1880.] on Social Democracy in Germany. 426 



rcmarkablo that no illcpjul oiitrago has been committed since the 

 passing of the anti-socialistic Act. Five years ago lialf of tlie in- 

 habitants of Germany were too poor to pay any direct tax ; of those 

 that remained, more than 400,000 had to be i)rosecnted, and of these 

 160,000 were simply found to be completely destitute of means. 



It is not wonderful, then, that even young Government clerks fresh 

 from the University are unconsciously using in State documents the 

 jargon of State socialism, and that they inveigh against the spoils of 

 private enterprise and individual egotism as if they were writing for 

 the socialist press, and not inditing documents intended to suppress 

 socialism. The German Government is placed in a delicate position. 

 Their actions are scrutinised by minds filled with chimeras. From 

 professorial chairs, from low platforms, the restoration of society is 

 the never-ceasing theme. Practical ideas fall flat, and hard work, 

 which must inevitably be the first duty of tlie greater part of man- 

 kind, becomes unattractive. A German workman forfeits his wages, 

 convinced that eventually the " Volksstaat " will give him unjire- 

 cedcnted comforts. Meanwhile he is dismissed by his employer and 

 becomes cynically covetous. He does not want reform, which is 

 the more just application of an existing princii)le, but revolution, 

 which is the substitution of a new principle for an old one. He is 

 not satisfied with the same privileges w^hich the other citizens enjoy. 



Germans have been accustomed to centuries of j^atriarchal govern- 

 ment. That patriarch cannot suddenly abdicate. He should, however, 

 surrender gradually his functions. The question of State interference 

 is the great political question of the day. Where the State under- 

 takes everything, as in the socialist State, society ceases to live, and 

 becomes like a corpse. The rout of the Manchester school ("das 

 Manchesterthum "), on which the Nord Deutsche Zeitung throws 

 the blame of socialism, would be, on the contrary, the defeat of its 

 bitterest enemy. In Germany, faith in organisation has superseded 

 faith in liberty. Bismarck himself gave the explanation in his sj^eech 

 of May the 8th, 1880, when he said : " Thirty years I have fought 

 for German unity" — mark: not liberty — though he also made the 

 following remarkable statement : " I deem it necessary to state, that 

 the enthusiasm for the principle of German unity is slightly weakened. 

 Yes, gentlemen, weakened. Particularism has increased, the an- 

 tagonism between parties is fiercer, the struggle of passions more 

 violent. I am fully entitled to appear on this subject as a competent 

 witness." Nobody here I suppose will dispute the gravity of these 

 words. 



We owe too much to German learning, to German science, to 

 German literature, not to wish that united Germany should j^rosper. 

 A regular action of the heart of Europe is all-important. But the 

 unity of Germany must be accompanied by the free development of all 

 German internal forces, to be safe from disruption. Let us hoi^e that, 

 after having travelled through the wilderness of protection and re- 

 pression, Germany may enter on a smooth course of real liberty. 



