Cabinet or President?

Prof. A. V. Dicey, writing in a recent number of the Nineteenth century, discusses whether it is desirable to introduce sorae of the qualities of Presidential Government into the Monarchical and Parliamentary constitution of England. The essential characteristics of the English Cabinet are (1) That it links or fuses together the English Executive and the English Legislature (2) that it can in general dissolve the Parliament by which it was created and appeal to the next. The existence of the Cabinet protects the King from responsibility for his acts, and on the other hand the vagueness of the King's powers, most of which are exercised through the Cabinet, increases the moral and the legal authority of the Cabinet. The Cabinet links the electorate and Parliament and produces harmony between the will of Parliament and the will of the people. In short, it harmonises the action of every part of the constitution.

Presidential Government means the real administration of affairs by an executive officer who may, when occasion requires, exert considerable power, but he is an official whose authority is under the constitution definitely restricted. The Presidential Government, as it exists in America contrasted with Cabinet Government as it exists in England, has the following virtues and defects. It does not appear at its best in a period of peace and it appears to good advantage in only times of war. Then the authority of the Presi dent if supported by the nation will become almost despotic. The independence of the President within the sphere of his powers not only increases the dignity of his office but limits to a considerable extent the evils of Party Government. The power and independence of the President especially in strong hands will considerably increase the sense of patriotism and of the

duty owing to the country by its chief and chosen representative. On the other hand, a Cabinet Government ensures the presence in Government of men of ability; it educates the nation; it possesses a special kind of flexibility which at times may be of extreme advantage. But in times of War, its defects become very obvious. It is deficient in the energy, promptness and decisiveness of action which should mark a Government then. It is based on partisanship and it is all but impossible to transmute partisanship into patriotism.

The only matter worth consideration for English people is to see whether it would not be possible in times of warfare to create a dictatorial power such as has fallen under the constitution of the United States to Abraham Lincoln and President Wilson. In spite of a final triumph, the English Cabinet did certainly exhibit weak sides during the War. The coalition of adverse parties, the creation first of a War Council and then of a War Cabinet were in the main efforts of patriotism; the working of Parliamentary Government since the beginning of the War has exhibited the radical defect of the Cabinet, namely its constant dependence for office upon the will of the House of Commons, and Cabinet Government now-a-days even in peace does not come up to the ideal of Bagehot. The Prime minister is in reality chosen by the will of well-organised factions and the nation has come to loath party cries. The Presidential dictatorship of America has not damaged its freedom and Prof. Dicey concludes by asking the question whether it is absolutely impossible to discover some constitutional arrangement by which in times of War a real leader of the nation may be given that independence and that patriotic supremacy which was possessed by Lincoln and is possessed by Wilson.

Oriental Religions

The Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society for January 1919 has an interesting article by Prof. A. G. Widgery on "The Theories of Salvation and Redemption from Sin and Suffering as found in some Oriental Religions." The writer says that the mild influence of the image of the sitting Buddha must have helped millions of suffering minds to realise a feeling of resignation and fortitude. The earliest religious attitude towards suffering was to think of it as due to disobedience or some form of wrong-doing against the Gods or as coming from deliberate malevolence of bad spirits. Sacrifices and offerings were then resorted to as means of reconciliation or propitiation. In the consciousness of some wrong committed and the desire to overcome the wrong is the beginning of a genuine feeling of repentance and it is the earliest form of the consciousness of sin. From its most primitive conception to its latest theory sin is some thought, feeling or action regarded as being disharmonious with the wishes or will of the God. Tho position of emphasis varies; at first, predominantly on the external acts and its consequences it is moved more and more on to the inner attitude of the will and the feeling of loyalty or disloyalty to God. Aristotle and the stoics go beyond the Socratic position of virtue is knowledge' in their recognition and insistence that for the moral life the right use of the will is essential. The most thorough-going presentation that suffering is the result of our iniquities is to be found in Buddhism, Jainism and the various forms of Hinduism and in the Doctrine of Karma. Zoroastrianism traces all evil back to wrong thought, wrong words and wrong deeds.

Buddhism originated in a measure and has always been preached essentially as a way of redemption from evil especially from suffering. Early Buddhism teaches the suppression of desire as the way of redemption from suffering but was opposed to methods of self-torture, for expia

tion or the acquisition of merit. All sin has been thought off as being due to ignorance, in other words 'virtue is knowledge.' In Hinduism, suffering is represented as an inevitable characteristic of the life of a finite being. The only redemption from suffering is escape from finitude and salvation is thus described as escape from rebirth, i.e., freedom in fact from all thought of self. There are several ways in which this may be achieved, action-Karma Yoga; emotional devotion-Bhakti Yoga and knowledge and contemplative insight-Gnana Yoga. According to the Jains, possession of true knowledge will obtain redemption. In Zoroastrianism, we find saviours who by their good deeds help in the work of final restoration of the world and who destroy the breakers of promises and servers of false idols. Mithraism which spread over a large portion of the Roman Empire and became the most formidable opponent of Christianity also contains the conception of a mediator. The Jews see in suffering not only the punishment for sin but also a means of divine preparation for the religious mission in the world. Amongst many Sunnis and Shyyas the Prophet Mahmet has a particular function in the salvation and redemption of men.

