CONTENTS,
PAGE PAGE NOTES of llIL WEEK ...... 281) REVIEWS ...... 302 CURRENT CANT ...... 292 DRAMA Hy John Francis Hope ...... 304 FOREIGN AFFAIRS By S. Verdad ...... 292 ART. Iiy Anthony hl. Ludovici ...... 305 Guild_Socialism BRAINSAXIJ ‘IIIK Guild ...... 293 MUSIC AND MUSICIANS. ByJohn Playford ...... 306 :1 POLITICIAN’S MANUAL By 1:. N. Sumner ...... 295 PASTICHE. By Albert Allen ...... 307 THE BALLOT Box A FARCE By \V. li. Hall ...... 296 LETTERS To THE EDITORmow- Note ON POWERS. By S. Verdad ...... 297 Margaret Douglas, Prizeman i,n PoliticalEconomy, 11. NOTES ox TIW PRESENT KALPA By J. 11. Kennedy ...... 298 MacColl J. H. Hallard, H. 51. Hyndman, W. Dunstan Sheffield, Arthur G. Depoulain, Harold EACHFOR HIMSELF. By J. T. Fife ...... 299 Hood, Newton, William Sidney Butt, Herman Ould, Oliver TIXIIOUCHALIEN EYES-111. By Ezra Pound ...... 300 Cosway ...... ?OS VIEWSAND ‘REVIEWS. By A. E. R...... 301 ... A11 communications relative to THENEW AGE should cision(though, in truth, the two principles involved be addressed to THE NEW AGE, 38, CursitorStreet, oouldnot be compared-the one affectingthe Unions E.C. and the other only affecting the ambitious politicians of __._ .__..__ ...... ~__~~.... .___ ...... ~. theUnions). Nevertheless, it has not been reversed, noris it likely to be. As theGovernment Bill stands, trade unions are simply permitted to make a voluntary NOTES OF THE WEEK. collection among their members for political purposes-- ‘I‘HE end of thepresent Session in Parliament is suffi- aright that any crowd in Trafalgar Square already cienily near to make a fosecast of next Session’s legis- possesses.Does this magnificent permission satisfy. lationpossible. Contrary to thegreat expectations of the Labour Members that their services to the Govern- those responsible for the “Campaign against Poverty,” mentha\-e been amply paid.? \Ye arc: not contending., itis already obvious that of sociallegislation in theis of course, that the Bill, as drafted by the Party, ought sense of the word there will be no more, not only dur- io havebeen passed. In our opinion the Osborne ingthe coming Session, but during the remainder oi judgment itself was ablessing in disguise to Trade thelife of thisParliament. The Minimum Wage, the Unionismand its reversal would be acalamity. Hut Eight Hours Day, the Reform of the Poor Law and all rememberingthe heat with which the Hill was de- the rest of .the fatuous programme of the Fabian job- manded,and the sacrifices it was thoughtgood to makersand takers may theref’orc be regarded as still make For it,we cannot refrain from remindingthc forthe present impracticable; and all the bluff about Labour Party that, after all, they have not yet got theii- demanding them at once is exposed for what it is. The Bill! TheIrish, it will benoted, have been well paid. most elementary sense for politics, indeed, would ha~e arid paid on the nail, for their supportoE the Coa 1‘Itlot1 ’ : demonstrated t’o itsauthors th;lt underthe circum- they have HomeRule with our blessing. The Welsh stancestheir campaign was ill-Limed. Itis perfectly camarilla has also got its wages in the form of the Dis- truethat social reform is no longer popular and that establishment of the Church in Wales. But the Labour my Government would be foolish to risk its office and Party, equally necessary to the Coalition and as strong case to satisfy a demandthat does notexist. But it in numbers as the Welsh party, has gotnothing-; and is also true that, even if social reform were as popular seemsto be grateful for it. Nay, in the opinion of to-day as it was a few years :~g-o,the present Govern- everygood judge, they have got considerablyless mentin the .remnant of itstime codd and would do thannothing. ,4s if he ratedtheir services at a posi- nothing.The Parliament Act no doubt necessitated ti\-e discount, RIr. Asquith has appeared almost to take two crowdedyears of glorious lifein thefirst part of painsto see that the Labour Party should be soundly any Government’s period ; but it also invited two empty kickedfor their humiliating subservience. Nsot only years of talkduring the latter part of theperiod of have they,been refused their Osborne Bill, but they five years. And the fullest use ‘of the second privilege, were maliciouslyemployed as catspawsduring threc atany rate, will assuredlybe made. Itdoes not re- greatstrikes; commerce has been so loadedagainst quire the “Nation” to plead for a “legislative sabbatical themthat prices in relation to wages have risen three year for apoor overworked Ministry. ’I’hc Ministry shillings in the pound, and finally their whole class has hasevery intention of taking il. .\nd to the excuses been coercedinto the Insurance pigeon-holes where of overwork andthe Parliament Act they can add, lor everyman-jack has his number like a ticket-of-leave the privateinformation ‘of theirfriends tllc more con- convict.But for the existence of theLabour Party in \-inringargument that the coming General Election Parliament these thingscould not possibly ha\e occurred. will need to lbe ground-baited \\-ill1 promises. Vague *-x.* promises. therefore, we mayexpect in plenty. during Somenotion of thefinal futility of Labourpolitics the nest twelve monihs, but no Bills will bc introduced to the Labour movement appears ;~tlast to have entered s::\-c thos!: of :I non-controversial that is, anti-social, the heads of at lc;~stonc of thc constituentUnions. It character. * 6 \vas announcedlast week that the Boilermakers h:ctl REviewing the results of thc Session nonr cIosing :I:. withdrawnfrom the Labour Party. Explanations were they affect the Labour- Party in partictular, 1q.e ha\-<- at once issued by lhr latterdesigned to minimise. thv :ig:bin lo ask what fortyMembers h;nc obtained b!- significance of the event ; but there is reaIly no .eon- their loyalty tothe Liberal Party. ‘I‘hc ollc measure cealingor under-rating its importance. We donot specifcallyannounced by them :IS the price of their hesitate to say that thrj resignation of the Boilermakers coalition has hen notoriously clipped an(! debased in its is 111uch the most important fact in recent Labour poli- passage ti1rocq.h Committee ’I‘hc reversal of il1f. tics : for,whatever its immediate causes, there can l),~ Osbourne j11tl
means in Parliamentare not a whitgreater than the tl; % value to the allirmce of the crumbling Labour Party means in industryat large. In fact, they are the smne, Again, there is not the least doubt that the presence of forParliament, as wehave repeatedly proved, is the the Parliamentary Labour Party in the new alliance will register of power and symbolically measures to a nicety mean a diversion, of energy frsom theproper economic theexact economic values of theclasses represented task of organisingworkers co-operatively, to the im- there. We conclude,therefore, that aLabour Party proper and impossible politicaltask of organising in Parliamentis of the same value, whatever its num- workerson political lines. Politics, hc it ren~ember~~d, bers,as the Labour movement out of doors. If thc is not only a diversion of economic encl-gy : it is itself ;I latter is weakthe former must be weak. If thelatter cause of division. It is actually a matter of complete isstrong the former is superfluous. unimportanceeconomically whether workmen vote 291
Liberal,Tory, or Labour. In fact, if our advicewere ductiveand distributive agencies, to acquireand to taken, workmen for the next half-dozen elections would employ capital in co-operation, to conquer little by little the main instruments of production-namely, land and simply notvote at all. They would strikeagainst money-these are the simple rules for its general guid- politics until they had obtained the right of citizenship, which, whatever fools may say, is denied them so long ance.But theproblem before Trade Unionism is un- doubtedly a,greater and more difficult scale. If as they have no stake in thecountry. But if thepro- on posed allianceincludes the Labour Party, what chance administrators are necessary in the Co-operative move- isthere that politics will berelegated to the idiosyn- mentit is certain that something approaching states- crasies of the individual, and cease to be made a cause manship is indispensable in theTrade Union move- ment. Forit isplain thatTrade Unionism cannot of dividingeconomically-united workers ? No chance whatever. On thecontrary, everymegalomaniac waitto enter into possession andcontrol ofindustry Trade Union or Co-operative organiser will think him- untilCo-operation has made a completeconquest of commerce.'Co-operation may graduallytransform self in duty bound to his wife to aim beyond the useful patches (of the industrial map here and there, and may, necessaryobscurity andanonymity of economic indeed, in aeons of time, transform the whole map ; but organisation into the limelit regions of political display. A career, God helphim, will be open to him there, in thfe meantime Trade Unionism will be fighting for its offering themaximum of self-advertisementand the life in the still barbarous places of business. The ques- tion is, therefore, what should bethe aim of Trade minimum of serviceto his fellows. As surely as this flame is lit in the alliance themoths will fly intoit, Unionismin regardto industry in general? By the with theresult that not only will theybe lost to the allianceit isdemonstrable that its power will be so economic Labourmovement, but the movement will greatlyincreased that any particular union would be suffer fromtheir strenuous suicide. The Co-operative able to commandwhat we havealways regarded as movement that has hithertoknown no poIitics, the Trade the minimumeconomic resources necessary for any Unionmovement that against its will has beenforced strike-namely, a year's supplies. The valueof this into politics, will make a great blunder in uniting only commissariat will, however,largely depend upon the to provide a background for their worst enemies. intelligence of the plan of campaign in which it is em- ployed, as well as upon thespirit of theleaders and *** men employed. Can there be any doubt that in loyalty to it-s Co-operative partner the Trade Union movement It doesnot follow, however, that becausethis par- should aim at the creation of the Co-operative common- ticularalliance would be foolish to introducepolitics wealth? None whatever,we will suppose.But the into its counsels, either a political movement of a more questionstill is of amore exact objective. Let us put enlightened kind than any now existing is unnecessary, it, then, as the proper object of the Trade Union move- or that political action will not in the lmg run, be needed ment to compel the State to acquire the capital of all the tosupplement economic action. What wecontend is existing large monopolies and to insist in their manage- simply thatat present the economicsituation is not ment upon thedemocratic rights of theworkers in- ready f,or it. As we haveseen, .it is useless to send volved. *++ membersto Parliament whose constituents are unable ,But tograsp this objective andto make of it the to support them when the bluff is called. On the other goal of Labour require that the Unions shouId be more hand, if the reserves are ready, there will be plenty of alive than they are, both to their own value and to the members of Parliamentto callfor them. We donot futurethat awaits them. Forit isnot by anymeans know whether the Co-operative and Trade Union leaders an easy task which theyhave to perform. No prole- areaware of itor not, but the fact is well knownto tariat that we have ever heard of has yet succeeded in us, atleast, that quite a score of members of the emancipating itself ; and if the English proletariat shou!d existing Parliament-none of them being Labour mem- succeed, a record in thehuman race will have been bers-would be willing to move for the nationalisation established. Apart,therefore, from the immediate of industry, provided that the workmen were prepared gain, thegain to mankind would be tremendous. A :o undertakeits responsible management. Even more new epoch would, indeed, be inaugurated, not merely ihan that, we are acquainted with capitalists, supposed ;:I England,but in the world. The discipline, the in- to be mortallyhostile to labour, who would bequite telligence, and, letus say,the sacrifices involved are, glad to be relieved of their economic responsibility, and however, ,of corresponding dimensions. To succeed, or to hand it over to their workmen if the latter showed wen to make a grand attempt after success,will demand signs of being fitted for it ; yes, and to take their chance th.at the Unions (a) shall regard themselves as entrusted of a managerial post under their own workmen into the each, with the whole future of its own particular in- bargain.The melodramatic assumption, so common dustry, to control it, and to develop it in the interests of amongst th,e spouting comrades, that capitalists of the themselves and of their nation ; (b) shall act as industrial Parliamentarytype are wholly devilish,does not bear guardiansto all their members, providing themwith inspectionfor a single moment. Thefact is that useful %'and honourablemeans of livelihood,with a nothingconduces more to the apparent heartlessness masonic body of fellows, with amenities peculiar to their of capitalists than the disgusting feebleness of Labour. trade, and with, security under all the circumstances and But if Labour resolutely setto work to organise its against allth'e accidents 'of life. These, we think,are forces economically, to eschew politics, except individu- comprehensiveenough to include the wholeduty of ally, for the time being, and to prepare itself for making TradeUnionists as industrialists. It may be said that and taking its grand demand, not only would economic it is also aUtopian dream. They. say ; letthem say ! power be obtained,but consequential politicalpower I:or US it is enough to reply that In moments of hope wouldbe added to it.Economic power is as indispen- this future of industryappears the most certain, and sable to politicalpower as money isindispensable to even thebest authenticated. Fortwo years only has credit,and where economicpower collects thither will the movement of industrial unionism and federation been flock the politicians. We cansee, in fact, th,at if active ; yet in that brief period miracles of organisation the new alliancesucceeds, a specially formed political have been performed. The barriers between the skilled party in Parliament will beunnecessary. Either or :rnd unskilled of any one trade, the barriers between both of the existing parties will pay their court to it. trade andtrade, the barriers between tradesand pro- **it fr-;sions, have been, if not completely cut down, at least whittled somewhat away. At any moment almost Some Leavingthe Labour Party to take care of itself, trade or other, some profession or other, may project its there wouldremain in theproposed alliance only the epoch-making demandto the State to handover to it Co-operativeUnion andthe Trades Congress. The thr: controlof its industryor service. TVe hzve Seen Co-operative Union may, we think, be trusted to go its Ihnt the doctors were within an ace of Guild-Socialism own way under the new circumstances with no danger i:l theirblind struggle with Mr. Lloyd George. A toits future. Its course is clear,and there are no lesson, w7e hope and believe, has been learned from externalproblems to vexit. To extendboth its pro- their failure. 393
Current Cant. Foreign Affairs. “Dear Sir,---My soul is stirredto its very depths by hearing of the awful perils our girls are subject to. It is By S. Verdad. not safe for girls to go unprotected these days outside the READERSof THE NEW AGE,if of no other paper, hadbleen doors of their homes. Would it he possible to have warn- warned of the difficulties experienced ,by Kiamil Pasha ing notices in trams, trains, tubes, lifts, picture palaces on account of the intriguing of the war party at Con- and shops.”-“ A MOTHER”in “The Awakener.” stantinople, of the intense feeling over Adrianople, and “Havingspent fifteen years inthe work of uplifting of the desire of Germany to he!p Turkey rather ,than the the downtrodden women of theEast End of London- Allies. Withinthe last few days-I writeon January from which locality most of theEnglish whiteslaves 24-it becamemore and more clear that a ‘coup was are, by the force of cruel circumstances, recruited- and imminent, even though the Powers had hloped up .to the havingduring thosefifteen years seen manythousands lastmoment that Turkey would beinduced .to yield of lovely woman-souls slowly but surely bereft of all their beauty under the bestial touch of vicious men, I can with Adrianople, as I said last week, “without violence.” difficulty restrain a jubilant shout each morning since the *** White Slave Act has come into operation and I read of In adopting this attitude the Powers were, to a very this or that scoundrel having been sentenced to a severe lashing. The moral effect of these floggings will be enor- great extent, thoroughly justified. Within the last tWQ mous. Each stroke will mean thesaving of a wonxm’s yearsor so I haverepeatedly called attention tothe SoUL.”--EDWARD) SEATON in the “Daily Citizen.” lamentablefinancial condition of the Turkish Empire; and I need hardly emphasise the fact that the war with “We do not want to make London so beautiful and ala- Italy, followed smo closely by the war with :the Balkan tial that the habit of beauty will sink into the souls of States, was not likely to improve the situhon. At the everybody until we are a nation of artists. . . Let us present moment th;e Treasury is empty, thlough the Otto- avoid the inculcation of beauty in the masses . . . . re- man Bank, I understand, is advancing the small sums member the fate of Greece . . . It is to the narrow, dirty, grimystreets of London that the Empire owes its pro- necessary for the payment of the State officials and tile gress. If it were not for the evils and discomforts of being army officers. But this cannot go ‘on indefinitely. poor there would be nothing to urge us to get rich. ”- +*r “ The Standard.” The Powers, realising this,proposed to,Kiamil “ All Christian people must greatly rejoice‘ at the won- Pasha, though ntot in such a formal manner t-hat we ctn derful changes that have been taking place in China, now say “officially” that the tangle could be solved in some that the Chinese are eagerly seeking after Western civil- such way as this, : Adrianople shlould be ceded to the isation . . . .”-‘I TheBritish Congregationalist.” Allies, the islands should be lleft for the Powers to dis- tribute as best ,they might ; and in return fmor this im ‘‘ That staunchupholder of courtly proprieties---Lord Willoughby de Broke.”-“ The World.” mediate arrangements would be mamdle for the flotation of a largeTurkish loan. Further,the Powers under-
