of social or religious agitation. Mere political reforms are not likely to produce a complete reversal of former arrangements because they appeal to a rather restricted public to those who have the education and the leisure necessary for political activity. But when sweeping political reforms are combined with the cravings of hunger or of faith they will carry multitudes which otherwise would have remained silent and passive. Such was the great Rebellion of the seventeenth century in England and the great Revolution of the eighteenth century in France, while the nineteenth-century changes in Germany were of much lesser compass, and its social tranformation is still to come.

It is no contradiction of this general estimate to think that the fatal progress even of such tremendous upheavals may be regulated to a certain point and up to a certain moment by conscious agencies. Some eighteen months ago the revolution in Russia might probably have been prevented by a strong and clear-sighted Government, if it had either taken the lead in the political movement of the upper classes and conducted it into the channel prepared by the Zemstvos, or else if it had boldly played the game of the lower orders and overawed the intellectuals by an authority derived from great democratic reforms. But, of course, strong and clear-sighted leaders were required for either of these policies, and, if the Government had possessed them, it would not have been driven to the extremities which render heroic measures absolutely necessary. The measure of its strength and insight is to be gathered, among other things, from the woeful collapse of its most clever personality, Count Witte, who has only himself to thank for the universal distrust and disapprobation bestowed on the colleague of M. Durnovo. Nor is Goremykin likely to avert the coming

crash; his record is not better than that of Count Witte and his ability certainly less, while by his side appear such striking representatives of the old régime as M. Stishinsky and Prince Shikhmatoff. But, after all, these personal questions are of infinitesimal importance now. Events are moving on by their own weight, as it were, and a kind of historical fate rules the actions of the protagonists of the great drama.

Different resolutions and policies may be adopted on the surface, but the main results are not likely to be much affected by them. When the country condemned the Octobrists at the elections it declared implicitly in favor of radical programmes and revolutionary methods. The much-abused Octobrists were the only party which would have attempted to reconcile the claims of reform with national traditions and would have tried, perhaps ineffectually, to arrange a compromise with a strong Monarchy. They have been reduced in the Duma to such an insignificant number that their influence does not count for much just at present. As for the victorious "cadets," the professions of moderation made by some of them are chiefly meant to disclaim the responsibility for the use of rougher methods and to secure the choice of favorable time and place for the battle, Their programme, even in its most reduced expression, cannot be accepted by the Tsar, and the inevitable collision is likely to occur very soon. A fight is sure to ensue on the subject of amnesty, which has been made the starting-point of the discussions of the Duma, For one side there can be talk only of a pardon for offences; political murderers and mutinous soldiers will hardly be included in it. For the other side amnesty is a very imperfect term for the liberation of the foremost combatants in the struggle for freedom.

And how about the Parliamentary investigation into the crimes and misdemeanors of bureaucratic officials? Is the Emperor to withdraw his protection from men who acted by his command and some of whom have been expressly praised and rewarded for their acts? How about the abrogation of the ordinances of the 5th of March? How about the Constitutional position of the Upper House? How about the political responsibility of Ministers? How about the Fundamental Laws? Indeed, there is not a single question within the range of conceivable politics that will not call for a conflict between the forces of tradition and those of revolution.

One of two courses may be adopted by the Tsar. He will either make a stand from the very first against the Duma majority on one or the other of the vital questions raised, or else he will try to pacify the Assembly by sweeping concessions. The ultimate result is not likely to vary in either of these eventualities. Matters will come to a head more rapidly in the first case, while the main decision may be staved off for some time in the latter. But there is sure to be a breach in the end, nor is it improbable that the crucial question of the disposal of the Army may come to play a decisive part in bringing about a struggle. The leadership of this force the Sovereign cannot give up without surrendering himself, and, on the other hand, the Assembly would be ever haunted by apprehensions in regard to such a force even in the case of the widest concessions. The compromises effected in this respect in Germany and Italy are mainly the products of the great services rendered by the monarchical power in both States in the military history of the two nations. Already in Austria-. Hungary the case is different. As for Russia, the best solution a frankly monarchical army organization with an

effective control of the financial side of it by the representatives of the nation - is rendered extremely difficult by the mutual distrust of the powers concerned and by the lamentable inefficiency of the Imperial rule in the Army.

