1
10
8
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/c826dd9704e32dba2a627f80d8f81cfa.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=BQxth2myhq-qq%7EfzNrpudJ0iCzYgllTzRbTMhfkp1aqM9yJiAXkBNGWjpmTYaciSWm%7Ee604TDl0l0ifr70cGWX0MC1zlN%7EC6BFjW40yhbU%7E02NvC8rSBIg07ND-Aj5pp6Zh417%7EAb7SZutAILxqBG6cegbmjze2AwUUj7GdpgaF2-Wa0qtKhZ7tGxFgRLeCZFQCTMvXugghT8A03tan4eqwJ05CuA9lPAim9mJow8mBONVRRA3ZzG4myuLc448wiRl7l1KI7dcLsP%7EbvI984HAruXyqKsPSz1Z3Q7pPffXyDHgPgbpWux%7ERS%7Ee3u0II28a01twxYllNzOicQr360wg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f8af8bca94907db5b6aad682468182e6
PDF Text
Text
VERSUS
REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.
Translated FROM THE ORIGINAL SWISS pamphlets bÿ
EUGENE OSWALD.
t
CHERRY & FLETCHER, 6, WARDROBE PLACÉ,
DOCTORS’ GOMMONS, E.C.
1869.
*
��PREFACE.
It is with the permission of one of the originators of this project,
Karl Biirkli of Zurich, that I take the liberty of laying this matter
before the English public. It is a subject well worthy of attention,
as it has both historical precedence and the advantage of being now
practically in existence in several cantons of Switzerland, and open
to the inspection of the curious, who may desire to investigate more
closely its rejuvenescence, and to those who may doubt the merits of
its real practical working. I therefore, without further comment,
place it before the English public.
W. F. COWELL STEPNEY.
The translator wishes to add that, while fully aware of the im
portance of the matter stated in these pages, and thinking it desirable
that they should become subject for inquiry and discussion, he does
not undertake a joint responsibility for all the views expressed.
E. 0.
�.
■
,
• ■■
<:•;
ni
I
ñ
' r<>i
lijlH
jíi • !tx' ni V
H
ti
• i ■ .q
: triai) >rh ì»> n »iî-> q ni ■• J ni
•;
:’t ut hn»
r.til 1
JiiQütiv/
:■
¡í-íu»'
* ‘ll7
,
:
rin.'.
;';:rq ii«:!
!
>'.
,r
.oiMlf'J
,>;í¡i4’!nW I
Siti
II'
. ■
il •í’.ii'.i ,
j j;-i h a) /« :/f
■ i>û '
f '•<)
, .
oítfínt?. >b li .
, bbß .(ijíhi'ñ •íídi.b ú 'J viiT
■
,
«prit i<i f■ >J • î < i W "i 'o oanshoq
ml
asK’b ad ,11
.W«e iq ■’
,o .a
n '■ n i.
iviio'j J blnoiii v-ni) iß-‘J
ß ‘.játjtüiillif J'"'
�DIRECT LEGISLATION BY THE PEOPLE,
VERSUS
REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.
The experience of the last twenty years has entirely cured the
working classes of Europe of the idea that Imperial Democracy
and Imperial Socialism, that is, the dictatorship of a single person,
are capable or even willing to do anything for the social education
of the working masses. There have been merely apparent reforms,
dust thrown in the eyes of the people, while in reality the workman
is more than ever a victim of taxation and food for powder. Since
the coup d’etat of Bonaparte, the belief has, with great astuteness,
been spread among the working classes that political or state
reforms had nothing to do with social reforms, and that therefore
the working man should not occupy his attention with politics, but
solely with the improvement of his social position. The ruling
classes know only too well by experience what a great advantage
they derive from political forms favourable to themselves, and that
so long as the working population allows itself to be led without
volition in political matters, and has no direct influence upon legis
lation, it will not devise a form of government favourable to the
interests of labour. Socialism, even of the most radical kind, is a
mere bugbear, without any danger, because the political fulcrum is
wanting to its social lever, wherewith it may lift from off its hinges
the old form of society, with its poverty of the masses and its in
dividual wealth. Social reform is condemned to remain in a state
of theory until the right means are found to put it into practice,
and these means can be no other than, above all, to bring about
a governmental reform of such a nature that the laws shall hence
forth be made by the voice of all the citizens, and no longer accord
ing to the wishes of the privileged few.
French workmen are thoroughly wearied of the so-called Im
perial Democracy of Napoleon, they wish for a social democratic
republic. The workmen of Northern Germany are so satiated with
the imperialism, the cavalier dictatorship of Von Schweitzer, that
�6
they turn aside with disgust from this misleader of the people, and
go over with bag and baggage to the camp of the International
Working Men’s Association, where waves the banner of the right
of self-government, of social democracy, of a Confederate Republic
of Europe, and round which the workmen of Southern Germany,
of Austria, of Italy, and of Spain, begin likewise to rally in ever
increasing numbers.
But how is this socially democratic State to be organized ? This
is the all-important question for the workman. The International
Working Men’s Union should be perfectly clear and united upon
the point as to which kind of republic it prefers, so that in the
event of the breaking out of a revolution the working classes may
everywhere know what to do.
The political movement in Switzerland during the last two
years, chiefly in the canton of Zurich, is perhaps only a symptom,
a prelude to the great and deeply penetrating movement which is
about to agitate European politics. The bourgeois republic, or
Representative Democracy, is on the point of dying out in Switzer
land, for it has been found insufficient to combat the injurious
influences of the Jesuitism, as it were, of the great capital. It has
neither the strength nor the will to solve the social question, and
Pure Democracy now steps forward, by which the people take a
direct part in the legislation, and can therefore transform it in
accordance with their social requirements.
The idea of direct legislation through the people must be largely
spread among the working multitudes of Europe, in order that at
the forthcoming crisis of monarchy it shall pass into flesh and
blood, and shall create on a large scale, throughout the whole of
Europe, political institutions of the same kind as those which
already exist in Switzerland.
Representative government is everywhere the same. The work
men of Paris remember only too well how in the days of June,
1848, those middle-class representatives endeavoured to solve the
social problem with grapeshot; and, quite recently, the miners in
Belgium have found out that their constitutionalists, too, know of
no other means than powder and shot. Nay, even in the repre
sentative democracy of Zurich, there existed for more than twenty
years severe laws against the coalition of workmen, and against
the social and democratic press. So long as the workmen allow
the laws of the State to be manufactured and forced upon them by
those who live by using up the workman, so long will the laws be
unfavourable to the toiling masses, and favourable to the masters
only. When did a monarch ever make laws in the interest of his
people, and against the interest of his dynasty? First comes
himself, his interest, his dynasty, and the welfare of the tools who
support him in working the commonwealth for his own benefit;
�7
and it is only at last, when all these worthies have had their fill,
that the much-squeezed people are thought of at all, and then too
often stones are offered to them instead of bread. There are, in
deed, so-called Christian monarchs, who, like good-natured riders,
stroke or pat the neck of the creature panting under their weight;
-but that the heavily burdened animals, ridden to soreness, would
best be helped if the master and all his train would dismount, is a
thing which never occurs to the one above until the one below
throws him off.
In the same manner an aristocracy can make excellent laws for
themselves, but not for the people. Has the aristocracy of Eng
land, perhaps the cleverest body of the kind in existence, ever done
anything in the interest of the working man?
*
No! if they have
retained their position until now, it is only because they have not
shown over-much obstinacy in strenuously opposing reforms that
had become absolutely necessary. But, again, the legislators of the
representative state, although elected by the people, are not capable
of making good laws for the working classes, but yet are able to
make excellent laws for their own class, the middle class. And
why? Because, as experience teaches us, the majority of every
representative body consists of capitalists and their creatures, and
members of the middle classes, hostile to social progress. And
even as the slaveholder is, by his very nature, incapable of making
laws in the interest of his slaves, so the representative, being a
capitalist, is incapable of ever1 framing laws in the interest of the
workman. Representative democracy, though it be, comparatively
speaking, a far better form of government than a monarchy or an
aristocracy, is therefore not that political form within which the
world of workers can attain its proper place and social questions
can be solved. It might be more so, if working men, and especi
ally the peasantry, were always to send to the national council the
most intelligent of their own class only; but, unfortunately, the
experience of every country shows that this is done only in ex
*Note by the Translator.—Common fairness seems to require some
modification of, or exception to, the negative rule which the form of the
question implies. For instance, every workman living in or near London
enjoys the privilege of proceeding in the morning and evening by rail to and
from his work at a greatly reduced rate. The legal enactment which forces
the railway companies to make this reduction was originated in the House
of Lords. Earl Derby was the mover, and after speeches by Lord Stanley of
Alderly, Ellenborough, Grey, and Shaftesbury, the clause was agreed to by
the Upper House, on April 22, 1864.— Vide Hansard, Vol. 174, pH,488. The
House of Commons, with about a hundred railway directors among its
members, had to adopt it. Nor should individual exertions of many members
of the aristocracy be forgotten, such as Lord Ashley, now Shaftesbury’s
successful efforts in the carrying of the ten hours’ bill. One need not share in
the party views of the actors to recognize such acts.
�8
ceptional cases. As a rule, the people elect only members of the
so-called higher orders, because the pernicious prejudice, an out
come of monarchical periods, leads men to believe that Intellect
alone can produce good laws, and consequently highly educated
people are all that is wanted, while, in reality, Interest is the de
terminative cause in matters of legislation. Add to this, that the
salary of a member of a legislative body, and the travelling expenses
paid to him, are systematically fixed so low that for a member of
the working classes it is even economically impossible to fulfil the
functions of a representative.
The experience of democracy further teaches us that a people
can be far more easily misled when there is a question of persons
(such as elections for national or municipal councils) than where
there is a question of things (for instance, voting on laws); and
this for the simple reason that it is immeasurably more difficult
to probe the heart and character of a person than to go to the
bottom of a thing, that is, the meaning and intention of a law;
because it is far more easy to judge whether a certain law is made
in the interest of the working classes, than whether a councillor
will always speak and vote in the interest of the people.
Thus the touchstone by which true gold is to be distinguished
from false is this. In a true, pure democracy, or popular republic,
the people do not deal with persons only (elections of councillors)
but also, and indeed above all, with things (laws.) In false repre
sentative democracy or a middle-class republic, the people are only
allowed to occupy themselves with persons (election of councillors)
who proceed to make laws, and do so according to their own
pleasure, profit, and prejudice. What the middle-class democrats
want is that they alone are to govern the people, for the benefit of
the few. What the social democrats want is that the people should
govern themselves, for the advantage of all, by taking legislation
into their own hands and attending to it themselves, instead of
allowing others to attend to it for them—that is, they want self
help to the fullest extent, and therefore in the domain of politics
as well as elsewhere.
The history of the world abundantly proves that the law is only
a written expression of the interest of the lawgiver. To express
the matter somewhat prosaically, one may say that the spirit of
the law lies in the stomach of the lawgiver; the quintessence of
laws is determined by the legislator’s money-bag. This is all the
more true when not only an individual, but a whole class is in
question; not the dominion of one man, but the dominion of a
class. Never yet has the misusing class emancipated the misused
one, or spontaneously issued laws favourable to the latter. Only
when the misused class have become masters in the state, and have
taken legislation into their own hands, have the laws been made
�9
in their interest, that is, in the general interest, and then only
could that class develope itself according to its social needs. But
what applies to the third estate, the bourgeoisie, or middle-class,
is only the more sure, when there is a question of the working
class, of the whole people. Like as the chemical germ, the inner
impelling power of a plant requires, in order to prosper, certain
physical peculiarities, that is, external circumstances, such as a
favourable soil and climate, just so do the inner—and, so to speak,
chemical—impulses of society, or social ideas, require, in order to
unfold according to their nature, and to germinate in practical
life, a peculiar physical form of political life, that is, favourable
political circumstances. And these are the social and democratic
laws which never could have been made by princes or clergy (who
already possess Heaven here below) but can be made only by the
working classes, who longingly wish for such a social transforma
tion, an existence, worthy of man, in this world. No saviour will
ever redeem the people; they must redeem themselves. Thence
proceeds the universal stirring of the nations of Europe towards
emancipation. As a plant confined in a dark vault grows towards
an air-hole, to get within reach of sunlight, so the working world
of Europe struggles to escape from the close, dreary, and dull air
of monarchy to the brightness of democracy. When once in a
state of freedom, the people will be sure to grope its way instinct
ively into social redemption, feeling as it does every day its
sufferings, which, however, are giving it the necessary impulse to
make itself acquainted with the cause of the evil, and its remedy.
In a real democracy—wherein direct legislation gives into its
hands the instrument of perpetual motion, and the path for constant
peaceful revolution lies open before it—the people will create new
forms and laws, not according to preconceived social theories, but
according to real wants, as they make themselves practically felt,
and it will make its will prevail, as in Switzerland, by a stroke of the
pen, and no longer by firearms and bloody revolutions, as in
despotic states.
The fear which has been expressed lest the ideal conquests of
mankind should, in the social-democratic State, be less attended to
and less promoted than in monarchical or representative forms of
the commonwealth, is an idle one; for history proves that the
freer a nation is the more willing it is to bring sacrifices to the
cause of human culture, because it perceives that it is not the
spirit-crushing, sterile faith, but only the spirit-raising, fertile
science that can redeem the world. Nay, direct legislation by the
people is of all political forms the one which is most favourable to
the advancement of the education of the people, for every one has
an interest in his fellow man, who has co-operated in the making
of the laws, giving his vote with conscious knowledge ; and above
�10
all the so-called well-educated folks—to whom direct legislation by
the people appears in the fancied shape of a ruin of all culture, of
a modern irruption of barbarians—will have the greatest interest
in the matter, and will readily lend a hand to giving the masses
their schooling gratuitously, and, moreover, of as good a kind as
possible, and so making the higher institutions of learning
accessible to every one that is capable. Besides, direct legislation
is in itself a mighty engine of culture, seeing that the people are
impelled, by their most immediate interests, to get information,
lest they be, after all, bamboozled and misused by the men of socalled higher culture—which really is mis-culture—and their
lawyer-like subtleties. Strangely enough these very men—the socalled well educated, who think direct legislation incapable of
fostering the ideal wealth of mankind, and who, therefore, point at
it as a retrogression—these very men, we say, cannot sufficiently
admire the ancient Greeks as the principal supporters of civiliza
tion in antiquity, and seem not to recollect that those who had
made the greatest strides among the Greeks were the Athenians,
who had direct legislation through the people, that is, through the
free citizens, and that it was just this political form which contri
buted most essentially to the development of the Attic spirit; for
with the suppression of this political form, with the dominion of
strangers, the great minds disappeared.
*
The ancient Germans,
too, had direct legislation by the people in an organization similar
to that which has been preserved through the course of many
centuries in the “ Lands-gememden ” of the Forest cantons. The
Germans did homage to the political principle that every man is to
be a legislator, a military defender of the country, and a judge.
Is it not strange that the Romans, so well versed in legislation,
in war, and in the administration of justice, could put all the
nations of the old world under the yoke except just this nation of
Germans, though politically so disunited? And why? For this
reason—that a popular legislation, a popular army, and a popular
administration of justice had become flesh and blood in them, and
had produced men, against whose unalloyed strength the omni
potence of Rome was shattered. Unfortunately in the course of
time those Germans became silly enough to prefer the Roman
Trinity (God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) to the German
Trinity (legislator, soldier, and judge in the one person); and
they will be punished with scorpions by priests and Cæsars until
they re-establish the ancient Germanic institutions : legislation
by the people, the army of the people, and the administration of
* Half suppressed sigh by the Translator.—The Athenians gave no vote
to the immense majority of their working men, who were slaves; and it was
democracy that killed Socrates, whom the aristocrats had left in peace.
�11
justice by the people. The ancient democracy which, by monarchi
cal senselessness and ecclesiastical belief, has been torn away from
the people, must, by sense and science, be re-conquered and further
developed in the spirit of our age. Every one must again become
a legislator, soldier, and judge. He must periodically and in his
own person exercise the rights and practise the duties appertain
ing to those dignities. Here no division of labour, no substitution
of another person, is possible, if we would not fall into servitude.
If the people renounces the right to decide in the last resort on
laws, if it hands over this duty to one man or to a few men, then
these will soon arrogate to themselves the privilege of making the
laws only for themselves and against the general good. If the
people abandons the defence of its rights and its country to a
number of individuals, specially trained and set apart for this pur
pose, it creates a standing army—the most terrible tool in the
hands of the governors, which is used against its right and its
freedom whenever the civilian sheep become restive under the
monarchical shears. If the people leaves the right and the duty
to pronounce guilty or not guilty to permanent officials in the
place of the judge, it runs the risk of a bureaucracy and lawyerdem
springing up and growing, which judges us according to Heaven
knows what kind of outlandish—say Roman—law, but surely not
according to that law which has its basis in the convictions of the
people as to what is right.
Little Switzerland, penned in between mighty monarchies whose
population is a hundred times larger, has, notwithstanding all per
nicious monarchical influences, notwithstanding the miasma of the
theory of right divine, still preserved to herself, during centuries,
the old Teutonic health, the ever true principles of those Germans,
before whom Rome, the enslaver of nations, trembled; at least she
has preserved them in part, and especially with respect to the
arming of the people. Because the Swiss, a recognized defender
of his country, always had arms in his home—that is, had the
armed right of voting; because the Swiss never would hear of a
standing army; therefore has his republic been preserved; therefore
could the popular spirit, whenever it was aroused, easily make a
path for itself between intervening obstacles.
At present the plan of direct legislation by the people makes
way for itself with all that weight which a modern idea can re
ceive by the historical recollection of things as they were in
Germanic antiquity and in the heroic ages of the old Confederacy,
when the people were asked, and their sanction or rejection re
quired, even in the larger cantons, with respect to such important
questions as the making of peace and war, the establishment of
the religious reformation, the imposition of taxes and the like.
Already this direct legislation has legal existence in the larger
�12
cantons of the German portion of Switzerland, in Berne, Thurgovia,
the Grisons, but above all in Zurich, in which latter canton it is
laid down in the constitution in the most complete and purest
form. Already the movement has begun, which strives to extend
even to federal legislation this direct legislation by the people, and
to do this in such a form as will admit of its exercise by the people
of even the largest states.
Already the French Constitution of 1793, which bears in its
preamble the ever memorable Declaration of the Rights of Man,
laid down the principle of direct legislation by the people, though
in a form less developed than the one in which we have it before us
now-a-days. It does so in the form of the so-called veto, a certain
number of voters having to raise an objection, previous to a general
vote being taken with respect to a proposed law. Article 53 of
the French Constitution of 1793 says:—
“The legislative body proposes laws” {propose des lois.)
Art. 58. The bill is published and sent to all the municipalities
{communes) of the republic, under the title of proposed law {loi
proposée.')
Art. 59. If, forty days having elapsed from sending out the
bill, no objections have been offered, in the half of the depart
ments plus one, by one tenth of the primary assemblies regularly
convoked, the bill has been accepted, and becomes law.
Art. 60. If such objections have been raised, the legislative
body has to convoke the primary assemblies (for the purpose of
voting on the acceptance or the rejection of the law.)
Unfortunately, this Constitution could never be practically
worked, the weight of the difficulties with which the young Re
public had to struggle, both at home and abroad, not permitting
a peaceful development. But, as in general in the life of nations
a good idea never gets lost, and no step towards improvement is
made quite in vain, these ideas of 1793 slumbered on in the depths
of the heart of the French people. And when the second Republic
arose out of the revolution of February, 1848, and the social
democrat Rittingh arisen, of Cologne, in the years 1850 and 1851,
scattered among the people the idea of Direct Legislation by the
People, an idea whose further development and realisation he has
made the aim of his life, these thoughts at once kindled, and a
mighty movement was produced in men’s minds against the re
presentative state; a movement which could not have failed to
bear good fruit, had not the beautiful blossom been nipped in the
bud by the blasting coup d'état of Bonaparte, the so-called saviour
of society. For it is the fate of Cæsarism that the grass withers
wherever its foot falls. Out of that desert of reaction the seed
was wafted to the only remaining republican oasis, the soil of
Switzerland, where in the healthy life of the people it has gradu
�13
ally struck deep roots. Now that Cajsarism is decaying, and a
new breath of spring is pervading the nations, the seed that has
been sown is shooting up everywhere from the soil, fresh and
healthy, like a real crop of thought, and the idea of Direct Legis
lation by the People, germinating so long, takes practical shape in
the form of a political institution.
Of course direct legislation cannot be exercised in larger com
monwealths in the same mode in which it was once practised in the
public square at Athens, in the oak forests of ancient Germany,
and is still carried out in those cantons of Switzerland which
possess the “landsgemeinde.” The essence, that is, the participa
tion in the making of the laws, must continue, only,,the form in
which the participation takes place must disappear, and give way
to quite a different one, because the circumstances have become
different, have become enlarged, and will no longer allow the whole
people to assemble in one spot for the purpose of consultation.
Our century, however, with its magnificent inventions, has, among
other things, prepared and rendered possible democracy on a large
scale, by nearly annihilating distance, so that an extensive body of
people are so connected by steam and telegraph as to allow the
existence and movement of any single limb to be at once felt
everywhere, and to be received into the consciousness of all the
members. Therefore the old form, though venerable on account
of its antiquity, must be given up. ■
The show of hands of the “ landsgemeinde,” that is, open voting,
must now, when every one can write, be replaced by secret voting,
(the ballot,) in the municipalities, by means of electoral urns,
which, on the day appointed for voting, stand open for every
citizen to throw in his voting paper at such time as may be con
venient to him. By this plan the influence of capital, with its
improper suggestions by employers, whereby open voting is but too
frequently impaired, is completely put an end to. The workman,
under a system of secret voting, will be able to give a much freeer
expression to his wishes than if he is subject to intimidation, which
is too frequently the case with a system of open voting, where he
has often to pay by social disadvantages (loss of work, &c.) for the
free utterance of his political convictions.
The consultatibn in the “landsgemeinde” will now, when every
one can read, be replaced by printed explanations, to be given with
the bills, by discussion in the newspapers, and by free meetings
whenever the importance of the proposed laws call for such de
liberation.
The faculty of bringing a motion before the “landsgemeinde”
in the old cantons, will, in more extensive commonwealths, be
provided for by a differently organized popular initiative (right of
the people to make proposals.) It is proposed, with this aim, that
�14
any fraction of the people, say one tenth or one twentieth, as the
Constitution may determine, should be able, by a committee to be
elected for the purpose, to formulate its desire in the shape of a
bill, and ultimately to bring it before the whole people for decision
by popular vote.
Direct legislation by the people consists then in two essential
elements: the one of impulse and initiative, the other of deter
mination and decision. Whence we obtain :—
1. The Right of the people to propose laws; also to be called
Popular Initiative.
2. The popular vote on the laws, also called Referendum.
Between these two elements the functions of a regular organic
body are exercised by the Council, which is, indeed, no longer to
be a legislative body, but merely a law-proposing one, that is,
simply, a giver of counsel, which counsel the people may adopt or
not.
The Council is thus exposed to a cross fire which is calculated
to keep it from going to sleep. If the Council propose bad laws
(if they are guilty of sins of commission) these laws will be re
jected by the popular vote, or Referendum. If the Council do not
wish to propose good laws (if they are guilty of sins of omission)
the Popular Initiative steps in, making its own proposals.
Taking as an instance the canton of Zurich, the Popular Initiative
can manifest itself in two ways:—
1. If the thirteenth part of the people—in Zurich 5,000 initiants
out of 65,000 possessors of votes—make a proposal, it must be
submitted to the vote of the whole people.
2. If a single individual makes a proposal which is approved of
by one third of the Council, such proposal must likewise be voted
upon by the people.
Thus there are, in the canton of Zurich, three parties equally
entitled to bring proposals before the people for its vote, viz.:—
1. Five thousand initiants.
2. Any individual gaining the assent of the Council of the
canton.
3. The cantonal Council itself (consisting of about 220 members.)
Only the Council is the ordinary organ; the two others are
extraordinary organs, whose activity begins only when the ordinary
one proves inert.
In order to render this matter still more plain, we here insert
those articles of the Constitution of Zurich which deal with the
Popular Initiative and the Referendum. The Constitution begins
with these words :—
“ The people of the canton of Zurich give themselves, in virtue
�15
of their sovereign right to determine their own destinies, the
following constitution;” and in Chapter iii., Legislation and Re
presentation of the People, we read as follows:—
“Art. 28.
“ The people, with the co-operation of the Cantonal Council,
exercise the powers of legislation.
“ A.—Right of the people to make proposals.
“ Art. 29.
“ The right of making proposals which those entitled to vote
possess (Initiative) comprises the demand of the passing, repeal, or
alteration of a law, or of any such resolution as is not, by the
terms of the Constitution, expressly reserved to the competency of
the Cantonal Council. Demands of this kind may be made either
in the form of simply calling attention to the matter in question,
or by offering the details of a bill; and in either case motives are
to be adduced for the alteration proposed.
“ If a single individual or a constituted authority makes such
a demand, and it is supported by one third of the members of
the Cantonal Council, the question must be laid before the
people for decision. The right of personally advocating in the
Cantonal Council the alteration proposed is granted to the indi
vidual having made the demand, or to the deputy of the constituted
authority moving in the matter, provided that twenty-five members
of the Cantonal Council support the request of this personal
advocacy of the motion.
“ If five thousand persons, having the right to vote, make a de
mand of the kind aforesaid; or if a number of municipal meetings,
in which at least five thousand persons entitled to vote have pro
nounced in favour of such a demand, the decision of the people is
to be equally taken, unless the Cantonal Council have previously
responded to the demand. Any demand of this kind, having been
handed in early enough, the matter is to be placed before the
people for their decision, at the latest, at the second subsequent
regular taking of votes.
11 The demand or bill has in every case to be submitted, before
the vote, to the Cantonal Council, for them to give an opinion in
the form of a resolution.
“ In any case in which a bill proceeding from popular initiative
is submitted to the vote, the Cantonal Council, besides giving its
opinion, may place before the people a modified bill for decision
between the two.
�16
“ B.—Popular Vote.
“Art. 30.
“Twice every year, in spring and in autumn, the vote of the
people takes place on the legislatory acts of the Cantonal Council
(Referendum). In urgent cases the Council can order an extra
ordinary taking of votes.
“ There are to be submitted to the popular vote:
“ 1. All alterations of the constitution, laws, and concordats.
“ 2. Those resolutions of the Cantonal Council which that
Council is not competent to pass definitely (vide Art. 31).
“3. Any resolutions which the Council may wish to put to the
popular vote.
“ The Cantonal Council is entitled on submitting a law of reso
lution, to order-—beside the Vote on the totality of the proposal—•
exceptionally a vote on single points of it.
“ The vote takes place by means of the ballot boxes in the
municipalities. Participation in it is a citizen’s duty, binding on all.
“ The vote can only be by affirmation or negation.
“The absolute majority of affirming or negativing votes is
*
decisive.
“ The Cantonal Council is not entitled to give provisional validity
to any laws or resolutions requiring the popular vote, previous to
such vote being taken.
“ All proposals to be submitted to the popular vote are to be
published and handed to the voters at least thirty days before the
taking of the vote.
“ C.—Cantonal Council.
“Art. 31.
“ The competency of the Cantonal Council extends to
. “1. The discussion and resolution of all questions which are
to be submitted to the popular vote.
“2..........................
“3..........................
“4. The control of the entire administration of the country, and
of the action of the courts of law.
“ 5. The final decision on new expenses, occurring but once and
for a definite purpose, such expenses not to go beyond 250,000
francs; as well as on annually recurring expenses less than the
amount of 20,000 francs.
* That is, one-half of all the votes given, plus one, in contradistinction to
a vote by a two-thirds’ majority; or to a majority which, as being com
pared with the absolute majority, is only the largest of several minorities,-“
Translator.
�17
“ 6. The fixing of the annual estimates of ways ancl means, and
of expenses, in accordance with existing laws and resolutions. . .
“ 7. The audit of public accounts..................... ”
We should not like to affirm that the above articles have in
every case hit the mark exactly, and that they could be considered
as an infallible scheme, so to speak. Variety of individual views
will here and there find shortcomings. Yet these articles, as a
first serious attempt at realizing the idea, deserve in so far every
attention, as they offer a new form of commonwealth—a form pro
ceeding from the discussions and votes of an entire people, a form
wherein the community may grow and unfold itself, without let or
hindrance, according to its progressive wants.
We are firmly convinced that direct legislation by the people,
through the institutions of the popular initiative and the popular
vote on laws, can and must be introduced into the largest states ;
and that without these political institutions the social questions
cannot be solved.
The section of Zurich therefore think themselves not only justi
fied in bringing the idea of direct legislation through the people
before the forum of the Industrial Working Men’s Association,
but they consider themselves even under an obligation to do so,
convinced as they are that this idea—like the ever memorable
Declaration of the Rights of Men—will make its way round the orb
of the earth, as being the most effective means of realizing those
social rights.
The section therefore move the following resolution :—
“ The Congress of the International Workmen’s League at
Basle, considering that the law is the written expression of the in
terest of the legislator; that, in legislating, the interest of the
community is naturally to be decisive ; that experience shows
representative bodies to represent capital rather than labour, and
laws, therefore, to be made as a rule at the expense of the working
multitudes and in favour of capital ; that only by direct participa
tion in legislation that politico-social consciousness, which is the
first condition for solving the social questions, can efficiently pene
trate the people ; resolves :
il That it be the chief aim of the working classes to strive
towards the realization of the social and democratic republic, in
which legislation is exercised directly through the people.”
Everything for the people, and everything through the people !
By order of the section of Zurich,
The Reporter,
Zurich, August, 1869.
KARL BÜRKLI.
B
�18
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION TO THE
ZURICH PEOPLE.
Fellow Citizens:—Four numerously attended popular meetings,
followed by a petition of 28,000 citizens, having, towards the
close of the year 1867, demanded the revision of the Constitution,
the same was decided upon on the twenty-sixth of January, 1868,
by the people of the canton of Zurich, by the great majority of
50,786 votes; and, at the same time, by 47,864 votes, the subject
was placed in the hands of a Constitutional Commission. After
long and thorough consultations, such as were demanded by the
great importance of the task, we now herewith lay before you the
result of our labours for acceptance or rejection. As our trans
actions from the beginning were public ; and, as they from time to
time were accompanied and supported by the active collaboration
of circles more or less extended, we can waive for the present
an explanation of particulars, and confine ourselves to giving pro
minence to the most essential points in which the project differs
from existing institutions.
Whilst, with the exception of decisions concerning constitutional
changes, the people have hitherto exercised their right of voting,
and of approbation or rejection, only upon questions of law, hence
forth all financial transactions, of more than ordinary importance,
shall appertain to the people; and, moreover, the right is to be
accorded to each citizen to introduce propositions for laws and
decrees, which, if they are supported by five thousand valid votes,
or, on the other hand, by a third of the members of the Council
of the canton, must be submitted to the decision of the people. At
the same time, the Executive Council is to proceed from the direct
choice of the people, to whom also a more direct influence is to be
conceded in church and school, by the abolition of all life appoint
ments, with all due respect to the vested rights of the actual oc
cupiers of the same.
This decided step, which leads from a representative state to a
comprehensive rule of the people, is advocated by us in the con
fidence of the matured intelligence of the people, and of the pre
dominance of the powers for good within it. And, for the same
reason, we do not hesitate to add here a series of propositions
which are demanded by the progressive ideas of our age, concern
ing humanity and human rights, viz., abolition of capital punish
ment, and of the penalty of chains, abrogation of imprisonment for
�19
debt, and of the degrading consequences of unmerited insolvency,
obligation of the State to make adequate compensation to those
innocently condemned and those illegally arrested, the lessening of
the term of minority, so as to enable persons to embark, at an
earlier age, in pecuniary transactions, extension and security of
the right of settlement, and facilitation of the right of civil
marriage.
Starting from the conviction that only by a more elevated
culture those forces can be awakened and maintained which a
people needs in order to govern itself, and to deveiope its ex
ternal and internal well-being, we have in the project laid down
conditions which aim at a seasonable extension of our common
school-system, conditions whose execution is reserved to the law,
and thus again to the examination and decision of the people.
A series of other articles of our project repose upon the endea
vour by a more just division of public burdens, according to the
measure of the actual capacity of bearing taxation, by an increase
in the means of communication, by protection to health, and by
support to be given towards the independence of the workman, to
exalt the productive powers of the country, and thereby the material
welfare of its citizens. The indirect salt tax is to be materially
lessened, and compulsory instruction in the common schools gra
tuitously imparted. The first military equipment of militia men to
be undertaken by the State. The State is to contribute in a more
comprehensive manner, and with an enhanced regard to the in
dividual wants of the municipalities, to the burdens of the poor and
to the expenses of road-making.
On the other hand, those prin
ciples of taxation of income from labour, which have been current
since the political regeneration, dating from the year 1830, are
henceforth to be extended, within equitable and suitable limits,
to incomes derived from property; and thereby, as well as by the
introduction of a moderate “ active-citizen ” tax, and a tax upon
inheritance, but particularly by a more correct assessment, which
justice demands with increasing urgency, means for the remission
of burdens and for the liquidation of the new expenditure of the
State may be gained.
A Cantonal Bank, long desired by the people, and long promised
by the leaders of former political movements, will be conducive to
the increase and consolidation of credit, whilst changes in the
manner of election and payment of notaries, in conjunction with a
contemplated re-organization of the notary system, are calculated
to facilitate and surround with suitable guarantees the transfer of
landed property.
As to the municipal government, the project aims at securing
the progress already attained by the law of the year 1866, and
with due consideration of existing relationships and modes of proB 2
�20
ceeding, handed down from of old, to open the door for further
development.
As to the administration of justice, the Constitution limits
itself—as the filling up of the outlines appears to be better left to
special laws—to the exposition of a few general propositions,
amongst which we particularly call attention to the demand that
regulations be made for a more speedy and cheap method of deal
ing with cases in both civil and criminal proceedings in courts of
law, with a view to the greatest possible security of justice being done.
Dear fellow-citizens:—We lay before you the constitutional
project as an entirety, to be decided upon by a simple vote, Yes or
No! because, by the Decree of the People, of the 26th January,
1868 we received an injunction for a total revision, and for that
reason must wish that a decision be come to upon our work as a
whole ; and further, because the taking of a vote upon each article
or upon each chapter would be connected with a chain of difficulties,
which might postpone ad infinitum the very desirable final decision ;
and again, because even if voting by portions were to take place,
yet another vote of the people would still be required to give to
the Constitution validity in its entirety.
We know, indeed, full well, that various shortcomings may be
found in the project, and that it cannot satisfy all expectations;
but we believe ourselves entitled to express the conviction that
within it are laid down the conditions for a decided progress,
such as our people themselves have demanded.
. It is for you, therefore, to decide whether our work responds to
the spirit and the will of the great popular movement, which gave
rise to it, and whether it subserves the welfare of the country.
May each one, therefore, on stepping forward to perform the
grave act of voting, as a good citizen of the republic, raise himself
above his individual interests, and dwrell on that only which tends
to the advantage of the community. And, if it should please the
people of Zurich to accept the proposed Constitution, may the
result be that each citizen, finding himself invested with more
extended rights than heretofore, shall also become conscious of
higher duties to be performed.
If our people in good faith take upon themselves these duties
and hold fast to them, then, we confidently hope, will the principle
of the rule of the people be approved and develope itself, and tend
to the furtherance of the honour, the strength, and the welfare of
our country.
In the name of the Constitutional Council,
Dr. T. SULZER, President.
L. FORRER, First Secretary.
Zurich, March 31st, I860.
�21
CONSTITUTION OF THE CONFEDERATE CANTON
OF ZURICH.
The people of the canton of Zurich give themselves, in virtue of
their sovereign right to determine their own destinies, the follow
ing constitution:—
I.—Political Principles.
Art. 1.
The political power resides in the totality of the people. It is
exercised directly by the “ active ” citizens, and indirectly by the
constituted authorities and public functionaries.
Art. 2.
All citizens are equal before the law, and enjoy the same politi
cal rights, unless in cases where this constitution itself institutes
an exception.
Art. 3.
The utterance of opinion by speech and writing, the right of
association and meeting, are guaranteed. The exercise of these
rights suffers no other limitations but those which may flow from
common rights.
In actions of libel the proof of the truth of the allegation is
allowed. If it be shown that the statements complained against as
libellous are true, and have been published or retailed with honest
motives and an honest aim, the accused is to be found not guilty.
Art. 4.
The State protects honestly acquired private rights. Expropria
tion is allowable if the public weal demands it. For such forced
cessions a just compensation is granted. Disputes concerning the
amount of compensation are judged by the courts of law.
Art. 5.
The criminal law is to be modelled according to humane prin
ciples. Capital punishment and the penalty of bearing chains are
inadmissible.
The person accused of a crime or misdemeanour, as well as the
injured party, are to be admitted to all proceedings taking place
before the judge of instruction (magistrate), with the faculty of
appointing counsel and addressing any questions to the witnesses
which may serve to clear up the subject.
�22
Art. 7.
Personal freedom is guaranteed. No one may be arrested, ex
cept in the cases foreseen by the law, and with the forms prescribed
by the law.
To such as may have been illegally arrested the State has to
make proper compensation or satisfaction.
No means of forcing a confession are allowed.
Imprisonment for debt is inadmissible.
Art. 8.
The sanctity of the private dwelling is guaranteed.
A domiciliary visit can only take place either by consent of the
resident, or by authorization through a competent functionary,
who is exactly to specify the aim and the extent of this measure.
Exceptions of this rule are permitted if there should be danger in
delay.
Art. 9.
In cases of judicial restitution of persons innocently condemned
proper satisfaction is to be made by the state.
Art. 10.
Every functionary is, according to the terms of the law, re
sponsible as well to the State and the municipalities as to private
persons for acts done in his official capacity.
Art. 11.
The term of office of the Cantonal Council, and of all adminis
trative authorities and functionaries, is fixed at three years ; that
of judicial authorities and notaries at six years.
All constituted authorities are to be renewed in their totality.
In no administrative or judicial body may there sit at the same
time father and son, father-in-law and son-in-law, two brothers,
two brothers-in-law, or the father of a husband and wife.
Art. 12.
Any functionary who is removed from his place within his term
of office, and without fault on his side, has a claim for full com
pensation ; and if such removal takes place in consequence of an
alteration in the constitution or laws, for equitable compensation.
Art. 13.
All elections by the people of cantonal, county, and district
officers are made by means of the ballot box. The municipalities
are likewise at liberty to employ this mode of election.
�23
Art. 14.
The citizens of the canton or of Switzerland may, on fulfilling
the legal conditions, settle in any municipality of the canton, and
acquire the right of local citizenship. Those having settled in any
locality may not be subjected to other or higher local'taxes than
the local citizens (liverymen), with the sole exception of a mode
rate fee for the permission of settlement. A right (in the munici
palities) to refuse or withdraw the right of settlement, where the
local documents have been handed in, may, on principle, only be
derived from the proof of a manner of life in the person claiming
or having obtained settlement dangerous to public safety or
morality.
Art. 15.
Marriage has equal civic validity whether it be concluded by
the civic ceremony or by the ecclesiastical one.
The functions in this respect of the civil officers as well as of
the clergy of the birthplace and domicile of the bride and bride
groom are gratuitous.
Art. 16.
The faculty of entering on valid pecuniary transactions, the
right of voting, and the capacity of being elected for all offices,
begin simultaneously with the close of the twentieth year of life.
Art. 17.
Swiss citizens, having settled in the canton, are the equals of
the citizens of the canton in the exercise of all political rights.
Art. 18.
Suspension of the right of active citizenship, and of the capacity
of being elected, takes place—
1. With the loss of the faculty of entering on valid commercial
*
transactions.
2. On account of degrading crimes or misdemeanours, by judg
ment pronounced by a court of law.
