THE MAGAZINES.
THE future of the House of Lords is while we write the question of the day. Mr. Atherley-Jones deals with it in a temperate article to which the Nineteenth Century gives the emphasis of the last place. He is not a single-Chamber man. A too perfect party organisation, not yet effectually modified by the growth of groups, results, he thinks, in an absolutist Ministry which can coerce its followers into a policy of which they do not approve. That would hardly be our reading of the history of the present Cabinet. But this may pass; we agree with Mr. Atherley-Jones in maintaining the necessity of a Second Chamber. We part company with him when he
condemns the Referendum. He tells us that if it were established "the country would continually be threatened with and frequently involved in what would be the equivalent of a General Election." No one contemplates the frequent use of this device. As we look back upon the history of the last thirty years few occasions suggest themselves. The Government might have used it in 1893 when the Lords threw out the Home-rule Bill, and last year on the education question. Probably one emphatic pronouncement by the nation in a sense adverse to the Lords would suffice for a long time. On the whole, Mr. Atherley-Jones seems inclined to do nothing. A Second Chamber constructed on approved principles might easily be a more formidable ally of reaction than the present House. That is the perpetual dilemma. Opponents do not want to end it; possibly ending it would flood the remaining Chamber with the dispossessed ; to mend it might make it too strong. —Mr. W. O'Brien contributes the first part of a paper on "The Breakdown in Ireland." In this he deals with what happened under the administration of Mr. Wyndham. It will be more convenient to mention it again when we have the second and concluding part. Meanwhile it is certainly encouraging to see Mr. O'Brien courageously maintaining the attitude of a conciliationist when we remember the impression that he made when he first appeared in Parliament almost a quarter of a century ago. There was not much "conciliation" about him then.—Mr. S. M. Mitra, who writes about "Dis- content in India," has, it is clear, no sympathy with the English doctrinaires or sentimentalists who object to vigorous action by the Indian Executive. He advocates, on the con- trary, a more energetic policy, especially in the repression of the seditious vernacular Press. Our a priori theories of liberty must be greatly modified in practice. The Government's "wide grasp of generalities should keep exact pace with a close mastery of details of Oriental ways." Mr. Mitra is him- self a journalist of many years' experience. Many of the difficulties which he sets forth in his paper are insoluble. The East will still be eternally divided from the West. But he has some excellent advice to give which may help to make a more satisfactory modus vivendi.—Of the other articles in this number, we can mention only Mr. D. C. Lathbury's "High Churchmen and Disestablishment." It is an able plea by one who is a leading spirit in the "Anglican Counter-Reforma- tion"—his own phrase, we should say—for Disestablishment. But he is against immediate action, and for a reason which makes us feel very doubtful, to say the least, about the policy in general. "As we look back over three-quarters of a century we learn to realise how much the Church in this country has profited by the subjection of theological passion to the machinery 'which letteth.' " There are still serious questions which a free Church could settle, but "only by accepting very grave risks." On one point we are less sanguine than Mr. Lathbury. Would the pariehes be served as they are served now ? There is not one village in twenty where there is a resident Nonconformist minister, and it is probable that something of the kind would happen with a disendowed Church. In the United States there are, we have seen it stated, extensive districts where it is exceptional to have religious services.
Lord Willoughby de Broke courageously urges in the National Review "A Plea for an Unreformed House of Lords," though he is not disposed, we take it, to shut the door against all reform. He would give any newly created Peer a choice between an hereditary and a life peerage, and he speaks with respect of the Committee of the House which is sitting under the presidency of Lord Rosebery. He is strongly opposed, however, to any effective modification of the hereditary principle. He is hardly right when he says that it is on the hereditary principle that the "House of Lords, from its incep- tion, has depended for its composition." It must be remem- bered that in early days the non-hereditary Members, the Bishops and mitred Abbots, were relatively far more numerous than the Spiritual Lords of to-day, and that the Barons were Members, not became they were the sons of their fathers, but because they were the strongest men of the time. The Duke or Earl who owned a vast domain and did nothing but eat, drink, and amuse himself would have had but a very short tenure of power. Lord Willoughby de Broke's argument, as a whole, fails to impress us. It is not a little strange to find him claiming credit for the House in passing a measure which be describes as "totally vicious in its fundamental principles."