“Cicely Hamilton, who ’ is notexactly a post-card took to see that the Allies did not get a very large slice beauty, looked beautiful when she was telling of her of Thrace--up to the line of the Maritza River, perhaps, hunger for maternity.”--CHRISTOPHER ST. JOHN. but notmuch more. Thissuggestion, if it had been carried out, wlould have left Turkey with a fair arnouni ‘I Mr. Lloyd George is no hair-brainedpolitician who of land in front of Chatalja; and, if an army had been meddles in machinery which he does not understand.”- “Votes for Women.” quartered there, a retreat to the famous Chatalja lines would havebeen aneasy mxtter in the event of any “When Mr. Balfour claims special political power for future war. R man became he is a banker or a merchant he is falling **c intothe same error 2s theSocialist.”-.---“Ne~~s and Leader.” This was a suggestion which the Kiamil Cabinet was disposed to accept, with the reservation that the Turks “The Queen isdetermined that presentation at Court shouldhand over Adrianople as well as the islands to shall I-)c? the hall-mark of character. . . . London th’e Powers, a m:ove which, it was thought, would have ‘Mail.” enabled,the Cabinet to“save face.” In the long run, thismight conceivably have been a good move, even “The birth of a son andheir in March will cause an f’ot- Turkey herself. There would have been an im- immense anount of rejoicing in one of our well-known and highly respected families of GreatBritain. Thean- menseloss of prestige,and Kiamil and hisfriends nouncement will cause quite a flutter of excitement in would hare been swept from office; but Turkey would the highest circles.”---“Old Moore.” have been left withlout an amount ‘of territory in Europe _I-__-_ mhi,ch, if she continues to possess it, will always givv (‘Men do not have the Vote because they have brains, rise to quarrels with Bulgaria. they have ‘Votes because they are citizens.”-“ News and 1,ezder.” *a* . .- By way of having th,is suggestionagreed to semi- ‘‘Miss Elizabeth Robins’ new book-‘ Where arc you officially (orshould wle say semi-nationally) a Council- goingto . . . . ? All women, and especially all who do General was summoned, but it was “packed.” Mahmud not understand wh~7women need the Vote, should read it. From its pages they will learn that even gently born and Shefket was invited to attend; but heexcused himself on the plea of illness. .And the acquiescence of the gently nurtured girls are in danger of being trapped . . .’I The Suffragette.” packedCouncil was too much forthe population of + Stamboul to stand, so they drove out the Cabinet and ‘‘ Had Miss Elizabeth Robins never writtenanything tdcpossession of ,thme Sublime Porte. else, these chapters would bring her fame. But as I read *** I (la not think of Miss Robins, I do not think of BAlzac . . the thing is a reality. The girls are trapped in a honse of This event, however, was not precisely spontaneous. shame, andthey even do not know it. There is luxury As I have already indicated, preparations had (been pro- all around. Velvet curtains . . . . there is avery large ceeding ftor some time; and when the right moment ap- bed. . . . There are three men. . . .J’-Mrs. AYRToN ZAGWILL peared to havearrived Talaat Bey,ex-Minister of the
I--- Interior,and Mahmud Shefket Pasha, ex-War Minis- “ The power of advertising even to-day is not fully ter, had not ,to be sent for. They were on the spot, and grasped. LIONEL JACKSON. quiteready fior anything. It is a strange enough coin- cidence that Mahmud Shefket should havecarried out “A son of one of the Chiefs of Burdwain was converted the revolution of 1908 and quelled the counter-revolu- by a tract. He could not read, but he went to Rangoon, a missionary’s wife taught him how to read, and in forty- tionin the following year, for he has now overturned eighthours he could react thetract through and was anmothergovernment which was Hamidian, if itwas sared.”-“The Christian.” anything, rather than Young Turk. As forthe immediate future, no one can foretell it, least of allthe Young Turks themselves. When they Guild Socialism-X. werein power before they mismanaged the Empire scandalously; and Mahmud Shefket himself, although a Brains and the Guild.-(Concluded.) very capable man, left his own department in a chaotic condition. Itis almostinevitable that rioting should WE are n,ot concerned with thepolitical methods adopted take place; and, indeed, as I write I learn 'that Nazim by the American Government togain absolute posses- Pashahas been shot dead. These things, h'owever, sion of the Panama Belt. From the mid-Victorian point are details. Whatis the possibleplan of theYoung of view, theywere doubtless immoral and reprehen- Turks, and how far are they supported by Austria and sible; but th8e work isnow almost completed and we are Germany? These are the main questions; even though free to confessth,at we are indifferent to the sorrows a few of the Young Turks are in favour of a republic. andgrievances of theRepublic of Colombia. What, *** however, appeals' to us is that the work has been done The Young Turks have come into power by popular bya combination of humanforces that marks an in- favour,and this favour is due t,o 'the single fact that cipient stage of Guild organisation. th'ey are prepared to carry ton the war in order to retain Fully bo realise the significance of this, it is necessary Adrianople.Now, this is perilous. TheTurkish army to grasp the extent and complexity of this monumental at Chatalja is undoubtedly in first-classcondition; but undertaking. We have seen that it was altogether too thetransport service at its disposal is utterly inade- great a task for modern capitalism; we shall show that quate.Last week I referred tocommissariat difficul- it is a task easy of accomplishmentto a society effec- ties, for it was difficulties of this nature that led to the tively dividedinto guilds. In the light of laterevents, disasters of thewar. An army is useless with'outfood theidea od buildingthe Canal at aprofit sounds andammunition. The Turks can just manage to sup- grotesque ; moderncapitalism can only existupon ply theChatalja lines with food. Men have been ac- profits. The Panama Canal is being built regardless of cumulating; there are now nearly 200,000 a.t Chatalja. profits; the economic interests it subserves are greater If these soldiers make a forward move and are defeated than the commercial interest that would only have re- owing tlo lack of war material, the Ottoman Empire is gard to commercial profits. One Guildprinciple, 'there- as good as dead-and this in spite (of the fact that there fore,obtains : profitis eliminated. Even more strik- are more than 250,000 men under arms in Asia Minor. ing : rent and interest are also eliminated. The money *** paid every week in wages is not borrowed; If comes out I't was my expectation,naturally, that the Turkish ,of thenational revenue of theUnited States. To ,that authoritieswould make good use of theirtime during extent,at least, it is shorn of Statecapitalism. Yet the armistice t'oimprove their transport services; but my ,thereare hundreds of thousands of serious folk- latestinformation assures me that tkey have not done Socialistsand others-who stilllabour under the de- this. Thme Turks arewell entrenched and can resist almost lusion tbat the only way to finance a great enterprise anyattack. But a forward move is a differentmatter, requiring &75,ooo,ooo is to float a loan and pay interest for the Bulgarians are equally well entrenched, and are in approved capitalistfashion. Observe, too, that as provided, intothe bargain, with superior artillery. 1.t no loan has been issued, ,there is no annual sum to be is acase of stalematewith a vengeance. It is nearly paidto the bond-holders and,accordingly, the United impossiblefor one army toattack the other with &he States G'overnment may open the Canal free of tolls to certainty of gaining a victory, especially as 'the winter itscoast-borne traffic ; it is anunpledged security- has begun and the space between the armies is covered morallyand financially unpledged.This proposed with snow several feet deep. The roads in Thrace, bad arrangement, which has aroused the diplomatic opposi- enoughin the summer as I can testify, become posi- tion of GreatBritain and Germany would, under the tive quagmires in tbe winter, and a mile an hour is con- complete Guild Organisation of America, be anex- sidered as excellent speed for a bullock-wagon. tremelysimple operation. The Transport Guild (Ship- *** ping Section) wlould have arranged with the Enginering I do not wis'h t'o over-estimate the difficultiesof trans- Guild t'o pass its ships through the Canal for reasons, port;but to give the reader some conception of the and upon terms, that would appeal to all the American difficulties 'of fighting. The snows of the Balkans made Guildsassembled in fullplenary conference, at which n.o difference tothe 1877-78campaign; but, in that also the 'Government would be adequately represented. case, the campaign was at its height whenthe winter The Guild then is obviously no figment of the imagina- had begun, and the men's blood wasup. To conclude tion;it is the inevitable development of thelarge in- an armistice lasting ,overa month just ,after the autumn, dustry. Ittakes up the burden of largeaffairs at the and then to resume the campaign when the winter has point where modern capitalism hopelessly breaks d'own. begun in earnest, is another matter. But the fanaticism Butbefore we pursue this argument further, let us (I use a oonvenientword) of bothsides may make a tell of this embryo Guild's. operations. great deal possible in tKe present circumstances which Inour last 'chapter, we tell how French capitalism muld be impossible if thewar were being waged encountered the mosquito, its wage-slaves being in con- betweenany other belligerents. Will the Bulgarians sequencedecimated by yellow feverand malaria. Ts give up their goal when they are almost in sight of it? capitalism .this means nothing SIO long as the supply of Will the Turks see the tombs of their most celebrated the labour commodity does not fall short. But the un- emperors fall into the hands of the Christians? It will consciousguild spirit, induced by theunusual circum- b,e difficult enough bo induce the Bulgarians to return at stances of theAmerican intervention, created a com- the end of such a glorious campaign; but it will be just munityfeeling and rendered death a community loss as difficult to (induce 200,000 Ottoman troops to return irrespective #of its oommodity lloss. Accordingly, *before to barrackswithout having fired ashot in defence oi theengineering operation began, a " Sanitation Divi- Adrianople. sion " wasformed under the direction of another *** obscureColonel--this time of the Medical Corps-and Th,e Young Turks, I say definitely, are relying upon war was successfully waged against the mosquito pest. verbal assurances given by the Austrian Foreign Office The mosquito that breeds yellow fever was distinguished to Hilmi Pasha, the recently-appointed Turkish Ambas- andlocated; so al#s(othe malarial. Each was traced to sador to Vienna. Germany has warned Russia that no its haunts; the'one lived on domestic garbage, the other interference with Asia Minor will be permitted. France, infested the swampy land through which the Canal was who, in view of her interests in Asia Minor, is anxious destined topass. Stagnant water was covered with to claim an'd soothe the Allies rather than displease the kerosine 'oil, and im it the malarial mosquito found its Turks, is inclined atthe present moment to sidewith grave.Domestic refuse was systematically and Germany as againsther own ally, Russia. As for our promptly removed, the consequence being that the yel- own Foreign Office, it has mot shown a tendency latterly low-jackmosquito had nowhere to lay its eggs. This to make up its mind about anything. sounds simple in the telling, but the magnitude of the 294
work done by the Medical Division can only be realised cretehave gone into the locks, thespillway and the by travelling over the fifty miles of watery swamp and Canal. Provision is made for passing through from the passing through the various camp’s where live the forty Pacific tothe Atlantic vessels even larger than the thousand employees, their wives and dependents. Eng- “Olympic,” which is 1,000 feetlong. These ships are lish,French, German, or Americancontract work can lifted85 feet from sea level, eitherat Miraflores lor be Seen in all parts of the world; from the Andes t’o the Gatun, and are lowered again to sea-level at the other Caucasus, from the Rockies to the Himalayas, profiteer- end.They will passfrom the Pacific to the Atlantic ingcontractors with their hosts of wage-slaves are Oceans in ten hours-a saving of three to six weeks in building railways or harbours, are erecting public build- their journey from East to West. ings lor sinking mining shafts. What traveller is there We are not so foolish as to push too far lour analogy who d80es not rememberwi’th a shudder the abiding ugli- betweenthe Panama organisation and the Guild. But ness of the scars they have cut on the earth’s surface? whatwe have shown is thatsomething in thenature But, so far as thewhite population is concerned, the andstructure of theGuild has undeniably succeeded camps at Ancon, Culebraand Gatun on the Panama where capitalism, adequately financed and even backed Belt are models of their kind and put to blush mlos,t of by aproud national sentiment, has undeniably failed. the manufacturing t,owns of England or America. Had We have further shown that the canonsof reward, when theelement of profit enteredinto the work, Panama modified by the Guild spirit, will call into play capacity would be horrible; as it is, situated in a torrid heat with and brains far superior to the capacity and brains nur- a rainfallvarying fnom 70 to 225 inchesa year, the tured and trained in the profiteering spirit. death-ratefrom disease is 7.72 perthousand. At the The weakness of our analogy is to be found in the time of writing, sanitation has cost the Administration persistence of thewage system in the Panama Zone. nearly &~,OOO,OOO. Buteven here there are obvious reservations. In the The health of this mushroom community being thus firstplace, rations are supplied at cost price. Inthis effectually guardedagainst plague, fever, and zymotic way, capitalism loses ‘one of its two profits and one of disease(the dominance of the doctor is indeed becom- its two rents. In the second place, the wage system is ingan acute problem), the cext step was t,o provide n,ot exploited by rent,interest and profits, the whole wholesome food,sustaining and untainted. This neces- enterprise not being, nor pretending bo be, on a profit- sity calledinto being the ‘‘. SubsistenceDivision.” bearing basis. Again,anothe’r obscure Colonel book command,the Itmay be urged that whilst an undertaking on the workbeing far too important and responsisble tobe scale [of Panama calls into play poblems of large pub- entrusted to anyprofiteering caterer Nor restaurateur. lic policy, and is therefore too much for private capital- Did this Colonel seek to make a profit on the supply of ism,it does not follow thatsmaller works ought not food?Not he. An armyman, he knew something to be left to the private capitalist an’d contractor. But, about rations and something about pay; of wages and broadly stated, there are no small enterprises left. The the industrial system built up on wages he was happily purchase of a pound of tea or sugar, apparently an ex- oblivious. His task was t.0 feed this industrial army at tremely simpleoperation, just as surely calls up prob- hisperil; what had profits todo with it? He has to lems of large public policy as does thse construction of ‘supply daily over 65,000 people with food, clothes and thePanama Canal. Indeed, Panama is a very small theother necessities ,of life.And hedoes it with,out a affaircompared with the organisation of ‘thetea or penny of profit. This‘obscure colonel, nomerchant sugarindustries. Two shillings paid over the grocer’s princeis he, has a clear perception that the workers counter fgor a pound of tea means work for a coolie in wantrations at cost price. He doesnot report at the Indiaor .a Chinaman in China. Itmeans work f’or a end of the year that he has made a large profit outof his packer,work for asailor, work for asalesman in transactions-if he did hewould be superseded; it is London ; it calls inti0 play the labour of the shipbuilders his duty t,o ‘report that he has secured rations of pure who build theships that carry the tea, and work for quality and distributed them effectually, punctually and theengineers who installed the machinery that drove rapidlyamongst the Panama workers. Is not this a the ship. This florin for a pound of tea is thrown into distinct approach to the Guild spirit? an ocean of mobile interests, and its ripples circle to the TheSubsistence Division spends every year outsideedge of theindustrial world. The Panama ~1,200,ooo onfood. It runs 22 generalstores and 18 Canal is a mere accessory to the supremely important hotels.These hotels supplyevery month 200,000 sub- transactionengaged in by a woman why buys food- stantial meals at ma cost of fifteen pence each. In addi- stuffs or clothing. It is because these transactions have Qi,on, thereare 16 hugeEuropean messes, where grown so vitally important, so profoundly far-reaching, European(euphemism for cheap white labour, mostly both in fact and in significance, that private capitalism Spanishand Italian) labourers can obtain day’sa finds itself toolimited in its scope, too circumscribed rations of three meals for twenty pence, and 14 West in its principlesand methods, adequately to grapple Indian kitchens where black labour can obtain a day’s withsuch a complexsituation. It failed in Panama; rations fmor ‘thirteenpence. Every morning, atfour its failure is equally pronounced when it gives away a o’clock, fromCristobal on the Panama side of the gew-gaw with a pound ‘of tea. Isthmus a supply train ‘of 21 cars distributes fresh dood. Thisbrings us backto our subject : brains of the It is all done through the Quartermaster’s Department capitalist order are now palpably out of date; they be- -the Chief Quartermasterand his Lieutenant being long to the stuffy furniture of the Victorian era. It is, alsoobscure colonels, withbrains not vitiated by the perhaps,more accurate to poseour statement thus : profiteeringspirit. These men understand esprit de executiveand administrative brains are hampered and corps; they have sensed the Guild spirit. It is enjoined restricted by the limitations and false economic concep- upon them that as officers they must necessarily be gen- ti,on of private capitalism. The able army colonels who tlemen.Instinctively they know that profiteering, like arebringing the Panama Canal to its final success buccaneering,gentlemanly nota is profession. would havebeen as impotent as’ wasDe Lesseps had They are n’ot “‘brainy” enough to make “a good thing” ‘they not had at their back a nation’s credit and a new out of thoseresponsible tasks; but they have accom- form of industrialorganisation. They had to concen- plished awork at which “brainy”capitalism failed trateupon the Canal Zone all theavailable labour utterly. specially organisedfor the great adventure. But that In this atmosphere, penetrated by a spirit closely akin is preciselythe function of the Guild. Theymust first to that which will pervadethe future Guild, the wtork monopolise the labour power of their own people, then of the Panama Canal has been carried out and is fast theymust apply that power to its mostfruitful uses. approachingtriumphanta conclusion. Onehundred Itis important to remember that we have explicitly andeighty million cubityards have been excavated. rejected the Syndicalist theory ,that the land, buildings Thetrains conveying this material, if placed endto andmachinery should be owned by theSyndicalist end, would four times circle the globe, and every cubic equivalent of the Guild. Just as the land, buildings and yard weighs a bon and a half. Five million tone of con- machinery Gf the Panama Canal belong to the American 29.5