3. In consequence of bankruptcy, whether the proceedings have
been carried to an end, or the bankruptcy has been annulled again,
but only in case of fault attaching to the bankrupt, and by a judi
cial decision. The suspension to continue from one year to ten.
4. On account of continued receipt of public alms, and only
whilst such period of assistance lasts.
* By declaration of lunacy, &c.
�24
II.—Economical Principles.
Art. 19.
All owing the duty of paying taxes have to contribute to the
burdens of administering the state and the municipalities in the
measure of the resources at their command.
The income tax and the property tax are to be ordered by classes,
according to the principle of a moderate and just progression.
Small fortunes of persons incapable of work, as well as of every
income that amount which is absolutely required for existence, are
free of tax.
The progressive ratio is not to surpass, as to income tax, the
fifth part of the simple ratio; and, as to property tax, the double
of the simple ratio.
As to municipal taxation (rates), a progressive tax on property
does not take place, but only a proportional one can be claimed.
The duty of contributing to rates for the expenses of the munici
pality is to be regulated by the state.
The right of voting implies the duty of making a moderate con
tribution to the public burdens, to be distributed equally on all.
The State raises a tax on inheritance, to be progressive accord
ing to the distance of the degree of relationship of inheritors, and
according to the amount of the sum inherited. The law fixes
those degrees of relationship and those minimum sums which are
to be exempted from this tax.
Legislation will make those regulations which may appear appro
priate to an exact ascertaining of the power of bearing taxation.
Tax privileges in favour of single private individuals or indus
trial companies are inadmissible.
No new taxes on the consumption of indispensable articles of
food can be introduced. The tax on salt is at once to be diminished.
Art. 20.
Cantonal and county officers, as well as notaries, receive, as far
as possible, fixed appointments in the proportion to the amount of
business to be transacted by them. Any fees and fines are, as a
rule, to go to the cantonal treasury.
Art. 21.
The exercise of every profession in art and science, commerce,
and industry, is free, providing however such legal and police
regulation as the common interest may require.
Art. 22.
The care of the poor belongs to the Municipalities. The State
affords appropriate contributions towards rendering the burden of
providing for the poor more easy to those localities which are in
�25
need of it. The State supports the efforts of municipalities and
societies towards the decrease of poverty, especially towards the
education of poor children, improvement in the care of the sick,
and reformation of neglected persons.
Art. 23.
The State furthers and facilitates the development of co-operation
resting on self-help. It institutes by legislation such conditions
as may be necessary for the protection of workmen.
Art. 24.
The State, with a view to the increase of a general system of
credit, establishes, as soon as possible, a credit bank.
Art. 25.
The highways, roads, and streets are to be classified according
to the importance of the traffic carried on in each.
The burden of making them and keeping them in repair falls to
the State and to the political communes (or municipalities).
*
The assistance of the State extends to all classes of road, except
ing bye-streets and lanes.
Art. 26.
The railways, which, on account of their importance in the
economy of the nation, enjoy extraordinary privileges granted by
the State, are to be administered under its control, so as to fulfil
their destined purpose.
Those portions of the territory of the canton which, in regard to
population and traffic, are on the same line with such as have by
means of State help been endowed with railways, have likewise a
claim to assistance from the State.
Art. 27.
The State undertakes the first military outfit of militia-men. As
to the replacement- of articles of military furniture which have been
used up or lost a law will fix details.
III.—Legislation and Representation of the People.
Art. 28.
The people, with the co-operation of the Cantonal Council,
exercise the powers of legislation.
A.—Right of the people to make proposals.
Art. 29.
The right of making proposals which those entitled to vote
Query : In what proportion?—Translator. .
�26
possess (Initiative) comprises the demand of the passing, repeal, or
alteration of a law, or of any such resolution as is not, by the
terms of the Constitution, expressly reserved to the competency of
the Cantonal Council. Demands of this kind may be made either
in the form of simply calling attention to the matter in question,
or by offering the details of a bill; and in either case motives are
to be adduced for the alteration proposed.
If a single individual or a constituted authority makes such
a demand, and it is supported by one third of the members of
the Cantonal Council, the question must be laid before the
people for decision. The right of personally advocating in the
Cantonal Council the alteration proposed is granted to the indi
vidual having made the demand, or to the deputy of the constituted
authority moving in the matter, provided that twenty-five members
of the Cantonal Council support the request of this personal
advocacy of the motion.
If five thousand persons, having the right to vote, make a de
mand of the kind aforesaid; or if a number of municipal meetings,
in which at least five thousand persons entitled to vote have pro
nounced in favour of such a demand, the decision of the people is
to be equally taken, unless the Cantonal Council have previously
responded to the demand. Any demand of this kind, having been
handed in early enough, the matter is to be placed before the
people for their decision, at the latest, at the second subsequent
regular taking of votes.
The demand or bill has in every case to be submitted, before
the vote, to the Cantonal Council, for them to give an opinion in
the form of a resolution.
In any case in which a bill proceeding from popular initiative
is submitted to the vote, the Cantonal Council, besides giving its
opinion, may place before the people a modified bill for decision
between the two.
B.—Popular Vote.
Art. 30.
Twice every year, in spring and in autumn, the vote of the
people takes place on the legislatory acts of the Cantonal Council
(Referendum). In urgent cases the Council can order an extra
ordinary taking of votes.
There are to be submitted to the popular vote:
1. All alterations of the constitution, laws, and concordats.
2. Those resolutions of the Cantonal Council which that
Council is not competent to pass definitely (vide Art. 31).
3. Any resolutions which the Council may wish to put to the
popular vote.
The Cantonal Council is entitled on submitting a law or reso
�27
lution, to order—beside the vote on the totality of the propoals—
exceptionally a vote on single points of it.
The vote takes place by means of the ballot boxes in the
municipalities. Participation in it is a citizen’s duty, binding on all.
The vote can only be by affirmation or negation.
The absolute majority of affirming or negativing votes is
*
decisive.
The Cantonal Council is not entitled to give provisional validity
to any laws or resolutions requiring the popular vote, previous to
such vote being taken.
All proposals to be submitted to the popular vote are to be
published and handed to the voters at least thirty days before the
taking of the vote.
C.—Cantonal Conncil.
Art. 31.
The competency of the Cantonal Council extends to :—
1. The discussion and resolution of all questions which are
to be submitted to the popular vote.
2. The request that the Federal Council be convoked (vide Art.
75, § 2, of the Federal Constitution).
3. The disposal of the military forces of the canton, as far as
they are not required by the Confederacy.
4. The control of the entire administration of the country, and
of the action of the courts of law, as well as the decision in any
conflicts between the executive and judicial powers. For the pur
pose of impeaching members of the Government Council and of the
Supreme Law Court the Cantonal Council may appoint a special
procurator (a public prosecutor).
5. The final decision on new expenses, occurring but once and
for a definite purpose, such expenses not to exceed 250,000 francs;
as well as on annually recurring expenses up to the amount of
20,000 francs.
6. The fixing of the annual estimates of ways and means, and of
expenses in accordance with existing laws and resolutions, reserving
however the above restrictions under No. 5; and the granting at
the same time of the amount of taxes required.
7. The audit of the public accounts, and of the accounts of
separate funds, the care for undiminished preservation of the public
domains, and for appropriate . (f) . and employment of the
income from them.
* That is, one-half of all the votes given, plus one, in contradistinction to
a vote by a two-thirds’ majority; or to a majority which, as being com
pared with the absolute majority, is only the largest of several minorities.—
Translator.
f Unintelligible misprint in the original.—Translator.
�28
8. The exercise of the right of mercy.
9. The order of such elections as are by legislation placed within
its competency.
10. The election of its officers.
Art. 32.
The Cantonal Council is elected in electoral districts whose num
ber and extent the law orders, in such wise that each district re
ceives at least two members.
The number of 1,200 souls gives a district a claim for the election of a member of the Cantonal Council; a fraction of above 600
souls is reckoned as a full number. As' to fixing the number of
the populations the Confederate census is decisive.
In electing a Cantonal Councillor not more than three successive
electoral acts are to take place; in the first two, absolute majority
decides, in the third, relative majority.
*
Art. 33.
The members of the Government Council cannot be members of
the Cantonal Council; yet in it they have a consulting voice, and
the right of making motions and presenting reports.
If any members of the Supreme Law Court are elected as mem
bers of the Cantonal Council they have a merely consulting voice
on the presentation of the reports from their court.
The Cantonal Council can call into its meetings experts with
consulting voice.
Art. 34.
The meetings of the Cantonal Council take place at Zurich, and
are, as a rule, public. Its members receive during the session a
moderate daily pay, and once in the session an appropriate com
pensation for travelling.
D-—Cantonal Foief and Election of Representatives of the Canton.
Art. 35.
The result of the popular vote in the canton, with reference to
the acceptance or non-acceptance of any alteration in the Federal
* Vide note to page 27. This is the mode of proceeding :—If the result
of the election shows a candidate not to have a number of votes equal to
one-half of the votes given, plus one, then the election is null, and a new one
has to take place, which will be decided on the same principle. If its appli
cation has twice failed, then, in a third election, a relative minority is, by
force of circumstances, considered sufficient; that is, the person having the
highest number of votes is considered elected, though that number may be
below the half of the number of voters — Translator.
f In the Assembly of the Swiss Confederation.—Translator.
'
�29
Constitution (Art. 114 of the latter) is at the same time to be con
sidered as the cantonal vote. The right of proposal (initiative)
granted by Art. 81 of the Federal Constitution to the ' different
cantons, can be exercised as well by the Cantonal Council as by the
mode of a decision of the people.
Art. 36.
The two members of the Swiss Cantonal Council are elected by
*
the whole electoral body of the canton, forming for this purpose
one electoral district, at the same time with the members of the
National Council,! and for three years.
IV.—Executive Power and Administration.
A.—Government Council.
Art. 37.
The executive and administrative authority of the canton, the
Council of Government, consists of seven members, who are elected
by the people, the whole canton being formed into one electoral
district^ at the same time with the Cantonal Council.
Art. 38.
The Government Council elect their President and VicePresident for a term of one year.
Art. 39.
The office of a member of the Government Council is incom
patible with any other appointment bearing a fixed salary. In
order to fill the office of a director or member of an administrative
council of a joint-stock company a member of the Government
Council requires the permission of the Cantonal Council.
Not more than two of the members of the Government Council
may.belong to either of the Federal Councils.
Art. 40.
Within the competency and the duties of the Government
Council are essentially:
1. The right of proposing to the Cantonal Council laws and
resolutions.
* This is one of the Federal authorities sitting at Berne, not to be con
founded with the Zurich Cantonal Council, and may be compared with the
American Senate.
f Another of the Federal authorities, to be compared with the American
House of Representatives.—Translator.
I That is, every elector voting for seven candidates.—Translator.
�30
2. The proper publication of all proposals to be submitted to the
popular vote, and of all proposals after their being passed into
laws, as well as the care for the execution of the laws, and of the
resolutions of the people and the Cantonal Council.
3. The intercourse with the Confederation and with the cantons
of Switzerland.
4. The control.of matters of education, of ecclesiastical affairs,
and of the administration of the poor law, as well as of all sub
ordinate authorities and functionaries.
5. The. judgment, in the last instance, of all disputes in ad
ministrative questions.
6. The drawing up. of the estimates of ways and means, and of
expenses of the public exchequer, and of the separate funds; the
presentation of the annual accounts, as well as of a report, to the
Cantonal Council, of the entire activity of the Government
Council.
7. The organization of the government offices, and the appoint
ment of all those functionaries and officers whose election has not
by constitution or law been entrusted to some other public appoint
ing body.
Art. 41.
The Government Council elects, for the term of office fixed for
administrative officers, the public prosecutor, on whom the duty is
incumbent of prosecuting, in the name of the State, crimes and
punishable offences.
Art. 42.
The functions and business of the Government Council are, for
the purpose of furthering their despatch, divided into Directions,
*
each of which is presided over by a member of the Government
Council. Final decisions proceed from the whole Council ; how
ever, within certain fixed limits, a final competency may be assigned
by law to the different Directions.
The Government Council distributes amongst its members the
Directions in such a manner that no member shall fill the office of
the same Direction during more than two continuous periods of
office.
Standing commissions, appointed by the Government Council,
may be added to the single Directions if the nature of their functions
require it. In all other respects the law fixes the organization of
the Directions and offices as well as the number and salaries of
officers.
Departments.
�31
B.—Administration of Districts.
Art. 43.
The canton is divided into Districts; any alterations in the
existing distribution of these has to be made by legislation.
Art. 44.
The administration of the District is carried out by a District
Council, consisting of a Lieutenant-Governor (“ Statthalter ”) as
President, and two District Councillors, to whom are to be added
two Deputy-Councillors.
Where local wants require it the number of District Councillors
may be augmented. Equally, wherever the extent of a LieutenantGovernor’s business’demauds it, a part of it may be handed over to
an Adjunct, to be transacted by him independently.
The election of these officers belongs to the inhabitants of the
district entitled, by Art. 16 to 18, to vote.
Art. 45.
The duty of the District Council is especially:
The control of the administration of the communes and their
domains, as well as of matters relating to minors and their
guardians; in certain cases, to be determined by law, the decision
in the second instance in affairs of guardianship and of the assist
ance to the poor; finally, the decision in the first instance in dis
putes referring to administrative matters.
On the Lieutenant-Governor especially is incumbent the execu
tion of the order of the Government douncil, as well as the
execution of such functions as are laid on him by the criminal law
and the police law, and the control of roads and streets.
Art. 46.
Any position in the district administration is incompatible with
that of a common councillor or clerk to a Common Council.
C.—Communes.
Art. 47.
Communes are ordinarily divided into ecclesiastical communes
(parishes), educational communes, and political communes (muni
cipalities).
The parish forms, as a rule, at the same time the educational
district.
The formation of new communes, and the union or dissolution of
existing ones, belong to legislation.
For special and local aims other associations may take placewithin the communes, especially the formation of civil communes.
�32
Art. 48.
The communes are entitled to regulate their affairs independently
within the limits of the constitution and the laws. Decrees of a
commune, barring their being attacked on grounds of informalities,
can only be called in question if they evidently transgress the
proper sphere of the commune, and at the same time involve the
imposition of an appreciable burden on those obliged to pay rates,
or if they improperly offend against considerations of equity.
Art. 49.
The administrative organs of the ecclesiastical communes
(parishes) and school districts, or educational communes, are:—
The assembly of the ecclesiastical commune (parish meeting ; )
The assembly of the school district and educational commune ;
The Church Council ;
The School Council.
The administrative organs of the political commune (municipal
ity) are :—
The assembly of the political commune;
The Common Council ;
Art. 50.
In all assemblies of the commune, the citizens of the commune,
having a vote according to Art. 16—18, and the cantonal and
federal citizens, established in the commune, have the right of
voting.
In questions of the administration of relief to the poor, of con
ferring communal citizenship, as well as in questions of the ad
ministration of purely communal separate funds and communes,
only communal citizens, residing in the canton, though within or
without the commune, are entitled to vote.
In the ecclesiastical communes (parishes or general vestries) on
the occasion of discussions on ecclesiastical matters, and of the
election of ecclesiastics, of members of the Church Councils, and
of church employés, only those of the citizens, and of those estab
lished in the commune who belong to the denomination in question,
have the right of voting.
Art. 51.
To the general assembly of the commune belong especially: —
The control of such portions of the communal administration as
may be assigned to it, the fixing of the annual estimates, the audit
of the annual accounts, the granting of rates, the consent to such
expenses, as may surpass an amount to be fixed by it, as well as
the election of its council, whose composition with respect to
citizens proper, and to those having a settlement, the law will
determine.
�33
Of the resort of the Common Council are especially : —
1. The preliminary discussion of all affairs which have to be
brought before the assembly of the commune.
2. The execution of the resolutions of the commune.
3. The administration of the domain of the community, with
reference, however, to Art. 55, § 2.
Art. 52.
The general assembly of the ecclesiastical commune, and the
Church Council, have to attend to the ecclesiastical affairs of the
commune; and, as a rule, also to the administration of relief to the
poor. The communes are free to elect a special authority for the
latter purpose.
Art. 53.
To the general assembly of the educational commune, and to the
Council of Education, belongs the care for the general national
schools.
All other branches of the administration of communal affairs,
with the reservation, however, indicated in Art. 47, § 4, are
handed over to the political communes and their organs. How
ever, where special circumstances make it appear desirable, a
union of several political communes may be formed, in order to
carry out in common any special branches of municipal adminis
tration, and appoint special organs for that purpose.
The celebration of civil marriage belongs to the Municipal
Council, or to a committee of the same.
Art. 54.
The care for minors, and the duty of assistance in case of im
poverishment, belong as a rule to the commune where the persons
in question are born. (Comp. Art. 22.) However, the legislature
may transfer, wholly or partially, these duties, and the rights con
nected with them, to the commune of residence.
Art. 55.
The communal domains, excepting the citizens’ purely separate
lands and commons, are in the first instance destined to satisfy
the public requirements of the communes.
The municipalities are left free to entrust to the communal
councils the administration of all communal property.
V.—Administration of Justice.
Art. 56.
A judgment given by competent authority cannot be set aside
c
�34
or modified either by the legislative or by the administrative power.
The right of mercy, however, is reserved to the Cantonal Council.
Art. 57.
Crimes and political offences, including offences of the press, in
which the defendant demands it, are tried before juries.
The law may also appoint trial by jury for other portions of the
law, both civil and criminal.
Art. 58.
The law determines the number, organization, competency, and
proceeding of the courts of law.
Courts of arbitration by mutual agreement are admissible.
Art. 59.
The mode of proceeding is to be regulated with a view to the
greatest possible security of right, as well as to speedy and cheap
dealing with the cases. For disputes concerning small amounts a
summary proceeding will be introduced.
Art. 60.
The officers entrusted with notarial business are elected from
among the examined candidates by the inhabitants of the notarial
circle entitled to vote according to Art. 16-18.
Art. 61.
Execution for debt is entrusted to an officer of the municipality.
VI.—Education and Ecclesiastical Affairs.
Art. 62.
The furtherance of the general education of the people, and of
the republican education of citizens, is the care of the State.
In order to increase the professional and industrial worth of all
classes of the people the national schools are to be extended so as to
embrace a more advanced period of youth. The higher establish
ments of learning are to be harmonized with the wants of the
present age, without doing injury to their scientific character, and
are to be placed in organic connection with the national schools.
Primary instruction is obligatory and gratuitous. The state
undertakes, with the participation of the communes, to provide the
means required.
The teachers of primary schools are to be thoroughly trained
with respect to knowledge and management. They are likewise to
be especially fitted for managing adult schools.
The communes control, through the local educational authorities,
�35
the management of the schools, and the performance of their duties
by the teachers. For every district, besides, a special educational
authority, or district school council, is to be appointed.
The organization of an education council—to be attached to the
direction of education—and of a school synod, remains reserved for
legislation.
Art. 63.
The freedom of belief, of worship, and of teaching is guaranteed.
Civic rights and duties are independent of religious confessions.
Every exercise of force against communities, associations, and
individuals is excluded.
The national evangelical church and the other ecclesiastical
*
corporations regulate their affairs independently, under the supreme
control of the State. The organization of the former, to the ex
clusion of all violence done to consciences, is fixed by the law.
The State undertakes, in general, the contributions it has hitherto
furnished for ecclesiastical wants.
Art. 64.
The ecclesiastical communes elect their clergy, and the educa
tional communes the teachers of their schools, from amongst those
capable of being elected.
The State remunerates the clergy, and—with the participation of
the communes—the teachers, in the sense of the greatest possible
equality and of a rise in the stipends appropriate to the require
ments of the times.
The teachers of the national schools, and the clergy of the eccle
siastical corporations assisted by the State, are subjected to a con
firmatory election every six years. If, on taking the vote, the
absolute majority of the members of the commune having the right
to vote declines to confirm the appointment, the place must be filled
up anew.
Teachers and ecclesiastics at the present moment holding posi
tions are to be considered as elected for a new term of office on the
acceptance of this Constitution; and in the case of their not being
re-elected have a claim to compensation according to their years of
office and to their services rendered.
This rule applies also to the clergy of the (Roman) Catholic
parishes.
VII.—Revision of Constitution.
Art. 65.
The revision of the constitution in its totality, or in single parts,
may take place at any time by the mode of legislation.
* Protestant.—Translator.
�36
In case the revision of the totality of the constitution be resolved
by the action of popular Initiative, a new election of the Cantonal
Council will take place, which will have to take in hand the
revision.
Bills referring to the revision are subject to a double discussion
in the Cantonal Council, and the second discussion is not to take
place less than two months after the date of the first.
In the name of the Committee of Constitution,
Dr. J. SULZER, President.
L. FORRER, First Secretary.
Zurich, March 31st, 1869.
TRANSITORY ENACTMENTS.
1. Articles 11, 15, 19—21, 23, 59-62, and 64 of the Constitu
tion will be applied only after the passing of the laws necessary for
their execution.
2. Article 14, in so far as it prescribes the abolition of the tax
on settlement, is applicable from the beginning of next year.
3. With regard to Article 18, § 3, it is resolved that the re
habilitation of such citizens as have, previous to the acceptance of
this constitution, lost their active citizenship in consequence of
bankruptcy, shall take place, ipso facto, after the lapse of ten years,
to be reckoned from the day of the declaration of bankruptcy,
unless such rehabilitation have, before the expiration of such
term, been declared by a judgment of court.
4. Articles 1-10, 12-14, 16-18, 22, 26, 28-58, 63, and 65, are
to be applied even before their principles are further developed by
future legislation. Consequently, all existing regulations contained
in laws and ordinances, and contradictory to those articles, are
herewith abolished.
5. In case of the acceptance of this constitution, the election of
the new Cantonal Council, as well as of the Government Council
and the two members of the Swiss Council of Cantons, will take
place on May 9th, according to the mode prescribed by the con
stitution. The Cantonal Council will meet on the second Monday
after the accomplishment of the third election, and at the same
moment the charge given to the Committee of Constitution is to
be considered at an end.
After having constituted itself and taken the oath, the Cantonal
Council proceeds to swearing in the Government Council, and then
issues, before any other business, a provisional set of standing orders.
Cherry & Fletcher, Printers, 6, Wardrobe Place, Doctors' Commons, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Direct legislation by the people versus representative government
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Burkli, Karl
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 36 p. ; 22 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Cherry & Fletcher
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1869
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5235
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Oswald, Eugene (tr)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Government
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Direct legislation by the people versus representative government), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Democracy
Political reform
Referendum
Representative Government and Representation
Sacerdotalism
Social Reform
Working Classes
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/4ff0e60aa3ed06141f0b1963d6ee71ea.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=plFUYmpnkP--JMjlgm5ILoQq9BOX1nSfkgGg2fbIySTPx%7EqTgdws6NRl0brpvjUuD6TXbFbQBrvoNnYop7Py0D6xsDLOBAu2AYtZSYR1qs9JnGUPknJgBnsTOiTOPru-QDODz4KFWLf1tWllE0b6e8QKTQYoQlBePYC1fttIwjQhIegWjxlRBAnI3NTVNA3jwhv7se04CwyWNwK1KWAff7tLEk13npuVZ1AR-e3hSSc4%7EFoM6rcMx22gP9dFcJ0MmeKl%7EYiNqg-r-hPyzChC3muVAxwjmraRojN6x4efL7Zr-XXnukP%7Eo%7EvZs9ZCc60zvBn8tXHGc1UDQZse%7Et1hnA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0fdcce0891f3525bb3f522965cc95358
PDF Text
Text
cm
RECOLLECTIONS
OF
DAWSON
GEORGE
AND
HIS LECTURES IN MANCHESTER
in
1846-7.
BY
ALEXANDER IRELAND.
mgPRINTED, WITH ADDITIONS, FROM THE “ M.
��RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON
AND
HIS LECTURES IN MANCHESTER IN 1846-7.
BY ALEXANDER IRELAND.
AVING been requested by Mrs. Dawson, not long
after her husband’s death in 1876, to contribute
some recollections of him, in his earlier years, to a memoir
then about to be undertaken by his intimate friend, Mr.
Timmins, I willingly put together the following pages.
For many years I had the privilege of knowing him in
timately, and of being thrown into the closest relations with
him; so that a warm friendship resulted,—a friendship which
remained unbroken for thirty years, and was only severed
by his untimely death. The memoir has not yet appeared,
having been delayed by unforeseen circumstances ; but it is
now, I am told, in a forward state for publication. I have lately
had an opportunity of revising and considerably extending
what I wrote in 1877, and of adding a few sentences which
I would have hesitated to print while Mrs. Dawson was
living. From this reticence I am absolved by her death,
which took place about two years after that of her husband.
She left, with those who knew her, rich remembrances of a
tender and gentle, yet firm spirit; of warm sympathies, and
H
�4
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
the performance of active and never-ceasing charities. In
her a nobility of nature was joined with high intellectual
gifts, which made her conspicuous amongst women, and
attracted towards her the admiration and regard of the best
persons who came within the sphere of her influence.
In the last week of 1845, while on a Christmas visit to rela
tions in Birmingham, I went to hear George Dawson preach
in a dissenting chapel, of which he was then the minister.
I now remember little of the subject of his discourse, but
I was struck by the simple earnestness of his manner, and
the directness with which he went straight to the heart
of the subject he had in hand. But what surprised me
most was the quaint, vigorous, and singularly appropriate
language in which he conveyed his thoughts to his hearers.
It was Saxon, terse and sinewy; and there was a fluency
and ease and perfect self-possession in his delivery which
surpassed anything I had ever met with before. He
had no notes or memoranda before him, and throughout his
whole discourse there was not a word which was not in its
right place. The attention of his audience was riveted
from beginning to end, and what he said evidently produced
a powerful effect on their minds. After the service, I was
introduced to him, and invited to spend a few hours in his
company, in the house of a common friend. Having heard
that he had been delivering lectures on social, historical,
and literary topics in Birmingham and some of the neigh
bouring towns, I asked him if he would accept an invitation
to lecture to the members of the Manchester Athenaeum, if
I should be able to offer him one; and to this he assented.
I was then one of the Directors of that Institution, and at
the next meeting of the Board I proposed that he should be
engaged to deliver a course of lectures. This was agreed
to, and the selection of the subject, and the other necessary
arrangements, were left in my hands. He then came to
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
5
Manchester to confer with me on the subject to be lectured
upon. Many topics were discussed—literary, social, political,
and historical—and at last it was decided that “ The Genius
and Writings of Thomas Carlyle” would be the most fitting
topic for the proposed course.
The first lecture was delivered on Tuesday evening, 13th
January, 1846, and was mainly of an introductory character.
It was listened to throughout with rapt attention. His
thorough appreciation of the spirit, and keen insight into the
tendencies and bearings of Carlyle’s philosophy, his remark
able power of summing up its cardinal features, and of
applying it to the practical purposes of life, made him
just such an interpreter as the apostle of “ The Gospel
of Work ” himself might have desired. It abounded with
homely illustrations and frequent appeals to common
sense; and these were combined with a most effective
elocution, and a singular raciness of language. Absence
of affectation, and a directness and simplicity of manner
pervaded the discourse. It was altogether one of the
most interesting extemporaneous addresses I ever heard—
not so much for its eloquence, though replete with that
quality, of a glowing yet subdued character ; nor for
its illustrations and imagery, which were numerous, varied,
and striking ; but for its deep thought, wide and compre
hensive views, and earnest sincerity, its elevated tone and
disregard of petty conventionalities, its noble estimate of
man’s nature and worth, and solemn regard for the great
verities of life. His fearless outspokenness, even when his
auditors could not wholly assent to his propositions (often
startling enough), gave a freshness and charm to his address
not often enjoyed in a lecture-room. And this was greatly
increased by the vigorous seventeenth-century diction that
flowed with such marvellous ease from his lips. It was not a
mere lecture on Carlyle—a reading of selected passages with
�6
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
comments thereon, but an embodiment of his spirit in a
simpler form, and the application of his sentiments to the ele
ments of our daily experience. It was a comprehensive sur
vey of the spirit of the eighteenth century, and of that which
dawned on the nineteenth; and comprised a vigorous exami
nation of the faults and merits of the literature and morality
of the period ; as well as an inquiry into the circumstances
and the men that have effected a change in that spirit. He
boldly swept away much of the meaningless talk about
Carlyle’s style; and glanced at what he had done to make
us acquainted with the greatest minds of Germany. In the
course of his lecture, many prevailing fallacies, prejudices,
and weaknesses were commented on and exposed with
unsparing keenness—many popular idols dethroned. The
key-note throughout was of the highest.
His second lecture embraced an analysis of Sartor
Resartns—that inimitable “mosaic” of meditations, tender
recollections and confessions, passionate invectives, and
romantic episodes—every page stamped with genius of the
highest order, and from which has flowed all that its author
afterwards wrote on life, duty, society, growth, work, culture,
and the great and inscrutable problem of Being. The work
must be regarded as an exposition of Carlyle’s philosophy, a
grand prose-poem, a veiled autobiographical account of the
changes of thought and opinion through which he had
passed—changes through which every thoughtful man must
pass on his way to settled convictions on the great questions
of Life, Duty, and God.
The third lecture was devoted to Heroes and Hero Worship,
Chartism, and Past and Present. With regard to the first
of these productions, he said its chief object was to show
that all long-lived systems of religion and philosophy must
possess some portion of truth; that shams never live
long; and that truth-speaking and truth-acting are ever
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
1
accompanied by a certain kingly energy, as in the case
of Mahomet and Cromwell; the latter of whom, after
being gibbeted for two centuries, was now beginning to
be appreciated. The great aim of Chartism -was, to bring
prominently forward a subject which had been drowned
amid the war-voices of party—“ The condition of England
question.” It reproved the miserable policy of those Govern
ments, which treat rebellion as the disease, instead of the
symptom. Another feature of the book was its doctrine that,
in all struggles for progress, the reformer should rather seek to
create or diffuse the spirit, than busy himself with construct
ing the precise form in which it should be embodied. In
his remarks on Past and Present he adverted to the vivid
artist-power with which Carlyle had thrown light and life
into a musty old chronicle,—not by any added figments of
fancy, but by a strict induction from the recorded facts;
just as Cuvier, from the last bone or joint of a bone, would
reconstruct the type of an antediluvian species.
The fourth and last lecture was devoted to The French
Revolution and Cromwell's Life and Letters. Speaking of
the style of the former, he said that cavillers must surely
in this case be silent; for never certainly was style better
adopted to a subject than this. It was not unbefitting that
the language in which a revolution was recorded should itself
be almost revolutionary. It was of little use to read this
marvellously-vivid book, if the historical facts were not pre
viously known to the reader. He denounced as senti
mental twaddle the perpetual harping upon the darker
features of the struggle. Legitimists should remember
that in the reign of our Henry VIII. there was more
martyr-blood shed than during the whole French Revolution.
The Revolution was an inevitable national and natural pro
test against a corrupt and mechanical Church, and a sensual
and insolent aristocracy, which for centuries had oppressed
�8
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
the people. An infidel philosophy could never have stimu
lated a nation to rebellion, had there been no oppression to
rebel against. The Revolution was not to be considered a
thing of the past. It was yet progressing. The present
history of Europe was a part of its products. The reviving
faith and earnestness of France, Germany, and England
were the result of the Revolution. The book was not to be
considered a philosophical history of that kind which details
the events, and then tells us what to think of them; but a
wonderful dramatic narrative, delineating, with matchless
power of painting, particular scenes, and leaving the reader
to deduce for himself the moral contained in the story.
In his remarks upon Cromwell's Life and Letters, he praised
the author for his modesty and reticence in keeping his own
opinions comparatively in the background, and in allowing
Cromwell to speak for himself. This was but showing a
proper respect for Cromwell. He had been charged with pre
senting only the virtues of the Protector;—the reason might
be that the shadows in the picture had been made black
enough already. Never had mankind been so duped as in
allowing themselves to be taught to disparage Cromwell.
The secret was that the corrupt courtiers of the succeeding
age lived too close to the time of Cromwell to be comfort
able. They felt dwarfed and chilled in the shadow of that
great rock ; so they sought to bring it down—at least in
public opinion—to their own stature. In a strain of rich
humour and incisive sarcasm, he vindicated Cromwell from
the oft-repeated charges of lying, hypocrisy, levity, and in
difference to law ; and proved, by his treatment of Catholics,
Episcopalians, Quakers, Unitarians, and Jews, that he was
greatly in advance even of a later age in an enlightened
respect for the rights of conscience.
During these lectures the audiences increased in number
from night to night, and many persons were unable to obtain
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
9
admittance. The delivery of this course was a noteworthy
event in Manchester; not only did it stimulate earnest
thought amongst us, but it also revealed to many searching
spirits a series of writings, abounding in “ riches fineless,”
hitherto known only to a small number of students. An
impulse was given to free thought and to a spirit of free
inquiry, and many young men and women were stimulated,
by this and subsequent courses of his lectures, to higher
aims, and encouraged, by their purifying and elevating tone,
to aspire to a nobler daily life. The great success of the first
course led to other engagements, not only in Manchester and
Liverpool, but in other towns of Lancashire, and also in
Yorkshire. Among the subjects treated by him were “ The
Characteristics and Tendencies of the Present Age
“The
Influence of German Thought on English Literature; ”
“ Historical Characters Re-considered ; ” “ The Poetry of
Wordsworth ; ” “ Faustus, Faust, and Festus,” &c.
There was one memorable appearance which Mr. Dawson
made in Manchester to which I must refer before passing on
to other matters. It was an oration on Shakspeare, de
livered at the Athenaeum on the poet’s birthday, and in the
afternoon. It was only thought of on the previous day, and
notice could only be given to the public on the morning
of the day upon which the address was to be delivered.
Nevertheless, the hall was crowded to overflowing, and
hundreds were unable to gain admission. The subject
stimulated him to the exercise of his highest powers, and a
more noble and worthy tribute to the genius of Shakspeare
could hardly be imagined. It was certainly a remarkable
proof of the lecturer’s powers, that he was able in our
busy town, engrossed in commercial pursuits, to induce a
thousand men to leave their ordinary callings at an hour in
which they are generally absorbed in business, and listen with
breathless attention to what he had to say about the genius
�IO
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
of the greatest of poets, and the influence he has exercised
on humanity. Towards the conclusion of the address, he
said :—•“ We thank God for victories gained in warfare, but
none seemed to thank God for genius, and for its victories
gained over bigotry and superstition. Poets, painters,
sculptors, and musicians were all teachers of the Kingdom of
Heaven under different parables—each teaching in his own
language righteousness and peace, love to God and man, the
worship of the holy, the noble, the beautiful, and the true.”
“ How gratifying to me,” to quote his concluding words, “to
have been able, for a short time, to segregate a number of busy
men from their ordinary pursuits, and induce them to think,
during an hour of academic quietness, of one whose name
would live, when even this great commercial town might be
buried in the ruins and the decays of time, and whose genius
had offered a true holocaust of peace-offerings and sinofferings and burnt-offerings upon the altars of Humanity,
the incense from which might ascend for ever unto the
Holiest of the Holy.”
These and subsequent courses of lectures by Mr. Dawson
were admirably reported by his intimate friend, the late
Mr. John Harland, of the Manchester Guardian, who was
one of the most accomplished stenographers of his day.
The rapidity of Mr. Dawson’s utterance, and the novelty
and unexpectedness of his turns of expression were sufficient
to tax the powers of the swiftest reporter. Mr. Henry Sutton,
of Nottingham, also a shorthand writer of the highest
class, possessing rare skill and finish, became, a few
years later, the head of the reporting staff of the Manchester
Examiner, and was in the habit of frequently reporting
Mr. Dawson. In recalling his experiences of that time, Mr.
Sutton says :—
“ I do not believe he had any notes before him when I
heard him lecture ; everything seemed to come freely out of
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
ii
a richly-stored mind, which, if it happened to forget for the
moment what it had planned to say, was well able to extem
porize equally-good material to fill any vacancy. This is
how it seemed to me at the time, and was probably not
incorrect. He was always more difficult to report than most
speakers are; his matter was produced so freely and evenly,
and had in it so little of verbiage or repetition, besides being
so incalculable from its originality, that the reporter, straining
hard to keep up with him, could neither afford, as with most
speakers, to condense whilst going on, nor to omit in the
hope of supplying what was missing. Thus, if part of a
sentence was lost, the whole sentence was useless, and, in its
absence, the thought-connection of the paragraph to which
it belonged was broken, and the result was sheer disaster.”
During Mr. Dawson’s frequent visits to Manchester and
the neighbouring towns in the years that followed, I
had many opportunities of becoming intimately acquainted
with him, and of profiting by his society; and a very
close friendship sprang up between us. Of his noble
character and admirable qualities of heart and mind, I
shall ever retain a grateful recollection, and I feel richer for
having known him. I always found him one of the most
genial and companionable of men. He had a tender, gentle,
and most compassionate nature, and in him the elements of
humour and pathos were delightfully blended. In his society
the better part of my own nature was stimulated, my
sympathies widened and enlarged, the inner as well as
the outer world made brighter by contact with him. I
have reason to know that this was the experience of
other intimate friends besides myself. There was ever
conspicuous in him an inherent natural courtesy towards,
and thoughtful consideration for others, which attracted an
amount of personal regard that does not always fall to the
lot of men of intellectual power. In his friendships he was
�12
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
steadfast as the rock, and to be relied upon under all circum
stances and difficulties. With women and children he had
the most winning ways, and for honest, simple, earnest,
unpretending people—however wanting they might be in
intellectual culture or refinement of manner—he entertained
a sincere regard. He inspired immediate confidence and
trust in those with whom he came into close contact. Here,
they felt, was a straightforward, plain-speaking, sincere man,
who meant truly what he said—sometimes a little rough and
blunt, and peremptory withal—but at the core, kind, genuine,
and generous. He never disputed or argued about creeds or
dogmas of any kind, nor spoke disparagingly of those who
thought differently from himself on religious subjects. He
was naturally of a devout and reverent disposition, and the
essential spirit of practical religion pervaded all he said or
did. And yet this was the man beside whom Samuel Wil
berforce, Bishop of Oxford (himself no ordinary man, and of
whom one might have expected better things), refused to sit
on the same platform, on the occasion of a celebrated Soiree
held in the Manchester Athenaeum in 1846, for promoting
the cause of intellectual culture, and at which celebrities of
all shades in religion and politics were present;—because,
to use the Bishop’s own words: “ I understand that Mr.
Dawson is re-engaged to lecture at your institution, and I
have met with sentiments in these lectures of his, which, as
far as I understand them, seem to me to be at variance with
Christianity; and therefore I cannot give even an accidental
or apparent countenance to their further circulation.”
There are few left who can recall the pleasant hours
occasionally spent with Dawson, after his lectures, in the
homes of some of his hospitable friends. Freed from the
restraints of the platform, and surrounded by a few con
genial spirits, he would revel in the luxury of perfect freedom,
and, stretched on an inviting couch, enjoy to the full his
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
13
well-earned repose. During these hours, which were
humorously spoken of as the sacred period for further
elucidating the subject of the lecture—the “ after-math ” as
it were—all manner of topics were discussed—often the
political or social, or literary event of the day—amidst
curling wreaths of soothing tobacco smoke, which somewhat
veiled the features of the interlocutors, and gave a kind of
courage to the younger ones. At such times, his wit and
humour, free from the slightest taint of malignity or cynicism,
had full play, and sparkled forth in endless sallies, evoking
the best there was in others. He would sometimes give
humorous descriptions of persons he had met in his lecturing
tours, making vivid their peculiarities by his happy imitations.
Often, too, he would descant on his favourite authors, and his
cherished heroes and heroines in history and fiction, until the
ominous sound of the clock gave warning that the symposium
must break up, and respectable persons return home.
