BOOKS..

METHODS OF SOCIAL REFORM.*

THE republication of these valuable papers will recall and increase the profound sense of loss with which the news of Professor Jevons's untimely death was received a year ago by the English public. Lucid, calm, and usually as cautions as be was sagacious,—though when he discovered, or thought he dis- covered traces, of a popular feeling unjust to men of science, no one could be more impetuous, and, as we think, more rash, than Professor Jevons in running a tilt at that popular feeling, —Professor Jevons was the man of all others to whom we might have looked for guidance in the many difficult social and economical questions of the day ; nor, since Mr. Bagehot's death, do we know in whose hands we could have placed with so much confidence the review of the dangerous and diffi- cult questions so crudely raised by Mr. Henry George, in his Progress and Poverty, as in those of Professor Jevons. Of the papers here republished, we may say that all are able, and most are wise, though we cannot say that we think wisdom by any means the characteristic of the vehement attack on those who regard the rapid extension of that professional physiology which makes Vivisection one of its chief instruments of investigation a -very serious moral danger, against which it is absolutely necessary to warn the public, and to take the strictest guarantees. We should say much more of the paper called "Cruelty to Animals, a Study in Sociology," if its author were still living. As he is gone, we will only comment on one aspect of his paper so important that we should not feel it right to pass it by. Nothing can be more misleading than to use the cruelties of sport as a sort of buttress for the cruelties of science. If Professor Jevons was right in assuming that something like three million living creatures are wounded every year without being killed by the sportsmen who find their pleasure in shooting at them, and that other and much less painful means,—such as netting,—might be found for procuring the same amount of food, and keeping down the numbers of the animals which are now destroyed almost wholly by the gun, he would have been well justified in saying,—if he did mean to say, but of this we are not sure,— that this is monstrous and wholesale cruelty on the part of society, which deserves to be denounced. But Professor Jevons seems to us to have attacked society for the cruelty of its sport, less because he condemned its proceedings than because he wished to meet an attack on physiologists by a counter-man- oeuvre. And to suppose, as he did, that we ought to have refrained. from even condemning the deliberate infliction of torture for scientific purposes, although that is the business of a new and rapidly-growing profession which invokes the authority of scientific right, until we had succeeded in putting down the un- intended cruelties of the sportsman, seems to us to be most misleading. Is it conceivable that a public sanction given to the principle that any amount of torture may be deliberately inflicted by a great profession on any creature less than human, for any useful human purpose, would result in a more humane public feeling as regards sport ? Would it not at once be said that if we may be as cruel as we please in order to improve our knowledge of the laws of health, we may clearly be equally cruel to increase our actual stock of health,—the former pro- ducing only a promise of contingent good to human health, while the latter produces a certain and measurable addition to • liethods of Social Reform, and Other Papers. By W. Stanley Jevons, LA.• LL.D., P.B.S. London : Macmillan.

it? It should, we think, have been perfectly clear to so lucid a mind as that of Professor Jevons, that if you want to impress on human beings their grave responsibility for the humane treatment of their poor relations, you must begin by challenging a grave profession of the highest scientific claims, when it de- mands the right to torture at will any number of animals that it may be needful to torture,—so long only as pain unnecessary for the object in question is avoided, — for the clear pro- spect or even a reasonable chance of adding to the stock of use-

ful scientific knowledge. " The vivisector," says Professor Jevons, " like most discoverers in pure science, must look for his reward in the pleasure of pursuing knowledge for its own sake, or for the sake of the millions of men who will in the future be benefited by his discoveries. Of course, I do not

mean to say that the vivisector has clearly before his mind in each experiment the good of mankind generally. Men are usually driven to work for a great end by some instinctive ten- dency, some pleasure in the action itself, or some minor motive, just as the bee gathers a store of honey, not because he is con- scious of its future utility, but because it is agreeable to gather it. We approve the industrious actions of the bee, because they lead to a useful end; and it is quite sufficient defence of the vivisector's character that his labours are likely to result in the diminution of disease and suffering." We reply that it is precisely the growth of this formidable "in- stinctive tendency" to amass knowledge by inflicting pangs on our fellow-creatures, as the Lee amasses honey by sucking it out of the flowers, which we dread, and desire to extinguish.