Government, so must the assets with which theGuild the method of arriving at them, Professor Pigou’s con- workbelong )to the nation. But because economic clusions differfrom those of theeducated Liberal power dominates politicalpower, it f,oll~owsthat the elector. The suspicion thatarises in our mindmore Guilds will possess only theusufruct of th:e assets. than once, indeed, is that Professor Pigou, consciously NeverthelesstheGuilds must primarilybe con- cernedfruitfulwiththe application of their or unconsciously,is engaged in justifying the ways of labour monopoly. They will inbe position a theLiberal Party, particularly in respectof compara- (like the Panama Colonels) to compel thre sup- tiv’ely recent social legislation, and generally in respect ply of allnecessary material throughthe appropriate ofsocial legislation about to come. Fromthis point Guild, They will be quit of theprivate capitalist ; of view, however, the volume is not only interesting as capitalism will go to Limbo with Wagery ; its burden, economics, itis important as politics. We may,per- its devastating restrictions, its crudeness and its cruel- haps, conclude from Professor Pigou’s pages t% nature ties, +ill all become the nightmare of an evil night that has gone for ever. of th’e theory on which future liberal legislation will be In these circumstances, it is evident that the super- based. ficial “braininess“ now so deplorablyin request by We may premise that, so far at any rate as discus- privatecapitalism will haveno place. The new era sion isconcerned, the main subject of legislative con- will inevitably develop afiner type of executiveand sideration during the immediately coming years will be administrativebrains. The Guild leadersand adminis- thedistribution of wealth. It is common doctrine that trators will be in thetrue sense statesmen; they will thoughour wealth-production is enormous andgrow- give to anyproblem an impersonal consderation be- ing, our wealth-distribution tends to greater and greater causethey will notbeperpetually obsessed with thoughts of personalaggrandisement and of paltry apparent inequality. The problemis certain, therefore, profits. Theirfuture will beassured ; so also will be to arise, and in fact it has arisen, whether the present their status. Their souls will be washled clean from the inequalities of distributioncan be artificially modified corrosionand stains of capitalistmorality. In that re- without damage to the sum total of production. spect, at least, they will breathe a purer ether and their On the supposition-accepted, as we think, too easily work will accordingly show richerresults. Doubtless by Professor Pigou-that the present national net divi- othermoral weaknesses will develop--any good cus- dendis maintained at a maximumin consequence of tom will corruptthe world-but so far,at least, as profiteering corrupts they will be immune. the stimulus toeffort offered by the present distribution, We haveseen that private capitalism failed at any arbitrary or forcible reduction of their present share Panama, with its expenditure to,f ~75,000,ooo.But this in the dividend to any of the factors would tend to re- amount will be a comparativelysmall matter for the ducethcir productive efforts and consequently the Guilds. TheTextile Guild,fo’r example, will spend volume of wealth to be divided. Suppose, for example, three times th.at amount every year and think nothing thatthe confiscation of profit andinterest beyond a of it. It will, to begin with,purchase from America givenmaximum were to be legallyenforced on the or elsewhere at least~~oo,ooo,ooo worth of raw cotton. capitalist and employing classes, the effect might be to It will purchase new machinery on a scale undreamt of in capitalist philosophy. Its quota towardssanitation, induce in them a disposition to limit their effort to the education and all other public services will putthe quantity necessary to produce the legal maximum. And Panama expenditure completely in the shade. Naturally it is noteven a speculativequestion in Professor so; for Panama is only Concerned with a population of Pigou’s mind whetherthe extra effort thatmight be 60,000, whilst theTextile Guild will be concerned, in inducedin the poor by the transfer would compensate itsright proportion, with apopulation of 4~,000,000. for the diminished effort of the rich ; for, whereas, he In short, .the Guilds are far greater things th.an private says, the surplus of the rich is now spent in machinery capitalism can conceive. Many men we meet are proud for further production, the same surplus, transferred to tobe connectedwith aome large “firm”(observe the the poor, would be exhausted in consumption. root meaning of the word) ; but how ridiculously small All this, as we say, seems clear and unanswerable to and eveninsignificant must be the greatest capitalist the Liberal politician ; and since it appears in Profes- firmscompared with a Guild? Whenthat day comes sor Pigou’s volume, with all the attraction of diagrams men will be proud to be associated, not with any private and mathematics, it will doubtless determine legislation firm, but with their Guild. forsome time to come.Indeed, we already discern on Out of thatpride will springthe strong will and the horizon the beginnings of legislation on the theories trained capacity ,to make the Guilds great instruments here laid down. For granted khat tbe poor can only be in a national economy so orderedthat the production made richer at the expense of the rich by making the and distribution of wealth will be an occupation fit for nation as a wholepoorer, it follows, first, that every gentlemen. such transfer must be staved off as long as possible ; secondly, that itshall be conceded as a favour;and, thirdly, that the damage involved to the national divi- dend shall be reduced to the smallest compass by con- A Politician’s Manual* trollingthe recipients of thetransfer so as tomake them earn it if possible. Arenot th,ese the grand old IT would appear that Professor Pigou, annoyed by the principles of the grand.old Liberal Party, and of th,e Tory charlatanry of populareconomics, had determined to Party,too, lor that matter? See the “ Spectator.” make his exposition at once as precise and as difficult as Butwe are not obliged, we think,to accept Pro- possible. “Th,e book o’f statesmanship,”he says, “to fessorPigou’s pessimistic conclusions as necessarily the writing of which I have endeavoured in this volume beyondcavil. Apartfrom the general reasoning that to add a page,is not, and never will be,one that he the morallygood is also in the long run the economi- cally good, thereare considerations that 1,ead us to who runsmay read.” This is a wholesome doctrine doubt even the immediate validity of the main proposi- inthese days, when everybody believes everythingto tion. We do not say that no transfer of dividend from be comprehensible by anybody; and we are, therefore, the relatively rich to the relatively poor can operate in- not disposed toquarrel with Professor Pigou, as the juriously onnational production. It is obvious that “ Nation ” does,for accommodating his methods, to many forms of suchtransfer, voluntary as well as thesubject, rather than to the popularreader. At the forcible, may have that effect. But, on the other hand, same time, we are not very clear in what respect, save forms of transfercan be devisedwhich, it is con- ceivable,would have the contrary and beneficial effect x- “ Wealth and Welfare.” By A. C. Pigou. (Macmillan. even without the inspection and compulsion of the re- 10s. net.) cipients indicated by Professor Pigou. 296
‘Lhe whole problem, however, is, we contend, of far greater complexity than even Professor Pigou has made The Ballot Box a Farce. it outto be ; for, in consideringwhat stimuli induce By the late W. K. Hall. effort, we are in theregion of psychology-a region PART 11. almostignored by ourauthor. Of course,assuming that economic effortisproportioned to prospective HAVINGbriefly, though clearly, Ihope, described the economic rewards, the problem is simple, and Professor structure of theEnglish Government, and shown for Pigoucannot be challenged.But iseffort so pro- what purpose it exists, we are now in a position to as- portioned? ProfessorPigou himself citesthe substi- certain the worth of the vote to the working people as a meansof accomplishing their emancipation. Signs, tution of the idea of “success ” for personal economic rewardsas an instance of what maybe called non- not to be mistaken, show that a crisis of some sort is economicstimuli. And, by lookingfor them, many loomingnot in the distant future, but near at hand. others may be discovered. Weare notsure, indeed, The labour question overshadows all others, and is by that effort even in the economic sense is not subject to commonconsent the question of thehour. A solution thelaw of diminishing returnsto economicstimuli, isurgently demanded. SocialDemocrats and members being at itsmaximum at a comparatively low degree of theIndependent Labour Party believe State of the latter and requiring subsequently another order Socialismoffers a solution ; butit is not my intention of stimulus altogether. Be that as it may-and we can- in thispamphlet to discuss Socialism ; Iam merely not do more thansuggest the subject here-until the about to point out that the method by which they pro- psychology of effort has beenmore exactly examined pose to attain th’eir object is entirely fallacious, and far by theeconomists, we maydoubt Professor Pigou’s more likely to lead to the people’s ruin than to their re- conclusion that the transfer of wealth from the relative!;: demption.Now, what steps do Social Democrats ad- rich to therelatively poor would necessarilydiminish vise the working classes to take with a view of making the national net dividend. themselvesindependent of landlordsand capitalists ? Why,that the working peopleshould formone great Thereis another consideration involved also, with SocialDemocratic Party,and elect a majorityof which Professor Pigou deals even more lightly than he honestand true friends of labour toParliament, and deals with the psychologicalfactor. “ The products of make the agency, which has hitherto kept them in a de- a district or a country,” he writes, “ whose efforts are pendent and enslaved state, become in their own hands directed to leadership in quality as distinct from quan- the instrument of subverting the present industrial sys- tity, are lessexposed to the competition of substitutes temand of inaugurating Socialism. To show thatthis thanany other products.” Surely we havehere aclue iswhat theypropose, I shall give two extracts from to the possible beneficial effects on effort of an equitable theiraccredited organs, and hundreds of passagesto distribution of wealth.For even supposingthat thz thesame effect might be producedfrom their writ- presentsystem of distributionproduces the maximum ings .:- quantity of dividend,may not a moreequitable distri- The “ Clarion,” of February 8, 1896, says :- bution, by calling out a different order of effort, produce “ Theworking man elector outnumbers all other a maximumquality of dividend? And this, by reason electors, and could, if he was united and knew what he of the high inelasticity of suchproducts., might more wanted, easily get it peacefully and constitutionally by than compensate for the reduction in quantity. thesimple exercise of theParliamentary Franchise.” Thequestion involved hereis the relative valueof “ Justice,” in aleading article of the7th March, rhe machine and the man. We shouldhave said above 1896, in reference to the question of feeding and cloth- thatthe test allowed by ProfessorPigou of the ing the children, says :- economic utility of a transfer of wealth from the rich to “ The workers have only to impress upon the Gov- the poor is atest of thebank-rate. Investment in ernment by means of their vote-a capitalistGovern- machinery presumablybrings an average return of ment though it be-that it is their duty to provide food between two and three per cent. The diversion of tlr is and clothes for the children of the nation, and they will capitalfrom machinery to menis, therefore, only forget all aboutthe expense involved in rearing a economically profitablewhen it can be shown that the strong nation of men andwomen, as they do when a latter mode of investmentbrings in the same ora strong navy is required to protect their class interests. greater return. Witness, in consequence, the endeavour The working population of this kingdom have sufficient of Mr. Lloyd George to prove that ninepence for four- pence is a profitable investment for the nation. politicalpower in their hands to make any impression theyplease upon the Government,whether Conserva- But, in the firstplace, isit always difficult in tive or Liberal.” sociology to isolate effects of one cause from effects of Perhaps, so. Let us see. Nothing could be simpler another cause; and it would, therefore, be easy to prove thanthis plan of reconstructingsociety, atany rate, according t,o inclination that investment in social reform so far as the people are concerned. All that is required pays better or worse than investment in machinery. A of them is that they should mark 2 sufficient number of priori,however, theadvantage is with investment : in ballot papers in a certain manner, and put them into the men rather than investment in machines, for the reason ballot-box ; thenthe work of remodellingthe institu- that economically regarded, man is himself a machine tions devolveson those elected toParliament. Be- of unsurpassableproductivity. And when,further, we ginningwith the organisation of themasses, for it is comparequality with quantity th’e advantage seems evident that beforethey can prevail in Parliament, a even practically to be with men. The “ leadership in vastorganisation of theworking peopleis absolutely quality,” therefore, to which Professor Pigou refers ap- indispensable-an organisationwhose ramifications pearsto us tonecessitate investment in men rather must extend to all parts of the country for electioneer- than in machines. ing purposes. A moment’sreflection will enable usto Inconcluding our notice of,perhaps, the most not- see that to
A little boy gull,more intent on play thanhis neigh- “Humph,” answered the others, winking knowingly- bours, noticed the commotion. “ Weare not fools. ’’ “ Hurrah ! ” heshouted, “ somethingup, boys. ButJohn Dory was down againamong the mud, Hopeit’s for eating. H’m ! Won’t I join in ! ” looking as pleased as it is possible for a John Dory to He flew at once to where the screaming trio were; look. but hedidn’t go alone. Hisremarks had beennoted The mass of gulls melted gradually away ; the mere at once. menrenewed their work; and so endedthis never-to-. “Something up ! Eating ! ” was squawked right and be-forgotten fight when “ Each was for himself.’’ left, as the other gulls followed. Almost in a twinkling J. T. FIFE. that corner of the dock was a maze of flashingwhite wings,for they all joined thefight. But ever “ Each forhimself.” No “ Mutualaid. ” And so none of them got the desired food. Through Alien Eyes. “ It’smine,” Johnny kept yelling. Butfor all his By Ezra Pound. iteration about ownership it wasn’t, as he knewonly too well. 111. “ It isn’t ! It isn’t ! It isn’t ! ” Katekept scream- IN my articles on America I compared that country to ing, which at any rate was true, for itreally wasn’t; nor Spainat the time of theSenecas, saying it was not was it hers. so muchlike a nation as like a provincewithout a “ I’ll have it ! I’ll fight you for it ! ” Bill was bawl- centre. ing. And hewas fighting his hardest, but he didn’t London,to carry out the simile, is likeRome of have itfor all that. Not one of them had it. the decadence, so far, at least, as letters are concerned. “ Something up ! Something for eating ! ” yelled the She is ‘a main andvortex drawing strength from the newcomers. “ Eating ! Eating ! Hurrah ! ” But they ate verylittle. “ Eachwas for himself, ” and so peripheries. was in the others’ road. Thusthe finest authors, in my judgment--Yeats, Away overthe sea, numbera of theirfathers, .James,Hudson, and Conrad-are allforeigners, and mothers, sisters,brothers, gaffers, gammers, cousins, amongtheprominent English writers vigour of aunts, and uncles were puddling about in the lea of a thought, as in the cases of Wells and Bennett, is found gigantic rocky islet on which they had their homes. One of themrising into the air just to stretch his only in conjunctionwith a consummatevulgarity. Among the tub-whackersthe Briton fares scarcely wings a little, suddenly hung poised in mid-air. “ Some- thing up ! ” the rest heard him say. “ Something up ! better, and the bubbling G. K. C. makes a poor second Hope it’s for eating.” to the bellowing Hilaire. Perched on the dry rim of the