George Dawson constantly advocated the exercise of free
thought in its highest and noblest sense, as well as the
assiduous cultivation of a spirit of free inquiry. “ Give me,”
he used to say, using Milton’s own words, “the liberty to
know, to utter, and to argue freely, according to conscience,
above all liberties.” “ Let us forego this prelatical tradition
of crowding free consciences and Christian liberties into the
precepts and canons of men.” “To be still searching after
what we know not, by what we know, still closing up truth
to truth, as we find it (for all her body is homogeneous and
proportional), this is the golden rule for making the best
harmony, not the forced and outward union of cold, and
neutral, and inwardly-divided minds.” He had a passionate
love of fairness and fair-play. Everything mean, unworthy,
self-seeking, and underhand was abhorrent to him. He
detested cant in every form and shape; but what he exposed
with the keenest satire, and denounced with the most wither
�14
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
ing scorn, was that self-sufficient and arrogant intolerance
which disparages and would deliberately inflict injury upon
those who have the courage to think for themselves, and the
independence to hold and avow honestly-formed opinions—
however unpalatable these might be to the powerful and
fashionable—however much in opposition to interests for the
time predominant and in the world’s sunshine. I remember
his once saying to me—“ Verily, in this country, known vice
breaks fellowship less than suspected heresy, or difference
of religious creed.” He looked upon any man—no matter
what his creed or social position might be—who spoke of
liberty of opinion as a favour conceded, and who treated that
liberty with an air of condescending tolerance, as morally
pestilent and detestable—whom self-respecting men should
endeavour to get rid of by some legitimate but swift method
of social extinction.
During one of his visits to Manchester, I showed him a
collection of passages I had made from the works of our
greatest thinkers, bearing on the subjects of Free Inquiry and
Free Thought, Liberty of Discussion, Intolerance, Religious
Liberty, the Right of Private Judgment, the Unfettered
Publication of Opinion, &c. Some of these he asked me
to transcribe for him, wishing to introduce them on suit
able occasions in his lectures. To readers of the present
generation they would not perhaps appear so significant as
they did to those who were young thirty or forty years
ago—so remarkable has been the progress of opinion on
these subjects within the last quarter of a century. They
were from Lord Bacon’s Proficience and Advancement of
Learning, John Locke’s Works, the Areopagitica, and other
prose works (or rather stately prose-poems) of Milton, Jeremy
Taylor’s Liberty ofProphesying, the writings of Bishop Butler,
and Bishop Berkeley, and, among more modern writers,
Samuel Bailey of Sheffield, and others. A few of these
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
15
extracts I have gathered together, and given at the end of
this paper in the shape of an appendix. They were especial
favourites with him, and represent the essence and outcome
of his opinions on the subjects above named.
Concerning the last-named writer, whose works are scarcely
known to the present generation, I should like to say a few
words. I had the pleasure of making known Bailey’s works
to Mr. Dawson, who was previously unaware of their exis
tence, and from the perusal of some of which he derived
real pleasure and profit. No author of this century has
written with greater force and clearness, or with more power
ful reasoning, on the right and duty of free inquiry in every
department of human thought, on the imperative necessity
of candid, temperate, and free discussion, and on that much
neglected part of morality—the conscientious formation and
free publication of all opinions affecting human welfare.
We have never had a more earnest and strenuous advocate
of intellectual liberty and free discussion than Samuel
Bailey. His style is truly admirable; its characteristics
being lucidity, accuracy, and precision—not a word out of
its place, not a word that could be spared—his meaning
impossible to be misunderstood. All his works were
carefully prepared, and long thought over, and subjected to
frequent revisions, before publication. He was one of the
most perspicuous of English thinkers, and no one can study
his writings, especially his first Essays on the Formation and
Publication of Opinions, and its successor, Essays on the
Pursuit of Truth, on the Progress of Knowledge, and on the
Fundamental Principle of all Evidence and Expectation,
withQut having his intellectual horizon extended. To the
thoughtful and earnest, who care for and can appreciate
something higher than the ephemeral and vapid literature
with which the press floods our modern circulating libraries,
these two bracing volumes would be invaluable companions.
�16
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
They act upon the mind like an intellectual and moral tonic.
The most fitting monument to the memory of Bailey would
be a carefully-edited edition of his works, most of which
are scarce, and entirely out of print Colonel Perronet
Thompson, an accomplished economist and philosophic
thinker, and well known as the author of The Catechism of
the Corn Laws, thus spoke of Bailey in an article in the
Westminster Review:—
“If a man could be offered the paternity of any com
paratively modern books that he chose, he would not hazard
much by deciding that, next after Adam Smith’s Wealth
of Nations, he would request to be honoured with a relation
ship to the Essays on the Formation and Publication of
Opinions. ... It would have been a pleasant and an
honourable memory to have written a book so totus teres
atque rotundus, so finished in its parts, and so perfect in
their union as the Essays on the Formation of Opinions.
Like one of the great statues of antiquity, it might have
been broken into fragments, and each separate limb would
have pointed to the existence of some interesting whole, of
which the value might be surmised from the beauty of the
specimen.”*
One of George. Dawson’s most striking and prominent
characteristics was his robust common-sense; and to this
may be added a shrewd observation of character. He also
possessed a fine sense of humour, and the widest sympathies,
moral and intellectual. His sarcastic power was of the most
delicate and subtle kind; and when he had occasion to ex
press scorn, ridicule, or contempt, no one could launch it
forth with more effectiveness. In addition to these qualities
he had, as I have already had occasion to remark, the rare
* In Notes and Queries, 5th Series, Vol. IX., p. 182, will be found a
bibliographical list of Samuel Bailey’s writings, contributed by me to that
periodical in 1878.
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
<7
gift of being able to clothe his thoughts in the most terse
and appropriate words, and to give utterance to them with
an ease and mastery of the resources of our language that
surprised his hearers. Sentence followed sentence, faultless
in construction and symmetry. A lecture of an hour and a
half’s duration might have been printed from his ipsissima
verba, without a single alteration. While on the platform he
rarely used notes or memoranda. With such endowments, it
was not wonderful that he made the lecture-platform an edu
cational agency. To his lectures and expositions (for he was
a born expositor) numbers have been indebted.for their first
real knowledge of some of our greatest countrymen, his
torical as well as literary. The sympathetic, genial, yet
finely discriminative manner in which he discoursed con
cerning some of the great thinkers and men of action of the
past, as well as of our own day, inspired many of his hearers
with an earnest desire to become acquainted with their
works ; and thus his lectures were the means of introducing
no small number of thoughtful minds to the rich treasures
of our literature and history.
The admirers of George Dawson have never claimed for
him the merit of originating new thoughts. But he had a
wonderful faculty of seizing and appreciating the original
thoughts, however abstruse or complex, of the highest order
of minds; of perceiving at a glance their practical bearings; of
making them attractive to, and understood by the thousands
in all ranks and conditions of life, who so eagerly listened to
him; and of adapting them to every range of comprehen
sion. He agreed with Emerson in thinking that next to the
originator of a good thought is the first apt quoter of it. If
we are fired and guided by a good thought, the presenter of
it—whoever the author may be does not matter—becomes to
us a benefactor, claiming from us a gratitude almost equal
to that we render to the originator of the thought itself.
�i8
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
It may be of interest to those who have followed my
remarks on Mr. Dawson as a lecturer, to know something
of him in connection with his life and labours in Birming
ham. For upwards of thirty years he was the most pro
minent preacher in that town, and one of its most active
and energetic citizens. As a preacher he was essentially
eclectic. Well acquainted with the history of Christianity in
its successive phases, he believed that even the greatest
perversions of its purest form had some raison d'etre.
He never accepted even the cardinal doctrines in the
literal sense in which they were understood by the several
sects. It would be presumptuous in me, and out of place
here, to attempt to give any explanation of his views
regarding these doctrines. Suffice it to say that his
teaching influenced deeply both Trinitarians and Unitarians,
and appeared less dogmatic and more reasonable to the
many who stood entirely outside the pale of the sects.
Some of the extreme sectarians on both sides complained
that his teaching was unsound, because he stopped short
of their dogmas, but he looked on all such doctrinal matters
as not literally binding, but as “ views ” to be interpreted by
the light of reason, the good of humanity, and the practical
action which such beliefs could and should produce in every
day life and work. He was never tired of teaching that
real religion should unite, and not divide; that doctrinal
views necessarily differed so greatly, that they should not,
and could not be a bond of union. He held that, in the
words of the great prayer in the Church Service, “ all who
professed and called themselves Christians, should hold the
faith in unity of spirit, in the bond of peace, and in righteous
ness of life.” He always took a reasonable view of doctrinal
difficulties, and constantly preached that “ he who does My
work shall know the doctrine, whether it be good or evil.”
Laborare est orare briefly expressed the essence and outcome
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
19
of his religious belief. The basis of all his teaching, the
spirit of all his sermons, the stimulus to all his work, was
the dominant conviction that Religion, the greatest of all
human concerns, should pervade the thoughts and actions
of men in every form, that it should rule in the State, the
Community, and the Family, and even in the smallest concerns
of ordinary life. By religion he always meant Love to
God, and obedience to His divine will, as shewn forth in the
laws of the universe, charity and love to our fellow-men, and
the embodiment of the spirit of Christ’s teachings in our
daily walk and conversation.
How successful this form of teaching proved to be, may
be found in the fact that, from his very earliest preaching, he
attracted and continued to attract and to retain among his
congregation, Trinitarians, Unitarians, Swedenborgians, Bap
tists, Churchmen, and especially many who did not accept
the Bible as inspired, who did not believe in miracles, and
many who, like Gallio, “ cared for none of those things.” All,
however, heartily united in real service and genuine work.
During the whole of his life the members of his church
united heartily and liberally in establishing schools for the
young and the adult, in kindly and generous care of the
aged and the poor, in the industrial training of young women
for service and for work, and in every kind of social influence
to equalize the lot of all, and to improve the tone and
character of rich and poor alike.
“ The Church of the Saviour,” in which he ministered for
upwards of thirty years, was opened in 1846, in the month
of August, and his sermon, “ The Demands of the Age on
the Church,” was an eloquent and powerful statement of his
position as a teacher, and of the work he had set himself to
do ; and which he accomplished with such marked success.
In his earlier days he visited constantly and kindly the poor
and needy, and I am told that no one who had not seen
�20
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
him in a sick-room, ever saw Dawson at his best. His
tender sympathy with all in trouble, his genuine humanity,
in the best sense of the word, his generous hand and lovingkindness will be remembered by many with grateful heart
and tearful eyes. Later on, his numerous engagements led
to the appointment of a Minister to the Poor ; but whenever
possible he attended all the sick and needy, and gave such
consolation as only he could give. The church would seat
about i,600 persons, and was generally full ; and, in the
evenings especially, was crowded to excess. Many orthodox
people attended their own churches and chapels in the
morning, and came to hear him at night. One of the most
conspicuous preachers in the town, for several years during
his studentship, heard Dawson once every Sunday, and con
fessed himself deeply indebted to his teachings, although
he differed from his doctrinal views. The most remarkable
and touching characteristic of Dawson’s services were his
prayers, about which all agreed. Their thorough devotion,
deep humanity, intense feeling, and passionate love and
tenderness, may be found to some extent in the printed
volume which has been issued since his death ; but only
those who heard his gentle, earnest voice can ever appre
ciate those memorable outpourings. Another of the promi
nent orthodox preachers of the same town regarded these
prayers as the very highest and best of Dawson’s true teach
ing, and beyond all praise—the very spirit of all prayer to
God. I have heard many devout men and women, of creeds
the most opposite, speak of their wonderful beauty, and
gratefully acknowledge the beneficent influence exercised
by them on their own religious feelings. He generally
preached every Sunday, morning and evening. Another of
his notable characteristics was his reading of the Scriptures.
One chapter read by him was better than most sermons.
His simple, natural, earnest, manly style made old familiar
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
21
verses seem full of meaning and new beauty and force. It is
difficult to describe the impressiveness of these readings and
prayers. In his Church services he was especially eclectic. He
was the first to introduce into Birmingham chapels the prac
tice of chanting, of anthems, and of having the best music
possible—at that time an innovation which shocked most .dis
senters, but which nearly all have adopted since. He also
introduced colour and decoration on the walls, where all had
been dingy and drab before. Sometimes, on week-day even
ings, he gave lectures in his church—one series of six on the
Greek Church being most valuable and interesting in the
Crimean War time. Another of his innovations was the
social parties of the members of his congregation. This
example, too, has been followed by all other dissenting con
gregations in Birmingham.
As a citizen, Dawson greatly shocked his brother preachers
at first by appearing in non-clerical attire. From the begin
ning, he took an active part in all public work, and especially
in political and social reforms. He was one of the first to
arouse any interest in the Hungarian struggle. He ear
nestly supported the French Republic after Louis Philippe’s
flight, and was one of the most eloquent speakers during
the Crimean War. He ably and constantly advocated the
claims of Italy, and was placed in the “ black book ” by the
Austrians, as the friend of Mazzini. In all local matters he
took a special interest; and he was really the first public
man in Birmingham who studied and understood foreign
politics, and who aroused any local interest in the affairs of
Hungary, Italy, and France. His frequent absences on his
lecturing tours prevented his taking personally any public
work, except on the Free Libraries Committee; but on
that, and on the Committee of the Subscription Library, he
did excellent work from his coming till his lamented death.
He educated the people by his lectures, and taught them
�22
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DA WSON.
to go to the libraries and use them. He and his accom
plished and devoted friend, Mr. Timmins, established a lite
rature class and delivered a series of lectures on English
o
Literature from Saxon times down to 1800. These lectures
have been continued ever since with great and growing suc
cess. They sensibly raised the tone of the town, and have set
many persons reading and thinking. While he did not take
office personally, he advocated most earnestly and per
sistently the duty of every citizen to take some share of
public work. It is beyond all question that he so educated
and influenced his personal friends and occasional hearers,
that they went forth to work; and he really gave the first
impulse to that public life, high municipal spirit, political
energy, and literary and artistic progress which have so
distinguished Birmingham during the past thirty years. His
constant pressure and personal influence infinitely improved
the quality of the Town Council, which, when he came, was
in but indifferent repute. He used to say : “ Never send a
man into the Council whom you would not like to be Mayor.”
Practically, that advice has been followed, and hence the
very marked improvement in the municipal life of Birming
ham. No one man ever had so large and so evident an
influence in a great town. He came when, after the Reform
Bill, the town was resting from its labours. He evoked a
new spirit, and aroused a new life, and became an important
power. No meeting, no movement, no cause was complete
without him,yi2r or against. This sturdy independence, his
manly courage, his inflexible principle, his passionate love
of liberty, and unflinching fairness all round, made him
respected and also feared. It was felt by all that he was
above party, a man of stern principle, a bold, honest, and
generous advocate of truth and justice.
I must now bring these remarks to a close. Yet, I cannot
do so without recording a most pleasant incident in our
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
23
intercourse, inseparably associated with the memory of my
friend and his charming wife. He was married in the
autumn of 1846 to Miss Susan Fanny Crompton, of Birming
ham, a lady possessing mental gifts of no common order,
and whose grace of form and feature will ever linger in the
memory of those who knew her in the society which she so
much adorned. To her might be applied the lines of
Wordsworth—
The reason firm, the temperate will,
Endurance, foresight, strength, and skill;
A perfect woman, nobly plann’d,
To warn, to comfort, and command.
Instead of making the usual conventional wedding tour,
they wisely preferred a better course. They arranged with
Harriet Martineau (who at that time was leaving England
to visit Palestine), to occupy her pretty cottage near Amble
side for a month. Here their honeymoon was spent amidst
the most picturesque scenery of the Lake district. It was
proposed that I should join them for a week, an invi
tation gladly accepted. Fortunately, the weather was of
the finest; and the hills, fells, lakes, and streams, and the
fading glories of the autumn woods, were seen to perfection,
bathed in the serene September sunshine. On this pleasant
occasion, all the circumstances connected with my visit were
of the most auspicious kind. Included in the invitation was
Dr. W. B. Hodgson, afterwards Professor of Political
Economy in the Edinburgh University, since deceased—a
dear and most intimate friend of us both. His social gifts
were of the rarest kind, and cannot be forgotten by those
who had the privilege of knowing him. His unfailing
memory and inexhaustible stores of wit and wisdom made
him a favourite wherever he went. We had many delightful
rambles by the margin of Rydal Water and Grasmere, and
on the Loughrigg Fells; and the cliffs and woods of Fox-
�24
RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
how often rang with the laughter evoked by our brilliant
friend’s jokes and humorous stories. Alas ! that three
of those merry voices are now for ever silent! The
enjoyment of this delightful week was greatly enhanced
by an unexpected piece of good luck for us. The way
in which this came about was curious, but I need not
enter into details. Suffice it to say that we had the rare
privilege of spending part of a forenoon with the Genius
loci—the venerable poet Wordsworth, then in his seventy
sixth year—about four years before his death. He received
us with a dignified but cordial courtesy, introduced us to
Mrs. Wordsworth, and showed us many books in his library,
taking down from the shelves some precious presentation
volumes from Coleridge, Lamb, Southey, and other friends,
and pointing out to us the inscriptions with which they were
enriched. He walked with us about his grounds, conversing
freely on various topics, and occasionally telling us amusing
anecdotes of his neighbours. Not long before this had
occurred the tragical suicide of Haydon, the painter, and
the subject became matter of conversation. Wordsworth
spoke most feelingly about the sad event, and asked us if
we remembered his sonnet, addressed to Haydon in his
earlier days, long before the clouds had begun to gather
round him. Of course, all readers of Wordsworth know
this, one of his finest sonnets, beginning “High is our calling
friend,” and ending with the lines—
And oh ! when nature sinks, as oft she may,
Through long-lived pressure of obscure distress,
Still to be strenuous for the bright reward,
And in the soul admit of no decay,
Brook no continuance of weak-mindedness :
Great is the glory; for the strife is hard !
Wishing to hear the sonnet from the old man’s lips, and
knowing it would gratify him to be asked to repeat it, we
made the request with a deferential or rather reverential
�RECOLLECTIONS OF GEORGE DAWSON.
25
hesitancy, to which, however, he at once acceded, repeating
the lines in a sonorous and rather monotonous voice, but
with evident feeling. On this occasion I was fortunate
enough to have it in my power, by the merest accident of an
accident, to give the venerable poet a trifling pleasure.
While we stood in a little breakfast-room, fronting the
eastern sky, which he called his morning study, he showed
us with pride a set of framed portraits of some of the old
English poets and worthies: Chaucer, Gower, Spenser,
Shakspeare, Sidney, Bacon, Selden, Beaumont, Fletcher, and
others the series known as Houbraken’s. On my observing
that Ben Jonson was not amongst them, although he belonged
to the same series, he said he had never been fortunate enough
to meet with a copy of that portrait Curiously enough, and
by rare good fortune, as far as I was concerned, I happened
then to possess a very fine impression of the identical portrait
wanted to complete his set It instantly flashed into my mind
that here was a supreme opportunity offered me of pleas
ing the aged poet, so I at once made my little speech: “ How
much pleasure it would give me to fill up the gap, &c.” My
offer was, after a little preliminary reluctance, accepted,
accompanied with a friendly shake of the hand, followed
some days afterwards by a cordial letter of thanks, after the
picture had been received by him, and hung in its rightful
place. This little incident was often recalled in after years,
and became a pleasant memory with us.
Inglewood,
Bowdon, Cheshire,
April nt, 7882.
�APPENDIX.
The following are the extracts (referred to at p. 15) from
the writings of Bacon, Milton, Locke, Taylor, Berkeley,
Butler, Brougham, and Samuel Bailey. The quotations
from the latter writer are given at some length, as his works
are comparatively unknown.
Lord Bacon.
1561-1629.
The commandment of knowledge is yet higher than the commandment over
the will ; for it is a commandment over the reason, belief, and understanding
of man, which is the highest part of the mind, and giveth law to the will itself:
for there is no power on earth, which setteth up a throne, orchair of state, in
the spirits and souls of men, and in their cogitations, imaginations, opinions,
and beliefs, but knowledge and learning.
John Milton.
1608-1674.
The light which we have gained was given us, not to be ever staring on, but
by it to discover onward things more remote from our present knowledge.
Well knows he, who uses to consider, that our faith and knowledge thrive by
exercise, as well as our limbs and complexion. Truth is compared in Scripture
to a streaming fountain ; if her waters flow not in perpetual progression, they
sicken into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition. A man may be a
heretic in the truth ; and if he believes things, only because his pastor says so,
or because the Assembly so determines, without knowing other reason, though
his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy.
BiSHor Jeremy Taylor.
1613-1667.
It is unnatural and unreasonable to persecute disagreeing opinions: unnatural,
for understanding being a thing wholly spiritual, cannot be restrained, and there
fore neither punished by corporal affliction. It is in aliena republica, a matter
of another world ; you may as well cure the colic by brushing a man’s clothes,
or fill a man’s belly with a syllogism. . . . For is an opinion ever the
more true or false for being persecuted ? Force in matters of opinion can do
�APPENDIX.
27
no good, but is very apt to do hurt; for no man can change his opinion when
he will, or be satisfied in his reason that his opinion is false because discoun
tenanced. . . . But if a man cannot change his opinion when he lists, nor
ever does heartily or resolutely but when he cannot do otherwise, then to
use force may make him an hypocrite, but never to be a right believer; and so,
instead of erecting a trophy to God and true religion, we build a monument for
the Devil.
John Locke.
1632-1704.
He that examines, and upon a fair examination embraces an error for a
truth, has done his duty more than he who embraces the profession of truth
(for the truths themselves he does not embrace), without having examined
whether it be true or no. And he that has done his duty, according to the best
of his ability, is certainly more praiseworthy, than he who has done nothing of
it. For if it be our duty to search after truth, he certainly that has searched
after it, though he has not found it, in some points has paid a more acceptable
obedience to the will of his Maker, than he who has not searched at all, but
professes to have found truth, when he has neither searched for it, nor found it.
Bishop Berkeley.
1684-1753.
Two sorts of learned men there are ; one, who candidly seek truth by
rational means. These are never averse to have their principles looked into,
and examined by the test of reason. Another sort there is, who learn by rote a
set of principles and a way of thinking which happen to be in vogue. These
betray themselves by their anger and surprise, whenever their principles are
freely canvassed.
Bishop Butler.
1692-1752.
We never, in the moral way, applaud or blame either ourselves or others for
what we enjoy or what we suffer, or for having impressions made upon us which
we consider as altogether out of our power; but only for what we do, or would
have done, had it been in our power; or for what we leave undone which we
might have done, or would have left undone, though we could have done it.
Lord Brougham.
1778-1868.
The great Truth has finally gone forth to all the ends of the earth that man
shall no more render account to man for his belief, over which he himself has
no control. Henceforward, nothing shall prevail upon us to praise or to blame
any one for that which he can no more change than he can the hue of his skin,
or the height of his stature. Henceforward, treating with entire respect those
who conscientiously differ from ourselves ; the only practical effect of the
difference will be, to make us enlighten the ignorance on one side or the other,
from which it springs—by instructing them, if it be theirs, ourselves, if it
be our own ; to the end, that the only kind of unanimity may be produced,
which is desirable among rational beings—the agreement proceeding from full
conviction after the freest discussion.
�28
APPENDIX.
Samuel Bailey.
1791-1870.
Whether a man has been partial or impartial, in the process by which he has
acquired his opinions, must be determined by extrinsic circumstances and not
by the character of the opinions themselves. Belief, doubt, and disbelief,
therefore, can never, even in the character of indications of antecedent voluntary
acts, be the proper objects of moral reprobation or commendation. Our appro
bation and disapprobation, if they fall anywhere, should be directed to the
conduct of men in their researches, to the use which they make of their oppor
tunities of information, and to the partiality or impartiality visible in’ their
actions. . . . The allurements and the menaces of power are alike inca
pable of establishing opinions in the mind, or eradicating those which are
already there. They may draw hypocritical professions from avarice and ambi
tion, or extort verbal renunciations from fear and feebleness; but this is
all they can accomplish. The way to alter belief is not to address motives to
the will, but arguments to the intellect. To do otherwise, to apply rewards or
punishments or disabilities to opinions, is as absurd as to raise men to the
peerage for their ruddy complexions, to whip them for the gout, and hang them
for the scrofula. . . . All pain, mental or physical, inflicted with a view to
punish a man for his opinion, is nothing less than useless and wanton cruelty,
violating the plain dictates of nature and reason. . .
Although the advanced civilization of the age rejects the palpably absurd
application of torture and death, it is not to be concealed, that, amongst a
numerous class, there is an analagous, though less barbarous persecution, of all
who depart from received doctrines—the persecution of private antipathy and
public odium. They are looked upon as a specie of criminals, and their devia
tions from established opinions; or, if any one prefer the phrase, their specula
tive errors, are regarded by many with as much horror as flagrant violations of
morality. In the ordinary ranks of men, where exploded prejudices often linger
for ages, this is scarcely to be wondered at; but it is painful, and on a first
view unaccountable, to witness the prevalence of the same spirit in the
republic of letters ; to see mistakes in speculation pursued with all the warmth
of moral indignation and reproach. He who believes an opinion on the autho
rity of others, who has taken no pains to investigate its claims to credibility,
nor weighed the objections to the evidence on which it rests, is lauded for his
acquiescence, while obloquy from every side is too often heaped on the man
who has minutely searched into the subject, and been led to an opposite conclu
sion. There are few things more disgusting to an enlightened mind than to see
a number of men, a mob, whether learned or illiterate, who have never scruti
nized the foundation of their opinions, assailing with contumely an individual,
who, after the labour of research and reflection, has adopted different sentiments
from theirs, and pluming themselves on the notion of superior virtue, because
their understandings have been tenacious of prejudice.
The true grounds, the grand principles of toleration, or (to avoid a term which
men ought never to have been under the necessity of employing) of religious
liberty and liberty of conscience, are the principles which it has been the object
�APPENDIX.
29
of my Essay to establish—that opinions are involuntary, and involve no merit
or demerit, and that the free publication of opinions is beneficial to society,
because it is the means of arriving at truth. They are both founded on the
unalterable nature of the human mind, and are sure, sooner or later, to be
universally recognized and applauded. Under the general prevalence of these
truths society would soon present a different aspect. Every species of intoler
ance would vanish ; because, how much soever it might be the interest of men
to suppress opinions contrary to their own, there would be no longer any pretext
for compulsion or oppression.
Difference of sentiment would no longer
engender the same degrees of passion and ill-will. The irritation, virulence,
and invective of controversy would be in a great measure sobered down into cool
argumentation. The intercourse of private life would cease to be embittered by
the odium of heterodoxy, and all the benevolent affections would have more
room for expansion. Men would discover that although their neighbours
differed in opinion from themselves, they might possess equal moral worth, and
equal claims to affection and esteem. A difference in civil privileges and social
estimation—that eternal source of discontent and disorder, that canker in the
happiness of society, which can be cured only by being exterminated, would be
swept away, and in a few years a wonder would arise that rational beings could
have been inveigled into its support. Another important consequence would be,
a more general union of mankind in the pursuit of truth. Since errors would no
longer be regarded as involving moral turpitude, every effort to obtain the grand
object in view, however unsuccessful, would be received with indulgence, if not
applause. There would be more exertion, because there would be more
encouragement. If moral science has already gradually advanced, shackled as
it has been by inveterate prejudices, what would be the rapidity of its march
under a system, which, far from offering obstacles, presented facilities to its
progress ?
Whoever has attentively meditated on the progress of the human race
cannot fail to discern that there is now a spirit of inquiry amongst men which
nothing can stop, or even materially control. Reproach and obloquy, threats
and persecution, social ostracism, will be vain. They may embitter opposition
and engender violence, but they cannot abate the keenness of research. There
is a silent march of thought, which no power can arrest, and which it is not
difficult to foresee will be marked by important events. Mankind were never
before in the situation in which they now stand. The press has been operating
upon them for several centuries, with an influence scarcely perceptible at its
commencement, but daily becoming more palpable, and acquiring accelerated
force. It is rousing the intellect of nations, and happy will it be for them if
there be no rash interference with the natural progress of knowledge; and if, by
a judicious and gradual adaptation of their institutions to the inevitable changes
of opinion, they are saved from those convulsions, which the pride, prejudices,
and obstinacy of a few may occasion to the whole.—Essays on the Formation
and Publication of Opinions, and on other Subjects. 1821.
�30
APPENDIX.
If, instead of encouraging candid and complete examination, I endeavour to
instil my own notions into the mind of another by dogmatical assertion and
inculcation ; if I do all in my power to prevent the evidence on both sides from
coming to his knowledge; if I forcibly or artfully exclude any arguments or
facts from his cognizance ; if I try to coop up his mind in my own views, by
keeping aloof every representation inconsistent with them, and even pervert his
moral feelings by teaching him the guilt of holding any other; if, instill greater
defiance of integrity of conduct, I attempt to work upon his will in the matter ;
if I offer him certain advantages provided he come to a conclusion agreeable to
my wishes, and threaten him with obloquy, and pains, and penalties, should he
decide against me; all these proceedings are surely so many offences, not only
against him, but against the Almighty. What are they all but trying to prevent
the full and free application of his faculties for discerning truth to a question of
the greatest moment between him and the Almighty Ruler of the Universe?
And what are the worst of them, but bribing and terrifying the poor human
creature ; in the first place, not to examine fully and freely, not therefore to
discharge the obligation he is under to his Maker ; and in the second place, to
hide his internal convictions, and to profess what he does not feel. If the prin
ciples of duty to God, which the light of nature clearly exhibits, are to be relied
upon, it is scarcely possible to conceive grosser moral turpitude, or greater mad
ness, than this. My own duty clearly is a full and impartial examination ; and
yet, by the course described, I should be endeavouring, to the utmost of my
power, to prevent in my neighbour that full and impartial examination, which
is as incumbent on him as it is on myself.
It is to be deeply lamented, that nothing is more common among mankind
than this senseless, this immoral, this truly impious proceeding, the only pallia
tion of which is unconsciousness of its real character. Look abroad into the
world, and what is the language on this subject held by man to man, in all ages
and all countries ? It is in effect this : I care nothing for your partiality or im
partiality, for the diligence or negligence of your investigations : here are certain
advantages in my gift: if you are of my opinion, or will say you are, they are
yours; if you differ from me, I will take care you suffer for it.
Figure to yourself, my friend, a young man, who, while he is desirous to
discharge every duty, and ardent in the pursuit of truth, is at the same time
ambitious of power, wealth, and distinction. A career is open to him, in which
these latter desires may be gratified on the single condition of professing and
teaching certain established tenets, and performing certain offices grounded upon
them. Is it to be supposed, that before he accepts the tempting offer, his can
dour and conscientiousness will be sufficiently strong to induce him to institute
a fair and rigid examination of tenets on which his wealth and station are to
depend ? and after he has accepted it, will the inducements to the performance
of that duty be strengthened or increased ? The result is not very doubtful; he
shuns inquiry and accepts the office, and from that moment all probability of any
fair investigation is at an end : he becomes an intellectual slave bound in golden
fetters : he is no more free to pursue truth than the chained eagle is free to soar
�APPENDIX.
3i
into the sky ; or rather he is quite as free to pursue it as the muezzin to throw
*
himself from the minaret, or as the traveller to leap from the summit of the great
pyramid ; that is to say, at the risk of consequences—of utter destruction.
And is it possible not to perceive, that besides putting an end to impartial
examination, this species of bribery is a bounty on hypocritical pretension ? Is
there one man in ten thousand, who, looking forward to the prospect of living
in the enjoyment of worldly advantages from the profession of certain opinions,
will shrink from that profession in the first instance, or subsequently abandon it,
because he finds it impossible to believe in the opinions professed ? Can there
be a more effectual method of creating insincerity, as well as indifference to
truth, and can there be a practice more destructive of moral worth and real
piety ?
You know, Hassan, as well as I can describe, how all this is exemplified
amongst the followers of the Prophet; you are aware not only of their utter
neglect of examination, but of the secret disbelief of thousands of Moslems
(priests as well as laymen) in much of what they profess for the sake of gain, the
scarcely disguised violations of precepts they pretend to revere, the rapacity for
wealth and power which puts on the semblance of holiness and laughs at the
credulity of its dupes.
I shall never, for my own part, lose the recollection of the indifference to
truth and the hypocrisy I witnessed on my pilgrimage to Mekka. Wrapt
myselfin holy thoughts and sincere devotion, I was shocked at the conduct of
those whom sordid rapacity had congregated around the sacred place.
Here, too, we have another main root of intolerance and persecution. When
ever the emolument, power, and distinction of any set of men depend on the
reception of particular doctrines, or are bound up in their maintenance, not only
is all fair examination at an end on the part of their supporters, but the liveliest
zeal is kindled in their defence, and the bitterest hostility is roused against all
who will not fall into the same blind acquiescence. There is an inseparable
connection between the lucrativeness of opinions and persecution.—Letters of
an Egyptian Kafir on a Visit to England, in Search of a Religion, Enforcing
some Neglected Views regarding the Duty of Theological Inquiry, and the
Morality of Human Interference with It. 1839.
* The muezzin is the crier who, from the minarets of the mosque, summons the faithful
to prayer.
A. IRELAND AND CO., PRINTERS, MANCHESTER.
�k
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Recollections of George Dawson and his lectures in Manchester in 1846-7
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Ireland, Alexander
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 31 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: Reprinted, with additions, from the "Manchester Quarterly", No. II. April, 1882. Inscription in black ink: "M. D. Conway Esq, with A. Ireland's kind regards." From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes Appendix with extracts from the writings of several authors including John Milton and John Locke. Printed by A. Ireland anc Co., Manchester. George Dawson (1821- 1876) was an English nonconformist preacher, lecturer and activist. He was an influential voice in the calls for radical political and social reform in Birmingham, a philosophy that became known as the Civic Gospel.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1882
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT46
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy
Social Reform
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Recollections of George Dawson and his lectures in Manchester in 1846-7), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Clergy
Conway Tracts
George Dawson
Nonconformism
Social Reform
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/7be69ad8f8c4ecb7c5744a0577af001f.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=g5QiK5aDBa4LxLFBAFD6WDRrFdR1wVezO8YhpR4xozNuwMnXE46o8yug7QnAnGJlaQWc44Apmv8gBrQy9FupVT8nZdD8aEA%7Eelk6e4vtbpzfKj25HWkIrYuLaZbECRBf9kp4SSMvp7JtAunVC9SvssFHm5RHk%7ETVVY4ltjGSL4RObWaw1FvvBuTFdupUmN%7EW4ApNyUKlrBc9i6QlwEdiIBzTe6SODArcDMrk6Wp1dxAr51Vm4mAfUpu000v3QYFuj7%7EUByuvqHNsFZ-cDHZRJe8bufIjJE6W26dX%7EgrzzZUWay9tyO0yvKCYX30ASjasqZSsDoQeDfwezdApVnarTA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
bf561e76bed248625997a91080bd344a
PDF Text
Text
PRICE ONE PENNY^
AND
EDWARD CARPENTER.
(Reprinted from TO-DAY, February, 1885.^
UonHon :
THE MODERN PRESS,
13, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.
1886.
��HE Progress of Society is a subject which occupies much
attention now-a-days. We hear the shouts and cries of
reformers, and are inclined sometimes to be vexed at their
noisy insistance and brandishing of panaceas ; but when we come to
look into the evils to which they draw our attention-—under our very
noses as it were—and see how serious they are : when we see the
misery, the suffering all around us, and see too how directly in some
cases this appears to be traceable to certain institutions, we can
hardly be human if we do not make some effort to alter these insti
tutions, and the state of society which goes with them; indeed at
times we feel that it is our highest duty to agitate with the noisiest,
and insist at all costs that justice should be done, the iniquity swept
away.
And yet, on the other hand, when retiring from the heat and noise
of conflict, we mount a little in thought and look out over the world,
when we realise what indeed every day is becoming more abundantly
clear—that Society is the gigantic growth of centuries, moving on in
an irresistible and ordered march of its own, with the precision and
atality of an astronomic orb—how absurd seem all our demonstra
tions ! what an idle beating of the air! The huge beast comes on
with elephantine tread. The Liberal sits on his head, and the Con
servative sits on his tail; but both are borne along whether they
will or no, and both are shaken off before long, inevitably, into the
dust. One reformer shouts, “ This way,” and another shouts
“That,” but the great foot comes down and crushes them both,
indifferent, crushes the one who thought he was right and the one
who found he was wrong, crushes him who would facilitate its pro
gress and him who would stop it, alike.
, I confess that I am continually borne about between these two
Opposing views. On the one hand is Justice, here and now, which
must and shall be done. On the other hand is Destiny indifferent,
coming down from eternity, which cannot be altered.
Where does the truth lie ? Is there any attainable truth in the
matter ? Perhaps not. The more I think of it, the more am I
�4
persuaded that the true explanations, theories, of the social changes
which we see around us, that the forces which produce them, that
the purposes which they fulfil, lie deep, deep down unsuspected ; that
the profoundest hitherto Science (Buckle, Comte, Marx, Spencer,
Morgan, and the rest) has hardly done more than touch the skirt of
this great subject. The surface indications, currents, are elusive;
the apparent purposes very different from the real ones; individuals,
institutions, nations, more or less like puppets or pieces in a game ;
—the hand that moves them altogether unseen, screening itself
effectually from observation.
Let me take an illustration. You see a young plant springing
out of the ground. You are struck by the eager vital growth of it.
What elasticity, energy! how it snatches contributions from the
winds and sunlight, and the earth beneath, and rays itself out with
hourly fresh adornment! You become interested to know what is
the meaning of all this activity. You watch the plant. It unfolds.
The leaf-bud breaks and discloses leaves. These, then, are what
it has been aiming at.
But in the axils of the leaves are other leaf-buds, and from these
more leaves! The young shoot branches and becomes a little tree
or bush. The branching and budding go on, a repetition apparently
of one formula. Presently, however, a flower-bud appears. Now
we see the real object!
Have you then ever carefully examined a flower-bud ? Take a
rosebud for instance, or better still perhaps, a dahlia. When quite
young the buds of these latter are mere green knobs. Cut one
across with your pen-knife : you will see a green or whitish mass,
apparently without organisation. Cut another open which is more
advanced, and you will see traces of structural arrangement, even
markings and lines faintly pencilled on its surface, like the markings
that shoot thro’ freezing water—sketches and outlines of what is
to follow. Later, and your bud will disclose a distinct formation ;
beneath an outer husk or film—transparent in the case of the dahlia
—the petals can already be distinguished, marked, though not
actually separated from each other. Here they lie in block as it
were, conceived yet not shapen, like the statue in the stone, or the
thought in the brain of the sculptor. But they are growing mo
mently and expanding. The outermost, or sepals, cohering form a
husk, which for a time protects the young bud. But it also confines
it. A struggle ensues, a strangulation, and then the husk gives way,
falls off or passes into a secondary place, and the bud opens.
And now the petals uncurl and free themselves like living things
to the light. But the process is not finished. Each petal expanding
shows another beneath, and these younger ones as they open push
the older ones outwards, and while these latter are fading there are
still new ones appearing in the centre. Envelope after envelope
exfoliated—such is the law of life.
�5
At last however within the most intimate petals appears the central
galaxy—the group of the sexual organs ! And now the flower (the
petal-flower) which just before in all its glory of form, colour and
fragrance seemed to be the culminating expression and purpose of
the plant’s life, appears only as a means, an introduction, a secondary
thing—a mere advertisement and lure to wandering insects. With
in it lies the golden circle of the stamens, the magic staff of the pistil,
and the precious ark or seed-vessel.
Now then we know what it has all been for! But the appearance
of the seed-vessel is not the end, it is only a beginning. The flower,
the petals, now drop off withered and useless; their work is done.
