858 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



well, when he does not get the expected 

 sound of a fog-signal, to assume that he may 

 not hear a warning that is faithfully given, 

 and then to heave his lead, and resort to 

 the other means used by the careful navi" 

 gator to make sure of his position." (Wash" 

 ington : Judd & Detweiler, printers.) 



Herbert Spencer and the Land Question. 



Mr. Herbert Spencer sends to the " St. 

 James's Gazette " (London) the following 

 communication, explanatory of his views on 

 the ownership of land: "During my absence 

 in America, there appeared in the ' St. 

 James's Gazette ' (27th of October, 1882) 

 an article entitled 'Mr. Herbert Spencer's 

 Political Theories.' Though, when it was 

 pointed out to me after my return, I felt 

 prompted to say something in explanation 

 of my views, I should probably have let the 

 matter pass had I not found that elsewhere 

 such serious misapprehensions of them are 

 being diffused that rectification seems im- 

 perative. Before commenting on the state- 

 ments of your contributor, I must devote 

 a paragraph to certain more recent state- 

 ments which have far less justification. In 

 old days among the Persians, the subordina- 

 tion of subject to ruler was so extreme that, 

 even when punished, the subject thanked 

 the ruler for taking notice of him. With 

 like humility I suppose that now, when after 

 I have been publishing books for a third of 

 a century ' the leading critical organ ' has 

 recognized my existence, I ought to feel 

 thankful, even though the recognition draws 

 forth nothing save blame. But such elation 

 as I might otherwise be expected to feel is 

 checked by two facts. One is that the 

 ' Edinburgli Review ' has not itself discov- 

 ered me, but has had its attention drawn 

 to me by quotations in the work of Mr. 

 Henry George a work which I closed after 

 a few minutes on finding how visionary were 

 its ideas. The other is that, though there 

 has been thus made known to the reviewer 

 of a book of mine published thirty-two years 

 ago, which I have withdrawn from circula- 

 tion in England, and of which I have inter- 

 dicted translations, he is apparently uncon- 

 scious that I have written other books, 

 sundry of them political; and especially he 

 seems not to know that the last of them, 

 1 Political Institutions,' contains passages 



concerning the question he discusses. Writ- 

 ers in critical journals which have reputa 

 tions to lose usually seek out the latest ver- 

 sion of an author's views ; and the more 

 conscientious among them take the trouble 

 to ascertain whether the constructions they 

 put on detached passages are warranted or 

 not by other passages. Bad the Edinburgh 

 reviewer read even the next chapter to the 

 one from which he quotes, he would have 

 seen that, so far from attacking the right of 

 private property, as he represents, my aim 

 is to put that right upon an unquestionable 

 basis, the basis alleged by Locke being un- 

 satisfactory. He would have further seen 

 that, so far from giving any countenance to 

 communistic doctrines, I have devoted four 

 sections of that chapter to the refutation of 

 them. Had he dipped into the latter part 

 of the work, or had he consulted the more 

 recently published ' Study of Sociology ' and 

 ' Political Institutions,' he would not have 

 recklessly coupled me with Mr. George as 

 upholding 'the doctrines of communism, 

 fatal alike to the welfare of society and to 

 the moral character of man' ; for he would 

 have discovered the fact (familiar to many, 

 though unknown to him) that much current 

 legislation is regarded by me as communis- 

 tic, and is for this reason condemned as 

 socially injurious and individually degrad- 

 ing. The writer of the article in the ' St. 

 James's Gazette ' does not represent the 

 facts correctly when he says that the view 

 concerning ownership of land in ' Social 

 Statics ' is again expounded in ' Political 

 Institutions ' ' not so fully, but with as 

 much confidence as ever.' In this last work 

 I have said that, ' though industrialism has 

 thus far tended to individualize possession 

 of land, while individualizing all other pos- 

 session, it may be doubted whether the final 

 stage is at present reached.' Further on I 

 have said that ' at a stage still more ad- 

 vanced, it may be that private ownership of 

 land will disappear ' ; and that ' it seems 

 possible that the primitive ownership of land 

 by the community . . . will be revived.' 

 And yet again I have said that ' perhaps the 

 right of the community to the land, thus 

 tacitly asserted, will, in time to come, be 

 overtly asserted.' Now it seems to me that 

 the words I have italicized imply no great 

 ' confidence.' Contrariwise, I think they 



