SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY CONWAY HALL, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON, W.C.I

(Chancery 8032)

THE

MONTHLY RECORDDECEMBER, 1942

SUNDAY MORNINGS AT ELEVEN

December 6.—PROEESSOR C. W. KEETON, M.A., LL.D.—Some Makersof Modern England (3) William III.

Bass Solos: Calm and tranquil lie the sheep folds .. BachWhither? .. Schubert

Mu. C. C. DOWMAN

Hymns Nos. 46 (tune 28) and 43

December 13.—C. E. M. JOAD, M.A., D.Lit.—The Arguments Eor andAgainst the Existence of God : (I) The Arg :tits Against.

Pianoforte Solo: Prelude, Sarabande and Gigue fromEnglish Suite .. Bach

miss JOAN COOMBS

Hymns Nos. 226 and 139

December 20.—PROFTSSOR J. C. ELUGEL, D.Sc. Class Mind andGrouts Mind.

Bass Solos I sometimes think .. Liza LehmannMoney-0 .. Michael Head

MR. C. C. DOWMAN

Hymns: Nos. 210 and 32.

December 27.—No Meeting.

January 3.—RT. HON. LORD SNELL, C.B.E., P.C., LL.D.—Retrospect1942 and Outlook 1943.

Pianist: MISS ELLA IVIMEY

ADMISSION FREE

A collection is made at each Meeting to enable those present to contribute tothe Society's expenses.

SOME THOUGHTS ON WORK, LEISURE AND EDUCATIONEach of us is a member of a community, indeed of several communities,

and it is in youth and chiefly at school that we learn how to behave as amember of a community. 1 his is a matter on which there is a good dealof confusion at prescnt. In the old-fashioned school, everything is done topromote herd feeling--school assemblies, singing, athletics and militarytraining being the chief methods adopted to secure this end. Co-operationbetween children in academic matters is usually impossible, since it wouldbe considered cheating. Children brought up in this way are convinced thattheir school and their country have all kinds of imaginary merits a nd are

unquestionably superior to other schools and other countries. They do not.however, know how a group can carry through any activity which is notinspired by the desire to defeat some other group. Modern schools andmodern parents have usually reacted very strongly from this point of viewand, while there is much group activity in a modern school there is alsogrrat stressing of the individual as an end in himself. It is right that theteacher should think of the child, not only as a member of a group, but a,an end in himself, but I doubt very much whether the child should knowthis. It is a common complaint which may, I think, be justified, that childrenbrought up by modern methods are unduly selfish and have too little respectfor the rights of others. Militaristic methods of promoting group feelinghave not been adopted and, since no others are substituted, the child vet voften has foo little sense of social obligation. .Fhis is a problem which hasnot -yet been solved. I am disposed to think, however, that the answermay be found by reflecting upon Sanderson's famous saying that " schoolshould be a model of the world as we would love to have it." It seems tomc that, in an ideal world, the individual would have two different relation-ships to the community. On the one hand, economic parasitism (except

perhaps at a very low standard of living) would not be tolerated and everyonewould normally be expected to take his share in the necessary work of theworld. As regards work, therefore, freedom is limited and the right toidle does not exist. Work, however, would not occupy twenty-four hoursin the day, and the rights of the community arc at an end when one's workis over. At this stage, the right of the individual to spend his leisure as hepleases seems to me unquestionable. provided he is not interfering with thesimilar rights of others.

How does this apply to education? I think that modern children.especially in the middle and upper classes, find life altogether too easy.They have insufficient sense of economic reality and many services whichthey could perfectly well perform for themselves or for the family, or forthe school, as the case may be, are performed by paid servants. Not longago, I heard a mother boast that her daughter had never made her own bed.There are schools where the children, as a matter of course, do a considerableshare of the necessary menial work, and the war has increased their number.In times of peace, however, this is very uncommon among schools for thewell-to-do, and still less common among the families of the well-to-do.I suggest that education would provide a far better training for life if everychild were expected not only to do some academic work, but also to dowork of economic value in connection with his school or home. Whenthis is begun early, it is taken as a matter of course.

As regards leisure, a quite different attitude is needed. I am by no

means sure that children need to be " taught " to use their leisure, and itis far too common both in schools and in homes for the leisure hours ofchildren to be planned for them by adults. I have known mothers to planthe whole of their children's holidays and to arrange all their entertainments.Not only, therefore, are such children not expected to have a sense ofresponsibility for the community, they are not even allowed to be responsible

2

for themselves. Having deprived children of the opportunity and obligationof responsibility such parents are apt to turn round when their childrenare ready to leave school and complain that the children have developedno sense of responsibility!

My suggestions are, therefore, two-fold. On the one hand, I think itessential that every child should perform work of economic value; when achild is quite young, he can begin to take care of his own room, to makehis own bed, take care of his clothes, and generally do many services whichare all too often performed by mothers and servants. Later on, both athome and at school, a child can begin, in co-operation with others, toperform services which are useful to the group. These might include helpingin the preparation of meals and the washing of dishes, cleaning of buildings.and the care of gardens. On the other hand, I would say that a child'sleisure hours ought to be as free as possible from the interference of adultsand also from the sense of obligation. Some room for spontaneity isnecessary as a condition of mental and emotional health. There shouldbe some chance even to loaf, some time when one is accountable to no onefor one's actions. Children who do not know what to do with their leisureought to be allowed to be bored until they find out, provided only thatadults have ensured that the environment is rich in opportunity. Parentsare all too apt to be worried when their children do not know what to doand to make the decision for them. In this way, it is impossible for childrento form habits of independence and to experience the valuable discipline oftaking the consequences of their own decisions. In the formation of clubs,in the cultivation of hobbies, parents and adults should be always in thebackground, ready to help if necessary, but still more ready to withdrawand to leave the children to make their own decisions and to profit by theirown mistakes. At the same time, it should be considered a matter ofelementary morality that one earns one's right to leisure and freedom bythe prompt and faithful performance of one's duties.

W. B. CURRY.

SUMMARIES OF SUNDAY MORNING LECTURESPROFESSOR C. B. FAWCETT, D.Sc., on " THE COLUMBIAN

DISCOVERY-1492," October 11, 1942

Readings front: (I) "The Great Age of Discovery," edited by A. P.Newton.

(2) "Master Mariners," by J. R. Spears.