Such a concession to a popular demand can hardly be put on the credit side.—The politics of the Review are, as usual, to be found in the "Episodes of the Month." Not far from a half of the space is given to an indictment of the Transvaal Loan and General Botha, in which the editor returns to the mare's-nest which he discovered in his June number. He insists that the guarantee loan to the Transvaal was the result of a " corrupt " bargain between the Government and General Botha. We see no evidence whatever for the suggestion. Why General Botha should be supposed to be at heart in favour of Chinese labour passes our comprehension. With the exception of the mineowners, almost every one in South Africa dislikes the use of Chinese labour.—Under the heading of "India" in the concluding summary there is a note- worthy suggestion. If there is any place in the world where the obligation of soldiers' service is free of any imputation of militarism, it is India. Volunteering in that country does not prosper, and it is not difficult to see why. But the railway companies stipulate with their employes that they shall serve in this way, and have in consequence very effective corps. The example might be followed elsewhere. Of course every Englishman would come forward in the case of another great rising, but would commonly have had no training, and might even possess no arms.—Mr. Jesse Collings writes on "The Government's Land Policy." It is a subject on which he has every right to be heard. He pronounces, we see, in favour of ownership againat tenancy. Doubtless ownership has advantages, and certainly attractions. But there are grave difficulties in the way. What if the owner were to sell the holding so acquired as building land, or turn it into a rabbit- warren 9—Mr. J. Holt Schooling more than fulfils the promise of his title, "The Householder's Nightmare." He seems to find some real blots in the Workmen's Compensation Act of 1906, as applying to domestic service. If the exten- sion is to produce a crop of litigation like that which has followed its predecessor, the uninsured householder's outlook is gloomy.
Iii the Contemporary Review Mr. H. W. Massingham writes about "Liberalism and the Lords." He thinks that "the tendency of all modern Governments is to centre in one Chamber," and he pronounces against the Referendum, without, however, as it seems to us, realising what the Referendum is. "Probably," he writes, "there is no electorate more fluent in opinion than our own, and at the same time more unable to concentrate itself on a single question." But that is exactly what the Referendum would do. One question, and one only, would be put to the electorate. Mr. Massing- ham's scheme is to "limit the veto of the House of Lords to a single Parliament." He means, we suppose, the House as constituted at a General Election, not a single Session.— Lord Cardigan in discussing "Time Government and the Land Question" expresses a doubt whether agriculture is really in a condition of distress. But to quote the prices of 1731— wheat 27s., barley 21s., and 3 per cent. Consols £92— and compare them with those now current—wheat 32s., barley 23s., and 21 per cent. Consols 285—is to ignore the differ- ence in the value of money. There is more in the argument that, in view of the great change in the proportions of grass-land to arable, it may be doubted whether there is a deficiency of labour in the rural districts. It is certain that the average wage has been raised by the absence of competition, and to flood the country again with labour might have a disastrous effect. A small holder might be able to work out at a lower figure than the labourer proper.—Mr. H. Morgan-Browne deals with "Australia's Plea for Preference" in a cogently reasoned argument. He asks : "Is it part of the case for Colonial Preference that Australian trade is prosperous or unprosperous 9" Here is Mr. Deakin complaining that it cannot get fair play anywhere except in the United Kingdom, and all the while the Tariff Reformers are crying out : "See how prosperous Australia has become under a Protectionist regime! Let us imitate her example."—Sir John Mac- donell has "A Note on the Hague Conference," in which he advocates the immunity of private property from capture at sea.—Among a variety of interesting non-political articles, we may mention one by Dr. G. Buchanan Gray, Litt.D. He addresses himself to the argument by analogy that if contra- dictions and repetitions are found in the Kollin, which is known to be the work of one author, critics are not entitled to base a proof of diverse authorship upon them when found in the Old
Testament. Now the Koran is confessedly a collection of utterances made over a considerable period to meet varying occasions, and it has also undergone a certain amount of editing. The article merits the careful attention of the Biblical student.
Sir Rowland Blennerhassett in his article in the Fortnightly Review discusses the attitude of Germany towards Holland. Germany, he says, has never forgotten the days of the Empire, of which she considers herself the heir. The idea of the absorption of the Netherlands into the confederation of Germanic States is always present to her statesmen, and gains in strength in proportion to the development of naval policy. The writer of the article notes the statement made by Herr Bebel that he and his friends were ready to support a policy to make Prussia supreme in Germany, and Germany the first Power in the world. It is useless, there- fore, to regard far-reaching ambitious as belonging only to the governing class, for they are national. Sir Rowland Blennerbassett tells us that to counteract the consolidation of German power we must consolidate our Empire, but he has nothing to suggest as a means of bringing this about except the adoption of a tariff.—" Y" considers that there is now a movement both in Belgium and in Holland towards a closer union of the two States for purposes of defence. It is pointed out that although these two countries are reckoned as small States, their combined exports and imports are not far short of those of Germany. Proportionally to population, the trade of Belgium and Holland is greater than that of Great Britain.