EMPIRE POLICY

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 80, 5 April 1927, Page 4

EMPIRE POLICY

THE PLACE OF ETHICS

MODERN DEMOCRACY

NO "HUMAN EQUALITY"

(From Our Own Correspondent.)

LONDON, 23rd February

Dr. HensleyrHenson, Bishop of Durham, delivered the ninth Earl Grey Memorial Lecture" at Newcastle-on-Tyne, his subject being "The Ethics of Empire."

He emphasised that Imperial power was not unconditioned. It could never wholly disregard the wishes of the subject populations. It would always have to respect the requirements of the general conscience and the ' particular demands of its own ideals. International law, and exigencies ot government, and the prevailing moral standards would affect, and might even determine, the methods of Imperial Government. AH these factors had gathered strength from the distinctive features o£ modern civilisation—the closer interlocking of human interests, democracy, and the- new humaneness of the civilised conscience. Perhaps the specific covenants which bound civilised peoples together were less powerful as restraints on Imperial Governments than the understandings which established themselves in the general mind and determined political action. Continuing, Dr. Henson said: "The ethics of Empire will reflect the mind of the Imperial race, and if that-mind.be confused by prejudice, darkened by ignorance, or perverted by false political theory, the Imperial policy which it determines will assuredly reflect all these baleful features. A twofold development within. Great Britain has been apparent. On the one hand, the public conscience has become more sensitive, more humane, more intolerant of Severity. On the other hand, democratic theory has taken a shape more dogmatic, more impracticable, and more proselytising. While the first leads to frequent interference with the process of Imperial administration, the last credits non-Christian and even uncivilised populations with the qualities indispensable for the successful working of democratic institutions. I find it difficult to imagine that any democratic system of the Western type can be raised on' the substructure of child-marriage, caste, general illiteracy, and fanaticism.

ILLUSION OF HUMAN EQUALITY. "Inapplicable as democratic theory is to tne civilised peoples" of Asia, it becomes actually grotesque when applied to the uncivilised people o£ Africa. Yet to these also the aggressive faith of the British. electorate would seek to apply it. 'Human equality,' writes Lord Bryce, 'has become a dogma, almost a faith, with a majority of those who, dwelling in Europe, have no direct knowledge of the races to whom ™«' theoretical sympathy goes out.' The backwardness of the African populations constitutes a temptatioc to those who desire to take advantage of- their sim- : plicity, a temptation co strong that none can prudently be exposed to it. If, as the civilised world has acknowledged in a iormal international agreement, the native races are a 'sacred trust/ then it follow, plainly that, they ought not to be sacrificed to the, material advantage of the ■TJ.hite settlers. Yet no one can follow the' discussions about the situation in Kenya or study the native question in South Africa, without an uncomfortable suspicion that the ethical issue is being perilously I subordinated to lower considerations. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. "", "It is the function of Empire to btins ' the higher ethical standards of the; centre to correct the lowering-tendencies of the circumference. ■ That function of Empire lias become very difficult as its exercise is challenged by the ruthlessness of industrialism, on the one side, and-by the crude^ nationalism of the subject races on the other. Its fulfilment has been greatly assisted by the tradition of - high-minded the raent PaSt haS be«ueathe!i *« "The very conscience of the .Imperial race has uttered itself in a great succession of public servants-soldiers, Civil servants, Judges, teachers—who have built up and maintained the Empire of Britain. ■ ■, be a "elusion to imagine that the procedure of nations can be" brought' under the same-.ethical code asTffiatfn-hich con--: tiols and illumines the life of individualsit.it be true that, expediency must determine much in the one case which a higher t law will determine in the other, and that impersonal factors enter so largely into the attain of nations that a personal code of moral obligation cannot suffice for nilers and statesmen, it is also true (and, per-»«\thf-ithe v?' temPer, tradition, and effect of Imperial Government will inevitably reflect the ethical quality of it. agents, whose .personal standards of duty and honour wi I determine their interpretation of expediency and in the final event fashion the moral character of the Empire which they represent."

85, Fleet street.