On October II and 12 (dawn) of 1492, just 450 years ago, Columbusfirst sighted land of the New World. That event has had such momentousconsequences that by general consent 1492 is one of the leading dates ofhistory—it is often chosen to mark the opening of the Modern Age—and thename of Christopher Columbus is one of those most widely known to fame.So it may be well, in spite of today's distractions, to look back to the greatevent. Was it, as some seem to think, the achievement of a solitary GreatMan? If so, in what does his greatness consist? Or was it such an eventthat, in the conditions of the time, if not made by Columbus it would soonhave been made by some one else? What were the circumstances leadingup to the Discovery? And what were its direct, and remote, results?

There are two extreme views regarding the importance of the GreatMan of history which are probably well known to all of us. One, the morepopular, was forcibly expressed by Thomas Carlyle when he wrote that "TheHistory of Mankind is the history of Great Men." The opposed view is tobe found, in an extreme form, in H. T. Buckle's " History of Civilization "where he likens the Great Man to the largest bubble on the stream of events.

3

and says that he is valuable because he shows more rapidly which way thestream is flowing. Probably the truth lies somewhere between these extremes,though to a student of science it seems that Buckle is nearer to it than Carlyle.In the history of discovery it is clear that the results attained depended, ateach stage, on the previous work of unnumbered inventors and experi-menters, without whose work the Grew Man could never have reached thegoal. Every outstanding invention and every great discovery is a complexthing and the credit usually goes to the one who completed it, though hemay not have been the chief contributor.

The discovery of new land west of the Atlantic by Christopher Columbus450 years ago was the " high light " of geographical discovery. It has madethe name of Columbus known to every schoolboy, and scattered it over themap of the Americas. The discovery marks the " divide " between medievaland modern time in Western Europe and so the opening of a new age in ourcivilization. Yet it was quite certainly the culminating point of a series ofevents, without which it could not have been made, not an isolatedachievement.

Consider some of the pre-requisites, the development of ships capableof making trans-ocean voyages, the parallel development of seamanship andof the science and art of navigation, the equipment needed to provision theships, and the knowledge of geography which set their goal and course. Ship-building is a complicated process. In the time of Columbus there were galleysfor the relatively calm waters of the Mediterranean. These could only sailbefore the wind, and when that was unfavourable it was necessary to take to

' the oars—an expedient costly in food and labour. The Portuguese haddevised the caravel which had movable yards and a group of small sails.This ship could sail fairly close to the wind. Then there was the " tallship " ascribed to the English, in which they out-sailed and out-manoeuvredthe Spanish Armada. The second and third were capable, under favourableconditions, of crossing the Atlantic.

Provisioning was still difficult. Less than one hundred years earlier aDutchman had discovered a method of salting fish so that it would last fora year, but really satisfactory means of preserving other provisions were notfound until the middle of the 18th century. Scurvy was long rampant amongsailors. The carrying of fresh water was a difficulty to earlier navigators,who had to huLthe shores. Not till an effective wooden barrel was invented—perhaps in Norway in the latter part of the Middle Ages—could frashwater be carried for long periods. Instruments essential for navigating theocean had not long been invented, and lastly. Columbus on his first voyage.was lucky enough to sail, without knowing it, in the most favourable time

'of the year, and to find good weather.We may ask why this great discovery fell to Spain and not to the northern

peoples, who had more experience of rough seas, or to the Portuguese whohad greatly developed navigation and pushed far down the coast of Africa.In the year 1492 Spain had just completed the expulsion of the Moors. TheSpan'ards had been crusading against the Moslems for seven centuries andFerdinand and Isabella, in the great age of Spain, found themselves left withlarge numbers of men accustomed to fighting for plunder and the faith, forwhom there was no ready occupation.

In accordance with the incorrect geographical information of the periodColumbus had conceived a plan for reaching the Indies by a short voyagewestward. He was also a fervent crusader, and he eventually prevailed onQueen Isabella to provide him with ships and men in order 10 take the Crossof Christ to the land of the heathen, thus giving thanks for the victory overthe infidel, and bringing greater glory to Spain. He found the Bahamas andthought he had reached Japan. His view was not accepted because Europeansbelieved China and Japan to be civilized countries with a knowledge of the

4

use of metals, whereas the natives found by Columbus, though like Asiatics,were still in the Stone Age. It was believed that he had reached outlyingislands of the Indies, and that name stuck. The word America was not usedby the early Spanish discoverers. Later on he reached the north coast ofSouth America, while later explorers conquered Mexico and Peru. Despitethe discoveries of Columbus, however, it was in honour of Amerigo Vespucci,a Portuguese who explored the coast of Brazil, that America received itsname, and not for twenty years was it realized that a new Continent had beendiscovered.

A Spanish mission was sent to the Pope to obtain his authority to all landshe had discovered being held by the King of Spain. The Portuguese tooksimilar action, and despite objections the Pope decreed that the undiscoveredpart of the world should be divided between Spain and Portugal ThePortuguese got the better of this bargain, for the shores and trade of theIndian Ocean which they controlled for a time proved more immediatelyremunerative. Columbus and his immediate successors gained little profit,and it was not until Mexico was reached in 1519 that much plunder accrued.Soon came the realization by all the sea-faring people of north-west Europe(hat the Ocean was crossable by skilful sailors willing to face the risk, andthat beyond it there were unlimited opportunities for exploration, adventureitrid wealth. So the Dutch and English intervened.

The discovery of America shifted the centre of civilization in Europefrom Italy to the Atlantic States, which suddenly became important. Noother country experienced so great a change as England. France had herattention divided between the ocean and her land frontiers, and hascontinued to suffer in consequence. Spain set out on a career of missionaryconquest which imposed the Roman Catholic faith and the Spanish languageon much of South America, and sent oversea a very large proportion ot heryoung men. She acquired much precious metal in an age which believedthat gold and silver constituted wealth. This caused one of •he greatestmonetary inflations recorded in history and later had disastrous results inSpain.. There were attempts to put the blame on foreigners and there wereextensive wars in which Spanish conquests were carried into Italy, theNetherlands and Germany. It seemed in the 50 years after Columbus thatthe enormous stimulus to the power of Spain had not only made her forthe time being the greatest power in the world but had enabled her to conquerEurope. Her attempt at conquest broke on the resistance of the Dutch andthe superior seamanship of the English.

The English took a different line from the Spanish. At first they alsosought only trade and plunder, but later they were the chief Europeans whowent out to settle, work and make homes in new countries. In the tropicalbelt European colonies were mostly failures •ecause they were based onNegro slavery and a White aristocracy. Further north European labour wassuccessful. kr addition to the discovery of the New World there was theexpansion of navigation to the east which meant contact with eastern civiliza-tions, at that time superior to our own in many respects. China was farahead of Europe of the 15th century. Thus Eastern exploration brought innew ideas and knowledge which stimulated technical development. This newknowledge was more important than the material goods brought home.

