SOME BOOKS OF THE WEEK.
[Under this heading we notice such Book, of the week as have not been reeerred for reriew in other for.ns.1
Socialism before the French Revolution. By William B. Guthrie, Ph.D. (Macmillan and Co. 6s. 6d. net.)—Dr. Guthrie begins his work with a very able introduction, in which he furnishes his readers with a bibliography and with a general appreciation of early Socialistic theories. Plato is, of course, recognised as the founder of all the philosophy which seeks to reconstruct society, but our author's more immediate concern is with its modern expositions, and he may be said to start from Sir Thomas More and his "Utopia." Few books of the kind have boon more widely read. It was early translated into French and Italian. Both these versions were made by younger contemporaries of the author. The Spanish translation was nearly a century later. In the Spain of the seventeenth century it must have looked, one would think, curiously out of place. More's after career is a remark- able comment ou the book, perhaps one might say a practical con- futation. Tho " Utopia" was the expression of a social discontent which had been at work long before it appeared. That discontent, aggravated though it was by the greed and oppression of the ruling class, was in substance a rebellion against economic changes which were inevitable, and which tended, ultimately and on the whole, to the general good. It is one of the things that prove that Socialism is really opposed to development, and is self- condemned because it is an effort to resist the evolution of human life. After More, separated from him by nearly a generation, comes the Italian Campanella. He was curiously like and unlike his predecessor. More became a Conservative ; Campanella grew more and more revolutionary. The man and his theories are certainly worthy of more attention than has been given to them, and Dr. Guthrie deserves well of all students of social philosophy for supplying this account of him. The next development of Socialism was in France. Rousseau was, in a sense, its most famous prophet ; but Rousseau was anything but orthodox in many of his views. In fact, as our author puts it, "ho admitted communism in theory, but he did not propose its application." It was his view that the " abandonment of property would mean a reversion to barbarism." Morelly, who was a slightly younger contemporary (born in 1720, whereas Rousseau was born in 1712), was a more logical person. He regarded private property as the source of all social evils. But the logical Socialist is very apt to be converted when he leaves his chair and begins to mix himself with action. The insidious individualist takes the wind out of his sails by the reforms which he advocates.—Perhaps something of this probability or possibility may be seen in a little volume of the "Labour Ideal Series," The Socialist and the City, by Frederick W. Jowett, M.P. (George Allen, is. net). Mr. Jowett does not disavow logical Socialism, but postpones it. Meanwhile ho busies himself with various schemes for improving, as he believes, the condition of the labouring classes. Ho would change the incidence of rates, for instance, in certain respects. But surely the very term " rate " is an anomaly. Mr. Jowett's book, how- ever, is well worth reading. He makes various suggestions which may well be considered. Only it is necessary to repeat that this sort of thing is not Socialism. That really implies the abolition of the family and of marriage. That must come sooner or later, if the theory is to prevail, and thinkers of the school of Mr. Stewart Headlam and Mr. Masterman must take it into account.
Previous page
