SOUTH Flacz ETHICAL SWETT Conway Hall Humanist Centre Red Lion Square, London, WC1R 4RL SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

11C2a

Vol. 80, No. 4 APRIL 1975

CONTENTS

EDITORIAL: ROBIN HOOD'S RETURN? 3

THE SOCIAL ROLE OF MONEY . 4 by James Robertson

THE MALE CHAUVINISM OF D. 14. LAWRENCE. 8 by Hector Hawton

DISCUSSION: ECSTASY 10

FORUM.: POPULATION EXPLOSION 11

FOR THE RECORD . 12 by the General Secretary

BOOK REVIEW: THE UNIQUENESS OF MAN 16 by Dr. A Lovecy

SPECIAL ITEM: SOUTH PLACE, TRUSTS AND CHARITABLE STATUS 17

YOUR VIEWPOINT . 20

SOUTH PLACE NEWS. 22

COMING AT CONWAY HALL 2, 23

Published by SOUTH FLAcz ETHICAL SWETT Conway Hall Humanist Centre Red Lion Square, London, WC1R 4RL SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

OFFICERS: General Secretary: Peter Cadogan Lettings SecretarylHall Manager: Iris Mills Hon. Registrar: Rose Bush Hon. Treasuier: C. E. Barralet Editor, "The Ethical Record": Eric Willoughby Address: Conway Hall Humanist Centre Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL. (Tel: 01-242 8032)

Coming at Conway Hall Sunday, April 6 11.00 am—Sunday meeting: T. F. EVANS on A German Master: Ginner Grass. Soprano solos: Hedone Faulkner 6.00 pm—Bridge practice and Scrabble in the Library 6.30 pm—Concert: Georgian Quartet. Schubert Dmi Op. Posth. (D810), Barry Guy No. 2, Brahms Ami Op. 51 No. 2 Tuesday, April 8 7.00 pm—Discussion. First in series on Scandinavia. Swedish Social Democracy introduced by Eric Willoughby Sunday, April 13 11.00 am—Sunday meeting: HAROLD BLACKHAM on Sir Julian Huxley. Violin and piano: Margot McGibbon and Phyllis Roast 3.00 pm—Forum: The Future of South Place, with Peter Cadogan, George Hutchinson, Dr Albert Lovecy 6.00 pm—Bridge practice and Scrabble 6.30 pm—Concert: Tilford String Trio, Mary Ryan. Mozart A K298 Flute quartet, Mozart Divertimento Ell K563 String trio, Beethoven serenade D Op. 25, flute, violin, viola (Continued on page 23)

CURRENT SPES PUBLICATIONS THE SECULAR RESPONSIBILITY Marghanita Laski 10p THE ALTERNATIVE SOCIETY James Hemming 10p THE BREAKDOWN OF GREAT BRITAIN Leopold Kohr 10p MAN AND THE SHADOW Laurens van der Post 10p WHAT ARE EUROPEANS? G. K. Young, CB, CMG, MI3E 10p THE ORIGINS OF CHRISTIANITY FROM PAGAN AND JEWISH BACKGROUNDS G. A. Wells 20p HUMANITY AND ANIMALITY Edmund Leach 10p THE USES OF PAIN Jonathan Miller 10p 33-p postage for one-7p for two or more THE ETHICAL RECORD Vol. 80, No. 4 APRIL 1975

The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of the Society EDITORIAL Robin Hood's return? IT IS cruelly ironic that as the comparatively rich peoples of the western world and industrial lands clamour for more and more money, the developing countries (with the exception of the oil pro- ducers) are becoming progressively poorer. The peoples who have wealth want more to spend on unnecessary things they could not otherwise afford, and the last thing they think about is giving money to the causes established to help the poor of this world. It is considered obscene by some that the getting and spending of money which forms the "western" way of life not only takes no notice of the starving millions in the world, but indeed contributes to that starvation and poverty by wastefully consuming precious resources. This does not only apply to oil, coal and other heat-producing materials, but to foodstuffs, too. How much uneaten rice does each housewife in England scrape off the plates every week? Of course the old argument about it being impractical to send wasted western food to the starving nations is perfectly valid. The fact that it would only be sending back a lot of what we have taken away from them in the first place is another matter. But a radical, and potentially successful, way to improve the world balance of wealth—for like it or not, that is the lynch-pin of modern life everywhere—has recently been discussed. The idea centres around graduated international taxation, adminis- tered by the United Nations. The rich countries would then be subsidising the poor nations, and a greater equality could ensue throughout the world. A UN spokesman has written of the idea: "An exploration of a broad spectrum of international financial measures for development appears to be called for. Progressive international taxes are certainly one of the most potent measures in the spectrum." Dr Jan. Pronk, the Dutch minister for development co-operation, has written: "I am very much in favour of progressive and obligatory international taxation. . . ." Dr Karan Singh, Indian minister of health, believes: "Certainly the affluent countries should make a larger contribution to the welfare of the poor. . . ." And since the idea started in Sweden, it is right to quote Olof Palme, Sweden's prime minister: ". . . sooner or later international taxation is inevitable". As US senator Charles Percy, Illinois, has pointed out, "This would be taxation without representation". But as someone else once said: "Taxation with representation is no darned good, either." 3 The Social Role of Money BY JAMES ROBERTSON

Mr TALK covers three main topics. First, I shall make some general points about social and economic institutions and about institutional reform. Second, I shall focus in greater detail on the institutions of business, industry and finance, and those parts of government that are concerned with the industrial economy. I shall suggest that a wide ranging programme of reform is necessary, under the headings "socially responsible enterprise", "financially responsible government" and "honest money". Third, I shall say a little about the framework of political debate in which these reforms will take place. I shall conclude by suggesting that the present time should he seen as a turning point in the development of institutions, politics, ideas and personal values—certainly for the western world, and probably for the world as a whole. The challenge, as I see it, is whether this turning point will be a breakdown or a breakthrough. Some people believe that the fabric of modern society is breaking down. But we could be on the brink of a breakthrough to a new post-capitalist and post-socialist era. This will involve institutional changes in politics and public life reflecting similar changes in the personal values and life-styles of iridividual people and in their ideas about the world.

The Need for Institutional Reform We live in a society which is now dominated by large institutions. These have certain characteristics which we need to understand. First, all large organisations have a tendency to malfunction. They tend to be less intelligent, less moral, less forward looking and less civilised than most of the individual people who work in them. From my own experience I would say that this is true, for example, of organisations like the big banks, the Foreign Office, or the Treasury. I am sure it is also true of big business, big trade unions, and other big organisations generally. More specifically, they have a tendency to become self-serving and self-perpetuating. Big business, big trade unions, the civil service, public services like education and health—all these now seem to give top priority to the interests and aspirations of the people who run them. Customers, workers, citizens, students and patients have become the material—the fodder, you might almost say—upon which business tycoons, trade union leaders, politicians and top civil servants, teachers, doctors and administrators in the public service, build their empires and achieve their satisfactions. Ivan Illich is probably the best-known advo- cate of this view in books like "De-schooling Society" and "Medical Nemesis". Even those of us who do not go all the way with Illich will surely agree that we want institutions serving people instead of people serving institutions. Second, it is important to remember that the institutions of our society interlock with one another. At present in Britain, for example, government, industry and the City all tend to blame one another and the trade unions for our failures in the industrial and economic sphere. Changes in one cannot be introduced successfully while the others remain unreformed. A piecemeal approach to London's traffic problems is no good, if all that happens is to shift the traffic jams from Hyde Park Corner to Knightsbridge, Piccadilly and Marble Arch, A piecemeal approach to reforming the institutions of our society makes little headway for the same reason. This interlocking character of institutions explains, at least in part, the failure of leadership from the top in industry, the City and government. The 4 top people are prisoners of the present system. They are organisation men, and they cannot break out of their traditional roles and pigeon holes. This, in turn, is one of the factors that has led to a more general failure of authority throughout the country as a whole. Top people say that Britain is becoming ungovernable. But what has actually happened is that our gov- erning institutions have lost credibility. Inflation is a prime example. We need to consider the social role of money, therefore, in the context of a broader need to transform our economic, social and political institutions into mechanisms of decision and choice that will work openly, fairly and credibly, and be acceptable to most members of society.

