ever, they deem it advisable to organize leagues, devoted to the spread of syndicalist ideas. The first meeting of the Syndicalist League of New York City was held in December, 1912. There are leagues in many other cities, and "The Syndicalist League of North America" exists at least on paper. A biweekly paper, The Syndicalist, is devoted to the advancement of the movement. In America, however, the syndicalist leagues are as yet of little importance. Both in numbers and in energy they are far behind the Syndicalist League of England, which seems to have inspired the movement.

IV

The only American organization, therefore, which embodies. syndicalist tendencies-under the name of " industrial unionism" -is the I. W. W., and the future of American revolutionary unionists will for some time to come be bound up with the destinies of this organization. What these destinies may be, it is difficult to foretell. At present the I. W. W. is numerically and financially weak. According to Mr. Vincent St. John,' general secretary-treasurer of the organization, the paid-up membership is 70,000, distributed in the following manner: textile industry, 40,000; lumber industry, 15,000; railroad construction, 10,000; metal and machinery, 1000; and miscellaneous, 4000. The members in the textile industry are located in the eastern states; those in the lumber industry are in the states of Washington, Oregon, Louisiana and Texas; the railroad construction workers are in Washington, Oregon and British Columbia; the rest of the membership is scattered.

The figures given by Mr. Vincent St. John can hardly be taken as representing the full strength of the I. W. W. The membership of this organization is in its nature a fluid, shifting mass, largely migratory, subject to long periods of unemployment and disinclined to the regular payment of dues. While

In a letter dated December 5, 1912. The writer takes this opportunity to acknowledge his indebtedness and to tender his thanks to Messrs. Vincent St. John, Clarence Smith, Daniel De Leon, Frank Bohn, Wm. D. Haywood, Wm. E. Trautmann, Franklin Jordan and all others who have assisted him by the loan of documents and by replies to queries, either in letters or in personal interviews.

this vitally affects the finances of the organization, its finances are not a fair test of its effective force. Its tactics are not those of a well appointed army, retarded in its movements by an elaborate commissariat, but rather those of a daring advance guard. The leading spirits of the I. W. W. realize the situation and frankly admit that their organization can grow only in proportion as it can fight. They seek, therefore, to utilize every opportunity for a clear-cut class struggle. That is why they have concentrated their attention on those industries in which unskilled labor predominates, and why they are bent upon fanning every little fire into a blaze of class war.

There can be little doubt that the I. W. W. is already exerting no slight influence on the economic life of the country. It terrifies employers. During the recent strike in New York city, many employers were so disturbed by the fear that the I. W. W. might assume the leadership of the strikers that they were ready to make concessions to escape this peril. They were willing to make terms with moderate and reasonable trade unions rather than run the risk of developing indirectly a revolutionary organization. The American Federation of Labor is undoubtedly feeling the pressure exercised by the I. W. W.; it has been spurred into more energetic action in fields which it had previously neglected. The recent invasion of the steel industry by the Federation illustrates the point. Whether the Federation will now succeed where it has previously failed is hard to predict. In certain industries it cannot compete with the I. W. W. It is therefore probable that the I. W. W. will achieve further success in the near future. It may build up an effective organization in a limited number of industries. It may then be in a position to exert a more extensive influence on the labor movement of the entire country.'

NEW YORK CITY.

LOUIS LEVINE.

1 Since this article was written, the strike of the silk operatives of Paterson, New Jersey, has taken place. During this strike, the attitudes of the employers, of the American Federation of Labor and of the Socialists towards the I. W. W. and their methods were conspicuous as never before. The feeling of hostility towards the I. W. W. is now deeper and more general than before and may lead to the accentuation of the tendencies described in this article.

THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF THE GERMAN

BE

IDEALISTS. II1

Wilhelm von Humboldt

2

EFORE Fichte worked out his system of extensive state activity, a noteworthy theory in the diametrically opposite sense was formulated by the elder of the Humboldt brothers. His Ideas for an Attempt to Determine the Limits of the Activity of the State was written and parts of it were published in 1792, when the author was but twenty-five years old. In his later career, as a power in the Prussian government, he lost confidence and interest in the product of his irresponsible youthful enthusiasm, and the complete essay did not see the light till 1851, long after his death.3 Though thus in a way repudiated by its author, the little book has a real significance in the history of political theory. It embodies a very full and systematic expression of ideas that were closely involved in the philosophy of the time when the essay was written and that were on the verge of widespread acceptance when it was finally published.*