It was in 1523 that Magellan got round the world; only thirty-one yearsafter the discovery of America. Africa was nearly circumnavigated, theEast Indies and China were reached by seaways, and a journey acrbss thePacific proved the world to be spherical. That expansion of geographicaland mental horizons was the great stimulus to the minds of men in this greatage of discovery, when Western civilization burst out across the oceanbarriers and began the slow process of establishing a world-wide order.

E G. G.5

DR. C. E. M..10AD, MA., on " THE EDUCATIONAL FERMENT—H," October 18, 1942

Readings from: (I) "Education for a New Society," by Ernest Green,Secretary, Workers' Educational Association.

(2) " Principles of Social Reconstruction," by BertrandRussell.

Dr. Joad said he would endeavour to obtain from the various recentreports and recommendations on education the highest common factor ofviews which were shared by serious and enlightened thinkers. Mostprogressive reports were agreed, for instance, that all schools should infuture be controlled by the State. There were two educational ladders whichall deprecated. On one were the large majority of children whose parentswere not rich enough to pay for a full education. Only one out of five haveany education, voluntary or compulsory, after the age of fourteen. On theother ladder were the minority. They may start with a nurse followed by anursery-governess. After that, up to about eight, they attend a pleasantmorning school, with plenty of benevolent teachers. Then they go to apreparatory school up to fourteen, and afterwards to a so-called PublicSchool. Finally, they enter a University until twenty-two. There it ispossible to stay four years without doing much work. -

This second ladder is made accessible by the parents' bank balance.Its existence introduces privilege into education which reformers want toeliminate. If there were only one ladder differentiation between rulers andruled, those who are served and those who serve, would go. Should

'reformers have their way only one ladder will be retained, and the distanceascended will depend on ability.

Despite much disagreement as to what education is, and what it is for,it may be taken that its purposes are, first, to equip children to " maketheir way in the world," by acquitting themselves with credit in a trade orcraft, so that they can support themselves. Secondly, there is educationfor "citizenship," an all-important requisite for those born in a "democracy"for which intelligence must be trained. Such education must give peopleknowledge of facts which will train them, not what to think, but how tothink.

From this standpoint much that passes for education today is open tosevere criticism., The effect of much education today is merely to open theminds of people to the catchwords .of the hour, with the result that thevoice of reason, being small, is drowned. In this way we are making thegreat mass of men accessible to those who wish to exploit them for theirown purposes. If the type produced is interested in astrology and quackmedicines, the educational system today is helping those who deal in falsityand opackery by providing them with the ideal raw material for theirpurposes. The cultivation of the critical sense can be undertaken byeducation, and we should see that this is in fact done. Unless the educationproduces this result, you are likely to hand over power to those whoexploit the half-educated, and who then justify themselyes by'claiming thatthey are only giving the public " what it wants."

Men and women must be encouraged to have ideas of their own. It is true that those who think are liable to cause difficulties for those who govern. It is not, however, for a democracy to accept a kind of education according to which a privileged few shall do the thinking and the rest follow like a flock of sheep. It will be found that those who desire to rob the public of the opportunity of intense education are those who profit most by the sheepishness of the public. A critical and informed public opinion is an essential pre-requisite for the proper functioning of democracy.

Education for citizenship entails the spreading of knowledge of the way we are governed, of our constitution, and of the powers of local government.

6

• It entails the giving of information to enable us to interpret public events,the furnishing of our minds with some useful map of the modern world,and providing knowledge that will make us alert and critical.

Finally, a third purpose—it is only through education that a humanbeing can develop all his capacities, and be stimulated to the point ofexperiencing and enjoying mental adventure.

Another point on which there is fairly general agreement is that, it isno good leaving education alone till after the war. Mr. H. A. L. Fisher,who was responsible for passing the Education Act of 1918, has told us inhis Autobiography : " Had I not succeeded in piloting my Bill through theHouse of Commons in the last year of the war it would never have appearedidler the war."

The Labour Party's programme also stresses the need for urgency. Iturges that now is the time to provide for employment, housing, old age andeducational opportunities. It is now when things are fluid, and when we areprone to idealism—and also when our governing classes are chastened—thatwe can pass measures which otherwise would be impossible. For instance,it is agreed that the school-leaving age is to be raised to I5, and three yearsafter that to 16; but there will be fewer teachers equipped to teach after thewar than there were in 1939.

If we take the urgency plea seriously, certain things should be donenow. We must, for instance, recall from the Forces a proportion of theteachers. We must remove the obstacles in the teachers' channel fromschools to training colleges, and divert to some extent the stream of youngmen from the army to the teaching profession. Another point, if we puta doctor or a priest in the army, he carries out the duties of a doctoror a priest. We must see that the teacher in the Forces is treated similarly.The Army Educational Scheme is working poorly because teachers, insteadof teaching, are made into soldiers.

From the Conservative Party's report it is made to appear reasonablycertain that after the war conscription will continue. Thus, the followingsituation will arise. The State will control us up to the age of 15. From15 to 18 it will abandon control, and then resume it at 18 for militarypurposes. From 15 to 18 alone the State will wash its hands of responsibilityfor youth. A very odd gap!

After a consideration of the reports, Dr. Joad suggested a schemebased upon the situation we will have to meet after the war. First came theabolition of the system of dual education. All children should be given thesame education up to the age of II. It should be free, and attendancecompulsory. Primary schools should be attended by all. Up to 15, therewould be secondary education. It too, would be free and compulsory. At15 (or 16) there would be a break and a stock-taking. By that time they,could generally tell with regard to a child whether (from the point otview of the community) it was profitable to give it higher education orwhether it was not. The stocktaking would be both by written and oralexamination, and the consideration of annual reports on the child's previouscareer would be included in the evidence. On such a basis the board ofteachers would decide whether a child should receive a higher education, orbe placed on what might be called the technician's ladder.

Should the higher education be decided upon the child would go toan institution modelled (to some extent) on our Public Schools up to 18 or19, and from 19 to 22 to one modelled on our Universities. At bothestablishments the education would continue to be both free and compulsory,the point being that if the community would benefit, the parents would beforced to comply. A similar system has already been adopted in Denmarkand Sweden in contrast to our own where the principle of compulsion hasprevailed up to 14, but no further.

If it should be ruled that the child is not likely to benefit by higher

7

education, then in a technical school he will pursue according to his bent 'such a course as engineering, accountancy, mining, or some craft.

