Workshop/A Politician In Sight of Haven

From The Libertarian Labyrinth
Jump to: navigation, search

A Politician in Sight of Haven

BEING A PROTEST AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF MAN BY MAN. BY AUBERON H., ERBERT. BOSTON: BENJ. R. TUqKER, PUBLISHER. 1890.

A POLITICIAN IN SIGHT OF HAVEN.

By AUBERON HERBERT.

[From the Fortnightly Review.]

In a small but cheerful lodging overlooking the Thames, Angus found Markham. After a few words he began to pour out his old troubles. Was it possible to act honestly with party P. Did it not lead to a constant sacrifice of convictions, or, indeed, learning to live without them P And then was party itself, morally speaking, better off; would not convictions, if simply and straightforwardly followed, place the party that so acted at a fatal disadvantage in its struggles with its rival P Were not politics an art in which a clever manipulation of the electors, and a nice opportunism in selecting measures that satisfied one portion of the people without too .much offending anoth,er portion, possessed the first importanoe, while the high motives and great causes to which all politicians loved to appeal were as bits of broken mosaic that the Jew dealer throws in as a make-weight to complete the bargain P "What course is open to aman," he 'asked, "who wishes, above all, to be honest and to speak the truth; who wishes neither himself to be corrupted nor to con"upt the people; who has no desire to preserve any privileges for the richer classes, but yet will not go one step beyond what he belioves to be just in gaining the favor of the masses P The common theory of modern government seems to be that we have given power to the people, and therefore, whatever may be our own opinions, we must acquiesce in their wishes. We may dexterously pare a little off here and there, at this or that point, but having placed power in their hands, we must accept and act upon their views. Should it happen that we can add a little semi-spontaneous enthusiasm on our own account, why, so much the better. Now, with this theory I·cannot come to terms. I stick at the old difficulty. Shall n. man look first and foremost to his own sense of what is right, or shall he follow his party P" " Does not the question answer itself when stated in words P" replied Markham. " If the world is to make ,any real improvement, does it not depend more upon the individual resolution to see what is true, and to do it, than upon any possible combination into which men may enter P Is not the great thin~ that we have to r 4 A Politician in Sight of Haven. hope for that a loan should cherish and respect his own opinions beyond every other thing in life, so that it should be impossible for him to act in disregard of them P What forIn of slavery can be more debasing than that which a man undergoes when he allows either a party or a Church to lead him to and fro when he is in no real agreenlent with it P Truth to your own self or faithful service to your party P Can you hesitate about the choice P" " But might he not say," urged Angus, " , the highest truth to me personally is to follow faithfully my own party P I feel that I am doing the best of which I am capable when I act under anq obey a man whose capacity and devotion to great ends I believe. I prefer his judgment to my own. I do not trust my own views . as regards all these complicated questions of the day; but I have faith in those who lead us, and wish to strengthen their hands in all ways possible.'" "Yes, a man might speak in that sense who accepts the Catholic theory; who is ready to hand himself over to authority, and believes that he need not solve great questions himself, but may leav~ others to do it for him. If he slavishly give up the attempt to bring this world and that higher part of himself, his own intelligence, into harmony with each other; if he be content to act without seeing the just and the true and -the reasonable ill all that he does, then he ma,y use' this language, and plead an easy faith and easy devotion in excuse for effacing bis own reason and making default, as far as he is concerned, in the great plan of'the world. Your words are well chosen to snare a man's soul, but they cannot alter the fact that you are born a reasonable being, and that there is no rightful deliverance from the use of your own reason." II But is not party a necessity P" replied Angus. "flere a~e two great parties in oxistence, and is it not a ' counsel of perfection' to say that a man must follow his sense of right, and act in complete independence of party P Suppose all the clearer-sighted and nobler-minded men did this, and- retired from party, would it improve matters P" " Have a little faith, Mr. Bramston, in right for right's sake. More good \vill come from the best men being true to themselves th~n from any co-operation of theirs with others. Unless the good man keeps true to himself, you will get but little profit from his goodness which is sacrificed in order that he may work with others." " But is not party, " again urged Angus, U a reasonable thing in itgelfP Is not co-operation a natural and right means by which mon unite their strength to obtain certain results P" " Yes," replied Markham, " as an instrument, as a means toward a distinct end. A party organized for some common purpose in which men distinctly and d~finitely agree, in which each unit preserves bis own consciousness and volition, is a natural and right instrument for men to use. But you politicians, Mr. Bramston, make party an end and not a means. You do not strive to live in· real ., 1 ·----c .-/ A Politician in Sigllt of Haven. 5 harmony with your opinions; you care far more to be one of a party to shout with it, fight with it, win with it." " But suppose for a moment," said Angus, " that my sense of right went entirely with the most popult\r measures of the party; snpposing that I sincerely approved of every gift which it was possible to take from the richer and give to the poorer. Suppose that I were Bastian-Jou probably know Bastian-with only this difference, that I believed heart and soul in what I promised, and so long as these services were done for the people I csred but little what was the exact form that they tookP" .., And suppose the party were divided by two rival schemes for endowing the people P" "I probably should be guided by the wishes of the people," said Angus, hesitatingly. " Yes; that is pretty nearly the only answer which is left you. As you have dismissed your own intelligence as your guide, what else can you do but follow the wishes of the peopleP And now please to say, !\fr. Bramston, however good may be your intentions, is this no true position for any man to hold P Has he the right as regards himself to give others the keeping of his intelligence, to become in consciousness as a polype that leads but a semi-detacbed life in the polype group P Can he really help his fellow-men by such mental subservience and denial of his own reason P Do you think that progres8 lies before us if we simply exchange holy mother Church for holy mother Party P" "And yet," said Angus, hesitating, "granted that men ought not to accept a party programme any more than they accept a Thirty-nine Articles, granted that no man who has freed his mind can take either his theology or his politic(\) in a lump from others, still practically if any Government is to do great services for the people, if it is to educate them, if it is to give them decent dwellings, to im.. pI·ove their sanitary condition, and on all sides to soften l\nd improve the circumstances 'of life, I cannot disguise from myself that I can do more towards this end by simply supporting the Government than by insisting on my own opinions." U Ah, Mr. Bramston, you are introducing a large' if.' You ask me if a body we call Government, enjoying certain honors and rewards at the expense of its rival, has for its object, in all the greatest matters that atrect human life, to proclaim 8 certain number of universal schemes, bo it for education, for regulating labor, for providing against distress, or for adding to the comforts of existence, whether in such a case we must not dismiss our separate intelligences to the second place, and simply support the Government against th~ rival that waits to dislodge it rro which question I at once answer' yes;' as I should if you asked me whether the men who make up an army sent to conquer a neighboring country llad better give up their own judgment in .a11 things and be moved at will by the bands of their general. Defeating an enemy and defeating a political rival