The Money System Money should function as a calculus of value, an accounting system, which indicates the entitlements of people (including organisations) to -purchasing power and thus enables us to recognise the claims that each of us may make on society's resources. Using the institutions that operate the monetary and financial system (banks, insurance companies, stockbrokers, and so on), people should be able to trade present for future purchasing power over time as suits them best, and prepare themselves or their success- ors for accident or death. In other words, the monetary and financial system should make it possible for individuals and organisations and society as a whole to channel the resources at their command into the activities of their choice at the time desired. If we visualise the flows of money that arise from buying, selling, investing, borrowing, insuring, paying taxes, receiving taxes, and so on, we can see that these money flows—or cash flows—to and from each individual, to and from each enterprise, and to and from the government, reflect the patterns of their activties in relation to one another and the rest of society. By planning and managing those cash flows successfully, all concerned should be able to plan and manage the complex totality of their activities so that they interact acceptably with one another. The government, by planning and managing its cash flows successfully should be able to carry out its complex range of tasks coherently, in accordance with social and economic priorities demo- cratically laid down. An enterprise, by planning and managing its cash flows successfully should be able to discharge its multiple responsibilities, in accordance with its agreed priorities. An individual, by planning and manag- ing his (or her) cash flows successfully, will be helped to pursue his aims and objectives while meeting his various obligations to other members of society. The money system should, in fact, be a highly responsive system for allo- cating resources and distributing purchasing power, Every society must have such a system. In totalitarian countries it tends to be highly centralised, operating largely by instructions coming down from the top. In market econ- omies it is decentralised, operating at least in theory through a multitude of independent decisions. In the self-governing democracy of the post-capitalist and post-socialist society, where we want to encourage social responsibility and personal enterprise, we shall clearly want the money system to operate fairly, openly and accountably, like the machinery of government itself. We shall want it to reflect the values and honour the due claims of those who use it, whether at the level of society as a whole, at the level of the enter- prise, or at the level of the individual. We shall want it to run uncorrupted by the interests and aims of those responsible for running it; and we shall want the latter to be publicly accountable for the way it works. In "Profit or People?" I have argued that, in order to achieve that happy state of affairs, a redefinition is now needed of the functions, rights and obligations of all the participants in the industrial economy. This will involve a threefold package, of reforms which can be summed up in the 5 phrase "socially responsible enterprise", "financially responsible govern- ment" and an "honest money system". Let me now try to describe what I mean by these terms. . In speaking of "socially responsible enterprise", I mean that the time has come to recognise explicitly that those in charge of large public companies have multiple responsibilities, to serve the interests of employees, investors, customers and the public. The time has come to develop employment law, fair trading law, and the law governing such matters as safety, health, and pollution, together with company law, into a coherent legal framework for business enterprise. Nationalised industries, consumer co-operatives, worker controlled enterprises, and public companies in the so-called private sector— all alike have these multiple responsibilities to discharge, and the relevant laws should be revised so as to make this clear. So far as investors are concerned, removal of the legal fiction that the shareholders of public companies are their owners and that the raison d'etre of public companies is to make profits for them, will—paradoxically—make it easier to give them a fair deal. It will become possible to develop forms of risk investment which will give investors a contractual right to a return on their money that varies according to the performance of the company in question. It will then become an explicit responsibility of company boards to see that in- coming and outgoing cash flows are planned and managed in such a way as to meet the company's obligations to investors, as well as to employees, suppliers and creditors. The "trusteeship" function of top industrialists will become clear once more.

Social Contract By "financially responsible government" I mean to suggest that, once eVery business enterprise has been given legal responsibility to serve the interests of all its participants and has thus been transformed into a decentral- ised instrument of a comprehensive new social contract it will become pos- sible to insist that governments shall manage their financial affairs with a strict sense of financial responsibility. Like individual enterprises, govern- ments can then be required to plan and manage their cash flows—public expenditure, taxation and government borrowing—so as to show openly that they are allocating resources and distributing purchasing power according •to accepted priorities democratically laid down. They can also be required to balance their incoming and outgoing cash flows, like enterprises of all other kinds, because the pressures that have led to the inflationary monetary policies of recent years will have been "earthed" at the level of the enterprise. "Honest money" is, so to speak, the third leg of the tripod. Without it, socially responsible enterprise and financially responsible government will not be able to sustain. themselves. By "honest money" I mean that we should no longer try to run our monetary and financial system on the basis that financial institutions exist to make money for their shareholders, or that individuals go into the City to make money for themselves, or that one of the monetary authorities' main tasks is to enable govern- ments to exploit the system by borroWing cheaply from those who invest in government stocks and national savings. Financial institutions should be required to accept 'explicit responsibility for demonstrating that they serve the public interest, including the interests of their customers, and should welcome new forms of regulation to that end. The Bank of England and the Treasury should open themselves to public and parliamentary scrutiny, and be prepared to demonstrate that they are running the money system straight and fair. This threefold package of reforms will, as I argue in "Profit Or People?", transform the financial system into a scoring system for 6 members of society to use in their dealings with one another, which is valid, trusted and accepted as fair. And that is, as I have said, the true social function of money. This threefold programme of reforms cuts right across the present alignment of British party politics. Socially responsible business enterprise involves the socialisation of companies in a manner usually considered left-wing. Financially responsible government is normally supported by right-wing politicians like Enoch Powell and monetary economist's like Milton Friedman. The idea of an honest money system, in the sense that banks and financial institutions should be required to operate fairly and openly in the public interest, is nearer to socialism than to capitalism. That these ideas cut across the conventional structure of. politics is, in fact,'a source of strength. Our present structure of political debate is old of date. The -two big traditional parties of right and' left have become Committed to centralisation and to the big institutions of business, finance, trade unions and government. It makes very little difference whether we have a Conservative government trying to run the country in close co- operation with big business and big finance, or whether we have a Labour government trying to run it through big government, with more nationali- sation, and in close co-operation with the big trade unions. Neither can meet people's needs and aspirations. That is why there has been a growing backlash against centralisation and giantism in recent years, with the growth of Scottish and Welsh nationalism and a wide variety of local pressure groups, anti-politics, and "alternate" approaches to society's problems. Writers like Schumacher, supporting intermediate technology and the idea that small is beautiful; Ivan Illich, who argues for an "institutional framework which constantly educates to action, participation and self- help"; and Erich Fromm, who holds that "the unfolding and growth of every person should be the aim of all social and political activities"— these and others like them are providing an ideological basis for this alternative approach. Politically, the Liberals and Social Democrats come nearest to it. A programme of business and financial reform on the lines I am suggesting will, I believe, help to provide the institutional framework needed to sustain it. Conclusion We are at a turning point in human history, involving radical changes in our ideas about human society and the world we live-in, in the structure of political conflict and debate, in our social and- economic institutions, and in the values we hold and the lifestyles we follow as individual people. This, I think, is the right way to see our present situation. I am sure it is not just an economic crisis. I am sure that economists cannot help us to solve it by economic measures. I believe that people now have a historic opportunity to take power. In saying this, I am not talking about seizing political power, or even acquiring it through the ballot box. I mean that we should take the kind of power to which Erich Fromm referred when he said, "With his power of reason, man can penetrate the surface of phenomena and understand their essence. With his power of love he can break through the wall that separates one person from another. With his power of imagination he,can visualise things not yet existing." . Some of us, I think, can now visualise a breakthrough to a new kind of human society. Institutional reform will be only one aspect Of this breakthrough. But it will be an important one. And making sure that the money system performs its true social function will be an important aspect of that. (Summary of a lecture given on January 5)

