To all this it might, of course, be said that the
I As, €.g., Mr. W. G. 8. Adams cogfniiy poinU out in a recent Dumber of the Journal of Political Eeoniimy (December 1002).
'As Mr. Webb shows {Induatrial Dcmocracg, 1902, pp. rxlvxtxvl).
■ The historical explanation of this House of Lords reveraaJ of trade-union practice is probabl; la be found in tlie conservative, or rather reactionary, trend given to British sentiment by the imperioliBt policy of the last two or three decades, accentuated by the eipariences of the Boer War. The Boer War seems to mark a turning-point in the growth of sentiment and institutions. Since the seventies the imperialist interest, that is to say. the dynsstlc interest, has be«n coming into the foreground among the iutercsls that engage the attention of tlio Briclsb community. It seems now to have definitively gained the tirst place, and may he expected in the immediate future to dominate British policy both at home and abroad. Concooiitantly, it may be remarked, the British community has been sloning down, if not losing ground, in Industrial animus, technological efficiency, and Boientitic spirit, Ct Hobson, /mpcrfoiinn, part IL ch. I. and lU.
now* I liiM Otem to ttaad togstka —d to act rnflf n tirdf in dealing vidi tlMsr «w|ilqyi3LB ; while the fact tfaftt tfaetr demaods hsre do standii^ in oomC ooiwtniiM them to seek thdr ends bjr exti»4e^ means td ooercion. Bnt this objection is little dse than another way of sabring that the exigendeB forced upon the workmen by the mechanicallj standardized iDdustria] system are extra-l^al exigenciefl — exigencies which do not nm in business terms and therefore are not amenable to the naturat-righbi principles of property and conbraict tbat underlie business relations ; that they can therefore not be met on common-law