The Acquisitive Society.

Tawney (R.H.)

The Acquisitive Society.

Description: FIRST EDITION, the bookplate and contemporary ownership inscription of Christopher Hatton Turnor to half-title, his notes throughout in ink or pencil (see below), pp. [viii], 242, crown 8vo, original blue-grey cloth, the backstrip lettering in blind (once gilt?), wear to edges and some fading, corners knocked with some wear, tail edge roughtrimmed, endpapers browned with further notes by Turnor and his bookplate repeated to rear pastedown, fair

Publication Details: G. Bell, 1921

Notes: A superb association copy, with the notes of Christopher Hatton Turnor, a contemporary author on agricultural and educational reform, throughout the book - often approbatory, sometimes mildly critical, at points digressive and discursive. His views are formulated at length in the form of a letter drafted (both headed and signed) on the front endpapers, carrying onto the versos of the half-title and title-page and through to the dedication page (6pp. in total). Tawney's 12pp ALs in reply, defending and explaining his work, is laid in.Dated August 1921, Turnor begins by stating that he has read...moreA superb association copy, with the notes of Christopher Hatton Turnor, a contemporary author on agricultural and educational reform, throughout the book - often approbatory, sometimes mildly critical, at points digressive and discursive. His views are formulated at length in the form of a letter drafted (both headed and signed) on the front endpapers, carrying onto the versos of the half-title and title-page and through to the dedication page (6pp. in total). Tawney's 12pp ALs in reply, defending and explaining his work, is laid in.Dated August 1921, Turnor begins by stating that he has read the book 'with the greatest interest & much agreement [...] it should have a great influence for good, & for clear thinking' – contrasting it with the 'crude and obsolete socialism of which one is so weary', and praising Tawney's 'admirable balance between collectivism & individualism'. The 'fundamental difficulty', Turnor observes, with 'putting into practice the high principles you advocate & with which I largely agree', is the deficiency in 'religious conviction backing the effort [...] As a nation we are without religion: not only are we not Christian, but we are not even good pagans'. The quality of 'obedience' Turnor considers 'irksome to the mass of people' at the present time, and professes doubt that the 'technical managers' will 'fall in with your scheme of industry' – citing the examples of Russia and Italy for this negative assessment. Turnor enlarges on Tawney's reference to the role of 'the financial middle man or company promoter', who, Turnor considers, have caused 'untold Evil in this country' – and more so here than elsewhere, where 'all our industries, save agriculture are over capitalize[d]' and the proportion of those 'who do not function' is higher (contrasting with Denmark, in which he identifies the 'highest state of organisation'). His final 2pp. offer a view of the role of landowners, his own class, who 'functioned supremely in the agricultural depression', compromising their own return for the general good – allowing that 'our treatment of the land is not perfect [... ] I want landowners to function much more', expressing his support for 'the break up of large estates', but criticising the way such a practice has already been carried out in this 'land ignorant nation'.The points he raises here are also reflected in his notes to the text, where they are occasionally expressed with greater force; at the close, Turnor notes despondently that Tawney's proposed regeneration could only be effected by a mass conversion of 'all men into true Christians' – concluding that 'there is little chance of that'. The rear endpapers bear his transcription of Robert Chapin's view of Tawney.In response to Turnor's missive, Tawney writes a lengthy ALs at the beginning of the following month – pleased that the book's thesis does not seem 'too impossible or deafeningly wrong'. He begins by tackling Turnor's remarks about the status of the agricultural landowner, qualifying his pronouncements with the fact that 'I have no practical knowledge of agriculture or rural life', offering a distinction between rural and urban landowners in terms of revenue and taxation, and talking about the latter specifically with regard to the question of secondary and higher education. It is, Tawney proposes, 'the mere shareholder and the financial manipulator who is the real enemy', and the 'simple reform which is the condition of everything' is that of 'publicity' – or, public transparency in respect of facts and figures, which will dissolve the 'poisonous atmosphere of suspicion which surrounds everything at present'. With regard to nationalization, Tawney considers it 'a waste of time to quarrel about words' and dismisses the alternatives as 'almost entirely sterile' and the 'choice, therefore, is not between two programmes of reform, but between the Labour programme and the status quo. He does not 'underestimate the difficulties of nationalization' but regards it as 'practicable' and 'better for both the consumer and the worker than the farcical chaos'. As Turnor did at the end of his letter, Tawney breaks off with the knowledge that there is more to say in this absorbing debate between two key proponents of post-war economic and social reform in Britain, but 'this letter is already of unconscionable length'.Turnor and Tawney were Oxford contemporaries, at Christ Church and Balliol College respectively; during and after the War they sat on various committees concerning industry and education, and their mutual respect is evident in the dialogue they conduct in and around this book. HIDE