—Mr. Cloudesley Brereton writes a very interesting article on the agricultural question. He truly says that at present organised agriculture "is one of the most difficult of callings in which a man may rise from the ranks." The central factor of the whole problem is undoubtedly the buildings. Mr. Brereton proposes to take large farms and split them up into smaller holdings, of which the rent would be thirty shillings an acre instead of an original one pound. The increase of ten shillings is to provide the buildings and cover incidental expenses. But would not raising the rent by one-half be a serious handicap to the new farmer P What Mr. Brereton has to say about the success of the Raffeison banks is very interesting. This system of collective honesty has succeeded admirably in Germany, Austria, and Italy, where, although millions have been lent, many banks have never lost anything. A curious point is noted in the attitude of the farmer towards credit. The manufacturer for the development of his business makes the most of his power of borrowing in the open market, and prides himself on his credit. The farmer considers it a disgrace, and goes stealthily to the moneylender only as a last resource. We wonder whether this difference has arisen from the greater uncertainty of farming owing to its dependence upon the weather. A manufacturer at the worst only gets a low price for his goods. A bad season may mean that the farmer has no goods to sell. - In Blackwood Mr. Andrew Lang gives us some "New Light on May Queen of Scots." It must not be supposed that this new light causes a great illumination and makes all former obscurities clear. It is a torch for the expert and minute student. Mr. Lang has found some letters unknown to historians in the British Museum and in the Advocates' Library at Edinburgh. These letters are from Thomas Randolph, and are of importance for the details they give of the negotiations which Elizabeth was carrying on. These negotiations bad for their object the marriage of Mary with Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Incidentally the letters contain curious bits of gossip about one of the Queen's Manes, Mary Fleming.—" The Rear-Guard" is a powerfully drawn picture of the advance of an army through bill country in Northern India. The point of view is that of the rearguard and its commander. We also get a picture of the camp at night, with the prowling Pathans kept at bay by the pickets.—Another very powerful piece of description is "Indomitable." The scene is laid in Mashona- land some years ago. A party of prospectors get separated by the rising of the river they are crossing. Some of them remain on either bank, and the central incident is the terrible fate of the Dutch transport-rider, who will cross the swollen stream in which lurks a crocodile.—Mr. Whibley has made a study of the American millionaire, and of the attitude of the public towards him. In the country of equality the rich man is almost worshipped. At least this is so to judge by the newspapers. Mr. Whibley thinks Mr. Carnegie the least picturesque and most dangerous of his class,—dangerous
because he interferes with the lives . of other people, by the dispersion of his money broadcast for charitable purposes. One of the favourite ways of describing millionaires is to use the language of war. We are told of " battles " and "tre- mendous issues," and of their fighting for causes. Mr. Whibley asks :—
"Is there one of them who is not haunted in hours of depres- sion by the memory of bloody strikes, of honest men squeezed out, and rival works shut down ? In a kind of dread they turn to philanthropy. They fling from their chariots bundles of bank- notes to appease the wolves of justice. Universities grow ignobly rich upon their hush-money. They were accurately described three centuries ago by Robert Burton gouty benefactors, who, when by fraud and rapine they have extorted all their lives, oppressed whole provinces, societies, etc., give something to pious uses, build a satisfactory almshouse, school, or bridge, etc., at their last end, or before perhaps, which is no otherwise than to steal a goose and stick down a feather, rob a thousand to relieve ten."
An article in the Albany Review by Mr. Guy Bowman summarises the conditions of labour in Spain. The Spanish labourer, be says, is much more advanced than is generally
supposed. Although he acquiesces in clerical domination, it is not because he likes it, but because he is not yet capable of shaking it off. According to Mr. Bowman, the aristo- cratic and military classes are also against the priests and their recent allies, the fifty thousand monks and nuns who have come across the Pyrenees from France. Thus, while the upper classes in Spain are trying to get a larger share of power at the expense of the Church, the labourers are struggling to
improve their material condition. That it needs improving is shown by the wages in Spain as compared with other countries. In Andalusia the wages of an agricultural labourer are not 101 a day, and even in the towns of that district are only is. 5Ad. Owing to the high taxation, the cost of living is dearer in Madrid than in Paris, though the rate of wages is not much more than a third of what it is in the latter city. Added to this, in the.mining districts there exists a truck system pro- ductive of great harm, and the miners are obliged to live in houses belonging to the employers which are said to be of the worst possible description. As may be expected, Spain is losing large numbers of her population through emigration, so great is the difficulty of existence. At the same time, we are told of mining companies paying 50 to 70 per cent.— The writer of the editorial notes on "Current Events" is scandalised at Mr. Morley using the word "agitators" with reference to India. Lala Lajpat Rai, we are told, is a Con- stitutional advocate for reform. It is also inplied that Mr. Morley only acted with vigour because he was forced to do so by the officials on the spot. If you set out on the high road to anarchy shouting "Constitutional government ! " it seems you can be sure of followers.—Mr. J. H. Ingram gives a sad account of the way in which Poe succumbed to the temptation of writing biassed criticisms. To secure a favour- able notice of their poems, literary ladies used every artifice of flattery and money. Poe's mother-in-law took the con- tributions towards housekeeping offered, and then saw that the poet did his share. A certain Mrs. Davis was one of the people whose indifferent writings secured praise. A poem of hers is here printed, with Poe's corrections and suggestions of improvements.
Previous page
