« AnteriorContinuar »
justice prevails, to be the fulfillment of the great law (first enunciated by him in 1850) of equal freedom, that " every man is free to do that which he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man." This is the central idea of the Spencerian system of political and social ethics. It is the major premise from which follow Mr. Spencer's well-known and generally disputed deductions respecting the rights and duties of the individual and the limited sphere of governmental action and predominance.
Having established this ultimate and absolute dictum of justice Mr. Spencer deduces the several corollaries thence derived. They are set forth in their logical sequence in the chapters on "The Right to Physical Integrity," "Free Motion and Locomotion," "Uses of the Natural Media," " Property," "Incorporeal Property," "Gift and Bequest," "Free Exchange and Free Contract," "Free Industry," "Free Belief and Worship." The maintenance and protection of these "rights" become the sole function of "the State," the nature, constitution and duties of which he next proceeds to discuss.
"The end to be achieved by the society in its corporate capacity, that is, by the State, is the welfare of its units." The State is simply and solely the agent or instrumentality of a community or people for "preventing interferences with the carrying on of individual lives; " and "the ethical warrant for [State] coercion does not manifestly go beyond what is needful for preventing them." If governments assume other duties than those of maintaining justice and equal freedom for all by arrogating to themselves industrial, educational and other functions, it is violating the very law of equal freedom which alone gives its existence an ethical warrant.
It will doubtless be a surprise to many writers to learn what comprehensive words justice and equity are in Mr. Spencer's mind. He justifies and encourages legislation which makes railroads responsible for injuries sustained by their employes. Quarantine and sanitary inspection laws he would have. The State care and municipal supervision of our public roads meets with his approval. Inheritance taxes have an ethical justification. He would have the State protect individuals free of expense, not only from foreign foes and criminals, but from offenders classed as civil. Thus he utters his wonted vigorous protest against the "miserable laissez faire which calmly looks on while men ruin themselves in trying to enforce by law their equitable claims," and at the same time allows governments to supply them "at other men's cost with gratis novel reading."
The publication of the divisions on Negative and Positive Beneficence should dissipate the charges usually preferred against Mr. Spencer and his philosophy that there is no heart in him, that he has
no generous consideration for the strugglings and sufferings of humanity, for in these closing parts he points out how the ethical progress of the race is retarded if altruistic actions be not constantly dwelt upon and practiced by all. The beneficent and maleficent effects, both immediate and remote, of man's actions upon himself and fellowmen are treated in a manner at once philosophical and inspiring. His chapter on "Relief of the Poor," contains some timely warnings; and those on political and social beneficence inculcate man's duties to his fellows in no uncertain language. Even though one holds views opposed to Mr. Spencer's, the careful reading of these two masterly volumes must needs make one regard with profound admiration this fearless mariner who has so long opposed the hostile waves of public opinion.
FRANK I. HERRIOTT.
Our Indian Protectorate, An Introduction to the Study of the Relations between the British Government and its Indian Feudatatories. By CHARLES LEWIS TUPPER. London and New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1893.
So little is known in the United States concerning the government of India, its history or its present working, that we welcome with pleasure a new work on the subject. The average knowledge of even our educated classes, concerning what we may well call one of the noblest monuments of Anglo-Saxon genius—the organization of India-is indeed indistinct. We believe that the general impression in this country of English rule in India is that it is oppressive and bad. Such an impression only shows our ignorance of the subject, an ignorance which a perusal of the present work will go far to dispel.
Mr. Tupper writes as one thoroughly familiar with the subject with which he deals. This very familiarity, and the fact that he confined himself to the Protectorate in India, renders his work in no sense an
elementary treatise. One unfamiliar with the English government, or the main facts of Indian history, must read the text carefully if he would carry away correct ideas. The Indian Protectorate is that part of the territory of the Indian Empire under the rule of native princes, whose authority is upheld by the British government, but over whose acts the English government exercises more or less direct control. According to the official return in 1886, there are 629 of these Feudatory States in India, with a total area of 638,672 square miles, and a population of 65,000,000 of people, or over one-fourth of the entire population of the Empire. The work is a discussion of the relations between these feudatories and the English government, including an historical outline of how these relations were brought
about, with a view to determining the proper general principles to be applied by the Indian government in its dealings with the native governments of the protected States. Mr. Tupper, therefore, has nothing to do with the government of that part of India which is under the exclusive administration of English officials. Neither does he treat of those governments, such as Afghanistan, whose relations to the British government are those of semi-independent powers. The States, with which he deals, are those, which, while having local autonomy under native princes, are strictly dependent on the English government, having no political relations with foreign powers or with each other.