“ Eh? Eating? ” they cried in chorus as the puddling cauldronthe naive transpontine observes the “ British ceasedinstantaneously. “ Eating ! Where? ” institutions,”Gosse, Thackeray, Garnett, and their Butthe pioneer was off, andwith heavy, flogging penumbra, the “ powers in the world of letters,” with drives of his wings was travelling at top speed towards the dock. Theothers, as drawn by someinvisible but Hampstead as a more hideous sort of Boston,Massa- irresistible force, rose as onefrom thq water and chussetts.One knows that if one ascend up into followed. height the manifestations of the papier mache are before What a sight it was now in that corner of the dock. him, and if he descend into depth they are before him, The very men stopped, actually ceased work to watch it. and it is no use leaving one country to escape them. And the noise !-Mine, mine, mine ; isn’t, isn’t, isn’t ; Surely “ The Sphere ” and Mr. Clement Shorter are fight,fight, fight; shriek, yell, scream and squawk; it the realexpression of Britishnationality? I ask it as was ear-splitting. The men were soon betting as towhich would capture a stranger, as one seeking for instruction in the peculiar thebread. But owing to the difficulty of tellingthe conditions of a charming country wherein I find myself. t’other from which,most of th,em soonwere fighting, In journalismyou have Garvin ; butI come from too. And all the time that silly old loaf bobbed up thecountry of Brisbaneand Willy Hearst, and you
and down in the water, not troubling itself a bit. cannot expect me to be kpatk by the .author of “ Doom ” The din increased ; so did the whirling, soaring, and and “ Gehenna ” and “ Whang ” and all themighty diving until the men-folk were blinking at the intensity of what looked like a whirlwind of feathers. And productsof his trade. It is not my business as an observer to speak of your- “ Each was for himself.” But a new factor in the struggle was nearing. hearts of oak,or to tap the marrow of yournation. JohnDory was having a siesta in the corner of the I can only be expected to know what meets the eye of a wall. Anumber of foolish herringhad strayed into stranger. the dock at tide-time andJohn shad followed. Now If anythingwere calculated to giveme faith in the there were no more herring, and John was taking his future of England and a belief in her present strength, it after-dinner nap. All of a sudden he was wide awake. was yourcoal strike-which yourpapers misrepre- sented.This tbing will bewritten in hishistory when “ Eat ! ” that was the magic word that roused him. Hewas ready at once, andwith a great propulsive the future prduces a Burckhardt. A million men going swing of hismuscular tail he began to look forthe out of theirwork and keeping perfect order. No ! where.Soon he wasunderneath the centre of com- Thisthing is stupendous;it is of far greater signific- motion.Balancing himself, hetook hisbearings. ance than this archaic row in the Balkans. Believe me : Glintingup with his staring eyeshe sawsomething Nascitur ordo. bobbingup and downabove him. He didn’tknow what it was, but it looked swallowable. I know very well that there is no dearth of those who Therewas a mighty heave, a flash of dark, india- want to turn you into a nation of shopkeepers, to make rubbery body, and-the bread was gone. youinto a Venice fortourists. A despairing cry came from the gulls. “ It’s away ! Against this labour of your mines you have got the It’s lost ! ” shop-keeping type. Ylou have got your Bennett and A few weaklingswho had been unable to penetrate Wells, your shopkeepers in “ The realm of books.” to the vortex of the maelstrom of wings, winked sagely YOU have got your parasitic East End ; for the idle to each other.They had their doubts of theloaf’s reality. poor are as much .against labour as thle idle rich. And ” “ Ugh,” saidone, “ it? I don’t believe itever was if onewere to prophesy the future ‘‘ type from the there. ” seeing of Londonalone one would say : Thefuture: 301
Briton will havethe large buttocks of the Jew, the curiousout-turning feet, and this will besurmounted Views and Reviews. by a bowler hat and a chest of the dimensions of those which onesees hoveringabout Eustace Miles’res- THE Speaker’s’statement of hisintentions towards taurant. theFranchise Bill, if certainamendments are made, You have, of course, a fine physiqueamong your gives me somepleasure, the pleasure of a prophet Imperialists. And anImperialist is, to foreign eyes, a whosepredictions are verified by facts. In a supple- fine, robust, old Torygentleman with a stake in the mat to THENEW AGE d February 2, 1911,I said : “ I do not think there is any hope of passing a Bill for country,and he bristleswith “ thestate of Empire.” He would ratherreform the Empire in itsperipheries theenfranchisement of womenin the present Parlia- than at its centre, for a change at the centre might dis- ment. TheHouse of Lordsand Home Rule will pro- turb his tenures and gracious ease. vide enoughwork for thenext two Sessions;and the LiberalParty will-probably hav’etlo make another bid And you have Lord Roberts bidding you “ Arm and for popularitywith another so-called Socialist Budget Prepare. ” Avery inspiring figure ! Or,rather, he beforeit appeals to ,thepeople again. ”e I admit that would be if he would drop his cinque cento attitude and I overlooked thenative stupidity of theTory Party facethe whole of thematter, for the dilemma is not when I madethis forecast : I did notsuppose that it an army or a German invasion, but a German invasion was s’o incapable of political strategy as to be unable or social reorganisation ; and this later would mean a toform an alternative Government. Everyone knows Governmentbased on, and representative of, the real now that the Government has obtained a new lease of strength of the nation-Le., the producers, the million life fromthe dissensions in thle Unionist Party, which men who struck and the rest of their sort and calibre. have become manifest during the last few weeks; and There was once a beautiful lady, .and she said to me : it is possible that ,theGovernment may lastits term. “ I havejust been lunchingwith six generals. Now The forecast alsosays nothing of th’e Insurance Bill, I know why the war (in South Africa) took so long to and is a tacit proof that Insurance was not a real issue get finished. ” at th,e last election. But so far .as the matter with which Of course,any sort of militarydiscipline would be I amdealing is concerned; the forecastis admirable; goodfor a nationlike yours, which is primarilya and I cannot resist the temptation to say : “ I told you nation of amateurs. It would make them immeasurably so. )’ more fit to compete with a nation of specialists and pro- For if theGovernment withdraw the Bill, as ,they fessionals, butyour salvation doesnot lie in a pic- most likely will do, it isnonsense t,o expectthem to turesquemilitarism of thepre-Napoleonic order. Nor introduce a Bill providingspecially forthe extension does it lie, I think, in that very funny body which you of the franchise to women. Women’s suffrage, in spite call yourHouse of Commons-not, at least, in its of militancy, isnot a political issue;the Cabinet will presentcondition or with the present electorate. no:t split cn th,e matter,because the support to be Infact, the pretences of the “ House ” aretoo obtainedis not tobe compared with the power that feeble to deceiveeven so casualan observer as I am. would be lost. The Cabinet is not united ,on the matter, TheHouse has for so long been accustomed tosee and th,ere is nopossible alternativeCabinet wh.ich itself in the traditional pages of “ Toby ” that it may wlould be united o’n th’e matter; and in the present state not be amiss for an outsider to say what he saw there. of ,things, it is ridiculous t,o suppose thatthe Cabinet The diaryruns as follows :- will split when it knows that no alternative Government This curious assembly is said t,o be descended from the canbe formed. The King’s Governmentmust go on, mootsof the folk andthe witan. I sawthe utterly and neither the Tories nor the women can, at present, disagreeablefacing the utterly inefficient. At vari- provideanalternative. Inother wor,ds,women’s ous places in th’e chamber men aroseand began suffrage canntot become aGovernment measure in the talking,and it reminded me of our junior debates in lifetime of thisParliament. college-except that we had to get up our subject better; In the same letter to th,e supplement aforementioned, we were“flunked ” (Anglice, ploughed) if we didn’t. I madea statement which has since been splendidly We madeoccasional appeals to logic. Such would supported by the writer of “ Notes of the Week,’’ and notseem to be Parliamentaryform. has beensimply ignored by the women. AS the Yourcountry was said to be in a crisis. I dare say Speaker’s ruling may convince a number of women that itwas verycleverly managed. I presumelabour was theproper thing to dbo, accordingto the form of re- “ broken for the next thirty years.” presentative government, is to educate tbe electors be- But in the House of Commons one heard only a little foreattempting a coup d’emain, I quote the passage ineffective banter. The Tories impressed m,eby a h,ere : “ The mostpowerful argumentagainst votes charm of manner, w.hlolly absent from the Government for women is that women have n,ot the right tQ vote in side of theHouse. S’o’meone whothey told me was England. (I havere-written this phrase because the “ Hugh Cecil ” volunteered that “ co-partnership ” was construction of theoriginal w.ould be unintelligible.) the solution. He hadgreat charm of manner,but F60rit is clear that if women have been able to improve seemedrather vague in hisideas asto just what or th&rstatus, to increase their power,and to enlarge how “ co-partnership ” might be. their sphere of activity, with.out the vote, then the vote Lloyd Georgeentered ; heseemed almost as un- is n’ot necessary to their welfare or progress,. Its value. pleasant as Mr. Churchill;he had a voice like a file whimch is the only thing I careabout, is nil. It will in a bit of uneven steel. His speech wasinteresting not increase the representation of women in Parliament, psychologically, andthe substance of hisreply tothe for it will add nothing to the abilities of the Members general objectionto somethingrather undefined was returned.It will simply increaseth,e numbers of the about as follows :-“ Thai’s allvery well and that’s polls, and add t’o the work of the returning officers and allvery well, butI’m the biggest dog in thiskennel, scrutineers. The extension of thefranchise to women and there’s n’o use in’ arguing that.” may, by registering a greater number of votes, give I heard two things that sounded like sense-one from greater confidence tothe Government; for the will of a man who knew something about the inside of a coal the people, as the phrase goes, will be more accurately mine,and, later, another argument from a manwho ascertained.But asthe introduction of legislation is knew something about marine engines. practically the prerogative of the Cabinet,and it isa So I conclude the real division of the House is some- statesman’s business to getthe country to allow him where about the gangway, rather than a matter of left to d,o ashe likes,it offers nio guarantee o,f better an,d right. governmentor ,of th.e removal of practicaldisabilities And as itis obvious that such a great world-empire from whimch the sex undoubtedly suffers.” as yours could not be governed by the lucubrations of I must repeat here what I h,ave wrimtten in other issues this debating club, I am forced by the process reductio of THENEW AGE. Representationis only possible in ad absurdum toconclude that it must be governed by Parliament.Women’s Suffrage has no more to do something else. with representativegovernment than has proportional. 302 representation; both aresimply electoral reforms. The This book, judging not merely from its title, but from slightest knowledge of political history will show us its introductory chapter and various references through- thatit does not matter how a manis elected, 0.r for out, is supposedto deal with the abstract problem of whatportion of thecountry he may sit. Sarum may aristocracy and its alleged decline. It is only too clear, bLe asheep-walk, Dunwich may be half underthe sea, however,that the author is notfamiliar with the de- Droitwich may be an abandoned salt-pit; but the mem- ments of hissubject. Hegives us a brief definition bers for those constituencies were no less and no more o,f his theme at the start, and then proceeds to tell US amenable to party discipline (a euphemismfor corrup- that the thing he writes about has never been realised. tion)than representatives of thrivingcentres of trade. And to show that all attempts towards realising it have SirSamuel Romilly, one of thepurest men who ever failed, he proceeds to quote instances from the British sat in Parliament,purchased his seat, believing that aristocraticclasses ch.iefly, andalso from the German only thus codd a member of Parliament be independent aristocraticclasses. He confuses these concrete classes andfree from corruption. Representative government with the abstract principle of aristocracy, speaks of the isonly possible to representativemen; and unless the rise ‘of democracy, and concludes that democracy is right womenhave some candidates who are more English andaristocracy wrong, simply becausethe ruling than the Welshmen, the Scotchmen, the Irishmen, who classesin England and Germany do not rule so well n,ow monopolise politics, we should be no better off if asthey difd. This,we confidently assert, is no mere womenobtained the vote. “In representativegovern- travesty of Mr.Ponsonby’s arguments; it is merely a ment, tao change the members is to reform the House.” brief summary .of them. Take these four passages :- I wrotethat nearly two years ago, just after Herbert Thesuspicion is growingthat our aristocratic model Jacobs had polled 22 votes, and Mirrilees had polled, I is deteriorating, that our patricians are inadequately per- think, 37 votes as Women’s Suffrage candidates. Since forming the duties which fall to them, that theya’re by no then,George Lansbury has thrown away his seat in means alive to their responsibilities, and that democracy support of Women’s Suffrage. demands a higherlevel of trained, well-informed, and- It is certain that all the attempts to bring pressure if necessary-specialised capacity in the agents which are to bear upon the Government are futile, and area denial required to perform its work. There is an increasing im- of thedemocratic spirit professed by thewomen; and patience against the existence of a class that merely vege- tates, lives off the fat of the land, 2nd squanders, according the fact thzt no Cabinet thinks that the electoral support to theirwhim and fancy, the wealth that others have of women isworth the effort of overcomingits pre- toiled to create. There is no room for a purely ornamental judices against admitting women t,o the exercise of the class in a modern State, and it is an abuse of liberty and vote ought to convince even the women that the vote a danger to social advancement to allow any large section is no,tworth having. We shall,let LIS hope,have a of the community to be idle and parasitic. (Pp. 23-34.) revival of militancy. Twoyears ago, I feared that the The advent of a’ plutocracy, we devoutly hope, 1s only continuance of militancy would result in serious danger a nightmare. Nevertheless, the manipulating of interests, to the women; but events have proved that forecast to the juggling in the money-market, the mania for specula- tion, the creation of falsemoney standards, the interna- be wrsong. Any cessation of militancy will deprivetbe tionalsyndicates of financial adventurersto which people of England of a joke, and in these doleful days Governments become a prey, the control of the Press, the that would be a seriousdeprivation. It is hintedthat ostentatious benevolence of millionaires, and the brutalis- militancy will be more terrible than it has ever been : ing effect of the pursuit of wealth give us a foretaste of the Miss Mary Gawthorpe has suggested a general hunger kind of calamity it would mean. (P. 314.) strike if the vote is denied tu women. This is a brilliant \&Thatever good characteristics may be possessed by the suggestion,and I hbope thatit will beadopted; for, if aristocrat, they are not theoutcome of his blood and breed- all the women starve themselves todeath, there will ing or even of his environment. (P. 319.) In theupper class, although attainments in learning be no womento be ‘enfranchised.Another suggestion and letters have fallen off, 2Iid although millionaire col- is a development of some advice given in THENEW AGE lectors have taken the place of the great patrons of art, about three years ago. No, votes, no babies, suggested the average o€ taste and appreciation in art and literature THE NEW AGE : Mrs.Lucy ReBartlett suggests that iscertainly higher than formerly. (P. 310.) a general celibate strike should be proclaimed.This is We have quoted from the beginning and end of the not the “ Freewoman” idea of a strike against celibacy; Mrs. Re Bartlett simply declares that all th,e spinsters, bookbecause the middle chaptersform chiefly an married,and unmarried, should dteprive men of the in- examination of the English ruling classes since the time estimable joys of sexual intercourse until women get the ofElizabeth. Confining ourselves to thle passages vote. It would be a shame to deprive us of the innocent givenabove, Mr. Ponsonby must be informed that amusement provided by theseannouncements, and democracydemands nothing, and never did. The therefore I hope that militancy will continue. “ornamental class” alluded to does exist in present-day A. E. R. England ; but it is not, as our author gives us to under- stand, to be found amongst the so-called “aristocrats,” REVIEWS. orcomposed of them. It iscomposed of thewealthy capitalists,against whom Mr. Ponsonby would seem The Decline of Aristocracy. By ArthurPonsonby, M.P. (T. Fisher Unwin. 7s. 6d. net,) to be declaiming on p. I 13-those very capitalists who are the main support of the hypocritical party of which THEREare a few thinkingpeople in Englandat the Mr. Ponsonby is a member. It is thesewealthy people presenttime, but not very many. If they should ever whonow rule us, and, even if democracywere so en- feelthe need of anemetic, we strongly advise a few lightened as to“demand” specialists €or this or that ’doses of thisbook ‘of Mr. Ponsonby. We havefound purpose,our rulers would take pod carethat these here and there, a happy observation, a just phrase. But demandswere granted, only in so far as they did not the general tenor of the book is monstrously absurd ; happentlo conflict withthe interests of capitalism. the conclusions are ridiculous, the arguments deplorable. But what are we to say of a writer whlo expresses the “ Aristocracy,” begins Mr. Ponsonby nobly, “in its pure theoreticalsense means government by thebest, the hope th,at the advent of plutocracy may be only a night- best being those who are superior both morally and in- mare? What are we to think of his observation, his in- tellectually,and who, therefore, would govern directly telligence,his powers of judgment?In his very next in theinterests of thegoverned. . . . Inpractice such sentencethe hopeful M.P. mentions indications of an ideal has never been realised, for the simple reason plutocracy which are all around us, yet he professes not thatthe best are undiscoverable.” Mr. Ponsonby goes to see that the power of anyaristocracy w-e once had 011 to refer to Greece and the Middle Ages, the danger has beensmashed €‘orever. To take the fourth quota- of anoligarchy’s degeneration into a plutocracy,and tion I have given, how can we reconcile th,e statements SO forth: but his primary statement is simply not true. that,while attainments in arts and letters have fallen The best are not only discoverable : they have been dis- off in theupper class, the average of taste is now cover&; and they have ruled, not merely in the interests higherthan formerly? This is a contradiction in of th.e governed, but in theinterests of themselves. terms:the passage is simply nottrue. Mr. Belloc, This, could our author but know it,is equally important. withfar more insight,pointed out long ago, in one 303
