THE WISDOM OF THE WISE.*

DR. CUNNINGHAM is a leading authority on English economic history. His laborious and path-breaking researches in that subject entitle him to a respectful hearing even upon matters that lie outside his special field of work. In The Wisdom of the Wise he has written about his own and other people's opinions on the Fiscal controversy. The book consists of three lectures and two appendices. The lectures are entitled respectively " The Right Honourable R. B. Haldane and Economic Science," " Mr. St. Loe Strachey and Imperial Sentiment," and "Lord Rosebery and the Unemployed." Of the appendices, one is an historical disquisition on " The Imperialism of Cromwell," and the other a University sermon on the text, Psalm cxxvii. 1, 2.

"The Imperialism of Cromwell" the reviewer may perhaps omit. The sermon—a novel pendant to political polemics— displays the author's mind. Its presence illustrates the con- nexion which he conceives to obtain between Tariff Reform and religion. This connexion is one of the keynotes of his thought. The following passage, for instance, from the Cambridge Theological Essays (p. 20) on the logical methoa appropriate to theology describes equally well his procedure. in fiscal controversy r- " Men of deep religious conviction cannot recognise that. humane learning affords a suitable position from which to pro- • The Wisdom of the Wise: Three Lectures on Frees uTrnialeerelverrearitair. BF W. Cunningham, D.D., Cambridge ; at the net

nounce on the validity of their faith; to them it is not a mere opinion, and they cannot accept the 'theoretical ' decision of those who are content to weigh one opinion against another The man of deep convictions cannot regard this tribunal as authoritative ; he claims at least to be judged by his peers [his peers, in Dr. Cunningham's view, are those persons who agree with his opinions] Religious conviction has a logical character of its own : it is a personal matter, and cannot be brought into direct line with the data on which common-sense intelligence is fitted to work."

These sentences exhibit the logical process by which Dr. Cunningham's theological conclusions are established. A similar method is applied in his discussion of Fiscal policy. This also has a logic of its own. Indeed, it is only necessary to substitute "Tariff Reform" for "religious" in the above passage, and the method of the lectures before us stands displayed in the author's very words.

Dr. Cunningham paves the way for his main argument by judicious reflections upon his opponents. These fall into two divisions, economists and politicians. The economists it is easy to discredit. They are a " little academic coterie."

"They review one another's books and appreciate one another's work, and create one another's reputations, till the public

come to take them seriously " (p. 7). In this they differ from their foreign confreres ; for, writes Dr. Cunningham with

large-minded tolerance, "I think it quite likely that many foreign professors, unlike the English coterie, feel unable to pronounce upon the subject off-hand, and prefer to study it first and write afterwards" (p. 8). So much for the English economists. Dr. Cunningham himself, on the other hand, is neither academic nor a coterie. Hence it follows that his conclusions are correct, and his opponents' ridiculous. We commend the argument to Dr. Cunningham's peers.

The second division of his opponents, the politicians, are dealt with in equally trenchant fashion. They are, of course, Little Englanders. " The attitude of Free Traders at this time, whether they profess to be Imperialists or not, is a serious danger to the Empire Those who are con- cerned with insular interests only will always be glad to advocate a peace-at-any-price policy in the House of Commons, since England will enjoy the peace, and the Canadians or South Africans will have to pay the price " (p. 60). On the other band—and this is the ideal of the true faith—" if we are conscious of our real interests, and take our stand on them, we shall so far recover our dignity that other nations will be less likely to try it on, and see how far they can twist the lion's tail" (p. 61). This passage also may be commended to Dr. Cunningham's peers,—in particular to those among them who are interested in the elegancies of literary style.

The ground thus prepared, Dr. Cunningham passes to the substance of his argument. In this some prominence is given to a point raised by one of the writers he is criticising. Preferential arrangements, by inflicting a burden upon the people of this country, might, it had been argued, rouse un. favourable feeling towards the Colonies in England ; and, in

support of this view, reference had been made to the well-known circumstances of the old preferential system. Dr. Cunning- ham's answer is characteristic. First, he explains that the unfavourable feeling towards England in the Colonies, which

existed during the first half of the nineteenth century, was not due to the preferential system; and he fails to perceive that this thesis is irrelevant to the issue. Secondly, he observes that

some unfavourable feeling towards the Colonies existed in England before the preferential system began. Precisely ! But it is also true that some patriotism existed before Mr.

Kipling began ; and yet Dr. Cunningham holds that that writer has done much to rouse patriotic sentiment (p. 57). The main body of the lectures is, however, concerned with more general considerations. These turn chiefly upon (1) reasoning from experience, and (2) the principle of laissez- faire. Reasoning from experience is, in Dr. Cunningham's view, a more valuable weapon than those abstract analyses in which the "academic coterie" indulge. It is certainly of

great assistance to his cause. For it enables him to prove that,

because the.abolition of duties between the separate States of America and of the Zollverein helped forward political

cohesion in those territories, therefore the erection of new duties against foreign countries on the part of England and her Colonies would help forward political cohesion in the British Empire (p. 58). - When it is suggested that that Empire differs from the United States and Germany in geo- graphical structure, his aptitude for irrelevance again assists him. He answers :—" Nor is it only in states which have a continuous territory that this policy proves effective; the wisdom of the protective policy of France may be questioned in regard to many matters—for example its effect on shipping —but the increase of trade that has accrued under the new Colonial scheine is most striking" (p. 59). He is proving, be it remembered, that preferential arrangements promote political cohesion.

The second division of the main argument deals with the principle of laissez-faire. It starts from the proposition that wealth is of no importance in itself, but is only desirable as a means to welfare. This point established, the writer observes that welfare is not, in general, best promoted by a policy of laissez-faire all round. "It is an object which we must take some pains to attain in a greater degree, and will never come of itself by mere laissez-faire" (p. 27). This thesis, it is then affirmed, Free-trade Imperialists deny. Dr. Cunningham admonishes them for their folly, and has no difficulty in establishing his proposition. So far good. At this point, recollecting that Tariff Reform " has a login of its own," he proceeds to employ that useful instrument. Since, his argu- ment runs in effect, laissez-faire all round—to burglars, for instance—is bad, therefore State interference all round is good. But Tariff Reform is one kind of State interference ; therefore Tariff Reform is good, and the "historical method" is vindicated. This is the kernel of the argument:—Since the proposition "all A's are not-B is false," therefore the pro- position "all A's are B is true." Dr. Cunningham perceives, for instance, that Trusts are one form of organisation, and that preferential treaties with the Colonies are another form. He thereupon observes that Trusts have been economically successful, and leaves us to infer that since by this circum- stance the case for universal non-organisation is disproved, preferential treaties must be successful also (p. 53). He has in fact, decreed that the distinction between the contrary and the contradictory is, like modern economic science (p. 20), too "cumbrous and confused" to be applied to practical problems. To those who accept his decree his lectures may prove convincing. But to any one who, unable to perform that intellectual feat, asks whether Britain ought to adopt, not merely some policy, but the particular •policy known as Tariff Reform, they will, we fear, seem scarcely more relevant than Dr. Cunningham's appended observations upon Theism and Oliver Cromwell.

Space forbids further comment. To speak quite frankly, The Wisdom of the Wise, alike in tone and substance, appears to us unworthy of the author of The Growth of English Industry and Commerce. Innuendoes against colleagues and political opponents are not atoned for by pulpit platitudes on religion and political life. Irrelevance and confusion are worsened, not bettered, when advanced under the cloak of a distin- guished reputation. The role of political pamphleteer is not, in short, adapted to Dr. Cunningham's genius. The fields of economic history impatiently wait his return.