.^2 



I he Review of Reviews. 



April SO. 190e. 



cal methods as dominated by the principle of party. 

 For the Church to take any share in these movements 

 would be to introduce division in its ranks. The re- 

 sulting clash of opinions and views would be fatal to 

 its 1 fe and proper influence. On the other hand, 

 the religious man seems to me to be bound to sym- 

 pathise witli -rvery endeavour to lessen the burdens 

 ef the larger number, and even to interfere with the 

 operation of freedom itself, when it tends only to aid 

 the strong and the capable, and especially when it 

 enables unbridled, unconscientious selEshness to use 

 all opportunity for its own ends. Whether the State 

 should supply gas and water and lodging-houses, and 

 own collieries and mines and railways, are matters 

 which the Church must leave to individual opinion, 

 and to the conflicts of the municipal and political 

 Vi-orlds. giving freedom to its members and ministers 

 to hold and promulgate such views as they please. 

 But in all action which limits the hours of labour, 

 which secures rest and possibility of culture, which 

 checks the inordinate tyranny of capital on the one 

 hand and class labour on the other hand; which de- 

 velops peace and universal brotherhood and a human- 

 ity which knows not the limits even of national life : 



which protects childhood and the unfortunate; which 

 secures equality of opportunity for all ; which seeks 

 even to undo the wrong of past unjust legislation ; 

 which has sacrificed the interests of the entire com- 

 munity to the advantages of the few, and the count- 

 less other ideals of the spirit of Socialism, I can- 

 not conceive of the Christian man or the Christian 

 Church which can refuse sympathy and co-operation. 

 To do this, in mv opinion, stamps both the indivi- 

 dual and the community with the mark of Anti- 

 Christ. In such a case religion has perished, and 

 the teaching and example of the Lord are distinctly 

 repudiated and rendered futile. 



In regard to State Socialism, remembering how 

 far we have already gone in this direction, the test 

 of efficiency will have to be applied. If the State 

 can do anything better than the individual, let it do 

 it. What it cannot do Ijetter it must leave alone. In 

 regard to the Socialistic spirit of aiming at the good 

 of all. and the restraint of what is not for that end, 

 even to the limitations of freedom. I deeply feel its 

 claim and. as I have learnt. Christianity cannot con- 

 ceive of any other issue of its impulses and teach- 

 ings. 



ENGLISH INTERVIEWS. 



LXXVL— MR. MORLEY'S CHANCE: THE PARTITION OF BENGAL. 



Mr. John Morley's chancel What is Mr. John 

 Morley's diance? 



" .Mr. Morley's chance," reply two Irish ladies 

 now resident in Bengal, from whose vivacious letters 

 I extract the points of this intervie\v, "is to undo 

 the partition of Bengal. He could not find a better 

 opportunity of demonstrating his goodwill to the 

 people of India. " 



" Why was Bengal partitioned?" I ask. 

 "Ask Lord Curzon," they reply. "In India we 

 see no reason for it except a desire to wound the 

 national sentiment of the Bengalees." 



" But was Bt-ngal not far too huge an area to be 

 handled as an administrative unit?" 



" Possibly. But if so, the remedy was to cut Assam 

 off from. Bengal, making it a Crown Colony, but 

 leaving Bengal intact. By partitioning Bengal you 

 wound the national sentiment and provoke the most 

 peaceful and law-abiding of peoples into demonstra- 

 tions of hostility." 



"How does that demonstration take effect?" 

 " (i) By the Swadeshi movement — a perfectly 

 legal effort to express dissatisfaction with Anglo- 

 Indian high-handed methods of government by show- 

 ing a preference for goods of native Indian manu- 

 facture over those of English make. (2) By a re- 

 fusal to attend the reception of Sir Bampfylde Fuller 

 or to present h.im with addresses. (3) By protests in 



the newspapers and at public meetings, when ttie 



latter are not suppressed by the [)olice ' 



"What! 'suppressed by the police'! — peaceable 

 meetings under the British flag? Vou must be mis- 

 taken. Vr-u are in British India, not in European 

 Russia. ' 



"What we want the British public at home to 

 understand is that in order to enforce this most de- 

 tested partition of Bengal Sir Bampfylde Fuller is 

 using Gurkhas as General Trepoft' used Cossacks to 

 compel the people to break up public meetings, and 

 generally to establish a reign of terror among the 

 people." 



" But surely there was some \iotence were there 

 no outrage?" 



" None, save those of the authorities. The ofBdal 

 mind, especially when incarnated in the body of Sir 

 Bampfylde Fuller, is autocratic to a degree you can 

 hardly imagine. Law .and order have never been 

 disturbed in Bengal. But they want the natives to 

 cra\vl on their faces to their feet, and at last, thank 

 God. the worm has turned and is crawling the other 

 way. Believe us when we tell you frankly that a 

 persistence in this arbitrary, despotic method of 

 trampling upon popular sentiment will endanger the 

 security of the Empire. Our only hope is that Mr. 

 Morley will look into the matter with a judicial 

 mind. We feel \ye can trust him. For he is a pupil 