7 The Male Chauvinism of D. H. Lawrence BY HECTOR HAWTON

"THIs is not a question for science, it is a matter for the police" cried an angry protestor when Freud addressed a stormy meeting of doctors in his early days. He had broken the great conspiracy of silence about sex. Later, D. H. Lawrence also defied an age-old taboo which had led sex to be iegarded, in his own words, as "the little dirty secret". His novel, The Rainbow was banned. His poems and drawings were seized by the police. Even after his death the publishers of Lady Chatterley's Lover stood trial at the Old Bailey. Both Freud and Lawrence are now regarded as pioneers in the sexual revolution, but the truth is not quite so simple. They had a streak of Puritanism. Freud was a rationalist but not really a liberal humanist. D. H. Lawrence was neither. He believed in male superiority. He upheld monog- amous marriage because it sanctified the domination of the masculine partner. Admittedly he did not practice what he preached—at least not in any literal sense. He was faithful to Frieda, but he had taken her from her husband and three children. He was furiously jealous of her continual interest in her children. He demanded her total submission. She put up a strong resistance but on the whole he had his way. He was influenced by Freud but he had his own idiosyncratic version of the respective masculine and feminine roles. Freud thought there was sound scientific evidence of female inferiority. The emergence of civilization out of primitive barbarism was due to the growth of a strong super-ego. And the super-ego, or conscience, arises from a boy's fear of castration. For obvious reasons little girls have no such fear, consequently they have a weak super-ego or conscience. Accordingly they lack moral sense as well as a penis. By a different route Lawrence also reaches the conclusion of male super- iority, though he is not so impressed by the achievement of creating civiliza- tion out of barbarism. He feels that too much has been lost in the process. The true roles of man and woman are in danger of being forgotten and even reversed. He would have agreed in principle with Freud's notorious attack on John Stuart Mill's plea for female emancipation : "Law and custom have much to give women that has been withheld from them; but the position of women will surely be what it is: in youth an adored darling and in mature years a loved wife." Male and Female Lawrence would have phrased the last sentence differently. It was the function of the woman to love and the man to be loved. "Man must bravely stand by his own soul, his own responsibility as the creative vanguard of life. And he must also have the courage to go home to his woman and become a perfect answer to her sex call. But he must never confuse these two issues. Primarily and supremely man is always the pioneer of life, adventuring onward into the unknown, alone with his own temer- arious, dauntless soul. Woman for him exists only in the twilight, by the camp fire, when day has departed. Evening and the night are hers." -The tension that results when man and woman confuse their proper roles is the theme of Lawrence's novels. He wrote at a time when the emancipa- tion of women, as it was then called, was at least being taken seriously 8 instead of ridiculed. Ibsen and Shaw had created an image of the "modem woman", and to Lawrence it was an abomination. In Women in Love he continues the story of Ursula and the campaign against the "modern woman" she represents. She is a school teacher and she hoped to get a university degree. Lawrence contrives that she fails the examination and meets Rupert Birken, plainly Lawrence himself, who opens her eyes to the true philos- ophy. "It's the last, perhaps, the highest impulse," he tells her, "to resign your will to the higher being." So she gives up all idea of independence, all foolishness about wanting a career, and becomes a housewife. Lawrence appears in nearly all his novels disguised as a gypsy, an Indian, a groom, a game-keeper. It is a limitation for a novelist to be so absorbed in his own inner conflicts though it provides a penetrating insight into the ambivalence of marital relationships. The backdrop may vary but always there is the battle of the sexes. Always there is the male demand for sub- mission. It is put bluntly in The Fox, a short story: "He did not want her to watch any more, to see any more, to understand any more. He wanted to veil her woman's spirit as Orientals veil a woman's face. He wanted her to commit herself to him, and to put her independent spirit to sleep. He wanted to make her submit, yield, blindly pass away out of her strenuous consciousness and make her just his woman. And then he would have her, and he would have his own life at last." At times Lawrence could look at himself quite objectively. There is a merciless self-portrait in Kangaroo, the Australian novel: "And now he'd got into his head this idea of being Lord and Master, and Harriet's acknowledging him as such. He was to be Lord and Master and she the humble slave. She was to submit to the mystic man and male in him with reverence and even a little awe, like a woman before the altar of the great Hermes." Scornful Acclaim However, although Harriet believed him to be a literary genius she couldn't regard him as a Messiah. "Him, a Lord and Master!" she exclaims scornfully. "Why he was not really lord of his own bread and butter; next year they might both be starving. And he was not even master of himself with his ungovernable furies and his uncritical intimacies with people . . . He was so isolated he was hardly a man at all among men. He had absolutely nothing but her. Among men he was like some unbelievable creature—an emu for example. Like an emu in the streets or in a railway carriage." He was capable of self-mockery but his fantasies were undiminished. They border on the absurd in The Plumed Serpent which is about an in- credible revolutionary movement to bring back the ancient gods of the Aztecs in Mexico. What this would really mean is shown in The Woman Who Rode Away. The bored wife of an American living by a deserted silver mine seeks to escape from it all by riding into the hills. She is taken by some Indians to a remote native village and submits willingly as they prepare her for human sacrifice. Female passivity and male dominance is taken here to the uttermost extreme. As Simone de Beauvoir observes: "Lawrence believes passionately in the supremacy of the male. He rediscovered the traditional burgeois conception that woman should subordinate her existence to that of man. But that is a miserable kind of domination; if the woman is only a passive substance, what the male dominates is nothing. He thinks he is taking something, enriching himself; it is a delusion." We can be grateful to Lawrence for breaking some deep-rooted taboos, but let no one mistake him for a liberal humanist. He was closer to what we now call the counter-culture, but in whatever movement we try to identify him he will always be odd man out. (Summary of a lecture given on February 2) 9 DISCUSSION Ecstasy JOHN WILLMIN, introducing the subject, gave an exacting, if not exact, definition of the meaning of the word ecstasy. He began by indicating what it is not and listed a number of peak experiences that gave grounds for elation, but did not constitute ecstasy. If, for instance, you feel on top of the world, supremely confident and capable, greatly excited and mar- vellously carefree, or singularly at one with other people—all these are significant experiences, but they are not ecstasy. He then indicated the limiting elements of experience that are absent in the context of ecstasy. One loses the sense of the differences between things, just as one loses all sense of lime. Also lost is any sense of a par- ticular location—it does not matter where you are. All sense of worry departs and with that goes any sense of worldliness. You lose all sense of yourself as a separate being. What then is gained? You gain a sense of uniting with all things be- yond all differences. You gain a sense of timelessness—past, present, future are as one. You gain an intense peace—a release from tensions— nothing matters, even death seems irrelevant. There is a sense of contact with .ultimate truth and ultimate reality. As to its more particular characteristics . . . There is a profound sense of deep joy or despair, a conviction beyond all possible doubt. The sub- ject does not only just feel, he knows. There is a feeling of being a 100 per cent alive, vibrating as a person. The experience seems to go be- yond feelings, personality, love, hate and words. There is no divine person at the end, but there is a sense of wonder and awe, of being taken over and absorbed in the great All. There is no sense of fear.

