilight of the Idols.” On November 16 Brandes gave him the “mad Swede’s’’ address. On the 20th Nietzsche answered that he had read Strindberg’s “ 1,es Maries ” with delight. He speaks of Strindberg’s work thus : - ‘6 French culture ,upon an incomparably Stronger and healthier foundation The effect is bewitching.” This was probably the prelude to the correspondence between Nietzsche and Strindberg. ( I should here mention that owing- to a misprint in ( ‘ Das Literarische Echo,” Nietzsche’s first letter to Strindberg was assigned to the year 1880 instead of 1888.)

I t would appear that Nietzsche was highly pleased at Strindberg’s answer. In writing to Peter Gast (the music cian referred to in his letter), he said :--“ It was the first letter with a world-historical accent that reached me.’’

Zola’s preface to Strindberg’s “ Father,” mentioned by

622

Nietzsche in his letter of November 27, 1888, runs thus (1 translate from the French original) : -

“Dear sir and colleague, “ I owe you many apologies for my long silence. But

if you knew what an existence I lead, the toil and worry of i t ! I did not wish to return you your manuscript without having read it, and at last I have managed to find time. Your drama interested me keenly. The philo- sophical idmea in i t is very bold, the characters very dar- ingly grouped. You have derived powerful and disturb- ing effects from the uncertainly of fatherhood. Then your Laura is truly the woman in her pride, in the uncon- sciousness and the mystery of her qualities and faults. She will remain fixed in my memory. Altogether, you have written a curious and interesting work, in which there are, especially towards the end, some very fine things. To be candid, some analytical abridgments bother me a little. You know, perhaps, that I am no lover s f abstraction. I like the characters to have a complete social status, so that we can mix with them freely. I like them to be saturated with our atmosphere. And your captain, who has not even a name, your other characters that are almost lay figures, do not give me that complete feeling of life that I expect. But, of course, between you and me, there i s a question of race. Such as it is, your play, I repeat, is one of the rare dramatic works that have moved me deeply.

“ Believe me, your devoted and sympathetic colleague,

In conclusion to the present series, i t may be of inte- rest to note the following oral statement made by Strind- berg at Berlin in February, 1893 : -

“ Nietzsche alone has found words for what I have felt and thought in the last ten years.” P. SELVER.

(* EMILE ZOLA. ”

* * * Sir,-Mr. Selver’s admirable translation from “ Das

. Literarische Echo” of the Strindberg-Nietzsche correspon- dence omits one passage which should prove of peculiar interest to English readers. I t comes at the end of Strind- berg’s reply to Nietzsche’s letter of December 7, 1888 (the last of those translated by Mr. Selver), and answers Nietzsche’s, query as to the English translation of his works. Strindberg writes :-

“ So far as England is concerned I feel myself quite unable to say anything whatever. For in this case we have to deal with a nation of hypocrites, which has sur- rendered itself into the hands of its women-and that means nothing more or ‘less than utter decadence. ‘ Morality ’ in England, my dear sir-you know what that means : libraries for the daughters of gentlemen, Currer Bell, Miss Braddon, and the rest. You may as well wash your hands of all that. With French you can penetrate even into darkest Africa, and you can safely snap your fingers at the English matriarchate. Please think tlie matter over, and consider my suggestions, and let me hear as soon as possible what you decide.’’

Thus Strindberg. I t i s only fair to add the comment of Herr Strecker, who publishes this interesting correspon- dence for the first time : ‘ ‘ Strindberg’s harsh verdict on English literature is perfectly true of the time at which he wrote ; to-day the position is somewhat different, even if the ‘ hypocrisy ’ still ‘ holds out against every storm,’ like the saints and the knights in ‘ Faust.’ ”

This is a singularly apt remark. On the one hand, we have Dr. Levy’s English edition of Nietzsche, which in 1888 no publisher would have dared to issue ; on the other hand, to prove that our hypocrisy still “ holds out against every storm,” we have the nauseous cant with which the ‘ ( White Slave Traffic ” question has deluged Press and platform. PAUL V. COHN. * * *

