SOCIALISM  IN  ENGLAND.

301

universe.  That  is  a  lie.  The  time  has  come  for  us  to  declare
that  it  is  a  lie  by  word  and  deed.  I  see  no  way  but  associating
for  work  instead  of  for  strikes.”  “  It  is  my  belief,”  said
Kingsley,  “  that  not  self-interest  but  self-sacrifice  is  the  only
law  upon  which  human  society  can  be  grounded  with  any  hope
of  prosperity  and  permanence.”
They  differed  from  Socialists  generally  in  that  they  did  not
look  to  the  State  for  the  regeneration  of  the  social  system.
Maurice,  indeed,  had  a  theory  that  the  State  could  not  be
communistic,  but  was  “by  nature  and  law  conservative  of
individual  rights  and  individual  possessions,”  and  that  it  was
only  by  accident,  as  it  were,  and  by  going  out  of  its  own  more
peculiar  sphere,  that  it  was  compelled  to  recognize  another
principle,  as  in  the  case  of  the  factory  children  ;  while  the
Church,  on  the  other  hand,  was  “  communistic  in  principle,  and
conservative  of  property  and  individual  rights  only  by  accident,
bound  to  recognize  them,  but  not  as  its  own  special  work,”  In
the  union  of  Church  and  State,  accordingly,  Maurice  saw  the
true  fusion  of  the  principles  of  communism  and  of  property.
It  is  true  that  Kingsley  publicly  called  himself  a  Chartist,  and
in  one  of  his  letters,  written  under  the  famous  pseudonym  of
“  Parson  Lot,”  said  that  his  only  quarrel  with  the  Charter  was
that  it  did  not  go  far  enough  in  reform  ;  but  he  immediately
explained  his  meaning  by  adding  that  the  mistake  the  Chartists
made  was  in  fancying  that  legislative  reform  was  social  reform,
and  that  men’s  hearts  could  be  changed  by  Act  of  Parliament.
At  the  time,  he  was,  perhaps,  prepared  to  grant  all  the  points  of
the  Charter,  but  neither  then  nor  afterwards  was  it  to  political
action  that  either  he  or  any  of  those  who  worked  with  him
looked  for  the  salvation  of  the  labourers.  They  sought  no
State-aid  for  their  co-operative  societies,  but  merely  a  fair
field.  Even  private  individuals  could  do  little.  They  might
“boycott”  the  slop-shops  which  adopted  the  “sweating
system  ;  ”  they  might  encourage  the  growth  of  associations  and
deal  exclusively  with  them  ;  the  rich  might  even  provide  healthy
workshops  at  a  low,  fair  rent  ;  but,  in  the  main,  the  workers  must
fight  their  own  battle,  aided  only  by  “  Him  whose  everlasting
Fatherhood  is  the  sole  ground  of  all  human  brotherhood.”