But the seed-vessel begins to swell, to take on structure and form
just as the formless bud did before—there is something at work
within. And now it bursts, opens, and falls away. It too is a husk,
and no longer of any importance—for within it appear the seeds, the
objects of all this long toil!
Is the investigation finished ? is the process at an end ?—No.
Here within this tiny seed lies the promise, the purpose, the vital
principle, the law, the inspiration—whatever you like to call it—of
this plant’s life. Can you find it ?
The seed falls to the ground. It swells and takes on form and
structure—just as the seed-vessel which enclosed it took on form
and structure before—and as the flower-bud (which enclosed the
seed-vessel) did before that—-and as the leaf-bud (which enclosed
the flower-bud) did before that. The seed falls to the ground ; it
throws off a husk (always husks thrown off!)—and discloses an
embryo plant—radicle, plumule and cotyledons—root-shoot, stem
shoot and seed leaves—complete. And the circle begins again.
*
We are baffled after all! We have followed this extraordinary
process, we have seen each stage of the plant-growth appearing
first as final, and then only as the envelope of a later stage. We
have stripped off, so to speak, husk afLer husk, in our search for the
inner secret of the plant-life—we have got down to the tiny seed.
But the seed we have found turns out (like every other stage) to be
itself only an envelope—to be thrown away in its turn—what we
want lies still deeper down. The plant-life begins again—or rather
it never ends—but it does not repeat itself. The young plant is not
the same as the parent, and the next generation varies again from
this. When the envelopes have been thrown off a thousand and a
hundred thousand times more, a new form will appear; will this be
a nearer and more perfect expression than before of that withinlying secret—or otherwise ?
To return to Society : I began by noting the contrast, often drawn,
between the stern inexorable march of this as a whole, and the
* Though not really a circle any more than the paths of the planets
are really ellipses.
�equally imperious determination of the individual to interfere with
its march—a determination excited by the contemplation of what is
called evil, and shapen by an ideal of something better arising with
in him. Think what a commotion there must be within the bud
when the petals of a rose are forming! Think what arguments,
what divisions, what recriminations, even among the atoms. An
organization has to be constructed and completed. It is finished at
last, and a petal is formed. It rays itself out in the sun, is beautiful
and unimpeachable for a day; then it fades, is pushed off, its work
is done—another from within takes its place.
One social movement succeeds another, the completion of one is
the signal for the commencement of the next. Hence there can be
no stereotyping: not to change is to die—this is the rule of Life ;
because (and the reason is simple enough) one form is not enough to
express the secret of life. To express that require an infinite series
of forms.
Even a crab cannot get on without changing its shell. It outgrows
it. It feels very uncomfortable—pent, sullen and irritable (much as
the bud did before the bursting of the husk, or as society does when
dead forms and institutions—generally represented by a class in
power—confine its growth)—anxious, too, and oppressed with fears,
the crab—retires under a rock, out of harm’s way, and presently,
crack! the shell scales off, and with quietude and patience from
within another more suited to it forms. Yet this latter is not final.
It is merely the prelude to another.
The Conservative may be wron& but the Liberal is just as wrong
who considers his reform as ultimate, both are right in so far as
they look upon measures as transitory. Beware above all things of
utopianism in measures ! Beware, that is, of regarding any system
or scheme of society whatever as final or permanent, whether it be
the present, or one to come. The feudal arrangement of society
succeeded the clannish and patriarchal, the commercial or competi
tive system succeeds the feudal, the socialistic succeeds the
commercial, and the socialistic is succeeded in its turn by other
stages ; and each of these includes numerous minor developments.
The politician or reformer who regards any of these stages or steps
as containing the whole secret and redemption of society commits
just the same mistake as the theologian who looks upon any one
doctrine as necessary to salvation. He is betrayed into the most
frightful harshness, narrow-mindedness, and intolerance—and if he
has power will become a tyrant. Just the same danger has to be
guarded against by every one of us in daily life. Who is there who.
(though his reason may contend against it) does not drop into the
habit of regarding some one change in his life and surroundings as
containing finally the secret of his happiness, and excited by this
immense prospect does not do things which he afterwards regrets,
and which end in disappointment ? There is a millennium, but it-
�7
does not belong to any system of society that can be named, nor to
any doctrine, belief, circumstance or surrounding of individual life.
The secret of the plant-life does not tarry in any one phase of its
growth; it eludes from one phase to another, still lying within
and within the latest. It is within the grain of mustard seed ; it is
so small. Yet it rules and is the purpose of every stage, and is like
the little leaven which, invisible in three measures of meal, yet
leavened the whole lump.
Of the tendency, of which I have spoken, of social forms to stereo
type themselves, Law is the most important and in some sense the
most pernicious instance. Social progress is a continual fight
against it. Popular customs get hardened into laws. Even thus
they soon constitute evils. But in the more complex stages of society,
when classes arise, the law-making is generally in the hands of a
class, and the laws are hardened (often very hardened) class
practices. These shells have to be thrown off and got rid of at all
costs—or rather they will inevitably be thrown off when the growing
life of the people underneath forces this liberation. It is a bad
sign when a patient ‘ law-abiding ’ people submit like sheep to old
forms which are really long out-worn. “ Where the men and women
think lightly of the laws. . . . there the great city stands,” says
Walt Whitman.
I remember once meeting with a pamphlet written by an Italian,
whose name I have forgotten, member of a Secularist society, to
prove that the Devil was the author of all human progress. Of
course that, in his sense, is true. The spirit of opposition to
established order, the war against the continuance (as a finality) of
any institution or order, however good it may be for the time, is a
necessary element of social progress, is a condition of the very life
of Society. Without this it would die.
Law is a strangulation. Yet while it figures constantly as an
evil in social life, it must not therefore be imagined to be bad or
without use. On the contrary, its very appearance as an evil is
part of its use. It is the husk which protects and strengthens the
bud while it confines it. Possibly the very confinement and forcible
repression which it exercises is one element in the more rapid
organization of the bud within. It is the crab’s shell which gives
form and stability to the body of the creature, but which has to give
way when a more extended form is wanted.
In the present day in modern society the strangulation of the
growth of the people is effected by the capitalist class. This class
together with its laws and institutions constitutes the husk which
has to be thrown off just as itself threw off the husk of the feudal
aristocracy in its time. The commercial and capitalist envelope
has undoubtedly served to protect and give form to (and even
nourish) the growing life of the people. But now its function in that
respect is virtually at an end. It appears merely as an obstacle
�8
and an evil—and will inevitably be removed, either by a violent
disruption or possibly by a gradual absorption into the socialised
proletariat beneath.
At all times, and from whatever points of view, it should be borne
in mind that laws are made by the people, not the people by the
laws. Modern European Society is cumbered by such a huge and
complicated overgrowth of law, that the notion actually gets abroad
that such machinery is necessary to keep the people in order —that
without it the mass of the people would not live an orderly life ;
whereas all observation of the habits of primitive and savage tribes,
destitute of laws and almost destitute of any authoritative institutions
—and all observation of the habits of civilised people when freed
from law (as in gold-mining and other backwood communities)—
show just the reverse. The instinct ofamanis to an orderly life,
the law is but the result and expression of this. As well attribute
the organization of a crab to the influence of its shell, as attribute
the orderly life of a nation to the action of its laws. Law has a
purpose and an influence—but the idea that it is to preserve order
is elusive. All its machinery of police and prisons do not, cannot
do this. At best in this sense it only preserves an order advan
tageous to a certain class ; it is the weapon of a slow and deliberate
warfare. It springs from hatred and rouses opposition, and so has
a healthy influence.
Fichte said : “ The. object of all government is to render govern
ment superfluous.” And certainly if external authority of any kind
has a final purpose it must be to establish and consolidate an internal
authority. Whitman adds to his description of “ the great city,”
that it stands “ Where outside authority enters always after the
precedence of inside authority.” When this process is complete
government in the ordinary sense is already “rendered superfluous.’
Anyhow this external governmental power is obviously self-destruc
tive. It has no permanence or finality about it, but in every period
of history appears as a husk or shell preparing the force within
which is to reject it.
Thus I have in a very fragmentary and imperfect way called
attention to some general conditions of social progress, conditions
by which the growth of Society is probably comparable with the
growth of a plant or an animal or an astronomic organism, subject
to laws and an order of its own, in face of which the individual
would at first sight appear to count as nothing. But there is, as
usual, a counter-truth which must not be overlooked. If Society
moves by an ordered and irresistible march of its own, so also—as
a part of Society, and beyond that as a part of Nature—does the
individual. In his right place the individual is also irresistible.
Now then, when you have seized your life-inspiration, your
absolute determination, you also are irresistible, the whole weight
of this vast force is behind you. Huge as the institutions of Society
�are, vast as is the sweep of its traditions and customs, yet in face of
it all, the word “I will ” is not out of place.
Let us take the law of the competitive struggle for existence—
which has been looked upon by political economists (perhaps with
some justice) as the base of social life. It is often pointed out that
this law of competition rules throughout the animal and vegetable
kingdoms as well as through the region of human society, and there
fore, it is said, being evidently a universal law of Nature, it is useless
and hopeless to expect that society can ever be founded on any
r other basis. Yet I say that granting this assumption—and in
reality the same illusion underlies the application of the word
1
“ law ” here, as we saw before in its social application—granting
I say that competition has hitherto been the universal law, the last
word, of Nature, still if only one man should stand up and say, “ It
shall be so no more,” if he should say, “ It is not the last word of
my nature, and my acts and life declare that it is not,”—then that
so-called law would be at an end. He being a part of Nature has
I
as much right to speak as any other part, and as in the elementarylaw of hydrostatics a slender column of water can balance (being at
l
the same height) against an ocean—so his Will (if he understand it
aright) can balance all that can be arrayed against him. If only
one man — with regard to social matters — speaking from the
very depth of his heart says “This shall not be: behold
something better; ” his word is likely stronger than all insti
tutions, all traditions. And why ?—because in the deeps of his
P individual heart he touches also that of Society, of Man. Within
ft himself, in quiet, he has beheld the secret, he has seen a fresh crown
of petals, a golden circle of stamens, folded and slumbering in the
L
bud. Man forms society, its laws and institutions, and Man can
!
reform them. Somewhere within yourself be assured, the secret of
that authority lies.
The fatal words spoken by individuals—the words of progress—
are provoked by what is called evil. Every human institution is
good in its time, and then becomes evil—yet it may be doubted
whether it is really evil in itself, but rather because if it remained
it would hinder the next step. Each petal is pushed out by the
next one, A new growth of the moral sense takes place first withinthe individual—and this gives birth to a new ideal, something to
love better than anything seen before. Then in the light of this
new love, this more perfect desire, what has gone and the actually
existing things appear wizened and false (i.e., ready to fall like the
petals). They become something to hate, they are evil; and the
perception of evil is already the promise of something better.
Do not be misled so as to suppose that science and the intellect
• are or can be the sources of social progress or change. It is the
moral births and outgrowths that originate, science and the intellect
only give form to these. It is a common notion and one apparently
�gaining ground that science may as it were take Society by the hand
and become its high priest and guide to a glorious kingdom. And
this to a certain extent is true. Science may become high-priest,
but the result of its priestly offices will entirely depend on what
kind of deity it represents—what kind of god Society worships.
Science will doubtless become its guide, but whither it leads Society
will entirely depend on whither Society desires to be led. If
Society worships a god of selfish curiosity the holy rites and priest
hood of science will consist in vivisection and the torture of the
loving animals ; if Society believes above all things in material
results, science will before long provide these things—it will surround
men with machinery and machine-made products, it will whirl
them about (behind steam-kettles as Mr. Ruskin says) from one end
of the world to the other, it will lap them in every luxury and
debility, and give them fifty thousand toys to play with where
before they had only one—but through all the whistling of the
kettles and the rattling of the toys it will not make the still small
voice of God sound nearer. If Society, in short, worships the
devil, science will lead it to the devil; aud if Society worships God
science will open up, and clear away much that encumbered the
path to God. (And here I use these terms as lawyers say “ without
prejudice.”) No mere scientific adjustments will bring about the
millenium. Granted that the problem is Happiness, there must be
certain moral elements in the mass of mankind before they will
even desire, that kind of happiness which is attainable, let alone
their capacity of reaching it—when these moral elements are
present the intellectual or scientific solution of the problem will be
soon found, without them there will not really be any serious attempt
made to find it. That is—as I said at the head of this paragraph
—science and the intellect are not, and never can be, the sources of
social progress and change. It is the moral births and outgrowths
that originate; the intellect stands in a secondary place as the tool
and instrument of the moral faculty.
The commercial and competitive state of society indicates to my
mind an upheaval from the feudal of a new (and perhaps grander)
sentiment of human right and dignity. Arising simultaneously
with Protestantism it meant—they both meant—individualism, the
assertion of man’s worth and dignity as man, and as against any
feudal lordship or priestly hierarchy. It was an outburst of feeling
first. It was the sense of equality spreading. It took the form of
individualism—the equality of rights—Protestantism in religion,
competition in commerce. It resulted in the social emancipation
of a large class, the bourgeoisie. Feudalism, now dwindled to a
husk, was thrown off; and for a time the glory, the life of society
was in the new order.
But to-day a wider morality, or at least a fresh impulse, asserts
itself. Competition in setting itself up as the symbol of human
�II
equality, was (like all earthly representations of what is divine)
only an imperfect symbol. It had the elements of mortality and
dissolution in it. For while it destroyed the privilege of rank and
emancipated a huge class, it ended after all by enslaving another
class and creating the privilege of wealth. Competition in fact
represented a portion of human equality but not the whole: in
sisting on individual rights all round, it overlooked the law of charity,
turned sour with the acid of selfishness, and became as to-day the
gospel of “ the devil take the hindmost.” Arising glorious as the
representative of human equality and the opponent of iniquity in
high places, it has ended by denying the very source from whence
it sprung. It passes by, and like Moses on the rock we now behold
the back parts of our divinity !
Competition is doomed. Once a good, it has now become an
evil. But simultaneously (and probably as part of the same pro
cess) springs up, as I say, a new morality. Everywhere to-day
signs of this may be seen, felt. It is felt that the relation which
systematically allows the weaker to go to the wall is not human.
Individualism, the mere separate pursuit, each of his own good, on
the basis of equality, does not satisfy the heart. The right (un
doubted though it may be) to take advantage of another’s weakness
or inferiority, does not please us any longer. Science and the intel
lect have nothing to say to this, for or against,—they can merely
stand and look on—arguments may be brought on both sides. What
I say is that as a fact a change is taking place in the general senti
ment in this matter; some deeper feeling of human solidarity,
brotherliness, charity, some more genuine and substantial apprehen
sion of the meaning of the word equality, is arising—some broader
and more determined sense of justice, Though making itself felt as
yet only here and there, still there are indications that this new
sentiment is spreading ; and if it becomes anything like general,
then inevitably (I say) it will bring a new state of society with it—
will be in fact such new state of society.
Some years ago at Brighton I met with William Smith, the
author of “Thorndale ” and other works—a man who had thought
much about society and human life. He was then quite an invalid,
and indeed died only a week or two later. Talking one day about
the current Political Economy he said : “ They assume self-interest
as the one guiding principle of human nature and so make it the
basis of their science—but,” he added, “ even if it is so now it
may not always be so, and that would entirely re-model their
science.” I do not know whether he was aware that even then a
new school of political economy was in existence, the school of Marx,
Engels, Lassalle, and others—founded really on just this new basis,
taking as its point of departure a stricter sense of justice and a new
conception of human right and equality. At any rate, whether
aware or not, I contend that this dying man—even if he had been
�12
alone in the world in his aspiration—-feeling within himself a deeper,
more intimate, principle of action than that expressed in the existing
state of society, might have been confident that at some time or
other—if not immediately—it would come to the surface and find its
due interpretation and translation m a new order of things. And
I contend that whoever to-day feels in himself that there is a better
standard of life than the higgling of the market, and a juster scale
of wages than “what A. or B. will take," and a more important
question in an undertaking than “ how much per cent, it will
pay ”—contains or conceals in himself the germs of a new social
order.
Socialism, if that is to be the name of the next wave of social life,
springs from and demands as its basis a new sentiment of humanity,
a higher morality. That is the essential part of it. A science it is,
but only secondarily ; for we must remember that as the bourgeois
political economy sprang from certain moral data, so the socialist
political economy implies other moral data. Both are irrefragable
on their own axioms. And when these axioms in course of time
change again (as they infallibly will) another science of political
economy, again irrefragable, will spring up, and socialist political
economy will be false.
The morality being the essential part of the movement, it is im
portant to keep that in view. If Socialism, as Mr. Matthew Arnold
has pointed out, means merely a change of society without a change
of its heart—if it merely means that those who grabbed all the good
things before shall be displaced, and that those who were grabbed
from shall now grab in their turn—it amounts to nothing, and is not
in effect a change at all, except quite upon the surface. If it is to
be a substantial movement, it must mean a changed ideal, a changed
conception of daily life ; it must mean some better conception of
human dignity—such as shall scorn to claim anything for its own
which has not been duly earned, and such as shall not find itself
degraded by the doing of any work, however menial, which is useful
to society; it must mean simplicity of life, defence of the weak,
courage of one’s own convictions, charity of the faults and failings
of others. These things first, and a larger slice of pudding all
round afterwards!
How can such morality be spread ?—How does a plant grow ?—
It grows. There , is some contagion of influence in these matters.
Knowledge can be taught directly ; but a new ideal, a new sentiment
of life, can only pass by some indirect influence from one to another.
Yet it does pass. There is no need to talk—-perhaps the less said
in any case about these matters the better—but if you have such
new ideal within you, it is I believe your clearest duty, as well as
your best interest, to act it out in your own life at all apparent costs.
Then we must not forget that a wise order of society once estab
lished (by the strenuous action of a few) reacts on its members. To
�T3
a certain extent it is true, perhaps, that men and women can be
grown—like cabbages. And this is a case of the indirect influence
of the strenuous few upon the many.
Thus—in this matter of society’s change and progress—(though
I feel that the subject as a whole is far too deep for me)—-I do
think that the birth of new moral conceptions in the individual is
at least a very important factor. It may be in one individual or in
a hundred thousand. As a rule probably when one man feels any
such impulse strongly, the hundred thousand are nearer to him than
he suspects. (When one leaf, or petal, or stamen begins to form on
a tree, or one plant begins to push its way above the ground in
spring, there are hundreds of thousands all round just ready to
form.) Anyhow, whether he is alone or not, the new moral birth is
sacred—as sacred as the child within the mother’s womb—it is a
kind of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to conceal it. And when
I use the word “ moral ” here—or anywhere above—I do not, I hope,
mean that dull pinch-lipped conventionality of negations which
often goes under that name. The deep-lying ineradicable desires,
fountains of human action, the life-long aspirations, the lightninglike revelations of right and justice, the treasured hidden ideals,
born in flame and in darkness, in joy and sorrow, in tears and in
triumph, within the heart—are as a rule anything but conventional.
They may be, and often are, thought immoral. I don’t care, they
are sacred just the same. If they underlie a man’s life, and are
nearest to himself—they will underlie humanity. “To your own
self be true . . .
Anyhow courage is better than conventionality : take your stand
and let the world come round to you. Do not think you are right
and everybody else wrong. If you think you are wrong then you
may be right; but if you think you are right then you are certainly
. wrong. Your deepest highest moral conceptions are only for a
time. They have to give place. They are the envelopes of Free
dom—that eternal Freedom which cannot be represented—that
peace which passes understanding. Somewhere here is the invisible
vital principle, the seed within the seed. It may be held but not
thought, felt but not represented—except by Life and History.
Every individual so far as he touches this stands at the source of
social progress—behind the screen on which the phantasmagoria
play.
�THE INTERNATIONAL LIBRARY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE.
Vol. I. Woman, in the Past, Present,
and Future. By August Bebel, Deputy in
the Reichstag.
Translated from the German by H. B.
Adams Walther. Demy 8-vo., cloth, price 5s.
Vol. II. The Co operative Common
wealth : an Exposition of Modern Socialism.
By Laurence Gronlund, of Philadelphia.
cloth, price 3s. 6d.
Demy 8-vo.,
“ The book, while just as readable and captivating as Henry George’s
Progress and Poverty, is far more logical and thoughtful: at the same time,
it is in a masterly manner adapted to the Anglo-Saxon public.”—New York
Volkszeitung (one of the largest Socialist papers in America).
‘‘The best account of German or State Socialism in English.”—-Mw
York Sun (the largest capitalist newspaper in the States).
“The grandest and highest minded statement of Socialism I have ever
seen.”—H. D. Wright, Chief of Massachussetts Bureau of Labour Statistics.
Socialism made Plain.
The social and
political manifesto of the Social-Democratic Federation
issued in June 1883, with proposals for organisation of
labour issued in November 1883. Fifty-first thousand.
Crown 8-vo., paper cover, price id.
44 JUSTICE,” the Organ of the Social Democracy.
' Every Saturday, one penny.
Summary of the Principles of Socialism
By H. M. Hyndman and William Morris.
Second
edition, 64-pp. crown 8-vo., in wrapper designed by Wm.
Morris, price 4d.
This gives an account of the growth of capitalist production, and con
cludes with a statement of the demands of English Socialists for the imme
diate future.
The Socialist Catechism. By J. L. Joynes.
Reprinted with additions from Justice.
price id. Tenth thousand.
Socialist Rhymes.
By
Reprinted chiefly from Justice.
J.
Royal 8-vo.,
L.
Joynes.
Royal 8-vo., price id.
The Modern Press, 13, Paternoster Row, E.C.
�Wage-Labour and Capital.
By Karl Marx.
Translated by J. L. Joynes and reprinted from Justice,.
Price 2d.
This is the only work of the great Socialist thinker which has been
translated into English.
Socialism and the Worker.
Sorge.
By F. A.
Price id.
An explanation in the simplest language of the main idea of Socialism.
Socialism
and
Slavery.
By
H.
4
M.
Hyndman. (In reply Mr. Herbert Spencer’s article on
the li Coming Slavery”). Crown 8-vo., in wrapper,
price 6d.
The Working Man’s Programme (Arbeiter
Programm). By Ferdinand Lassalle. Translated from
the German by Edward Peters. Crown 8-vo., paper
cover, price 6d.
Socialism versus Smithism: An open
letter from H. M. Hyndman to Samuel Smith, M.P. for
Liverpool. Crown 8-vo., paper cover, price 2d.
The Appeal to the Young.
By Prince
Peter Kropotkin.
Translated from the French by
H. M. Hyndman and reprinted from Justice. Royal 8-vo.,
16-pp. Price one penny. Tenth thousand.
The most eloquent and noble appeal to the generous emotions ever pen
ned by a scientific man. Its author is now suffering five years imprison
ment at the hands of the French Republic for advocating the cause of the
workers.
The Future of Marriage.
Woman.
By a Respectable
Crown 8-vo., paper cover, price 4d.
English and French Morality; from a
Frenchman’s point of view.
Paper cover, is.
By Yves Guyot, Depute.
Herbert Spencer on Socialism. By Frank
Fairman.
16-pp. crown 8-vo., price id.
The Modern Press, 13, Paternoster Row, E.C.
'
�BY
THE
SAME
AUTHOR.
Towards Democracy. New edition, with numerous
added Poems, crown 8vo, cloth. 260pp. Price 2s. 6d.
Modern Science : a Criticism. Crown 8vo, paper, 76
pp. Price is.
Modern Money-Lending ; or, the Meaning of Divi
dends. A Pamphlet. Price 2d. Second edition.
England’s Ideal. Price 2d.
To be had of the Publisher,
John Heywood, Deansgate
and
Ridgefield, Manchester;
11, Paternoster Buildings, London.
and
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Social progress and individual effort
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Carpenter, Edward
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 13, [3] p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Reprinted from To-day, February, 1885. Publisher's list on two unnumbered pages at the end. List of other works by author on unnumbered page at the end.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Modern Press
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1886
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
T394
Subject
The topic of the resource
Socialism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Social progress and individual effort), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Social change
Social Reform
Socialism
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/9bbedea3d102766c0ae341752d92d5dd.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ac5VqGHcK1%7EHZTPdo8DnygjbThBk5yeQWbdzB9qFBVPI39AcaG7tbFPFT4sNfNTeEfDbEoZPvPpntg8hCJ06fU1NHN6YUwOmycmYTEopKZDECK39-vVr4ghvWcG1DCIn%7EOmuRPfnzEBaq4liO3Ym8-81Bm6BzNUQbgBEcFhbGFVyXcnkM572CUdbvH2ISHKYYHZsnbDJuu8S72n1tQqmB6v3bwnyu23rWZQXXiyj8Dbqv3TlS5fI6iNjpnM8-Xxj4H-vA0aKDr18v9BhFepzI7KTySRy-y4bq44NeY7NOzJdImy65sRlxLGFCzR74yROKjY0ViIh1Q1dIh714ZkL3g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
76d5af8099696daf9ac29a395a87e3f8
PDF Text
Text
THE
"CIVILIZATION OF THE FUTURE,
NECESSITY OF THE ORGANIZATION OF ^SOCIETY ON
SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES.
BY A.
BRISBANE.
HE idea of a Reconstruction of Society, involving an entire
change in the existing order of things, has taken possession
of a large number of minds at the present day. These minds
belong mainly to two extreme classes in society; to the most
advanced thinkers, and to the suffering masses. Profound reflection
and misery are alike leading men to comprehend the necessity of fun* damental social changes, and of a new and higher Order of society on
I the earth;—and this insight is giving rise to a vast under-current of
p agitation^-but little suspected by the conservative classes—which is
becoming powerful, and is destined ere long to change all the issues
that now occupy public attention.
The question of a Social Reconstruction is by far the most im- portant that can engage human thought. It should be a subject of
• the most serious study on the part of progressive and able thinkers,
- for ere long the question will become the order of the day: and when
r
this takes place, and the idea of a better social state penetrates the
minds of the masses, it will<give rise to great convulsions, to Social
Revolutions, unless the leaders of society are prepared with scientific
solutions. The work of real Thinkers at the present day is not with
partial and fragmentary reforms; it is with these solutions,—with the
. means of a fundamental and organic Reconstruction of Society.
We will endeavor to throw some light on this subject by an analysis
of Society—of its nature and constitution. We will examine it in its
relation to Man, who is a system of mental and moral Forces, and
who lives under and acts through its Institutions. Society (by which
we understand a synthesis of customs, laws, and institutions) is the
great external or collective Body of a collective Soul,—of a large
community of beings, co-operating industrially, politically, and socially,
and forming a State or Nation. In studying this Body, we must do
so with constant reference to the living and superior Principle which
acts through it, and to which it should be adapted.
The terms Society, Social System, Social Order, are used in a gen■L
29
T
�226
, THE
CIVILIZATION
OF THE FUTURE.
eral and vague manner to convey the idea of a system of customs, laws,
and institutions, under which a community of human beings liveThey convey the idea of merely an indefinite Whole, which requires
to be decomposed or analyzed and defined, and its different parts shown
and explained, in order that a clear and intelligible conception of its
nature may be formed.
The Social System is then'to be considered as a Whole, composed
of subordinate parts or branches like other Wholes,—like the human’
body, for example, which is composed of subordinate organs, such as
the brain and nervous system, the lungs, heart, stomach, liver, etc., or
like a machine, composed of wheels, springs, and other parts. To
living Wholes, the name Organism is given: to inanimate Wholes,
constructed by man, that of Machine or Mechanism. Thus the
human body is an Organism, while a steam-engine is a Machine. To
the Social Whole, called the Social System or Order, the term Organ
ism may, we think, be justly applied, inasmuch as the living Forces
in man—the Senses, Sentiments, and Intellectual Faculties—act . in
and through it. It is, as stated, the external Body of a collective
Soul,—of a community, nation, or race.
In analyzing the social Organism, and decomposing it into its con
stituent parts, we find that it is composed of the following principal
branches.
TABLE OF THE SOCIAL ORGANISM AND ITS BRANCHES.
Transitional Branch. EDUCATION : Development of the Child or germ.' INDUSTRY : Creation of Wealth.
Three
SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS: Regulation of the Social rePrimary
“
lations of human beings.
Branches.
GOVERNMENT : Regulation of the collective relations
t and interests.
Pivotal Branch.
RELIGION: Regulation of the relations of Man with the
invisible Universe.
J THE FINE ARTS. Harmony.
Accessory Branches.
1 THE SCIENCES. Knowledge.
We will explain briefly the functions of these various branches;
after which we will present a more complete analysis of the social Or
ganism.
Transitional Branch: The System of Education. We designate
this branch as transitional, as its function is to develop and form the
Child, which is the germ of the future Man, and to train and prepare
it for the industrial, social, and civil.pursuits and relations into which
it is later to enter. This branch is composed of three sub-branches :
1st Sub-branch : Industrial Education. The function of this
branch of the general Educational system is to develop the Child
physically, to initiate it into Industry, and thus render it a producer
capable of supporting itself, as it grows to manhood. This branch is
entirely unorganized in the present social Order; in fact, it does not
�THS
CIVILIZATION
Of
THE
FUTURE.
22?
exist, except in the rude state of the apprenticeship system for the
children of the poor. The upper and middle classes grow up entirely
uneducated industrially, and are, as a consequence, non-producers,
who must appropriate to themselves the wealth created by the poorer
classes,’ which they do through the parasitic operations of commerce
and finance, and the profits of capital.
2d Sub-beanoh: Social or Moral Education. The function
of this branch is to develop the social or moral Sentiments, and pre
pare the Child to become a true member of the body-social. This
branch is unorganized; the germ exists in -the families of the rich,
but in a feeble and artificial state. As a consequence, the honorable
social Sentiments are almost wholly undeveloped in men. The feel
ings of collective justice^honor, fright, and benevolence exist only
exceptionally in a very few individuals.
3d Sub-branch: Intellectual Education. The function of
this branch is to develop and cultivatejkthe Mind, and initiate the
Child into the Sciences. The whole attention of men has hitherto
been directed to this branch, and it has been developed and organized
to some extent. Our schools, colleges, and universities are the results
of the efforts to organize Intellectual Education. Under it, the chil
dren of the rich receive a fair degree of mental training; and are
much more developed intellectually than they are morally or indus
trially.
First Primary Branch of the Social Organism: The System oe
Industry. The function of this branch is the creation of Wealth and
the regulation of the relations of Man with Nature. At present it
is unorganized or falsely organized, and does not second Man in his
industrial labors and operations, especially those of a higher and more
universal character. In the future, when scientifically organized, it will
furnish him the means of executing his industrial function or destiny
on the' earth; namely, that of cultivating and embellishing his globe,
of developing and perfecting the animal and vegetable kingdoms upon
it, of distributing them properly over its surface, and of establishing
order and harmony in Nature. Man, the Overseer of the globe, the
Beason of Nature, requires a scientifically organized system of Indus
try to execute the vast industrial labors that devolve upon him. This
first of the primary branches is composed of three sub-branches, which
are:
.
1. The Production of!Wealth, effected by agriculture, manu
factures, the mechanic* arts, mining, transportation, the fisheries, and
household labor.
2. The Exchange of Wealth, effected by commerce and bank
ing. Commerce buys and sells, that is, effects the exchange of products
already created. Banking gives credit, and credit is equivalent to the
exchange of products, one of which is not as yet created. The first is
synchronous exchange, the second exchange on-time.
�228
THE
CIVILIZATION
OF THE FUTURE.
3. The Division- oe Wealth, effected or determined by the Laws
and Customs of Society, which regulate the ownership of property,
the system of labor, commerce, banking, the currency, interest, rents,
etc. The custom of Slavery, for example, determines a division of
wealth, based on the will of the master; it is different from that de
termined by the system of Wages or hired-labor, which gives the la
borer the right of refusal. Entailed estates, as the system exists in
England, determines a division of the products of the earth different
from that of the small proprietary system of Erance. The Commer
cial system, as it now prevails in our unorganized and incoherent
Industry, with its speculations, monopolies, and frauds, and its selfish
individual action, determines a division of the wealth created by the
first branch in a way most favorable to the commercial class. It is
these Laws and Customs which regulate the Division or Distribution
of Wealth among the different classes in society, and constitute the
third sub-branch of the Industrial system.
Second Primary Branch of the Social Organism: The System oe’
Social Institutions. The function of this branch is the regulation
of the play and action of the social Sentiments in society, and of the
social relations between human beings to which they give rise. Thesel
Institutions are as yet in an undeveloped, and, consequently, in an un
organized state; they exist in fact only in germ. When fully developed
and organized in the future, forming part of a Scientific Social Or
ganism, they will secure a full and harmonious action of the social
Sentiments,—of those moral Eorces in man, which impel him to form
ties of various kinds with his fellow-creatures—ties of Friendship,
Love, Ambition, and Parentalism—and will lead to the creation of
social order and unity in Society. This branch of the Social Organism
places Man in sympathetic relation with Humanity, as the Industrial
branch places him in relation with Nature. It is composed of four
sub-branches:
1. System oe Rights and Obligations, regulating the social
relations of human beings as members of the body-social, and as
beings of the same species, without regard to sex, age, or capacity.'
2. System oe Marriage, regulating the sympathetic relations of
the Sexes.
3. System oe Hierarchy, (of grades, ranks, honors, and dis
tinctions in industrial, social, and political functions), regulating the
relations of human beings.as functionaries and co-workers, according
to capacity and merit. It is introduced in a more or less imperfect
manner in government, the army, and the catholic church.
4. The Family System, regulating the relations of parents and
children, and generally of the old and young, the strong and the .
weak.
These four Systems, when fully constituted and organized, will
become four Cardinal Institutions, which. will develop fully and
�THE
CIVILIZATION
OF THE lUTUR'E.
229
normally the four cardinal Social Sentiments in the human soul,
regulate theirmction, and establish order and harmony in the Social
relations to which they give rise. These Sentiments iare—1. Friendship
or the ■■sentiment of humamequality and unity. 2. Love, or the symi - pathy betweeiuthe Jsexes. 3. The corporate and hierarchal Sentiment,
called Ambition. 4. Parentalism, or the family Sentiment. These
four Institutions, when truly and normally organized, will constitute
a general
o/ Laws and Ordinances, and of Rites, Ceremonies,
Usages, and other external forms, which will correspond perfectly to
the social Forces they are to govern; they will become the external
Organism, through which these Forces will manifest themselves and act.
Music furnishes an ^lustration that will render this intelligible. The
r Scien^ of music consists of the laws of the Sense of Hearing; and
the Art, orthe means and aids through which the Sense manifests itself
and acts. The two constitute its external Form and Organism. With
the aid of Music, the Sense is cultivated, and is truly and harmo
niously developed. We may call Music, to render our idea clear, the
Institution of the Sense of Hearing. When Institutions, as perfectly
adapted to the four Social Se'htiments as Music to that Sense, are discovered and established, they will develop them as harmoniously as
Muji^fdevmpps the musical Sense, and will create in the social world
accords as beautiful as Music creates in its sphere. The social Senti
ments, we will add, are in as low a state of development among the
civilized masses as the Sense of Hearing among savages and barbarians.
Third Primary Branch of the Social Organism: The System of
Government. The functions of this branch is .the regulation of the
conduct and action of Man in the extensive relations and combinations
he forms with his fellow-men as a citizen of the body-politic. As men
must form great political Associations or Communities, with complex
and varied interests and relations, there must be Institutions, with
their laws, ordinances and prescriptions, and their external forms, to
In
regulate these interests and Relations. They are the Political InstituMAonaErnd constitu^^ whole! called Government. They regulate the
Political or collective relations of human beings, as the preceding Insti?
tutions Lregulate their social and personal relations. This branch is
composed of three sub-branches.
1. The Legislative Branch,E-the^creation of Laws and Ordinances.
Legislation has been, first, Theocratic, having its source in the Emotions of theocratic rulers and law-givers, who attribute to inspiration
or the Divine will the laws they promulgate; second, Monarchic and
Oligarchic, having its source in the will of one or many Rulers; third,
Democratic, having itsjourcepn the deliberations of legislative Bodies,
Khat min the speculations and theorizing of human reason. The Laws
derived from these three sources are all arbitrary, incomplete, or false,—
those derived ‘from the ^speculations of Reason as well as the others.
The true and scientific Legislation of the future will be based on the
�230
THE CIVILIZATION Of THE FUTURE.
Laws of order and organization in creation, according to which the
government of the universe takes place.. The true function of Reason
is to discover these Laws and employ them in the government of
human relations and interests on the earth.
2. The Judiciary Branch,—the Interpretation of Laws and the
explanation of their intent and purpose. This interpretation has been
exercised; first, by Priests; second, by absolute Rulers; third, by civil
Judges, appointed by the government or the people. In the future,—
in the scientific Organization of Society,—it will be exercised by Men,
who will be guided entirely by science, and who will restrict themselves
to interpreting and explaining the laws of Nature.
3. The Executive Branch,—the enforcement of obedience to
Laws, and their Execution. This function has been exercised in the
past by agents of various kinds,—religious, military and civil, secret and
open,—according as they served priesthoods, monarchies or democracies.
At the present day, it is exercised in our civilized societies by men chosen
for the purpose,—by sheriffs, constables, policemen, executioners, and
others, employing as means the scaffold, prison, fines, exiling and other
penalties. In a true social Organization, with the reign of universal
education and wealth, and the normal development of the social senti
ments, the vices and crimes of our unorganized and incoherent Socie
ties will so far disappear, that the violent and brutal system of repres
sion and constraint, now necessary, will be dispensed with, and replaced
by one of direct incentives to, and of rewards and honors for, just and
honorable conduct.
Pivotal Branch: Religion. The function of this branch is to
develop the Sentiments and the Intellect of Man in their higher
degrees, to elevate them to universality, so as to awaken in him an
interest in the cosmical Whole to which he belongs; that is, in the
Humanities on its planets, its plan and design, and its laws and order,
and thus associate him in feeling and thought with its cosmical life and
destinies. Man, by his Senses and the physical wants they entail upon
him, is drawn down to the material or animal plane of existence, and
his sentiments and reason are subordinated to material and selfish con
siderations. Now as the function of social Institutions, with the influ
ence they exercise upon the social Sentiments, is to develop him
morally,, and attract him to Humanity, thus elevating him in one direc
tion above the animal plane; and the function of Science, with the
influence it exercises upon the Intellect, is to develop him mentally,
and attract hiigrto universal ideas, to laws and principles, thus eleva
ting him in another direction above that lower plane; the function of
Religion is to develop him both in sentiment and thought to the extent
to excite in him an interest in the great Whole, to which he belongs,
and of which he forms a part and is a member; and to seek to asso
ciate himself with its cosmical operations. and destinies, and with the
moral Order that reigns in it, thus raising him to the dignity of a citi
�THE
CIVILIZATION
OF THE FUTURE.
231
zen of the universe. As it is noble in Man to become a truly social
being, associated in hisj sympathies with the whole of the Humanity to
which he belongs, and a scientific thinker, associated in his thought
with the Laws and Order of creation, it is nobler still to become ideally
a universal being, associated with the Cosmos, his finite life linked in
consciously with it, and participating through his aspirations in its
grandeur and harmony, its destinies, and its eternal life.
This pivotal branch is composed of three sub-branches, which, as
they have existed and now exist, are:
1. Worship,—a System of Bites and Ceremonies, through which
Man manifests his aspiration for Unity with Humanity, with the Uni
verse and its spiritual hierarchies, and with God; and a System of
Symbols by which he expresses through material forms, appreciable by
the Senses, invisible and mysterious truths, which the intuitions of the
Soul dimly apprehend.
2. Morality,—a System of Bules and Ordinances of conduct, of
moral life on earth, based on the mind’s conception of the moral attri
butes of the Deity—attributes to which he is stimulated to conform
from desire of unity with God.
3. Theology,^-Theory of the Universe and its general destinies,
of the immortality of the soul, and the Divine nature.
These three elements of Beligion will in the future—in the normal
social Organism of Humanity—be developed in a way widely different
from what they have been and are in the incomplete and outlined
Societies of the past and present.
