recorded two cases in which there was alternation between gly- cosuria and the exhibition of mental symptoms, as if the emotional discharge asserted itself either at the metabolic or the psychic level but not at both.
Finally, the inhibitory effect of the sympathetic on the digestive processes must be remembered. Fear checks the secretion of saliva, anger stops the secretion of gastric juice. Depressing emotions acting through the sympathetic check the peristalsis of the stomach while closing the pyloric sphincter, thus leading to a dilatation of the stomach. A similar inhibition of intestinal peristalsis may occur, leading to intestinal stasis. This in its turn will lead to a drag on the sympathetic nerves in the mesentery, increasing their inhibitory effect. Thus a vicious circle is established and the persistent intes- tinal toxaemia that results may produce organic changes in many structures, including the group of endocrine glands which cooperate with the sympathetic.
The consideration of diseases produced through the agency of the parasympathetic lies outside the present topic, except in so far as the vagus may overact from a loss of balance produced by diminished sympathetic action. Suffice it to say that laryngeal spasm, asthma, slow or irregular action of the heart, low blood pressure, hyper- chlorhydria, spastic constipation and a liability to skin disturbances of the vasodilator type are among the symptoms evoked. Since febrile reaction to disease is a function of the sympathetic, which is antagonistic to the parasympathetic, we find that those subjects with an overacting vagus do not react well to infections and, indeed, show an abnormal sensitiveness to many foreign proteins. Their tendency to undue anabolism is sometimes indicated by their tendency to flabbiness of the tissues and overgrowth of lymphoid structures. A curious point is the occurrence of sweating, since the secretion of the sweat glands is under the control of the sympathetic. Put a similar discrepancy is seen in the action of a vagotropic drug such as pilocarpin.
In assessing the effects of the sympathetic nervous system in disease, it must be borne in mind that we have very littleTcnowledge of its morbid anatomy, though a beginning has been made in the study of pellagra. The evidence so far mainly relates to function and were our knowledge of its structural alterations at all comparable to what we know of organic changes in the spinal cord, we should be on firmer ground. But enough has been learned to show that the sympathetic plays a large part in the regulation of the internal viscera, and, through the endocrine glands, in general metabolism. The balance between these glands determines to a large extent both the racial and individual characteristics. Climatic influence has a profound effect through the skin on the sympathetic nerves and hence on the endocrine glands. The development of protective pigment is an important method by which the sympathetic-endocrine system can react to this, and the unadaptibility of albinos in this respect is well known. Thus physical environment can influence both tem- perament and structure, and the sympathetic-endocrine system must have played a large part in developing the variability of man into different races.
Evolved in a subconscious plane the sympathetic nervous system remains for ever beyond the control of the will. Timme quotes an instance which, while apparently contradicting this, proved on further inquiry to support it. This was the case of a man who could voluntarily dilate his pupils, who could cause the pilomotor muscles to raise the hairs on his arm, and who could at will produce the phenomenon of " goose-flesh " in various parts of his body. When closely questioned he admitted that the effects were produced not immediately by his will, but always by the intermediation of some association called into being by him. Thus when dilating his pupils he always imagined himself looking far into space, under which con- ditions the pupil does dilate. For the goose-flesh effect he would picture to himself his arm plunged into ice-cold water, and the goose-flesh appeared. Various associations produce autonomic effects without our will, and it is reasonable to infer that, if we can recall these associations through our will, the same autonomic effects will be produced.
The higher centres of the brain show their influence on the lower chiefly in the direction of inhibition. The highest organism is the most self-controlled, but the sympathetic cannot be thus controlled. The will can only help in so far as " it can make our voluntary ac- tivities harmonize with our environment." The emotional apparatus remains, as McDougall has pointed out, the most unchanging part of our nervous equipment, though the stimuli to which it responds may vary enormously in different individuals. But once the re- sponse occurs, it is extraordinarily true to type. This is compre- hensible since the apparatus retains so many features of the primitive nervous system. (W. L. B.*)
SYNDICALISM. "Syndicalism" is the name given to a form of socialist doctrine elaborated by, and born from the experience
of, the members of the French syndicats or trade unions. On the
one hand it is a body of social doctrine, or theory of social organi-
zation; on the other it is a plan of action for the realization of this
ideal. Of all the social theories competing for existence it is the
most purely proletarian in origin. One writer indeed has described it as " working-class Socialism " (le socialisme ouvrier)
in contradistinction to the types of socialism originated and
propagated by middle-class " intellectuals." Without unduly
stressing the importance of this fact, it may be said that syndi-
calism is that form of socialist theory which regards the trade-
union organizations, entirely proletarian in origin and direction,
as at once the foundations of the new society and the instruments
by which it is to be erected.
The syndicalist starts from the assumptions common to most schools of socialist thought. He affirms the inherent injustice of the wages system and the fundamental immorality of capital- ist society, which is based, in his belief, on the exploitation of labour. He accepts and pushes to its logical conclusion the Marxian dogma of the class war; he therefore affirms that soli- darity of interests does not, and cannot, exist as between em- ployer and employed, between capitalist and wage-earner. From these premises he draws the usual socialist conclusion, namely, that individual ownership of the instruments of production must > be abolished and communal ownership and control substituted for it. But at this point syndicalism and socialism (as usually understood) part company. Whereas the orthodox socialist demands control by the consumers acting through the State and its dependent organs the municipalities, the syndicalist demand, until very recently, was for producers' control, acting through the organizations of their own creation the trade unions. This is the essential feature of syndicalist theory, that which differentiates it from other revolutionary schools of thought. The arguments usually employed by its advocates may be briefly set out.
State organization and control of industry are, in their view, incompatible with true working-class emancipation. The State is, and must be, an instrument of class domination; it is indeed " the executive committee of the capitalist class." It exists to defend the interests of that class, and is consequently as much the enemy of labour as capital itself. To extend its powers would be to twine the bonds of wage slavery ever more firmly about the workers' limbs. The State is, however, hopelessly wedded to an uncreative bureaucracy, incapable of initiative and ignorant of industrial technique. Its control, even if it were benevolent (which the syndicalist denies it could be), would necessarily be despotic and inefficient; the spirit of routine would combine with | inexperience to crush out the possibility of economic progress. Here, as will be seen, the syndicalist endorses the ordinary in- dividualistic criticism of State socialism. Producers' control, exercised through the syndicats, would, on the other hand, combine : freedom with efficiency. Every worker would participate di- rectly in the government of his industry; he would thus enjoy the ' substance of democracy instead of the shadow offered him by the bourgeois State. Moreover, the worker would be led to identify his personal interests with the successful conduct of the indus- try; he would have a pride in his work which would manifest itself in improved quality and greater output, thus producers' control would be justified both on human and economic grounds.
The form of social organization in which this ideal could be realized was, until recently, conceived somewhat as follows. The unit of organization would be the local syndicat. This would be brought into touch with the local groups by means of the Bourse du Travail, the present function of which is to act at once as an employment agency and a general centre for trade-union activi- ties. When all the producers were thus linked together by the bourse, the administration of the latter would be able to estimate the economic capacities and necessities of the region, could coordinate production, and, being in touch through other bourses with the industrial system as a whole, could arrange for the necessary transfer of materials and commodities, inwards and outwards. A species of " economic federation " would thus replace the structure of capitalist industry, with which would necessarily disappear the political and administrative machinery of the State. Two features of this Utopia need to be emphasized: consumers as such were excluded from any share in industrial control, and a localized system of industry was envisaged.
This latter feature was a direct reflexion of French economic circumstances; both industry and trade-unionism were much
