by Bart Schultz
), p. . See also Letters from Newnham College, – (Cambridge:
Newnham College, ), by Catherine Durning Holt, and Keynes, Essays,
pp. –.
. McWilliams Tullberg, Women at Cambridge, p. .
. Annan, The Dons, p. .
. Soffer, “Authority in the University: Balliol, Newnham and the New Mythology,”
in Myths of the English, ed. R. Porter (Oxford: Polity Press, ), p. .
. There is, however, some question of whether Sidgwick talked too much: “Mrs.
Marshall visited her friend in the evening too, and brought her difficulties to be
talked over at the Newnham fireside. Nora Sidgwick talked more freely, she tells
us, after Henry’s death; much of her silence had come from the need of listen-
ing, or of directing attention, to him. But with students she was less happy in
establishing terms: many were shy, some really rebuffed. Unaware she damped
enthusiasm by a dry answer. Her brief ‘yes’ or ‘no’, in response to an untold
effort to open talk at the dinner-table, were disheartening to a new student. That
she also was disheartened by her social shortcomings, was the last thing they
would suspect. Once, she wished aloud to a friend that she could be like other
people. ‘I am afraid you never will be’, replied the friend.” ( Mrs. Henry Sidgwick, pp. –). Again, Mary, a Newnham success, sacrificed her career as an
economist to advance her husband Alfred’s.
. Phillips, ed., A Newnham Anthology, p. .
. Ethel Sidgwick, Mrs. Henry Sidgwick, p. .
. Ibid., pp. –. This is a testament to Eleanor’s tact, since, as her correspondence reveals, she shared many of Henry’s reservations about orthodoxy.
P: GnI
notc.xml
CY/Schultz
February ,
:
Notes to Pages –
. Ibid., p. .
. This fact, along with much else concerning the Sidgwicks’ feminism, rather
vitiates the critique advanced by Walker in Moral Understandings; again, see
my “Sidgwick’s Feminism” for some more specific commentary on her reading
of Sidgwick as advancing a masculinist and exclusionary “theoretical-juridical”
model of moral theory.
Chapter . Colors
. In R. L. Stevenson, Essays and Poems, ed. C. Harman (London: J. M. Dent,
), pp. –. Stevenson was of course a friendly rival to Symonds, as well
as his neighbor in Davos; Treasure Island was composed at Symonds’s Am Hof.
. Principia Ethica, p. . As Shaw observes, “many of Moore’s readers found his Principia Ethica fresh and exciting back in because they saw it as breaking with established morality by giving so much moral freedom to the individual.”
But Shaw, like so many others, suggests that Moore “was less taken with the
glories of ordinary morality than Sidgwick” – a judgment hardly vindicated by
any comparison of the two on the subject of sexual purity. See Shaw, Contemporary Ethics, p. .
. Quoted in Holroyd, Lytton Strachey, the New Biography, p. .
. Sidgwick to Symonds, August , . (CWC)
. Here and throughout this chapter the reference is to more standard interpreta-
tions of Bentham; Sidgwick apparently did not have any real understanding of
Bentham’s subtler arguments concerning human irrationality.
. The original of this letter is in the Sidgwick Papers, Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge University, Add.Ms.c..
. See Dicey, Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England
during the Nineteenth Century (London: Transaction Books, ; st ed. ), pp. –. Although Dicey was another of Sidgwick’s longstanding Oxford
friends, he appears to have had little real understanding of Sidgwick’s political
and economic views; Dicey was a prime example of how reactionary the old
Benthamite defense of individualism had become, and he grew quite hysterical
about the Home Rule issue.
. ToappreciatehowprescientSidgwickwasontheproblemofsuchglobaleconomic
measures, compare A. Sen, Development as Freedom (New York: Knopf, ), a
recent critique of the limitations of neoclassical economic theory on questions of
development, though not one very appreciative of Sidgwick’s contributions. Peter
Singer’s One World: The Ethics of Globalization (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ), especially Chapter , also provides a clear account of many of these
dilemmas, though in many respects the judicious approach of Charles Lindblom,
in The Market System (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ) better
reflects a Sidgwickian cognizance of how much economists do not know.
. See the letters from Spencer in the Sidgwick Papers, Wren Library, Trinity
College, Cambridge University, Add.Ms.c..–; Sidgwick’s letters are in the
P: GnI
notc.xml
CY/Schultz
February ,
:
Notes to Pages –
Spencer Papers, University of London Library. Again, for a close comparison of
Sidgwick and Spencer, see Weinstein, “The Anxiety of Influence.”