.
„
, ( The Fine Arts.
iTui, g0IBK0BSH|
This branch accompanies the others, and is common to them all.
The function of the Fine Arts is to embellish the other branches
of the Social Organism, and establish refinement, beauty, and harmony
in the material and the social world. The function of the Sciences is
Organization and the creation of Order in all departments of human
affairs.
The Fine Arts comprise two sub-branches
1. The M atkrt at,. or the Fine Arts of the Senses, of which
music, painting, sculpture, architecture, and tlje dance are the princi
pal now developed. These Arts are external embodiments of the
Senses in their measured or harmonious development and action.
The Laws of the Arts are the modes of action of the Senses in this
development. Music, for example, is the external expression or em
bodiment of the Sense of Hearing,—of its perceptions distributed, co
ordinated, and classified by the Intellect or organizing Faculty. There
will exist, in the future, four Orders of this first Class of Art; namely,
the Arts corresponding to Hearing, to Sight, to Taste, and to Smell.
The Art which corresponds to Hearing—Music—has been fully de
veloped. That which corresponds to Sight—Painting, Sculpture,
�232
THE
CIVILIZATION OF THE
FUTURE.
Architecture, and Decoration—has been developed in outline; some
empirical principles have been discerned by instinct, but the laws of
visual Harmony are as yet unknown. The two Arts, corresponding to
Taste and Smell, are not discovered, or even recognized; they will be
come important Arts in the future, especially the first, and will hayp.
their interpreters, as has Music at the present day. The Sense of
Touch is the pivot or trunk out of which the other Senses spring or
ramify, and has not its Art.
2. Social or Moral Art, or the Fine Arts of the Spot at.
Sentiments. These Sentiments, when they shall receive a refinp.fi
development, will, like the Senses, give rise to a system of harmonious
expressions and forms, which will constitute a Harmony of Manners,
that may appropriately be called the Fine Arts of the Social Senti
ments. Its germs exist and are known under the name of Polite
ness. When a complete system of politeness, with its various elements
fully developed, such as urbanity, suavity, gracefulness, dignity, deli
cacy, and refinement, is established, with a Code of Etiquette—the
Laws or Science of the Art—we shall then see developed the new Art,
and shall understand its vast importance in refining, elevating, and
giving charm to the social intercourse of human beings. There will
be four branches to this second Order of Art, corresponding to the
four Social Sentiments that are to evolve it. Each Sentiment will have
its own special Art, that is, a System of Politeness and Etiquette pe
culiar to it. That .of Ambition will differ quite widely from that of
Friendship. The former will sum up all the forms of - hierarchal
dignity; the latter, those of frank and friendly equality.
The Sciences, classified objectively, or according to the subjects of
which they treat, form the following five sub-branches:
1. The Physical;—Theory of Matter and its Forces.
2. The Psychological;—Theory of Man, or theory of the mental
Forces that impel him, and their social functions.
3. The Sociological;—Theory of Society and its Organization.
4. The Cosmological;—Theory of the Cosmos, of its constitution,
organization, and order.
5. The Ontological;—Theory of pure Being or of primary Existence. (This latter is an illusive Science, which will be replaced by
another.)
A final Synthesis unites all these Sciences in one,—in a Pivotal or
Trunk-science; namely, the Science of the Laws of Order and Har
mony in the universe, according to which its various departments are
governed, and its phenomena regulated. These Laws are the mani
festation of the Supreme Reason, in action in creation—the Thought or
Logic of the universe. The finite Reason of Man, constituted on the
model of the Supreme Reason, (and it can be constituted on no other
for there are no more two kinds of reasoning faculties than there are
two kinds of mathematics), can discover and comprehend these Laws,
�THE
CIVILIZATION
OF THE FUTURE
233
and in so doing elevate itself to unity with its supreme Prototype, and
obtain the Key to the special Sciences, which key is the Science of
Laws, and underlies them all.
With these brief explanations, we will sum up and present in
tabular form the six branches of the Social Organism, so that it can
be seen both as a whole and in its parts.
SYNOPTICAL TTABLE OF THE SOCIAL ORGANISM, WITH ITS
BRANCHES AND SUB-BRANCHES.
Industrial Education
EDUCATION.
Social Education
Preparation of the Germ.
Scientific Education
( Development of the Body, and Ini| tiation of the Child into Industry.
I Development of the Social Sentij ments, and Initiation.of the Child
) into Social life and true social re( lations.
(Development of the Intellect, and
< Initiation of the Child into the
( Sciences.
Production of Wealth ■
INDUSTRY.
Relation of Man to Nature.
Exchange of Wealth
Division
of
Wealth
I
Institution
of
Rights
SOCIAL**
Institution of Marriage
INSTITUTIONS.
I Hierarchal Institution
Relation of Man to Hu?
manity.
Family Institution
GOVERNMENT.
Relation of Man to the
>
State.
Legislative Branch.
Judiciary Branch.
Executive Branch.
Worship
RELIGION.
Relation of Man to the
Universe.
Morality
Theology
The Fine Arts
ACCESSORY
BRANCH.
The Sciences
Agriculture, Manufactures, Min
ing, Transportation, Fisheries,
Domestic Production.
Commerce.
Banking.
Laws and Customs that regulate
landed property, capital, labor,
commerce, the currency, interest,
rents, etc.
Laws that regulate the relations of
human beings as equals.
Laws that regulate the relations of
the Sexes.
Laws that regulate the relations of
men as co-workers.
Laws that regulate the relations of
Parents and Children, and the
family.
Creation of Lawn.
Interpretation of Laws.
Execution of Laws.
'System bf rites, ceremonies, and
symbolic acts by which Man
manifests his unity with Human
ity and with God. Explanation
of spiritual truths by means of
material emblems.
’Aspiration for unity with God, and
desire for regulating human con
duct in accordance with the Di
vine Will—the true basis of Mo
rality.
Theory of the Divine nature, of
Creation,—its cause and origin,—
of Man’s cosmical destiny and his
I I immortality.
(The Material or Sensuous Arts.
J The Social or Moral Arts.
Science of the Laws of universal
Order,—the Logic of the Uni
verse. Basis of the five special
Sciences.
(
The table exhibits the branches (the special organs) of which the
general social Organism is composed. It exhibits, as a whole and in
its parts, the great external Body which a collective Soul creates for
itself. Without the developing, educating and directing influence of a
Social Organism, Man remains an undeveloped, .ignorant and gross
being, but little raised above the level of the lower animals, as is proved
30
�234
THE
CIVILIZATION
ON THE FUTURE.
by the social condition of the Savage. He elevates himself in propor
tion as he improves his Social Organism, and when, in the future, he
shall have discovered the true Laws of organization, and based it on
them, he will attain to a social Destiny, worthy of the cosmical Wis
dom that has planned the Order and Harmony of the universe,—an
Order and Harmony in which Humanity is involved, and is ultimately
to participate.
The different social Organisms which have existed oh the earth
since the beginning of history, are embodiments of the social concep-.
tions, and the experience of the various Races that have established
them, and mark the stages of the great social elaboration in which
Humanity has been, and .still is engaged,—the elaboration being sub
ject to the general Laws of development in creation,—the Laws that
regulate Eyolution in all departments. We will explain briefly the
order which has reigned in th&uccession of the social Organisms that
have been so far elaborated and. established, the true character of these
Organisms, and their place in the social career of Humanity on the
earth. Our views, both of the order of succession and of the character
of the Organisms, are deduced from the above Laws of Evolution, aided
by the study of social phenomena in the past and present.
In the course of the existence or the career of every finite thing,
whether concrete and. tangible, like a. plant or an animal, or abstract
and intangible, like a religion or a science, there exist two fundament
ally distinct states. The one is the Formative or Fm&rgonic phase in
the career,—the process of development from the germ or beginning to
the organized and completed state. It is a preparatory, transitional
and unorganized stage, during which the constituent elements dr parts
of the finite thing are elaborated and prepared, and the process of their
combination and organization takes place. The other is th® Formed,
Organized and Completed state, and the normal and permanent condi
tion of the finite thing,—its destination. In this second stage, the
elements are fully developed and regularly constituted,—forming an
organic Whole, which is the true or natural state. We thus find two
distinct states or conditions of existence in every finite career:—the
formative or embryonic, which is the inorganic state; and the fully
developed and completed, which is the organic state.
A few illustrations will explain this subject, and render clear the
difference between the state of Formative development and of Organic
completeness; between non-organization and organization.
The physical organism of a human being is formed—gradually
organized—in the mother’s womb. The elements of the new organism
are brought together successively in this wonderful workshop, where
the process of formation goes on for a fixed period, until the new being
is organized, when it is ushered into the world by an operation called
Birth. There are marked differences in the life, of a human being,—as
that, for example, between infancy and adult age,—but none so radical
�THE
CIVILIZATION
OF THE FUTURE.
235
and distinct as that between the formative or inorganic state, preceding
birth, and the formed and organic, following birth.
• In the career of our globe, we find an illustration of these two great
stages on a vast scale. The geological ages which preceded the appearance of the present flora and fauna and of Man, were the formative or
embryonic phase in the career of the globe—a phase of elementary
development and of immaturity, in which, the crust of the earth was
formed. The present state is one of organic completeness, although in
the early (infantile) organic stage, and susceptible of future develop
ments.
In the construction of an Edifice, we find an illustration of this
Law of Evolution, for nothing can escape.it. When an edifice is to be
built, the materials are collected, the foundations laid, the walls raised,
the timbers put in, and the roof puk on. A process of construction
(evolution or elaboration) takes place; and an incomplete and partially
finished (formative and inorganic) stage precedes the completed (or
ganic) state. When thejedific® has left the hands of the masons and
carpenters, it is then painted and cleaned, and enters its true and
organized state, or that designed for it, and becomes fit for habitation.
It (thus passes, like a living organism, through a formative and inorganic stage—in all cases preparatory and transitional—to arrive at"one
of completion and permanence. •
All finite things must go through this process of development or
formation, for nothing can pass at once from the germ to a fully organ
ized and developed state. It is a necessity, inherent in the nature of
things; and to change it, it would be requisite to annihilate time,
space and succession, and the property of matter.
A few examples in the sphere of the abstract and intangible will
show that this Law of Evolution is not limited to material things.
The Formative or Embryonic Stage in the Evolution of Christianity
embraced the period extending from Christ to the Emperor Constan
tine. The latter "in making Christianity the Religion of the State,
gave it its regular constitution, which marked the period of its birth.
During this phase, which lasted about three centuries, the elements of
the Religion—its Worship, Morality and Theology—were elaborated,
and regularly developed and organized. The state of full development
and .<of complete organization, was that of the great Catholic Church,
as inexisted between the 7th and 16th centuries.
The Formative stage in the development of the Greek Civilization
^Comprised the heroic ages prior to Solon. During these ages, the ele
ments of Grecian life were wrought out. The Laws established by that
remarkable man may be said to have brought the fluctuating, and (for
the Greek race) abnormal political state to a close. In the great
Egyptian Civilization, the Formative stage embraced the Theocratic
ages which preceded Menes, who established a Monarchy in the place
of the Theocracies that had previously ruled the country; and brought.
�236
TBE
CIVILIZATION
ON TNE
FUTURE.
Egypt under one government. The social life, industry, art, laws and
religion of that race were developed during the reign of the Theocracies.
The country was divided into nomes or districts with a theocratic ruler
at the head of each. When the elements of society were developed and
prepared, Menes established a unitary power, and organized one great"
State. This event took place not less than 4,000 B. 0. The Formative
phase, directed and controlled by the influence of Religion, must have
reached back at least twenty-five centuries.
The Formative—preparatory and preliminary—stage in the evo
lution of the Science of Astronomy extends from the observations of
the Egyptians and Chaldeans to the time of Copernicus, who, in 1543,
published his discovery of .the true constitution of the Solar system
This important discovery marked, we think, the birth of the science*®that is, placed it on a true or positive basis. From that time, the
Science was rapidly developed by Kepler, Galileo, Newton, and others.
Chemistry had a much shorter Formative phase in Alchemy. The labors
and speculations of the Alchemists created the materials or elementsj
of the science; its birth was determined in the last century by the dis
coveries of Stahl, Priestley, Lavoisier, and others. A great Science is
being developed at the present day—the' most important of all
branches of knowledge—namely, Social Science. Glimpses of it were
caught by Pythagoras and Plato; the latter, in his Republic, presents
a plan of social Organization. The Embryonic preludes, the Transi
tions to this Science, comprise, first, the Political and Economm theories
of the past and present, which are a mass of incoherent and conflict
ing speculations, based on no positive Laws; and, second, the special
theories of social Organization, such as are contained in the Republic
of Plato, the Utopia of Sir Thomas More, the City of the? Sun, and
the Icaria of Cabet, which are equally without any scientific founda
tion. Socialism, with its multiform doctrines, is the immediate pre
cursor of the new Science, that is to be developed; it holds about the
same relation to it that astrology held to astronomy, and alchemy^ to
chemistry. The basis of a positive Social Science has been laid in the
present age by Charles Fourier and Auguste Comte. The Science is
born, that is, is regularly constituted, and awaits its full elaboration.
Fourier has shown the true foundation on which the Organization of
Society must rest, namely, the Laws of Order and Harmony in crea
tion ; the Laws which underlie all Organization in Nature, and which
regulate the distribution, co-ordination, and classification of her
phenomena. Human Reason, he affirms, should not frame social
theories of its own; its true work is to discover these Laws of Organ
ization in Nature, and with their aid deduce the natural or scientific
social Organization destined for Man. In his Organization of Indus-S
try, his system of Education, his brilliant theory of “ Passional Har
mony ” (which implies the possibility of regulating in accord or
harmoniously the action of those mental and moral Forces in Man,
�TEE
Cl VILIZA TION
OF
THE
FUTURE.
237
called sentiments, passions<etc.) ;• and in the extension of the Law of
Attraction to the moral or passional world—all deduced from and
based upon the general Laws of Order in Nature—he furnishes the
special foundations of the first three branches of the social Organism.
Comte has "shown that a certain ascending Order or Hierarchy
exists in the Sciences, and that the lower sciences in the series point
to, and provAlearly, that at the apex a Science of Society must exist.
He thus demonstrates the possibility and the necessity of a Social
Science, in doing which he has rendered it an immense service.
With these remarks, we can enter upon the examination of the
course which the Evolution of human Society has taken, and the
Order that prevails in the succession of the different Systems of Soci
ety which hatBbeen established on the earth.
The evolution of human Society is subject to the Laws of proJgressiVfadevelopment which we pointed out. It must pass through a
preparatory hnd transitional stage—the Formative or Embryonic—in
order to arrive at a fully developed and organized state. Humanity is
the agenF that? effects this great Evolution. It constructs the social
Organisms und|r which it lives, and does so by successive stages as
Nature constructs a globe? The elaboration is so vast that the individuSts'Bngaged in it cannot oversee the field of operations, and do
not comprehend the work on which tlfoy are employed. This is true
at least of the Formative Societies, when Humanity is without So
cial Science to guide, it. These Societies, we will remark, are devel
oped by theEoUecilm^iinstinctsjioi Humanity without any clear.idea of
the results which are to follow. In the future, when the path shall be
KWmingted by a positive social Science,, it will labor at its great Social
Construction with a clear consciousness of its work.
It isrevident, without recurring £0 general Laws, that Society must
pass through the Formative and Preparatory stage of evolution de
scribed.! Humanit^cannot leap at once from a primitive or Savage
S^SyiiMmhwh it is without the elements of Society and without In
stitutions^ to a state, of perfected Social Organization. It must first
develop or prepare the elements of Society (Industry, the Arts, Sciences,
on others), and discover the Laws by which they should be co-ordinated;
and then mak^axperiments and acquire experience in applying such
‘ Laws^ It is as impossible for Humanity to construct its great Social
Edifice without passing through the preliminary stage of creating and'
putting to^Sher its parts, as for theS individual man to construct’an
■HM® without putting together the materials of which it is composed.
The Social Organisms which have existed and are to exist on the
earth, are to be divided into two great Classes. These Classes are
based on th”two distinct\Stages in Evolution which we have pointed
(mL^-th^Formative^ Preparatory and Inorganic; and the Formed,
Completed and\ Organic. The first division of Societies is, then, deter
mined by these two essential Stages in Evolution. The two Classes
�238
THE
CIVILIZATION
OE
THE
EUTUR'E.
differ from each other as much as Embryonic differs from Organic life,
as immature and incomplete organization from complete and mature
organization; or, choosing a concrete illustration, as the globe in its
geological phases of development differed from the globe in its present
condition; as an edifice in process of construction differs from the
edifice finished and fit for habitation.
The first Class of Societies comprises those that have existed from
the beginning of history to the present time,—from the Egyptian
Civilization, which was the earliest, to our modem Civilization. This
first Class (Inorganic and Transitional) still exists, and determines the
character of social phenomena, and the social condition of the races
living under it.
To exhibit clearly the important truth that human Society is still
in the formative and transitional stage, and that our modern Civiliza
tion is one of the inorganic Societies, would require an elaborate anal
ysis. We will content ourselves with a few indications.
1. The first branch of the present social Organism—Education—
is not only unorganized, but two of its sub-branches—the Industrial
and Social—are so rudimentary that they can scarcely be said to have
an existence. These two essential sub-branches must be developed, and
the three scientifically organized,.before the organic statesin this department will be reached.
2. The second branch—Industry—which is the most advanced of
any part of the social Organism, is still in an unorganized and in
coherent state. As proof we find that Labor is prosecuted in a rude
and repulsive manner in dirty workshops and lonely fields; that con- H H
flict and antagonism exist in all interests and operations; that Com- ■
merce is at war with Production, which it spoliates, and Capital with
Labor, which it oppresses; and that there is an entire absence of
method, order and unity in the industrial world. If the Economists
see in this unorganized field of operations justice, and even “ Har
monies,” as does Bastiat, the student of social Science sees in it dis
order, anarchy, strife, and servitude,—characteristics of Non-organization. When this important branch of Society shall be scientifically
organized, it will be prosecuted with all the resources which the genius
of man can invent, as War now is, .on principles of unity and co
operation, and in a thoroughly scientific manner; it will, through such '
organization, be dignified and rendered attractive, and will become the
most honorable, as Well as the most agreeable field for the exercise of
the physical activity of Humanity.
3. Of the’ four Institutions which compose the third branch of the
Social System, one only—that of Marriage—is regularly constituted.
We will not stop to inquire how scientifically, that is, bow fully in
accordance with the Sentiment to which it corresponds, and to which
it should be adapted. The other three exist only in germ; they a.re
wholly undeveloped, not to speak of being unorganized.
�THE
CIVILIZATION
OF
THE
FUTURE.
239
4. The political branch!-Government—is, so far as its elements
are developed, much more regularly constituted,—a consequence of the
necessity of establishing Order in Administrative affairs. But the
element^ of a complete Political system are. only partially developed,
and the conception of a scientific Government does not exist. The
Republican form, which is the least imperfect; is but a fragment of the
< integral and organic Government of the future. Strictly defined, it is
the transition from political despotism to liberty.
5. The fifth or.Religious branch is in a general state of disintegra: -tion and decay,—at least as regards its Theology and Worship. The
great Catholic .Unity jhas been broken into fragments—into sects—
which are in conflict with each other, each denying the other’s dogmas,
while thg progressive and scientific world attaches no importance to
any of their theological systems. The second sub-branch—the Aspira
tion for Unity with the spiritual universe and the desire for the reign of
justi.c"and right on the earth—are as vitally active at the present day,
we think,, as they have been in the past, but they cannot’ assume their
religious form without the aid of a Theology and a Worship,—the first
being the Intellect; the second, th® body of the Aspiration or Senti
ment. Before this fifth branch*can be scientifically organized, the
whole circle of the Sciences must be created, and the true Theory of
the Cosmos discovered and established.
6. The accessory branch, comprising the Fine Arts and the Sci
ences, is, as a whole, in an undeveloped state. There are, however,
two exceptions which are very important. One Aft—Music—and one
Science—Mathematics—are fully developed and organized. It would
Seem as if Nature wished to furnish Man some models of scientific
Organization as guides, and for this reason facilitated the creation of
these two. All the Arts, except music, are still in the formative stage.
Of the Scieiwes, a few of the Physical are placed on a positive basis,
though not fully elaborated and constituted, while the higher branches
of the Physical and the Psychological and Cosmological sciences are
in a speculative and conjectural state,—in the embryonic phase of
their development.
These facts disclose the important truth that the general Evolution
of human Society is still in its formative or embryonic phase, and that
our modern Civilization is one of the imperfect and transitional so
cieties, through which Humanity is passing in its onward march
towards its social Destiny.
The most general division of the great epochs in History shows, we
think, that there are three of these distinctive systems of Society.
They are the three great Civilizations which have been evolved and es
tablished by the progressive and historical Races, by the Egyptian and
the Chaldeo-Assyrian on the' one hand, and the Arian on the other.
The out-lying Societies and races are, in a. primary analysis, to be left
. aside, as they have exercised no direct influence on progressive history.
�240
THE
CIVILIZATION
OF
THE
FUTURE.
The earliest Civilization—the Egyptian and the Chaldeo-Assyrian—
was the creation of the first two races; its seat was the valleys of the ;
Nile, and the Tigris and Euphrates. In it was begun the regular de
velopment of the elements of society—industry, the arts, sciences, etc.,
—and the work of social construction; it governed the world of its
epoch, and was its active history. The second Civilization was that
developed by the black-eyed Arians—the Greeks and Romans; its seat *
was the shores of the Mediterranean. In it the elaboration, begun in the
first Civilization, was taken up and continued, and vastly extended.
The third was that developed by the blue-eyed Arians, and mainly by
the Germanic races; its seat was the whole continent of Europe. It
inherited of the two preceding all that was essential and valuable, and
continued the work of social evolution and construction, bringing it
down to the present day.
The Medes and Persians (Arians) founded great States, but effected
nothing essentially new in social elaboration. The Hindoo Civilization,
founded by the Brahminical Arians, was a failure, as Castes and other
false institutions were established to hold in subjection the indigenous
races that were conquered.
These three great Civilizations form the three Orders of the first
Class of Societies. We will present them in tabular form, to enable
the reader to embrace them at a glance.
FIRST CLASS OF SOCIETIES.
The Formative and Inorganic.
First Order : the Egyptian and ChaldeoAssyrian Civilization, with its branches—
the Hebrew, Phoenician, etc.
Second Order : the Greek and Roman Civ
ilization, with its branches.
Third Order : the Germanic, or the Catholico-Feudal Civilization, which still con
tinues, but modified, and in process of
dissolution and.transformation.
Whether the classifications we have given, and' the various details
into which we have entered, are strictly correct or not, is a matter of
secondary importance. The great Truth which we have wished to set
forth in a clear and distinct light is, first, that Humanity is still living
in the Formative, Preparatory and Inorganic Societies,—in Socie
ties which are not the true and final ones, are not its normal
social state, its social Destiny; and, second, that a Class of Organic
Societies—as radically different from the first Class as scientific Or
ganization is different from incomplete or false Organization—remains
to be discovered and established on the earth.
If this fundamental truth were clearly comprehended, it would
change entirely the views of Men on social questions,—on the true
character pf the present system of Society, and the social Destiny of
Humanity. It would unite the intellectual leaders of the world in a
general and concerted effort to effect a fundamental social Reconstruc
tion, and to organize Society on scientific principles.
�THIS
CIVILIZATION
OF
THE
FUTURE.
241
In a future article, we will explain the fundamental and distinctive
systems of; Society, which have existed up to the present time, show
the stages through which Humanity has passed to reach its present
F - social state, and indicate the4 nature of the constructive social labors
which lie before it in the immediate future.
In Connection with this subject of the progressive Evolution of
human Society^ and of the distinction between the Inorganic and 'the
' Organiclsocieties, we will present what we believe to be the simple so
lution of a problem that, from the beginning of history, has bewildered
the human mind, and led it to the framing of innumerable false theo
logical and metaphysical theories. The problem is the Cause of Evil.
EhBs a general or synthetic term, which sums up all the effects
resulting from the Non-organization, the incomplete, and the false Or- M
ganization of the six branches of the social Organism. Its reign takes
■ plac^inth^Inorganic Societies. Poverty, for example, which, with its
■' ' privations and sufferings, is the great physical Evil that oppresses man
hook, is caused by the false organization, of Industry; its product is,
in the first pl^^ scanty, and in the second place, this scanty product
Kisi*rvB.nequffably and unequally divided. Social or moral discords,
or the dissensibns, hatreds, antipathies, jealousies, disappointments, and
mental sufferings of human beings are caused by the false Organization
of ^Wal IiRtitutions.,’ These Institutions thwart, violate, and pervert
the social or moral Sentiments, and engender a class of effects which
■BonstitlnBivhat is called Moral Evil.j Political Evils, such- as war, op
pression, and thejreign of monopoly and privilege, are caused by the
false organization of political Institutions.
Thejreign of Evil will come to a close with that of the Inorganic
Br societies: the reign wdG-ood will begin with the inauguration of the
r
Organic, societies. Opposite phases of development produce opposite efS'fepts: this is a universal Law. It applies to all things—to the least as
to the grdjTWEB If a fruit, when ripe or fully organized, is destined to be
■ • ■ agreeablHin flavor and healthy, it must, when green and unripe, be to
a certain extent disagreeable in flavor and unhealthy. If order and
harmony, with the happiness and elevation of mankind, are effects of
Societies, scientifically and normally organized, disorder and dis
harmony! with suffering and degradation, must be effects of Societies
incomplerely and falsely organized^
Evil, as stated, is a general term. To be understood, it must be
analyzed, so that it can be clearly seen in what it consists. In the
analysis, of this general term we find’ three primary Classes of Evils.
1st Class : Evils in Man, comprising three Orders.
’ 2d lClass : Evils in Society,’comprising five Orders.
3dKJl1ss: Evils in Nature, or the material world around man,
comprising six Orders.
The Evils in Man are the result of the perversion of his nature by
•
the influence of incomplete or false social Institutions, causing a fq]se
31
K
�242
*
THE
CIVILISATION
ON THE
FUTURE.
development of the Senses, of the social Sentiments, and of the in
tellectual Faculties. This first Class contains three Orders
Order, comprising the effects of the false development of the
Senses,—which development gives rise to sensual excesses, coarseness,
brutality, selfishness, and vices and crimes of a material character.
2(Z Order, comprising the effects of the misdirection and perversion
of the social Sentiments, giving rise to antipathies, hq^reds, jealousies,
antagonisms and discords, and disorders of a moral character. Each
of the social Sentiments, when violated and outraged, takes a false de
velopment and produces effects exactly the opposite of its true nature.
Friendship and Love, for example, engender hatred, distrust, jealousy,
suspicion, coldness, etc., instead of the sympathy, confidence, devotion,
and other noble feelings which are natural to them. Benevolence
turns to malevolence, and philanthropy to misanthropy, under long
disappointment. These false or inverted developments of the social
Sentiments are the source of what are called, moral Evils.
3d Order, comprising the effects of the misdirection of the Intel
lectual Faculties, and of their ’subordination to the Senses and the
social Sentiments in their inverted development. In this state; they
engender craft, cunning, low intrigue, deception, hypocrisy, duplicity,
deceit, falseness, treachery, perfidy, and o.ther subversive effects- of an
intellectual character.
2d Class,—Social Evils. They include the various effects of an *
incomplete or false Organization of the five branches of the social Or
ganism :—Education, Industry, Social Institutions, Government, and
Religion. A few’ examples will explain this branch of the subject,
without entering into details.
Poverty and disease, the coarseness of the masses, and other Phys
ical Evils are caused by the false Organization of 'Industry, or the
second branch of the social Organism. The product of our ‘false In
dustry is, in the first place—comparatively to the wants ,of man—very
scanty; and in the next place, it is very inequitably divided. Here is
the true Cause of Poverty,—the explanation of the mystery of one. of
the Evils that afflicts man. Debility and disease—other Evils—have
their source, directly, in the prolonged and excessive! toil of our un
organized Industry ? indirectly, in the effect which its repulsiveness
produces of driving the rich from it, and causing them to lead a life
of idleness and inactivity.
The existence of antagonist and antipathetic classes in society, of
social inequality, the pride of caste, the subordination of Woman, the
tyranny of false and capricious customs, and other similar abuses are
caused by the false Organization of Social Institutions, or the third
branch bf the social Organism.
Tyranny, servitude, war, class privileges, monopoly, and abuses of a
political character are caused by the false Organization of Government,
or the fourth branch of the social Organism.
✓
�TSE
CIVILIZATION OF TEE
FUTURE.
243
Superstition,Ifana’ticisnT, intolerance, blind faith, persecution, and
religious abuses generally are engendered under the influence of false
Religious Ins&tutions, and especially of false Theologies.
3dEvils, in Nature. They comprise the disorders that re
sult from a derangement of the climate, the atmospheric system, and
other departments of Nature, and are caused by the neglect of cultiva
tion, falsmcultivation,. and ravage of the surface of the globe by man,
that is, by the false industrial action of Humanity on its planet. These
disorders (Evils in the physical world) consist in—1. The Derangement
ofxbtt^&n^ manifested in violent fluctuations of temperature, excess
of heat and cold, late and early frosts, draughts and prolonged rains,
and the uncertainty of the seasons. 2. The Derangement of the AtmoSfflkeric
manifested in violent storms, hurricanes, tornadoes,
Cyclone" and disturbance in the proportion of the elements of the
atmosphere. 3. Pervert
causing epidemic diseases, such
as the plague, cholera, and yellow and other fevers. 4. "Disorders in the
^egekablf-agx^^i/mal kingdoms, such as the oidium in the vine, potato
rot and onderpest, and the excessive spread of destructive insects and
vermin, and of weeds. 51 Perturbation of the electro-magnetic forces
of t^garth, peiwading the other departments, and giving rise to phenomena, now inexplicable! (possibly to earthquakes.) 6. False state of
the ^^P^ofulfflalobe. exhibited in the great deserts (looked upon as
the! natural and unchangeable condition of the planetary surface); in
theRwamps,.marshes, jungles, and arid steppes; the devastated and
ruined regions (like the Tigro-Euphrates basin); the treeless districts,
and the denuded mountain ranges. These great physical disorders or
evils! whichEn^belieyed to be natural and permanent, are in fact due
to thanon-cultivationf bafllcultivation, ravage and devastation of the
globe by manrj He exercises an immense influence for good or evil on
his planet, He can, for example, destroy the forests on ’the mountains of
a country, dryingmp the Streams, and rendering a region sterile that
beformwas Wtil^. The great'physical disorders that now exist in Na
ture will disappear under a system of universal and scientific cultiva
tion, and such a system will l>fput in execution when Industry shall
be scientifically organized, and dignified and rendered attractive, so as to
induce all mankind to engage voluntarily in it; when the Industrial
policy shall become entirely preponderant, as it will, over the military,
Iconm^^yll^^Mfirmncial policies; when the material resources of
Society shall be devotedgto industrial improvements; and when Humanity shall comprehend its collective function or destiny—that of
Overseer of the globe, and the creations upon it. When the labor,
treasures, and talent that have been devoted in the past to war, shall
be devoted to a systematic (cultivation and embellishment of the globe,
it will become in a few generationsEaBgarden. a scene of material har
mony and unity!
^Themgn of Evil is" o cease with the reign of the Inorganic So-
�244
THE CIVILI ZATIO 2V
OE THE
FUTURE.
cieties, it being the general expression of their disorders and discords.
The reign of Good is to begin with that of the Organic Societies.
Two classes of opposite social effects will be generated by opposite
social states.
Wealth and Health will be secured by a scientific Organization of
Industry. Social Concord and Harmony by a scientific Organization of Institutions, adapted to the social Sentiments. Political Justice, prac
tical Liberty, universal Peace, by the scientific Organization of political
Institutions. The full development of the Child, by the scientific
Organization of the three branches of Education. The real and prac
tical Sentiment of the Unity of the race, and its ideal association with
the cosmos, by a universal Science (a true theology) which will explain
to it its Destiny on the earth, and the plan and order of creation and
its place in it. ‘
The duration of the inorganic and transitional Societies is relatively
short, as is the inorganic (embryonic) phase in the career of the indi
vidual man. That of the organic and normal Societies ?is relatively
long, as is the period of organic development in man when compared
to that of gestation. In this organic and long period which lies before
Humanity in the future, the reign of Good will hold sway; and the
Order and Harmony (the result of Organization) which pervade all
spheres of the Universe where normal .Organization exists, will be
realized on the earth.
The formative and inorganic phase of development can, in no de
partment of creation—no more in the development of a social Organism
than of a human being or a globe—be avoided, unless finite creations
cease, and time and space, and succession and matter, are annihilated.
In this phase, effects are engendered and phenomena take place which
must, from a mathematical necessity, be different’from, and in many
cases exactly the opposite of,those of the1; organic state. It. is these
effects and phenomena—abnormal and transient—that constitute Evil.
From the earliest Civilization of Man—that on the banks of the
Nile—down through the Chaldeo-Assyrian, the Greek and Roman, and
the Oatholico-Feudal of the middle ages to our own, but one great Sys
tem of Society has existed and held its sway. There have been different,
stages in its progressive evolution, giving rise to the different Orders
pointed out, accompanied by different manifestations and phenomena
on the surface, but with Unity of Principles underneath. The ap
parently long duration of this System, with the reproduction of the
same effects—the^ same Evils—under different forms, has misled the
human mind, and caused it to frame the erroneous Induction that it
is the permanent and natural social state of mankind, destined, with
its discords and miseries, to last forever. This erroneous Induction,
this reasoning falsely from the known to the unknown, has -blinded
men on social questions; it has destroyed hope in the future, and faith
in 'human nature, and has paralyzed and still paralyzes all studies on
/
/
�THE
CIVILIZATION
OF
THE
FUTURE.
245
the part of the thinkers and. intellectual leaders of the world on the
vast problem of a Social Reconstruction, and of happier social destinies
for Man. A new Civilization is to come—the true and normal Civiliza
tion of Humanity, based on the full development of the elements of
the six branches of Society, and their scientific Organization. It will
come, accompanied by the reign of Good; that is, of that Order,
Harmony, and Unity which are the general Law of creation, and
which prevail wherever preparatory Development or Evolution is ac
complished, and scientific Organization has taken place.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The civilization of the future: necessity of the organization of society on scientific principles
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Brisbane, A.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: New York
Collation: [225]-245 p. ; 26 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From Modern Thinker, no. 1, 1870.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[American News Company]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5425
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<p class="western"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br />This work (The civilization of the future: necessity of the organization of society on scientific principles), identified by <span style="color:#0000ff;"><span lang="zxx"><u>Humanist Library and Archives</u></span></span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</p>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Society
Civilization
Conway Tracts
Social Reform
Society
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/ca9dc2235e36314834838a1e9bd6bc9a.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=LXvTdCOJMnhtF74eUPD-sSRUfaKLTNcC%7EwEFeCqiEeRKqtzG103dNH6ImonuoxSdcRfEbsYsBson7YSwq29wZzxtYQDafgs%7Ej10WoxreaPatl7HSvaCTMRqzb6Lqb1BaiGFfwP6ZBfvUSmmDy01XBr5UsBzJkWDJl5eaufhXVUpTkuZCU3VaY7ZTGN-LdKIpQLTPpHeGSa53RC9697MQmUWstHBWfIh26R0Iztskic9hUbkVVkDQvZxFkqKWxHmBXTlEW2W05gFxQFC-LBraTRDcoOw300ewjlDtPnhmukFH%7ET6SKyS2DvF1gCgsuxoQLU6V4Pt7v0J5kGzzj335vA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
520587af2e2c99329ee569ce67947d57
PDF Text
Text
����������������������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The ethics of social reform: A paper read at a meeting of The Fellowship of the New Life, London
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Adams, Maurice
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 26 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Publisher's advertisements on front and back endpaper.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
W. Reeves
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1887
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G898
Subject
The topic of the resource
Ethics
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The ethics of social reform: A paper read at a meeting of The Fellowship of the New Life, London), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Ethics
Social Reform
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/2497b488fb98c4561bfe43128bb0eda6.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=cRTVgnan8Ec64XIoZnXkDxZidsgGchjH2Tf4SI1johLuyHnnCsCEGs7e04BH9pVNuRbR%7Esc4C2QTGOU1ornYGvjuXC9Ea8pYBQfSQcEfZ2blHCOyKiwiDMHYJX%7EKPjheqaQ83cpUFs%7EtMUGL1o0TGDXaJZ7CmaIzeGxf9A0O6ms1G7ql%7EhJ4tMjGJ1q1fobc6iU9MEVr6zuw1jhKNCMimohh%7EsXm5KbmeBv2NqwXknQpfSKPt62oH4lsjonRAN3PGdnOKbCKkdUBFh1%7EXoA9RNt80iB45RwS63zR%7EBcKim7tNleYP4ubglUU937VCt-tDAdI4hWYAicaey5dED%7E4Xw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
3fc045419e6a41a7b262adf13c2c9085
PDF Text
Text
THE
GOVERNMENT & THE PEOPLE;
A PLEA FOR REFORM. •
' '
BY CHARLES WATTS.
VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE LONDON REPUBLICAN CLUB.
The question about to be considered may be divided into two
'
parts—first, Government ; and secondly, the People. The object
in dealing with these divisions will be to show that reform is re
quired upon the part of those who govern, and that improvement
is necessary among those who are governed. Let us understand
what is meant by the word government." It is a term applied to
a body of men who superintend the making and administering
■of laws, and who conduct the general affairs of the nation. A
true government should represent the wishes of the people it
governs ; if it fails to do this, it is an usurpation, and therefore
■unworthy of the support of the community at large. There are
many forms of government, but it will suffice to notice here
two of the principal ones that have hitherto existed in this
country. The author of the “ Rights of Man ” has written
that governments arise either out of the people, or over the
people.” The governments which arise out of the people are
Democratic or Republican, and therefore of a nature to repre
sent the public will, having, as it doubtless would, a prac
tical knowledge of the wants of the people. Now the very
reverse of this is true of the governments of this country. As the
writer just mentioned observes : 11 The English Government is
■one of those which arose out of a conquest, and not out of society,
and consequently, it arose over the people.” The reins of go
vernment in this country have been held by a few aristocratic
persons—so few that a person could almost count them on the
ends of his fingers. When one family had held the reins long
enough to grow tired, and had well filled their pockets, then
they handed the reins to some other aristocratic family, without
■consulting the wishes of the people, and thus our governments
had been kept in a narrow circle, ignoring the working-classes,
who are the great support of the nation. Thus patronage has been
used for personal gratification rather than for the public good.
The great object of successive governments in filling the posi
tions in the Church, has not been to comply with the alleged pious
desires of the people, nor has the morality or qualification of the
persons that have been put into office been always considered;
but the great aim of the “ powers that be ” has been to place
some member of the aristocratic families into good livings. That
has been so patent, that Lord John Russell, in his “ Essay on
the English Constitution,” says : “ In the Church the immense
and valuable patronage of Government is uniformly bestowed
on their political adherents. No talent, no learning, no piety,
can advance the fortunes of a clergyman whose political opinions
are adverse to those of the governing powers;” Thegreat bishoprics
�2
throughout the country have not been filled by men remarkable
for intelligence or moral purity, but by those who had sworn
allegiance to the Government of the time. Bishop Warburton
wrote that the “Church has been of old the cradle and the throne
of the youngermobility.”
A true government should be guided by constitutional laws.
Much has been said recently about our “ glorious constitution.”