have 6 · ----- ~-- A Politician in Sight of Haven. only too many points in common; and in either caso separate intefligences would be a great hindrance to success. It would be best in both cases - to use the mildest phrase - that they should be disciplined." " Is it a fair compa.rison, Mr. Ma.rkham, between wh:\t men do in \var and what they do in polilicsP " asked Angus, forgetting that he himself had often cOlnp~,red the two parties to two armies. U 'Va almost all condemn war and its violence; you cannot compare these with the peacefui methods of discussing and voting." "Are you sure," replied Markham, " that the two systems are so far apart P III war you use force, in politics you only imply force, but it is still there. What reason can you find why twelve millions of men should accept the views of sixteen millions after they have voted, except that it is taken for gr~nted th~t the sixteen millions could smash up the twelve millions, or as many of them as was necessary, were it a trial of strength between them P You take numbers because they represent force, as conclusive of the verdict in what we call a constitutional country; but can you give me any moral reason that will bear five minutes' ex:amination why you should do so, or why three men should compel two men to accept their views of life P Of course you cannot. Any moral scheme built upon numbers must break to pieces under' its own inconsistencies and ahsurdities. There is only the one reason that superior numbers imply superior Coree. The sixteen tnillions are presumably stronger than the twelve, and therefore the twelve submit without having recourse to practical tests." "But is it impossible," said Angus," to defend the authority of numbers P ~Iay it not be ri~ht that if five men differ, the two should give w~y to the three P It would be absurd to ask the three to submit to the two." " Why should either two' men live at the discretion of three, or three at the discretion of two P Both propositions are absurd from a reasonable point of vie\v. If being a slave a.nd owning a slave are both wrong relations, what difference does it make whether there are a million slave-o\\·ners and one slave, or ono slave-owner and a million slaves? Do robbery l\nd murder cease to be what they are if done by ninety-nipe per cent. of the population P Clear your ideas on the subject, Mr. Bramston, and see .that numbers cannot affect the question of wha.t i~ "right and wrong. Suppose s~me man with the cunning brain of a Napoleon were to train and organize the Chinamen, and then should lead them to annex such parts of the West as they desired; on YOllr theory of numbers, if they ~xceeded the population of the country they appropriated it would be all right." " I do not say that it is a satisfactory answer; but might Dot a majority inside a country afford a right ~ethod of decision, without extending the rule to the ,case of one country against another P" "On what ground P" said Markham. U From where are the rights 'to come which you have so s~ddenly discovered,P Do l"oU think that the moral laws that govern m~D are made to appear and disappear at our convenience P Forget that .A Politician in Sight of [laven. 7 you are a politician, Mr. Bramston, and admit that if you can plead any nloral law as against the numbers of a stronger race, you must be able to pleat) it equally against the stronger part of n nl\tion, you most bo able to plead it whother on behalf of two men against three, or of one man against a million. Either there are or are not moral conditions limiting force, but if they exist they cannot depend upon numbers.." U Then you would condemn the Birmingham doctrine of the sovereign rights of a majority, and refuse to treat it as the found:\tion-stone of democratio government," said Angus. U Bright preaches the doctrine eloquently, but I am continually doubting the easygoing philosophy which assumes that the majority will always be on the right side and will only ask for what is .lust." "I sbare the common respect which Engll\nd has for Mr. Bright," said Markbam. "We all instinctively foel that he Is more of l\ mon with living beliefs, and less of a politician, than the rest. But-can anl·tbing be less defensible than his position P He declares force to be no remedy; he declares war, which is force nakedly asserted, to be wrong; but he looks on the outcome of the ballot-box, which is as much force as the orders issued by f\ Prussian field-marshal, and Is only obeyed because it involves the breaking of heads when nocessary, almost as 8 divine and inspired thing. What is the diffurcnce between force calling itself force or wrapped up in platform phrllses, so long ns it bas the sante self P" U Then you reject the rights of the nll\jority, and with them the theory of democmtic government P" " I believe myself more democratic than your politicians," said Markham, II but I reject utterly their view of what democracl' is. They have not the coorago to bid the people to accept universal conditions, but wish, in imitation of dep~rte(l kings and emperors, to build anew every sort of artificial privilege, as If such privileges, for whomsoever they are created, ever had lusted or could last in defiance of moral law. Well, Mr.. Bramston, the \vol"ld hl\S lived through many lies; it has lived through the priestly lie, the kingly lie, the oligarchical lie, the ten-pound-householdel" lie, and it has now to live through the majority lie. These other lies are gone to their own place, Rnd ~his last lie will follow aCtel' them. The law of equa.l freedom and equal justice knows nono of them." U Do you then c9ndemn the use of force for all purposes P" asked Angus. U Will you undertake to define fol" me the purposes for whioh I am and for. which I am not to use forceP For myself I fail to be able to do it. I cannot suppose that three men have power to compel two IDeD in some matters without finding Dlyself presently obliged to conclude that the three mon must docide what these matters are, and therefore that they have powers of l\pplying force In all matters. Between the some purposes Rnd the all purposes I can find no settled boundary_ You cannot draw, and DO man living can (traw, a force-line. If you sat down with Mr. Gladstone to-day to do it, to-morrow his exigencies would 8 .A. Politician in Sigllt of Ilaven. have eaten out the line, and its authority would be gone, at all events for our plat:tet. Do not let us play with these things. and build up pleasant fictions that are of no value. Either 8 state of liberty-that is, a state where no physical force is applied by man to man-is the moral one, or we must recognize Coree &s rightly applied by those who possess it for all purposes that they think right." " Now I become more and more puzzled," said Angus. "May not the majority apply force for what we call good, and not for b:l.d purposes P" U Please to define good and bad purposes. You will find that your definitions hold as much meaning as a sieve holds water. If you wish to see how hopele~ s is the task, read Sir F. Stephen's book, in which he tells us not to elnploy compulsion, even if calculated to obtain a good object, if it involves 'too great an expense.' What possible binding power is there in such a rule over the minds of Dlen P Where is the common standard of measurement? Who sees with the same eyes the accompanying expense or the resulting good P It is far better to look the truth in the face and to say that when you s3,nction force for good purposes you sanction it for all occasions which the holders of power think good." U But can one be sure that force is a bad thing in itselfP" said Angus. "Do you not see, first, that-as a mental abstract-physical force is directly opposed to morality; and, secondly, that it practically drives out of existence the mornl forces P How can an act done under compulsion have any moral element in it, seeing that what is moral is the free act of an intelligent being P If you tie a man's hands there is nothing moral about his not committing murder. Such an abstaining from murder is a mechanical act; and just the same in kind, though less in degree, are all the acts which men are compelled to do under penalties imposed upon them by their fellow-men. Those who would drive their fellowmen into the performance of any good actions do not see that the very elements of morality-the free act foUowing on the free chQice-are as much absent in those upon whom they practice their legislation as in a flock of sheep penned in by hurdles. You cannot see too clearly that force and reason-which last is the essence of the moral act-are at the two opposite poles. When you act by reason you are not acting under the compulsion of other men; when you act under compulsion you are not acting under the guidance of reason. The one is a force within you and the other is a force without. Moreover, physical force in a man's hand is an instrument of such brutal character that its ver.y nature destroys and excludes the kindlier or better qualities of human nature. The man who compels his neighbor is not the ma.n who reasons with and convinces him, who seeks to influence him by example, who rouses him to make exertions to save himselr. He takes upon himself to treat him, not 8S a being with reason, but as an animal in whom reason is not. The old saying, that any fool can govern with bayonets, is one of the tmest sayings which this generation has inherited and neglected ADy fool caD reform the surface of things, can drive children by the hundreds of J .A Politician in Sight of Haven. 