of his most interesting essays (THENEW AGE, June I, one in which anyKing’s Counsel or Commons’ ap- 1911 thattaste among th,e upper classes began to pointed judge can bully it, dictate to it, and by devious decline about the middle of the 1as.t century, the result wayseven appoint it.Mr. Yarrosis quite convinced, being seen in the declining number of book-buyers’. Mr. and so are we, that libertycan never return until the Ponsonby, not for the first time, must be directly con- people have the last word in the determination of laws, tradicted. Th’e average of taste in the classeshe men- the power to decide, not merely whet,herthey areor tions is certainly not higher n,ow than it was formerly; arenot properly administered, but whethler theyshall and, what is miore, the general average of taste is lower orshall not be administered at all. It is obviousthat, to-day, with therise of plutocracyor democracy (let left to unwhippedjuries, many laws now operative Mr. Ponsonby call it wh8at he will) than it w.as fifty or would bea dead letter. Against the despotism of the sixtyyears ago. This fact is well enough known to House of Commons, indeed, and in the absence of the all really cultured men; but it has apparentlyescaped jury systemin it? originalintegrity there is no check the notice of a writer whlo “hopes ” th.at plutocracy is on the horridest arbitrariness of the most soulless and not yet upon us. irresponsibletyrant ever permanently established. We Now f,or thethird extract, the origin of all our commend this little but precious work to every popular author’s blunders. The characteristics of aristocracy libertarian;and particularly to these simpletons who are in the bloodand ‘breeding of aristocrats;not, as imagine that the Servile State is still a 1,ong way off. Mr. Ponsonby would .appear ,to think, merely in the The Notebooks of Samuel Butler. (A. C. Fifield. educationgiven t,o the children of theupper classes. 6s. net.) Blood, breeding,and environment may be summed up SAMUELBUTLER’S scientific works, “ Lifeand in theone expression : purity of race. Race,as s.0 Habit,” “ Evolution Old andNew,” ‘‘ Unconscious manycultured men, from the ancient Greeks and th,e Memory,” and “Luck ,or Cunning” are full of interest, ancientIndians down to Gobineau, Disraeli, and and his novel, “ Th,e Way of all Flesh,” though spoilt Nietzschehave already remarked, race is the key to by much smarting resentment, is exceptionally good as almost everysocial problem. of the present time, or of Englishworks of fiction go. To anyone, however, any time. Thecharacteristics of anyaristocrat will who is ready to acknowledge the freshness, penetration, befound in th’e answer tso thequestion : Is hisrace andvigour of much in the above works,these notes pure?The spread ‘of education,the “demands” of have come somewhat as a disappointment. If to such a democracy, th.e rise of plutucrats : thesethings h.ave reader Butlerhad hitherto seemeda noble free-lance, nothingat all todo with the decline of aristocracy. occasionally sheddinga volume of hissurplus energy Theyare symptoms, effects,indications; but they are and wisdom from his all-too-rich naturalstore, the certainly not causes. reading of thisnew volume of Fifield’s will scarcely Hencethe foolishness of this book. The author has tend to confirm or add colour tothis view. That proved, no doubtsatisfactorily enough, that the Eng- which a sympathetic reader of “ Erewhon” might lishruling classes h.ave stea,dily degeneratedduring readily have expected to find was a deep and luxuriant the last three centuries :or BO, and, because these people backgroundto the fifteen or so odd volumesconsti- claimed aristocracy,and have declined, the principle tuting Butler’s life works. Flor itis not unusual, it is of aristocracy is therefore badand must be thrown rather de rigueur for a man of Butler’s boasted origin- overboard. We havegiven Mr. Ponsonby’s definition ality, to keep a gooddeal in hisprivate note-books of theword; and we challengeanybody toshow that which, though it is understoodto have been unpub- theEnglish ruling classes have ever, as a whole, cor- lishable, yetproves its author to have b,een very far responded to i’t. And even if we admit that they have, beyondhls age.There is so little of thisnature in and that theyh.ave degenerated in any way, what on the volumebefore us, that a fewreferences would earth has that to do with th,e general abstract principle suffice to exhaust every instance of it. Of course, of aristocracy?Nothing whatsoever. We do n’ot Butler’s whimsical andsometimes melancholy humour wonder that taste h.as declined; we do n,ot wonder that never leaves him, and does much towards lightening the so many people havestopped buying modern books, pages of th,eseposthumous records. Even here, blow- when productionslike this ill-constructed,ill-conwived ever, there is no trace of wealth, and one rises from the thing are flaunted and reviewed in the humdrum dailies perusal of the bookwith a disagreeablefeeling that andweeklies asthe acme of thelatest sociological Butler put all he had into his shop window. There is no thought. Inages when tastewas higher, Mr. Pon- reason why a man should not put all he has into hisshop sonby would probablyhave been engaged in copying window, but when he does so posterity may be forgiven th,e manuscripts of men of talentand genius; m,ost if itquestions whether, .after all, he was so very assuredly he would nothave been allowed to puthis much in advance (of hisage. Were Butlereven con- ownthoughts on paperor parchment. His work, tto sistent, were he evenfree from that terrible confusion speak frankly, has disgusted us. of thought which so frequently marsthe work of Free Political Institutions. Edited by Victor Yarros. Englishthinkers, some of hisobservations in this (Daniel. IS. net.) volume would be worth all his other works puttogether. Mr. Spooner’s work, “Trial by Jury,” of which Mr. For instance, his remarks an Christian morality and on Yarroshas here made an able “ abridgmentand re- virtueand vice on pp. 25, 27, 28, 29; those on artists arrangement,”dealt mainlywith America;but his and artand music on pp. 9S, 104, 110 111, 112, 113, powerfuland illuminating analysis of thecauses and 121, 136, 187, etc. are excellent, and still utterly beyond effects of the decline of the jury system is equally applic- even this age. abletlo England. It is evident thatthe right of the On the other hand, however, for every one of these jury was no small popular safeguard in early and mediae- pages, so many could be found which show thatButler’s val England. On the contrary it was of such importance soundness was not to be relied upon beyond twenty-four that kings resented the liberty thus held against them lines of print; that, trite as this caution may seem, the and sought on many occasions to regain control of the reader is warned that he will feel some difficulty in not jury. Inour day we can scarcelyconceive whatkings suspectingmere smartness or superficial brilliance, saw t.0 fear in theinstitution of the jury. But in truth where, in a more consistently profound writer he would the jury system is nut now and has not been fortwo have to recognise only superior insightand wisdom. hundredyears what it was when kingsfeared it. For It i.s all very well to say that “Christian morality is just thci-e is no doubtthat in its inception andfor long as immoral as any other,” but if later on in the notes afterwardsthe jury wasthe ultimate popular defence you are going to argue about morality and the ego in against the sovereign’s laws. To secureadministra- apurely Christian way, the former remark is rendered tion there wasnecessary the consent of King,Lords, valueless. Thusagain and again the reader becomes Commons and Juries (thelatter being and not merely conscious of the Bishop’s grandson in these notes, and representing thepeople). Gradually, however, the let him rest assured that f,or every side-spring over the sovereign power usurpedthe power of the people and traces of proprietyand orthodoxy he will find an by a series of legalprecedents reduced the jury to its apology, tacit or expressed, duly recorded somewhere presentimpotent, ignominious and disgraceful str?te ; in the chapters. 304
him in all sorts of horse-play ; vou would say, roars Drama. and laughs.. And then, if notalways the finest, it is always a genial laughter.” Not to recognise this is to By John Francis Hope read Shakespeare like a Shavian ; and Mr. Barker is a Shavian.Nowhere d,oes his production suggest even THEmost notable characteristic of modern art, as THE thi,s superfluity;thle performance atthe Savoy is as NEW AGE is constantlysaying, is theapparent deter- “ adequate ” as ,Sir Henry Wood’s conducting of mination of those skilled in one artto producethe Beethoven; in bothcases we feel that everyoneis effects of anotherart or of a science. In thework of exhausted, and that the peculiar effect of the author or Strauss and his followers musk, which can ‘best render composer is not produced. theinarticulate emotions of man,attempts to para- Inthe columns of THE NEW AGE “AnActor” has told us how this effect of sufficiency instead of phraseideas, which, by theirvery nature, are already superfluity isproduced ; butthe methodis notthe articulated. The “ Also Sprach Zarathustra ” is a case reason. As I statedon a previousoccasion, Shaw in point. Sculpture, whichcan render betterthan any preventedactors from acting because hewanted to other art theperfect beauty of theideal human form, convertthe stage into a Witenagamot; Barker, who fallsaway to the impressionism of Rodin orthe de- is the merest pupil of Shaw, is simply competing with liberate distortion of Epstein.Painting, which, by its thecinematograph. He is attempting to blend the very nature, must fix the transitory movement on can- kinemacolour,with gramophone attachment, with the vas, must give permanence to the momentary grouping fixed beauty of thepainted picture. He says inhis preface to the play : “ Its serious mood is passionate, or the fleeting expression, attempts to portray motion, itsverse is lyrical, the speaking of it needsswiftness or, worse thanthat, to visualise thought. Literature, and fine tone ; not rush, but rhythm, constant and com- which, more than life,should correspond to Herbert pelling. And now I wait contentedly to be told that less Spencer’sdefinition of evolution,and change from an rhythmic speakingof Shakespeare hasnever been heard, ” indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite, coherent I accept the challenge : I tell him so. It was impossible heterogeneity,prides itself onbeing inchoate, without to tell the difference betweenverse and prose ; the form and void. Dramaattempts, in thesedays, to verse portions of the comedy, were, indeed, less “con- stant andcompelling” than the prose ones. And it is usurp the function of the Houses of Parliament; and a hignificant of his uttrfailure to reproduce even his concourse of players on the stage tends to become a de- ownconception of the play that the finest tonein the liberativeand legislative assembly. The modern arts play was produced by Henry Ainley, as Malvolio, who agree in this, at least, .that they are all revolutionary ; in did not speak verse and did not speak swiftly. other words, they begin with a denialof their own nature, I havereferred at leastonce inthese articles to and are compelled to adopt the disguise of another. Hamlet’s advice to the players, but there is one passage There would be no harm in this if we were a healthy so apposite thatI must quote it : “ Benot tootame neither, but let your (own discretion be your tutor; suit people. Revolutions .cvould runtheir course back to the action to the word, the word to the action.” Will thereality from which theystarted, with a valuable it be believed? Granville Barker suits the action to the addition of experience. In South America, for example, picture. At the very beginning of (theplay Duke Orsino revolutions are not really a dangerous trade ; they are stands centre stage with arms ‘outstretched spreadeagle a daily occupation, a form of casuallabour. But to fashion, while themusicians ply himwith “‘the food a people thathas been corrupted by Wagner, de- of love.” The gesture and the position fit the picture; bauched by Strauss, demoralised by Shaw, bewitched by but they do not express the emotion. At the end of the thewriters of free rhythm,and that has sold its soul play (togive another and a more ludicrous example) to thePost-Impressionists, revolutions aredangerous. Viola and Sebastian confront each other like the famous “Disease itself may be stimulusa tolife,” said “ Wrestlers, ” whilethey establish their identical Nietzsche; “only a personmust be sound enough for parentage. Once again, thegesture fits the picture ; such a stimulus.” We are not. If we were, Mr. Gran- indeed, it is so long sustained that one knows that it is ville Barker would be givenshort shrift, and the adopted for pictorial instead of dramatic effect. “Twelfth Savoy Theatre would be the scene of a riot. Wight,” on Mr. Barker’s own showing,should be It doesnot seem to be understoodthat “ Twelfth a play of quick and violent contrasts ; now sexually pas- Night ” was written by Shakespeare. The fact must be sionate, now grievous, now boisterouslycomical, and vociferated,lest visitors tothe Savoy imagine that so on. Butthe performance is simplyrecitation, of a it was written by Mr. GranvilleBarker. Ifthere is kind thatdoes not provoke theappropriate mood. one thing more certain than another of Shakespeare, it Claude King, with his rasping voice, could not be pas- it that he was of the stage, stagey. No English writer sionate in tone if hetried ; an,d he is not allowed tlo has a surer sense of dramatic effect than Shakespeare ; try. I havenot forgotten MissEvelyn Millard’s won- no Englishwriter ever relied so entirelyon charac- derfulperformance of Francesca ; but I foundit difi- terisation and dramatic speech for his effect as Shakes- cult to believe that Olivia at the Savoy was played by peare did. We is more real, if that bepossible, in the the sameactress. Something must have gone wrong ; studythan on thestage. Garrick, if we can believe the exquisite voice and intelligence of Francesca cou;d eye-witnesses, was even greater in recitationsof not so have marred the crescences and cadences of the Shakespeareto a smallcompany than in themore passionate Olivia. Onegot the impression that Miss. elaborateproductions of thestage. The point is that Millard must have rehearsed with the aid of a tuning- Shakespeareis pre-eminently anauthor who can dis- fork, so calculatedwere her responses, so stereotyped pensewith trappings, in theperformance of whose herintonations. There is no doubtthat Mr.Granville plays a producer is an importance. For no manwith Barker is attempting to make a picture of the stage; it dramatic skill could fail tomake Shakespeare’s work is conceivable that he is trying to make a choral sym- pleasing and intelligible, ‘since character is always more phony of the speeches. If this be so, the more beautiful interesting than circumstance. notesof Miss Millard’s voice are pitched at least a There is anotherpoint evenmore importantthan couple of toneslower. Miss McCarthywas worthy of this,for “ TwelfthNight ” is a comedy.Carlyle has herhusband’s instruction ; there was not a thrill or a said that “ in nopoint does Shakespeare exaggerate, finetone in herspeaking. She spoke, asshe always but only in laughter.Fiery objurgations, words that speaks,huskily, when sheought to have made her pierce and burn, are to be found in Shakespeare ; yet he voice vibrate ; and she expressed passion in the approved is always in measure here ; never what Johnson would style of Miss LillahMcBarker. “ Twelfth Night,” one remark asa specially ‘ goodhater.’ But his laughter feltsure, was not a play by Shakespeare ; it was an seemsto pour from him in floods ; heheaps all sorts elementary exercise in production by Granville Barker ; of ridiculous nicknames on the butt ; tumbles and tosses and if was damnable. 305