When Conservatives, or “ Constitutionalists,” talk of loving the
English constitution, they are indulging in a delusion, because,
-as a matter of fact, we have no political constitution in this
country—not a political constitution in its most comprehensive
sense. What is a political constitution ? “ A constitution is
not a thing in name only, but in fact. It has not an idea, but a
real existence ; and wherever it cannot be produced in a visible
form, there is none. A constitution is a thing antecedent to a
government, and a government is only the creature of a consti
tution. The constitution of a country is not the act of its
government, but of the people constituting its government. It
is the body of elements, to which you can refer and quote
article by article; and which contains the principles on which
the government shall be established, the manner in which it shall
be organised, the powers it shall have, the mode of elections,
the duration of parliaments, or by what other name such bodies
may be called; the powers which the executive part of the govern
ment shall have; and, in fine, everything that relates to the
complete organisation of a civil government, and the principles
on which it shall act, and by which it shall be bound. A con
stitution, therefore, is to a government what the laws made
afterwards by that government are to a court of judicature.
The court of judicature does not make the laws, neither can it
alter them; it only acts in conformity to the laws made ; and
the government is in like manner governed by the constitution.”
In order to have a constitution it is necessary to have a political
programme, drawn up by the people, to which the government
—whether Whig or Tory—should conform, and. be guided by.
Therefore, if we were asked as Republicans whether we would
support a constitutional form of government, the answer would
be, by all means ; but let us have a properly-constructed con
stitution, and not that sham constitution which we have hitherto
had, which has been for the benefit of the few, and to the injury
of the many. What are the defects of the form of government
now in existence ? First, its exclusive and aristocratic nature.
In it there is no provision made for the general representation
of the people. It is only certain classes of society which are
represented. If we analyse the House of Commons, as at
present constituted, we shall find that, while wealth, law, and
land are fully represented, poverty and labour have no bonafide
representatives there. It cannot be a true form of government
where the working classes are thus ignored. True, there are a
few men in the House who sometimes speak boldly on behalf of
the toiling millions, but even those cannot fairly represent the
wants of the excluded classes. Labour requires for its advocates
�3
those who know what it is to toil; poverty needs men to speak for
it who have felt its pangs. And the system that does not allow
this is partial and unconstitutional. The facts which Sir Charles
Dilke gave in his Manchester speech, every working man should
be made acquainted with, for they show the imperfection of our
representative system, and indicate clearly that under its unequal
provisions, the majority of the public are not represented. The
votes of the large towns are more than counteracted by those of
small aristocratic boroughs and counties. Sir Charles Dilke
drew the attention of his audience to the fact that, whereas
136 electors in Portarlington return a Member to Parliament,
the 56,000 electors who are on the register for Glasgow only
have three representatives awarded to them. They were reminded
that, while Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, and Birmingham,
rqake up with the ten metropolitan boroughs, a population of
five millions, and an electoral body collectively amounting to
450,000 voters, they return but thirty-four members in all; yet
seventy boroughs, with a population about equal to that of Man
chester, and about the same number of voters, send eighty-three
members to the House. Instances also were quoted of counties
returning two members only, though possessing a population and
a number of voters equal to those of other boroughs, which
together return twelve or fourteen. Sixty-two boroughs return
sixty-two members by 42,800 votes, and possess a population of
about 400,000 souls. Hackney, with about the same number of
voters, and nearly as large a population, returns two members
instead of sixty-two ; and as a final illustration, it was stated
that no members sit for 1,080,000 voters, and another no for
83,000. If under the reign of a monarch we are obliged to yield to
this kind of representation, it would be far better that Monarchy
should be swept away, and that we should have that form of go
vernment that would recognise the rights of the working classes.
There is an important defect in connection with the present
mode of government, and that is, its whole machinery is so expen
sive. Take parliamentary elections. There is no fair chance for
a working man to be successful at those elections. Why are they
made so expensive ? Surely it is not necessary under a proper
form of government that a candidate should be kept down under
the weight of money bags, and that the influence of the aris
tocracy should be brought against him, to crush him when he
is doing his best to become a member of Parliament. Not
only are the elections expensive, but the associations therewith
are also expensive. Hence, until we obtain something like a
proper arrangement of elections, and also the payment of mem
bers, we have little hope of having a real and legitimate form ot
government. The expenses attending law are the result of an
imperfect form of government. At present its use is principally
enjoyed by the rich, instead of being within the reach of all
classes. In a properly-constructed constitution, the poor should
be able to avail themselves of the law as well as the rich. Now,
the poor man is obliged to keep clear of the clutches of the law,
in consequence of the enormous expense which it entails. The
�4
salaries which are paid to the legal profession are so high that
many clients have frequently to turn aside, and not pursue the
course of justice. Another great defect in the government is
the present monopoly of land. No more gigantic injustice
could be done to a country than is being perpetrated by the
aristocratic millionaires of England in reference to the mono
poly of land. The land of-the United Kingdom, it has been
estimated, is owned by about 30,000 men, and the bulk of the
land in England and Wales by only 150- families. The Duke
of Richmond and Lord Leconfield own between them, in the
county of Sussex, land to the extent of nearly 800 square miles.
The Marquis of Westminster has an annual income of nearly a
million from his property. The Earl of Derby has ^40,000
per year from land at Liverpool alone, upon which he has never
spent one farthing to increase its value ; while the Marquis
of Breadalbane can ride upon one hundred miles without
going off his own property. Are these things just, and do they
not indicate a necessity for a different form of government to
that under which we are living ? Professor Levi has estimated
that there are 2,000,000 acres of land devoted to deer forests in
Scotland ; and Baillie Ross, of Aberdeen, has made a calcula
tion that 20,000,000 pounds of meat are lost every year through
such misappropriation of land. Many complaints are made as
to thte high price of meat, and some persons have stated that the
working classes ought to do without it. While those who
are willing to do without that which is now becoming almost a
luxury have a perfect right to do so, it is unjust that they
should be compelled to do so because of the monopoly of the
land. Our first and primary duty, is to protest against such
monopoly. In less than 160 years there have been no less than
7,000,000 acres of land enclosed and devoted to the interests
of the aristocrats of the country—for the amusement and be
nefit of those who have never studied the wants of the popu
lation, who never knew what it was to want food, and who
lived idle and—many of them—reckless lives, forgetting the
claims of their fellow countrymen who were starving for that
food which was being denied to them. No wonder that the
people should agitate for the repeal of the Game Laws—laws
which ought not to exist, and which are a curse to the nation,
excluding as they do the people from the advantages of the land.
We do not want to do things recklessly, but we desire that the
present monopoly of the land should be destroyed ; and we are
determined not to rest till our desire is realised. Our inten
tions are to pursue a peaceable advocacy, and we trust ere longto be able to say to the landowners : “You must use the land
for the benefit of all, or give it up to those who are able and
willing to do so.”
There is another serious impeachment against the present
form of government. Whether Whigs or Tories were in office,,
they had ever objected to reforms. The people had met toge
ther in public assemblies, and decided upon the necessity for
reform, and the will of the nation had been almost unanimous
�5
in its favour, but the Government still refused it. So long as the
people acted quietly and temperately, so long had their appeals
been disregarded. The result was, that often in a state of des
peration they did what they would not otherwise have committed
themselves to. The riots we have had in times past were to be at
tributed in a large degree to the refusals of necessary reform by
the Government of the country. Take the struggle for reform
in 1832. What did Wellington do? He who represented the
old form of government put his command in this form : “ The
people were born to be governed, and governed they should be,
and if they would not be governed contentedly, then at the
cannon’s mouth they should be made to obey the ‘ powers that
be.’ ” The Duke affirmed that U nder the Bill it would be
impossible for the government of the country to be carried on
upon any recognised principle of the constitution.” The Duke of
Newcastle said, “ If the Bill passed it would destroy the throne,
despoil the church, abolish the House of Lords, overthrow the
constitution, violate property, desolate the country, and annihilate
liberty.” It was only after the riots of Bristol, London, and Man
chester, when prisons were set fire to, and when prisoners were re
leased ; it was not till the people had committed such actsof des
peration, that the Government granted the reform that had been
quietly asked for. Now, precisely the same thing applied to
Catholic Emancipation. It was not until the Government by
their obstinate conduct had driven the country to the eve of a
civil war that they granted that measure of religious liberty.
The fact is, that hitherto the Governments had granted to force
what to reason they had denied. Governments that did this
were unworthy of support, because as the guide and protector of
the nation, they should endeavour to foster the moral and intel
lectual aspirations of the people, and not make them desperate
by withholding such reforms as they desired.
The leading defects, then, of the English form of Government
are its exclusive and aristocratic nature; its class policy ; its
imperfect representative system ; its monopoly of land, and its
reluctance to grant required reforms. What has been the effect.
of this mode of government on the nation ? Shall we judge of
the tree by its fruits ? Let us turn to the people and endeavour
to ascertain their real condition. This is a fair argument, for if
among the masses the governmental tree has borne disastrous
fruit, is it not a duty to uproot it, that something better may
thrive in its stead ?
If the condition of a people may be taken as a reflex of the
government under which they live, the governing classes of
England have indeed much to answer for. For among the toiling
millions of this country, ignorance, privation, and social inequa
lities exist to an extent perhaps unparalleled in the history of
civilised nations. The two reports presented to the House of
Commons in 1868 and 1870, exhibited the degrading state into
which the agricultural labourers had been driven through class
customs and unequal legislation. The evidence of Mr. Simon,
medical inspector, showed that more than one-half of our southern
�(fTp'.-,-
- sM»
6
agricultural population, was so inadequately fed that starvation,
disease, and ill-trained minds were the necessary results. As
a sample of many like cases, it was mentioned that in Haverhill,
Suffolk, nine out of ten adults could neither read nor write, and
only one in twenty-five could both read and write. The report
states that the population round Mayhill appeared “ to lie en
tirely out of the pale of civilisation, type after type of social life
degraded to the level of barbarism.” It refers to the “ immora
lity and degradation arising from the crowded and neglected
state of the dwellings of the poor” in many parts of Yorkshire.
“ In Northamptonshire, some of the cottages are disgraceful,
necessarily unhealthy, and a reproach to civilisation.” The
Reverend J. Fraser, in his report, says of the wretched con
dition of the parishes in Gloucestershire and Norfolk : “It
is impossible to exaggerate the ill-effects of such a state
of things in every respect............. Modesty must be an un
known virtue, decency an unimaginable thing, where in one
small chamber, with the beds lying as thickly as they can be
packed, father, mother, young men, lads, grown and growing up
girls—two and sometimes three generations—are herded pro
miscuously ; where every operation of the toilette and of nature
—dressings, undressings, births, deaths—is performed by each
within the sight or hearing of all; where children of both sexes,
to as high an age as twelve or fourteen, or even more, occupy
the same bed; where the whole atmosphere is sensual, and
human nature is degraded into something below the level of the
swine. It is a hideous picture, and the picture is drawn from
life;” In alluding to the same class of labourers, Professor
Fawcett writes : “ In some districts their children could not
grow up in greater ignorance if England had lost her Chris
tianity and her civilisation ; the houses in which, in many cases,
they (the labourers) are compelled to dwell, do not deserve the
name of human habitations.” Nor is the condition of many of
the working people in some of our large towns much better.
Despite our boasted national wealth, there are thousands who
exist in daily anxiety as to how to obtain food to eat, and to
whom the rights,, comforts, and pleasures of real living are
strangers. In his work, “ Pauperism, its Causes and Remedies,”
the Professor says: “Visit the great centres of our commerce and
trade, and what will be observed ? The direst poverty always
accompanying the greatest wealth...... Within a stone’s throw ”
of the stately streets and large manufactories of such towns
as Manchester and Liverpool, “ there will be found miserable
alleys and narrow courts in which people drag out an existence,
steeped, in a misery and a wretchedness which baffle descrip
tion.........Not long since, I was conversing with a West-end
clergyman, and he was speaking, not of Bethnal Green, nor of
Seven Dials, but of a street quite within the precincts of luxurious
and glittering Belgravia, in which he knew from his personal
knowledge that every house had a separate family living in each
room. Dr. Whitmore, the medical superintendent of Marylebone, in a recent report, states that in his district there are
�7
hundreds of houses with a family in every room...... Official re
turns show that in London there are never less than 125,000paupers, and that as each winter recurs the number rises to
170,000. There is abundant reason to conclude that a number
at least equally large are just on the verge of pauperism.” Such
facts as these require no comment, they speak in language
terrible enough in all conscience/ We have become so accus
tomed to the Verdict “ died from starvation,” that the extent of
misery it represents is not always fully recognised. It isnot merely
the death of the victim to be contemplated, but the pain of body
and torture of mind experienced ere the spark of life was ex
tinguished ; also the sorrow and bitter pangs of the relatives of
the deceased left to mourn the loss of the one departed. And,
judging by the past, there is but little hope of much improve
ment while the present form of government lasts. Mr. Joshua
Fielden recently stated, in his speech at Todmorden, that in the
last eighteen years our poor rates had increased ,£2,700,000.
Our laws touching imperial taxation are so unjust that its
burden falls unfairly upon the shoulders of the working classes.
Last yeartheimperial taxation in round numbers was ,£70,000,000.
Now,from whom was this revenue derived? During the reign
of Charles II. an important change took place in our fisqal ar
rangements. Up to that time land had borne a more equal share
of the taxation of the country. Charles II., being desirous of
favouring the aristocracy, relieved them of much of the taxa
tion then upon the land, and placed instead heavy duties upon
articles of consumption. From that time up to the presentan
unjust system of taxation had been in existence, and had been
’ working as injuriously as it possibly could upon the labouring
portion of the community. In the last century the land of this
country paid one-third of all the taxes, now it pays less than
one-seventieth. And this palpable injustice has been going on
while land-rents have increased enormously, for the same land
that seventy-two years ago yielded a little over .£22,000,000,
now yields nearly £100,000,000. The following extract is from
"the papers issued by the Financial Reform Union :—
“ The acknowledged principles of all fiscal reforms since the
report of the Import Duties Committee of 1840, are the repeal
of all duties upon the necessaries of life, the remission of unpro
ductive duties, and the abolition of protections and prohibitions.
Notwithstanding this report, a duty is still levied upon corn,
which yields the greatest return when the people are least able
to pay it, and involves a necessity for fourteen other duties,
yielding from nothing to £2, £3, and up to ,£2,841 per annum
each. The total revenue from these sources in 1866-7 was nearly
£800,000 ! The duty on sugar, an article described by Mr.
Gladstone as next to corn in importance as a necessary of life,
produces above .£5,800,000, and involves duties on nine other
articles in which it is an ingredient, yielding a yearly revenue
varying from £1 to .£2,000 per annum. Tea, coffee, chicory,
and cocoa, all of which have become necessaries of life to the
great bulk of the population, produce upwards of ,£3,200,000.
�8
Currants, figs, plums, prunes, and raisins, notwithstanding
dates are admitted free, are taxed to the extent of ,£400,000.
The total revenue from these sources in 1866-7 was <£10,310,056,
or nearly one-fourth of the total revenue from customs and excise.”
A recent writer in the Liverpool Financial Reformer, divided
the community into three divisions—first, the aristocratic, re
presented by those who have an annual income of £1,000 and
upwards ; the middle classes were represented by those who
had incomes from £100 to £1000 ; and the artisan or working
classes were those who were supposed to have incomes under
£100 per year. He then assessed their incomes respectively at
.£208,385,000; £174,579,000 ; and £149,745,000. Towards the
taxation, each division paid as follows : The aristocratic por
tion contributed £8,500,000, the middle classes £19,513,45 3, and
the working classes £32,861,474. The writer remarks : The
burden of the revenue, as it is here shown to fall on the different
classes, may not be fractionally accurate, either on the one side
or the other, for that is an impossibility in the case, but it is
sufficiently so to afford a fair representation in reference to those
classes on whom the burden chiefly falls. Passing over the middle
classes, who thus probably contribute about their share, the re
sult in regard to the upper and lower classes stands thus:—
Amount which should be paid to the revenue by the higher classes
(that is, the classes above £1,000 a year), £23,437,688 ; amount
which they do pay, ,£8,500,000; leaving adifference of £ 14,937,000,
so that the higher classes are paying nearly £15,000,000 less
than their fair share of taxation. Amount which should be paid
by the working classes (or those having incomes below £100),
,£16,846,312 ; amount which they do pay, £32,861,474 ; making
a difference of £16,015,162; so that the working classes are
paying about £16,000,000 more than their fair share. In other
words, the respective average rates paid upon the assessable in
come of the two classes are—by the higher classes, iod. per
pound ; the working classes, 4s. 4d. That is to say, the working
classes are paying at a rate five times more heavily than the
wealthy classes.”
Now, with these inequalities existing, is not a reformation of
government highly desirable ? The happiness of the people
requires it, and the progress of the nation demands it. How is
it to be obtained ? There are two fundamental remedies neces
sary in order to effect true reform. First, the real representa
tion for the people, and, second, their control over the national
purse. Until these are obtained true government will exist only
in name. Let the working classes be united, discreet, and de
termined in their present struggles ; and if the “ stupid party ”
and their supporters will not be “ wise in time,” they must mar
vel not if that electricity that now charges the political atmos
phere shall ultimately strike the present imperfect institutions,
thereby making way for the establishment of principles that
will secure political justice and social equality.
London : Printed and Published by Austin & Co., 17, Johnson’s
Court, Fleet Street, E.C.—Price One Penny.
*
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The government & the people: a plea for reform
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Watts, Charles
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Date of publication from KVK.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[Austin & Co.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1873]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4943
Subject
The topic of the resource
Social reform
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The government & the people: a plea for reform), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Great Britain-Politics and Government-19th Century
Political reform
Social Reform
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/12a974651e2c4cfed05f6db2819d1b09.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=jJJEds6p82-Dv4etSelcjcUS465S5Zdw3WfbDA1za3VjDuIvILhdB1WeM2mFKh196T0WmhTeT17hn3X2utE-DRZK-sPLsMyBRyaLtCmnaOd6T34-NYj5ngZfmCEyP007fcukZuG4SB3bwsIU1Yc%7E4yBOcv5Q1g%7E8xAsstqNBoeO7EIcd3O4Dzuqfphfw1P80xN9PCj%7E42jtdPWt8%7EDLkChMi8OnKe-uyWwKkagXPKzFnFJNyWmrnT-RdhrCPQ20QFRMhqCTZdL2ke1wRkTSyusxo2UMpCGiyxfKTHKKHao9NqgFRcgjaTth2pSUN2BccebEh-61GmVxPNZ4BJhZVNA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f9f712daa758baf04cf9c2d9de037b92
PDF Text
Text
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE
.
WORKING CLASS.
*
*\
& ftttert
Delivered to a Meeting of Trades Unionists, May 7, 1868.
BY
EDWARD SPENCER BEESLY,
PBOEESSOB OP HISWEY IN UNIVEBSITY COLL EC®, LONDON.
“ The working class is not, properly speaking, a class at all, but constitutes the-body
of society. From it proceed the various special classes, which we may regard as organs
necessary to that body.”—-Auguste Comte.
Reprinted from the “Fortnightly Review.”
LONDON:
E.
TRUELOVE, "256,
. .
HIGH HOLBORN.
± 1869*1^
��THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.1
We live in a day when social questions are for the first time con
testing precedence with political questions. In the first French
revolution the distinction was not apparent; at all events it was not
recognised even by sharp-sighted observers, though we, looking back
to those times, can detect the signs of it. During the reign of Louis
Philippe—from 1830, that is, to 1848—the distinction became every
year more marked. It is the fashion to speak of the revolution of
1848 as a very small affair—as a feeble imitation of the old revolu
tion. If looked at from a political point of view, in the narrowest
sense of that term, it certainly was a much smaller affair than the
old revolution. But to those who have realised in their minds that
there has been in truth but one revolution, which began in 1789 and
has been going on ever since, and that the year 1848 marks its
transition from the purely political to the social phase,—to such
persons, I say, the last epoch will seem even more momentous than
the first. The attempt of 1848 was a failure, no doubt. But the
history of the French revolution was not closed in 1848, as most of
us here present will live to see.
In England we have travelled the same path, though hitherto
without such violent shocks. We are all of us, French and English
alike, moving rapidly towards the most fundamental revolution
Europe has yet undergone ; a revolution in comparison with which
the great political changes in the time of our grandfathers, and even
the great religious changes three centuries ago, were, I had almost
said, insignificant. I will not pretend to say how far workmen may
have clearly realised to themselves this prospect. I am inclined to
think that not many of them have more than a vague conception of
it, although they are instinctively working towards it. But the
middle class have no conception of it at all. I am not speaking of
the stupidly ignorant part of that body, but of its more enlightened
and active members. They sincerely believe that the series of
political changes which they commenced in England forty years ago
is nearly completed. When they shall have abolished the State
Church, reduced taxation somewhat, obtained the ballot and equal
electoral districts or something like it, they think reform will be
completed, and that England will enter upon a sort of golden age.
(1) This lecture was the last of a series of three delivered last spring, by request of
the London Trades’ Council, to meetings convoked by that body. The first two were
"by Dr. Congreve and Mr. Frederic Harrison.
�2
THE SOCIAL FUTURE 0$ THE WORKING CLASS*
They do not contemplate any serious change, either political or
industrial. Politically, we are still to be governed by Parliament.
In industry we are to have the reign of unlimited competition.
' Now we can all of us understand that some men, either from
education or mental constitution, do not believe in progress at all.
They think that all change is for the worse, unless it is a change
backwards; and they are convinced that nothing but firmness is
wanting to resist change. There always have been such men, and
we can understand them. But what is less easy to understand is
that there should be men who believe heartily in progress, and yet
shut their eyes deliberately to the goal whither we are tending.
The truth is that their belief in progress does not rest on any reason
able basis. It is nothing better than a superstitious optimism, a
lazy semi-religious idea that the world must have a natural tendency
to get better. As for what getting better means, that they settle by
their own likes and dislikes. Consequently the middle-class man
interprets it to mean a reign of unlimited competition and individual
freedom; while the workman understands it to be a more equal
division of the products of industry. Although the workman’s
circumstances have led him to a truer conception of progress, perhaps
he has not arrived at it on much more reasonable grounds than those
on which the middle-class man has arrived at his. For, after all, it
does not follow because we long for a certain state of society that
therefore we are tending towards it.
The lot of the poor is a hard lot; there is no denying that. With
a very large number of them life is absolute misery from birth to
death. Though they may not actually starve, they are more or less
hungry from one week’s end to another; their dull round of toil
occupies the whole day; their homes are squalid and frightful,
seldom free from disease, and the heartrending .incidents of disease,
when aggravated by poverty. For them life is joyless, changeless,
hopeless. “ They wait for death, but it cometh not; they rejoice
exceedingly and are glad when they can find the grave.” Those who
have mixed with the very poor, and have been startled by the strange
calmness with which they contemplate and speak of death, whether
of themselves or their relatives, will not say that this picture is much
over-drawn. But it is not of this poorest class that I now wish to
speak. I say that the lot of the skilled artizan earning his 30s.
or 35s. a week (when he is not out of employment) is a hard lot.
Perhaps it may seldom or never happen to him to go for a day with
his hunger only half satisfied. But his position compared with that
of a non-workman is one of great discomfort. People often seem to
forget this. It is not uncommon for rich men, when addressing an
audience of workmen to say, “ My friends, I am a working man. I
have been a working man all my life. I have been working with
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
3
my brain as you have with your hands.” Yes, but there is just
that difference. The one man has risen, say, at eight in the morning,
from a comfortable bed, has come down-stairs to a comfortable
breakfast, read his newspaper, reached his place of business towards
eleven o’clock, and then worked perhaps hard enough for some hours,
but in a comfortable office, and with interest in his work so intense
that he perhaps prefers it to any amusement, and then back to his
comfortable dinner and bed. The other man has risen perhaps
before daylight, has toiled ten or twelve hours, it may be under a
broiling sun, or a chilling rain, or under other conditions equally
disagreeable, and at work which cannot have very much interest for
him, first, because it is monotonous, secondly, because the product
will not be his when he has produced it. He has snatched his coarse
food at intervals during the day, and has returned at night to an
uncomfortable home. I think rich people are too apt to forget that,
though habit counts for much, a poor man’s, muscles, lungs, and
stomach,.are, after all, not very unlike their own, and that no amount
of custom makes such a life Otherwise than disagreeable and even
painful to him; and that the main question for him in reference to
civilisation will be, how it alleviates his condition. How are we
to answer that question? Everyone is familiar with the hymns
of triumph that are raised from time to time on the platform and in
the press. We need not enter into particulars, because no one
disputes that, so far as they go, they do point to progress of a certain
kind. No one disputes that the production and accumulation of
wealth is an element of progress J but it is only one element, and if
even this is confined to a comparatively small section of the com
munity, it must be admitted either that society as a whole is not
progressing, or that its progress must be proved by somewhat better
evidence than the statistics paraded in budget speeches and news
paper articles.
There is no question about the material progress of the non-work
man class. There are many thousands of houses in London infinitely
more commodious and luxurious than the palaces of Plantagenet
kings. But there is very great question whether the workmen
generally have made any real progress in comfort. Some of them
have, no doubt. The skilled artizan in London gets enough to eat.
He is perhaps no better lodged than his forefathers, but he dresses
better, and he has greater opportunities of enjoying himself and
moving about to better himself. But among the agricultural
labourers what state of things do we find ? In many parts of England
they are positively worse off than they were a hundred years ago.
In the Eastern Counties, where agriculture is carried on by the
newest lights of science, the horrible gang-system has come into
existence within the present century. Nor is such misery confined
.
b 2
�4
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASSJ
to agricultural labourers. It has been proved in official reports that
' the workmen in such extensive trades as shoe-making, silk-weaving,
and stocking-weaving, are on an average worse fed than the
Lancashire operatives were during the cotton famine.1
Now, wretchedness of this terrible kind does not exist even among
barbarous nations and savage tribes. The child of the North
American Indian, or the Caffre, or the Esquimaux, does not begin to
work in a mill or in an agricultural gang almost as soon as it can
walk. It gets better food than the English child, and leads a
healthier and more enjoyable life. The West Indian negro has
been treated as an irreclaimable savage because he will not toil like
an English labourer, and the reason assigned is that he has plenty
to eat and drink without working hard for it. I fancy most English
labourers wish they could say the same. Really, if progress and
civilisation mean nothing but an increase of wealth, irrespective of
its distribution, Rousseau had much reason to prefer the state of
nature. It is childish to remind the poor man that his ancestor
under the Plantagenet kings had no chimney to his hut, no. glass in
his windows, no paper on his walls, no cheap calico, no parliamentary
trains, no penny newspapers. He was no worse off in these respects
than the Plantagenet king himself, who was equally without chimneys,
glass windows, calico, railways, and penny newspapers. There are parts
of the world now where the labourer is still in that condition. But
he gets sound and healthy sleep out of the straw spread on the floor
of his windowless hut, which is more than three or four families
huddled together in a single room in St. Giles’s can do, though they
may have a glazed window and a chimney. A poor Englishman
might be ashamed to walk about in a good stout sheepskin; but he
is often clad in garments much less warm and durable. What sort
of progress is this, in which the larger part of the community remains
as miserable, if not more miserable, than in a state of barbarism ?
If progress is necessarily so one-sided, it were better—I say it deli
berately—it were better it ceased. It were better that all were poor
together than that this frightful contrast should exist to shake men’s
faith in the eternal principles of justice.
Happily, we are not shut up to so discouraging a conclusion. If .
we look at the whole history of our race in Western Europe, instead
of studying one short chapter of it alone, we shall soon see what its
progress has been. The labouring class have steadily advanced in
dignity and influence. Once they were slaves, with no more rights
than horses and oxen. Then they were serfs, with certain rights,
but still subject to grievous oppression and indignities. Then they
became free hired labourers, nominally equal with the upper class
before the law, but in practice treated as an inferior race, and them(1) Public Health; Sixth Report, for 1863, pp. 13, 14.
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
3
selves looking on the rich with much deference and awe. Now we
have come to a time when the workmen are almost everywhere
standing on their rights, and resisting what they deem unfair or
oppressive. They have learnt the secret of combination. With
freedom and dignity has come confidence—confidence in each other.
They have grasped the idea that the main object of government and
industrial organisation should be their comfort and happiness. What
is more, everybody is beginning to hold the same language. Every
proposal publicly made, whether to destroy or to create, is represented
as for the good of the lower classes. The very employers who are
trying to destroy your trade societies profess to be doing it out of
pure love for you. How astonishing and incomprehensible would all
this have been—I do not say to the ancient slave-owner, or to the
mediaeval baron—but to the wealthy men of the last century. Is
not this progress ? What if a minority only of the workmen have
as yet derived any benefit from the increased production of wealth ?
Is it nothing that the arms are being forged with which all shall at
length get their share ? Material improvement has always begun,
and always will begin, not with. those who need it most, but with
those who need it least; and the higher classes of workmen are now
making the experiment which the lowest will repeat after them.
Once firmly grasped, this truth throws a flood of light on history,
and makes clear what at first sight, is so obscure—the unbroken,
continuous progress of society. We see that even in the so-called
dark ages, when the splendour of Roman civilisation appeared to be
extinguished by the barbarian—when science, art, and literature
were lost and forgotten, and the world seemed to have retrograded
ten centuries—even then, in that dark hour, our race was accom
plishing the most decided step forward that it has ever made. When
the philosophers and poets and artists of Greece were lavishing their
immortal works on small communities of free men—when the
warriors and statesmen of Rome were building up the most splendid
political fabric that the world has seen—the masses were sunk in a
state of brutal slavery. . But when savage tribes, with uncouth names
and rude manners, had poured over Europe,. when a squalid bar
barism had superseded the elegance and luxury of ancient society,
when kings could not read, and priests could not write, when trade
and commerce had relapsed into Oriental simplicity, when men
thought that the end of a decayed and dying world was surely near
—then were the masses, . the working men, accomplishing un
noticed their first great step from slavery to' serfdom.
What I have already said amounts to this: that the improvement
of the condition of the working class is the most important element
of human progress—so important that even if we were to make it
�6
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
the sole object and test of our public life we could not justly be said
to be taking a one-sided view of political and social questions. I
shall endeavour presently to draw a picture of the workman’s life,
as it ought to be, and, as I believe, it will be in the future. But I
must first examine some of the means by which the transition is
being effected.
I will put aside the various schemes of Socialists and Communists.,
which have found so many supporters on the Continent. Widely as
they differ from one another, I believe they all agree in demanding
that the State shall intervene, more or less, in the direction of
industry. Now that' opinion has never found much favour in
England, nor is there at the present time any large body of workmen
who support it. In France the first idea of every reformer or
innovator is to act through the Government. This tendency arises
partly from the jealousy with which all Governments in that country
have repressed voluntary association, but partly also from the logical
and orderly character of the French mind, which abhors anything
partial or patchy either in thought or action. But in England,
where there has always been considerable facility for private and
associated action, it is our way rather to depend upon ourselves than
to wait till we have a Government of our way of thinking. Hence
the only two methods which have any serious pretensions to promote
the elevation of workmen in England have both of them sprung, not
from the brains of philosophers, but from the practical efforts of
workmen themselves. This is shown by the very language we
employ to describe them. In France the labour question has meant
the discussion of the rival schools, the Economic School, the school of
Fourier, the school of Proudhon, the school of Louis Blanc, of Cabet,
of Pierre Leroux, and so on. In England we do not talk of schools,
but of Unionism and Co-operation, which began in a practical form,
and have continued practical. There can be no doubt that all work
men who care for the future of their class are looking to one of these
two methods for the realisation of their hopes. Here, as on the
Continent, there is no lack of thinkers with elaborate schemes which,
in the opinion of their authors, would ensure universal happiness.
But whereas the French philosophers, whom I have mentioned, had
each his thousands of ardent disciples among the workmen, our
theorists cannot count their disciples by dozens, and are therefore not
worth taking into account. But Co-operation and Unionism are real
forces, and to pass them over in silence would be to deprive this
lecture of all practical value and interest for such an audience as I
am addressing.
The first thing to be noticed about Co-operation is that the word is
used for two very different things. There is the theory, and there is
the practice. The theory, as you know, is that there should be no
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASSI
7
employer-class, that the workmen should divide the profits of produc
tion amongst themselves, and that whatever management is necessary
should be done by salaried officers and committees. Co-operation,
nowever, in that sense, does not get beyond a theory. The nobleminded men who founded the celebrated mill at Rochdale did indeed
for some years manage to put their principles in practice; but even
their own society at length fell away from them, and began to employ
workmen who were not shareholders at the market-rate of wages;
and I believe there is not in England, at the present moment, a
single co-operative society in which workmen divide the profits
irrespective of their being shareholders. Co-operation, in this sense,
then, may be dismissed from consideration with as little ceremony
as the Socialist and Communist theories before alluded to. Like*
them it supposes a degree of unselfishness and devotion which wedo not find in average men, and it does not attempt to create those
qualities, or supply their place by the only influence that can keep
societies of men for any length erf time to a high standard of
morality, the influence of an organised religion.
The Co-operation which actually exists, and is an important featureof modern industry, is something very different. We must strip it
mercilessly of the credit it borrows from its name, and its supposed
connection with the theory above described. It is nothing more than
an extension of the joint-stock principle. In what respect does the
Rochdale mill differ from any other joint-stock company ? A con
siderable number of its shares are already%eld by persons who do not
work in it, and it is very possible that in course of time all, or most
of the workmen employed in it, will be earning simply the market
rate of wages. A certain number of men, by the exercise of industry,
prudence, and frugality, will have risen from the working class into
the class above. How is the working class the better for that ?
What sort of solution is that for the industrial problem ? We set out
with the inquiry how the working class was to be improved, not how
a few persons, or even many persons, were to be enabled to get out of
it. We want to discover how workmen may obtain a larger share of
the profits of production, and the Rochdale Co-operative Mill, which
pays workmen the market-rate, has certainly not made the discovery.
The world is not to be regenerated by the old dogma of the economists
masquerading in Socialist dress.
The history of Co-operation is this. The noble-minded men who
first preached the theory in. its purity, were deeply impressed with
the immoral and mischievous way in which capital is too often
employed by its possessors,, and instead of inquiring how moral
influence might be brought to bear on capitalists, they leaped to the
conclusion that capitalists as a separate class ought not to exist. In
making this assumption they overlooked the distinction between the-
�8
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OB’ THE WORKING* CLASS!
accidental and the permanent conditions of industry. Collective
activity among men has had two types—the military and the indus
trial, the latter of which has gradually almost superseded the former.
Military organisation has undergone many and great changes, from
the earliest shape in which we find it among savage tribes down to
its most elaborate form in our own time. But its one leading
characteristic has remained unchanged. There has never been a
time when armies weje not commanded by generals with great power
and great responsibility. Wherever there has been the slightest
attempt to weaken that power and diminish that responsibility, there
it is admitted that the army has suffered and the work has been so
much less efficiently done. Whether the soldiers were mere slaves
as in Eastern countries, or free citizens as in the republics of Greece
and Rome and America, or mercenaries fighting for hire as has often
been the case in modern Europe, the principle of management has
always been the same. Discipline was as sharp among the citizen
soldiers of Grant and Sherman as among the conscripts of Frederick
and Napoleon. Such a thing as the co-operative management of an
army has never been heard of.
Now in the other type of collective activity-—the industrial—a
similar organisation has constantly prevailed. The analogy is
striking, and it is not accidental, for the conditions are fundamentally
the same. Fighting and working are the two great forms of activity,
and if you have to organise them on a large scale, it is not strange
that the same method should be found best for both. And workmen
will do well to notice this analogy, and insist on pressing it home to
the utmost of their power; for the more logically it is carried out, the
more striking and overwhelming are the arguments it supplies for
their side of the labour controversy. There is not a phase of that
controversy which it does not illustrate, and invariably to their
advantage. As one instance out of many, I may mention the sanc
tion afforded by military practice for a uniform rate of wages to the
rank-and-file of labour—an argument which was put by one of the
Trades’ Union Inquiry Commissioners to the Secretary of the Master
Builders’ Association, and which completely shut his mouth on that
questioh. But it is for another purpose that I am now referring to
this analogy. Special skill and training, unity of purpose, prompti
tude, and, occasionally, even secrecy, are necessary for a successful
direction of industry just as much as of war. “ A council of war
never fights ” is a maxim which has passed into a proverb, as
stamping the worthlessness of such councils. Yet councils of war
are not composed of private soldiers, but of skilful and experienced
officers. They are more analogous to our boards of railway directors,
whose incapacity, I must admit, does not take exactly that form.
Whether the efficiency of our railway management would be improved
�Khe soUIAIj future of the Working class.
9
by an. infusion of stokers and plate-layers into the direction, I will
leave it to the advocates of Co-operation to say.
Another no less important advantage of the old industrial system
over Co-operation is that it transfers the risk from the workman to
the employer. Capital is the reserved fund which enables the
employer to carry on his business' with due enterprise, and yet
to give a steady rate of wages to the workman. Great as have been
the changes through which industry has passed—^-slavery, serfdom, and
free labour—this fundamental characteristic has remained unaltered.
In all ages of the world, since industry began to be organised at all,
the accumulated savings which we call capital ha^e been in the hands
of comparatively few persons, who have provided subsistence for the
labourer while engaged in production. The employer has borne the
risk and taken the profits. The labourer has had no risk and no
share of the profits. Though in modern times there appears to be
some desire on the part of the master to make the workman share
the risk, he will soon come to see that such a policy destroys the
only justification of capital, and thus strikes at the root of pro
perty itself. The workmen will help him to see this by their com
binations, if he shows any indisposition to open his eyes. It is one
among many ways in which they will teach him in spite of himself
what is for his own good. In point of fact, in the best organised
trade—that of the engineers—the rate of wages is subject to little if
any fluctuation.
The separation, then, between employers and employed, between
capitalist and labourer, is a natural and fundamental condition of
society, characteristic of its normal state, no less than its preparatory
stages. We may alter many things, but we shall not alter that.
We may change our forms of government, our religions, our
language, our fashion of dress, our cooking, but the relation of
employer and employed is no more likely to be superseded in the
future by Communism in any of its shapes, than is another institu
tion much menaced at the present time—that of husband and wife.
It suits human nature in a civilised state. Its aptitude to supply
the wants of man is. such that nothing can compete with it. There
may be fifty ways of getting from Temple Bar to Charing Cross;
but the natural route is by the Strand; and along the Strand the
bulk of the traffic will always lie. ' And so, though we may have
trifling exceptions, the great mass of workmen will always be
employed by capitalists.
Now this was what the founders of Co-operation refused to see;
and in their enthusiasm they fancied they could establish societies,
the shareholders of which would voluntarily surrender to non-share
holders a large part of the profits vhich their capital would naturally
^command. But the shareholders were most of them only average
�10
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
men; they were not enthusiastic, or their enthusiasm cooled as the
money-making habit crept over them. The co-operative theory was
not bound up with any religious system, or supported by any spiritual
discipline ; and they soon fell into the vulgar practice of making the
most of their capital. What is the lesson to be learnt ? Whatever
there was of good in the movement belonged not to the industrial
theory, but to the social spirit of the men who started it. If those
men had been employers, or if any employers had had their spirit,
the workmen would have reaped the same advantages without any
machinery of co-operation. Therefore we must look for improvement, not to this or that new-fangled industrial system, but to the
creation of a moral and religious influence which may bend all in
obedience to duty. When we have created such an influence, we
shall find that it will act more certainly and effectually on a small
body of capitalists than it would on a loose multitudinous mob of
co-operative shareholders.
Before leaving the subject of Co-operation, let me say that, while I
cannot recognise its claims to be the true solution of the industrial
question, I heartily acknowledge the many important services it may
render to the working class. Even as applied to production, in
which I contend it can never play an important part, it will do good
for a time by throwing light On the profits of business. As applied
to distribution in the shape, that is to say, of co-operative stores, its
services can hardly be exaggerated. It not only increases the
comfort of workmen, by furnishing them with genuine goods and
making their money go further, but it gives them dignity and
independence by emancipating them from a degrading load of debt.