. For the full horror of twentieth-century Marxian socialism, recounted by someone
with decidedly Sidgwickian sensibilities, see Jonathan Glover, Humanity: A Moral
History of the Twentieth Century (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ).
. See Feuchtwanger, Democracy and Empire: Britain – (Baltimore: Edward Arnold, ), p. .
. Included in CWC. Sidgwick actually developed a very considerable expertise in
devising and assessing taxation schemes. His correspondence with Edgeworth,
for example, has the latter expressing warm appreciation for Sidgwick’s insights
into the possible advantages of taxing luxury goods or other commodities, as
opposed to imposing rates of a more general nature. See the letter from Edgeworth
in the Sidgwick Papers, Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge University,
Add.Ms.c...
. There are scattered bits of correspondence between Sidgwick and the represen-
tative of various cooperatives (M , n). As for his efforts to help the university with its finances, which the depresssion rendered precarious given the dependence of the colleges on agriculture, Sidgwick’s schemes were apparently a failure
because of their “excessive subtlety and elaboration,” according to his colleague
and sympathizer Henry Jackson. See Jackson’s remarks (M –), which may
suggest part of what Marshall had in mind when he criticized his friend’s mania
for overregulation. See also Keynes, Essays, pp. –.
. The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, ed. J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, and P. Newman (London: Macmillan, ), vol. , p. .
. Mark Blaug, Economic Theory in Retrospect (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ), p. .
. Richard Howey, The Rise of the Marginal Utility School (New York: Columbia University Press, ), p. .
. Scott Gordon, The History and Philosophy of Social Science (London: Routledge,
), p.
. Blaug, Retrospect, p. . Blaug also describes Sidgwick’s critical dissection of the “mixed static-dynamic” character of Ricardo’s famous rent theory as
“outstanding.”
. The Athenaeum, June , , p. .
. Ronald Coase, Essays on Economics and Economists (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ), p. . Coase does not discuss Sidgwick much, but he does bring out
the conflicts Marshall had with such figures as Foxwell and Keynes (J. M. Keynes’s
father, and a very good friend of Sidgwick’s). Sidgwick’s correspondence with
Foxwell (in CWC) is illuminating on these controversies.
. J. S. Nicholson, “The Vagaries of Recent Political Economy,” The Quarterly Review
(July and October ), p. .
. For some relevant discussion, see Lewis Feuer’s Introduction to J. S. Mill, On Socialism (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, ), especially p. , note .
. For a full acount of the snarled relationships between Widgwick, Marshall, and
Cambridge, as well as much background material on Sidgwick and economics,
P: GnI
notc.xml
CY/Schultz
February ,
:
Notes to Pages –
see Peter Groenewegen, A Soaring Eagle: Alfred Marshall, – (Aldershot: Edward Elgar, ), especially pp. –; such Sidgwick–Marshall correspondence as survives is available in The Correspondence of Alfred Marshall, Economist (New York: Cambridge University Press, ), though once again, much material
has been lost.
. See Riley’s helpful introduction to J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy (New York: Oxford University Press, ), especially p. xlvii, note .
. See also his slightly more spirited statement in “Bi-Metallism,” The Fortnightly Review, new series (July–December ), pp. –.
. As Sidgwick put it to Lady Welby, in : “It is a difficult matter to persuade
a plain man to go through the process necessary to attain precision of thought:
it requires great literary skill in presenting the process. I tried to do something
of this sort in my Principles of Political Economy but I fear I bored the reader horribly.” Sidgwick Papers, Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge University,
Add.Ms.c...
. Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Empire, – (New York: Pantheon Books, ), pp. –.
. That is to say, there is little reason to suppose that there is a “Henry Sidgwick Problem” – akin to the “Adam Smith Problem” – arising from the contrasting
methods, historical versus analytic, of his various works. The Smith problem was
merely a concocted one anyway, and the same is true in the case of Sidgwick, despite
Collini’s remarks in “Ordinary Experience” (in Schultz, Essays, pp. –).
. W. A. Dunning, review in The Political Science Quarterly (), p. .
. Woodrow Wilson, review in The Dial, (May –April ), p. .
. D. G. Ritchie, review in the International Journal of Ethics (–), pp. –.