But a few questions suggest themsplves.-Are these Art. people at the Grosvenor Gallery stronger, more power- ful,than the tradesmen outside? Are they the last The: Arts and Grafts Exhihition at the Grosvenor healthycontingent of an unhealthy population? IS thleirbeauty an impetuous, irresistible torrent that Gal I ery . nothing, n80t even the gigantic horrors of this age could dam? Or are they mere romanticists who believei3 beauty By Anthony M. Ludovici. "academically"; wh,o think it is right and proper, whio would be ready even to die for it, but who have but weak- A SOMEWHAT astuteScotsman observed the other day ness to enlistin its cause? Far from being .an impetuous in mypresence that one of tbehopeful signs of the andirresistible torrent that nothing could arrest, is times was the increasing appreciation of beautywhich theirbeauty perhaps but a tricklingrivulet, coaxed characterisedthe taste of th'eyounger generation to- along feverishly with 'loving and yet hopeless fingers? day. This may or may not be so. In any case, if it is a Theseare searching questions, ,and they are unkind fact, the younger generation can find but little to' satisfy questions.They are not, however, gratuitously un- it; for there are certainly n,ot enough beautiful girls to kind, as every 'one will allow who agrees with me on thle go allround, neither are there enough beautiful men. matter of beauty, and on thIe question of the quality of thisage. An inspection of theExhibition, however, Almostone hundred years ago-that is to say, whlen soon tells its own sad tal'e. Everything seems inspired- modern industrialism was still only aboutfifty years old- more than inspired : remembered ! ThisExhibition i5 William Cobbett wrote of Stroud, Rochester and Chat- notthe past; it is a sad memento of thepast. These ham. : " The girls in these towns dlo not seem to be s40 artistshave remembered a good deal.They love a pretty as theywer'e thirty-eight years ago." It would past thmey wlouldfain revive. Of originalstrength, of beinteresting to hear what he wfould now say of the native power, of native beauty, th,ere is little hereabout. And where there is frank severence from tradition the girls of " th'e Wen," if he could return to pass them in a result is drab, clumsy, ugly, lovelorn weak-just what review, after anothiei- century's spell of the evils he was onewould expect. No, nIotwhat one wodd expect, so energetic in condemning ! butrather, what is littleless than inevitable. Look at Still, if we confine our attention to' mere adornment, theexhibits Nos. 87, 89, 95, 96, 97, takenquite at both of thebody and 01 the home, perhapsit may be random ! Theyonly remotely resemblethe past; they said with some truth that there is. an increasing appre- are an attempt at expressinga novelty, a new l'ove, a ciation of .the beautiful to be observed among the risipg newcharacter. And what are they? Cabinets, tables, generation-an appreciation far greater than any which bookcases andbookstands, devoid of al charmand grace. characterised the people of the nineteenth century. And Incidentally, one of the most successful of Sir Robert foremost among the movements which are evidence of Lorimer'sexhibits consists of thethree waste-paper this better taste, we may perhaps mention the Arts and pails; whille his designs, f,or furniture are as uninviting Crafts Exhibition Society. as they are characterless. It is difficult, also, to see the The root of allbeauty, however, is power in some charmMr.in Ambrose Heal'swork. Nlo. 56, a form. It iseither the power of a long,uninter- China Cabinet, is quite devoid of either imagination or ruptedtradition, which, giving rise to a particular power, anld thelittle insignificant moulding which recedes modestly frlo8m the extreme length and breadth and orderly set ,of features, pleases th'ose to whom that of the sides issuggestive more of weaknessthan of particulartradition is dear and familiar; olr it maybe novelty in design. As for the squares in the windows, thepower of anaccumulated effort, running through it is hard to see 'their beauty. Their spirit reappears in generations,to achieve a certainaim; in which case Nos. 375, 410 (hideous,both by Mr. Ambrose Heal, something very beautiful "may result, either in body or andin each case thmey are equally difficult to acoount spirit, provided once more thatthat aim be dear and f'or lor to appreciate.Two other pieces of furniture by the same artist are of some interest in, the present dis- familiar to thosewho are to judge of thebeautiful. cussion : No. 151 for its lack of proportion .and No. 444 Very well, then, in thepursuit of beauty we tacitly forits careless workmanship (but Mr. Ambrose Heal implypower of some sort-the power or means to' do wasnot responsible for this.). To give you someidea so, which is Art; or the strength to do, which is Craft of the unnecessary massiveness of N80. 151, a very well- (,Ger. Kraft.=strength). Wherever we find weakness, knownarchitect is said t,o haveobserved, on looking then, or imitation (which ais weak substitute for original at it, that it had been conceived in the mind of a stone- mason.This is perfectlytrue. Certainly no skilled strength), we shall naturally not expect to see beauty. worker in wolod wouldever have designed such a Becauseweakness and beauty are incompatible. The COLOSSUS ! wople of a weak age, 5or instance, can always be recog- Thesefaults lend an atmosphere of amateurismto nisedby thle preponderance of uglyindividuals anlong the(exhibits, which is as deplorableas it ,ktannoying. them. Take, f'or instance, Mr. Joseph Armitage's corner cup- Now the exhibition od the Arts and Crafts Exhibition board, with its hinges executed by Mr. Edward Spencer. Society is an interesting lesson in the application of this If YOU can imagine a massive prison door, with heavy principle.Everybody, even the most captious critic, steel hinges, fitted to a box intended to contain knick- would be ready to admit that the men and women con- knacks or jam-pots, you have an idea of the extravagant absurdity od thisexhibit, with its gold embellishments stitutingthe members of thissociety, are actuated by andtawdry design; while for lack of restraint in a a genuine desire to producebeauty. Stand in any one madtumultuous struggle for beauty, No. 122, by Mr. of therooms od theNew Grosvenor Gallery and look A. Romney Green, is, an easy second in the whobe exhi- about you ! In an instant you will- beconvinced that, bition.The first Ishall refer to later. Mr. Romney however remote these people may be from their credit- Greenretrieves his reputaton, however, in thewalnut able aim, at least' they have sought to produce beautiful armchair (No. 121). Another instance of an amateurish things. The desire f,or beauty is almost articulate, it is lack of proportionis Mr. Hamilton T. Smith'smaple- so intense in some of the work; and here and there it wood cigarette-box (No. IIO~),th,e hinge of which deli- struggleswith such desperation asto be literally catestructure is sufficiently massiveto support a lid "loud." There is a touch .of pathos in it all-outside the twenty times as big as the one to whichit is actually ugly city, "the Wlen"; beyond it the ugly age with all fixed.But the greatest fault in allthe furniture is itsvulgar commercialism andindustry, and all its surelyits unworkmanlike, bad finish. Whatbecomes hedonism,exploitation and ostentatious upstartism- of "craft"when the strength of theworkman in the within,this frantic, convulsive and obviously sincere mastery of hismeans is. non-existent ? Perhapsthis effort to make beautiful things. will he thloughthypercritical. It really is not, How 306 canany goodcome out of anartistic and ostensibly heartd in London during recent ye,ars? One percent. ? artistic movement for superseding, or at least equalling, Yes, we are a conservativepeople-always talking the olld (superseding only in the matter of design appa- aboutenterprise, and patting each other on theback. rently), unless the craftsman's difficulties and problems Whe'n we do go a buster we produce an inflated sym- are in the first place completely mastered? To m.ention phony (save#the mark !) like that of GustavMahler, caly a few of the pieces that show this lack of mastery, whicheverybody was talking about last week. A look at Arthur W. Simpson's work cabinet in oak (No. pompous,vain-glorious, empty thing, this-just an SI), one of the moist beautiful things in the exhibiton, hrouransd ten minutes tmoo long. It was fairly played by spoilt forthe fastidious critic by its slovenlydetail. tbeQueen's Hall Orchestra under Henry Wood's See,also, G. L1. Morris (No. SI), WilliamWeinhart direction, land left the audience bored and apathetic. It (No. 52), Hamilton T. Smith (No. IIOC), inwkich the is difficult t,o see what use Mahler found in the herd-bell marquetry panels are so good that the bad workman- and thle guitars and that dreadful invention the zither- ship 'of th'e rest is all th.e more to be deplored, Malcolm banj'o. I have never hceard a serenade that was less like C. Powell (No. 252), AmbroseHeal (No. 444), C. a serenade,than tbat suggested in thismegalomaniac Spooner (No. 468). Butthe two worst cases are cer- symphony, an,d I have nleverhleard anytbingquite so tainly Walter Crane (No. 126) andJessie Bayes (No. apoplectic as the first movement. It reminded me of a 242). Thelatter, wbich is .a mass of gilding anld fussy,bad-tempered old-gentleman struttingalong the decorative painting,is utterly spoiled by theappalling street and pausing at every thdrd step to inveigh against workmanship (of itsconstruction. I sayagain, what the Almighty. Of scheme therewas apparently none, good can come ,of artistic furniture which ,is jerry-built? ofinvective tbere w,as an 'abundance. Perhaps it is only fair to say that the dtesigner in each x** case hasnot always executed hisdesign himself. But I, who have seenmere craftsmen executeRodin's For th'e moment Iam more deeply interested in the marble sculpture flor him, know very well t.0 what ex- workof our youngsters at hlome than in that of any tentan ,original artist can control hissubordinate's School abroad. For a century and a h.alf Germany was work,provided he himself wderstandsand ,masters t,op dog; for ,the last twenty years France and Russia thatsubordinate's difficulties andproblems. have tied fior th'e same position, althoughthe tremen- dous egotism od Richard Straws has during that period Th'e most pleasing things in the exhibititon are, first, ,made itself felt whaerfever themaking of musicis a Mr. 0. Waldmann's oak newel-post for staircase (N'o. serious occupation,and will continue tomake itself 34), andthen, somse goodway behinad, Miss Margaret frelt. But our turn is coming, if it hasn't already come. Reed'sstained wood chessboard (No. IsId).The At the present moment we have a group of men, well beauties of NIO. 34 are perhaps realisedm,ost vividly under fortyyears of age, wbose bestwork can more by comparing it with its neighbours, the Hawk .and the thanh,dd its own withth,at of anysimilar group in Owl (Nos. 32 and 33 respectively),designed and exe- anyother productive country. I am inclined to blame cuted by MissGrace Mead. Miss Mead's w,ork, like Cecil Sharpfor having a finger in our mostexcellent m,ostwomen's, excels rather in conscientiousnessthan pie. It maybe, of course, only a coincidence, but the in artistic quality. unself-conscious revival of folk-song and the revival and practice ,of traditionaldances have synchronised with, if not preceded, that creative energy which is expressed in the names of Roger Quilter, Percy Grainger, Balfour Music and Musicians. Gardiner,Vaughan-Williams, Granville Bantock, Cyril Scott, and several others. It is, perhaps, the sortof coin- By John Playford. cidence thatthe historiancalls renaissance. Any way, renaissance or coincidence, it is a cheerful thought. A BY the time ,th8ese linesare in print "all th,e world" will monthago, in Birmingham,at the conference CP~that betalking about Straws' pot-boiler. "DerRosenka- .mlost plaintive organisation, ,the Inoormrated Society of valier" will havetaken fashionable London by storm, Musicians (" IncorporatedDuffers," Ernest Newman and Covent 'Garden will again be a-flutter w-ith sheepish mostuncharitably callsthem), some young-British excitement. The Beecham Symphony Orchestra will music was heard one evening-music that only the most have covered itself with glory, everybody concerned will cynical and blase of critics would damn tor its optimism be weari'nglaurel-wreaths, and in Kensingtonsome and vigour. This music, letme hasten tjo add,had bitterwords will havebeen spoken. Kensington is nothingto do withthe Incorporated Society, which always bitter, and Kensington will be bitter to the end pursues a feverish course of its own in banqueting once of the chapter. The really cheerful thought is that we a year and discussing fees and Registration-whatever are getting pretty near th,e end of the chapter. It is not that may mean-and the rendezvous for the year after, s'o many weeks ago that a plaintive manifesto was issued Itwas heard at one of threeconcerts organised by fromthe royal borough demanding-not asking faor- the Musical League, and Arnold Bax, Balfour Gardiner, alms fr,om th,e great musical public. AState-subven- Edgar Bainton, Gustav von Holst (English, despite his timed opera, if you please ! To produce what? Ken- name), Havergal Brian, Harry Keyser, and Julius Har- singt,on comedies ? Marylebone tragedies ? God forbid ! risonwere represented. A scratchorchestra was em- *%* ployed,including a fewfirst-rate professbonal players, and no' doubtthe works performed hadnot quite the 1 pin my faith to the taste of the public. Majorities best of chances.But it was clearlyth'e ,death-knell are not always, in spite of cynical observators, wrong. of the miseryschool, forfrom what I know of the Majorities may be slow--moving, and they may become scores no doubt remains in my mind that the develop- feverishand unreasonable at times, but in musical ment of European music lies in England. matters they are so far right that during the promenade concerts at the Queen's Hall it wds, the Wagner and the *I% Beethoven nights that paid the directors blest. Sir Henry Weingartner's Violin Concerto,played by Kreisler Wood's confidence in public taste is unlikely to suffer and thle Beecham Symphony Orchestra at the Palladium m.uch change in thenear future. Occasionally, of onSunday, was recenta event of importance. It course, it is necessary t,o produce a new work in order was an event I cannot recaIl with any s.srt of ecstasy. to stimulate th,e concert-goer, to drive him into expres- Kreisler played gloriously as usual, but he might have sing an 'opinion loln8eway or anlother; but we are a con- employed hisskill in the interpretation of a more in- servative people andthe new works prolduced atthe telligentcomposition. Let all wh.0 areinterested in Promenade andthe Symphony Concertswere much Britishmusic look atthe programme of Balfour Gar- fewerthan they ought to be. What proportion of the diner's next concertsand rejoice. Theseare to take works of Paul Dukas, Florent Schmitt, Maurice Ravel, place quite shortly. On Friday evening the Societe des Roger-Ducasse, Arnold Schonberg, Stravinsky, Liadoff, Concerts Francais give a concert Gf old French music Moussorgsky--toname a few off-hand-have been at the New Arts Club, which promises to be interesting. 307
Of pallidwayside roses, heavier scents Pastiche. Of roses of the garden, deeper snares Of bowls of roses ripe and faded, bowls A SOLILOQUY OF THE LATEST-SHODDY-POET. Of leaves of roses, faded, dark and sweet, Thelast aroma! Clusters of thevine, BY ALBERT ALLEN. Mature, deep-bosomed, umbered with the sun; Old dregs and essences of happiness, You Jezebel of hell, you painted whore, Of women’s pulses wound like springs of steel. . . .” Talk about faith, I’ll give you faith galore. . . . The world owes me my time of times, Ah, Davidson ! Aregal craftsman, that. And thattime’s coming now, by crimes. . . . No shoddy stuff forhim. Though heartand mind -“The Widow in the Bye-Street” In febrile youth were palpitant with strains Of passion yet unsung, philosophies (John Masefield). Amorphous gathered close abouthis brow. ’Ware kkrds I The street’sa Patch of muck just here. . . Like\ darkling clouds portentously abound To have a damned cold windtickling your belly. Pilatus’ brooding summit--he, ’twould seem, . . . . Could doff the Poet’s iridescent robes 0 heroismseems a piddling thing. . . . And sally forth in mufti, just to delve --“The Six Men of Calais” In lone and virgin tracts, like any mere (Lascelles Abercrombie) . Philologist, explorer, Klondike digger In search of latent jewels, nuggets, wealth, WELL, that’sthe end. I’ve hadenough of it : Material or otherwise. . . . . Now see A frigid, fireless room under the leads, The temple of hisbuilding : how the walls And facingNorth, too : draughty, mildewed, damp ; Are diapered with multi-coloured gems Assiduous, bending over books whose touch Of image, metaphor, and simile Felicitous, that glow, coruscate, gleam Alone’s enoughto quench whatever fires Resplendently, fed by the altar flame Smoulder within ; expedient belief Of this man’s genius; a heritage That when the belly’s gnawing for a; meal Of treasure-trove. Colossal intellect The brain’s much more assimilative; this And vibrant soul of him ! Morbid contriving after solitude, Lord, save me now : Pretending that the mind can best mature, “ ’Ware turds ! The street’s a patch of muck just here.’! I’m lapsing from my mission. I must build Like rich men’s wine, in chambers lone, aloof, My temple jerry-wise, besmear the walls And chill.Enough ! I’ll let the damned lot go With pungent ordure (’though I ought to call To Blazes-which suggests a little warmth Turds simply turds-ah, me ! ) and hang before At any rate. . . . . God ! What a mug I’ve been, The sacred flame some pickled offal, “high,” Paying a nightly toll of nerve and blood That prurient-poetry-patronson the prowl To learn the technique of a craft-a wan, Fortit-bits browned andsavoury may sniff Subduedapprentice at the bench of Art, The stuff and come right in. . . . . Well, to resume, And in an Age of Shoddy, too. As though I’m out for, copy, stimulus, “atmosphere” ; People with shoddy boots and shoddy clothes, I mean to haunt malodorous brothels, gloat Obsessed in shoddy loves and shoddy tasks O’er humid dung-pits, cess-pools, gaping sewers, Want anything but shoddy poetry- And entrailbins in slaughteryards : hob-nob Lacquered veneer for shoddy souls. With rogue or zany so he be possessed Oh, yes! Of syphilis, ulcers, lice, surfeit of phlegm I see it now. Possessed of quickeningsense, Coagulated, viscous ; steep my soul, Diaphanous intellect, perhaps, in youth My poet’s soul, in subtle perfumes sweet, I stored the mind with halcyon visions, garnered Exuded thick by flatulent harridans Like winsome flowers-chaste with dew, refreshed Ablutionless, in fulsome hovels, dark, By matutinal breezes, limpid draughts Close-shuttered’gainst thetorment of the morn. . . . Of early light-from woods and meads remote. . . . Recumbent strumpets. Then Longfellow, and the glad resolve that I, ‘‘ Pride of life,pure sex, I’d be apoet, too, and sing my songs Dreamingand roseate ! Trick of the night, andsleep Even as the robin sings, ’mid sprightly hops. . . . PretendedSmiles ! . . . . Europa! No; shebreathes And then (I’ll learn to curse their influence ! ) With Parted lips her nostrils, carved and sweet Keats,Shelley, Davidson, therabid, crank As immortelles of pearl, too delicate N.A. (yes, that !) and since, until last night, To fill in slumber’sheedless anarchy My Thesaurus,Matthew Arnold, bulky Dios., Herrhythmic bosom’s vaulted depths; her arms Classic and Nuttall, and the frigid hours, Hanglistless, and her limbs beneath her gown Etcetera,herein referred to. (Ah : Are like the gates of heaven, ajar.” A cue here. Lest they tire of kitchen gab, Oh, damn! I must work in a bit of bucket-shop Damn Davidson; I’m paying dearly now Vernacular.)Until lastnight, I said, For nights made magic with the sweep of wings For now I’ve had about enough of it- Invisible ;-elusive, glamorous shapes The world owes me my time of times, And sounds that haunt the moon-lit halls of sleep : And that time’s coming now, by crimes. White, lambent feet impetuous ;-fingers tense, My time of times-the ticket ! Jove ! No more Intrepid, kindling chords to passion fires;- Ascetic’s grub. I’ll cram the belly well O’er bosom undulating as the sea, And when that comfy feeling ’gins to spread Ope’d, mobile lips,-a wind-swayed arbour, rich TJp from the belly, round my poet’s soul Endowered withluscious aureole of vines So warm and smug, I’ll seek a cosy crib Whence flutter chaplet-wreathed philomels Insidethe local “cowyard”-well, i.e., Of purling melody ;-dark, haunting eyes, For th’ uninitiate, the local pub Filmed, prescient eyes enrapt with damasked dreams Most patronisedby gin-enamoured maids Eyes cavernous-calm, gloaming pools recessed . . . . For mouthy interludes twixt breeding bed My glance,a timorous, ripple-charming zephyr! . . . . And pawnshop.Here I’ll lollcontentedly Illusion, dream vain glorious ! And turn out poetry like this ad lib. Enough ; No effort needed; fleshless, pulseless “tens” ’Tis superseded. This will nowsuffice : And some idea cribbed from shady books, “ You see that fellow, him with straggling hair, Or,p’raps, suggested by theSunday Press. Near the spittoon, picking his teeth ?-Yes, him Of course, to get my inspiration pat- Ogling that saucy bitch fingering her garter ! Mood proper-I must have some twist to chew, Well, that’sthe poet Allen . . . . Haven’t dared Some snuff, and booze. Ah, booze- Tosample him ? Lor, what aPhilistine “I love to drink : You are, old chap. Soft poetryisn’t for me, Thedingy world becomes a crystal orb But I confess I like his stuff. O.K., Revealingtruth when wine enlightens me- AI it is for when you’re getting sick Truth like a sumptuous vision in a bell Of beef and mutton-whets the appetite Oj dew,a magic bubble blown to film For a frizzly bit of pork. . . Ha ! Ha ! I see That melts and bursts, a passion of delight, You tumble, eh? O.T. ? Well, I should think! A shimmering womb of diverse stains and deep. He knowswhat’s what. Many abit of skirt’s . . (Drinks) Odours faint ...... Fluttered his way, you bet. . . . He looks a nut ! J3 308