“ THE PRETENDERS.” S i r , A s you have kindly allowed me a column of your

space to discuss Ibsen’s ‘ ‘ The Pretenders,” I am loath to ask for more; in fact, I said all I wanted to say. A. new question arises, however, which appears to me of Some importance. I mean the extraordinary sensitiveness of THE NEW AGE writers to any form of comment on their work. In my observation and experience every Criticism is followed by a declaration of hostility SO marked that 1 can only suppose i t to proceed from some principle that I do not understand.

In the present ‘case Mr. Hope seems to assume that every sentence in my letter aims at being an explicit contradiction of him, or at filling up the gaps in his general knowledge. If so, no wonder he is irritated, and rude enough to call my interpretation of Ibsen’s purpose ‘ ( puerile.”

St. Augustine has a sentence which I might have use- fully quoted in my first letter; it contains a formula

which I apply to artistic productions generally : ‘ ‘ Not everything which is told as having happened is to be taken as significant; but for the sake of that which is significant that which is not significant is added. Only with the ploughshare is the earth cleft; but, in order for this to be done, the other parts of the plough are also needed.” The issue between us is therefore : What did Ibsen intend to convey? What is the significant idea of ‘ ‘ The Pretenders ” ? Mr. Hope would have us believe that Hakon is the mouthpiece of Ibsen. He says : “ Once a king is established by divine right, the purpose of the universe is accomplished, according to Ibsen. . . . Ibsen constructed his play to show the triumph of God’s child over God’s ‘ step-child ’ ”-i.e., Hakon over Skule. I have given reasons for not accepting this as the purpose Ibsen had in view. Mr. Hope said, and repeats, that the play is “ Christian in its assumptions and demonstra- tions.” I do not quarrel with this dictum, but I want i t explained. If he means by Christian demonstrations the victory of Hakon over Skule in virtue of divine right, I disagree; if he means the victory of Skule over his egoism-as I think-then I agree.

I wish to be understood in my reference to Nietzsche and Bishop Nicholas. Mr. Hope remarked : ( ‘ I f Nietzsche’s dictum that ‘ Christ is the priest’s will to power ’ is too extreme, the character of Bishop Nicholas shows that Christianity at least fulfils that purpose.” The dictum is careless, and must be emended to imply that Christ is the Christian priest’s will to power. There are non-Christian and anti-Christian priests, and Nicholas is one of them. How, then, can I allow Mr. Hope to say that “ the character of Bishop Nicholas shows that Christianity at least fulfils that purpose ? ” What pur- * pose? The bishop’s character, as drawn by Ibsen, reveals the devil as his will to power.

One thing more; Nietzsche had not written a word when in 1865 Ibsen composed “ The Pretenders.’’ There was no doctrine of the will to power to refute, even by anticipation. I t therefore seems to be sounder criticism to relate a work of art to philosophical doctrines that have become explicit; that is the reason of my reference to Schopenhauer and my sketch of the history of ideas about egoism. I do not admit that I am prohibited from doing SO because Mr. Hope believes all his readers have mastered. “ The Genealogy of Morals.” Between o u r selves, I don’t think they have. WILLIAM I,. HARE.

