« PreviousContinue »
the censorship is retained, and rate the Censor has been most that is well. Any manager wisely retained, and the comwho desires his play to re- plaints of his enemies
are ceive the Lord Chamberlain's proved unfounded. In conapproval, may submit to the clusion, if we were asked to reader's decision. On the other sum up the whole matter in hand, the Committee suggests & small compass,
we could that it should be legal also not do better than cite the " to perform unlicensed brief conversation whch folplay whether it has been sub- lows :mitted or not." But those who thus perform an unlic- Lord Newton. The one thing ensed play will do it at their which is quite clear to me from peril. If the play be indecent, your evidence is that you conthe Director of Public Prose- sider that the importance of cutions may prefer an indict- the whole question is very much ment against the manager of exaggerated. the theatre and the author of Mr Walkley. I do. the work. Briefly, the long
Lord Newton. That is my discussion has ended, as the opinion too.... Upon the long discussions of Englishmen whole, you think the parties commonly end, in a compro- concerned are taking themmise. It is proposed that the selves too seriously. Censor should be retained, to Mr Walkley. Yes, that is my please the managers, and abol- view. ished to please the playwrights. How the double system would It is our view also. But we work is not very clear. Per- do not regret the inquiry. If haps one or two unlicensed it were not worth making, it theatres might hold aloft the has been so well made that we banner of emancipation, while shall still treasure the Report the others pursued in safety as a masterpiece in the art of the ancient ways. At any intellectual dialogue.
THE INTELLECTUAL BANKRUPTCY OF LIBERALISM.
THE other day & Liberal Bright and Gladstone may paper made an excursion into have erred in diagnosis, in the history, and returned with the delicate task of ascertaining comfortable news that most of facts and values, but they did the great men of the past had not blunder in logic. They been Liberals. Grote, Mill, sought their justification in Macaulay, Tennyson, Dickens, an intellectual appeal; and if Ruskin, Browning,-it was an they used emotion as an ally, odd collection; but the writer they did not forget that their was clear that, in some sense, first line of defence was elsethey had all been Liberals at where. The fault of the elder heart. He proceeded to con- Liberals lay in too rigid a desider the leaders of thought at votion to the laws of the practhe present day, and discovered, tical reason. A dapper proof to his disgust, that few sub- blinded their eyes often to the
, scribed to the Radical pro
shallowness of the
data on gramme. The great jurists, which it was based. But at economists, scientists, scholars, any rate they did not forwere all more or less Tories, swear the
of sound and the bulk of the men of argument. They accused their letters suffered from the same opponents of obscurantism, and taint. The deduction-natural, declared that, for themselves, perhaps, in the circumstances, they would walk only in the
, was that there was something full light of day. In Dr very far wrong with our modern Johnson's phrase, they dethought. “We live,” he wrote, manded in their policy not “in an era of small men.” only reasons, but reason.
But how if the other deduo- It is possible to exaggerate tion is the right one, and there the part played by the inis something very far wrong tellect in politics. The rules with modern Liberalism? The of common logic are insubject is worth discussion, for adequate to a subject so vast Liberalism has always claimed and mobile, and a thin into be the creed of thinking tellectualism see only
Under the Tory domina- half the facts. That was the tion of Eldon, Whiggism pro- charge brought by Disraeli vided almost the only avenue of against traditional Liberalism, rational progress. In the days as Burke long before had of Palmerston and Granville brought it against Jacobinism; it a coherent creed
creed- and nowadays fow on either limited, no doubt, but admir- side would deny its truth. ably logical. Disraeli gave to To the intellectuel the world Toryism ideas and principles, is too formal, and his easy but the other party did not generalisations do not exhaust slacken its grip upon reason.
its content. But, while this more unfortunate, from the
may be granted, reason re- power, and the country has mains the only court of ap
been offered variety of peal for any policy, reason Liberal
measures. Looking which is willing to go round to-day, we certainly humbly and recognise the cannot find any predominant complexity of the factors, but intellectual support for these which is inflexibly resolved schemes. The chief experts to come to a rational under- in national finance, like Sir standing of them. It is Robert Giffen and Professor truism that the great battles Bastable, have as little liking of humanity are all fought in for the new Budget as the the mind; and it is equally a great bankers, financiers, and truism that no creed which captains of industry. The offends against human reason new Liberal constitutional will long enlist the support of doctrines have been repudihuman nature. The intellect ated by every authority of by itself may be inadequate to note from Professor Goldwin the formation of a policy, but Smith to Professor Dicey and the exposition and defence of Sir William
No it must be rational, or cease lawyer of repute, save their to be either exposition or de- own law officers, has countenfence. Mr Gladstone's Home anced their innovation with Rule scheme seemed to us to regard to common-law rights be based upon a faulty read- in trade disputes. Their ing of the facts; but in the social adventures have met arguments for it he appealed with small support from those to the reason of the ordinary who have most seriously and elector. Free Trade and scientifically studied the conTariff Reform stand or fall dition of the poor. All their in the long - run by their chief measures have been raked diagnosis of present and future fore and aft with the most economic conditions, but the damaging critical fire. This advocates of each make pre- might be well enough, for cisely the same rational ap- experts are not infallible, but peal. Hence in the majority the danger begins when no of political questions we look serious defence is attempted. to see authoritative names on On the controversial points both sides. And in the past
have endless diatribes Liberalism, which represented against opponents, appeals to
more obvious appeal to humanitarian emotion and reason, had
rule the class prejudices, and the demaweight of intellect in its gogic rhetoric of the hustings; favour. It claimed explicitly and we have had all this from to be the creed of principle responsible Ministers. It is and argument, while it labelled unfortunate that any policy its opponents the party of ob- should lack the support of sourantism and prejudice.
the chief thinkers
on the For four years a Liberal subject; but it is infinitely Government has been in more
1909.) The Liberal Phrase of “ The Democracy.”