9 thousands into schools, can drive prosti~utes out of public sight, can drive dramdrinking into cellars, can provide out of public funds pensions for the old, hospitals for the sick, and lodging-houses for the poor, can call into existence a public departnlent and a population of officials and inspectors,.provided that ho has the handling of money that does not belong to him, and a people not trained to inquire beyond the present moment, and ready to applaud \vhat has a surface look of philanthropy; but what is the good of it a!l when he has done it P To be compelled into virtue is only to live.in order to die of dry rot." " I see the conflict between r~ason and force," said Angus; "still, I hesitate in the matter. It is clear that I cannot use force to make people reasonahle P Why may we not compel them to educate their children, to give up public-bonses, to only work a certain number of hours in the day, and many other things of the same kind? May not force be the instrument of reason P " u It would be false to call such acts reasonable. You may use your own reason when you say that compulsory education, or compulsory temperance, is good for certain people, and proceed to carry it out; but in so acting you disallow the existence of reason in those \vhom you compel. . You have placed them in a lower rank to )"ourself, you retaining and using your reason, they being disfranchised of it, Now this unequal relation between men, in which the reason of some is replaced by the reason of others, is one that reason acting universally rejects as a denial of itself. \Vhy should J'our reason be recognized and not that of the ma.n JOu compel P }Ioreover, from a reasonable point of view, can you not see that the ",ery idea of force necessarily involves ~ fatal absurdity? If A has power over B, you must assume that in the first instance he has power over himself; no man can be ma.ster of another man and not master of himself. But if so, then B (unless you assum~ unequal rights as the basis of social order) is also master of himself, which entirely destroys any rightful power on the part of A to be his malter and to make him act against his will." " I must confess, whether I agree or not with the abstract condemnation of force," said Angus, " that I sometimes regret to see the love of force and the be.. lief in it growing so fast upon us. All our would..be reformers can only suggest compulsion of some kind. The word is always in their mouth." U Yes, the mood is on us," saId !\Iarkham, " and utterly debasing it is. We are filled with the Celtic spirit of wishing to govern and be governed; we creep into one pitiful refuge after another, as if anything could save us from our appointed heritage of the free reason and the free act. But I live in faith, Mr. Bramston. Exoriare aliquis ! The time will come when some Englishman of sturdy common sense, a new martellu8 monackorum; will arise to rout these good gentlculen that wish to tie the English people to their apron..strings, to smash these pa~an re.. vivals of Catholicism, this blind submission to authority, to strip these 'cloi~tered virtues' of their seeming excellence, and bid the people live in a. free world, 10 A Politician in Sight of Haven. gaining their own good, trampling on their own sins, and making their own terms with their own souls. But let me ask you, Mr. Bramston, have you read Mr. Herbert Spencer's writings PI We shall do little good unless you have done so. We owe to him t~e placing of this grea.t truth, that man must be free if he is to possess ha.ppiness, on its deepest and truest foundations. No discursive talk of ours will really help you until you have felt the ptarvellous power with which he has read the wider and deeper meanings of the world, and given oi"der to our disorderly conceptions of it." U I must confess with sh~me that I have never read his writings. I ha,ve always believed him to be the great teacher of laissez-faire, and everybody to-day supposes that laissez-faire lies on the other side of the horizon behind us." U Ah," said Markham, " I fear that all you political gentlemen live in a greater sta.te of ignorance than. most of us. How can it be otherwise P \Vith your committees and debates, and speeches to prepare, you have but little time for watching the graver discussions that are going on. I.Jike lawyers in busy practice, you have no mental energy left to give to abstract questions; and yet I do not notice that any of you are wanting i~ courage when you come to deal with the ,·ery foundation of social things. So the world believes in the fail ure of laissezfaire GJ. ·No, Mr. Bramston, it is not laissez-faire that has failed. That would be an ill day for men. What has failed is the courage to see what is true and to speak it to the people, to point towards t.he true remedies away from the sham remedies. • But read Mr. Spencer and see for yourself. Believe me, you are not fit to be exercising power over others until ~you have done so. You had better leave some of your Blue Books unread than remain in ignorance of his work." " What is that work as regards politics P" . h He has made the splendid attempt," replied Markham," to give fixity and order to our moral ideas, and to place the relation of men to each other on settled foundations. The love of disorder is so great in the human mind that probably men will yield but slowly to his teaching, perhaps not till they have p~8~ed through many troubles. But it is along the track that he has opened out to them, and that track only, that every nation must escape anarchy· and find its happiness." " And the drift of his other work P" " I should say that the result was to make the world. as a whole, reasonable to men. He has connected all human knowledge, establishing interdependence everywhere; he has taught us to see that everything in the world is part of a great growth, each part, like the different structures of a tree, developing to its

  • Wherever the words" anarchy" and U socialism tJ appear in this essay, they are used, the one in the

ordinary sense of confusion, and the other In the limited sense of State 80ciallsm. The author either Is not aware that there is a school of Anarchistic socialism, or has not discovered that its teachings In relard to liberty are almost identical with his own.-Publi,he,.', Note. A Politician in Sight of Haven. 11 o\vn perfect form and special use, whilst it remains governed by the whole. lIe , has helped us to rise everywhere from the reason that governs the part to the reason that governs the whole; and in tracing back tb!s great growth of the past, compound form rising out of simple form, he has shown us the long, slo\v preparation towards perfection through which the world has travelled and yet bas to travel. It is scarcely too much to say that he has given us a past and he has given us a fut~re. In a time of sore need, when the old meanings were splintered to drift-wood, he has seen that the true meaning of the world was to be found, and in finding it he has restored to us the possibilities of a higher religions faith. The influence of modern science has been to make men" too easily satisfied with their own separate and fragmentary knowledge. Each man has settled down in his niche in the vineyard, and there labored industriously and sticcessfully, but with his eyes closed for the wider meanings. TQ read a learned paper before a learned society, to be highest authority on some special subject, have been objects which have unduly influenced our generation: and it is only such a work as Mr. Spencer's that recalls us to the truth that the u~e of knowledge is not simply to annihilate a rival on some particular