Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

The author draws a vivid picture of the political ideas of the Federalists and the Republicans respectively, observing the fallacies that weakened the views of Hamilton, as well as of Jefferson. He carries his examinations further, and accurately reviews the political ideas dominating the Democrats and the Whigs. Throughout the historical sketch the writer has endeavored to point out the relation of American nationality to political parties, principles, and individuals. In his treatment of the life and services of Lincoln the author is most happy. He comments on the fact that Lincoln was the first responsible statesman who proclaimed that American nationality was a living principle rather than a legal bond.

In examining contemporaneous political and industrial problems the writer deals severely with the American lawyer, commenting upon the fact that American government is managed through the instrumentality of the Bar. The writer believes the qualifications of the lawyer for the task he undertakes are no longer substantially such as they once were. He declares: "Not only has the average lawyer become a less representative citizen, but a strictly legal training has become a less desirable preparation for the candid consideration of contemporary political problems." The writer further declares that the bulk of American legal opinion is opposed to reform which tends to political or economic reorganization; and, further, that at a time when the basis of the American legal system needs a candid consideration, American lawyers "have either opposed or contributed little to the essential work, and in adopting this course they have betrayed the interests of their more profitable dients the large corporations themselves whose one chance of perpetuation depends upon political and legal reconstruction.”

The chief object of Mr. Croly's book is to show that the fulfilment of the Promise of American Life depends upon the fulfilment of American nationality as he has defined that term. He makes an interesting comparison of the situation in England, Germany, and France, respectively, giving in each case a vivid picture of the relation between nationality and democracy. In view of the present political crisis in England, the comment of the author that "the commoners on their side are proud of their lords and of the monarchy and grant them full confidence," may be questioned, at least by the adherents of the Liberal Party.

To students of international law in the United States one of the most interesting portions of Mr. Croly's book is that relating to American Foreign Policy. The author denies that the Monroe Dostrine has "a

status in the accepted system of international law." He adds that with the exception of Great Britain no other European country has accepted it, and that a number of them " have expressly stated that it entails consequences against which they might sometime be obliged strenuously and forcibly to protest." In the judgment of the reviewer it is a significant fact that at the present time European powers, before attempting, for whatever reason, coercive measures against delinquent American states, are disposed to consult the United States. It will be remembered that, for example, on December 11, 1901, the Imperial German Embassy filed with the Department of State a Promemoria with reference to proceedings about to be taken by Germany against Venezuela; and also that in 1908, the Government of the Netherlands consulted the United States with reference to measures to be undertaken against the same state. If civilized maritime states habitually conform to particular rules of conduct with respect to the American Continents, those rules will ultimately become incorporated into international law, even though their origin is due to the declarations of a single state, and their observance to its influence and naval power. Mr. Croly believes that there is a dangerously aggressive tendency of the Monroe Doctrine not due to the fact that it derives its standing from the effective military power of the United States, but because the policy which it fosters carries isolation to a degree that may provoke justifiable attempts to break it down.

[ocr errors]

With reference to an American international system Mr. Croly declares that the first object of the policy of the United States should be to place its relations with Canada on a better footing. To that end he suggests a closer political situation between the two countries "some political recognition of the fact that the real interest of Canadian foreign affairs coincide with the interests of the United States rather than with the interests of Great Britain." A fanciful suggestion for a Canadian-American treaty is made, the essential idea of which deserves. consideration. The writer is firmly convinced that the systematic effort to establish a peaceful American system is just as inevitable a consequence of the democratic national principle, as is the effort to make our domestic institutions contribute to the work of individual amelioration.

The general conclusions of the author are interesting and valuable, particularly with reference to the position and duty of the individual citizen in the process of the fulfilment of the Promise of American Life. He pleads for individual emancipation from the traditional American viewpoint. Finally, in order to attain the realization of American

nationality, the author emphasizes the overwhelming necessity of individual effort to accomplish individual emancipation by the doing of special work with ability, energy, disinterestedness and excellence. Whether or not the common citizen become emancipated, by the excellence and distinction of his work, and by contributing his part towards the fulfilment of the Promise of American Life, depends primarily, according to the author, upon the ability of his fellow-countrymen to offer him. acceptable examples.

In the judgment of the reviewer Mr. Croly has written a book which deserves wide reading. If it is widely read it is believed that its influence will be profound. By the excellence of his own work, by the fairness of a mind which he has applied to the American problem of largest consequence, Mr. Croly has forged and tempered an instrument not only for his own individual benefit, but also quite as much for that of American society.

CHARLES CHENEY HYDE.

A Vindication of Warren Hastings. By G. W. Hastings. London: Henry Frowde. 1909. pp. vi, 203.