859 point of view of patriotic whole body of citizens; which citizens, that this
policy is to say, that whatever the should be given no rational majority of the people seriously defence. The Government want they must get. The type contains several men of not has its merits and its drawable ability, who have been backs, but on the whole it is content to perform the the most universal and most ecutive duties of their own successful form of government departments, and have taken to-day, for the simple reason little or no part in general that by giving the mass of the discussion. Such a state of people the sense of power it affairs is & curious reversal gives them contentment.
It of the old doctrine of Cabinet is the sense of impotence that responsibility, but it is a sig- makes revolutions far more nificant commentary on the often than a burning injuscondition of Liberalism. No tice. Now, if under democracy one in his senses would argue every man governs, it is a misthat the Liberal party was take to apply the name to any intellectually bankrupt; but one class. This, however, is a we have the gravest doubts harmless confusion, for by about the solvency of the “democracy” in this popular thing now called Liberalism sense we can understand the which is being preached on masses, the bulk of the popua thousand platforms as the lation. Far more dangerous official creed. A party is is it to apply the word “demoperfectly justified in changing cratio” to this or that measure its principles. It may be a as a term of praise. Properly good election taunt, but the speaking, every measure which ordinary man has no pre. becomes law in a democracy is judice in favour of a drab democratic. If we mean what consistency. But surely it is is good for the masses, we leave another thing when a party a huge latitude to opinion, for changes its mode of appeal a good measure, even if passed and jettisons reason.
by a popularly elected ParliaA shrewd observer
some ment, may be far from years back might have pro- popular measure. Temperance phesied what was going to reform, for example, may be happen by observing the non- a democratic measure in one sense beginning to be talked sense but not in another, for about “Democracy." Those it is certain that the majority who voted Liberal at the polls of the inhabitants of these were labelled “the Democracy,” islands do not want it. We and the last word in praise of are therefore driven to some a measure was that it was kind of definition like this 6 democratio." But democracy “A measure is democratio if is not a quality, nor is it a in the opinion of those respon. class : it is a type of govern- sible for it it will be beneficial ment. Under it the ultimate to the majority of the people, power is in the hands of the and the said majority do not
resolutely reject it,”-a defin- old Liberal argued that cer
. ition, be it noted, which covers tain things were good for the every completed Act of every country, and was determined Parliament. The opinions of that the country should have the masses are the last appeal, them. But the new Liberal is and the democrat wants to in the fantastic position of guide them skilfully in the waiting always on the popular direction which he thinks bene- will, and at the same time being ficial. If the benefits are ques- extremely averse to consulting tioned, he must appeal to his it too often. He is compelled, masters.
therefore, to attune his policy Loose political terminology to his own conception of what matters little, and here at least his masters want. That is to is an intelligible attitude. But say, having no rational printhe difficulty is the appeal to ciples, he has not even the the masters. One may be far courage of his opportunism. enough from the individualism Professing to lead the people, of the old Polish Parliament, he is content to obey them, and where one hostile vote would get is disinclined to go to them wreck a measure, and yet see for orders. His life is one long dangers in the rule of a bare speculation on the psychology numerical majority. Even if of the masses, and his efforts “the people have no views, are centred on anticipating only wants, and these wants what he imagines may be the are always right" (as one of demands of this intermittent the Liberal prophets has said), Vox Dei. The wisest of men how much must they want in such paradoxical case a thing, and how long, and would become muddled in their by what majority? The mod- arguments. ern Liberal has
answer Whatever be the reason of to these questions. Arch- the new attitude, there can be bishop Magee
wrote: no doubt about the essential “I am unable to trust im- irrationality of the results. plicitly in the purifying and The most conspicuous instance elevating influence of the mul- is the Budget, which, after tiplication-table, or to believe eight months' tinkering and in the infallibility of the odd doctoring, remains largely unman;" and in his heart the construable, and almost cermodern Liberal is inclined to tainly unworkable. Techniagree with him. He cannot be cally it is the worst kind of faithful to that difficult creed finance, for it raises the neceswhich he has dubbed “demo- sary funds with the maximum cracy,” and he is altogether of cost to the Exchequer and opposed to its logical outcome, inconvenience to the tax-payer. the Referendum. He does not A new Lucian in a new * Dia. want to be always presenting logue of the Dead” might his cheques at the bank, since fitly expound Mr Gladstone's he is never quite sure about views on such fiscal aberrations. the size of his balance. The Much of the criticism, of course,