Moreover, it sets free, for the purpose of reproduction, a large
amount of labour and capital which had before been wasted in a
badly arranged system of distribution.
If we turn now to the other agency by which the labouring class
in this country is being elevated, I mean Trades Unions, we shall
find more enlightened ideas combined with greater practical utility
Unionism distinctly recognises the great cardinal truth which Co
operation shirks—namely, that workmen must be benefited as work
men, not as something else. It does not offer to any of them
opportunities for raising themselves into little capitalists, but it
offers to all an amelioration of their position. Co-operation is a fine
thing for men who are naturally indefatigable, thrifty, and ambitious
—not always the finest type of character, be it observed in passing—
but it does nothing for the less energetic, for the men who take life
easily, and are content to live and die in the station in which they
were born. Yet these are just the men we want to elevate, for they
form the bulk of the working class. They are in very bad odour
with the preachers of the Manchester school, the apostles of self-help.
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
11
To my mind there is not a more degrading cant than that which
I incessantly pours from the lips and pens of these wretched instructors.
Men professing to be Christians, and very strict Christians too—■
Protestant Christians who have cleansed their faith of all mediaeval
corruptions and restored it according to the primitive model of
apostolic times, when, we are told, “all that believed were together,
and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods,
and parted them to all men, as every man had need ”—these teachers,
I say, are not ashamed to talk of making money and getting on in
the world, as if it were the whole duty of a working man. Thus it
comes to pass, that while they are bitter opponents and calumniators
of Unionism,1 they patronise Co-operation, because it enables their
model workman to raise himself, as Lord Shaftesbury expressed it
not long ago, “ into a good and even affluent citizen,” a moral eleva
tion to which it is clear a primitive Christian never attained. But
you who are workmen, and have a little practical experience of the
thing, you do not want me or anyone else to tell you that the men
who raise themselves from the ranks are very often not distinguished
by fine dispositions or even by great abilities. What is wanted for
success of that sort is industry, perseverance, and a certain sharpness,
often of a low kind. I am far from saying that those who raise
themselves are not often admirable men ; but you know very well
that they are sometimes very much the reverse—that they are morally
very inferior to the average workman who is content with his posi
tion, and only desires that his work may be regular and his wages
fair. Now the merit of Unionism is that it meets the case of this
average workman. Instead of addressing itself to the sharp, shifty
men, who are pretty certain to take care of themselves in any case,
it undertakes to do the best that can be done for the average man.
And not only so, but it attends to the man below the average in
industry and worthiness: it finds him work, and insists on his
working; it fortifies his good resolutions; it strengthens him
against temptation; it binds him to his fellows;—in short, it
regulates him generally, and looks after him. Nor is even this the
full extent of the difference in this respect between Co-operation and
Unionism. While the benefits of the former are exclusively reaped
by shareholders, the union wins its victories in the interest of nonunionists just as much as of its own members..
I noticed as a fatal error of Co-operation that it regards the relation
of employer and employed as a transient and temporary arrangement
which may and will be superseded, whereas it is permanent, and
(1) “ God. grant that the work-people may be emancipated from the tightest thraldom
they have ever yet endured. AR the single despots, and aU the aristocracies that ever
were or will be, are as puffs of wind compared with these tornadoes of Trades Unions, j
BufeJ^.have small hope. The masses seem to me to have less common-sense than they
had a year ago.”—Zcfter of Lord Shaftesbury to Colonel Maude.
�12
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASSI
destined to survive all attacks. It is an eminent merit of Unionism
that it recognises this important truth. The practical good sense of
workmen has here shown itself superior to all the cleverness of philo
sophers. They have instinctively grasped the maxim that we shall
best serve the cause of progress, whether political or social, by striving
not to displace the actual possessors of power, but to teach them to
use their power for the interests of society.1 And there is this further
advantage of a practical kind, that Unionism is not obliged, like the
schemes of the philosophers, to hover impotently in the air, as a mere
speculative phantom, till such time as it can command the assistance
of the State to get itself tried in practice. A few dozen men can
commence the application of it in their own trade any day they please.
Nor is it a cut-and-dried scheme in which every detail is settled
beforehand with mathematical exactness; it is of infinite elasticity,
and can adapt itself spontaneously to the circumstances of each
case.
I It is desirable that the workman’s wages should be good, but it is
still more desirable that they should be steady. A fluctuating income
in any station of life is, as everyone knows, one of the most demora
lising influences to which a man can be exposed. When an outcry
is raised against the unions because -they maintain that wages ought
not to fall with every temporary depression of trade, it always seems
to me that in so doing they are discharging precisely their most
useful function. I have already alluded to the duty of the capitalist
in this respect, and Unionism supplies exactly the machinery required
for keeping him up to his duty, until a religious influence shall have
been organised which will produce the same result in a more healthy
and normal way. No doubt unions might offend deplorably on their
side against this principle of a steady rate of wages. It is conceivable
that they might screw out of the employer every year or every month
wages to such an amount as would leave him only the bare profit
which would make it worth his while to continue in business. It is
manifest that on those terms he could not amass such a reserve fund
as would enable him to tide over temporary depression without
reducing wages. Every fluctuation in trade would cause a corre
sponding fluctuation in wages, which would vary from month to
month. If Trades Unions were to act in this way they would lose
their principal justification. They are charged with doing so now,
but the charge is perfectly groundless. Probably in no case do they
extract from the employer anything like the wages he could afford
to give if he was disposed. I do not believe that unions, extend them
as you will, will ever be strong enough to put such a pressure on the
employers. I believe that an organised religious influence will here
after induce employers to concede to their men, voluntarily, a larger
(1) Comte Pol. Pos. i. 163 (p. 173 of the translation by Dr. Bridges).
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
13
sh^?e ofxhew profits than any Trades Union could extort from them.
An additional security that unions will never go too far in this direc
tion is to be found in the fact that some masters, whether from larger
capital, greater business ability, or higher reputation, make much
larger profits than others. But unions do not pretend to exact higher
wages from such masters. The tariff, therefore, is evidently ruled by
the profits of the least successful employers.
It might have been supposed at first sight that employers would
have looked with more favour on Unionism, which leaves them in full
possession of their capital, their authority, and their responsibility,
than on Co-operation, which proposes to supersede them altogether.
But, as you all know, the contrary is the case; and there could not
be a more instructive test of the relative efficiency of the two methods.
Unionism maintains that capital has its duties, and must be used for
a social purpose. Co-operation shrinks from asserting a doctrine so
distasteful to the propertied classes, and seeks to evade the necessity
for it by the. shallow fallacy that everyone is to become a capitalist.
Although everyone will not become a capitalist, no doubt some
will, and the net result of the co-operative movement will be that
the army of capitalists will be considerably reinforced in its lower
ranks. Will that army so reinforced be more easy to deal with ?
An exaggerated and superstitious reverence for the rights of property,
and an indifference to its duties, is the chief obstacle to the elevation
of the working class. The fewer the possessors in whose hands
capital is concentrated, the more easy will it be to educate, discipline,
and, if need be, gently coerce them. But when the larger capitalists
have at their back an army of little capitalists, men who have sunk
the co-operative workman in the co-operative shareholder, men who
have invested their three or four hundred pounds in the concern, and
are employing their less fortunate fellow-workmen at the market rate
of wages, why, it stands to reason that the capital of the country will
be less amenable to discipline than ever. A. striking example is to
be seen in France at the present time. You know that the immediate
effect of the old revolution was to put the cultivators in possession of
the soil. A vast number of small proprietors were created. Doubtless
many advantages resulted from that change. France got rid of her
aristocracy once and for good. The cultivators identified themselves
with the revolution which had given them the soil, and defended it
fiercely against the banded sovereigns of Europe. If the people had
not been bribed with the land, the revolution might have been
crushed. But there has been another result from it, of more doubtful
^advantage. The whole of this class of small proprietors is fanatically
devoted to the idea of property; and in their fear that property should
Ue attacked they have thrown their weight on the side of conserfeailSKL and against further political and social progress. The wealthy
�14
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASSI
middle class plays on their ignorance and timidity. All who desire
to initiate the smallest social reform, who express any opinion adverse
to the tyrannical power exercised by capital, are denounced as Com
munists and apostles of confiscation. The small proprietors are
worked up into a frenzy of apprehension, and fling themselves into
the arms of any crafty impostor who talks big words about saving
society. Thus the artizans and small proprietors, men whose interests
must be essentially the same, for they are all alike workmen living by
the sweat of their brow and the labour of their hands, are pitted
against one another, and the middle class alone profits by the dissen
sion. If the manufactures of this country were to get into the hands
of a number of small shareholders, simple workmen would soon find
the rein tighter and the load heavier. Their demand for the repeal
of unjust laws would encounter a more stubborn resistance; the
progress they have been making towards comfort and dignity would
be abruptly checked. Fortunately, as I have already endeavoured to
1 show, there is no likelihood that so-called Co-operation will ever drive
the capitalist employer out of the field.
Such are the reasons for which I hold Unionism to be by far the
most efficient of all the agencies that have as yet been largely advo
cated or put in practice for the purpose of elevating the working
class, and preparing it for its future destinies. The French workmen
have much to teach us ; but I think in this matter they might take
a lesson from our men with advantage. I hope they will signalise
their next revolution—for which, by the way, I am getting rather
impatient—by abolishing all those laws which so iniquitously obstruct
their right to combine. Indeed, Unionism cannot be said to have
had a fair trial in England until it is established in the other
countries of Europe also?
It remains to consider what the destinies are for which our work
men are thus preparing themselves, and to picture to ourselves what
their condition will be when society shall approximate more nearly
to its normal state. We may do so without indulging in Utopias or
extravagant estimates of our capacity to shape the course of human
development, because we are not postulating springs of action in
individuals, which, as a matter of fact, do not exist, or do not exist
in sufficient strength—we are not spinning theories out of a priori
notions of what society ought to be, but we are feeling our way by
an examination, on the one hand, of the permanent facts of our nature,
and the conditions imposed upon us by the external world ; and, on
the other hand, of the steady, continuous progress of society in the
past. And if it has occurred to anyone that I have been a long
time coming to what professed to be the subject of this lecture—
namely, “ the future of the working class ”—I must plead, in justi
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
131
fication, that I have in effect been dealing with it all along, and that
nothing now remains but to give some practical illustrations of the
conclusions already arrived at.
That the position of the workman will ever be as desirable as that
of the wealthier classes seems, as far as we can see, highly impro
bable. Some people are shocked when such a proposition is plainly
enunciated. They have a sort of hazy idea that the external condi
tions of our existence cannot be inconsistent with the perfection and
happiness of man. They have been taught that this is a world
where only man is vile, and it sounds to them immoral to talk as if
there was any insurmountable obstacle to an ideal state of society
except what they are accustomed to term our fallen nature. The
fact is, however, that this is very far from being the best of all
possible worlds, and we must look that fact in the face. Human
society might arrive much nearer perfection, both moral and material,
if there was not so much hard work to be done. It must be done by
some; and those to whom it falls to do it will inevitably have a less
pleasant life than others. But though to annul or entirely alter the
inflnone.es of the world external to ourselves is beyond our humble
powers, we can generally either modify them to some extent, or,
what comes to the same thing, modify ourselves to suit them, if only
successive generations of men address themselves wisely to the task;
just as an individual may by care preserve his health in a pestilential
climate, though he can do little or. nothing to alter the climate.
And so, though there will probably always be much to regret in the
workman’s lot, we may look forward to improvements which will
give him a considerable amount of comfort and happiness. I will
enumerate some of these which we may reasonably expect will be
reached when present struggles are over, and when employers and
workmen alike have learnt to shape their lives and conduct by the
precepts of a rational religion.
Employers, though exercising their own judgment and free action
in their industrial enterprises, will never forget that their first con
cern must be, not the acquisition of an enormous fortune, but the
well-being and comfort of the labourers dependent on them. Hence
there will be an end of that reckless speculation which sports with
the happiness, and even the life, of workmen and their families—
displacing them here, massing them there, treating them, in short,
as mere food for powder in the reckless conflicts of industrial compe
tition. We shall no longer see periods of spasmodic energy and
frantic over-production first in one trade, then in another, followed
by glutted markets, commercial depression, and cessation of employ
ment. For capital being concentrated in comparatively few hands,
it will be possible to employ it with wisdom and foresight for the
general good; which is quite out of the question while the chieftains
�16.
THE SOCIAL .FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
of industry are a disorganised multitude, swaying to and fro in the
markets of the world as blindly and irrationally as a street-mob at a
fire. Thus the workman will be able to count on what is more
precious to him than anything else—steady employment, and an
income which, whether large or small, is, at all events, liable to
little fluctuation. The demoralising effects of uncertainty in this
respect can hardly be overrated. Large numbers of workmen at
present, from no fault of their own, lead as feverish and reckless an
existence as the gambler. When this state of things ceases, we may
look forward with confidence to a remarkable development of social
and domestic virtue among the working class.
To give the workman due independence, he ought to be the owner
of his abode, or, at all events, to have a lease of it. In some
instances at present we find men living in houses belonging to their
employers, from which they can be ejected at a week’s notice. This
_is often the case among colliers and agricultural labourers, and what
grinding tyranny results from it, I need not tell you. It is not
desirable in a healthy, industrial society that labour should be
migratory. Ordinarily, the workman will continue in the same
place, and with the same employer, for long periods, just as is the
habit with other classes. Fixity of abode will naturally accompany
fixity of wages and employment. Here, again, we may expect an
admirable reaction on social and domestic morality.
A diminution of the hours of work is felt by all the best workmen
to be even more desirable than an increase of wages. All of you,
I am sure, have so thoroughly considered this question in all its
bearings, that I am dispensed from dwelling on it at length. I
merely mention it that it may not be supposed I undervalue it. If
the working day could be fixed at eight hours for six days in the
week, and a complete holiday on the seventh, the workman would have
time to educate himself, to enjoy himself, and above all to see more
of his family.
Let us next consider how far the State can intervene to render the
position of the workman more tolerable. That ought to be the
first and highest object of the State, and therefore we need have no
scruple about taxing the other classes of the community to any extent
for this purpose, provided we can really accomplish it.1 But of course
it must be borne in mind that by injudicious action in this direction
(1) As I have had some experience of the criticism (always anonymous) which seizes
a detached passage and draws from it inferences directly excluded by the context, I
desire by anticipation to protest against any quotation of the above sentence apart from
at least the three which immediately succeed it. Taken by itself (although even so it
is guarded by a strictly adequate proviso) it might be misunderstood. In the context
the proviso is carefully and fully expanded into an argument on social grounds against
excessive taxation of the rich. Arguments from the individualist point of view I
entirely reject, as I trust my audience did.
�THE’ SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
• 17
we might easily defeat our own benevolent intentions. For instance,'
it is conceivable that such taxation might become so heavy as to
approximate in effect to the establishment of Communism, and the
springs of industry and frugality, in other words the creation of capital,
would be proportionately affected. Again, the State must not afford
help to workmen in such shape as directly or indirectly to encourage
on the one hand idleness, and on the other a reckless increase of the
population. For example, it must not interfere to lower the price
of food or houses; because common sense and experience alike show
us that such interference would rapidly pauperise the class it was
intended to benefit. But there are, I believe, many ways in which
it may add most materially to the comfort and happiness of the poor
without at all relieving them from the necessity of exercising prudence
and industry. As regards their physical comfort, it may carry out
sanitary regulations on a scale hitherto not dreamt of. It may
furnish them in London, and other large towns, with a copious supply
of good water free of expense. It may provide medical assistance
much more liberally than at present. I would add, it may exercise
a close supervision over the weights and measures of the shopkeepers
and the quality of the goods they supply, did I not hope that the
spread of co-operative stores may render such supervision unnecessary.
The State may also do much to make the lives of the poor brighter
and happier. It may place education within their reach; it may
furnish an adequate supply of free libraries, museums, and picture
galleries; it may provide plenty of excellent music in the parks and
other public places on Sundays and summer evenings.
I think that a London workman in steady employment, earning
such wages as he does now, working eight hours a day, living in
his own house, and with such means of instruction and amusement
as I have described gratuitously afforded him, would not have an
intolerable lot. His position would, it is true, be less brilliant than
that of his employer. But it does not follow that the lot of the
latter would be so very much more desirable. His income, of course,
will be lessened in proportion as his workmen receive a larger share
of the profits of production. He will live in greater luxury and
elegance than they do, but within limits; for public opinion, guided
by religious discipline, will not tolerate the insolent display of
magnificence which at present lends an additional bitterness to the
misery of the poor. His chief pleasure will consist, like that of the
statesman, in the noble satisfaction of administering the interests of
the industrial group over which he presides. But the responsibilities
of this position will be so heavy, the anxiety and the strain on the
mind so severe, that incompetent men will generally be glad to take
the advice that will be freely given them, namely, to retire from it
to some humbler occupation, The workmen, on the other hand.
�18*
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASSI
will lead a tranquil life, exempt from all serious anxiety; and
although their position will be less splendid than that of the
(employers, it will not be less dignified. For in that future to which
I look forward, the pressure of public opinion, directed, as I have
several times said, by an organised religion, will not tolerate any idle
class living by the sweat of others, and affecting to look down on all
who have to gain their own bread. Every man, whether he is rich
or poor, will be obliged to work regularly and steadily in some way
or other as a duty to society; and when all work, the false shame
which the industrious now feel in the presence of the idle will dis
appear for ever. I am addressing an audience, which, whether it
calls itself Republican or not, has, I am sure, a thoroughly Repub
lican spirit, and a keen sense of the insolent contempt with which
labour is regarded by those whose circumstances exempt them from
performing it. You will therefore agree with me that of all the
changes in the workman’s condition which I have enumerated as
likely to be realised in the future, this is by far the most precious—
that his function will be invested with as much dignity as that of
any other citizen who is doing his duty to society.
There are some men who are inclined to be impatient when they
are asked to contemplate a state of things which confessedly will not
be of immediate realisation. They are burning for an immediate
reformation of all wrong in their own time. They think it very poor
work to talk of a golden age which is to bless the world long after
they are dead, buried, and forgotten. They are even inclined to
resent any attempt to interest them in it, as though dictated by a
concealed desire to divert them from practical exertions. “ Tell us,”
they say, “how we may taste some happiness. Why should we
labour in the cause of progress if the fruits are to be reaped only by
posterity ? ”
I do not wish to speak harshly of workmen who have this feeling.
There has been too much of such hypocritical preaching in times
past, and it is not strange if they have become suspicious of exhorta
tions to fix their eyes on a remote future rather than on the present.
So conspicuously unjust is their treatment by the more powerful
classes, so hard and painful is the monotonous round of their daily
life, that the wonder is, not that some men should rebel against it,
but that most should bear it with calmness and resignation. Never
theless, it is necessary to say firmly, and never to cease saying, that
such language as I have alluded to belongs to a low moralityJ
Moreover, it defeats its own object. For whatever may be the case
with individuals, the people will not be stimulated to united action
by arguments addressed to its selfishness. The people can only be
moved to enthusiasm by an appeal to elevated sentiments. If leaders
�THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
19
of the worst causes find it necessary to invest them with some delusive
semblance of virtue that may touch the popular heart, shall we who
have put our hand to the sacred task of helping and accelerating
social progress, shall we deal in cynical sophisms and play on selfish
passions ? We owe it to our race that we should leave this world in
a better state than we found it. We must labour for posterity,
because our ancestors laboured for us. What sacrifices have we to
make compared with some that have been made for us ? We are
not called on to go to the gallows with John Brown and George
William Gordon, the latest martyrs in the cause of labour; or to
mount barricades, like the workmen who flung away their lives in
Paris twenty years ago next month. Is their spirit extinct ? Were
they men of different mould from us ? Or did they enter upon that
terrible struggle on some calculation of their personal advantage ?
No ! but so short a time had wrought them up to an heroic enthu
siasm which made it seem a light thing to pour out their blood if
they might inaugurate a happier future for their class. And shall
we who live in times less stormy, but not less critical for the cause
of labour, shall we complain if the fruits of such small sacrifices as 1
we may make are reserved for another generation ?
The worst of this unworthy spirit is, that the exhibition of it is an
excuse to the self-indulgent and frivolous for their neglect of all
serious thought and vigorous action. One is sometimes ready to
despair of any good coming out of a populace which can fill so many
public-houses and low music-halls ; which demands such dull and
vulgar rubbish in its newspapers; which devours the latest news
from Newmarket, and stakes its shillings and pots of beer as eagerly
as a duke or marquis puts on his thousands. This multitude, so
frivolous and gross in its tastes, will not be regenerated by plying
it with fierce declamation against the existing order of society. You
will more easily move it by appealing to its purer feelings, obscured
but not extinct, than by taunting it with a base submission to class
injustice. The man whose ideas of happiness do not go much beyond
his pipe and glass and comic song, knows that the sour envious
agitator will never be a bit the better off for all the trouble he gives
himself; and he sees nothing to gain by following in his steps. But
there are few men so gross as not to be capable of feeling the beauty
of devotion to the good of others, even when they are morally too
weak to put it in practice. And though a man may lead an un
satisfactory life, it is something if, so far as his voice contributes to
the formation of public opinion, it is heard on’ the right side. This
is the ground we must take if we wish to raise the tone of workmen.
We must place before them, without reserve, the highest motive of
political and social action——the good of those who are to come after
�20
THE SOCIAL FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS.
us. We must hold out no prospect of individual advantage or reward
other than the approval of their own consciences.
Those who complain most bitterly of the slow rate of progress
towards an improved industrial state, would sometimes do well to
reflect whether their own conduct does not contribute to retard »
it. The selfish spirit follows us even into our labours for others,
and takes the form of vanity and ambition. Probably all of us have
had frequent occasion to observe how the cause of labour has suffered
from ignoble jealousies and personal rivalries. Yet it is the greatest
spirits who are invariably most ready to.t^ke the subordinate position '
and to accept obscurity with a noble satisfaction. The finest type k
of theocratic government, the lawgiver of the Hebrew nation, was
ready to be blotted out of God’s book, so that the humblest and
lowest, the rank-and-file of his people, might enter the promised
land. The greatest of the apostles wished that he himself might, be
accuised from Christ, if at that price he might purchase salvation for
an obscure mob of Jews. “ Reputation,” said the hero of the French
revolution, “ what is that ? Blighted be my name, but let France
be free.” So speaks a Moses, a Paul, or a Danton, while petty ambi
tions are stickling for precedence, and posturing before the gaze of
their contemporaries. Devotion, forgetfulness of self, a readiness to
obey rather than an eagerness to command—-if a man has not these
qualities he is but common clay, he is not fit to lead his fellows.
Det us school ourselves into a readiness not merely to storm the
breach, but to lie down in the trench, that others may pass over our.
bodies as over a bridge to victory. It is a spirit which has never
been found wanting whenever there has been a great cause to call it
forth; and a greater cause than that of the workman of Europe
advancing to their final emancipation, this world is not likely to see
again.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The social future of the working class: a lecture delivered to a meeting of Trades Unionists, May 7, 1868
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beesly, Edward Spencer [1831-1915.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 20 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Reprinted from Fortnightly Review. "This lecture was the last in a series of three delivered last spring, by request of the London Trades' Council, to meetings convoked by that body. The first two were given by Dr. Congreve and Mr. Frederic Harrison". [p. 1]. Title page brown and paper acidified. Tears at edges of title page. Printed by Virtue & Co., London.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
E. Truelove
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1869
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5208
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The social future of the working class: a lecture delivered to a meeting of Trades Unionists, May 7, 1868), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Labour Movement
Socialism
Capitalism
Conway Tracts
Labour Movement
Political reform
Social Reform
Socialism
Working Class-Great Britain
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/9f6fab2c377f05ea4868a67f3353791d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=sdqC%7EwsM9JOWvtfqIcTeE5pZjBwFFzMShdXEwZFYJ1d-AuW4wa4wCT66%7ELglZvcv75p7%7EODjwPMC%7EM4SsaVDNEnk7OnZRPIMYCSBr144QxactrGoth-0a%7Eg0bjZSeMLNncZr%7E47b25I9LZbwqedcEfG46o1JitSC6QJ59mZTTQsSs0S8FuustQTTZlT8V9x0uPGDwoZaozt7ulJUsFTpR2bPxT10Gn9NAPBnofG5GlbaXYb32ezLFB4wgp50wKRJ5580xvF8Gpj7Ug02XDSFoyVB5F293CbBPaV77YzUFlcVN3mY3spiZo2e5iLuKRfLQm6zLxiXmA3RuxVJJsz9Jw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
7da33cca055c715ed6100afc887c6f5d
PDF Text
Text
t“V
<*W"
72
WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL
AND SOCIAL REFORMER ?
CHARLES WATTS'
( Vice-President 0/ the National Secular Society).
LONDON:
WATTS & CO., 17, JOHNSON’S COURT,
FLEET STREET, E.C.
Price Fourpence.
��WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND
SOCIAL REFORMER?
' Although Thomas Carlyle has said that “ in these days it
is professed that hero-worship has gone out and finally
ceased,” thousands of the professed followers of Christ
idolise his memory to such an extent that they appear to
be entirely oblivious of any defect either in his character
or in his teachings. They regard their hero as having been
the very embodiment of truth, virtue, and perfection; and
those persons who are compelled to doubt the correctness
of these assumptions are regarded by orthodox believers
as most unreasonable and perverse members of society.
Probably the principal cause why such erroneous and
extravagant notions are entertained of one who, according
to the New Testament, was very little, if at all, superior to
other religious heroes can be accounted for by the fact that
the worshippers of Christ were taught in their childhood to
reverence him as an absolutely perfect character, and as
being beyond criticism. Thus youthful impressions
resulted in fancied creations which, in matured life, have
been accepted as realities. The Rev. James Cranbrook
recognised this truth, for in the preface to his work, The
Founders of Christianity (page 5), he observes : “ Our own
idealisations have invested him (Jesus) with a halo of
spiritual glory, that by the intensity of its brightness
conceals from us the real figure presented in the Gospels.
We see him, not as he is described, but as the ideally
perfect man our own fancies have conceived. But let any
one sit down and critically analyse the sayings and doings
ascribed to Jesus in the Gospels—let him divest his mind
of the superstitious fear of irreverence, and then ask him
self whether all those sayings and doings are in harmony
with the highest wisdom speaking for all ages and races of
�4
AVAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
mankind, and with the conceptions of an absolutely perfect
human nature, and I am mistaken if he will not find a very
great deal he will be forced to condemn.”
Even the sons of Labor, the apostles of Democracy, and
the advocates of Socialism appear disposed to adopt Jesus
as their Patron Saint. Conjectures are being constantly
made by professed modern reformers as to what the
Carpenter of Nazareth would say upon the many political
and social questions that agitate the public mind in this
the latter half of the nineteenth century. These hero
worshippers seem to overlook the apathy of Jesus in
respect to the evils of his own time. Of course, it is not
difficult for an impartial observer to learn why the name of
Christ is invoked to support the various schemes that are
now put forward to aid the regeneration of society.
However little Christianity is practised among us, it is
extensively professed, and it is thought by many a virtue
to assume a belief, whether there are sufficient grounds for
doing so or not. This slavish adherence to fashion is an
undignified prostration of mental freedom and independ
ence, and it is also a fruitful source of the perpetuation of
error. My purpose in examining the claims set up for
Jesus as a political and social reformer, is to ascertain
if the records of his life, doings, and teachings justify such
claims. If Jesus were judged as an ordinary man, living
nearly two thousand years ago, my present task would be
unnecessary. If we assume that such a man once lived, and
that what he said and did is accurately reported, he. should,
in my opinion, be considered as a youth possessing but
limited education, surrounded by unfavorable influences for
intellectual acquirements, belonging to a race not very
remarkable for literary culture, retaining many of the
failings of his progenitors, and having but little regard for
the world or the things of the world. Viewed under these
circumstances, I could, while excusing many of his errors,
recognise and admire something that is praiseworthy in the
life of “ Jesus of Nazareth.” But when he is raised upon a
pinnacle of greatness, as an exemplar of virtue and wisdom,
surpassing the production of any age or country, he is then
exalted to a position which he does not merit, and which,
to my mind, deprives him of that credit which otherwise he
would, perhaps, be entitled to.
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
5
The contentions which it is my purpose to dispute are :
that Jesus was a political and social reformer, and that
his alleged teachings contain the remedies for the wrongs
of modern society. Before directly dealing with these
points it may be necessary to glance at the various aspects
of reform that have, at different times in our national
history, been presented to the community; also to briefly
consider the nature of the required reforms, and some of
the principal methods that have been adopted to secure
them.
In quite primitive ages important struggles took place
to establish greater equality in the conditions of life. In
the time of Moses, according to the Bible, the land, for
instance, was not merely the subject of “tracts for the
times,” but the laws and regulations relating to it were
practically dealt with. It did not, however, cease to be
property, and its inheritance was recognised as a rightful
thing. The stock-in-trade of many modern reformers is
the denunciation of those who “ add house to house, field to
field, and grind the faces of the poor.” If this condemnation
is one of the many features of Socialism, then Isaiah,
Jeremiah, and Ezekiel may, in this particular, be fairly
termed Socialists—a name foreign to their language and to
the ideas of their day.
The contention with some is, that Christ was a successor
to all these prophets, that he took the same kind of
objection as they did to the then existing state of things,
and that he used the same form of speech in denouncing
them. The general reply to this is, that Christ was, if
anything, only a prophetic reformer, not a real one. In
proof of this many facts in his alleged history may be
cited. For instance, he did not rescue the land from the
control of the Romans, who held it from the people very
much in the same way as landholders do now; he did not
attempt to render any aid to the laborers of Rome, who in
his day were resisting the injustice of the capitalists; he
did not deliver his brethren of “ the royal house ” from
their foreign rulers; he did not redeem the Jews from
their social evils, or restore justice to their nation. In a
word, he entirely failed to do the reforming work that was
expected of him. About the year 1825 the “Christian
Socialists of London ” called special attention to the question
�6
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
of land as regulated by Moses, and the living in common
by the early Christians; but no practical issue arose out of
the discussion. From that period down to the present
the same subject has been more or less agitated, and still
the matter is very far from being settled. Now, if it is
alleged that Christ sought to bring about a just settlement
of the land problem, then the existence of the present
oppressive land laws proves that he failed, and that his
most devout followers have been equally unfortunate.
If Christ had been a practical reformer, we should not have
in our midst the deplorable injustice, the wrongs, and the
inequalities that now afflict society. These evils and draw
backs—the growth of centuries during which Christianity
was in power—-will doubtless be lessened, if not altogether
destroyed; but the work will be achieved by a moral
revolution, inaugurated and conducted by men who will
possess ability and experience that it is evident Jesus never
had.
It must be borne in mind that there are two kinds of
revolution—one that is gradual and intellectual, and there
fore useful; the other that is sudden, born of passion, and
therefore often useless as an important factor in securing
permanent reforms. We know that every change of
thought, or condition of things, involves a revolution which,
if controlled by reason and regulated by the lessons of
experience, must aid rational progress, and tend to build up
a State, and secure its permanence. But there is another
kind of revolution, which is sought to be produced by
Nihilism and Anarchism, both of which aim at the
destruction of the State. I am not in favor of either of
these “isms,” believing, as I do, that in our present
condition of society some form of government is necessary.
Law and order, based upon the national will, and the
principle of justice, appear to me to be essential in any
scheme that is accepted for the purpose of furthering the
political and social progress of the world. Then we have
Socialism, which concerns itself with economic, ethical,
political, and industrial questions. The principal subject,
however, dealt with by Socialists is the accumulation
and distribution of wealth. State Socialism dates from
the time of the eminent French writer, Claude, H. Count
de St. Simon, whose works were published in 1831. He
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
tried to secure the amelioration of the condition of the
poor, and aimed at the organisation of labor and the
distribution of the fruits of industry, upon the principle of
every man being rewarded according to his works.
Socialism is, in fact, an attempt (whether it is the best that
could be made is with some persons a debateable point) to
regulate the social relations, making them more equal than
they are at present, either by individual combination, by
municipal or co-operative action, by a philanthropic policy
of the Church, or by the control of the State. This last
phase of the Socialistic scheme means the complete
regulation by law of the equality of individuals, the State
being the owner of the land, and of all the instruments of
industry that are at present possessed by individuals, public
companies, etc., who now regulate, in their own interest,
production and distribution.
Having thus briefly stated the general conceptions and
aims of political and social reformers, the next step is to
inquire in what relation Jesus stands to any or all of them.
Of course there is only one source of information upon the
subject at our command—that of the four Gospels. From
these it will not be difficult to demonstrate that Jesus was
no mundane reformer. Although he was surrounded by
poverty, slavery, oppression, and mental degradation, he
made no effort to rid society of these curses to humanity.
As John Stuart Mill observes, in his work upon
Liberty (pp. 28, 29), in referring to Christian morality:
“I do not scruple to say of it that it is, in many im
portant points, incomplete and one-sided, and that, unless
ideas and feelings, not sanctioned by it, had contributed
to the formation of European life and character, human
affairs would have been in a worse condition than they now
are.”
Professor Huxley, in the Nineteenth Century, No. 144,
pp. 178-186, points out that Christians have no right to
force their idealistic portraits of Jesus on the unbiassed
scientific world, whose business it is to study realities and
to separate fiction from fact. The Professor’s words are :
“ In the course of other inquiries, I have had to do with
fossil remains, which looked quite plain at a distance, and
became more and more indistinct as I tried to define their
outline by close inspection. There was something there—
�8
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER
1
something which, if I could win assurance about it, might
mark a new epoch in the history of the earth; but, study as
long as I might, certainty eluded my grasp. So has it
been with me in my efforts to define the grand figure of
Jesus as it lies in the primitive strata of Christian litera
ture. Is he the kindly, peaceful Christ depicted in the
catacombs 1 Or is he the stern judge who frowns above
the altar of Saints Cosmas and Damianus ? Or can he be
rightly represented in the bleeding ascetic broken down by
physical pain of too many mediaeval pictures ? Are we to
accept the Jesus of the second or the Jesus of the fourth
Gospel as the true Jesus ? What did he really say and do ?
and how much that is attributed to him in speech and
action is the embroidery of the various parties into which
his followers tended to split themselves within twenty
years of his death, when even the three-fold tradition was
only nascent ? .... If a man can find a friend, the
hypostasis of all his hopes, the mirror of his ethical ideal, in
the Jesus of any or all of the Gospels, let him live by faith
in that ideal. Who shall, or can, forbid him ? But let
him not delude himself that his faith is evidence of the
objective reality of that in which he trusts. Such evidence
is to be obtained only by the use of the methods of science
as applied to history and to literature, and it amounts, at
present, to very little.”
Equally emphatic are the remarks of John Vickers, the
author of The New Koran, etc., who, in his work, The Real
Jesus, on pp. 160, 161, writes: “Many popular preachers
at the present day are accustomed to hold Jesus up to
admiration as the special friend of the poor-—that is, as
the benefactor of the humble working class, and their
representations to this effect are doubtless very generally
believed. But a greater delusion respecting him than this
can scarcely be imagined ; for, however much he may have
been disposed to favor those who forsook their industrial
calling and led a vagrant life, his preaching and the course
which he took were prejudicial to all who honestly earned
their bread. He did nothing with his superior wisdom to
develop the resources of the country and provide employ
ment for the poor; all his efforts were directed to the
unhinging of industry, the diminution of wealth, and the
promotion of universal idleness and beggary. It was no
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
9
part of his endeavor to see the peasant and the artisan
better remunerated and more comfortably housed, for he
despised domestic comforts as much as Diogenes, and
believed that their enjoyment would disqualify people for
obtaining the everlasting pleasures of Paradise. A
provident working man who had managed to save enough
for a few months’ subsistence he would have classed with
the covetous rich, and required him to give away in alms
all that he had treasured as the indispensable condition
of discipleship. On one occasion he is said to have
distributed food liberally to the hungry multitude; but
the food was none of his providing, since he was him
self dependent on alms. Moreover, the recipients of his
bounty were not a band of ill-fed laborers returning from
work/not a number of distressed farmers who had suffered
heavy losses from murrain or drought, but a loafing crowd
who had followed him about from place to place, and
spent the day in idleness. Such bestowment of largess
would only tend to produce a further relaxation of
industrial effort; it would induce credulous peasants, to
throw down their tools and follow the wonder-working
prophet for the chance of a meal; they would see little
wisdom in plodding at their tasks from day to day, like
the ants and the bees, if people were to be fed by
wandering about trustfully for what should turn up, as the
idle, improvident ravens (Prov. vi. 6 ; Luke xii. 24).”
Many eminent Christian writers maintain that Jesus was
a social reformer, because he is represented as having, been
in favor of dispensing with the private ownership of
property, and also of people living together, enjoying what
is called “ a common repast.” Professor Graetz, in the
second volume of his able History of the Jews, devotes a
chapter to the social practices which prevailed at the time
when Jesus is alleged to have lived. On page 117 he
states that Christianity was really an offshoot from the
principles held by the Essenes, and that Christ inherited
their aversion to Pharisaical laws, while he approved of
their practice of putting their all into the common treasury.
Further, like them, Jesus highly esteemed self-imposed
poverty, and despised riches. In fact, we are told that
the “ community of goods, which was a peculiar doctrine
of the Essenes, was not only approved, but enforced.............
�10
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
The repasts they shared in common formed, as it were, the
connecting link which attached the followers of Jesus to
one another; and the alms distributed by the rich publicans
relieved the poor disciples of the fear of hunger; and this
bound them still more strongly to Jesus.” But Graetz
also adds that Christ thoroughly shared the narrow views
held by the Judaeans of his time, and that he despised the
heathen world. Thus he said : “ Give not that which is
holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before
swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn
again and rend you ” (Matt. vii. 6). If this is “ Christian
Socialism,” it is far from being catholic in its nature. The
Socialistic element of having “all things in common ” was
limited by Christ to one particular community ; it lacked
that universality necessary to all real social reforms. It
was similar to his idea of the brotherhood of man. Those
only were his brothers who believed in him. He desired
no fellowship with those who did not accept his faith;
hence he exclaimed : “ If a man abide not in me, he is cast
forth as a branch, and is withered, and men gather them,
and cast them into the fire, and they are burned ” (John xv.
6); “I pray not for the world, but for them which thou
hast given me ” (John xvii. 9); “But he that denieth me
before men shall be denied before the angels of God ”
(Luke xii. 9); “ He that believeth not shall be damned ”
(Mark xvi. 16). This may be the teaching of theology, but
it is not indicative of a broad humanity, neither would it,
if acted upon, tend to promote the social welfare of mankind.
. Professor Graham, M.A., of Belfast College, contends, in
his work, Socialism: Olcl and New, that Christ taught
“ Communism ” when he preached “ Blessed be ye poor,”
when “ he repeatedly denounced ” the rich, and when he
recommended the wealthy young man to voluntarily
surrender his property to the poor. The Professor also
says: “ In spite of certain passages to the contrary,
pointing in a different direction, the Gospels are pervaded
with the spirit of Socialism ”; but he adds : “ It is not quite
State Socialism, because the better society was to be
brought about by the voluntary union of believers.” He
admits, however, that “ the ideal has hitherto been found
impossible; but let not any say that it does not exist in
the Gospels—that Christ did not contemplate an earthly
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER?
11
society.” Now this last point is just what could be fairly
urged, if the Gospels were trustworthy. There can be no
reasonable doubt that the disregard of mundane duties
would be the logical sequence of acting up to many of the
teachings ascribed to Jesus. For instance, he said, “My
kingdom is not of this world ” (John xviii. 36). “He that
loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in
this world shall keep it unto life eternal” (John xii. 25).
“ I am not of the world ” (John xvii. 9). “ Take no. thought
for your life, what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink; nor
yet for your body what ye shall put on. . . . Take there
fore no thought for the morrow, for the morrow shall take
thought for the things of itself ” (Matthew vi. 25, 34). “ If
any man comes to me and hate not his father, and mother,
and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and
his own life, he cannot be my disciple ” (Luke xiv. 26).