If it be allowed to grow, it will not stop at creatures beneath the rank of man ; nor is there any good reason why it should stop exactly at the point where an immense advance of know- ledge might easily be gained by going further. But even if it did stop at beings lower than man, this "instinctive tendency" would harden the heart, render human life altogether more cruel in its selfishness, and extinguish absolutely the last chance

of putting a stop to the inhumanities of sport. Professor Jevons was amongst the gentlest and tenderest-hearted of his

generation. We do not believe that he himself could have borne to torment even a frog, in order to have solved the most important physiological problem conceivable in "reflex action," or in any other department of the science. We believe that he threw himself into the cause of the physiologists suffering under the attacks levelled against them, very much as he would have thrown himself into the cause of the frogs, if he had ever realised the frogs' sufferings. All the more do we regret that this essay proceeded from his pen, and gave the great authority of his distinguished name to what we hold to be a bad cause.

The striking paper on " Cram " is the one which we should select as the best, and, in many respects, the most brilliant, in the book before us. Professor Jevons loved to expose the fallacy of a popular cry, and, in this case at least, he has performed the task most powerfully. He maintains that there is "good cram," and " bad cram." " Bad cram," he says, " consists in tem- porarily impressing on the candidate's mind a collection of facts, dates, or formulae, held in a wholly undigested state, and ready to be disgorged in the examination-room by an act of mere memory." " Good cram," on the contrary, he defines as train- ing which is of a thorough and arduous character, directing the candidates' studies into the most important lines of a given subject of examination, " so that the faculties of the pupil are stimulated and encouraged to the utmost in those lines." Pro- fessor Jevons maintains, and maintains, we think, with the utmost troth, that for nine men out of ten, this is precisely the most useful and telling education in the world. In reply to a very effective speech of Sir Richard, then Mr. Cross,—at that time Home Secretary,—against cram, Professor Jevons says :-

"Both in this and his other remarks, Mr. Cross commits himself to the popular but wholly erroneous notion that what boys learn at school and college should be useful knowledge indelibly impressed upon the mind, so as to stay there all their lives, and be ready at their fingers' ends. The real point of the objections to examination c3mmonly is, that the candidate learns things for the examination only, which, when it is safely passed, he forgets again as speedily as possible. Mr. Cross would teach so deliberately and thoroughly that the very facts taught could not be forgotten, but must ever after crop up in the mind, whatever we are doing. I bold that remarks such as these proceed from a wholly false view of the nature and purposes of education. It is implied that the mind in early life is to be stored with the identical facts and bits of knowledge which are to be need in after-life. It is, in fact, Mr. Cross and those who think with him who advocate a kind of 'cram,' enduring, it is true, but still bad cram.' The true view of education, on the contrary, is to regard it as a course of training. The youth in a gymnasium prac- tises upon a horizontal bar, in order to develope his muscular powers