subject that we look on as our private property, but to lead men to understand the great whole in which they are included - to hring that whole into perfect agreement with human reason. Specialism, however necessary, is not the end of science. The end of science is to teach men to live by reason and by faith, by grasping the great meanings of life, and by seeing- clear,ly the conditions under which they can gh?e effect to those meanings. How little science yet helps us in our general conceptions of life you can sec by the quiet ignoring amongst politicians of the vital meaning which Darwin's discoveries have for them. And hence it is that, great as has been the multiplication of scientific facts, they have done but comparatively little to reform the ideas and reshape the conduct of Inen. Our intellectual life still remains thoroughly disorderly, notwithstanding stray patches of science and order introduced into it It is here that we have so much to gain from Mr. Spencer. We owe to him our'power to realize the harmony and unity embracing all things, the perfect order and the perfect reason, and thus to walk confitlelltly with sure aims ;snd instead of being content to leave science as the technical possession of a few, he has, in a true sense, given it to the people by insisting on the universal meanings and making them accessible to all men." " On wha.t foundation does Mr. Spencer place political liberty P" asked Angus. " He founds it on the right of every man to use the faculties he possesses. It is evident, as he insists, that all sciences rest on certain axioms. You remember Euclid's axioms, such as' a whole is greater than its parts,' and you can easily perceive that any science, however complicated it may be, owing to its dependence on other sciences that have preceded it, must rest on its own axioms. Now politics are the science of determining the relations in which men can live to12 .A. Politician in Sight of Haven. getber with the greatest happiness, and you will find that the axioDls on which they depend are, (1) that happiness consists in the exercise of faculties; (2) that ~ as IDen have these fa.culties there must be freedom for their exercise; (3) that this freedom must rest on equal and universal conditions, no unequal conditions satisfying our moral sense." " Why do you insist on my treating these truths, if truths they are, as axioms P" asked Angus." "Because you cannot contradict them without involving yourself in what is inconsistent and absurd, without giving up the belief that the '\vorld is reasonable, and, therefore, that it is worth our while to try to discover what we ooght to do. Place before your mind the opposites of these statements, and try to construct I a definite social system out of them. Happiness is not the exercise of fa.culties; men having faculties ought not to exercise them; the conditions as regards their exercise should be unequal and varying. Can you seriously maintain any of tlt,ese statements P When you propose unequal conditions of freedom do )·ou offer a standing ground which men universally could accept, which they could look upon as the perfect condition of their existence P" "But might I not claim greater freedom for the abler and better man, for the more civilized race P" " Why should you P What does any man or any race want more than freedom for themselves P Admit that anyone may take more than his share; that is, ill other words, tha,t he may restrain by force the exercise of the faculties of others, and in what a sea of moral confusion you are at once plunged. \Vho is to decide which is the better man or tho more cjvilized race, or how mach freedom is to be allowed or disallowed P To settle this question men must act as judges in their own case; and this means that the strongest will declare themselves the most civilized, and will assign such portions of freedom as they choose to the rest of the nation, or the rest of the world, as the case may he. Are you prepared for this P" "I agree in some measure," said Angus; "but how can you persuade the strongest not to ule their strength P" U Only by strengthening human belief in reason, by bringing men to see that the Dloral system regulating their actions towards each other is as true and fixed as the system of the planets, its parts as orderly, its whole as reasonable; and that force - I mean in every case physical compulsion of one man by another has no possible place in it." " But can men see this reasonableness, this orderliness, of which you speak P" " Surely," replied l\larkham. U Is it not plain that between the world, the ontcome of the highest reason, and the humaJl reason as it evolves, harmony is ever growing? The cvo1ution of the human mind means that its power increases to read order everywhere; and it is only as it perceives <;>rder that it can ga.in perfect confidence ill its own conclusioDs. You must remember tha,t a science is not A Politician in Sight of Haven. 13 a mere mass of separate truths or conclusions which may, so to speak, lie anywhere as regards each other in the same heap. As Mr. Spencer has so well pointed out, men at first begin by learning the detached truths, and then in later stages see that each truth has its own place in an indissoluble and reasonable whole, which whoJe, as we learn to perceive it, gives certainty to the separate truths. The separate truths are like beads before they are strung on a string, and which do not gain their full meaning until the strlng is there. Take Mr. Spencer's example of astronomy. By countless observations yeu learn that the orbits of planets are ellipses of a certain kind, and then presently you learn the great central cause in obedience to which these forms are what they are; you have gained a master-key which, as you know, will unlock every fact, whether at present within or not within your observation, in the group that belongs to it. lIenee it arises that a separate truth only becomes really known when you know the system of which it forms a part.. Is it different in moral matters P Do yon think that there are order and system for the facts that concern the planet and not for the facts that concern the human mind; for mineral and for plant, and not for the relations in which Dlen are to live towards each other P Do you think that with order and system ill every other part of the universe that here you suddenly enter a territory sacred to disorder and conflict, a sort of moral Alsatia, where alone the writ of the Great Power does not run P Surely you cannot.defend such a belief. Surely you have some faith in the perfect reasonableness that underlies and overarches e\~erJthing. To the politician it may be torture to believe that social and political questions are parts of a reasonable whole, and can only be rightly dealt with in strict obedience to that whole. His own course is just 80 much easier as he may disregard this reason of the whole, as he may by turns plead the law or the exception, as he may ignore all fixed moral relations of men to each other, as he may urge plaintively that all is so uncertain and subject to change; and claim permission to deal with the circumstances that exist as the light of the moment and the ever-urgent personal interest may direct. The world does not see the impertinence and the danger of such clai~. It will do so tl,S the consequences of existing mental disorder thicken upon it." U But do you mean, the world being as it is," said Angu~, retlirnfng to the old point of attack," that we can get through it without force P Why, even a London street after dark may require one to use force to protect himself." " I have not said that. SIx months ago I knocked a scoundrel down who had snatched a lady's watch from her, and handed him over to the police. I do not say we can get through life without using force; but when we do so in the shn- • plest and apparently most justifiable case, even to repel force, we are outside the moral relation, and are simply living again in that force.rel~tion in which a man as half animal once lived, and in which the animals now live. Underneath all life lies the great law of self-preservation· (a law which we may fulfil either by 14 .A Politician in Sight of Haven. using force as the animals do, or by universally accepting the reasonable relation which, forbidding force, guarantees equal freedoln to all), and those who use force may compel us to live towards them in the force-relation; but the important thing is to see that it is only when we are living in the reason relation that we have distinct moral guidance to tell us what are right and what are wrong actions, and that in the force relation we must act often by guess-work and 81ways without certain 'guidance " "'Vhy alll I without mo~l guidance in the force-relation P Were you not right in knocking the thief down P" "My justification was, that he had established between himself and the rest of society the force..re1~tion, and therefore I had to deal with him as I should have dealt with a wild beast that had attacked me. The act on my part was so far a moral one, inasmuch as I obeyed the derived moral command to help my neigh-· bor; but being an act done in the force-relation, brute strength being simply opposed to brute strength, it is itnpossible that I should have that guarantee of certainty as regards right conduct, which can only exist where my actions are in harmony with the whole moral system. Mr. Spencer htls stated this with his usnal ':'odmirable force. 