. As I will suggest below, Sidgwick’s correspondence with Bryce is a crucial resource for understanding the Elements and Sidgwick’s political views generally; the original correspondence is in Bryce MSS , Bodleian Library, Oxford University.
. Sidgwick’s correspondence with Browning – many of the originals of which are
held in the archives at Kings College, Cambridge University – provides another
rich source for exploring his views on political theory and political history, though he was frequently rather frustrated with Browning’s less-than-rigorous approach
(see CWC). Still, Browning, Seeley, and Sidgwick formed a united front.
. Sidgwick Papers, Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge University,
Add.Ms.b.... See Collini, “My Roles and Their Duties,” for an engaging
account of Sidgwick’s possible candidacies, and a superb account of Sidgwick’s
work on various royal commissions.
. The Greek term means “beliefs.” This remark seems rather remarkable, given
Sidgwick’s early steeping in Plato and apparent aspirations to being a “superior”
man. But see the revealing “A Discussion between Professor Henry Sidgwick
and the Late Professor John Grote on the Utilitarian Basis of Plato’s Republic,”
Classical Review (March ), pp. –.
. Collini, “My Roles and Their Duties,” p. . Collini’s valuable work on the Vic-
torian “Public Moralists” certainly provides a necessary context for considering
P: GnI
notc.xml
CY/Schultz
February ,
:
Notes to Pages –
Sidgwick’s relationship to Mill, though he is right to insist that Sidgwick was
much more the academic, however painful he often found that role.
. Harvie, Lights, p. .
. Max Egremont, Balfour: A Life of Arthur James Balfour (London: Collins, ), p. .
. Ibid., pp. –.
. Hastings Rashdall, review in the Economic Review ().
. The Letters of Frederic William Maitland, ed. C. H. S. Fifoot (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ), p. . p. .
. James Bryce, “Henry Sidgwick,” Proceedings of the British Academy (–), p. .
. F. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty (Chicago: Regnery, ), p. , note . He was right.
. For a comprehensive assessment of the social conditions Sidgwick analyzed, see
The Cambridge Social History of Britain –, ed. F. M. L. Thompson, vols.
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ).
. The originals of these lectures are in the Sidgwick Papers, Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge University, Add.Ms.c..–.
. Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation (Boston: Beacon Hill, ), p. .
. Perhaps he had been thinking of Sidgwick’s views on the Irish landlords.
. See Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion (New York: Free Press, ; first edition
). In many respects, of course, Lippmann was the one who, along with his arch-
critic (albeit a very respectful one) Dewey, brought these debates into their modern
form, with a confrontation with the propagandistic potential of the mass media.
. This position, also set out in a letter to the Spectator for May , , marks a considerable change from his youthful opinions, as noted in the pre
vious chapter.
. A long-standing dissenting view of his; even in , he had found Mill’s views
on this score hard to swallow (M ).
. As Mill famously explained in his Autobiography; an excellent account of Mill’s socialism is given in Jonathan Riley’s “J. S. Mill’s Liberal Utilitarian Assessment
of Capitalism Versus Socialism,” Utilitas (March ), pp. –.
. See The American Commonwealth, ed. G. McDowell, two vols. (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, ). Sidgwick’s close connection to Bryce, another Old Mortality
man, will be discussed later.
. Sidgwick wrote in his journal that Maine’s essays – eventually published as Popular Democracy – were “the best antidemocratic writing that we have had” (M ),
but Bryce soon disabused him of any such view.
. This further confirms the argument set out in Chapter , Part II, concerning how
the dualism of practical reason marked, in Sidgwick’s eyes, a potentially explosive
development for the social order, given the religious content of ordinary morality.
. Though of course, given the fate of the great “sciences” of society – Marx’s,
Weber’s, Durkeim’s – Sidgwick looks rather intelligent on this score.
. Which is undoubtedly why he tends to be overlooked in discussions of the growth
of the public sphere that invoke Mill and Dewey, such as Jürgen Habermas’s
P: GnI
notc.xml
CY/Schultz
February ,
:
Notes to Pages –
Between Facts and Norms, trans. W. Rehg (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, ),
p. . Needless to say, Sidgwick’s version of “publicity” is highly qualified, being so subject to consequentialist constraint, and many will think it perverse to place
the defender of an esoteric morality in this context, associating him more with the
collapse of the public sphere than with its defense. But this is no more problematic
than situating Mill in this way, given how Sidgwick was so clearly a continuation of
the Millian project. Habermas appears not to recognize that Mill was a utilitarian –