generally ; he does not intend toga upon posturing upon horizontal bars all through life. School is a place where the mental fibres are to be exercised, trained, expanded, developed, and strengthened, not crammed ' or loaded with 'useful knowledge.' The whole of a youth's subsequent career is one long course of technical cramming,' in which any quantity of useful facts are supplied to him nolens. volene. The merchant gets his technical knowledge at the clerk's desk, the barrister in the conreyancer's offices or the law courts, the- engineer in the workshop and the field. It is the very purpose of a liberal education, as. it is correctly called, to develope and train the plastic fibres of the youthful brain, so as to prevent theM taking too- early a definite 'set,' which will afterwards narrow and restrict the- range of acquisition and judgment. I will even go so far as to say that it is hardly desirable for the actual things taught at school to stay is the mind for life. The source of error is the failure to distinguish between the form and the matter of knowledge, between the facts themselves and the manner in which the mental powers deal with facts. It is wonderful that Mr. Cross and those who moralise in his strain do not perceive that the actual facts which a man deals with, in life are infinite in number, and cannot be remembered in a finite brain. The psychologists, too, seem to me to be at fault in this. matter, for they have not sufficiently drawn attention to the varying degrees of duration required in a well-organised memory. We com- monly use the word memory' so as to cover the faculties of Reten- tion, Reproduction, and Representation, as described by Hamilton,. and very little consideration will show that in different cases we need the powers of retention, of suggestion, and of imagination in very different degrees. In some cases, we require to remember a thing- only a few moments, or a few minutes ; in other cases, a few hours or days; in yet other cases, a few weeks or months : it is an infini- tesimally small part of all our mental impressions which can be- profitably remembered for years. Memory may be too retentiver, and facility for forgetting and of driving out one train of ideas by a new train is almost as essential to a well-trained intellect as facility of retention. Take the case of a barrister in full practice, who dees, with several cases in a day. His business is to acquire as rapidly as possible the facts of the case immediately before him. With the powers of representation of a well-trained mind, he holds these facts steadily before him, comparing them with each other, discovering theirs relations, applying to them the principles and rules of law morn deeply. graven on his memory, or bringing them into connection with a few of the more prominent facts of previous cases which he happens to remember. For the details of laws and precedents he trusts to his, text-writers, the statute-book, and his law library. Even before the- case is finished, his mind has probably sifted out the facts and rejected the unimportant ones by the law of obliviscence. One case done with, he takes up a wholly new series of facts, and so from day to day, and from month to month, the matter befora him is constantly, changing. The same remarks are even more true of a busy and able- administrator like Mr. Cross. The points which come before him are. infinite in variety. The facts of each case are rapidly brought to his. notice by subordinates, by correspondence, by debates in the House,. by deputations and interviews, or by newspaper reports. Applying, well-trained powers of judgment to the matter in band, he makes a' rapid decision and passes to the next piece of business. It would be fatal to Mr. Cross if he were to allow things to sink deep into his mind and stay there. There would be no difficulty in showing that in like manner, but in varying degrees, the engineer, the physician, the merchant, even the tradesman or the intelligent artisan, deal every day with various combinations of facts which cannot all be stored up in the cerebral framework, and certainly need not be so. The bearing- of these considerations upon the subject of examinations ought to be very evident. For what is `cram' but the rapid acquisition of e. series of facts, the vigorous getting-up of a case, in order to exhibit well-trained powers of comprehension, of judgment, and of retention before an examiner ? The practised barrister 'crams' up his 'brief (so called because, as some suppose, made brief for the purpose)„ and stands an examination in it before a judge and jury. The.. candidate is not so hurried ; he spends months, or it may be two or three years, in getting up his differential calculus or his inorganic chemistry. It is quite likely that when the ordeal, is passed, and the favourable verdict delivered, he will dismiss, the equations and the salts and compounds from his mind as rapidly as possible ; but it does not follow that the useful effect of his training vanishes at the same time. If so, it folloWs that almost all the most able and successful men of the present day threw away their pains at school and college. I suppose that no one, ever heard of a differential equation solving a nice point of law, nor is it common to hear Sophocles and Tacitus quoted by a leading counsel. Yet it can hardly be denied that our greatest barristers and judges were trained in the mathematical sciences, or if not, that their teachers thought the classics a better training-ground. If things. taught at school and college are to stay in the mind to serve us in the business of life, then almost all the higher education yet given in this kingdom has missed its mark."

It would be hardly possible, we submit, to put the case more- powerfully, or on a surer basis of principle, than Professor Jevons puts it here. We have always maintained that the• better class of " crammers " give better instruction in the modes of acquiring the principles of knowledge, and in the aptest use of them when acquired, than any other class of teachers. They are not the men who inspire the highest of all intellectual passions, the love of knowledge and truth for its own sake ; but they are the men who best understand the gymnastic of the• mind, and best train young men in the exercise and use of their own powers.