Drink and Housing

Professor Radhakamal Mukherjee, Lecturer in Economics, Calcutta University, writing on the Housing Question in a recent issue of the Modern Review, testifies to the demoralising effect of the drink traffic upon the workmen in Indian cities. Grog shops are many, he says, and they are situated so near the lines where the people have to live that drunkenness and debauchery are the inevitable result. We would also draw attention in this connection to the inquiries resently set on foot by the Calcutta Temperance Federation. The moral of it all is: shut up the drink shop and open the social institute Improve the housing conditions and remove temptations. In short, make it easy for the people to do right and hard for them to do wrong.

The Lot of the Indian Labourer The January number of The Social Service Quarterly contains three very informing articles on the all important, question of Indian labour, i. e., one on "Factory Legislation" by Mrs. R. M. Gray, the second an editorial note on "National Minimum for Indian Labour" and the third on "Housing of Factory Workers" by A. E. Mirams, F. S. I., F. S. A. Mrs. R. M. Gray first speaks of the early stages of industrial revolution in England and thinks that the bad conditions of Indian labour in the Indian mills are nothing when compared to the low and intense economic depression of the former before the time of factory legislation. The principle underlying all factory laws, she says, has up till now been the protection of the younger and weaker workers from injury by overwork or unwholesome conditions. The conditions of men's labour remain unchanged. The Indian Factory Commissions of 1891 and 1908, she further writes, expressly repudiated the idea that they had any intention of interfering with men's work, though they acknowledged that the men's hours were far too long. The remedies suggested for improving the hard lot of the Indian labourer are the creation of sound public opinion which is invariably followed by legislation, and trade unionism following on compulsory education. Turning to the present condition of Indian workmen, she remarks:

At the present moment all classes of operatives are equally inarticulate in India. They submit with such extraordinary patience to their hard conditions that it has been possible even for enlightened people to argue that they like the life. But after all they are human beings, and it is hard to imagine that any human being really wants to rise long before dawn, hurry half-fed and half-rested through the dark streets to his work, snatch another short spell of sleep on the stones outside the factory doors, work at a dull, mechanical task, for 12, 13, 14 hours, amid crashing machinery, stifling heat, and flying dust and then return at dark to his home so weary that he can only get sleep enough to be able to resume his Sisyphean task. Is this what any of us call Life?

The editor in a thoughtful note on "National Minimum for Indian Labour" discusses the ideal towards which efforts at social reconstruction may

be directed. Commenting on the Industrial Commission Report with reference to the question of the welfare of workers in factories, he remarks:

The effect of the halting recommendations they make in respect of hours of work, education and housing may be only to perpetuate the existing state of things and to enable employers of labour to take refuge behind the tone of hesitancy adopted by the Commission and resist all demands at enforcement of the national minimum.

Further, the Industrial Commission, he then proceeds to observe, believe in the statement that the Indian workman is such an irrational and perverse human being that once his wages are increased his output diminishes, that he only earns enough to feed him and his, and that he is "content" with a very low standard of living. This standpoint leads the Commission to support another charge put forward by employers against labour. The Indian workman does not actually work for twelve hours as permitted by Factory laws as he is naturally inclined to waste much of his time during his work. As regards the Commission's attitude towards the shortening of the working day for labourers, the writer states:

"The Commission fail to treat the workers as human beings with social interests and with a desire for leisure and recreation like other men, and can only look upon the reduction of the working day as an act of grace on the part of the employer.'

Mr. A. E. Mirams, writing on "Housing of Factory Workers", discusses in detail that part of the Commission's report which treats about housing problems, and thus summaries the main remedies suggested therein:

They are of opinion that the ideal to be aimed at is a single or at most double storyed building with court-yards, or if possible, double-room units; and in any case ample space round the buildings; that, further inasmuch as the City of Bombay is directly interested in the question of housing its operatives, the Municipality and the Improvement Trust should bear the largest share in the cost of erecting and maintaining industrial dwellings, and that the Bombay Government should render such assistance as they may be able to spare. All that the employers are expected to do is to pay any additional taxation it may be necessary to impose upon them, contingent on the resources of the local authorities, together with Government assistance, not being sufficient for the purpose of carrying out the progamme of building contemplated,