On the Public Schools, he said that these are preparing a scheme ofeducation for after the war, on the assumption that the " upper " classeswill not be able to maintain the flow of pupils. In return for a certainamount of formal State supervision they propose to confer a number offree places on youth recruited from working-class homes through senior orsecondary schools, their fees being paid by the State. Thus the atmosphereof class education would be retained and the idea of " class " evenstrengthened. The scheme would, in fact, skim off for public schools the" top draw " of working-class ability, sterilize it, and produce from it a

generation of snobs, who had forgotten their " class " or were ashamedof it, and who would tend to perpetuate the old inequalities. As opposedto this conception the Public School ought to be incorporated in the Statesystem of education as another rung in the ladder. In the world after thewar, the assumption underlying educational planning should be that thehigher prizes of education will go only to those who are fitted for them, and

fitness will be determined entirely by the child's talents.Dr. load warned his audience that these conclusions, drawn from a

consideration of the more progressively-minded reports, would only cometo fruition if they and other people like them would give the conclusionstheir resolute support.

T. H. E.

PROFESSOR SUSAN L. STEBB1NG, M.A., D.Lit., on UNFREE

THINKING, October 25, 1942.

Readings from: (I) I. S. Mill. Liberty. Ch. H.(2) L. S. Stebbing. Ideals and Illusions. Ch. VIII.

It is well to recall Mill's insistence upon the importance of" individuality as an element of well-being." Mill knew that the worth ofa nation is determined by the worth of the many different individuals whocompose it. " With small men no great thing can be accomplished "; menand women who cannot or do not think for themselves are small. To thinkin herds, as fashion dictates, as dictators command, as timid neighbours thinkis to think unfreely; it is to fail as an individual. If I am to be free to makeup my own mind, I must have a mind to " make up," a mind that is myown.

We speak easily of " the development of oneself as an individualthe phrase sounds good. But what does it mean? It is not easy to makedefinite what " the development of oneself as an individual " means. J. S.Mill—whose essay on Liberty should he read in every school and collegetoday—strove to make clear what such development is. Sometimes he spokeas though eccentricity were a sign of individuality. " That so few now dareto be eccentric," he said, " marks the chief danger of our time." This waswritten in 1859. We shall not fail to see its appositeness to Germany duringthese last eight or nine years. 'Mill found his warning example in China;he would not do so today. What Mill feared was, not that our nationwould remain stationary—after the fashion of the China he thought of; hefeared that when we changed we should " all change together." It is thisfate that has befallen the Germans. When Hitler says " turn," they allturn—right about face, as drilled automatons. They dare not be eccentric,they dare not differ one from another, for all must think as their Fuehrerordains, i.e., as he thinks. The Germans are not fools, but they no longerhave minds of their own; they do not think for themselves, or—in otherwords—their thinking is unfree.

In this country we are still allowed to think for ourselves and we have

considerable freedom of expressing our thoughts. This is not enough to

ensure thinking freely. That lies only in our own power, the power of eachone of us. It is not easy. Thinking is a difficult activity; to think freely Imust exert myself, I must seek information and think about that of which

I am informed. You can contribute to the making up of my mind, or

/ to yours, where "1" and " you " stand for any two different persons; Ineed your help, and your mind, for thinking does not take place in a

vacuum—always there is a topic to think about. Hence, we need to avail

ourselves of one another's knowledge; we need discussion one with another:we can share our thoughts. But it remains true that no one can do our

thinking for us; thinking is an intensely personal activity; how I think

depends upon the kind of person I am. I must think for myself, otherwise,

I do not think at all, I merely am an echo of other's thoughts. It is desir-

able that we should differ one from another; human beings are diverse intheir gifts and their achievements; there is nothing human in an ape-likeimitation of others. In these days of mass-circulation of newspapers, ofwireless talks prepared for, and listened to, by millions there is no little

danger of mass-conformity of opinion.Eccentricity has no value as such, nor did Mill suppose it had. To be

eccentric for the sake of being different is silly, and such difference is usually

confined to what is unimportant. What is necessary is not to be afraidof seeming eccentric because one differs from one's neighbour's opinions.

He may be right, I may be mistaken; It is wise to listen to his opinion (atleast it may be wise) but having heard what is to be said, we must in the

end decide each for himself. In thus deciding—making up my own mind—

I run the risk of falling into mistakes, perhaps a mistake that has disastrous

consequences. That is a risk that must be run if I would think freely asbefits a free man.

(Contributed by Professor Stebbing)

PROFESSOR G. E. G. CATLIN, M.A., Ph.D., on " THE DUTY TO DIFFER," November I. 1942

Readings from: (I) R. Niebuhr: Moral Man and Inunoral Society.(2) Keyserling: The Art of Life.

Professor Catlin began by explaining that his lecture picked up the

theme stated in his previous address. He had selected the two readings.not because of agreement with their general sentiments, but because they

illustrated the distinction between the plane of the politician and the planeof the moralist. Indeed Niebuhr (although approved by Professor E. H.

Carr in his Twenty Years Crisis. a defence of Mr. Chamberlain as :1

" realist ") faithfully reproduced the all but infamous doctrine popularizedby General Bernhardi in the last war. Professor Catlin explained that his

title was taken from the phrase, about writers, of the novelist Koestler:" his urge and duty in a world where nobody is well, the duty not to accept."

Heroic Man, who regarded human happiness as of minor importance

compared with the success of the plans of an individual or group, in contrastalike with Acquisitive Man and with Reflective Man, tended to find the

solution of all social problems on the level of power. Especially in war-

time this type of solution became popular. The lecturer anticipated anincrease of this authoritarian mind even after the war. Within its own

framework of reference it was not to be regarded as an evil. It was

infinitely preferable to anarchy or to a reversion to the policy of the Balanceof Power and the division of Europe. World domination was a very properobject if it served the end of maintaining world peace and the world

dominating power was just, democratic, and even federal, e.g., the United

9

Nations, could these hold together. There was indeed a real danger thatU.S.A., of which the politicians did not understand Europe and feared heavymilitary responsibilities, might propound for post-war Europe merely" liberal " plans of a commercial or financial nature which would suit wellenough the task of holding together Germans, Poles, Czechs and Rumanianswho were American emigrants and already American citizens, e.g.. in

Chicago, but which would be pathetically inadequate for the task of holdingtogether in peace Poles, Czechs, Rumanians and Germans in their Europeanhomelands. It might be that the Russians understood the issue of powerbetter than the Americans. There was then a legitimate authoritarianismwhich worked in power terms and which corresponded to the question.How can we maintain peace at the present?