living.; but it is also true that out oi their abundance they LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, saveenormously, too. Theaddition tonational capital TEE INSURANCE TAX. which they thus make is invested in the form chiefly of Sir,-l am delighted tolearn that my “fierce” letter machinery which, again, enables the total production of inTHE NEW AGE some months ago had the effect of thenation to be increased. Now the question is this : making Mr. W. Woolverton a resister of theInsurance if, instead of taking,say, seven-tenths of thenational Act and a member of this Association. This fact absolves income andsaving, say, three-tenths, the presentrich me from the necessity of apologising for thatliterary were to transfer their surplus to the present poor, what effort, and relieves you of any doubts you may have had would become of it? Would themany poor savealto- as to the utility of sacrificing your valuable space to me. gether as much as the few rich save to-day ? And if they It also justifies the existence of this Association, without didnot, would notour capital diminish andtherewith which your correspondent would not, on his own showing, ourmeans of production?The effect, that is, of an have had the courage to defy this corruptly established equitable distribution of wealth might be to impoverish law, or even the secretary of the Littleswick Lodge of evervbody. By heaping wealth upon one smallclass we the Band of Hope ! do ai any rate ensure that some capital shall be saved and Surely it is rather ungracious of him to taunt us with employed in further production. lack of self-sacrifice andlack of determination when he If yourcorrespondent has followed me so far, I may would have had none himself but for us ! All thathe now go on to give the proper reply to his question. He imagines the capitalists, under threat of agreat strike, says ;LS to the apathy of the middle class and well-to-do I thoroughly endorse, but we are not to blame for it. We askingthe workers : “Whatis the most business-like did not send them to sleep with golf and bridge, we have n7ay In which we can give up much of the power that is not deprived them of the desire or power of making coming to us” : and he makes the latter reply, first, that sacrifices far theirprinciples, we havenot taught them the responsibility is thecapitalists’ and, secondly, that that their pledged word is a thing they can lightly break. out of their wealth they should raise the wages of poor On the contrary we have tried to awaken them from their Stateservants, purchaseindustries for the nation,and apathy, we have urged them to make sacrifices, we have generallyinvest their savings in Socialism. But their attempted the almost-impossible, the organisation of the answer to this mouldbe simpleand economically justi- middle class. We havedone thisin spite of the oppo- fied. They would say : “It is in the interest of the nation sition of thethree politicalparties, pledged tosupport to produce as ~nuchns possible everyyear. Machinery themeasure, and backed by allthe resources of secret can produce more than men. Investment in machinery is partyfunds and party organisations, in spite of the therefore more profitable nationallythan investment in Prudential and other companies interestedfinancially in men. Hence it is better to spend our surplus in making the scheme, in spite of the officials of trade unions and machines thanin adding to wages. Thelatter would friendly societies anxious to bolster up at all costs their only be spent and would probably increase the number of action in consenting to work in competition with profit- mouthsto feed. Sooner or lateryou would haveto de- making concerns. Whento this you add the conspiracy cide between machinery or population. The wealth you of silence inthe official Press of allparties as toour spend on population cannot be spent on machinery, and doings, thethreats of finesand penalties, the easiness vice versa. We, the capitalists, look afiier the machines.” and advantage of stamp-sticking, I think Mr. Woolverton How would “Another Guy’s Man” reply to this? The must agree that the wonderful thing is not that we have argument as given by the capitalists is really unanswer--- not conquered all our enemies at one blow, but that we able unless it can be shown that economics is wrong in ourselves have not been long since crushed out of exist- postulating quantity of production as its criterion of effi- ence, that we have stuck to our pledge in spite of prose- ciency, or unless it can be shown that raising wages, etc., cutions, in spite of the risks, in spite of the smiles of would actuallyincrease production. My reply, if I were our friends and the paid blandishments of the inspectors. speaking on behalf of the workmen, would therefore deal A4s regards his more drastic suggestions it may interest with these two points. I should argue, first, on the mani- Mr. Woolverton to know that those of us who are work- fest fact that the present system had ceased by virtue of ing have had tolimit our expenditure in manyways, ourstrike to produce anythingat all. Having demon- have had to forgo all amusements for many manths past strated our power to demand an increased share in pro- and lnake even more serious sacrifices. A milliner I know duction, or to smash production altogether (like Samson has had her salary reduced ten pounds a year after fifteen smashing the Philistines andhimself with them), I should years’ service with the firm because she had the temerity thenargue that we alsohad our notions of production to refuse to get a card ; a charwoman has sacrificed three anddid not desire to livewithout cakes and ale. In out of six daily places because she will only work where short, we could guaranteethat Guild Socialism would a card is not required; a waitress threw up a good berth infallibly increase the national total production measured because the card was a condition of service. Would Mr. in actual money. Your people, I should say, canonly Woolverton do so much ? Everyday the inspectors are agricultureindustry on thelarge estravagant scale of being sent away from houses andfarms, every daythe out-Westfarmers. We propose tohorticulture industry. Commissioners -intheir splendidhalls at Buckingham And, by the Lord, ifwe don’t with half the labour in Gate receive the polite refusals of small employers to col- half the timeand double the pleasure, double national lect a tax from people poorer than themselves,every production in value we will returnas chattel slaves to week brings its prosecutions and meetings of protest. your superior direction. Mr. Woolverton shouldsurely remember thatthis is I hope I need notamplify anyfurther my comments the first time the middle classes haveattempted to or- on your correspondent’s letter,as I havealready tres- ganise themselves at all. Thatthey should be holding passed on your space. I enclose my card. together now when organised labour submitted without a PRIZEMANIN POLITICAL ECONOMY. murmur, when the organised doctors blacklegged on *** each other, is very much to their credit, for it must be WHITE SLAVE ACT. remembered that they are organised this first time, not in Sir,-Below I submit a sample of the hits of Mr. defence of their own interests or tosave their pockets, McKenna’s recentexperiment in Parliamentary porno- but at financial riskto themselves in defence of an ab- graphy. It is a card printed by a juvenile (16-20 years stract principle. of age) football club exhibition-as is customary here If Mr. Woolverton has any scheme for carrying the war for into the enemy’s camp I shall be only too glad to discuss -in the windows of the club’s favourite ice cream store. it with him if he will summon dp courage to venture from The card has been rejected by the Italian bar-tenders, hisfastness in the Westmorland hills(where people do one of whom showed it to me. join leagues),and if he will stayand help uscarry it 2%. MACCOLL. into effect so much the better. In any case we shall be Glasgow. very*glad to receive thatfurther donationhe kindly VILLAFIELD F.C. promises ! A CHANCE FOR SPINSTERS ! MARGARETDouGLAS, Hon. Sec., TVe cordially invite 30 handsome and cultivated Insurance Tax Resisters’ Defence Association. youngladies to our Social on Friday, 14th Feb. *d+ MUST BE OVER THE AGE OF CONSENT. STATESMANSHIP BY STRIKE. Apply at C-r Place.*** Sir,-I’m afraidyour correspondent, “Another Guy’s Man,” has allowed his valour to outstrip his discretion. Sir,-Isee by thepapers that the barbarous and re- Hisgrasp of economics appearsto be so defective that actionary WhiteSlave law is beginning to bear its de- he apparently does notunderstand the real difficulties testablefruit. The chairman of the London Sessions, sf the more equitable sharing of the presentnational Mr. Allan Lawrie, -ass the first to inflict the penalty of production. It is true, of course, that the wealthy classes thrashing on some poor wretch who very possibly was consume enormous quantities of commodities in riotous an utter rogue and vagabond, but who, certainly-what- 309 cver his shortcomings-did nat deserve thisabominable perhapsthe results of what I saw of theMonteregrin punishment. army may interest your readers. NOW, in common with allkindly and sensible people, The Montenegrin soldier is paid nothing whatever. 1 loathe this new law. I do not agree with some of your ’l’he officers receive from &IOO to f;am a year, according correspondents that its genesis was due to conscious or to rank. Yet the nation rose up and flocked to the front unconscious sadism, though no doubt there is a possibility almostliterally to a man,even the women helping by that this terrible abnormality of sexual feeling- may have carryinghuge loads of food andclothing to their hus- played a part in the case of some of the promoters of the bands and sons, having usually to spend the night on the Ad. I ammore inclined to think that it is due to the mountain side en route. apparently incurable pharisaism and cant of the English Moreover, some 3,500 Montenegrin emigrants to people. Justthink for amoment of yourcanting egre- America came back entirely at their own expense to fight gious bishops ! The best, and indeed the only excuse for for their “old country,”many spending the whole sav- them is that they are men of quite childish intelligence. ings of years for the purpose, while those who had any I am not, of course, referring to thewhole episcopal bench, money over boughtpassages for the less fortunate, butonly to those who makeparade of theirfatuous Their keenness and bravery in fighting are well-known ; ignorance on the subject of sex. what is lessknown is thatthey were very dissatisfied But Mr. Lawrie only ordered his wretched prisoner to be because theKing would notlet them throw away birched; Lord JusticeDarling, I see, hasjust ordered thousands of their lives in a huge and probably ineffec- another unhappy nian to receive thirty strokes with the tual assault on Tarabosh-their forlorn hope to win back “ cat.” Now, I wonder if it has ever occurred to Lord Scutari, which they well knew the Powers would never JusticeDarling that the English law of divorce allows give them otherwise. a man to receive payment for his wife’s infidelity, 2nd Does not this little “Nation in Arms,” with its poverty- that this is really, in a sort, to live on one’s wife’s im- stricken little army of unpaid conscripts and volunteers, moral earnings ? Also has he ever reflected that there are show an example of Patriotism thnt really means some- manymen (and in so-called good society, too) who thing ? W. DUNSTANSHEFFIELD. accept cheques for the loan of their wives ? Would he in- *a* flict the ‘‘ cat ” on Lord So and So, and the Marquis of X. ? Perhaps he would, and that would at least say MR. C- H. NORMANAND THE INFERNO. something for his consistency. But the whole business is indefensible. To live on one’s wife’s immoral earnings sir,-I am coining to the conclusion that everyone in or is certainly not a’ creditable way of life, but I doubt very out of London must have been to see theappalling much whether the law has any right to step in here. Does cinema that attempts to represent some of the loathsome it do so in any other European countries ? I fancy not. and vindictive tortures that the fertile brain of Dante in- In any case, to revive tfis hideous form of punishment vented fortransgressors, and for those with whom he at the instance of canting bishops, old women in trousers hada personal disagreement.There can be seen pro- nncl violent unsexed women, is a thing- utterly rile and curers flogged by demons with leather straps, an apt re- utterly indefensible. minder to our Bishops and to all those who advocate the J. H. HALLARD use of the cat for offenders, in what is called the White *+* Slavetraffic; only let them notice that even Dante’s maliciousness pre-supposed the floggers to be demons, not
MR. HYNDMANANI) THE FABIAN LEADERS. ‘ men, andcertainly not bisho s ! Then,again, I find in Sir,-There is onepoint in Mr. Norman’s friendly the issue of THE NEW AGE for January qrd, Mr. C. H. Norman writing that : “ Mr. Joseph Chamberlain has mid flattering review andcriticism of my new volume been struck down, and is now undergoin the tortures of which I shall be much obliged to you if you will allow the damned on this earth, which is apleasurable spec- me to correct. I have never at any time held back from tacle.” Pleasurable ! ! ! Is it possible thatany man in co-operating withother Socialists. I hare invariably thetwentieth century can feelsuch a sentiment?