Humboldt assumes without discussion the Kantian view as to the origin of the state in a contract between men for their respective benefit. What he emphasizes and reiterates is that the political union thus created is merely a means-one among many for the promotion and realization of human welfare. The state is not an end in itself. It must subserve the end of man; and the end of man is the highest and best proportioned development of his powers to a whole. What, then, can the

'The first part of this study was printed in this Quarterly, vol. xxviii, pp. 193–206. Ideen zu einem Versuch die Gränzen der Wirksamkeit des Staats zu bestimmen. 'See Cauer's Einleitung to the Ideen (Breslau, 1851).

It is an interesting coincidence that Herbert Spencer's earliest exposition of laissez-faire, the Social Statics, appeared in 1850.

Ideen, p. 9.

state contribute to this development? Shall it take the individual in hand and guide him along carefully prescribed paths to his goal? Or shall it leave him to find his own path and make his own way? This latter, Humboldt answers, is the true principle; and his essay aims to establish it on the firmest rational grounds.

The full development of humanity depends, so his argument runs, on the fullest possible development of the individual man. This in turn depends upon the unrestricted play of the powers and faculties peculiar to each (Eigenthümlichkeiten). Liberty, in this sense, is the condition of progress. No obstacle due to the forces of physical nature will fail to yield in time to the art and energy of men acting freely, either singly or in voluntary coöperation. Only those obstacles to progress that arise out of the domineering propensities of men require for their removal power that can and will constrain the action of the individual. Such a power is the state. It is necessary, inasmuch as the collisions of individuals seeking unlimited self-expression would be fatal to the ends of all. At the same time it is an evil, because it interferes with that freedom which is the condition of full development in each. The problem then is to determine how this necessary evil, the state, is to be made most contributory—or, more exactly, least detrimental-to human ad

vancement.

Humboldt's solution is that the action of the state shall never extend to the positive promotion of the welfare of its citizens but shall be confined to a negative rôle, namely, that of providing for their security (Sicherheit). His demonstration of this doctrine, both in the abstract and the concrete aspects, covers substantially all that has ever been urged in support of it. Against intervention by the state for the positive promotion of individual welfare, he urges that it tends to produce a depressing uniformity among the citizens, to weaken their powers, to obstruct the proper reaction of the material environment upon their spirit and character, to divert their energy from self-development and waste it in prescribing rules for their fellows, and otherwise to hinder that exercise of idiosyncrasy which is the key to progress. On one or another of

these grounds Humboldt insists that the state must refrain from concern in education, in religion, in the improvement of morals (Sittenverbesserung)—in short from all activity designed to influence the character of the people (Nation). Effects upon. the popular spirit will flow indirectly from the legitimate operation of government; and these indirect effects alone should be regarded in shaping the policy of the state.

The legitimate sphere of the state is solely the care for the security of the citizens. By security he means "certainty of lawful liberty" (gesetzmässige Freiheit), that is, certainty that the use of one's powers and the enjoyment of one's property will not be wrongfully (widerrechtlich) obstructed.1 The criterion of state intervention must be necessity, not expediency. Danger to security may come from without or from within a society, and the field of state action is accordingly twofold. War in defense of the community is one of its appropriate activities; and war, with all its objectionable incidents, Humboldt regards as a very salutary influence in the development of human character. On the side of internal security the functions of the state are limited to those that fall into the four categories: police law (Polizeigesetze), private law (Civilgesetze), the regulation of judicial procedure (Prozessordnung) and criminal law (Kriminalgesetze), together with the guardianship of helpless minors and the insane. The rule throughout all these classes must be that the scope of governmental intervention is determined solely by what is necessary for the protection of individuals in person and property.

This conception of the state Humboldt presents frankly as an ideal a product of pure reason, not known to experience and not likely to be realized.3 It is an ideal of liberty; and men in general tend to feel more interest in dominion (Herrschaft). The strong man builds up a far-reaching government

1 Ideen, p. 103.

266

"... ... ist mir der Krieg eine der heilsamsten Erscheinungen zur Bildung des Menschengeschlechts, und ungern seh ich ihn nach und nach immer mehr vom Schauplatz zurücktreten." Ideen, p. 48. But the state must not actively either encourage war or hinder it. Ibid. p. 62.

3 Ibid. pp. 175-177.