ring the war there was a glaring instance of this. A soldier shot
the man who had been trying to steal his wife's love . . . and the
verdict of the jury was Not Guilty. The emotional factor in this case
was that the dead man was a German. I am not arguing that the prisoner
should have been hanged or imprisoned, for I think both procedures are
bad; I merely point out that in the eyes of legalism the soldier was
guilty, yet the jury threw legalism overboard.

Another instance of the emotional factor over-ruling legalism is seen
in the trial of the man who shot Jaures. He was acquitted. . . . Not
Guilty . . . the man who slew one of the best men in Europe. On the
other hand the youth who attempted to assassinate Clemenceau was
sentenced to death, pardoned, and sent to penal servitude. In France
therefore it is a crime to kill a politician of the right, but a virtue
to kill one of the Socialist left.

Abstract justice is a figment. No jury and no judge can be impartial.
The other day a man was charged with striking a Socialist orator with
an ice-pick. The judge lectured the orator on his Bolshevism, and then
gave the accused imprisonment for a short term in the second division.
Suppose that the Bolshevist had used an ice-pick on a Cabinet Minister!

I do not think that our judges and magistrates ever consciously show
partiality. They are an upright class of men, men above suspicion. It
is their unconscious that shows partiality just as mine does. The army
colonels who tried Conscientious Objectors were upright men, but it was
wrong to imagine that they could possibly see the C.O.'s point of view.
So it was with the regular R.A.M.C. doctors. To some of them the
neurotic patient was a swinger of the lead, a malingerer. They had
never heard of the new psychiatry, and the neurotic was a strange
creature to them. Their ignorance supplemented their prejudice, and
they could not possibly have treated these men with justice.

The truth is that we all make up our minds according as our buried
complexes impel us. If I saw a Frenchman fighting a Scot I should take
the Scot's side, because I have a Scot complex. Occasionally our
complexes work in the opposite way. I fancy that the few people who
sided with the Germans in the war were suffering from an "agin the
government" complex, which, if you trace it deep enough is usually
found to be an infantile rebellion against the father. In this case
the State represente