Marghanita's Model John Willmin instanced Marghanita Laski, who in the course of collect- ing material for her book on ecstasy, wrote to 63 friends and 60 of them had had direct personal experiences of the kind of thing she was interested in. Her evidence and that of Alan Watts was supported by a vast literature, some of which John Willmin drew on to provide examples. He .distributed some of his examples to members of the audience and they were read out in turn to considerable effect. •,As to the frequency of ecstatic experiences, some people have them and some don't. Quite commonly it only happens once in a life time, but once is enough. It doesn't last for any particular length of time, but as a general rule it varies between two seconds and half-an-hour. Since in the nature of the experience time seems to be transcended, the merely temporal element is irrelevant. As to when it happens, it is again not possible to generalise. It takes place.suddenly without warning and with or without the presence of other people. From the evidence it seems that the indivdual concerned is usually in a perplexed state, in an accumulative moment of some kind. But it is a moment that cannot be contrived or laid on, at least not in our society. Peter Lumsden, from the audience, remarked that in tribal societies ecstatic states were contrived by ritual incantations and in other instances by the use of hallucinogenic drugs. Mr Willmin continued by saying that it appears that ecstasy was trig- gered by a vast variety of circumstances—natural scenery, trees, flowers, mountains, sunsets, autumn, the sea were typical initial stimuli. Great music, painting and sculpture might induce it. Instances have been identi- fied under the influence of Beethoven, Bach, Verdi and the voice of 10

Kathleen Ferrier. Some people found ecstasy in creative work—drawing, writing, sculpting and composing, while others found it in religious ex- perience. The final category of triggering involved being in love, writing to a loved one or first holding one's baby. As always at South Place, when personal and psychological problems are considered, the interest was intense. At one point the Chairman sug- gested a show of hands to indicate what proportion of people present might have had ecstastic experience, but it was obviously a very sensi- tive and personal area and in the event the suggestion was not taken up. P.C. (Report of a discussion on December 10)

FORUM Population Explosion

COLIN HINES is the founder and secretary of the Population Stabilization Ltd., a voluntary research organisation started some three years ago and connected with Friends of the Earth. Mr Hines pointed out that the world population today is 3,900 m. and was expected to rise to 6,500 m. by the year 2000. In view of the difficulty in grasping these figures he translated them into terms of rate change. In 1970 500,000 people lost their lives in the Pakistan cyclone, but the number was made up in three-and-a-half weeks and the world as a whole made it up in two-and-a-half days—such is the rate of the population increase. In 1946 DDT virually wiped out malaria in Ceylon and the death rate fell by one-third in one year and this phenomenon, the fall in death rate, rather than the rise in the birthrate was at the bottom of the problem. In Europe and North America in the 19th century it was the fall in deathrate that led to the population explosion. It then levelled off through emigration and also because people, attaining the educational level and social standards of the industrialised West, tended not to have the large families common in peasant situations where the need for sons to work the land makes for large families. Mr Hines' case was summed up in the slogan "Stop at Two" and is based on the proposition that people can be persuaded to do things differently provided there is an intelligent awareness of the social conditions involved. He told some amusing stories about mistakes that had been made. In India, for instance, 20 years ago, they tried the rhythm method of birth control, but this proved to be a complex operation among those people who could not read or write. "Experts" were flown in from the USA and they gave the women strings of red and green beads. They had to move one bead a night—green for go, red for stop—but the women thought that the colour had some magical properties and hurriedly got through all the red beads in one night and were back on the permissive green the very next day Result—total failure! There has been more success in China, where dramatic changes followed the 1949 revolution; starvation has ended, education made extensive strides, women made equal and the old are cared for; a new profession of para- medicals has begun—men and women with basic medical training to handle elementary problems. Contraceptives and abortion are available, and the pressure to conform is immense. The population growth continues, but has been slowed down. The trouble in places like India is that the family will aim at having six children in order to be assured of a single surviving son. This means that the II idea of contraceptives only registers in the context of social progress and rising standards. In Mr Hines' view our own country is overpopulated. England and Wales have the third greatest density of population in the world. 1,600 people die every day, but 2,400 babies are born. In 1969/71 the "bulge" babies of 1946/47 got married. The sudden arrival of this generation on the adult scene is fundamental to the housing shortage. The population has grown by 4 million since the end of the war and there are higher expectations all round. For centuries we have had cheap food from the Empire and had not thought too seriously about fending for ourselves. As things stand at the moment we can feed 26 m. out of 55 m. ourselves. We could feed 40 m. on subsistence level. Are we going to eat less each year or pay more? Is there going to be sufficient food for us to buy? Competition for food and reserves is likely to become acute. People are hinging their hopes on North Sea Oil with its delivery beginning in 1979, but how long will it last? We can expect North Sea Oil to fall off badly after four years, so all we can look forward to is a temporary respite. At present we are feeding one third of our grain to animals. There is a sound case for eating less meat, for growing more for our own consumption and being more self-sufficient. As to the basic needs Mr Hines took the view that what was required was above all an improvement in the status of women and effective control over our own fertility. Birth control was not getting across to young people— six out of ten girls under 20 years of age were unmarried when first pregnant and one out of three marriages were of the shot-gun order. There was still a great deal of family pressure to have children. Our ethos laid it down that there was something wrong with a childless couple. There was also a widespread assumption that the only-child situation was a bad one, but the evidence suggested the contrary. Single children get the greatest possible attention. His own view was that it would be a good thing if the number of children per family were to go down from 22 to 1.6. (Report of a Forum held on November 10)

For the Record BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY

Assault in the Library WHEN. THERE is no precedent for a thing there is no expecting it. Years ago when we were showing the film "Growing Up", the Festival of Light mounted a counter-demo outside and came in to assail the film but there was no serious trouble. They made their protest in a civilised way, they were accorded the same right to express an opinion as anyone else and our Forum passed off without incident. But this time it was different. I had better start at the beginning. Some time ago the National Council of Civil Liberties were holding a special conference in our Large Hall and I went along on behalf of the Society. We are affiliated to the NCCL. I met a number of people I knew and among them was Neil Collins, a social worker and a long-time activist in the old peace movement. We got talking and in the course of the conver- 12 sation he mentioned a film about the Middle East made by the Middle East Research and Action Group or its friends putting a non-aligned point of view (i.e. not committed to the policies of either the governments of Israel or the Arab states) and wondered whether we would like to show it. Forums happen in this way. My mandate is to take up controversial issues at short notice. It is a good formula and it gets interesting results. We hadn't had a session on the Middle East for a couple of years and I knew Neil well enough to put some trust in his judgement so I said "Fine, we'll do that". A spokesman would come with the film to take part in the discussion. The Forum took place on Sunday February 23. Quarter of an hour before we began a lot of new people turned up. They hung about in the vestibule, on the staircase, at the door and in the Square itself, whispering to each other. I didn't like it and said to Charlie Gray, the Assistant Caretaker, "There's a lot of rather strange people about. Will you keep an eye on them?" He did, When the Forum began at 3 pm the Library was packed with nearly 100 people and they were still coming in. Charles Edridge and Bob Haywood, of the BHA Film Unit, were there with their projector to show the film, and Ud Davis, one of the directors of the film, had come to talk about it afterwards. He is an Israeli who has been closely associated with Peace News for many years and who takes the non-aligned position. About half the audience were familiar faces, the other half was of total strangers but it was clear thcy knew each other and that most of them had come as an organised group. We had the usual form in mind, to show the film first, give Uri Davis a few minutes to introduce himself and make a few comments, then questions and discussion.