'Ethics, or the principles of right conduct, ignore all crime and wrongdoing. It simply says such and such are the principles on which men s}1ould act, and when these are broken it can do nothing but say they . are broken.' Thus if there is a command that says, 'Thou shalt not lie,' you have no certain guidance from that command or from any part of the moral system which is subordinate to it whe~ you have once told a lie and choose to persist in it. It may be expedient to tell or not to tell another lie: many excellent secondary reasons, such as regard for your friend, may qrge you to do so, but all fixed guidance is lost, for when once the coherence of the system is broken. the law of lesser authority being obeyed and the law of higher authority disobeyed, only conflict and contradiction can arise. To obtain certain guidance you must obey the tDoral"laws in the order of their imperativeness; and whilst in my case 1 obpyed a derived law which bade me help my neighbor, I was outside the primary law which forbids the use of force. I did no wrong towards the thief, as far as I could judge, but I was acting on a personal judgment that might lead me right or ,vrong." " Why do you speak of the act of helping your neighbor as a derived law, and that of not using force as the primary law P " asked Angus. U Speaking rationally, do not honesty and justice precede generosity P To em- . ploy force to a man is to deprive him of what he rightly possesses, the freedom to use his f1\culties, and therefore is an act which I am bound not to do. To assist him by any gift or service of mine is an act which I am only bound to do in H,O inferior sense; it is but a development, important as it is, from the imperative command to respect a man's rights." , .A. Politician in 8igll,t of Haven. 15 " Might not some person try to make the laws change place, and insist that to help your neighbor was the primary law P" . U Yes," replied Markham, U if they had no fear of plunging into Sarbonian bogs. Which neighbor am I to help, and in what fashionP Am I to help one at the expense of anotherP Am I, like Robin Hood of old, to take the purse of the rich man and gi va it to the poor P Try to construct a definite and certain system that is really to guide men in their dealings with each other on such a foundation. You may amuse yourself some day for half an hour, Mr. Bramston, by trying to do it, but yon will hardly obL'1.in any other result." "I see the difficulty,n replied Angus sl<?wly. U To say we must do good to others means nothing unless there is some fixed system which allows us to define precisely the nature and conditions of this ever-elusive good." . "Exactly; there must be a fixed system, and that system must spring from rights. Without rights, no system; without system, no guidance. If you wish to rea,lize the moral confusion that results where rights are neglected, glance at the world of"'to-day, and observe the good qualities which impede rather than assist the general cause of good. Do we not see Nihilists and Invincibles devoting themselves in the spirit of self-sacrifice in order to obey an order of assassination; slave-owners showing kindness to their slaves; politicians carrying out what they believe to be useful measures.for the people by appealing to selfish pt\ssions' and infringhig upon the rights of others; Socialists hoping to regenerate the world by deciding in what way and to what extent men shall exercise their faculties. ·1'hese and a thousand other examples show us that actions springing from good qualities, but done in disregard of primary and moral commands may increase the sum total of unhappiness instead of happiness." ,~ \Vhat do you mean when you speak of primary and derived laws P" asked Angus. "Necessarily at the beginnings of social life men's actions are confused and in conflict with each other. Presently a stage is reached at which reason asserts its claims. to regulate these acts, and then, as we have already seen, it requires of men to respect each other's rights. This, though the necessary condition of nIl happiness, is not sufficient for the perfecting of it. A second command - inferior in authority and definiteness - succeeds to the first and bids us not only respect rights but also feelings, so far at lenst as such feelings do not tend to restrict rights. There are luany actions which we have, as far as the first command is concerned, a right to do, but which, as they causo unnecessary pa.in to others, we ought to abstain from doing. To these actions Mr. Spencer gives the namo of negative beneficence. Agldn, succeeding ~o these acts of abstention are the acts of positive beneficence, the direct ncts which men do for the sake of increasing the happiness of others; acts which, as human nature e,·olves, will beconlc more and mor,e 8 necessary and integral part of the happine~s of each man. But you can readily see that to add to the happiness of our neighbor, or even to avoid giving him unnec~ssary pain, excellent as sueh acts are, are of little moral value unless you begin by respecting' his rights. Except on such a foundation they cannot lead to the settled happiness of men; they can only lead to such confusion between good and evil as we see around us at present. And now observe a further development. From respecting rights' we learn to recognize tho self in . each man as the true governing centre of his actions. We learn to see the fa,lse side of those great systems ,vhich lower and debase a man by offering him comfort - whether it be intellectual or ma.terial comfort - at the price of liberty, which weaken his self-guidance and his self-responsibility, and make him but a semi-conscious unit in Churches and pa.rties. We seo that all social as well as political systems must be framed not only to make him in higher matters the possessor of his own soul, but in Inatters of everyday life the intelligent director of his own energies. Do you see how fruitful, how fa.r-reaching, will be the influence of this recognition of the self in each man? Our overy act towards others will be shaped and determined by it. Is it a matter of helping some fellow-man in distress, we shall... ask, 'Am I merely lifting the man by an external machinery out of a momentary trouble at the cost of depressing rather than increasing his own self-helping energies?' Of assisti.ng masses of men to better their position, , Can I rightly lighten the burdens of one man by incre~sing the burdens of another, to however small an extent, and howevor easily the latter may be able to bea.r it? Can I do so without weakening in all minds the sense of the universa. l agreement, and in the minds of those who are hel ped that self-respect which should only cla,im fl~ee-play for the energies of ea.ch P' Of spreading opinion nnll bringing others within a Church or party, ' Have I joined these men to myself by the true and pure conviction of eaeh soul, or have I treated them as a Dlere crowd, to be moved as I wished by machinery, to be bribed and cajoled and driven towards the ends that I desired P' Of education, ' Am I mechanically impressing the self of my own opinions on another mind? Am I merely gaining the ends on which the world of the day sets store, and content for the sake of these to follow such lifeless and mechanical methods as promise the readiest success P Am I willing to make my own task easier by employing systems of bribes and threa,ts, or is my one effort to develop another equal being that shall be strong in its own self-confidence and able by its own reason to make a life for itself?' There is no part of human life, no question of morality, that will not be illuulined by the light thrown from that intense respect for each human self which in due time will succeed to the perfect recognition of each other'g rights. The creed of rights leads as certainly t9 the elevation of the human race as the creeds of Socialism, founded on force, lead to the degradation of it." " Could you sunlmarize for me what you said P" asked Angus. " Using the fewest ,vords, I should say all truths belong to their own system. A Politician in Sight of Haven. 