I, A N J) A N 1) W A 1' !•: R. 
DccemDer jo, 1915. 
THE FORUM. 
A Commentary on Present-day Problems. 
THE groat cltort towards unity of national 
purjxjsc wliich was expressed by tlu' 
formation of the coalition (iovcrn- 
nient has brought us in due course a 
roaciion whicli is inclined to overstress the neces- 
sity, the privileges and the advantages of criticism. 
• ihis "war ot tendencies" marches too slowly for 
our peace of mind. We are perplexed, we are 
impatient, imuI we suffer. Therefore in Parliament, 
in the Piess and in common life an undisciplinecl 
battalion of eager critics rushes in without honest 
lear or measured prudence, questioning, carping, 
insinuating, denouncing, detracting and, on select 
occasion, slandering. 
It is true that the dissolution of the official 
opiwsition left an important function of our 
machinery of (iovernment unfulfilled ; and it is 
well worth while at this juncture to repeat to our- 
.selves that criticism has its responsibilities and 
hmitations as well as its sanctions. 
The present tendency of. criticism is towards 
a more and iiKjre reckless and aimless heckling - 
fogging and pettifogging. It seems to be forgotten 
that a great volume of informed and expert 
criticism is delinitely at the service of the ad- 
ministration ; that the work of the Cabinet is 
largely the intolerably difficult task of sifting 
and balancing that criticism. Take as an instance 
the cotton controversy. There was alwar>s room 
for doubt as to whether the Foreign Office'was not 
too tender of the susceptibilities of neutrals or 
over-emphasising the dangers and disad\antages 
of a breach with one or more of them. But the 
general nm of criticism seemed to assume that no 
member or adviser, of that department had ever 
heard, what e\ery schoolboy and cub reporter 
knew, that cotton w^as raw material of explosives ; 
or as if the decision to risk the suspension of 
certain in\aluable neutral services was anything 
but Aery difficult and delicate. 
No doubt the reasonably well-informed and 
the reflective could make their own adjustments, 
but there was here fine material for illustration 
of the text " our blundering bosses " so well 
canvassed in the ranks of advanced labour. The 
first thing criticism has to remember— it is a pity 
one has to write the platitude— is that the admini- 
stration, if erring, is not merely imbecile, and 
that the reputation of a Government -with the 
people in so desperate a crisis as war is not lightly 
to be breathed upon. It might safely be adiuitted 
in fact, without trenching upon any rights of 
democratic control, that the administration should 
be given the benefit of the doubt before any given 
criticism of it be widely circulated. 
Again, though no one will challenge the 
position that such advice as is available to respon- 
sible ministers should be supplemented, we have 
the right to demand that the same sort of work be 
]nit into the task of criticism as is necessitated by 
llie labour of administration ; that such criticism 
should be reasonably well-informed, carefully pre- 
pared and weighed, and should not wear that 
rather casual air of happy improvisation (so 
effective in suburban debating societies) which 
distinguishes so many of our Pariiamentary 
questioners. 
Criticism to be helpful demands, as it literally 
implies, judgment in the critic ; stability also and 
continuity. A critic, as well as an administrator, 
should be judged by and answerable for his mis- 
takes. Stumbling on to truth does not necessarily 
make sound criticism. It is the handhng of the 
truth that tells. 
Criticism should be offered on a balanced 
view of the whole case. An immense amount ot 
current criticism is, however honest, merely 
sectional. There are the critics who look upon 
the war too exclusively and simply as an affair 
of fighting forces, who press for nothing but 
more men at any cost. No such simplifications 
are possible. The obvious fact that armies need 
equipment and therefore organised industrial 
supports behind them is of course allowed. That 
our own industrial organisation, having to cope 
with the e(iuipment and munitioning of other 
armies cAeri larger than ovr own, needs an excep- 
tionally complete mobilisation is somewhat more 
reluctantly granted. 
But armies also need a willing people behind 
them. The temper of the people, of this curious, 
slow-moving British people faced with an un- 
expected situation of unguessed gravity, has 
been a constant and a necessary preoccupation of 
the administration. An army needs to be financed, 
is no stronger than its bank balance. We have to 
finance armies other than our own. How far the 
claims in the matter of labour of manufacture for 
export must be met in order to reduce the trade 
balance against us and so continue the adecjuate 
financing of the war is a question only to be 
determined by exhaustive enquiry. The very 
best of the military experts can possess no sort of 
knowledge about it. You have, in sum, a problem 
of quite appalling complexity, as to which a fair 
judgment can be delivered only after the most 
careful collation of complicated evidence. 
There i^ astonishingly little to suggest that 
our most strenuous critics have either the patience 
or the knowledge to undertake this balanced 
investigation. If such inadequate Daniels air 
their callow views in the club smoking room, we 
vote them tiresome bores. When it conies to 
inflicting this kind of thing upon a. nation from a 
privileged platform, harder words are necessary 
to meet the case. 
Criticism should be selective, concentrated 
on the salient points. A wise mentor in attempt- 
ing to correct the faults of his charge takes care 
not to overwhelm and distract him with fault- 
linding on a hundred points of niggling detail, 
but is carefiil to select one or tw^o more serious 
radical defects. Nor does he expect impeccability 
--only improvement. No administration involved 
m a crisis of immeasurable difficulty can avoid 
innumerable lesser and not a few.mafor mistakes. 
There is no way of securing infallibility in our 
"'1",^^>^.^'''=^» "ot even by replacing them by their 
crifiiis. ' It is only a crude, perverse or hysterical 
12 