[John Francis Hope replies : My objection to comments such as those of Mr. Hare is simply that of 3 somewhat busy man who regards such comments as a waste of time. I say what I have to say in my articles, as clearly as 1 can ; and I hope for no more than understanding from my readers. Whether they agree or disagree, is not a matter that concerns me, however important i t may be to them. Further, I do not feel justified in explaining a dramatic criticism by a philosophical discussion; and Mr. Hare’s attempt to make me do so inclines me to say : ( ‘ Damn St. Augustine.” However, Mr. Hare wants an explana- tion of one or two things, and the least I can do is to oblige him. Whatever may have been Ibsen’s “ pur- pose,” there is no doubt about his achievement. Prac- tically throughout the play, Hakon Hakonsson triumphs over Skule ; that is the dramatic fact. When lvar Bodde says : “ Pray to th,e Lord thy God, Hakon Hakonsson,” Hakon replies : “ No need ; I am sure of him.” If that i s not sufficient to justify my statement that Ibsen con- structed his play to show the triumph of God’s child over God’s stepchild, Mr. Hare will have to continue to dis- agree with me. It may be, it probably is, true that Mr. Hare is more interested in Skule thm in Hakon, but as drama the play is concerned with the victory of Hakon, and not the failure of Skule. Skule is that type of per- son whom Bishop Blougram said we must watch, “the honest ,,thief, the tender murderer, the superstitious atheist ; but the degree of interest depends on our own development. Dr. Ernest Jones has said that Shakespeare speare’s plays would have little interest for a people more consciously developed than we are ; and Skule is not a tithe as interesting as Hamlet. We do not know why Hamlet hesitated, because he did not know himself; but Skule is deterred by quite conscious reasons, and Ibsen attemots to sustain interest in his infirmities by raising doubts as to the fact. SO far as character is concerned, Skule is a foregone failure ; and his lapse into Death is not a victory over his egoism, it is simply a confession of his defeat in war and politics.

I f Mr. Hare will not understand that by Christianity T mean not the teaching ol Christ, nor the professions of the Churches, but th,e practice of the Churches and their worshippers, I cannot make myself clear to him. We shall have to disagree.

The ( ‘ one thing more ” is a correction, and I am com-

623

pelled to repudiate it. “ There was no doctrine of the will to power to refute, even by anticipation,” says Mr. Hare. I t SO happens that Max Stirner wrote a book called “ The Ego and His Own ” (translated title), and Stirner died in 1856. The ideas of that book were not original to Stirner, and it is not unlikely that quite a number of people were conscious egoists at the time that “ The Pretenders ” was written.]

* * * “ THE GREAT ADVENTURE.”

Sir,-When this piece was first performed at the Kings- way Theatre, I was fortunate enough to be seated in the next stall to that of Mr. John Francis Hope. No doubt, this was one of the reasons why I spent a pleasant even- ing, but i t was not the only one; and I am sorry to see Mr. Hope taking a more jaundiced view of the play than I had looked for. It may be, of course. . but enough of personalities. I want to quarrel with his most vital objection of the play, which emerges finally in a sneer at Putney.

“ The Pyrenees are abased and Putney is exalted, and the artist drops into a comfortable life with the sim le woman who is only concerned with the commercial value of his pictures.” Well, why not, in Heaven’s name? I t is well known that men of talent are generally the most conventional in their habits; they need peace, unbroken sleep, regular meals. Wh should they seek romance in the dirty and uncomfortable hotels of the Pyrenees, when they can make romance in Putney ? And what is Mr. Hope’s quarrel with thfe simple, inartistic woman? As wife or mistress, she is probably the happiest companion for Ilam Carve. If the lady were an art critic, now, or a novelist, she might well be left to the tender mercies of Mrs. Hastings; but as she is merely preserving a peaceful civilisation, I feel that THE NEW AGE should approve of her.

‘ ( England, and more particularly Putney, will probably accept Mr. Bennett as an artist.” Well, well ; we have heard satire of this order all too frequently. Did not Swinburne inhabit Putney, by the way?

ASHLEY DUKES. [John Francis Hope replies : “I do not deny that Janet

Cannot is probably the happiest companion for Ilam Carve, and that Putney i s probably the most suitable place for him. But Mr. Dukes says : ‘Did not Swinburne inhabit Putney ? ’ Who is sneering at Putney now? As I am not aware that I quarrelled with the simple, in- artistic woman, i t seems that I can make no reply, but suggest that Mr. Dukes should read my article again to see what exactly was my point.”]

* * * ‘ ‘ NEW AGE ” CARICATURES.