17 There is not such a thing as a stray or independent truth in existence; and it is only as you know the system to which the truths belong, that you know with certainty the truths themselves. Moral truths, then, like physical truths, are united in a system, and as this system must rest on certain assured foundations, the question is on what foundations does it rest P The answer is, in Mr. Spencer's words, on the l"reedom of men to exercise their faculties. From these foundations arises a coherent and harmonious moral system governing our political and social systems, and illuminating the most complex questions of human conduct. Apart from this foundation, morality is a mass of indistinct and contradictory commands, men often obeying a derived command whilst they disobey a primary command." "In all you have said you have only used a deductive argument," said Angus; u will you not sacrifice to the gods of the present time by spooking inductively P" ,t Ah! that greatest of all inductions! Some younger man with fuller stores of knowledge must give that induction to the world. It will be for him to follow the history of liberty as he would Collow a great river in the Enst, whose banks are covered with rf'joicing crops, whilst away from it all remains desert. You can see for yo~rse)f how vast is tbe material that is waiting to be used. Has any race of men ever fairly tried even the humblest experiment of freedom and found it fail P Have not the human faculties grown in every field just as freedom has been gi¥en to thenl P I-Iave men ever clung to protection and restraint and officialism \vithout entangling themsel~es deeper and deeper into evils from which there was no outlet P But to-night we cannot enter upon these wide fields. There is onIy one group of facts, those that belong to the history of plant and animal, at, which we can glance. See how clearly under Darwin's revelations comes out the saving meaning that there is in competition, the destructive meaning that there is in protection. Protect the plant and animal by some mere external protection, as that of nn island or an impassable barrier, and you reserve it for certain destruction \vhen the day comes in which at last the life that has ranged over wider ~paces and beeonle better adapted to the conditions of existence enters into competition with it. The very conditions that seemed to protect it have ensured its destruction. Had it Dot been protected it had pa.ssed through the same gradual adapta.tions that other life elsewhere has passed through. It was separation from the mainland that preserved the Australian marsupials, that has made islands such as l\iadagascar the interesting relic-houses of a life that had not been competent to survive unless protected. So also has it been that the European pla.nts, which by ranging over wider tracts have more thoroughly undergone selection, have beaten the native plants oC La. Plata, New Zealand, and, in a lesser degree, of Australia, whil.st speaking generally the plants of these countries cannut obtain a footing in Europe: that tho intertropical mouDtains lost their true vegetation, and accepted 18 A Politician in Sight of Haven. those hardier forms which in the Glacial period were able to reach them; that the wingless snd defenceless birds, such as those of Mauritius, and Bourbon, and Rodriguez, have only been found where beasts of prey wel'e absent. But why multiply examples P The histor.y of the world turns upon the fa.ct of the hardier forms, perfected by a wider and sharper competi~ion,inevitably replacing the weaker forms. And d~ you not also see how the lower kinds of selt:'protection die out before the higher kinds P The huge armor-plates and spikes that once protected animal life are replaced by higher organizations, botter adaptations of bone and muscle, and therefore quicker movements, py improved special organs, by increasing size of brain. It is the same with Ulcn. 'fhe clumsy restrictions and defences which parliaments provide must give pla.ce to those higher forms of self-protection which depend upon mental qualities. Is it not plainly ono and the same sentence wl~ich nature speaks to plants, to animals, and to men,' Impro\1e in the true way or be destroyed P, She affixes everywhere her two great conditions of hnprovement, variety (or difference) that both in the physical and in the intellectual world brings into existence the beginnings of higher life-and conlpetition, that selects for survival these nIl-precious beginnings out of the nlidst of the lower forms; whilst outside theso conditi{)ns she reserves no way of salvation It is wrong and unfaithful to disguise or evade these truths. Whatever it costs, you must say plainly to all men that variety and competition u.re the only con<litiona of their advance, and that these conditions can only exist under a system of perfect liberty. All infringements of liberty sin in a t\vofold way. They tend to uniforlnity by excluding natural variety, an<;l they give external protection at the cost of preventing the development of self-protection, saving the pain of the present by doubling it in the future. Does such a law soem hard to you P If so, remember that it ig not a competition like that of animals and savages, to be decided merely by physical force or cunning, but one in which the more powerful brain, the truer perception, the more temperate habit, the more upright conduct, shall pre'rail in the end, and that thus the better type shall be always evolving, while the pain of the passage from the unfit to the fit grows less and less." U And now," said Angus, U leaving further consideration of the principles, let me ask you for .the net result. How would you give practical effect to such views P" " l'he government, as pointed ont by Mr. Spencer, must confine itself Siolply to the defence of life and property, whether as regards internal or externa.l defence. You can defend neither of these systems, both of which involve the usc of furce, on true moral grounds; they can only be imperfectly defended under the law of self-preservation, which we extend to others beyond ourselves. But in the world as it is, those who use force mu~t be repelled-and eft"ectively repelled-by force. By their own act they place themselves in the force-relation, and, barbarous as is the relation, we must accept it j ost as far as they thrust it on us. Farther the A Politician in Sigll,t of Haven. 19 Go¥crnment must not go. It must not attempt any service of any kind for the people, from the mere mechanism of carrying their lelters to that most arrogant and ill-conceived of all universal schemes, the education of their children. All services which the people require must be done by themselves, grouped according to their wants and their affinities in their own natural groups, and acting by means of voluntary association. Tho system would be one of free-trade carliec1 out logically and consistently in every direction. We should then be quit both of the politician, with that enormous bribing power which he proposes by offering services to one part of the people at the cost of another part, and of tha.t fatal compression of ideas, energies, and experimenta.l efforts which results whenever universal systems are imposed upon a nation Those people who wish to ma.ke their fellow-men wise~ or temperate, or virtuous, or comfortable, or happy, by some rapid exercise of po~er, little dream of the $teril~ty that belongs to the universal syst~ms which they so readily inflict on them'. Some day they will open ~heir eyes and see that there never yet has been a groat ~ystem sustained by force under which all the best faculties of men have not. slowly withered." "As regards property, what would be the system which a Government ought to defend?" said Angus. "There is no choice except between an open market in all things-that is, free acquisiUon and complete ownership- or a more or less socialistic Government. If Government undertakes in any way tho task of arranging anu distributing property, it at once enters on the force-relation.