Perhaps the most ominous aspect of the present situation consists not in the facts themselves, but in the feelings. The points at issue could possibly be arranged by a round-table conference between level-headed men. But the leading personalities who have looked into each other's eyes in the Tauris palace have been brought up in hatred and contempt for each other: those who have now the upper hand have suffered so long and so much in the past that they are unable to recognize the relative rights and the conscientious objections of their opponents. A final trial of strength must come before Russia is allowed to proceed on its further course.

Far be it from us to assume that the adoption of the radical programme presents the desirable solution of the crisis, but in one way or another it will mark a stage in it. This stage of a rather crude importation of principles supplied by French democracy, American federalism and German socialism is necessary in order to get rid of the mischievous absurdities of the old régime. But bye and bye the Russian nation will realize, as other nations have done before, that living organization cannot transform bones and sinews at pleasure, that the future has deeper roots in the past than the present is inclined to grant, that, as the Emperor very properly said the other day, there are blessings of order as well as of liberty, that public authority and public force cannot be dispensed with, least of all in periods of violent social unrest, that Russia cannot give way before the aspirations of all the nationalities composing it without

ceasing to be Russia. It is by objectlessons that the people will be taught on all these points, and one may fear almost that these lessons will come, not in the shape of painful yet consecutive experiments, but in that of a downfall of the immense social fabric raised by the efforts of so many generThe Fortnightly Review.

ations. It would be rash to prophesy on the work of reconstruction: let us hope that it may be achieved by statesmen capable of conceiving lofty ideals and of realizing the matter-of-fact conditions with which all builders have to reckon.

Paul Vinogradoff.

The recent General Election has brought into public prominence the existence in Great Britain of a third political party.

The surprise and shock which the return of thirty independent Labor members to Parliament has given to the press, to the public, and to the ordinary politicians is evidence of how unconscious these have been of a great living movement working among the people during the last fifteen years.

The Labor Party is not a new birth; it is not a whim of novelty which has suddenly seized hold of the imaginations of the artisans in our populous centres of industry. The Labor victories at the General Election were the natural outcome of years of preparatory work, and the ideas and aspirations which this political action expresses have filled the hearts and minds of the workers as the result of long and intelligent study of the problem of their industrial and social condition.

This assertion by the working class of a right to directly participate in national legislation is not a political feature confined to this country. Indeed the workers of Great Britain have in this matter been lagging behind practically every other industrial country in the world. Australia has its Parliamentary Labor Party, so strong in numbers as to hold Governments in the hollow of its hand. Every conti

nental country, with but two or three exceptions has a strong Socialist representation in its legislature. The Labor Party in Britain is the counterpart of the working class political parties in these other lands; the British Labor Party has been forced into existence by the same causes, to deal with the similar conditions; though it has assumed a form and adopted tactics suitable for the special circumstances, or in conformity with the traditions, of our own country.

The contemporary world-wide character of the Labor movement is a fact sufficiently impressive of itself to demand the attention of all politicians and social students. No movement which was merely the creation of the dreams or ambitions of agitators could have attained such dimensions, have shown such progressive vitality, or have arisen almost contemporaneously in every industrial nation. There must be deep and abiding causes for such a movement, and these causes must be common to the industrial and social life of the workers of all countries.

There has always been a social problem; and the Labor movement of this age has come into being to deal with this eternal problem as it manifests itself and affects the lives of the people to-day.

All great political reforms of the past have been for the emancipation of

a class. The real motive in political agitation has been to secure economic benefit through political freedom. The barons overthrew the political autocracy of the crown, and established in its place their own rule of the people. They maintained their authority through nearly five centuries chiefly because they owned the land, which enabled them to exercise a power over the people which the possession of no political power divorced from economic control could confer.

The industrial development of this country, through the use of steam power and machinery, gave rise to a new class, controlling industrial conditions, but without political power. This new class soon realized that the two possessions, political and economic power, must be theirs if full advantage of the possession of one was to be reaped. So we had the fifty years of political agitation culminating in the Reform Act of 1832 by which the political monopoly of the autocracy was broken; the commercial classes coming thereby into the joint exercise of it.

