Sidelights on The Webbs
The Webbs and Their Work. Edited by Margaret Cole. (Muller. 15s.)
THIS book makes immensely interesting reading, but analytical readers could base on its evidence various conceptions of what the Webbs were like in their thoughts and methods. Mrs. Cole reasonably invited this result by her postulate that since the fame of the Webbs wassecured for ever by burial in the Abbey no sort of frankness could be out of place. Some of the contradictions arc as curious as they arc flat. For iostance, Mr. G. D. H. Cole says that Mrs. Webb was " und?gmatic" and regarded her Socialism rather as "an instrument of action than as a theory " ; whereas Mr. Leonard Woolf says that both the Wcbbs had " a curious habit of open-minded dogmatism" which gave their thought "dangerous narrowness."
Such not unplcasing clashes of opinion do not affect the admiration expressed by all the contributors for the amazing amount of work— mostly new wok—done by the Webbs in statistical research, voluminous writing of books, invention of new organisations, all designed to advance knowledge and with it a happier and more civilised society. It is uncontested that the Webbs' partnership was one of the most remarkable in our history. Like Bentham, with his doctrines of quantitative utility, they created an atmosphere which was breathed by everyone because It was everywhere. They did not precisely originate social science, which goes back at least to Plato, but they elaborated scientific forms of organisation ; they put " sociology " on the map and gave it a popular meaning. They were the most eminent pioneers of a welfare State, which we have now got, loaded with good intentions but not without its loads of mischief.
Beatrice Potter, who married Sidney Webb in 1892, was a member of a distinguished family belonging to the " business aristocracy." She had fine natural sensibilities, and in her girlhood developed a sympathy with the poor so strong as to make her question whether her father's scrupulous sense of honour in business was enough if it did not include mitigation of the ruthlessness of unrestricted com- petition. She committed her thoughts to diaries with such grace and intelligence that one suspects that she might have become, single- handed, more famous as a writer than was possible after she had made some sacrifice of form to the medium required by her husband's work.
Sidney Webb had risen by biain juld energy to important positions in the Civil Service. Beside his Wife, who was rptably dignified in bearing, he appeared insignificant ; but she had seen through the husk to the kernel. He had an easier apprqach than hers to untutored political friends ; she often seemed to be conquering prejudices. He could pull the heart out of a Blue Book at top speed, yet could remember everything he had read. He had no aesthetic tastes, and waited for old age before reading standard works of biography and fiction, and even then at a speed which could hardly have permitted a savouring of anything but facts or plots. Nevertheless, the Wcbbs' marriage was a perfect partnership in work and mutual affection and respect. Their minds became one.
Mr. Bernard Shaw's reminiscencis, in the shape of answers to a questionnaire, are, of course, entertaining, but they are also curt and off-hand, no do* begause he had said that the whole idea of the book was " imposseble." Mr. Edward Pease, the ever-obliging handy- man of the Webbs, writes wholly about the Fabian Society. Lord Beveridge tells the story of the London School of Economics (creation of the Webbs) and proves that so long as they an it it was exclusively the home of facts and truths. Nq partisanship was tolerated. Mr. R. C. K. Ensor's essay on Webb's policy of permeation " of the political parries, with all its dangers, into some of which Webb fell, is particularly good. Other subjects are Webb's long service on the London County Council, and the Minority Report of the Webbs, which greatly aided the ultimate break-up of the Poor Law. The story of the New Statesman (another Webb creation) is ably told by Mr. S. K. Ratcliffe, who helped to invent the title. Perhaps the best deserved failure of the Webbs was their fantastic scheme for a social parliament as well as a political parliament, as though industry and social organisation and international affairs could be labelled and isolated.
The last scene of all is painful. The Webbs' visit to Russia led to a sudden adoption of the Marxian theory of history. They saw in the Soviet system a model of the effective application of large- scale theories. Here was a smoothly-running machine apparently produced by one magical stroke. How was it done ? By the elimina- tion of opposition ? Yes. Had their own Fabian doctrine of the inevitability of gradualness betrayed them ? At least it had compelled them to stumble when they might have galloped. Why did they not recoil from the elimination of opposition by the elimination of human beings ? They explained it away as an unhappy passing phase. Alas for their illusion, -suppression (the utter denial of democratic
freedom) is the basis of one-party government. J. B. ATKIN&
Previous page