· It presumes to· set itself above all fixed moral relations of men, and to create for them out o~ its imagination the conditions under which they are to stand to each other. And notice that freetrade and free acquisition of a'll property stand and fall together. Either a man may do the best for himself. \vith his faculties, or he and his faculties may be sacrificed for the advantage of others. Our great effort at this moment should be to reconcile our people, heartily to private property, whether 1n land or in any other thing (Mr. Spencer draws a line between the two, but I am unable to follow him), and to lead them to see that no nation can in any true sense be free which allows a Government of the day to model and remodel that which touches a Ulan's life so nearly as his property. That English land is not largely held by the small owners is a great public calamity, but it is not to be ....epaired by the I!rcater one of small or big confiscations. Remove at once-as you would have done years ago, 'had the Liberal party remained true to its traditions, and not gone popularity and sensation hunting, under Mr. Gladstone's leadership-all legal impediments that yet exist to free sale. I nsist that the living owner should be the full owner in the sight of the law courts; avoid all ridiculous measures for patching up the present landlord .and tenant system, and the land will soon naturally and healthily find its way into the hands of the people. Any way, it is better to bear the evils of delay than to demoralize a whole nation in their spirit 20 A Politician in 8igll,t of Haven. and their aims by accepting the bribes of the politician to take from the few to give to the many." " And taxes, Mr. Markhaln P" asked Angus. " All taxes must be voluntary," said Markham. " Voluntary! " said Angus, drawing the longest of breaths. " There is no moral foundation for taking taxes by force.. Those who pay taxes have not put themselves outside the reasonable relation, and therefore you cannot justly compel payment at their hands. The Dissenters were on the right track when they refused to pay Church-rates, and every measure to which a man objects is a Church-rate if you have the courage and the logic to see it. Your present plan, Mr. Bramston, is to tread men's objections as mere soil under your feet. It won't do. No plan by which one man tre~d~ another man's freedom of action underfoot will do. Besides, Mr. Bramston, ~an you not see what lies before you in the near future P This unjustifiable power of taking money from others, even from those unborn, has led to such extravag~nce, such waste, and such heavy burdens that the people everywhere, improving upon the honest methods of the politicians, are beginning to ask the question, 'Granted that, as you teach us, our wishes are the law of right, why should we pay debts we have never incurred P, " . II And what about the debt itselfP" asked Angus. U An upright people, not trained to juggling metaphysics about the right and the convenient, will redeem, and ought to redeem, every penny of it. But they must do so voluntarily. The question has its difficulties, but I can find no right to force payment from those \vho did not contract it, great as I think would be the wrong towards the holders if it were not paid. I should give the holders a mortgage on all existing national property." U And the franchise?" asked Angus. U The franchise would depend on the payment of an income-tax for which everybody, down to the lowest workman, would be voluntarily liable. Everybody, man or woman, paying it would have the right to vote; those who did not p:l.y it would be-as is just-\vithout the franchise. There would be no other tax. All indirect taxation, excise and customs, would be abolished, freeing the trading geniu9 of the country with results that we can scarcely foresee." u And could you ask the workmen to accept such a tax P" said Angus. u I f you wish to treat them as equal rf3asonable beings with yourself and to spen,k the truth to them, if you wish them to cultivate the highest kind of selfrespect, to despise all favors and bribes, and to share power because they share burdens-yes," replied MarkhalIl. U If you mean to continue the politician's game, to trad(3 upon the selfishness and the unfairness that are in human nature, to tread the principle of true equality under foot, and !Jay all those who can be bought for your side-no." - .A. Politician in Sigllt of Haven. . 21 \ \ 1 I ! " And municipal government, with its care of streets P" asked Angus. " You must let me reserve that matter for our next talk." "And existing institutions-the Established Church, tho House of Lords, the Crown-what would you do P" asked Angus. . u I fear that I must look upon them all as signposts that point the wrong way and condemn themselves. All privileged and artificial institutions, whether for th9 few or the many, are destructive and anarchical in their character, as they obscure our perception of the great and simple moral relations on which our dealings with each other must be founded. Our subject is to teach the people to look on the equal and universal relations'that are created by liberty as the most sacred thing in tho world, and we must spare no darling institution of any class tending to perpetuate the idea .of privilege." " And Ireland P" asked Angus. "Ireland must decide for herself," said Markham. A Why not grant its freedom for the sake of principle instea.d of for the sake of convenience, as you will do in a few years. But the landowners should bo bought out; and if the north-east of Ireland elects to stay with England, let it do so." "Would Mr. Spencer agree to such applications of his principles P" aslied Angus. "I fear that Mr, Spencer would dissent. You must not regard him as responsihle for the corollaries which I have drawn.·' He would say that a truly equitable social system can be reached only as fast as men themsel':es become truly equitable in their sentiments and ideas, and in the meantime we must decido as well-as we can on the relatively right, referring continually to the .abs91utely right, with the view of taking care that we move towards it, and not away from it," replied Markham. • II And now once more for the net result," said Angus. "Whatwould be the effect of carrying out such a policS P " " 'Vhy, such a lightening of the ship as would give her power to float in any weather. You are sadly weighing and crippling her now. You do not recognize how enornlOUS is the anlount of enterprise and energy that is restrained by this ever-encroaching matter of politics; not simply bec:l.use whenever the State undertakes a great service even those who possess the most energy cease to think and to combine and to attempt fOl' themselves, but by the sheer misdirection of effort. IIow many men there are who could give more time and thought to their own work-which is the true way of benefiting others-if they ,vore not obliged to be politicians. You have made these bloated politics of such importance that the busiest workers can neither afford to follo'v them with any care nor yet to

  • Perhaps I should here point out quite distinctly that the proposal made by Mr. Markham to place taxation

on a voluntary baala, whether In itself a right or wrong deduct.lon from Mr. Herbert Spencer'. principle, haa never received Mr. Herbert Spencer's approval; but, as I have Borne groundB for believing, would be looked OD by him as an unpractical and undesirable arrangcment.-A. D. 22 .A Politician in Sight of Haven. neglect them. To all StIch men they are a perpetua.l vexation and distraction. If you wish to economise the best brain-energy of the country, reduce politics to the humble sphere that belongs to them, reduce Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury to tho smaller proportions for which two such men, highly gifted a8 they are, are filted; disband this frightful standing army of politicians that, like other armies, eats up the people whom it claims to serve, and return it to useful occupations in civil life. Our great object should be not only to bring to nn end the wasteful processes of Government work-the overgrown departments, the official mismanagements, the heavy burden of taxation, the innumerable occ3.sions of rivalry, of personal ambition, and corrupt uses of power-but to recall all human effort from a wrong direction and to put it in the one light track. We have to make each man a profitable workcl- by leaving him with undivided energies for his own \vork instead of letting him attempt to direct tho work of others, and to place him unde'r the one true and natu;al condition that his reward shall be all he can get in a free world, self-earned, and not adjusted for him by others. Achieve this great though simple result, and we should