Reversal Request But it was not to be as simple as that! No sooner had I got to my feet to start the meeting when one of the newcomers tried to demand that we have the discussion first. I pointed out that we could hardly have the discussion until we had seen the thing we were supposed to be discuss- ing—and the film started to roll. For about ten minutes all went well. Some of the scenes from Israel involved singing and members of the audience knew the songs, joined in the singing and clapped hands in rhythm with the music. The place was blacked out and I was sitting in the dark beside.the screen. Suddenly there was a soft thud and an egg thrown by a woman at the back hit the scfeen. Others followed. A group of men then got to their feet and rushed the projectionists and the projector. Charles Edridge, with fantastic presence of mind, not only grabbed the projector as he fell, switching it off at the same time, but fell in such a way that damaged himself but not the projector. He fell backwards over one of our steel framed chairs and the frame got him, with his own full weight, right in the back. He was in great pain and thought he had broken a rib. Table and chairs went flying, Bob Haywood was under attack and I went to his defence. The thugs thought they had done their dirty work effectively and wanted to get away in a hurry before the law caught up with them. One of them had taken the projector's plug out of the wall socket out on the landing and was pulling it. The cable was under my feet and I picked it up. There was a tug-o-war and the wire parted. Out on the landing about six of them were beating up one of our young Jewish members, Steve St Clair, who also had resisted their vicious assault. He was bleeding from a cut below his eye. They seemed to leave off when I turned up. Then there was a rending crash and one of them on his way downstairs had deliberately pulled Voltaire's marble bust off the window sill so that it 13 smashed to pieces on the stone staircase. (There is no question of any "accident"—the bust was right out of the way of passers-by, high up, and very diffcult to move because of its great weight.) Meanwhile Charlie Gray had made for the telephone to call the police and they had advanced on him menacingly. He abandoned the phone and took a short cut out the back entrance to the Police Station only 100 yards away. Three policemen arrived at the double, but the vandals had fled. Despite considerable pain and shock Charles Edridge, with Bob, went back to work on the projector, mended the wire and we saw the whole film. So the intruders failed. It appears that there can be no such thing as an unbiased film on the Middle East. It seemed to me (as a simple soul in this particular matter) that it was an acceptable film in that it put the case for both the under- dog communities in Israel, the displaced Palestinians and the Oriental Jews, and it led to a fierce discussion. No one, but no one, is likely to put anything over on a South Place audience and the film came under very heavy fire. We are not a political society and we were not required to make any collective judgement. For my own part I suspend judgement in any matter where I don't think I know enough—as in this case. But there is no suspending of judgement over the viciousness, the cowardliness and the terroristic tactics of the intruders. They were a disgrace to the Zionism they claim to defend. The Jewish Chronicle, in its coverage of the incident, identified them as members of Herut which is apparently an extreme right wing Zionist sect with a very unsavoury reputation. The matter is in the hands of the police. There have been a number of sympathetic and helpful telephone calls. There is now, in consequence of our Forum, an awakening in various quarters that there is another danger in our midst. I rather think that the Herut petty terrorists will not find it so easy in future to trample, or to try to trample, on the freedom of enquiry. They certainly failed at Conway Hall.

Ourselves in April Under pressure over space, I think our April programme speaks for itself. On the 13th we shall have our annual opportunity to speak our minds about ourselves as a Society and, hopefully, come up with one or two new ideas. Richard Gardner. and Magenta Wise will be making a dramatic presentation of their case on human archetypes. So in our Forums in April we shall be having a bit of a break with the highly controversial Forums in the last two months on the Common Market, Ireland and the English Conscience, the Middle East and Homosexuality! Our Editor, Eric Willoughby, who works for the Swedish press and knows Sweden very well, will introduce the Tuesday series on Scandinavia. Tor Neumann is the Press Attache of the Norwegian Embassy and Harry Agerbak and Kristofer Grasbeck are the Press and Cultural Attaches of the Danish and Finnish Embassies. So we can expect a first class platform.

Lionel Tertis Frank Hawkins writes: At the South Place Sunday Concert on March 2 (which was the one given annually in aid of the Musicians' Benevolent Fund) Alvar Lidell spoke on behalf of the Fund and drew attention to the fact that there were a few copies still available of Lionel Tertis's book "My Viola and 1", the royalties of which go to the Fund. Lionel Tertis had dicd a week or so earlier at the age of 98 and his life's work of enhancing the status and repertoire of the viola have been fully chronicled in numerous tributes. We should like to pay our tribute to one who must have been 14 the last surviving musician whose first appearance at the South Place Sunday Concerts was in the last century, in fact in the 1898-99 season. He attended the first concert when they re-started after the 1939-45 war and his interest in the viola never flagged—the book mentioned above was completed when he was 96.

AROUND THE SOCIETY At the time of writing Rose Bush is still in hospital and very poorly. She had an operation for appendicitis the day after the Annual Dinner (at which she was present!), there were complications and a second opration. Lots of people have been to see her. Rose is the very embodi- ment of South Place at its best and, at the age of 76, puts in the work of several ordinary mortals years her junior. She knows how much we all wish her well and soon. Fred Kissen has rung me to correct a mistake in his article for which I must take responsibility. In the second paragraph on page 16 the words "Papal Canon" should read "Pali Canon" the sacred text of Buddhism. It seems that writers and historians (not just the BBC!) are discover- ing the history of South Place. There is a new biography of Robert Browning in the bookshops. It is full of stories about Sarah, Eliza and Fox. Then Professor Welland, the Professor of American Literature in Manchester University, called in to see me. He is working on a study of Conway as a significant Anglo-American literary figure. He tells me, for example, that Conway was Mark Twain's agent in this country. When Professor Welland's current research is more advanced he will come to lecture to us about Conway. The Radio Times did, in the event, make amends for that part of its publicity that we took exception to. A letter from me was published in full and Neil Lyndon, the journalist in question, said all kind of nice things that seemed to add up to saying sorry. There was something to be said for being first in the new Open Door series! None of the subsequent programmes have been honoured with anything like the number of pictures and column inches that we got. The exhibition of paintings on the stairs and in the corridor are by Victor Rose (whose big painting on the landing is now a permanent feature of Conway Hall, given to the Society by Victor). He expects that his art teacher and friend John Mansbridge will exhibit with him in the Small Hall and that we look forward to. Jim Faure Walker has success- fully negotiated a grant from the London Arts Council to help with publicity, transport and other expenses of exhibitions. This is very much appreciated. With the Special General Meeting on Wednesday April 16 at 6.30 (over our legal case) and the AGM on Wednesday May 28 at the same time we have some extra pressure on. Come if you possibly can. We are essentially a face-to-face society. That is one main reason for our compara- tive success. Our Tuesday Discussions and our Forums will end at the end of May for the current Society year. This is normal practice (although we experi- mented with May Forums last year). The General Committee has decided, however, that if enough members would like some informal discussions on June Tuesdays, i.e. no visiting speaker and myself not in the chair—then fine. Will those interested contact me and I will at least help to arrange things, and see that proper notice goes in the next Record. 15 ID The six-week course of study tutored by Peter Cronin on The Religious Significance of Agnosticism and organised jointly with the Extra Mural Department of the University, will start on Monday April 7. The time will be f rom 6.30 to 8.30 pm and the fee £1. A number of people have already registered. If you are interested will you let me know? We shall meet in the Library. PETER CADOGAN