The history of the growth of these protected States is told in an entertaining manner by the author. As we have before pointed out, Mr. Tupper starts with the assumption that a general knowledge of Indian history is possessed by his readers. His own efforts, therefore, are confined to reviewing the important points of that history from a purely political-administrative standpoint. There is no more entertaining, and to Americans no more instructive, chapter than that which describes the annexation of the province of Oudh as a result of the misgovernment of the native prince. The rule of this potentate, Wajid Ali Shah, was upheld by British authority. The vivid picture of the horrible debauchery of the native government of India, and the misery of the people under their own rulers, will here be found graphically depicted, and in the picture we must see the justification of English rule. The history of Oudh is also instructive from the fact that the deposition of the Wájid Ali was the first distinct recognition by the English government, that in upholding the rule of a native prince, they became responsible to the people of the province to protect them from gross misrule, on his part. If such misrule is incurable, as in the case of Oudh, their duty is to depose the local sovereign and rule the country directly by English agents.
To those who are familiar with Indian history, it will be of interest to learn that Mr. Tupper is entirely in accord with the present policy of the Indian government in perpetuating through the Senad the local rule of the native princes over the different principalities of the Protectorate. In other words, that he believes the Protectorate should remain a Protectorate, and not be incorporated into the territory ruled directly by the Indian government. We may say, in explanation, that the Senad is a compact between the Indian government and the native prince, that if his own family dies out, which is very likely to be the case, owing to the barrenness of the women of the higher classes, that he will then be permitted to adopt an heir and thus perpetuate the native rule and
prevent the administration lapsing into the hands of the English. He also, while a strong federalist, approves of the movement toward local autonomy, which is taking place throughout India. The most valuable part of his work, however, is that which impresses upon Englishmen, from whom his readers will be mainly drawn, that while the native princes may be upheld in their government, the English owe a great responsibility to India. This responsibility is that the government of the dependency whether by English agents or native princes should conduce to the welfare and peace and happiness of the natives, and that misrule on the part of the native prince, is no more to be tolerated than the misrule on the part of the British agent.
We recommend Mr. Tupper's work to all those who desire to understand something of the problems with which the members of our race on the other side of the world have to deal, and something of the great work they have accomplished.
WM. DRAPER LEWIS.
Outlines of Economics. By RICHARD T. ELY, Ph. D. Pp. xii, 432. New York: Hunt & Eaton; Cincinnati: Cranston & Curts. 1893. The teacher has a perennial interest in the improvement of economic textbooks. Most teachers feel that the books in use at present neither give due emphasis to the different portions of economic theory, nor succeed in arousing that interest which the great problems of the science ought to awaken. The public still has a lingering antipathy to economic science as a result of the controversies of the political economists of the early part of this century; thus all interested in the progress of the science must welcome every endeavor so to restate economic doctrines as to extend their influence to new classes of people.
Dr. Ely's book is the first systematic attempt to present economics in the form which it has been given under the influence of German thought by the recent work of American economists. The ideas of the English school are clearly stated in the books of numerous authors; but, though most teachers still use these excellent manuals to start their classes, each instructor is compelled to supplement the class work by presenting important doctrines not even hinted at in the textbook. Such a method as this must obviously be unsatisfactory, except in the larger universities where the instruction is well differentiated and the students have access to good libraries.
The progress of the science is well indicated by the improvements in the present, as compared with the earlier, edition of Dr. Ely's book.
The last few years have brought many changes in the tone of American economics, and the new edition shows that Dr. Ely has kept abreast with the times. This change is clearly indicated in the divisions of the book. The first part contains a historical introduction; the second relates to private economics, and the third to public economics. This division is logical and enables the student to enter the whole field of economic discussion. The changes in the first part are the most important of the book. In the first edition, Dr. Ely strove to give his book a sociological cast. The tone of the present work is different. In the place of a general talk about the place and possibilities of sociology he has given an account of social progress from the standpoint of economic history. Sociology may be the great science of the future, but a textbook will do much more good by giving definite treatment to economic history than by making brief remarks concerning sociological laws.
The most original part of the book is the one on public economics. In these topics, Dr. Ely is at his best, and the discussion has all that freshness and force which characterize so many of his writings. Teachers owe a debt of gratitude to him for embodying these topics in a textbook, and for the happy way in which he discusses them.
I cannot regard the part on private economics as on a level with the two other portions of the book. Exception ought, however, to be made of the section on the transfer of goods, where the new ideas on value are happily introduced and clearly presented. The section on distribution is too inductive and descriptive to convey a clear idea of the subject. The relation between the different parts of income is not clearly brought out, and there is an absence of that definite concept of distribution which makes so valuable the works of President Walker. These defects are due, for the most part, to the spirit of progress which shapes Dr. Ely's thought. He has left the old standpoint of economics, as represented by the classical school, and has not yet acquired a new theory of distribution in harmony with the concept of the science which he now holds. A transitional stage necessarily lacks the clearness of the old position.
In my opinion, Dr. Ely will not be able to raise that portion of his book dealing with private economics to the level of the other parts of his treatise, without making consumption the basis of his discussion. Even now, his standpoint is plainly that of consumption; but his discussion of utilities and of the standard of life is so widely diffused through the whole volume, and is mixed in with so much other matter, that the force of the argument is lost. His section on consumption is not rightly named. It should be called an analysis of expenditure— an important problem, but one distinct from the theory of consumption.