bring about II, menta.l regeneration within a nation as great as if, in their external relations, nations were to abandon the idea of war. Of all perverted industries, that of accumulating force, whether in great bodies of soldiers or great bodies of electors, is the most 'Tasteful and disa,strous, not only because, as we have seen, the effort to obtain the possession of force is in itself au immense consumption of energy that should go for othcr things; not only because, so long as men are intent upon becoming the holder~ of power, they are blind to thc true renledies; not only because systems founded on force are fatal to th,o two conditions of difference and competition, apart from which unfitness can never be changed into fitness; not only because all fixed laws of moral right and wrong disappea.r in the presence of force; not. only because tho world can find no repose or security as long as a~l the great matters of life are left in suspense, to be shaped and reshaped by those who have climbed yesterday or to-day to power; but because, so long as wo live under force, compelling and compellcd, so long the affections and sympathies of men for men-all that is lovely in human natare-must remain sealed from breaking into universal blossom, like the plants of the earth remain sealed so long as wintel- is with them. Man is predestined to find his complete happiness, as Mr. Spencer teaches, only when the happiness of others becomes to him an integral part of his own; but this development of his nature cannot take place unless he is living under those true conditions \vhich belong to a free life. So long as force is paramount, so long must men stand in hate and fear of each other, and the old saying, horno h01nini lupus, remain true." "And now, Mr. Markham, granting the force that there is in much that you say, there remains the great question-is it possible to look on such a view as practical P" "Practical!" said Markham, slowly shaking his head. "And do you. think, .A Politician in Sight of Haven. 23 Mr. Bramston, that you politicians are the practical people P Under the name· of serving your party you press on along an unknown road, no man really taking the responsibility of his own actions, no man knowing, or even trying to know, where he is going. How would any politician of the day meet my demand if I were to ask him to sketch the future of England ashe desired and as he expected to sec it P Would he not excuse himself from th~ task; Of, ha.d he the courage to attempt it, would not his picture consist of l\ few incongruous conceptions thrown together, some not possible, some not probable, resembling in its want of definite ideas an animal drawn by a child, with the wings of R fowl and the legs of a horse P And yet in the midst of such mental incoherence you have the courage to act &s if you were a.ssured that the power in your possession were a divine gift, and that some shaping hand that you do not see would interpose to give order and meaning to what you do. Practical, Mr. Bramston ! Is it practical to have created the relations that exist between you and the people p. You meet them not to speak the truth, not to confess real difficulties, not to try to understand the real conditions under which men have to live, not to raise them in their self-respect, not to check the human tendency to selfishness and violence, and to bring out the reasonable self, but you speak to them as holders of power on whom power confers the right to be a law to themselves; and thi~ you do in order that you mu,y extract their votes f..o~ them. You are but courtiers of the people, as your fathers before you \vero courtiers of kings and emperors. If J·ou call this practical, Mr. Bramston, I desire myself to have no share in what is practical. Practical! .And do you think that when to-morrow succeeds to this reckless competition of parties, and you are called upon to deal with the greed you ha.ve appealed to, -the expectations you have l"aised, the rash beginnings you hn.va made, to-morrow, when the untruth, the weakness, and the personal rivalries of mon ,vho lead the people, not by real convictions but by beliefs assumed at the moment, when all these ugly things come home to roost, when that dangerous lust of power which is in aU human breasts, and can only be conquered by the sense of the rights of others has taken its full possession of us, do you think in that (Jay of consequences that you will be sa.tisfied that you were the practical people P Prn,ctical! And yet you do not see the mea.ning of the very things which yon are doing. You can youtselves Tor)Y, and Whig, and Ra.dical,-there is as much meaning in the names of Shiite and Sonnite; there was more in those of Guelph and Ghibelline. Can you not see that there are only two creeds in the ~orld possiblo for men; that there are only two sides on which a man caD place himself P Arc you for a frce world, or for a \vorld placed under authority P Arc you Socia.list, a believer in the majorityt a believer in force, or tIo you tako your stand on the fixed and inalienable rights of the individl1al P These mixed and p~rty systems, by which you set so much store, are only half-way huts in which the race sojourns for a day, and then burns behind it. Because you yourselves are confu3ed, indistinct, and inconsistent in your ideas, do you think that the ra.co, as a l'LlCC, ,vill stand A Politician in Big/a' of Haven. forever, like recruil.l heaLing lJIe ground in the drill-yard and march n01¥hltherP Time i!I a groat logician, anll lucceeding generatlonl wlll either preBB S\eadily on to the Iystem that is tbe perfect.lon of force, Socialism, or' &0 the perfection of liberty, complete Indlvidl1lllism. If men believe that Lbey may rightly use force to gain any of their objectl, they will claim In their IUppoaed Interest to usc It for all tbelr objectB; If force II not a right weapon, then they will altogether abandon It, On "blch aide then do you take your.ltand pc I loolt at. the partiel of today ll.l1d J eftO get no anlwer. la Mr. Glldltone, with bll many regre~ and apologies. i~ Lonl Salilbury, with bis 6uy adaptifeQeu, for or agalnlt Iiherty P The ooe and the other aecm to me eqll&lIy ready to betray It for their n_uhles. But whatever be the iMue of the present, that the world will remain In Socht.lbm-of that 1 CAD have 00 fear. The Iysl.em is doomed by the great law8 M inaltorably as the Tower of Babel. I do oot say It may oot descend upon WI for" Lime, like a great pall, blotting out all hopei of progress 10 our time. It may be that the race must pnBB through their Beason of it, lUI men pau througb IIOme dolirioul 1110611. After 8l11t Is only an old atory repeating it86lf. Soobilim il but Catholidlm llddroulog itllelf not to the !:IOul bu~ to the seoaea of men, Accept aulJlorlty, accept the force which it employB, l'8Bign youreelf to all.powerful managers and infallible schemers, give up the free choice and tho free act, the burdon of rulponllbillty and the rewards that come le each man according to his own uo.... tionl, dony the reuon and the self that are in JOu, place tbese in the keeping of othOT'll, and a world of eastl and comfort shall btl youT'll. It II a creed even more degrading tban Catholieism, but it etreT'll more tangible brlbell for ita acoopLB.oco. Still, Mr. BramBlen, wo must flgbt on. AI thc old darknOIlJ and montal cowardice como back upon UB, we ~n only trult that tho old light and courage and faith that protoated may como back also. Mr. Spencer bas set us a bright example of fllarl6S8noBB In thought and speech. No man quite knowl what that magical weapon, truth, can do whon he Betl hlmsolf resolutely to use it. I wo:~'"rathor choose It for our Bide than oither Mr. G1adstono's eloquence or Mr. Cha.rla.in'a organizntlon. Bot the night is fl\B~ atea.lIng IW8Y. J shall be glad to mae' you again. Mo:a.nwhlle Itudy Mr. Spencer until his mothods of order and re&llOQ 1Jecome an int.ellectualllcccasity to you And now, are you a reader of Browning P If so, rellay me for my long tallt by reading me Galfjppi whils~ I ligbt rot eVODIng pipe."

What a strange evening's work," said Angus to himsclf as his foot crossed the threshold. "Voluntary taxation, and ministers out of employment! How those dear wise fools In the House would shout at the idea; but then every fish believes in the swim to which he belongs. Ah!" he sighed as he walkod along the Embankment, and the blue smoke of his cigar parted the fresh night air, "if this were the disentanglement of the mess,--the perfect creed of liberty, the true acceptance by each man of the rights of the other, and yet---"