BOOK REVIEW

The Uniqueness of Man by John Lewis (Lawrence and Wisher°, £3.50 hardback, £1.90 paperback. "A WIDELY held view of evolution sees it as nature's way to create excel- lence. . . . Among men themselves the same principle is held to be in operation, and in the struggle between individuals (and nations) once again the fittest survives and the race improves." "Something very like this theory underlies the revival of Social Darwinism in our day. . . . We may regret human aggression, but we cannot help it and it is ineradicable. It is established , . . in our genes by a million years of selection. . . . What are a few hundred years of education, compared with that?" Taking these sentences from the middle of this wide-ranging book, we know very well what message they bring, namely, that it ain't necessarily so! Crudely stated, that is the theme Dr Lewis develops in these twelve chapters of concise exposition and lively argument. Argument there has to be, in a work directed to clearing away some of those misconceptions which have sadly sapped our confidence and weakened our will to act collectively against the man-made ills and miseries we suffer, especially in "advanced" societies! What kind of ethics shall we live by, if people are persuaded they are only educated apes? What prospect of correcting such fallacies, if science is made to appear a mere appendage or helpmate of "creative" science- fiction? Already in these questions the uniqueness of man is seen, firstly in the matter of language; lacking in that, the ape has no concern with ethics, or science either. How plausibly these differences could be dealt with if only we could allow man a soul again. I don't mean a ghostly component, but merely a functional one, a regulator and index of our ethical conduct, nothing immortal or other-worldly. That, however, would be a bit too much for the humanist, and not nearly enough for the faithful. What is the alterna- tive? Simply our accumulated knowledge of man's origin and develop- ment, in comparison with other animal species. By making a rational understanding of humanity available to all, human discord may fade and cease. This is a goal to strive towards, and Dr Lewis contributes notably to that purpose. His opening chapters bring out the salient information on man's ancestry and structure, in the context of the origins and evolution of living things generally, during the long geological ages. Using this basis, the way man behaves as a social animal is then shown to differ quite radically from the myths of naked apery. Tbis distinction has an important application in knowing what questions are relevant, and not only what answers are true. In practical terms, the social predicaments of mankind owe only a little to our variations in physical make-up as blacks/whites, males/females, etc., and not much to truly instinctive behaviour (in contrast to behaviour we acquire socially). What genetical evolution has brought us is more 16 evenly shared (more randomly, if you like); it is a remarkable capacity for thinking which we express in language, our chief means of learning, recording and passing-on knowledge. It is remarkably useful too in sharing tasks, making equipment, arguing and agreeing. Because of this, our actions are not governed by inherited stereotypes but almost wholly by our personal life-experiences (which may, of course, be directed to stereotyping, e.g. by the will or desire of others). In a word, our notable inheritance is versatility, not uniformity. Contrasting with the slow pace of genetic adaptation whereby species become suited to physical environments, the social adaptation of man to the changes he himself creates, in culture, is far more rapid. By nurturing particular technical skills, the culture is reflected in physical environment, too. In these ways, a distinct process of cultural or social evolution, arising directly from man's social needs (dependence-relationships) and his exceptional mental powers even in primitive conditions, already came to be the principal determinant of human evolution some tens of millennia ago. Here is a process which vitally concerns us today; it is both the source of man's unique pre-eminence among living creatures (for they cannot debate and decide to act in unison) and the one potential instrument of our own salvation in the future (for we can so decide). "Human nature is not the nature of the individual man, for man conceived in isolation is a pure abstraction. Human nature is essentially that of social man, a man owing lus very life, his gifts, the possibilities of his personal fulfil- ment to his membership of the family of man." In a book of this quality, it is a pity there are so many textual slips (my list to the author was more than 20). Admittedly, too, the unity of structure is not very definite, so there are some repetitions. Seeing that these effects are incidental to an author with all the material at his finger-tips, and an enviable style and vigour, my unstinted praise goes to Dr Lewis for tackling this noble task in his eighties, on a plan of remark- able breadth within a compass of 200 pages. Cogent and lucid to serve the general reader, this book will earn thoughtful re-readings for the light it sheds on serious contemporary anxieties. A greater concern for society as such can only come with a reciprocal growth of social concern for the individual, as the above quota- tion implies. Once we thoroughly understand that authority must base itself on consent, and therefore on effective service to the many whose true consent is indispensable for effective authority, then we can hope to eliminate the whole basis of social militancy, which is a minority leader- ship within a majority dissatisfaction. Conflict is not, co-operation is, the sign of a good society. "This is not at all the good of society as an entity—there is no entity beyond the individual; the common good is that which essentially flows back to the persons of each of its members." DR A. L. LONTECY

South Place, Trusts and Charitable Status THE SUBSTANCEof our problem concerns our charitable status and our Trust Deeds, especially the Trust Deed of 1825 (in respect of the Chapel in South Place opened the preceding year). There were . then amending deeds in 1907 and 1930. Part of the original deed specifying aims and 17 objects identified the Chapel "as a place for the public worship of one God even the Father and for instruction in the Christian religion by the said Society at such times according to such forms and under such regula- tions as are now adopted and shall from time to time be adopted by the said Society". During the nineteenth century the ideas of the Society so evolved that in 1896 thc Rules (but not the Trust Deed) were amended as follows: "The object of the Society is the cultivation of a rational religious senti- ment, the study of ethics, principles and the promotion of human welfare, in harmony with advancing knowledge."

. Objects Amendment In 1907, there was an amending deed specifying "the objects of tlie Society as defined by the Rules and Regulations for the time being of the Society", and in 1930 another deed defining the objects as we have known them ever since: "the study and dissemination of ethical principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment". In the course of negotiations over our charitable status our case came to the notice of Counsel to the Treasury Solicitor, Mr Browne Wilkinson. He took the view that the amending deeds of 1907 and 1930 were ineffec- tive since they did not have the sanction of the Court and that, further, the Society was in breach of its 1825 trusts. We have always made it clear that we were unaware of any ineffective- ness at the time. The amendments were then considered to be directly relevant to the central purpose in mind, namely evolution by constitutional means and with legal approval. If it is said now that the amendments were ineffective for the purpose, it seems evident that SPES (Trustees) were unaware that this might be so at the time; otherwise further steps would have been taken as the parties obviously desired to comply with the requirements of the law. Our deliberations have shown that the situation was not precisely as they saw it, nor indeed as Browne-Wilkinson later represented it. Based upon the constitutional freedom of religion there is an undeniable right of a congregation to question and to modify their own tenets, whether or not this entails any change in the forms of religious observance. The exercise of this right throughout history, step by step, had brought this congregation to believe sincerely that man's religious motivation comes from within mankind, and to regard theistic statements therefore as symbolic representations of man's nobler potentialities rather than as factual accounts of one indispensible source of all moral welfare.

