Extraordinary symptomatic phenomena have occurred in Russia as well as in Britain.  In Russia the rebellion of an awakening people against an age-long tyranny has almost at once leaped to the issue of the day, taken on the complexion of a struggle for industrial democracy.  Whether the Germans shall be able to exploit the country, bring about a reaction and restore for a time monarchical institutions depends largely upon the fortunes of the war.  In Russia there is revolution, with concomitant chaos; but in Britain there is evolution, an orderly attempt of a people long accustomed to progress in self-government to establish a new social order, peacefully and scientifically, and in accordance with a traditional political procedure.

The recent development of the British Labour Party, although of deep significance to Americans, has taken place almost without comment in this country.  It was formally established in 1900, and was then composed of manual workers alone.  In 1906, out of 50 candidates at the polls, 39 were elected to Parliament; in 1910, 42 were elected.  The Parliamentary Labour Party, so called, has now been amalgamated with four and a half millions of Trade Unionists, and with the three and a half millions of members of the Co-operative Wholesale Society and the Co-operative Union.  Allowing for duplication of membership, these three organizations —­according to Mr. Sidney Webb—­probably include two fifths of the population of the United Kingdom.  “So great an aggregation of working class organizations,” he says, “has never come shoulder to shoulder in any country.”  Other smaller societies and organizations are likewise embraced, including the Socialists.  And now that the suffrage has been extended, provision is made for the inclusion of women.  The new party is organizing in from three to four hundred constituencies, and at the next general election is not unlikely to gain control of the political balance of power.

With the majority of Americans, however, the word “labour” as designating a party arouses suspicion and distrust.  By nature and tradition we are inclined to deplore and oppose any tendency toward the stratification of class antagonisms—­the result of industrial discontent—­into political groups.  The British tradition is likewise hostile to such a tendency.  But in Britain the industrial ferment has gone much further than with us, and such a result was inevitable.  By taking advantage of the British experience, of the closer ties now being knit between the two democracies, we may in America be spared a stage which in Britain was necessary.  Indeed, the program of the new British Labour Party seems to point to a distinctly American solution, one in harmony with the steady growth of Anglo-Saxon democracy.  For it is now announced that the word “labour,” as applied to the new party, does not mean manual labour alone, but also mental labour.  The British unions have gradually developed