Successive extensions of the franchise, reluctantly conceded to popular agitation, have given political power to the working class. The barons used their political enfranchisement to constitute themselves the dominating economic class. The commercial class agitated for political power to aid the economic monopoly of manufacturing which success in competition had given to them. The working class has been slow to learn the historic lesson; but the political awakening of Labor means that we are once again in the political class struggle for economic freedom; it means that at last the workers have learnt the old lesson that political and economic freedom are complements; that both must be in the possession of a class if it is to be free from the domination of another class.

The meaning then of the coming of

this new power into British politics is that we are entering in grim earnest upon the last great struggle against class domination and the class ownership of the means of life. The success of the commercial class in its struggle with the aristocracy did not result in the supersession of the aristocracy by the plutocracy, but in giving the plutocracy joint political and economic power with the aristocracy. Together they completely controlled the land and wealth-producing means and the political power of the country. In like manner the inevitable success of the present class struggle will not be to deprive any class of political power or of its proportionate share in economic control; but the result of success will be to bring all classes into the joint and equal participation of political power with the object of thereby securing joint and equitable control of economic resources and conditions.

This result will be the abolition of all artificial classes, for where there is complete political equality, and politics is used to ensure the conditions and opportunities of economic equality, no classes can exist.

This is the significance of the Labor movement in Britain. It is the meaning of the working class movement throughout the world, whether the movement take, as in France and Germany, the form of revolutionary Socialism; or, as in Australia, the character of a practical non-doctrinaire working class reform movement; or, as in Britain, a combination of the two, bringing the idealism of Socialism to stimulate reform on lines which necessity has already compelled us to slowly

move.

The statement given of the ultimate purpose of the Labor movement will serve to explain the composition of the Labor Party and the reasons for the programme the party puts forward.

The political organization which was

responsible for the fifty-two Labor candidates at the recent General Election is a federation of Socialist and Trade Union Societies. In its present form the Labor Party is young in years, though the constituent bodies are all of considerable age. The history and the struggles of trade unionism are well enough known not to require description. The Socialist bodies, which are parts of the united Labor Party, are the Independent Labor Party and the Fabian Society.

The Fabian Society was established nearly twenty years ago, and its special function has been to propagate Socialism through its publications and lectures. It has never sought to become a body strong in numbers, aiming rather at quality than at quantity in its membership. It has never been a distinct political party, and has never, as an organization, taken any action in promoting candidatures for the municipality or for Parliament. In the early years of its existence it did a great and fruitful work by its lectures and the publication of tracts. But with the uprising of more militant socialist organizations, the Fabian Society fell away from active participation in the work of creating Socialist opinion, and for the last few years it has given no justification by works for its continued existence.

It was doubtless by way of compli ment to the Fabian Society for its work in former years that an invitation was given to it to join the federation of Trade Union and Socialist bodies, when this union was formed six years ago.

The only other distinctly Socialist body inside the Labor Party is the Independent Labor Party. This society has been the motive power of the movement for Labor representation and the unceasing propagandist for Socialism since its formation over thirteen years ago. Though constituting but a .very small proportion of the total mem

bership of the united Labor Party, the Independent Labor Party, by its exIclusive character as a propagandist body for Labor representation and Socialism, exerts an influence in the movement, and figures in the public view, quite disproportionately to its numbers.

As a

The I.L.P. (as the Independent Labor Party is generally called) has over 400 branches in Great Britain with a membership of something like 30,000. Each branch of the I.L.P. is an active centre of political work and education. rule a branch will hold public meetings every week the whole year round, taking advantage of the summer weather to carry its message into the open market-places and streets. The keenest interest is shown by these branches in local affairs; and, in large numbers, candidates are put forward at the recurring elections to represent the Socialist principles of the party.

The victories of the Labor Party at the General Election would have given no surprise to any one who had followed the local Government elections during recent years. An increasing .measure of success has attended the efforts of the I.L.P. in each of the last five years, culminating last November in giving the party a larger number of gains than fell to any other party. It can be readily imagined that the effect of unceasing education in politics and social reform, carried to the working people by working people themselves and presented to them in a way to be understood, must sooner or later make an impression on working-class thought and opinion.

The I.L.P. has developed unexpected capacity for popular exposition in large numbers of working men and women. The speeches of the working-class speakers at the Labor and Socialist meetings are not the vehement, iconoclastic, ignorant ravings which one unacquainted with the movement might