366 



The Journal of Heredity 



stituted — and one has only to compare 

 the satire of Aristophanes with that 

 of Bernard Shaw to be convinced of 

 the permanence of his general charac- 

 teristics — no greater stimulus can be 

 afforded to talent and industry in the 

 individual than the certainty that their 

 diligent application will keep in a higher 

 social order those who are already 

 there and will carry into a higher social 

 order those who are born in a lower. 



In conclusion I may refer to the 

 unanimous dissent expressed by my 

 biologist critics from my conviction that 

 the best governed countries are those 

 in which the mass of the people have 

 the least control over the administra- 

 tion of public affairs. 



I cannot do more in this place than 

 somewhat extend my former statement 

 of this conviction, for it will readily be 

 appreciated that a full discussion of 

 comparative government would not be 

 acceptable to readers of The Journal 

 OF Heredity, and would demand more 

 space than the journal could possibly 

 afford it. 



My conviction, then, is based upon 

 a somewhat extended observation of 

 government in practice. I have ob- 

 served the operation of constitutional 

 democracy in England, in Canada, in 

 the United States, in Australia, and in 

 France ; of constitutional monarchy of 

 a non-democratic type in Germany ; of 

 an almost pure absolutism in the King- 

 dom of Sarawak, Borneo ; of non-par- 

 liamentan' paternalism in India, in Java, 

 in Burma, in Indo-China, and in the 

 Federated Malay States ; of parliamen- 

 tary paternalism in the Straits Settle- 

 ments, in Batbados, in British Guiana, 

 and in Hong Kong. 



So confused is the terminology of 

 government that no standard definition 

 of terms is available. I have adopted 

 the foregoing classification simply for 

 the purpose of making clear a distinc- 

 tion which is, I believe, vital to an un- 

 derstanding of any question connected 

 with comparative government. 



So far as my observation goes, Eng- 

 land, Canada, the United States, Aus- 

 tralia, and France have, in varying de- 

 grees, been less well eoverned in mod- 



ern times than the countries which fol- 

 low them in the list. The reason for 

 this is, in my judgment, very clear, 

 namely, that in the tormer group local 

 politics have cast a blight upon the ad- 

 ministrative functions of government, 

 whilst in the latter group almost all 

 administrative projects have been con- 

 ceived and carried out, chiefly by ex- 

 perts, on the basis of their intrinsic 

 merits. In other words, in the latter 

 group of countries the health, comfort, 

 convenience, and prosperity of the peo- 

 ple have not been the pawns in that 

 political game so wittily described by 

 Mr. Balfour as "a system of organized 

 quarrelling." 



A word of explanation is necessary 

 in regard to Germany. Until 1914 we 

 heard little but praise of Germany's 

 internal administration. As Professor 

 Cook and Mr. Robert Carter Cook say 

 in their reply to me : "German cities 

 were cleaner than English or Amer- 

 ican cities. The visitor to Germany did 

 not see the docks of Hamburg lined 

 with human scarecrows, or little chil- 

 dren going barefoot in the snow, as in 

 the streets of Liverpool. Disheveled 

 slums like those of New York or Lon- 

 don did not exist. There were no hun- 

 gry beggars or aimless people wander- 

 ing in rags. Irresponsible indigence was 

 as strictly forbidden as other misde- 

 meanors." 



Now it was surely not any of these 

 things which led Germany to adopt her 

 foreign policy of violent aggression or 

 to carry it out with such infamous bar- 

 barity. To attribute her conduct to 

 such causes would be to declare that 

 clean, healthy, well-educated, and in- 

 dustrious people are more affected than 

 others toward lust and violence. It 

 was because German Administration 

 was controlled by a special class that 

 it was so excellent ; it was because her 

 Policy was controlled by a special class 

 that it was so pernicious. 



The distinction between policy and 

 administration, as the two elements in 

 government, is seldom drawn by writers 

 on politics ; yet it is, in fact, mainly 

 upon the drawing of this distinction 

 that good government depends. 