Nevertheless these solutions in terms of secular power could not giveany complete or finally satisfactory answer to their own questions. Ultimatelypeace rested not on force but on acceptance, choice and the idea of justice.The problems of international society today were in many ways comparable.o those of the Roman Empire in the days of St. Augustine. It wasrecognized that we must have a concentration of secular power in orderto prevent aggression and lawlessness; the pacifist early Church had cometo recognize the validity of the function of Caesar and of armed might:but nevertheless it denied through the mouth of Augustine, that any adequateor intrinsically satisfactory system could be established save on the rightpsychologiCal premises of charity and rational choice as distinct from theaccidents of force and domination. This same position was being re-emphasized today by such psychologists as D. W. Harding in his Impulse toDominate, and by Dr. Ranyard West in his Conscience and Society.

Often the churches had thought to escape from this dilemma betweenthe personal and voluntary plane of social action and the political and

compulsory plane, by finding freedom and direct moral significance (withLuther) only on the first plane; by preaching (with Luther, Cranmer andPascal) passive obedience on the second plane, where authority had to beexercised " by reason of sin "; or (with Luther, Bernhardi and Niebuhr) bydividing sharply between the two realms or planes. This was all anhistorical reaction against papalism or the doctrine that a spiritual man hadnot only a right to be heard in the world but a duty to control it; but itwas not necessarily sound. Such writers as Niebuhr forgot one half of whatAugustine was talking about. In fact Reflective Man had a categorical dutyto control the world. Confucius and Plato were alike clear on this. Theproblem was to find the appropriate means. A quotation from Lin Yutang,

given in C. E. M. load's Testament of load, gave an extreme instance ofthe abandonment of this task in favour of a comfortable indifferentism.

The ultimate analysis- of politics showed motivation in terms of thedesire for Power rather than, as with the Marxist analysis, solely or dis-tinctively in terms of material Acquisition. It was interesting to noticeGollancz coming round to this position which the lecturer had maintainedin his Science of Politics. following Hobbes, Spinoza and A. Adler andfollowed by Russell. One half of the solution of the problem of the desireof a man (or group or nation) " for power of the power until he be dead,"was the establishment of a World State, concentrating all final power, havingno external relations, giving decisive security, and (being unchallenged)

without object in seeking further power. With the subsequent growth ofa genuine world community—as the community of France grew up roundthe Capets—such a World State would gradually come to subserve the endsof impartial justice, so far as is possible in secular life.

The other half of the problem remained—how to reconcile the desire

10

of individual man to be " moral man " with his desire to live successfully

in a society which is " immoral society " (even if far less so when its

appetite for power is satisfied in a World State in which power is collectivized).

The answer would seem to lie in educating men in what was meant by

" success "; and in inculcating the cultivation, church style, of an art of life

as distinct from a wolfish total war of individuals or societies in the

immediate competition of life. It led, not to indifference to " moral society,"

i.e., world-society such as could maintain peace, but to a certain cynicism

concerning politicians, their self-importance, works and successes in

immoral society," i.e., in any type of society which, from its very nature

and structure, could not maintain peace or do justice. It led to placing

" civilization," " humanism " and the immortality which a man enjoyed

by his reputation in civilized society, the reputation which a Von Galin or

a Von Preysing, an Athanasius or an Ambrose would enjoy in history, ahead

of all successes which local politicians might achieve when governed by no

master plan of a world order, world peace or world justice. That is the

" communion of Saints." Remota itaque justitia, quid est imperium nisi

magnum latrocinium? " Without justice, then, what is the State except alarge scale bandit-hold? " (Augustine).

(Contributed by Professor Catlin)

THE ETHICAL UNIONEthical Principleg and Political Action

Under the Chairmanship of Mr. H. J. Blackham there was a Symposium

on this subject in the Library at Conway Hall on October 24. About

70 people attended.PROFESSOR G C FIELD (of Bristol University) dealt with the first ques-

tion " In what sense (within the scheme of Political Action) such and suchought to be done or aimed at? " After a somewhat academic introduction he

said he could see no general grounds why any definite state of things should

have a claim over all other considerations irrespective of the sacrifice of

many moral values. He cited the Scottish patriot who said he would give

his life for his country but would not do a base act to save her. ProfessorField remarked that it is good to be friendly, to have mutual ccinfidence,

self-respect and independence, some sense of responsibility for others rather

than concern for ourselves alone. It is better to be happy than miserable.

Unless happiness is included in an aim action is not justifiable. Neverthelesswe may always be faced with the problem of having to sacrifice some

values to obtain others.MR. H. L. BEALS (of the School of Economics) dealt with the question

" What changes ought to be made in the economic structure of (a) Great

Britain; (b) the civilized world, if the principles accepted in answer to

question one are to be implemented?" He asked—what are the necessarysocial minima on which a good life for ordinary people might rest? Hereferred to the need for abolishing malnutrition not only in our own

country but in certain parts of the Empire. There was extensive infant

mortality among Bombay mill workerk. This should be reduced to the

low level in better organized countries such as New Zealand. We agree thatit is a good thing to be properly housed. Beginnings in this direction should

be carried further, and the time should come completely to reverse ourconceptions of the meaning of expenditure. At the beginning of this

century we spent less than forty million pounds per annum on socialservices. Before the outbreak of war this had risen to about five hundred

millions. Sir William Beveridge says we should spend seven hundred. Weshould have insurance for all and for everything within our control. In the

world of the future economic insecurity must disappear. Security will giveII

leisure and an expanding personality. We must get rid of the Victorianobsession for thrift. We are always counting costs, and we view withdisfavour the expenditure of money by a public authority. If the Govern-ment can spend nearly thirteen million pounds daily on warfare it is morereasonable for it to spend that sum on instruments of peace and harmony.It is quite a simple operation. Then you will discover that economists whosay you cannot do so are standing on their heads. We must get into thehabit of using financial power for purposes leading to harmony. We mustuse and find means of using those developments of technique at presentburied. The manufacture of armaments must be controlled and inefficiencyin their production avoided. An educational reform is called for. Wehave to redefine property in our kind of society in order to say what itsscope shall be. There is a process of defaming public business goincon among us which must be ended.

Mr. Beals said that his previous points led on to the international sphere.The discussions on Federal Union reveal much wishful thinking. Unlesscare is taken disharmonies would be bound to appear. There are two orthree basic principles. There must be equality of opportunity in the world'smarkets of raw materials and finished products. Communities are atdifferent stages of development. Let those who are well off advise thosewho are not. Backward people must be helped, not exploited. A unifiedtransport system is required and customs barriers must disappear. Inter-national agreements on emigration come within the sphere of practicalpolitics. The British Empire contains many backward States. There mustbe a plan for Africa, occupational and nutritional standards must be raised.It is our responsibility. What of Germany and Italy? Here we leave theeconomic sphere. No wise man would look for a Commonwealth in whichgrievances would not arise. There must be means for these to be freelyventilated, examined and remedied. Thereby would be conquered some ofthose difficult spheres in which disharmonies are bred, and means would befound for eliminatingThem in the future.