Within Law We cannot undertake to prove before a Court that such a belief is ultimately true; but we are satisfied that it is not unlawful. Assuming that English law acknowledges the existence of religious beliefs and the freedom of religion enjoyed by non-theistic congregations, e.g. Buddhists, as well as the theistic ones, then it must be lawful for a congregation to evolve its beliefs from the one category to the other. As a consequence of the outlook arrived at in this way, the religious observance for which the South Place congregation continued to meet cannot be classified as "worship" unless "worship" is interpreted as in the recent Durham Report: "It is our view that an act of worship cannot be solely defined as .a religious ritual whereby believers respond to a God in whom they believe. This is to adopt too restrictive a definition and one that fails to take account of worship's diverse origins and the diversity of human reactions. 18 An act of worship has in practice many -facets and evokes various levels of response; it does not lend itself to narrow, rigid or exclusive definition." The Durham Report: The Fourth R (on Religious Education) Made to the Church Assembly The stated objective "cultivation of a rational religious sentiment" is no more and no less than an attempt to describe the Society's observance, based on believing that human nature includes a factor termed religious sentiment which is fully compatible with reason. Accordingly, the attempts made in 1907 and 1930 to define in specific terms the altered form of the religious observance developed within the Society were concerned with a more modern interpretation of the Trust wording, not a departure from its fundamental religious purpose. It is apparent that other congregations have achieved similar evolu- tionary changes without objection being raised, and the trend is likely to continue. The opinion given by Browne-Wilkinson derives solely from his premise that "in the course of time the character of the Society slowly changed . . ." whereas it was the character (or interpretation) of religious beliefs which was actually changing, outside as well as within our Society. And he says that "the Trusts of the Deed of 1825 did not keep pace, etc. . . ." which is a truism; but we must ask that this document be interpreted more freely, in accordance with the broader views which have now gained ground everywhere, and which the law can properly take into account. We note two "legal results" specified by Browne-Wilkinson: "The main objects of the Deed of 1825 were charitable." "The Society never had and has not now the power to vary these main objects." We point out that the 1825 Trust Deed specifies that the profession of the Society shall be "according to such forms and under such regulations as are now adopted or shall be adopted by the said Society". Mr W. J. Fox, the Minister of the Society, said in 1842 that the confession of faith on which he became minister in 1817 was: "I believe in the duty of free inquiry and in the right of religious liberty" and that that declaration was publicly recognised as the basis of our union. Nevertheless we note the view of Mr Browne-Wilkinson endorsed by other legal opinion that we did not have the power to vary the objects as such. Acting on the best legal opinion available at the time (in 1907 and 1930) we were advised that we had such power and acted throughout in absolute good faith. If it be true, however, that what we did was ultra vires we can only accept that the original objects do still stand and adhere to them, and this we do. What has happened in our Society as in religious circles elsewhere is that the meanings of religious terms have significantly changed—this is plain in the discourses of Fox and Conway themselves, who, fully in the tradition of South Place, and embodying it at its best with the full support of the congregation, continually redefined the Society's religious position in the light of the process of enquiry to which the Society was committed. Fox, in his main work "On Religious Ideas" (1849) made this very clear. He saw God as the centre of "religion of humanity" and Conway, following him, as the centre of "natural religion". He also used the expression "general religion". The Society consistently maintained its religious character in substan- tially the way it was defined by its two principal ministers, Fox and Conway. That the same process has taken place in other religious bodies, and among the best known and responsible theologians of this and other countries,- is apparent from the surveys of their comparable opinions. - As a consequence of the raising -of this issue we have spent several 19 years in an exacting examination of our own history as a Society and of our present identity. We are committed to the "central importance of a religious faith" (in 1930 we used the word "sentiment"). Fox and Conway unambiguously used the word "faith" to signify their religious adherence to experimental standards of truth, beauty, goodness and love, and to this we firmly accede today. We conduct the life of the Society in essentially the same way as in Conway's day—with Sunday meetings, discussions, forums, music, socials, outings of various kinds (e.g. theatre visits, rambles) as the life of a congregation. The feeling of "belonging" is central, too, to our religious tradition. Like any other religious body we conduct weddings and funerals. We republish our statement of aims in an expanded form on the back of our monthly programme. It says, inter alia, that we seek "to find the answer to man's age-old quest for ultimate human values and to inculcate them in harmonious social relationships". In our view we are true to the aims and objects of the Society as originally declared and the context of enquiry in which they are set. We therefore accept our original Trusts in this context of enquiry and will base our future actions and attitudes upon that position. Note: This document was prepared by the Legal Sub-Committee and approved by the General Committee as a brief for our lawyers in February 1973. The first four paragraphs have been added as a suitable introduc- tion, Background documents sent with it (a) Conway, Fox and Religious Ideas at South Place and (b) On the Wider Development of Religious Ideas are available on request.

Your Viewpoint Peace and Democracy I was interested in your Editorial in the February issue of the Ethical Record. I quote from this, "the demise of the peace movement in Britain is especially lamentable". I was reading E. W. Martin's book "The ' Tyranny of the Majority" and came across this statement by Dr Reinhold Kiebuhr—"the middle classes came into their own when they added the power of suffrage to their economic prosperity". He also stated "bourgeois civilisation reached its peak of development in the nineteenth century". He also wrote "that this civilisation is in grave peril, if not actually in rigor mortis in the twentieth century", and gave a serious warning that democracy, insofar as it is a middle-class ideology, also faces its doom. I think this was much in tempo with your Editorial. Democracy is failing because it makes too much of individual rights and not enough of responsibility toward the community as a whole. We hear very little of minor peace movements today such as the Peace Pledge Union, War Resisters International or CND. Are these being repressed? For as John Stuart Mill once wrote, "The State and the image of the State reflected in human groups, was in fact, the potential tyrant". J. Amos Freedom of Speech Ray and Albert Lovecy want to deny the National Front the freedom of hiring our halls because they don't agree with the ethical principles of this political party. I suppose their objections are, at least in theory, based on the fact that the National Front opposes further immigration into England and advocates that nationals of other countries be sent back to -their own 20 countries. Mr. Cook puts forward an argument that this does not contra- vene the right of freedom of assembly because he is sure that the N.F. can find other halls somewhere else. Please allow me to disagree with the ethical principles of these gentle- men. There is always a reason to be found why we disagree with one person or another, but this does not give us the right to deny him or them the right of freedom of speech or freedom of assembly. Being an immi- grant myself I don't want to get involved in an argument as to whether the British people have a right to reserve this island for their own off- spring or not, but it seems to me that since everyone else does the same, and since the available space on this overcrowded planet is very limited indeed, it is at least debatable. More important to me is the fact that in our society we seem to have people who completely deny the right of other people to assemble and speak their mind. The National Front has repeatedly asked for their oppon- ents to come forward and meet them in open debate. Surely it is better to air our differences in fair debate than to disallow freedom of speech and/or assembly. PHILIP BUTT1NGER London SW17

O The letter from Victor Rose in the February issue is very persuasive, but it could mislead some members about facts. We gave our votes on RIly 3, 1974, to prevent hirings linked to marches. Only those who give up this liberty ofl the premises are now allowed access to free speech on the premises. That decision has been taken, and the fact in itself denies that freedom of speech and assembly still obtain at Conway Hall. To me, it seems simple logic: What is the freedom of assembly for hirers who are denied the right to an orderly, legal procession? What is the freedom of speech and assembly if the one right is granted only at the expense of the other? Realistically, our whole Committee agreed to override J. S. Mill's opinion by this restriction, which is more severe than the law. Doubtless some will say we were wrong. I did not think so then, nor do I now, but that is not the point. Faced with ugly reality we did not rely on other people's intelligence and commonsense, nor rest on Mill's principle. We are not bound by it, and in fairness to Victor I note he does not say we are. So, when rooms are let to a racialist body, it is by consent of the Committee majority; and an AGM is coming up. DR A. L. LOVECY London E4

