106 Mr. H. Wickham Steed [May 4,, 



stated, and though the work of a free community is to ensure, in 

 normal times, a maximum of ordered freedom to its members, it is 

 clear that, at moments of crisis and common danger, questions of 

 individual freedom lose significance in comparison with the para- 

 mount necessity of preserving the community itself. The real 

 problem to be solved is how to ensure a maximum of individual 

 freedom in normal times with such efficiency of cohesion and spon- 

 tan«ity of discipline in times of stress, as to safeguard the community 

 against attack from outside or unwholesome tendencies within. In 

 this sen^e it may be said that, according to sound liberal doctrine, 

 the individual citizen has a right to liberty within the community 

 not in order that he may follow his own will in every act of his life, 

 but in order that he may use his liberty for the service of the com- 

 munity. He is entitled to liberty because he cannot make his full 

 contribution to the life of the community if he be the servant of the 

 will of others, and if he be not able to bring to the common stock 

 the fruit of his own activity and of his own judgment. Analogies 

 between the structure of living organisms and that of organized 

 communities have become hackneyed and are often misleading, but 

 it remains true that, just as the health of living tissue depends 

 upon the health and vigour of each individual cell, so the health and 

 power of resistance of a community may depend upon the self-reliant 

 vigour of each of its members. 



How far did the social and political conditions prevailing in 

 Great Britain before the war fulfil the requirements of a free and 

 healthy community ? To what extent were the " free institutions," 

 of which we had been taught to be proud, discharging their func- 

 tions? I cannot presume to claim infallibility for my personal 

 impressions, though I had been accustomed for many years to 

 observe the conditions of foreign communities and had long watched 

 the course of affairs in England with a fresh and impartial eye. 

 The impression made upon me by England in the years before the 

 war was that of a community in rapid process of political and social 

 degeneration. Our "free institutions," built up by centuries of 

 struggle against autocratic tendencies, seemed to have fallen into the 

 hands of a practically irresponsible oligarchy. I am not referring to 

 any men or party in particular, but to a phenomenon. I have never 

 belonged to any party. My ol)servations date at least from the 

 Ijeginning of the century. In theory, the people controlled the 

 working of the State through their n^presentatives in Parliament, 

 a majority of whom, in their turn, delegated executive functions 

 to a small body of Ministers. These controlled, ostensibly, the 

 workings of departments over which they presided, and were jointly 

 responsible to Parliament for the good government of the country. 

 In reality, party organizations, supported by contributions from 

 interested individuals or groups of individuals, foisted upon the 

 people, by means of elaborate propagandist machinery, notions which 