PROFESSOR SUSAN STERBING (President of the Ethical Union) had the taskof stating in what sense we can significantly speak of the " good of mankind."Never before, she said, had she found herself so completely in agreementwith any speaker as with Mr. Beals. There are, she continued, two classesof people who indulge in vague speaking, the majority of academicphilosophers, and English politicians. She criticized severely Mr. AnthonyEden who in speeches this year had talked about the post war world inwhich there will be no room for selfish or unselfish policies. There will, heannounced, be one village street from Edinburgh to Chungking. That justdid not mean anything. If leading politicians are not prepared to makedefinite statements we must be ready to make them for them. In whatsense can we talk of all mankind when we talk about the common goodof mankind? Such a phrase as " the Forward March of common men -might mean something important, but Professor Stebbing suspected thatboth statesmen 'and hearers are misled into thinking that something goodhas been promised because the phrase sounds good, and suppose all theyhave to do is to wait till the end of the war, and then the world will beunified as if it were one street. Most people alive today ought to be willingto sacrifice, without compensation, something that it would be withoutquestion good for them to have if the world were not in such trouble.Moral philosophers are under an obligation not to think abstractly andpolitical leaders ought to be definite. Just now the good of one set ofindividuals may possibly be capable of realization at the expense of thatof another. We ought not to talk about the common good for thatsuggests that everyone can have what is best. But that is not so, as weare bound to recognize if we take seriously the need for sacrifice.

F. G. G.

NotesSir Richard Gregory, Bt., F.R.S., has agreed to deliver the next Conway

Memorial Lecture. Further particulars will be announced in due course.

The summary of the lecture by Professor J. C. Flugel entitled " Work,Play and Happiness," published in our September issue, was reproduced inWorld Digest for December.

There was a large attendance to welcome Mr. S. K. Ratcliffe onNovember 15 after his absence of more than three years. He spoke withhis usual vigour and ability. A report of his lecture will appear in ournext issue.

The Librarian, on behalf of the Society, thanks Mrs. Holyoake Marshfor presenting Crosby Hall, by C. W. Goss, and Ingersoll's Lectures andEssays: also Mr. Ernest Carr for two volumes of Dr. Conway's Lessons of

the Day; and Mr. S. Burrows for "Jesus not a Myth," by Howell-Smith.Among books recently purchased for the Library are: Ideals and Illusions,by Professor Stebbing; I wonder, by Emil Davies, and A Common Faith,or Synthesis, by J. B. Coates.

A review of the last book was published in our September number. Itwill be seen from letters in the October and the present issues that Mr. Coateshas taken exception to the review. Members who have not already doneso may wish to read the book and form their own opinions. Copies arealso on sale at the Bookstall.

Mr. W. P. Toussaint, news of whose death has just reached us, had beenan Associate for 14 years. He will be remembered as a highly valuedmember of the play Reading Circle, and as a keen supporter of the Society'smusical activities. He bequeathed his scores of Chamber Music to theSociety.

Correspondence

A Common FaithS1R,—The faith which " Onlooker " describes as " vague " and

" undefined " is an ethical faith based on the ideas of freedom, creativity,disinterestedness, community and science, and on the necessity of inter-preting these ideas in political and economic as well as personal terms.1 should be glad if " Onlooker " would let me know which part of theconception is not clear. No other of my critics has accused me of lack ofclarity. Why should " Onlooker " misrepresent me by suggesting that" prayer to an ' inchoate Being ' is included in the common faith?" Ispecifically reject theism as being incapable of providing a basis for unityin the modern world, and have been taken to task by several critics fordoing so. The book is a statement of ethical conceptions which have oftenbeen expressed from the South Place platform and a tentative attempt tosuggest means by which the gap may be lessened between the principles andthe manner in which we conduct our social and political life. It seems tome, perhaps, a little unfortunate that the attempt should have been treatedwith more severity and less sympathy in the South Place journal than inany-other publication I have seen. I doubt whether it is quite fitting intimes like these to pour derision on the idea that there may be a promntnational acceptance of the ideas of liberty and community expressed inpolitical terms. When " Onlooker " ridicules with the term " grandiose " " anundenominational faith in which art, science, politics and economics arecompounded " does that mean that " grandiose " is the criticism he would

13

apply to Communism which is precisely such a faith? " Onlooker " willfind that no schemes for social planning will bear criticism nowadays, unlessthey are concerned with such matters as science, art and ethical educationas well as with political and economic questions.

J. B. COATES." Onlooker " writes :—Mr. Coates' second letter invites me to traverse yet again the ground

covered by my review and by my comments on his first protest. The termswhich he finds derisory were chosen to convey my studied conclusions on,and my profound distrust of, his programme as a whole. On this pointthe opinion of his chosen sponsor, Mr. John Macmurray, is of interest. Ina Foreword to the book Mr. Macmurray writes : " Whether the scheme ofproposals for practical operation which Mr. Coates outlines is a good one,or a possible one, I am not competent to say. I doubt if anyone can.-Faint praise, indeed!

Mr. Coates is not even consistent. He blandly places freedom in theforefront of his plan, but (as stated in his own words in my review) he wouldcheck individualism, " not only . .. in the economic sphere, but also in thesphere of morals and cultural expression." The control by his " religio-political " organization of the literary and plastic arts is a dreary prospectenough. Yet he urges in another passage that " the artist and the prophet "have a special insight giving them a direct knowledge of reality unattainableby the scientific method." Elements of disruption are clearly discerniblehere, even in the germ as yet unsprouted. And as to the theistic implication.my review quoted his prohibition of " dogmatic instruction on controversialissues "; but in a later passage also qtroted he enjoins " prayer " among themethods to be practised by the central society that is to set in motion thewhole vast machine of regeneration. If prayer does not imply a supremeBeing accessible to petition, then words are vain things. (Ed. M.R.)

Dr. Joad on "The Educational Ferment"Sir,—In your November issue Dr. load, speaking of Great Britain says.

" It is a State which manages its affairs so ill that two millions of its citizenshave been condemned to unemployment." Before censuring our economicsystem it would be wise to consider two other facts :

(I) A hundred years ago the population of England and Wales was16 millions. Today it is 41 millions, the immense majority of whom arcregularly employed, with a standard of life much higher than that of mostof the middle class a hundred years ago.

(2) We pay our unemployed an allowance higher than the wages paidto fully occupied workers in any European country except Holland andScandinavia.