O While I found much of interest in the February "Your Viewpoint" on the subject of lettings policy, may I say, as one who was privileged to serve as Hon. Treasurer of the Society for a short while, that the whole debate circles around the age old problem of business versus principle. For example, to quote the General Secretary: "Hirers are entirely free to conduct their own meetings in the way they want, open meetings, closed committees, etc. It is not for us to interfere." This can only mean that ethical principles must not interfere with business! Thus in this respect, the framers of our present rules, wittingly or unwittingly, clearly came down 100 per cent on the side of expediency. This is in fact the crunch: does our Society exclude ALL hirers who do not subscribe to our ethics, thereby almost certainly necessitating a large increase in the members' subscriptions (at a guess, at least fourfold) to replace loss of income? Or, being only ordinary mortals, do we compro- mise with principle for the sake of expediency? 21 When the Society gets down to debating this issue, I only hope that when the inevitable compromise is decided upon we shall recognise it as such. St Andrews, Malta JOHN W. BLUNDELL The General Secretary replies: The freedom of enquiry to which we sub- scribe is an ethical principle. It is not a question of expediency. The 17 clauses of the contracts signed by our hirers quite rightly refer to the nature of the contract and to hirers' conduct while on our premises. This is right and proper. South Place is a defender of free speech, not an inquisitor !—P.C.

South Place News New Members The list of new members for this month will, of necessity, be held over till next month. Obituary It is with very deep regret that we record the death of Prof Hyman Levy, a regular lecturer at South Place, and one of the most prominent names in British Humanism. A full obituary will be published in next month's Record, and members are invited to send short personal tributes. Theatre Party A theatre group is being arranged by Connie Davis (tel. 722 6139) to • see the 5 pm matinee of Emlyn Williams' Night Must Fall at the Shaw Theatre, Euston Road. The date has been arranged for April 26, tickets 80p (50p pensioners and students). Bridge Drive This will take place on April 17, at 6.30 pm New members welcome, light refreshments served. Ramble The April ramble, "Through Hampstead and on the Heath", takes place on the 12th. Rendezvous at 2.15 pm, outside Classic Cinema, South End Green bus terminus, Hampstead. Bus routes 24, 46 and CI I. Tea at Kenwood House cafeteria. John Brown will, lead party back to starting point. Distance, five miles. Sunday Social The April Sunday Social, on the 20th, will welcome Eleanor Lane, neice •of Rose Bush. She will talk on India and Pakistan and show slides. The social starts at 3 pm, and tea (10p) will served at 4.30. Country Dancing Saturday April 19 in the Library, 3-6 pm, jointly with Progressive League. New members and beginners welcome. Special General Meeting-7.00 pm, Wednesday April 16—The Library After some nine years of negotiation over charitable status and matters arising therefrom we are at last in a position to put the whole case before our members and ask their authority for proceeding to action in the High Court. The documentation is enclosed with this issue of the Ethical Record and the matter is also covered by the article in this same issue. 22 Annual General Meeting-7.00 pm, Wednesday, May 28—The Library Resolutions for the AGM have to be in the hands of the General Secretary by mid-day, Thursday April 17. The last date for nominations to the General Committee is Sunday April 27. In view of the usual annual difficulty over the printing schedule it will be appreciated if the nomina- tions can be sent in as early as possible. Nomination forms are obtainable from the office.

THE HUMANIST COUNSELLING SERVICE

Concern Themselves with Your Personal Problems ...... Whatever they are

Write or phone in Confidence 13 Prince of Wales Terrace, London W8 5PG Telephone: 01-937 2341

(Continued from page 2) Tuesday, April 15

7.00 pm— Discussion. Aspects of Norway introduced by Tor Neumann Wednesday, April 16 7.00 pm— Special General Meeting —see South Place News Thursday, April 17

6.30 pm— BridgeDrive Saturday, April 19

3- 6 pm— Country Dancing Sunday, April 20 11.00 am— Sunday meeting: RICHARD CLEMENTS, OBE, on Humanism and the Art of Biography. Soprano solos: Jean Adams 3.00 pm—Sunday social

6.00 pm— Bridge practice and Scrabble 6.30pm—Concert: Haffner String Quartet. Mendelssohn Op. 81, Walton Ami, Haydn F Op. 77, No. 2 Tuesday, April 22

7.00 pm— Discussion. Problems of the Fairy-tale Country—Denmark introduced by Harry Agerbak Sunday, April 27

11.00 am— Sunday meeting: W. H. LIDDELL on the Englishness of England

3.00 pm— Forum: Twelve Human Archetypes or States of Conscious- ness with Richard Gardner and Magenta Wise 6.00 pm— Bridge practice and Scrabble 6.30 pm—Concert: Lindsay String Quartet, Janet Hilton. Schubert Bfl Op. 168 (0112), Tippett No. 1, Mozart clarinet quintet Tuesday, April 29 7.00 pm— Discussion. Finland, Small Country in a Hard World with Kristofer Grasbeck 23 South Place Ethical Society FOUNDED in 1793, the Society is a progressive movement which today advocates an ethical humanism, the study and dissemination of ethical principles based on humanism, and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment free from all theological dogma. We invite to membership all those who reject supernatural creeds and find themselves in sympathy with our views. At Conway Hall there are opportunities for participation in many kinds of cultural activities, including discussions, lectures, concerts, dances, rambles and socials. A comprehensive reference and lending library is available, and all Members and Associates receive the Society's journal, The Ethical Record, free. The Sunday Evening Chamber Music Concerts founded in 1887 have achieved international renown. Services available to members include Naming Ceremony of Welcome to Children, the Solemnisation of Marriage, and Memorial and Funeral Services. The Story of South Place, by S, IC Ratcliffe, is a history of the Society and its interesting development within liberal thought Minimum subscriptions are: Members, £1 pa.; Life Members, £21 (Life membership is available only to members of at least one year's standing). It is of help to the Society's officers if members pay their subscriptions by Bankers' Order, and it is of further financial benefit to the Society if Deeds of Covenant are entered into. Members are urged to pay more than the minimum subscription whenever possible, as the present amount is not sufficient to cover the cost of this journal. A suitable form of bequest for those wishing to benefit the Society by their wills is to be found in the Annual Report

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM To THE HON. REGISTRAR, SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY, CONWAY HALL HUMANIST CENME, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON, WC1R 4RL Being in sympathy with the aims of South Place Ethical Society, I desire to become a Member and I enclose as my annual subscription the sum of (minimum f 1) entitling me (according to the Rules of the Society) to membership for one year from the date of enrolement.

NAME (RLOCIC LETTERS PLEASE) ADDRESS

OCCUPATION (disclosure optional) HOW DID You HEAR OF THE SOCIETY? DATE SIGNATURE

The Ethical Record is posted free to members. The annual charge to subscribers is £1. Matter for publication should reach the Editor, Eric Willoughby, 46 Springfield Road, London E17 8DD, by the 5th of the preceding month.

re David Neil Et Co Dorking Surrey