The “Questions” for local governing bodies issued in 1892 were full of such matters as fair wages, shorter hours, and proper conditions for labour, and it was speedily discovered that this line of advance was the best suited to Fabian tactics because it was a series of skirmishes all over the country, in which scores and hundreds could take part.  Each locality had then or soon afterwards three or four elected local councils, and hardly any Fabian from one end of the country to the other would be unable in one way or another to strike a blow or lift a finger for the improvement of the conditions of publicly employed labour.

But the Government of Mr. Gladstone had not been in office for much more than a year before a much more ambitious enterprise on this line was undertaken.  In March, 1893, Sir Henry (then Mr.) Campbell-Bannerman had pledged the Government to “show themselves to be the best employers of labour in the country”:  “we have ceased,” he said, “to believe in what are known as competition or starvation wages.”  That was a satisfactory promise, but enunciating a principle is one thing and carrying it into effect in scores of departments is another.  Mr. Gladstone, of course, was interested only in Home Rule.  Permanent officials doubtless obstructed, as they usually do:  and but a few members of the Cabinet accepted or understood the new obligation.  The Fabian Society knew the Government departments from the inside, and it was easy for the Executive to ascertain how labour was treated under each chief, what he had done and what he had left undone.  At that time legislative reforms were difficult because the Government majority was both small and uncertain, whilst the whole time of Parliament was occupied by the necessary but futile struggle to pass a Home Rule Bill for the Lords to destroy.  But administrative reforms were subject to no such limitations:  wages and conditions of labour were determined by the department concerned, and each minister could do what he chose for the workmen virtually in his employment, except perhaps in the few cases, such as the Post Office, where the sums involved were very large, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer had the same opportunity.

Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb then decided that the time had come to make an attack on old-fashioned Liberalism on these lines.  The “Fortnightly Review” accepted their paper, the Society gave the necessary sanction, and in November the article entitled “To Your Tents, O Israel” appeared.  Each of the great departments of the State was examined in detail, and for each was stated precisely what should be done to carry out the promise that the Government would be “in the first flight of employers,” and what in fact had been done, which indeed, with rare exceptions, was nothing.  The “Parish Councils Act” and Sir William Harcourt’s great Budget of 1894 were still in the future, and so far there was little to show as results from the Liberal victory of the previous year.  The case