Germany abolished unemployment by the simple device of breaking thetrade unions and cutting down wages. Russia avoids unemployment by thestill simpler deyice of having no standard wage at all, but just giving toeach worker what it thinks it can afford to give him. Britain prefers tomaintain the standard trade union wage, which inevitably means keepinga certain number unemployed. In the words of the late Orofessor Cannan(1933): " Indefinite numbers can be employed if they do not ask for toohigh a remuneration."

335 Sydenharn Road, Croydon. . R. B. KERR.

Annual Reunion—Dr. Joad's Address •SIR,—For the benefit of those of us who are not trained philosophers

would Dr. Joad be so good as to explain how a first-class war.can promotea reasonable belief in the existence of a good God; also how agnosticism,an absence of convictions, and a mind in a state of flux can be compatiblewith theism?

Rodenhurst, Oxted, R. A. PRICE.14

Review

" From Grave 10 Gay "

THE RATIONALISF ANNUAL, 1943. Editor: C. A. Watts. Watts and Co. Is. 6d,The special appeal of this now venerable Annual—for which the term

" hardy perennial " would seem more fitting –lies in the diversity of interestsafforded by its contents. Mr. Charles Watts. who has edited it for manyyears. has had the wisdom always to select a strong team and to leave themto express, by their choice of topic and of treatment, their own individualities;and the result, in this as in prior issues, amply justifies his method. We notewith regret that this is to be the last number appearing under his guardian-ship: with the 1944 issue his son, Mr. F. C. C. Watts, will take the reins. Wewish him as successful a tenure of office.

Of papers specifically devoted to war-time topics Mrs. CharlotteHaldane's informative review of the Soviet Union's attitude towardsreligion may be first noticed. As readers of her Russian Newsreel willrecall, she was in Moscow and Kuibishev during the critical autumn of1941, and interested herself especially in this aspect of the new Russia. Herconclusion is that the " freedom of religious worship " assured in 1936 by thenew Soviet Constitution has been firmly maintained: and that since theRussians, as a peasant people, are religiously inclined, " there has undoubtedlybeen a new orientation towards religion in the Soviet Union during recentyears."

Dr. Gilbert Murray, discussing " Projections and Idols " in relationto the bold opposition offered to Nazism by the Catholic bishops ofGermany, shows himself as always---a humanist first and last. Whilstadmiring their valiant indictments of Hitler. he feels that " the emphasis ofthese speeches is somehow wrong," they complain, not of the Fuehrer'scrimes against humanity hut of his Pagan hostility to their Church. Suchecclesiastics equally with Fascists, Communists and Nazis, are idolators,investing real objects with imaginary virtues. Should Rationalists—asks Dr.Murray—seek for themselves an equally burning faith? He answers with afirm negative.

Another notable humanist. Sir Arthur Keith, compares Carlyle andDarwin as interpreters of truth, the former narrow, vehement, capable ofclosing his mind. to any disturbing new light : the scientist patient, tireless,able to suspend judgment until conviction was enforced by evidence—" Oursense of what is true." concludes Sir Arthur, " depends upon whether welook with the eye of faith or the eye of reason."

A chapter of pure science is provided by that vigorous physiologist,Surgeon Rear-Admiral Beadnell. His consideration of the vital problem" What is Mind?" is a typical instance of scientific thought : observation,exact reasoning, and the quest for an underlying principle, are shown inalliance. Incidentally,. a startling analogy is drawn between the reactionsof living and non-living matter, that hints at an evolutionary processinvolving the whole universe.

Mr. Howell Smith brings not only his scholarship but his passion for apsychological quest to focus on " The Riddle of Paul of Tarsus." Thesolution suggested—for only inferential evidence exists—depicts this fanaticalPharisee as tortured by his own creed and enraged yet fascinated by the newChristianity, until his seizure on the road to Damascus " released the forceslong stirring in the subconscious."

In lighter vein are Mr. Eden Phillpotts' witty plea for the Devil as anecessary element in a most imperfect world ruled by a perfect Deity: andMr. Gowans Whyte's almost equally irreverent suggestion that the " Un-known God " whose altar on the Areopagus so impressed the Apostle Paulwas a deity as alien to Olympus as to Heaven: the God of Laughter.

ONLOOKER.

15

SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY " THE OBJECTS OF 1HE Sommv are the study and dissemination of ethical principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment."

MEMBERSHIPAny person in sympathy with the objects of the Society is cordially invited to

become a Member. The minimum annual subscription is 10s., but it is hoped thatMembers will subscribe as generously as possible and so assist the Society to meet itsheavy annual expenditure. Any person may join as an Associate, but will not beeligible to vote or hold office. Further particulars may be obtained before and afterthe meetings, or on application to the Hon. Registrar, to whom all subscriptions shouldbe paid.

OFFICERSHon. Registrar: Mrs. T. LINDSAYHon. Treasurer: C. E. Lisna Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, W.C.I.Secretary: S. 0. GREEN

Conway Hall is registered for marriagcs. Funeral Services may be arranged.Applications should be made to the Secretary.

The Monthly Record is posted free to Members and Associates. Matter forpublication in the January issue should be posted to reach the Editor, Mr. F. G. GOULD,45 Traps Hill, Loughton, Essex, by Saturday. December 12.

The Society does not hold itself responcible tor liews expressed or reported herein.

The Society's Activities" At Homes "—For Members and Friends.—There will be a social

gathering in the Library on Sunday, December 20, at 3 p.m. Tcawill be served at 3.30 p.m., for which there will be the usual charge of6d. Mr. and Mrs. S. K. Ratcliffe have very kindly accepted an invitationto be present. Mr. Ratcliffe will speak on " Thirty Years of SouthPlace." There will also be a short song recital by Mr. Walther Gruner.

BOOKSTALL—Attention is drawn to the selection of books and pamphletsoffered for sale in the vestibule on Sunday mornings.

L1BRARY.—This is open on Sunday mornings. It is free to members andassociates.

Librarian: Mrs. A. LISTER.

New MembersMr. B. BRADLAUGH BONNER, 23 Streathbourne Road, S.W.17.Mrs. L HAMLYN, 65 Townsend Cottages, N.W.8.Mr. R. LLEWELYN HUGHES, Glenwood, Llangollen.Mr. C. R. TAYLOR, 14 Archway Road, N.I9.Mr. H. I. WILKES, 15 Trinity Road, West Bromwich.

New AssociatesMr. H. BEILBY, Cheddington, Leighton Buzzard.Mr. W. MURRAY MORGAN, De Vere Hotel, Kensington, W.8.Mrs. W. SMITH. Greenhills, Portishead, Somerset.Mrs. L. F. STONE, 32 Orchard Avenue, New Malden, Surrey.