“Everyone that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or
sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands,
for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall
inherit everlasting life” (Matthew xix. 29). Even the
disciple who wished to bury his father was advised by
Christ to forego that duty of affection, for “Jesus said,
Follow me ; let the dead bury the dead.”
The fact is, Christ was a spiritualiser, and not a social
reformer. If he had been to his age what Bacon and
Newton were to theirs, and what Darwin, Spencer, Huxley,
and Tyndall have been to the present generation ; if he had
written a book teaching men how to avoid the miseries of
life; if he had revealed the mysteries of nature, and
exhibited the beauties of the arts and sciences, what an
advantage he would have conferred upon mankind, and
what an important contribution he would have given to
the world towards solving the problems of our present
social wrongs and inequalities. But the usefulness of Jesus
was impaired by the idea which he entertained, that this
world was but a state of probation, wherein the human
family were to be prepared for another and a better home,
where “ the wicked cease from troubling and the weary
are at rest.”
We have thus seen the views of the scientist, the
historian, and the professor, upon the subject under con
sideration ; it will now be interesting to learn what one
�12
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER?
of the successors to the apostles has to say in reference
to the same question. B. F. Westcott, D.D., the present
Bishop of Durham, in his work, Social Aspects of Christianity,
says : “Of all places in the world, the Abbey, I think,
proclaims the social gospel of Christ with the most touch
ing eloquence. ... If I am a Christian, I must bring
within the range of my religion every interest and difficulty of man, ‘ for other foundation can no man lay than
that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.’ ”
This is not by any means correct, for many other
“foundations,” which have nothing to do with Christ,
have been laid, and upon them systems, some good and
some bad, have been built. For instance, there are
Individualism, Socialism, material standards of progress,
unlimited competition, and the application of science.
These are “ other foundations ” that men have had apart
altogether from Christ. But the solution to present social
evils, Dr. Westcott considers, is to be found only in the
Christian faith. He says : “ We need to show the world
the reality of spiritual power. We need to gain and
exhibit the idea that satisfies the thoughts, the aspirations,
the aims of men straining towards the light.” He admits
that science has increased our power and resources; but, he
adds, it “ cannot open the heavens and show the glory of
God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.” Of
course it cannot; for science has nothing to do with
the impossible, or with the wild speculations of theology.
In the Social Aspects of Christianity, as presented by the
Bishop, it would be difficult, indeed, to recognise the
principles of true Socialism. Moreover, as it is admitted
by him that science has increased our “power and
resources,” it is a proof that Jesus must have been a poor
reformer, when we remember that he did nothing what
ever to aid this strong element of modern progress.
From the references which I have here made to some of
the ablest writers of to-day, it will be seen how Jesus is
estimated by them. I now propose to analyse the various
statements which, according to the Four Gospels, were
uttered by him, that have any bearing upon the political
and social questions of our time. It will then be seen
whether Christ has any claim to be considered a political
and social reformer.
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER?
13
That the political views held by Jesus were exceed
ingly crude is evident from the circumstance recorded in
Matthew xxii. It is there stated that, on finding a coin of
the realm bearing the superscription of Caesar, Jesus
declared that both Caesar and God were to have their due.
The very pertinent question put by the disciples afforded
a good opportunity for some sound advice to be given upon
the political subjection in which the people to whom Christ
was talking were living. They were in bondage to a
foreign power, and were anxious to know if it were
“lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not.” Instead of
returning a clear and intelligible answer, Jesus replied in
words which were evasive and meaningless, so far as the
information sought for was concerned. If he had any
desire to alter the then existing political, relations, or. to
suggest any improvement, he might have given a practical
lesson upon the duties and obligations of the ruled to the
rulers. Another opportunity was lost when, Pilate having
asked Christ an important question, “ Jesus gave him no
answer” (John xix. 9).
Subsequently, however, Jesus recognised the “divine
government,” for he said : “ Thou couldst have no power
at all against me, except it were given thee from above.”
(John xix. 11). He also, having stated, “My kingdom is
not of this world,” added : “ If my kingdom were of this
world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be
delivered to the Jews.” Christ s notions of government
were similar to those of St. Paul, who said: “The
powers that be are ordained of God. . .. . and they that
resist shall receive to themselves damnation (Romans xiii.
1, 2).
Now, in the very face of these scriptural utterances, we
have men to-day who allege that Christ is their hero of
democracy. The belief that he ever intended to. improve
the government of this world by secular means is utterly
groundless. His negligence in this particular cannot be
explained away by saying that society was not ripe for
reform, and that Jesus lacked the power to revolutionise
the institutions of his time. There is truth, no doubt, in
the latter allegation, for the power of Christ for all practical
work seems to have been very limited indeed. He did not
attempt any political reform, as other men in all ages have-
�14
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
done; he did not make honest endeavors to inaugurate
improvements which, under happier circumstances, might
have been carried out. There is no evidence that Christ
ever concerned himself with such reforms as civil and
religious liberty, the freedom of the slaves, the equality
of human rights, the emancipation of women, the spread of
science and of education, the proper use of the land, and the
fostering of the fundamental elements of human progress.
His language was : “ Behold the fowls of the air : for they
sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns ; yet
your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much
better than they ? And why take ye thought for raiment ?
Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil
not, neither do they spin. And yet I say unto you, That
even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of
these. Wherefore, if God so clothes the grass of the field,
which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall
he not much more clothe you, 0 ye of little faith ? But
seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,
and all these things shall be added unto you.”
Christ’s declaration that his kingdom was not of this
world may be taken as a reason why he made no adequate
provision for secular government; but those who worship
him assert that his plan is the only one that can be success
fully adopted to secure the desired reforms, and that he
really did contemplate a better state of society on earth
than the one that then obtained. Where is the evidence
that this was so 1 Not in the New Testament, for it is
nowhere recorded therein that such was his mission. With
him the question was : “ For what shall it profit a man if
he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul ?” Even
Renan, who is so frequently quoted by Christian advocates
as extolling Jesus, admits that he lacked the qualities of a
great political and social reformer. In his Life of Jesus
Renan says that Christ had “ no knowledge of the general
condition of the world ” (p. 78); he was unacquainted with
science, “ believed in the devil, and that diseases were the
work of demons” (pp. 79, 80); he was “harsh” towards
s family, and was “no philosopher” (pp. 81-83); he
“went to excess” (p. 174); he “aimed less at logical
conviction than at enthusiasm”; “sometimes his intolerance
of all opposition led him to acts inexplicable and apparently
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
15
absurd” (pp. 274, 275); and “bitterness and reproach
became more and more manifest in his heart” (p. 278.)
But let us further consider what it is said that he taught
in reference to life’s social requirements, and also what was
his estimate of the world and the things of the world.
Under any system conducted upon rational principles the
first social requirement is to provide for sufficient food,
clothes, and shelter; for to talk of comfort and progress
without these requisites is absurd. Now, it was about
these very things that Jesus, as it has already been shown,
taught that we should take no thought. In Matthew (c. vi.)
special reference is made to the Gentiles who did take
thought as to the necessities of life ; but other people were
not to be anxious upon the subject, “ for your Heavenly
Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things,” and
a promise is given that he will provide them as he
“ feedeth ” “ the fowls of the air.” Poverty and idleness
were essentials to Christ’s idea of a social state, as is proved
by his advice to the rich young man, to whom he said:
“ If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and
give to the poor” (Matthew xix. 21). In John (vi. 27) it
is also said : “ Labor not for the meat which perisheth.”
What wealthy Christian will sell what he has and give to
the poor, and thus carry out Christ’s idea of social duties ?
And if the toiling millions did not labor for their meat,
they would get but little of it. It is not overlooked
that Jesus said to the young man, “and follow me”;
which meant, I presume, that he was to join the Chris
tian society in which they had “all things common”
(Acts iv.). But this state of existence could only be
maintained by giving up all one’s possessions and adding
them to the general stock. If all did this, the stock would
be soon exhausted. And the point here to be noted is, that
in Christ’s scheme no provision is made to provide for a
permanent mode of living, except by prayer or miracle.
Surely it must be obvious to most people that a
communion of saints, fed directly by God, could not be any
solution of the social problem for those outside such
communities Besides, there is little prospect of outsiders
being made partakers with the saints, unless God the
Father draws them unto Christ (John vi. 44); but no one
can go to the Father except by Christ (John xiv. 6).
�16
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
Thus our chances of admission into the Christian fold are
very remote, for if we are admitted it must be through
Christ, to whom we cannot go unless the Father draws us ;
but then we cannot go to the Father except by Christ.
This is a theological puzzle, which must be left for a
“ Christian Socialist ” to unravel if he can.
The belief that a social condition of society is sustained
by an invisible power, where no labor is performed, and
where no interest is taken in its progress, or in the dignity
and personal independence of its members, is the height of
folly. It implies the destruction of all human institutions,
and the substitution of a “divinely-ordered state of
things,” such as some of Christ’s followers allege they are
now hourly expecting. Well might the late Bishop of
Peterborough say : “ It is not possible for the State to
carry out all the precepts of Christ. A State that
attempted to do so could not exist for a week. If there be
any person who maintains the contrary, his proper place is
in a lunatic asylum ” (Fortnightly, January, 1890).
The Sermon on the Mount, or “in the plain,” as
stated by Luke (vi. 17), has been called the. Magna Charta
of the kingdom of God, proclaimed by Christ, although it
has never been made the basis of any human government.
Its injunctions are so impracticable and antagonistic to. the
requirements of modern civilisation that no serious
attempt has ever been made to put them in practice.
It may be mentioned that the genuineness of the “ Sermon ”
has been boldly questioned. Professor Huxley writes:
“I am of opinion that there is the gravest reason for
doubting whether the Sermon on the Mount was ever
preached, and whether the so-called Lord’s Prayer was
ever prayed by Jesus of Nazareth” (Controverted Questions,
p. 415). The Professor then gives his reasons for arriving
at this conclusion.
The Rev. Dr. Giles, in his Christian Records, speaking of
the Sermon on the Mount, says : “ There is good ground
for believing that such a collective body of maxims was
never, at any time, delivered from the lips of our.Lord’;
and Milman declares that scarcely any passage is more
perplexing to the harmonist of the Gospels than this
sermon, which, according to Matthew and Luke, appears to
have been delivered at two different places.
�*S-'
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
17
Mr. Charles B. Cooper, a very able American writer,
aptly observes: “If this discourse is so important, as
Christians profess to believe—the sum of all the teachings
of Jesus, and the sufficient source of all morality—it is
curious that Mark and John knew nothing about it, and
that Luke should dismiss it with such a short report.
Luke, omitting the larger part of the matter, takes only
one page to tell what occupies three pages in Matthew;
and to find any parallel to much of Matthew we have to go
to other chapters of Luke and to other occasions. In
addition to which, they disagree as to whether it was given
on a mountain or in a plain.”
Taking a broad view of the teachings as ascribed to
Christ, I should describe most of them as being the result
of emotion rather than the outcome of matured reflection.
They are based upon faith, not upon knowledge, trust in
Providence being the cornerstone of his system, so far as
his fragmentary utterances can be systematised. In my
opinion, the idea of his being a political and social reformer
rests upon an entirely mistaken view of the union of what
are termed temporal and spiritual things. Examples of this
maybe seen in such injunctions as “Love one another ”
and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” The first was
clearly applicable to the followers of Christ, for he
expressly states, “ By this shall all men know that ye are
my disciples” (John xiii. 35); and the second command
applied only to the Jewish community, not to strangers
who lived outside. These injunctions did not mean that
those who heard them were to love all mankind. Christ
himself divided those who were for him from those who
were against him. To the first he said, “ Come, ye blessed
of my father ”; to the other, “ Depart from me, ye cursed,
into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
It has always appeared to me to be remarkably strange
that Christ should be regarded as the exemplar of universal
love. Neither his own words, nor the conduct of his
followers, justify such a belief. It is, of course, desirable
that a social state of society should be based upon love and
the universal brotherhood of man. This is the avowed
foundation of the religion of the Positivists, their motto
being, “Love our basis, order our method, and progress
our end”; but no such commendable features are to be
B
�18
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER
1
found in the Gospel of Christ, or in the history of the
Church. Jesus declared that his mission was only to “the
lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew xv. 24).
Moreover, the conditions of discipleship which he imposed
would, if complied with, exclude the possibility of love
among all men (Luke xiv. 26); as would also his avowed
object of breaking the peace and harmony of the domestic
circle (Matthew x. 34, 35). It may be said that such are
the contingencies attending the belief and adoption of a
new religion. Be it so; but that only shows the futility
of the contention that Christ established universal brother
hood. It is absurd to argue that he did so, when we are
told in the Gospels that his mission was to the Jews only
(Matthew xv. 24); that he would have no fellowship with
unbelievers (Matthew xv. 26); that he threatened to have
his revenge upon those who denied him (Matthew x. 33);
that he instructed his disciples to “go not into the way of
the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye
not” (Matthew x. 5); and, finally, that he commanded
those disciples, when they were about to start on a
preaching expedition, that “Whosoever shall not receive
you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that
house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I
say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of
Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment than for
that city” (Matthew x. 14, 15). Shaking the dust from
the feet, be it remembered, was an Oriental custom of
exhibiting hatred towards those against whom the act was
performed. And surely the punishment that it is said was
to follow the refusal of the disciples’ administration was
the very opposite of the manifestation of love. This
accords with the non-loving announcement that “ the Lord
Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty
angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that
know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord
Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the
glory of his power” (2 Thess. i. 7, 8, 9).
These references ought to be sufficient to convince any
one that Jesus cannot be reasonably credited with a
feeling of unqualified love for the whole of the human
race. His conduct, and the general spirit of his teachings
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
19
towards those who differed from him, forbid such a
supposition. His injunctions, if acted upon, would annul
the influence of the ancient maxim of “ doing unto others
as you would they should do to you.” Certainly he failed
to set a personal example by complying with this rule, as
his harsh language to those who did not accept his
authority amply proves. It is reported that Jesus said
(Matthew v. 22), “ Whosoever shall say Thou fool shall be
in danger of hell fire”; yet we find him exclaiming, “Ye
fools, ye fools and blind” (Lukexi. 40; Matthewxxiii. 17).
He advised others to “Love your enemies, bless them that
curse you,” while he himself addressed those who were not
his friends as “hypocrites ” (Matthew vii. 5); “ye serpents,
ye generation of vipers ” (Matthew xxiii. 33). We may
here apply Christ’s own words to himself: “I say unto
you that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall
give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy
words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt
be condemned ” (Matthew xii. 36, 37). In Luke (vi. 37)
he counsels us to “forgive, and ye shall be forgiven ”; but
in Mark (iii. 29) it is stated, “He that shall blaspheme
against the Holy G-host hath never forgiveness, but is in
danger of eternal damnation.” The unfortunate point here
is, that we are not told what constitutes blasphemy against
the Holy Ghost.
From these cases, and there are many more in the
Gospels of like nature, it is clear that Jesus taught one
thing and practised another—a course of conduct which
his followers have not been slow to emulate. But such an
inconsistent trait of character disqualifies those in whom it
is found from being the best of social reformers. Example
is higher than precept.
Whatever may be urged in favor of Christ’s supposed
“ spiritual kingdom,” his teachings have but little value in
regulating the political and social affairs of daily life, using
those terms in the modern and legitimate sense, inasmuch
as he has given the world no practical information upon
either the science of politics or of sociology. The affairs of
this world had but little interest with Christ. With him
pre-eminence was given to the soul over the body. We are
not to fear him who can kill the body only, but rather fear
him “ who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell ”
�20
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER?
(Matthew x. 28). Here we recognise the great defect in
Jesus as a societarian reformer. He treats this world as if
it were of secondary importance, and he furnishes no useful
rules for its practical government. True he says, “ Blessed
are ye poor,” and “Woe unto you that are rich but what
does this amount to ? These empty exclamations will not
abolish pauperism, neither will they produce the organisation
of honest industry, whereby human wants can be supplied
and social comforts secured. Would it not have been
better if Jesus had devised some plan whereby poverty
should become extinct ?
To talk, as Professor Graham does, about producing a
better state of society by a “ union of believers ” is, in my
opinion, folly. How is it to be done ? Every member of
“ the union ” would have to live on the alms of the wealthy
members. It would, in fact, be a society of the destitute
supported by voluntary contributions. Surely no sane
Socialists ever proposed to divide mankind into two
classes—z.e., paupers and those who feed them. We know
what the result of such a policy was in the case of the
Church. As the Professor says, the Church obtained the
funds of the rich in return for certain considerations which
were supposed to affect them in this world and in the next;
and out of such proceeds the clergy distributed bread to
the poor and kept something better for themselves. Thus
Europe for centuries was infested by fat, idle monks . and
an army of miserable beggars. A more detestable condition
of society to men of honor and independent spirit never
existed. Yet this “ Christian plan ” finds favor, as we have
seen, in “ the Abbey,” and is really the necessary outcome of
Christ’s mendicant teachings. For did he not allege that
the poor were blessed, and that “ ye hath the poor always
with you” (Matthew xxvi. 11)? If he contemplated that
the period would arrive when “it should be impossible for
men to be poor,” why did he not give some practical
instructions to hasten its advent ? This would have been
a o-rand contribution to social reform. But his overwhelm
ing anxiety about another life was, with him, the “one
thing needful,” and to it every other consideration had to
give way.
.
I am quite unable to understand how anyone can mistake
the obvious meaning of the parable in which the rich man
u-*** yMita
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
21
appears in hell and the poor man in heaven (Luke
xvi. 19-26). The only assigned reason is that the one was
well-to-do in this life, while the other suffered privations.
This is no justification for either of the men being where
they are represented to have been. For poverty is no
virtue, neither is it a crime to be rich. Men of wealth can
be worthy characters, and poverty may be allied with
much rascality. The wrong does not consist in possessing
riches, but rather in the misuse of them; and, therefore, to
be poor does not seem the highest qualification for future
bliss, and to be rich is not a sufficient cause for anyone
being excluded from an abode of happiness. But this
parable is another illustration of Christ’s exaltation of
poverty. He even dispatched his disciples on a mission of
propaganda, without scrip, money, or purse, to beg their
way through the world (Luke x. 7-10). Is this the highest
model that can be given for a mission to the poor ? It is
thought so little of to-day, even by professed Christians,
that they never adopt the plan suggested by their
“ Master.” They may preach “ Blessed be ye poor,” but
they have no desire to be one of them. They read the
warning, “Woe unto you that are rich; for ye have
received your consolation ” (Luke vi. 24); but they appear
to be exceedingly comfortable with their material consola
tion. “ A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush,” and
they are consoled more with the riches of this world than
with the chance of having a harp in the next. In the case
of the rich young man (Luke xviii.) it is true Christ
advised the giving up of private property; but it is also
true that the advice was not deemed practical, for the
young man “went away sorrowful” (Matthew xix. 22).
Supposing he had accepted the advice, he would then
have swelled the ranks of the poor unemployed, and
thereby have become the recipient rather than the bene
factor, although it is recorded that “it is more blessed to
give than to receive” (Acts xx. 35). The giving up all
one’s possessions would be as injurious to a community as
the amassing of wealth by the few is pernicious.
What is required is a social arrangement whereby all
members of the community shall have their fair share of
the necessities and comforts of life ; and this arrangement
Christ did not understand, or, if he did, he made no effort
�99!
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
to bring it into force, and consequently he lacked the
elements of a true social reformer.
There is an incident recorded in Luke (xii.) which shows
that Christ refused to say anything upon the subjects of
property, civil rights, and law and government. “ One of
the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother,
that he divide the inheritance with me. And he said unto
him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you ?”
Here Jesus had an opportunity, as a social reformer, to
give the world an important lesson upon the duty of one
man to another; but he did not avail himself of it. He
acted more like a modern lawyer would do, who, when
asked by a stranger to give him advice, would reply: “I
am not your appointed solicitor ; if you want information,
you must consult your own legal adviser.”
The parable of “ the rich man who set up greater barns,”
related in Luke (xii.), is another illustration of Christ’s
defective teachings in reference to the affairs of this life.
The man in the parable proposed to enlarge his premises so
that he might be able to put by increased stock of fruits
and goods, and thus be in a position to take his “ ease, eat,
drink, and be merry.” There does not appear to be any
great crime in this, for he lacked room wherein to bestow
his fruits, etc. (v. 17). Surely there could be no serious
objection to making such careful provision for “a rainy
day.” Such conduct is frequently necessary to the advance
ment of personal comfort and general civilisation. Have
not Christians in all ages, since their advent, done the
same thing, when they have had the opportunity ? Layingup treasures on earth, although forbidden by Christ, is
often an effective precaution against starvation, and against
being in old age the slave of charity. But for doing this
very thing the man was told : “ Thou fool, this night thy
soul shall be required of thee ; then whose shall those
things be which thou hast provided ?” (v. 20). Jesus then
said, “ Therefore I say unto you, take no thought for your
life, what ye shall eat,” etc. Here we have the prominent
Christian requirement of making the duties of this world
subservient to the demands of a future existence put forth
by one who is claimed as being a model social reformer.
If it is alleged that Christ meant that the man in the parable
should have distributed his fruits and goods rather than
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER?
23
store them up, the reply is, the account does not say so.
Why did not Christ, instead of making heaven the principal
consideration, point out the evil influence of the monopoly
of wealth upon human society ? The social problems cannot
be solved by indulging in speculations as to another world,
of which we have had no experience. The principle sought
to be enforced in this parable is evidently that the soul is
of more importance than the body, and that heaven is of
greater value than earth. Thoughtlessness of the things of
time is directly encouraged by reference to the ravens :
“ For they neither sow nor reap; which neither have store
house nor barn; and God feedeth them ” (v. 24).
It is worthy of note that Jesus never once intimated
throughout his career, either by direct statement or
illustration, that this world was the noblest and most
desirable dwelling place for man, and that it was the home
of social felicity and mutual happiness. His heart and
home were in his Father’s house, whither he went to
prepare a place for his followers, to whom he gave a
promise that he would come and receive them unto
himself (John xiv. 2, 3). So little did Christ understand
the philosophy of secular reform that when he condemned
covetousness (which was very laudable upon his part) it
was because he thought it interfered with the preparation
for inhabiting “mansions in the skies,” rather than in
consequence of its effects upon homes on earth. He
entirely overlooked the agencies that promote human
comfort. The means that have been employed to produce
and to advance civilisation received from him no matured
consideration. If every word attributed to him had been
left unuttered, not one feature of modern progress would be
missing to-day. Let anyone carefully read, with an
unbiassed mind, the four Gospels, and then ask himself the
questions : What philosophic truth did Jesus propound ?
What scientific fact did he explain ? What social problem
did he solve ? What political scheme did he unfold 1 The
New Testament does not inform us. On the contrary,
while other men, with less pretensions than himself, were
active in giving the world their thoughts upon these great
questions, Jesus remained silent in reference to them. It
is no answer to say that to deal with the subjects was not
his mission. For, if he came simply to talk about another
�24
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
world, at the sacrifice of the requirements of this, then my
contention is made good that, whatever else he was, he
certainly was no political and social reformer.
It appears to me that the gospel of Christ is a very poor
one for any practical purposes, inasmuch as it never deals
with the material comforts of human beings. It does not
suggest any means by which the poor could obtain that
power by which they could secure the amelioration of their
sad condition. It is not here overlooked that Christ is
credited with saying that those who sought the “Kingdom
of God ” should have food, drink, etc., added unto them
(Luke xii.). But, unfortunately, experience teaches that
such a promise cannot be relied upon, for it is too well
known that many of those persons who occupied much of
their time in seeking the kingdom of God remained
destitute of the necessaries of life. It was during the
prevalence of this superstitious belief, and of an un
reasonable reliance upon Christ, that personal misery and
intellectual sterility prevailed throughout the land. For
many generations the indiscriminate followers of Jesus
failed to give the world any new thought, or to establish
any new political or social institution; and from the
Church nothing of practical secular value emanated during
the fifteen centuries of its uninterrupted reign. This,
however, is not all that can be fairly urged upon this
point. The followers of Christ not only failed to originate
any social scheme for the good of general society them
selves, but they did their utmost to crush those who did.
It appears almost incredible that such persistent efforts
were ever made to extinguish every new thought as those
recorded of Christians, when they had the power to do as
they pleased. New books were despised and destroyed,
and new inventions were said to be the work of the Devil.
True happiness cannot co-exist with physical slavery and
mental serfdom, and yet, it must be repeated, Jesus did
nothing to remove these evils. His apathy towards the
institution of slavery is the more strange if we accept the
authority of Gratz, that Christ was connected with the
Essenes, and that, to some extent, he founded his system
upon theirs. By that community slavery, we are told,
was prohibited ; yet we read that both bond and free were
one in Christ Jesus. Is not this striking evidence that
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
25
Jesus had no intention to seek the removal of this inhuman
blot from the history of our race 1
Those persons to-day who desire to establish a relation
ship between Socialism and Christianity dwell with much
persistency upon Christ’s views as to the division of
property. But let us see what are the facts of the case.
Jesus told those who were willing to leave their homes,
families, and lands for his “ sake and the Gospels ”
(Mark x.), that they should receive “an hundredfold” of
each in this world, besides “ eternal life in the world to
come.” Now, this is ridiculous in the extreme ; for what
possible advantage could it be to any one to have his or
her relatives multiplied a hundredfold ? Besides, where
could Christ get either a hundred mothers to replace
every one that had been forsaken, or a hundred acres of
land to compensate for each one that had been given up ?
And even supposing he could do this, what becomes of the
theory of despising landed possessions ? Moreover, if the
smaller number and quantity were a drawback, the larger
must be more so. Further, there is but little self-denial
involved in parting with ten acres of land to secure a
thousand. It is really surprising that the Jews did not
“ catch on ” in this matter. Probably they saw that it
was all a sham, because Christ had no means of keeping
his promise. Where were the houses, land, etc., to come
from ? Evidently Christ had none, for he appears to have
been entirely destitute of all worldly goods, having “ not
where to lay his head” (Matthew viii. 20). Would not
such an augmentation of property be antagonistic to the
principle Jesus taught on another occasion, when he said
“ lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth ”
(Matthew vi.) ? No marvel that his friends thought he
was “beside himself” (Mark iii. 21), or that the Jews
considered “he hath a devil, and is mad” (John x. 20),
and that “ neither did his brethren believe in him ”
(John vii. 5). If any man at the present time dealt with
the question of property in the same way as Christ is here
represented to have done, he would not be regarded as a
social reformer, but rather as a man whose intellect was
far from being brilliant, and whose ideas were exceedingly
confused. Christ’s reply to the high priest, who asked
him the question, “ Art thou the Christ, the Son of the
�26
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
Blessed?” (Mark xiv. 61), is, to my mind, clear evidence
that he was neither the political nor the social Messiah
that some persons allege him to have been. His reply
was, “ 1 am; and he shall see the son of man sitting on the
right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”
Does not this accord with his statement, “ I am not of the
world,” and “ my kingdom is not of this world ” 1 Should
not this settle at once, as a fact, that the mission of Jesus
was not to be the founder of an earthly government, or
the promoter of a mundane social system ?
As to the idea that Christ will come, as he said, “in the
clouds,” that relates to the future, and has no bearing upon
the present inquiry, the results of which will not be affected
by either the fulfilment or the failure of that prediction.
The question is not what will be, but rather what Christ
did to entitle him to be classified as a secular reformer.
Professor Graham, as we have seen, admits that Christ did
not inaugurate State Socialism, but that he only proposed
a sort of friendly society among Christians themselves. In
doing even this, however, he showed himself sadly defective
in the knowledge necessary to a real reformer. There exists
to-day in this country an old-established Christian sect,
termed Quakers, who keep a common treasury for the
purpose of aiding those of their numbers who are in need.
But, be it observed, they fill their treasury by industry and
the result of laboring “ for the meat which perisheth,” the
very thing that Jesus forbade. The method of the Quakers
is a very charitable one, for it prevents their poorer
members from going to the workhouse, or from begging in
the streets, as other Christians are so often forced to do.
They are enabled, by this plan'of industry and of “ taking
thought for the morrow,” to preserve their dignity and
self-respect, and to receive all the advantages of assistance
without being branded as paupers, who have to forfeit
many rights in consequence of their poverty. This scheme
of mutual aid is not based upon Christ’s advice to “ forsake
all,’’.under the insane idea that they will be kept alive, upon
the same principle that the ravens and the lilies of the field
are; on the contrary, among the Quakers all who can both
“toil and spin.” Jesus, in his method, counselled no sort
of thrift, nor made any provision for the time of need.
There is no record, that I am aware of, that any society of
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
27
men ever lived upon help from heaven without labor, and
due care being taken for the requirements of life. Certainly
such a society does not exist in “ Christian England.”
The burden of Christ’s preaching was, “ Repent, for the
kingdom of heaven is at hand.” What was meant by this
kingdom it is rather difficult to decide, for it is variously
described in the Gospels. It is certain, however, that,
whether it signified the reign of peace and justice on
earth, or the appearance of Jesus “in the clouds,” neither
event has taken place up to date, although Christ said that
in his time the kingdom was “ at hand.” In Luke (xvii. 21)
it is stated “ the kingdom of God is within you ”; but that
does not quite harmonise with the description given of it
in Matthew (xiii. 47-50), where it is alleged that the
kingdom of heaven is “ like unto a net that was cast into
the sea,” which, when full, had the good of its contents
retained, and the bad cast away. “ So shall it be at the
end of the world,” when the angels are to “ sever the wicked
from among the just, and shall cast them into the furnace
of fire : there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”
Now, if this refers to a condition upon earth, it is not a
very happy one. And in neither case is there any light
thrown upon the rational conduct of men, either politically or
socially. Besides, the repeated references made by Christ
to the approaching end of all earthly institutions render
the idea of his being a reformer of this world altogether
meaningless. The termination of mundane affairs was to
occur in the presence of those to whom Jesus was speaking
(Matthew xvi. 28). Whatever other texts may be cited to
the contrary, the meaning here is clear, that no opportunity
was to be given, and no provisions made, to reform the
political and social conditions of earth. Let any one read
the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, and try to harmonise
the declarations there ascribed to Christ with the belief that
his mission was to reform the world, and the impossibility
of the task will soon be evident. True, in Matthew (xxv.)
works of utility are required to secure a place at the
“right hand” of God. But what does this involve?
Uniformity of belief (Mark xvi. 16), and only the relief,
not the cure, of poverty. No scheme was even hinted at
by Christ whereby the great army of the poor and
depraved should be impossible. He was inferior to the
�28
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
French philosopher, who aimed at providing a condition of
society wherein men should be neither depraved nor poor.
To put the matter concisely, what are the factors of
political and social progress ? Briefly, they are these:
The cultivation of the intellect, the extension of physical
and mental freedom, the recognition and the application of
the principle of justice and liberty to all members of the
community, regardless of their belief or non-belief in
theology, the knowledge and application of science and
art, the organisation of labor and the proper cultivation of
the soil, the possession of political power, the under
standing of the true value and use of wealth, and, finally,
the persistent study of, and the constant struggling against,
the numerous evils, wrongs, and injustice that now rob life
of its comforts and real worth. These are the agencies
that all men, who claim to be political and social reformers,
should support and cultivate. Not one of these originated
with Jesus, and throughout his career he never availed
himself of these essentials of all progress. Thus, to
designate him as the great social redeemer is entirely
unjustifiable. His very mode of living was the opposite to
that of a practical reformer. He was an ascetic, and
avoided as much as possible the turmoil of public life,
from which he might have learnt something of what was
necessary to adjust the social relations. Prayer, not work,
was his habit. In the day, and at night, would he retire
to the solitude of the mountain, and there pray to his
father (Luke vi. 12 and xxi. 37). So far did he believe in
the efficacy of supplications to God that he frequently told
his disciples that whatever they asked of his father he
would grant the request (Matthew xviii. 19 ; xxi. 22;
John xvi. 23). That this was a delusion is clear from the
fact that he prayed himself for the unity of Christendom,
that his followers might be one (John xvii. 21); yet from
his time down to the present divisions have always existed
among Christians. He distinctly promised that “What
soever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do” (John
xiv. 13, 14). Relying upon this, the Church for centuries
has been asking that unbelief should cease, and yet we find
it more extensive to-day than it ever was. The lesson
learnt from experience is, that all reforms are the result of
active work, not the outcome of prayerful meditations.
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
29
With all these drawbacks in the character of Jesus, it is
to me marvellous how he can be accepted as a model for us
in the present age. But thousands of his devotees insist
upon claiming him as their Ideal, although they cannot
regulate their conduct by such a standard. Such persons
overlook the fact that, if the better parts of an Ideal are
marred by that which is erroneous and impracticable, it is
comparatively useless as a guide in life. That Christ’s
alleged teachings are so marred the Gospels amply testify.
His conduct, on several occasions, was such as his
followers would not attempt to emulate to-day. Such, for
instance, as his treatment of his parents (Luke ii. 43-49 ;
John ii. 4); his cursing of the fig-tree (Matthew xxi. 18, 19);
his driving the money changers from the temple with “ a
scourge of small cards ” (John ii. 15); his possession of an
ass and a colt, which evidently did not belong to him, and
riding upon both of them into Jerusalem (Matthew xxi.
2-11); his expletives to the Pharisees (Luke xi. 37-44); his
breaking up the peace of the domestic circle (Matthew x.
34-36).
Judged by the New Testament, Christ was certainly not
“The Light of the World,” for he revealed nothing of
practical value, and he taught no virtues that were before
unknown. No doubt in his life, supposing he ever lived,
there were many commendable features; but he was far
from being perfect. While he might have been wellmeaning, he was in belief superstitious, in conduct
inconsistent, in opinions contradictory, in teaching arbi
trary, in knowledge deficient, in faith vacillating, and in
pretensions great. He taught false notions of existence,
had no knowledge of science; he misled his followers by
claiming to be what he was not, and he deceived himself
by his own credulity. He lacked experimental force,
frequently living a life of isolation, and taking but slight
interest in the affairs of this world. It is this lack of
experimental force throughout the career of Christ that
renders his notions of domestic duties so thoroughly
imperfect. The happiness of a family, according to his
teaching, was to be impaired before his doctrines could be
accepted. So far as we know, he was never a husband or a
father ; and he did not aspire to be a statesman, a man of
science, or a politician.
Now, a person who lacks
�30
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
experience in these phases of life is not in the best
position to give practical and satisfactory lessons thereon.
Even in the conditions of life he is said to have filled, this
“ Light of the World ” failed to exhibit any high degree of
excellence, discrimination, or manly courage. As a son, he
lacked affection and consideration for the feelings of his
parents. As a teacher, he was mystical and rude; and as a
reasoner, he was defective and illogical. Lacking a true
method of reasoning, possessing no uniformity of character,
Christ exhibited a strange example—an example injudicious
to exalt and dangerous to emulate. At times he was
severe when he should have been gentle. When he might
have reasoned he frequently rebuked. When he ought to
have been firm and resolute he was vacillating. When he
should have been happy he was sorrowful and desponding.
After preaching faith as the one thing needful, he himself
lacked it when he required it the most. Thus, on the cross,
when a knowledge of a life of integrity, a sensibility of the
fulfilment of a good mission, a conviction that he was
dying for a good and righteous cause, and fulfilling the
object of his life—when all these should have given him
moral strength, we find him giving vent to utter despair.
So overwhelmed was he with grief and anxiety of mind
that he “began to be sorrowful and very heavy.” “My
soul,” he exclaimed, “ is sorrowful even unto death.” At
last, overcome with grief, he implores his father to rescue
him from the death which was then awaiting him.
Christ is paraded as the one redeemer of the world, but
his system lacks such essentials of all reform as worldly
ambition, and reliance upon the human power of regenera
tion. If we lament the poverty and wretchedness we
behold, we are told by Christians that “the poor shall
never cease out of the land.” If we seek to remove the
sorrow and despair existing around us, we are reminded
that they were “ appointed curses to the sons of Adam.”
If we work to improve our condition, we are taught that
we should remain “in that state of life in which it has
pleased God to call us.” When we endeavor to improve
our minds and to cultivate our intellects, we are informed
that “ we are of ourselves unable to do any good thing.”
If we seek to promote the happiness of others, we are
assured that “ faith in Christ is of more importance than
�WAS CHRIST A REFORMER 1
31
labor for man.” We to-day have but a vague idea of the
extent of the influence such teachings once exercised over
the minds of those who believed them. These teachings
have permeated the minds of orthodox Christians, stifling
their reason and perverting their judgment, till they
cherish the delusion that the reasonings of philosophers,
the eloquence of poets, and the struggles of patriots are
all worse than useless unless purified by the “ Spirit of
Christ.” It is such delusions which foster the erroneous
and retarding belief that every thought which does not
aspire to the throne of Christ, every action which is not
sanctioned by him, and every motive which does not
proceed from a love for him should be discouraged as
antagonistic to our real progress in life.
It is contended by some that, although Christ did not
give detailed remedies for existing evils, he taught
“ general principles ” which would, if acted upon, prove a
panacea for the wrongs of life. This was not so, for his
“general principles” lacked the saving power that was
desired. What were those “ principles ” as laid down in
the Gospels ? So far as they can be understood, they were
as follows: Absolute trust in God ; implicit belief in
himself; reliance upon the prayer of supplication; disregard
of the world; taking no anxious thought for the morrow ;
encouragement of poverty, and contempt of riches;
obedience to the law of the Old Testament; neglect of
home and families; non-resistance of evil; that persecution
in this world and punishment in some other would follow
the rejection of Christianity; and that sickness was caused
by the possession of devils. These are among the leading
“ principles ” taught by Christ; and, if they were acted
upon, there would be an end of all progress, harmony, and
self-reliance.
But even if the “general principles”
propounded by Jesus were good, that would not be enough
to make him the greatest reformer. It is necessary, in
addition to knowing what is to be done, to have the
knowledge of how it is to be done. And this is just what
Jesus has not taught us. Principles do not aid progress
unless they can be applied ; and, whatever value his
teachings may have as matters of belief, they are incapable
of application in the great cause of political and social
advancement in the nineteenth century.
�32
WAS CHRIST A REFORMER ?
Judged from the Secular standpoint, the real redeemers
of the world are those who study the great facts of
nature, learning her secrets, and revealing her power and
value to the human family. While Christ devoted himself
to the mysteries of theology, such reformers as Copernicus,
Galileo, Bruno, and subsequently Newton, Locke, Darwin,
and a host of other servants of humanity, endeavored
to the best of their ability to ascertain the truths of
existence, and to vindicate the principle of freedom.
Copernicus and his immediate successors redeemed the
world from errors which for ages had been nursed by the
Church; Locke based his philosophy upon knowledge, not
upon the faiths of theology; Newton contended that' the
universe was regulated by natural law, not by supernatural
power; and Darwin exploded the Bible error of creation.
These redeemers rescued mankind from the burden of
ignorance and superstition that had so long prevented the
recognition of truth and the advancement of knowledge.
Shakespeare contributed more to the enlightenment of the
human race than Christ was capable of doing; Darwin far
surpassed St. Paul in bringing to view the great forces of
nature, and the Freethought heroes and martyrs aided the
emancipation of intellect to a far higher degree than either
the “Carpenter of Nazareth ” or the whole of his followers.
The power that has enabled these secular redeemers of the
world to achieve their glorious results was found, not in
perplexing theologies, but in the principles of Science and
Liberty—the true saviors of men.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Was Christ a political and social reformer?
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 32 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Date of publication from Cooke, Bill. The blasphemy depot. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Watts, Charles, 1836-1906
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1895]
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Watts & Co. (London, England)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Jesus Christ
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Was Christ a political and social reformer?), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA1572
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Christianity
Jesus Christ
politics
Social Reform