The historical night that shrouds English activity in India during the 18th century was not cleared by James Mill, who unqualifiedly accepted the slanderous attacks of Francis and his partisans on Warren Hastings. Mill wrote the slanders into his history, where being found by Macaulay, they appeared in his brilliant essay, as facts. Many who have read that scintillating essay have gained from it their entire historical knowledge of Hastings, and it left a wide-spread impression that his domestic administration of India was marked by personal selfishness and corruption, and that his foreign policy was dictatorial, unscrupulous and conducted with an unnecessary harshness towards the native rulers. It has perhaps been difficult for the American mind to differentiate the coloring from the facts in regard to the rule of the East India Company in India under Hastings, for though viciously opposed by a majority of his Council, Francis, Clavering and Monson, he nevertheless dominated India during the critical epoch in which the American Colonies, after protesting against a vicious system of taxation, finally threw off the yoke of the mother country. It is easy to believe that the arbitrary and unwise actions of Royal Governors and other officials in the American Colonies in all of her outlying possessions. There is an undoubted basis for the were part and parcel of a policy by which the England of that day ruled

belief that the early activity of the East India Company in India was animated by self-interest, that in Clive's time the country was fleeced by English officials from Clive himself downward, and that native officials employed by the Company did not hesitate to batten off their fellow countrymen. No monopoly such as the Company could, or ever did, govern wholly in the interest of the people. The Court of Directors at London had to pay dividends which meant that Clive and Hastings had to make India pay. They did, but Clive by methods that were deplorable, Hastings by an efficient and honest reform of the administration. England laid the foundations of her Oriental Empire through the activity of a monopolistic trading Company. Such was the general policy during the 17th and 18th centuries. The system was undoubtedly bad, but Hastings was the agent only of the East India Company, not its creator. The point is, did he as an agent of an approved method of government of his day, animate his administration by ideas so broad and sound that they would be approved and retained when the monopoly was replaced by a direct governmental control acting through an efficient civil service? Undoubtedly he did, although he committed a great error of judgment in fixing the opium monopoly into the Indian system of

revenue.

Lord Clive made the military conquest of Britain's Indian Empire, but he was no great administrator. When he left India for the third and last time, in 1767, the territorial foundations of the British Empire in Bengal were safe; but the dual system of government which he established, was conducted by English chiefs and native underlings whose corruption and rapaciousness were unparalleled. In 1772, Warren Hastings fell heir to this system, and it needed his commanding administrative genius to reorganize the Government of Bengal and the rest of British India, so that it remains to this day the foundation of the British Indian Government. Hastings had proved himself in minor positions and as a junior member of the Council, a faithful servant of the East India Company; intelligent and honorable, he had an intimate knowledge of Indian manners and customs. When he was appointed to the Governorship of Bengal, in 1772, and as first Governor General in 1774, it was his desire, as well as his express duty under a predetermined policy of the Court of Directors at London, to bring administrative order out of chaos, and to put a stop to the intrigues and continuous quarrels of the independent rulers in India. The later researches of Sir William Hunter, from whom I am freely quoting, G. W. Forrest, Strachey, and Sir James Fitzjames

Stephens have cleared up any doubts as to the personal integrity of Hastings, and there is now in this vindication by G. W. Hastings a final

answer to his critics.

The more recent and thorough knowledge of the original manuscripts of the Company show that for the thirteen years 1772-85- during which Hastings governed for the East India Company, he brought to bear on Indian problems an indomitable application and patient statesmanship that is unparalleled in oriental administration. Although his foreign policy has been most widely discussed and criticized, his true fame undoubtedly rests upon his administrative capacity. Under the dual system of government established by Clive in 1765, a substance of territorial power was obtained by the East India Company under the guise of a grant from the Mogul Empire. Several Indian provinces which had been overrun by Clive, were handed over to the Mogul Emperor, who in turn granted the Company the fiscal administration of Bengal, Bahar, Orissa and the Northern Circars of Madras. Under this system, the English received the revenues of Bengal, and on their part engaged to maintain an army. Criminal jurisdiction was left in the hands of the Nawab Wazir, to whom the Government of Bengal had been The weakest point in this dual administration was that the actual collection of the revenues was left in the hands of rapacious native officials.

sold.

Hastings rapidly changed all this. He created Courts of Justice, placed the collection of the revenue in the hands of English officials, known to-day as Collectors, purged the revenue service of corruption, and laid the foundations for an organized system of police. The paltry salaries of officials were increased, and the common corruption which tainted civil and military life under Clive was practically destroyed. His foreign policy was bold, and it is difficult at times not to regard it as severe; but if he had not protected the Company's territory from the scheming and unscrupulous native Princes, he would have been annihilated. He had to destroy them, or he would have been destroyed. In all of his great work he was handicapped by a statute of Parliament known as the Regulating Act of 1773. Under this Act he became the first Governor General presiding over a Council, the Members of which, like himself, were governed by the terms of the Act. Like every other Member of the Council he had but one vote, except in the case of an equal division, when he had a casting vote. Had his Council cordially cooperated with him, it would have been a heavy task to put the East

« ZurückWeiter »