-can tried my best to bring about complete understanding and dare to put it down in writing, and yet, at the same time, fusion, in order that we might be able to debate out our comment upon Mr. Hyndman’s stricture on Grayson as of differences amongourselves, and act together at all a “tonguelike a razor dipped in gall” ? This horrible periods of crisis. I refuse, therefore, to accept any portion delight expressed at seeing a man suffering from disease of the blame which Mr. Norman throwsupon Mr.Ber- must come from a heart framed in the most fiendishly nard Shaw, Mr. Webb, and myself for not having formed Calvinistic type. a combination with them for the advance of the cause. WhenWilliam Morris, twentyyears and more ago, And throughoutthe whole article MI-. C. H. Norman tried hard to bring us all together, he, quite mistakenly, leaps too wildlyand shrieks too frantically to prove a expected I should make difficulties myself, and that our guideto sane persons ; as when he asks whether the comrades of the S.D.F. would be equally recalcitrant. As capitalist class does not need the “ incentive of that ad- a matter of fact, we worked most heartily for unity, and 1 nirahle revolutionary instrument,the Tribunal of we succeeded in drawing up a manifesto, which Shaw Terror,”he altogether overshoots hismark. The Terror and Webb signed, as well as myself and others. Within a was not theinstrument of the revolution ; on the con- week thesetwo signatories had gone back uponevery trary, it was the instrument of those who destroyed the principleand the whole programme to which they had revolution, and who rendered void allthat the noblest committed themselves. Morris was much disgusted, a~cl and the sincererevolutionists had won. It was the out- from that time onwards threw in his lot again, SO far as come of the fear that overcame the money-making middle his other work would permit him, with the Social Demo- classes when tllep saw that smug prosperity and unequal cratic Federation, whose loyalty and readiness to sink all gains would xot be left tothem; underthis fear they differences for thesake of unityhe cordially acknow- turned against the revolution and attempted to bottle it, ledged, not only in private but in public, at ,areqt meet- and stop it, :?nd having effectually “ bottled ” the wisest ings at St. Martin’s Hall in London, and elsewhere. leaders they Fell at once into the hands of those lords of Foryears past, also, I have joined heartilyin every theTerror, the mere Scum of the revolutionists who endeavour which has been made to bring about unity with called licence liberty. the Independent labour Party andthe Fabian Society, And,again, of what use is it toprate loudly 011 the and I haL7.e offered to retire from all administrative work, one ham3of the wickedness of vindictivelypunishing or interference of anykind, speaking only in public criminals who come under the power of the law, if you when asked to do so by the united party. (&lite reCent1J7 are free vindictivelyto desire that all those persons the British Socialist Party has done its utmost to Secure whom YOU consider are moral criminals, or those who in unity, in accordance with the resolutions of the Interna- all honesty disagree with you, should be struck down by tionalSocialist Congresses. TheInternational Socialist terrible suffering or by sudden death ? The mental atti- Bureau offer& to hold an important conference Of foreig11 tude is the same, and if “judges are criminals” on these and British Socialists in London with this end in view. grounds, then Mr. C. H. Norman stands confessed by his mTe gladly accepted;the other two societies raised ;L own words asthe blackest-hearted of them all.He ex- series of objections. Again I offered to get out of the \Tray ultantly details the variouscatastrophes that have be- if my personality was an obstacle. fallen a certain set o’fmen. “ The hand of fate,” he says, \Vhen the full history of the Socialist movement in this (6 has fallen heavily ” upon them ; in a former paragraph country is written nobody will ever accuse me again Of heimplies, “as or,ewho knows,” thatthe Almighty having stood in the path of Socialist unity. would have demolished a certain peer iflabouring men H. M. HYNDMAN. had show the way;‘ Whenhe ha,s made certain in his *** own mindwhether fate ” or the “ Almighty ” wait to MILlTARYNOTES. destroy his opponents he might let US know ; unless in- deed, his own fate is suddenly and violently determined. Sir-I found Romney’s notes on paid and unpaid, na- ARTHUR Hood. tional and mercenary armies, SO interesting that I think L’ACTION FRANCAPSE-A FURTHER REPLY. is mere Billingsgate, aDd ourpolitical literature devoid ol any sound economic criticism of society.” On one side Sir,--I was very happy to see that we were promoted. there is a slightliterary difference between the articles Vi-bereas, according to yourarticle, we belong tothe of Paul Bourget, JulesLemaitre, Maurras, Daudetand headquarters of “ hooliganism,” in yourletter YOU tell “ Billingsgate.” On the crther, I beseech you to re- 11s that our journalism is mere (‘Billingsgate.” There member that we arethe faithfuldisciples of Au uste is a slight improvement. However, being of a rather un- Comte, the father of modern sociology, and sf (‘Le Play,” accommodating character I am not yet quite pleased with its guardian, so to speak. your way of discussing either the theories of our leaders, or theassertions of my letter. You might have told us I ratherlike yourlast suggestion that “ thedate of that you were a‘ follower of the Rev. SydSmith who publication is not necessarily a guarantee of modernity.” But I had already guessed it when reading yonr article wrote : “ I never read a book before reviewing it; it pre- judices a man so.” Rut even this quotation would not published atthe end of December, 1912. I was obliged be sufficient to justify your criticism. to tell you that though you were one of the most recent opponents of the Action Française, you seemed rather late So please read over again my letter, and you will find in yourcriticisms. So yoursuggestion is ynite useless ; that I havealready answered your question : ‘‘ Are all yet I tha’nk you for theintention. Moreover, I do not Protestantstraitors ? ” when I wrote that “ we ail11 at call“recent” Mr. Maurras’“Kiel et Vanger,” because reminding the Protestants that they are French people, a it is now quite classical (though it has reached its third fact which a greatuumber of them seem to havefor- edition in 1910 only, and not in 1907, as it was printed by gotten.” A greatnumber does notmean all, I am mistake), and not because it is “ hopelessly out of date.” ashamed to tell you ; and I usedthose words rr great But I am afraid I “divertyour attention from all the number ” because I know some Protestants who are serious problems e€ modern social condition ’’ as you “ patriots,”and even one who is asincere Royalist. write, and hope that before long withyour original Moreover, I alreadytold you that we carefully distin- Inethod you will be able to make new snd valuable dis- guish religious questions and ethnical problems. I even coveries in the fields of modern sociology.-Yours, quoted Mr. Dimier’s words, and you could find the same G. DEPOULAIN. assertion in Mr. Lemaitre’s books. Yet you affirm that +** we classify Jews andProtestants together, and that I am ‘‘ penetrated with the official spirlt of antipathy to- THE METHODS OF MR. BARKER. wards those whose form of worship differs from my own.” Do you think that the Agnostics and the Catho- Sir,-“An Actor’s’’ letter does not carry us much far- lics of the Action Française, who arefast friends, have ther. He offers as an alternative to Mr. Barker’s system the same form of worship, andthat you know the of play-producing : “Acting for actors,” and I confess I theories of neo-royalism better thanits leaders or its do not know precisely whathe means. It has not been members do ? suggested, so far as I know, that actors should not act; Yet, the first part of your letters gives us even a IIIOTC the suggestion is merely that actors should be subject to striking illustration of your way of discussing. You ob- thedictatorship of theauthor or the producer. He ad- viously seem to reckon inadequacy as a principle of logical mits my contention that a play must be a unit, but as he discussion. Read over myletter and you will see that claims the samedistinction for an actor, heapparently I do not think you are late because I quote three books hzs not appreciated my point. A play is a work of art : (‘‘ La Doctrine Officielle de 1’ Universitié,” ‘(La Politiqué. an actor is an artist. Acting is a secondary art ; in other Religieuse,” and “ Le Play ”) to which you did not refer ; words, it is interpretive,and not creative. This is a but because you shamefullymisrepresented our ideas distinction which actors are loth to admit, because they (first. paragraph). You tell me with great indignation think it belittlestheir art ; butit does nothing of the that when you wrote your article two of those books were sort ; it only classifies it. not yet published, and that the third is essentially a criti- By allmeans give the actor freedom, but freedom cism of the Sorbonne. But you can notice that I did not within the bounds imposed by the character he has under- expostulate with you that you forgot to read those books, taken to impersonate. And whatthose bounds are it is and that I did not even advise you toperuse them. I for the author (or the producer) to decide. What should simply told you, “You can add those titles to your col- we say if each member of an orchestra claimed the right lection, if you like.” I own that I begged of you to read toplay his version of a Beethoven symphony? Discip- some books dealing with OUT theories : (‘La Philosophie linein music is taken for granted,except by certain du Nationalisme ” and “ La Monarchie etla Classe famous “artists” who show their love for great composers Ouvrieré.,” but I thoughtthat your reading of “ La by mutilating their works; why, then, should we look Doctrine Officielle de l’Universit6 ” would be worse than askance at discipline in play-acting ? useless, and the account that you give of this book prox,-es If I had thetime and the money tospare for three that I was notaltogether wrong. On the otherhand, I weeks of nightsand matinees atthe Savoy,and found awn that I reproached you with not having read some of that Mr. Ainley gave approximately the same account of our books-but the books which you quoted to the readers Malvolio at every performance, I should give thanks that of TEE NEW AGE, not those I was quoting to you. he had made up his mind about the character. It is true UOU throw all thatinto confusion, and then go on that a character like Hamlet (poor Hamlet !) is capable affirming with a delicious plainness that clericalism, mili- OE more than one interpretation, but we may assume that tarism, and anti-semitism are the only three ideas which to Shakespeare Hamlet was one manand not a crowd, standout clearly inall the neo-royalist literature.I ~nclthe great actor is nothe who (to quoteyour con- could easily show you some others, supposing that those tributor) never playsHamlet exactly the same twice, threeare ours. But as I alreadydid justice on your but he mho, aftersincere study,thinks he has grasped assertions, I will neither reconsider them nor bother Shakespeare’s intentions. Me may have formed a wrong you any longer with your friend M. Fallieres, and your notion of thepart, but he will have made aman of client or patlent Soleilland, whom you SO eloquently de- Hamlet, and not a weathercock. fend,after all forsook them. Yet, allow me to tell J~o:~ \ HERMONOULD. that we do not, and that I did not, confound the private *+* life of M. Briand with his public career. I distinguished on one side the scandals of his private life, and on the Sir,-Insked “AnActor” for hisalternative to Mr. other the crimes of his public career. If bot3 of them are Barker’s method, and he turns me a phrase-“actors for almost of the same colour, and may be easily confounded acting.” Which actors? Actors, inthe lump, arein- by short-sighted people, I am not responsible for it. curably selfish andincredibly foolish, bnt not so foolish AS for Maurice Barres, René Bazin, andothers whose as not to resent being told so, however cleverly, by Mr. lucrativetrade itis to weep about Alsace-Lorraine, to Barker. Which explainsthe frame of mind of “An Actor” and Mr. Butt. sing the praise of throne and altar, YOU may sharpen the missiles which you level at them. Those writers, chiefly Theremay be an art of acting. I can’tsay. But I do thetwo first-as I do not know the others-are by far say that only some score of actors and half as many ac- Ipyond your reach. At ally rate, do not place Mr. Barrès tresses in London knowtheir business. And I do not among those who sing the praise of throne; he is 3 Re- thinkthat handful of competentsresents being “pro- publican and does notbelong tothe Action Française, duced.”They recognise the need for the producer. ysu can see that Rev. Syd Smith’s method has some If the author, as sometimes happens, is a man of the drawbacks ! Yet a fact may plead for YOU here ; YOU aye the theatre, he is himself his best producer. Rnt authors ;leither like me aLorrain, to understand Mr. Barres Or me often outside the theatre, or dead, or abroclcl, or (like Mr. Bazin, nor a Frenchman to enjoy Mr. Leon Daudet’s me) cmnot afford the tailoring which is a necessary pass- political “invecfives,” with which YOU find fault. By the port through a West End stage door. Moreover, authors. by, 1 dare say that you are not so felicitous in yOUr “ In- havingplays to write, lack the timepatiently to drill vectives )) as he is, when you write that ‘‘ our journalism into order a company of grown-upchildren. (“ 1111 311
Actor” objects to be “drilled.” He demands freedom. as mental applause, and when acting is sufficiently spiri- Hisindividualistic “art” should flourish ou the music- tual, playgoers will not trouble to make a noise with their hall stage, where he will find some admirable acting like hands It isinteresting to note that Mr. Shawis cn- that of Robey, Formby, and Maidie Scottto compete deavouring- to force this state intoexistence by forbidding with.) the audience to applaud. More quackery. He is trying Those who have never sat through rehearsals have no tu be as clever as Mr. Barker. Mr. Barkersuppresses idea of their deadly tedium. No author should beaskect miotion in the actor, Mr. Shaw will try the same trick to tolerate it.His authority is, at best,temporary, and m the audience ! Mr. Webb wants Mr. Barker’s “anto- confined to theparticular play, while the professional :nztic actor,” a beautiful sensitive being supple in mind producer, in permanent control, brings a strong will, 1111- :und in body. Very well; but Mr. Barker wantsno such tiring physique and accumulated authority to cope with ‘‘ being ” at all. What Mr. Barker wants is a ‘‘ mind ” il~ceverlasting egotisms of actors who, by the very nature capable of mimicking his own ; a “being” whose supple- of their calling-, see ;tlw;~ys:z “part ” and never a play as ;Icss will solidify in a particularshape and remain like I ;I whole. it, a “being” that will be “sensitive” but only in what After all, we havealways had stage-managers. Pro- JIr. Barker considers worth while. People like Mr. Webb clucer’’ is only a new term. But “acting for 3ctors” will ::row excitedabout what they term in a pseudo sense not do except for “stars” in the theatre GI- in the lonely “Art,”but they are blaste; then comes thestaggering “turns”at :L music-hall.The theatre demands a direc- triumph of the quack and the idealising of his quackery. tive brain, 1)nt “An Actor” may rest assured that a new MI., Webb lapses into bad form when hesuggests that Forbes Robertson will “break through”all right. It because an actor cannot afford to be an artist he should doesn’t do to argue from genius. We want competence, he thankful to submit to the tyranny of the bureaucratic and we haven’t got it. ‘‘ producer” I have purposely avoided all mention of Mr. Poel, wl~om37011 quote with approval on page 8, is economics while discussing acting as an art. The econo- partlyright. Frank Benson sends upthe raw material mic position of actors is ghastlyenough, but I see a of good poetic acting from his Shakespearean companies, greater evil in the modern tendency whi,ch not only denies but it isn’t the London producers who send it astray. It’s actors of a surety oE bare subsistence but also denies the London plays. Where’s the poetry in Pinero or Gals- then1 their souls. AN ACTOR. worthy ? ***OLIVER COSWAY. *** Sir,--I was much interested with the article and letters Sir,-Mr. Norman Fitzroy Webb’s lettersummarises a re the methods of Mr. Barker,by “An Actor” andhis modern type of mind which is obsessed by negative values, critics,and though not in a position to judge upon the anddistinguished by its complacent contempt of the merits or demerits of the case, yet fail to see that “An Sod. SLIC~minds are the embodiment 01 an inertia xvhich Actor” 111 any way “whined”about the matter, and hero-worships the bureaucrat, and, like the dying slave, would suggestthat if Norman Fitzroy Webb desired to salaams to the “boss” who walks oyer his expiring corse. “rebuke” the writer for his “plaint” he might have used The modern actor, indefending the bureaucratic ‘(pro- terms thqt more honestly fit the case, and apply some of ducer ” does something of great importance in a very the “bigness of mind” to the subject. effective manner. He maintains that he has no soul; the11 HAROLDNEWTON. he submits himself proudly to the “ producer,” who rigs him out in a second-hand ego. Sympathy between artist md spectator is obviously a firstessential to dramatic REMAINDER BOOKS. art, or indeed to any art. If the audience has no sympathy with the emotions which the actor is experiencingand FEBRUARY CATALOGUE OF PUBLISHERS’ REMAINDERS expressing, there is no art in it. Unlessa play IS ex- NOW READY, Gratia and Post Free. cessively bad, the audience is always reverent and recep- tive. T did not suggest in my article that an actor shoulct GLAISHER, Ltd., 265, High Holborn, London, alter his ‘‘ business ” in order to pander to an audience. WM. What I attempted to express was something more subtle And at 14, George Street, Croydon. thanthat. Under Mr. Barker an “ actor ” is primarily conscious of what he 11m got tot do ; not about what 11t might conceivably feelabout doing it. A parrotrepeats EXHIBITION OF PICTURES what we teach him but he is better off than t,lle Barker- BY MEMBERS OF THE FRIDAY CLUB, ised actor-the parrotonly repeats what we teach him ;cthe,n lw /eels lihr: repeating it; thatis, he is compara- -IT TlIE HALL OF THE ALPINECLUB, MILL STREET, ti-iely spontaneuus. 111 playing a partan actor cannot CONDUITSTREET, BOND STREET, W. possibly foretell how an audience is going to feel his next e1notion as expressed inhis next line. Being anartist Open till February11th. 10 till 9. Admission 1/-. he doesn’t know how he will feel about it himself. How )_* can he preconceive s movement or a gesture or an intona- tiou of voice which isyet to’ be born?This limitation FREETHOUGHT LECTURES. tothe present moment in timemakes spontaneity the QUEEN’S (MINOR) HALL, LANGHAM PLACE, W. highest quality in art. Spontaneity in acting is what the (Under thr auspices ofthe Secular Society, Ltd.) actor must achieve if he wishes to be an artist.What SUNDAY EVENINGS AT 7.30, BY I wished to suggest in my article, or in that portion of Mr. G. W. FOOTE, Editor of “The Freethinker.” it which Mr. Webb has so widely misconstrued, was the February 2, “Woman’s Worst Enemy.” resultant simultaneous merging into one or two conscious Reserved Seats IS. and Bd, Questions and Discussion invited. senses ; the spectator’s andthe actor’s. These two conscious MU__-... senses should be allowed sufficient freedom to unite in a spiritual a11cI creativecontinuity. What I maintain is SYNDICALISM VI SOCIALISM t1mt unless the actor is really experiencing the emotions DEBATE at Chandos Hall, Maiden Lane, Charing Cross, wIlich he is expressing, this intimacy cannot exist in its Sunday, February 9th, at 7.30 p.m., highest form. Any true actor will tell yo’u tht in ce1:- GAYLORD WILSHIRE V. VICTOR FISHER. tail1 situations which arouse in him a strong emotion, he ~~~__~ feels the spirit of the audience mergingand expanding with his own. He is conscious of a union with the audi- elice which inspires and intensifies his power of expres- SIO~.He draws his own soul and with it the soul of the audience on a wave of inspiration-ecstasy. He has created spiritual. union auct accomplished a divine thi1lF. A man who is mouthing second-hand emotions is not crea- tise at all.The emotions whi.ch he reproduces may be micellaneous advertisements quite rational and in harmony with the character, but he is not atting. Mr. Webb may say that he is, but I do not :;g-ree with him. It would be interesting to know whnt Mr. Webb’s definition of ‘‘ xting ” really is: Mr. BARKER is a quackinasmuch as he istrying to force art illto existence by anegative method. As Mr. Webb Says, ‘( Art is, it never seeks ‘io be, throughapplause.” Ap- plause isthe most obvious way of informing an actor that he is inspiring you. There is, of course svch 2 thil1.y 312
SIR RUFUS ISAACS.
MR. HERBERT SAMUEL.