The inaugural address to the Manchester Statistical Society in 1869, and the opening address to the Economic Section a

the British Association in 1870, are both of them full of valuable matter, and from the last we cannot help extracting, for the benefit of the member for Burnley, the passage in which Professor Jevons compares the policy of further reducing taxation with the policy of paying-off Debt. This is what Professor Jevons says,—and it is, we venture to think, almost as applicable to the year 1883 as it was to the year 1870 :—

"But I venture to raise another question. I doubt whether the remission of taxation does as much good at the present day as it would at a future time. There are comparatively few signs that the wages of the working-classes, even when sutficieLt, are saved and applied really to advance the condition of the recipients. All is expended in a higher scale of living, so thst little permanent benefit results ; and when bad trade comes again, there is as much distress as ever. It is only with the increase of education and temperance that the increase of wages will prove a solid ad- vantage. Thus, when the really hurtful taxes are removed, it by no means follows that the further remission of taxes leads to the profit- able expenditure of income. The money may be spent in a way far more profitable to the whole nation than it will be spent by those whose taxes are remitted. I am glad, on this and many other accounts, that the propriety of reducing the National Debt is beginning to be very generally recognised. The question was ably raised by Mr. Lambert daring the recent Session, and both in the House of Commons and in the newspaper press many strong opinions were expressed in favour of reduction. In fact, there was almost a general feeling that Mr. Lowe's small measure of redaction was altogether inconsiderab!e, compared with our opportunities and the greatness of the task before ns. During every interval of peace we ought to clear off the charges incurred during the previous war, otherwise we commit the serious error of charging to capital that which should be borne by income. If a railway company needs periodically to renew its works, and charges all the cost to capital, it must eventually become insolvent ; so if at intervals we require to maintain the safety and independence of this country or its posses- sions by war, and do it all by borrowed money, we throw the whole cost of our advantage upon posterity. If, indeed, one great war could free us from all future danger, we might capitalise the cost and leave it as a perpetual mortgage upon the property of the country; but if the effect of any war wears out, and we are liable to be involved in new wars at intervals, then we cannot fairly or safely go on adding perpetually to the mortgage upon the national property. The wars at the commencement of this century have secured for us fifty years or more of nearly unbroken peace, and yet at the end of this period of ever-advancing wealth, the great Debt stands almost at the same figure as at the commencement. We enjoy the peace, and leave our descendants to pay its cost."

No doubt, the working-classes have learned something since 1870, and do save a larger proportion of any addition to their wages than they did then. On the other hand, it is still true that the greater portion of any relief that might be granted to them in the shape of diminished taxation would be expended in a higher scale of living, and our subsequent experience has rendered it more certain than ever that " we are liable to be involved in new wars at intervals," so that " we cannot fairly or safely go on adding perpetually to the mortgage on the national property," and therefore that it is simply wrong for us "to enjoy the peace and leave our descendants to pay its cost."

Another impressive paper is that on " Married Women in Factories," in which the evils arising from the fact that the mothers of children leave them in the care of others, while they themselves attend the factory, are very powerfully stated. We feel, however, the greatest doubt whether the remedy which Professor Jevons proposes might not result in evils greater than those which now exist. We fear that so long as there continue to be so many mothers wholly unscrupulous as to the duties of mothers, no law which disqualified them for working in factories while their children are infants would answer the purpose required. It is but too certain that even as it is, criminal means are not anfrequently found of evading the burden and expense of children, and we fear that the remedy suggested by Professor Jevons would result in multiply- ing the use of these criminal means. The truth is that moral and spiritual influences alone can remove moral and spiritual evils, and we should feel the greatest un- easiness lest any serious attempt to bring home the re- sponsibilities of parental life to unworthy parents might only end in the way one would expect, when one adds greatly to the temptations to evil, without adding to the amount of moral force by which evil is resisted.

There is not a paper in this volume from which even those who differ most from its conclusions will not derive great in- struction; and we may add that serious as most of the subjects are, they are treated with a lucidity and force which make these papers anything but dry reading to those who have really studied the subjects treated. In Professor Jevons's early death, the world has suffered a very grievous loss.