DeathMr. W. P. Toussmtir. on November 21, aged 77.

Changes of AddressMrs. S. GARDENER, 31 Erlanger Road, S E 14Mr. W. GOODWIN, 8 Woodville Road, N.W.11.

FARENCH PRESS Um. (T.U.), Beechwood Works, Reed-mood Rise, Watford, Hens,

This document is published by the Committee of the SECULAR

EDUCATION LEAGUE (founded 1907), 58 Chandos House,

Palmer Street, London, S.W.1. It is presented to all members of the

League for consideration.

THE DANGERS INVOLVEDIN STATE-AIDED ANDSTATE-CONTROLLED

RELIGIOUS TEACHINGINTRODUCTION

•VIE present international crisis, the suspension of political party

controversy, and the almbst complete preoccupation of the mindof the people with the life-and-death struggle of the war have pro-vided the opportunity long awaited by the advocates of compulsoryState-aided religious education to make a new effort to secure theirends. What they could not achieve by an appeal to justice andequity they seek now to obtain through panic in a time of nationalemergency.

Other sections of the community in present circumstanceswillingly subordinate their theoretical preferences in the interests ofnational unity ; the ecclesiastical zealots alone try to exploit anational crisis for sectional ends. They are apparently prepared toendanger national unity and to outrage justice if the teaching bythe State of dogmatic religion can be introduced into the nation'sschools. Let us see what they demand.

WHAT THE ECCLESIASTICAL DEMAND INVOLVES

That the nation should renounce the basis of the compromisewhich has existed in regard to religious teaching since 1870.

That the nation, at this crisis in its affairs, should assume directresponsibility for, and control of, denominational religious teachitigin State schools, training colleges, and universities.

That this official religious instruction should be given by theteachers at the public expense.

4. That this policy must involve tests for teachers as a naturalconsequence.

In confirmation of what has been said a copy of the five pointslaid down by the Archbishops in The Times of Feb. 13, 1941, isreproduced :—

In all schools a Christian education should be given to all the scholars(except, of course, in so far as any parents may wish to withdraw their chil-dren from it). The religious instruction should be entrusted to teacherswilling and competent to give it. We desire that no teacher should be pre-judiced in his professional career by his unwillingness to give this teaching ;but all teachers will agree that it is a sound principle of their professionthat the teaching of any subject should be in the hands of persons qualified

by personal interest, by knowledge, and by training to give it.

We urge that religious knowledge and the imparting of it should be an" optional subject," not merely an "additional option," in the course oftraining for the Teacher's Certificate. This means that it should count inthe gaining of the Certificate. We also urge that the Local EducationAuthorities should further develop the Post-Certificate Training Courses inthis subject arranged by them, and should actively encourage teachers toattend these courses.

(9) Where only one or few teachers in the school are duly qualified to giveChristian teaching, we urge that it should be made permissible to give thisteaching at any period within school hours, so that the same teacher mayteach several classes at different periods.

In order that the importance of the religious teaching may be recognized,we urge that it should be inspected in respect of its methods by H.M.

Inspectors, or by some other duly authorized persons.

We urge that in all schools the time-table should be so arranged as to providefor an act of worship .on the part of the whole school at the beginning of theschool day.

• WHAT ARE NON-CONFORMISTS DOING?

The surprising thing at the present time is that these demandsare supported by certain Non-conformist leaders ; what a descentfrom the clearly-defined attitude of their great predecessors! Suchmen as Spurgeon and Dr. Parker insisted that the teaching ofreligion was outside the competence and the responsibility of theState. They contended that religious teaching, because of theimportance which they attached to it, was the direct and sole respon-sibility of parents and the Churches.

This is the position the Secular Education League has alwayssupported.

STATE NEUTRALITY IN RELIGIOUS TEACHINGThe State can do some things supremely well—it can improve

and regulate the social conditions under which we all live; it canafford protection to life and to property, and it can defend la

against the perils of invasion ; it rightly supplies an approvedsystem of secular education to our children. These activities arewithin its scope as a national governing body. But there areother things which it cannot do efficiently, and which it shouldnot be asked to perform. These include the teaching of religion,under the patronage of creeds and the preference of particularchurches. It has sometimes tried to do these things, but neverwithout damage to its credit or without injury to the issue concerned.Whenever the State has undertaken the control of religion it hasbeen disastrous both to the State itself and to the religious life ofthe nation. The State has its own responsibilities, the Churchesand the parents have theirs. Let each keep to its own, and let thenation see to it that each does so. Religious matters are far tooimportant to be interfered with by the State, just as secular affairsare of too great a moment to be dominated by the Churches.

THE DANGER OF STATE RELIGIOUS TEACHINGAt this very moment we are witnesses of a situation produced by

nations such as Germany and Italy usurping the oomplete educationof their rising generations. The State in these countries useseducation as an aid to national policy, conditioning the minds ofthe children, with results which are a major curse of mankind.

CONCLUSION

Shall the nation in a rash moment sell the freedom of opinionso long enjoyed, and call into being a political machinery whichmay one day be used against it 7—

" The religion that becomes the agent of the State will end bybecoming the tool of the State ; and the tyranny of the priestand the Church will be superseded by the tyranny of thepolioeman and the soldier."

The following have consented to add their names in approval :—

DR. GILBERT MURRAY

DR. JOSEPH NEEDHAM'

PROFESSOR ROY PASCALL

REV. J. A. PEARSON

MR. EDEN PHILLPOTTS

MR. D. N. PRITT, K.C.

REV. DR. RATTRAY

LADY M. SIMON

REV. J. HARRY SMITH

REV. ROGER THOMAS

DR. C. H. WADDINGTON

MR. H. G. WELLS

Miss MARJORIE BOWEN

MR. H. N. BRAILSFORD

PROFESSOR A. CANNES: (the late)

PROFESSOR LE GROS CLARK

MR. J. STEWART COOK

LORD FARINGDON

PROFESSOR FARRINGTON

PROFESSOR J. B. S. HALDANE

PROFESSOR H. A. HARRIS

MR. LAURENCE HOUSMAN

PROFESSOR HOGREN

PROFESSOR JULIAN HUXLEY

REV. H. MCLACHLAN

Additional copies can be supplied in return for stamps

to cover postage on application to the Hon. Sec.,

Secular Education League, 58 Chandos House,Palmer Street, London,

Printed by C. A. Watts & Co. Ltd.. 5 & 6 Johnson's Court. Meet Street. London. ILC.4