Sir,-The drawing on the back of last week’s number of THE NEW AGE will surely hurt the feelings of other readers besides myself.

Those who boycott or belittle THE NEW AGE will now also be able to say that it is a paper which descends to gross and vulgar personalities.

Will you please print this letter, with an editorial note appended, saying whether you approve of the drawing and consider i t worthy of your paper?

HAMILTON IRVING. [We invite our correspondent to inquire of himself

which of his feelings was hurt by the caricature referred to. Caricatures that hurt none of the congeries of human feelings, good, bad, or indifferent, fail entirely as carica- tures-e.g., the drawings of ‘ ‘ Punch ” or the cartoons of Mr. Max Beerbohm-and are merely exercises in purpose- less malice. “ Gross and vulgar personalities,” on the other hand, are the sole material, as their employment to some moral purpose is the sole excuse, of the art of caricature-an art, by the way, which is naturally most unpopular in England amongst the middle classes.- ED. N.A.]

* * * HEBDOMADAIRE.

Sir,-By a poor light, and in a sleepy condition, I took up one of my journals--“ Hebdomadal,” a penny thing, but i t supports always one good article-infrequently, two.

One’s journals accumulate if one is doing any work in the world; for that claims, i n these critical hours, not merely one’s time, but one’s thoughts, a more expensive thing. Last week’s and this lay in a pile. A bit tired I was ; so I hunted, rather blindly, for the one good article. I t seemed odd i t should be missing. Yet It was ! I turned back to the beginning, and saw the usual paragraphs, in nice, large print, all about Montenegro and how all sensible people said things in the end in the same way-just the usual thing. I t began in October,

most undisturbing it is, but I was just awake enough to crave a good article. Plague ! i t was. missing this week. My eyelids must have hung low owing to an access of sleep, for I didn’t note that the title had mysteriously altered. My futile search continued. At last I caught myself saying distinctly : ‘ [ British Weekly,” ‘ ‘ Chris- tian Commonwealth,” must countermand ‘ ‘ Everyman,” too, it seems. Truly, the dry rot is appalling. So I laid it on i ts back. Then I said : My eyes, in the beautifully translated words of the ancient Hebrews, were no longer holden. THE NEW-those were the fatal words. AGE did not follow, nor “Everyman.” That wholesome organ I beheld, with pleasure, still in my field of vision and regard. ’Tis a bit quiet, ’tis true-but it’s brave.

I acted. Seizing a pen I wrote to my pen; I wrote to my newsagent-an understanding man.

I‘ Sir,” I penned him, “ you need not continue the New Journal kindly found. One number suffices. I regret it, for the print, like ‘ Everyman’s,’ is good. This latter continue, please.” That goes. VICTORIEN. .~ ~ ~

J u s t Published. P r i c e 4 / 6 n e t .

~ T h e R e a l D e m o c r a c y

(First Essays of the Rota Club)

by J . E . F. M A N N , N . J . S I E V E R S ,

a n d R . W . T . C O X .

An a t tempt to explain and defend the principle of Property as the governing factor in the economic and 6 political structure of the State. This defence is accompanied by an examination of current theories such as Fabianism, together with a discussion of such matters of interest as the policy of the Labour Par ty and the a l l iance between Collectivist Propaganda and

Capitalistic Reform.

Longmans Green & co,,39 Paternoster Row,London,E.C.

G l a i s h e r ’ s P u b l i s h e r s ’ R e m a i n d e r s .

Supplementary List No. 394 Now Ready, including all the latest Remainder Book Purchase8 priced at great redactions from the original cost. Gratis and post free.

WILLIAM CLAISHER Ltd., 265, High Holborn, London, and at 14, George Street, Croydon, Surrey.

H E B L A C K C R U S A D E : Five Letters on the Eastern Question. By MARMADUKE PICKTHALL.( Reprinted from “The New Age.”) Price Id. ;

T

by post, Idd. T H E N E W A G E P R E S S , L t d . ,

78. CURSITOR STREET, E.C.

624 ~~