diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-25 00:41:49 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-25 00:41:49 -0800 |
| commit | ba491a5d91fcb390df317b1949ba40a23758f058 (patch) | |
| tree | c7d5dcfa2fbab4233a7eb041c96617471938c492 | |
| parent | cab391f10629ad7a5edf15a81ac5fbdc7fc2b04d (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69088-0.txt | 11167 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69088-0.zip | bin | 236536 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69088-h.zip | bin | 809700 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69088-h/69088-h.htm | 11995 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69088-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 566789 -> 0 bytes |
8 files changed, 17 insertions, 23162 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5e8f3c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #69088 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/69088) diff --git a/old/69088-0.txt b/old/69088-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index d178f7f..0000000 --- a/old/69088-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,11167 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of Fabian Essays in Socialism, by George -Bernard Shaw - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: Fabian Essays in Socialism - -Author: George Bernard Shaw - -Contributors: Sydney Olivier - Sidney Webb - Annie Besant - William Clarke - -Release Date: October 2, 2022 [eBook #69088] - -Language: English - -Produced by: The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at - https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FABIAN ESSAYS IN -SOCIALISM *** - - - - - - FABIAN - ESSAYS IN SOCIALISM - - - BY - - G. BERNARD SHAW - SIDNEY WEBB - WILLIAM CLARKE - SYDNEY OLIVIER - ANNIE BESANT - GRAHAM WALLAS - - AND - - HUBERT BLAND - - - EDITED BY - G. BERNARD SHAW - - - _With a new preface for this edition by Mr. Shaw_ - - - BOSTON - THE BALL PUBLISHING CO. - 1911 - - - - - _Copyright, 1908_ - BY GEORGE BERNARD SHAW - - - - -CONTENTS. - - - THE FABIAN SOCIETY AND ITS WORK. - BY WILLIAM CLARKE. Page xxiii. - - - THE BASIS OF SOCIALISM. - - ECONOMIC BY G. BERNARD SHAW. - - RENT. The Cultivation and Population of the Earth.--Economic - Origin of the County Family.--Economic Rent of Land and - Ability.--Tenant Right.--The Advent of the Proletarian. Page 1. - - VALUE. Mechanism of Exchange.--Price and Utility.--Effects - of Supply.--Law of Indifference.--Total and Final Utility.--Relation - of Value to Cost of Production. Page 9. - - WAGES. The Proletariat.--Sale of Labor.--Subsistence - Wage.--Capitalism.--Increase of Riches and Decrease of - Wealth.--Divorce of Exchange Value from Social Utility. Page 15. - - CONCLUSION. Apparent Discrepancies between History and - Theory.--Socialism.--Pessimism and Private Property.--Economic - Soundness of Meliorism. Page 20. - - HISTORIC BY SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B., BARRISTER AT LAW, - LECTURER ON POLITICAL ECONOMY AT THE CITY OF LONDON COLLEGE. - - THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC IDEAL. Ancestry of - English Socialism.--The Utopians.--Introduction of the Conception - of Evolution.--The Lesson of Democracy. Page 26. - - THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE OLD SYNTHESIS. The Decay of - Medievalism.--The Industrial Revolution.--The French Revolution.--The - Progress of Democracy. Page 31. - - THE PERIOD OF ANARCHY. Individualism.--Philosophic Radicalism - and _Laisser-faire_.--The Utilitarian Analysis. Page 35. - - THE INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL REVOLT; AND ITS POLITICAL - OUTCOME. The Poets, Communists, Philosophers, Christian Socialists, - and Evolutionists.--The Extension of State Activity.--Existing State - Registration, Inspection, and Direct Organization of Labor.--The - Radical Programme. Page 40. - - THE NEW SYNTHESIS. Evolution and the Social Organism.--Liberty - and Equality.--Social Health. Page 50. - - INDUSTRIAL BY WILLIAM CLARKE, M.A., CAMBRIDGE. - - THE SUPERSESSION OF INDIVIDUALIST PRODUCTION. The Cottage - Industry.--The Mechanical Inventions.--The Factory System. Page 56. - - THE GROWTH OF THE GREAT INDUSTRY. The Expansion of Lancashire.--The - White Slavery.--State Interference. Page 65. - - THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORLD-COMMERCE. The Triumph - of Free Trade.--The Fight for New Markets.--The Carriers of the - World. Page 71. - - THE DIFFERENTIATION OF MANAGER AND CAPITALIST. The Rise - of Co-operation and the Joint Stock Company.--The “Ring” and the - “Trust.”--The Despotism of Capitalist Communism. Page 76. - - MORAL BY SYDNEY OLIVIER, B.A., OXFORD. - - THE EVOLUTION OF MORALITY. The Common End.--The Conditions - of Freedom.--The Individual and the Race.--The Growth of - Social Consciousness.--Convention and Law. Page 93. - - PROPERTY AND MORALS. The Reaction of Property-Forms on Moral - Ideas.--Class Morality.--Negation of the Conditions of - Freedom.--Social Dissolution. Page 104. - - THE RE-INTEGRATION OF SOCIETY. The Ordering of the Primary - Conditions.--The Idea of the Poor Law.--Secondary - Conditions.--Morality and Reason.--The Idea of the School. Page 112. - - - THE ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY. - - PROPERTY UNDER SOCIALISM. BY GRAHAM WALLAS, M.A., OXFORD. - - VISIBLE WEALTH. Consumers’ Capital.--Producers’ Capital. Page 120. - - DEBTS AND SERVICES. Deferred and Anticipated - Consumption.--Interest. Page 125. - - IDEAS. Copyright and Patent Right.--Education. Page 132. - - INDUSTRY UNDER SOCIALISM BY ANNIE BESANT. - - THE ORGANIZATION OF LABOR. Rural.--Urban.--International. Page 136. - - THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PRODUCT. The Individual.--The - Municipality.--The State. Page 147. - - SOCIAL SAFEGUARDS. The Stimulus to Labor.--The Provision - for Initiative.--The Reward of Excellence. Page 150. - - - THE TRANSITION TO SOCIAL DEMOCRACY. - - TRANSITION BY G. BERNARD SHAW. - - MEDIEVALISM TO CAPITALISM. The Old Order.--Merchant Adventurer, - Pirate, Slave-Trader, Capitalist.--The Old Order burst by the - New Growth.--Chaos. Page 157. - - ANARCHY TO STATE INTERFERENCE. Political Economy.--Hegelian - Conception of the Perfect State.--Socialism: Its Practical - Difficulties.--Impracticability of Catastrophic Change.--Democracy - the Antidote to Bureaucracy.--The State Interferes. Page 160. - - STATE INTERFERENCE TO STATE ORGANIZATION. Hard Times.--Revival of - Revolutionary Socialism.--Remaining Steps to the Consummation of - Democracy.--Machinery of Socialism.--Social Pressure.--Urban - Rents.--The New Taxation.--State Organization of Labor its - Indispensable Complement.--The Unemployed.--Solution of the - Compensation Difficulty.--Economic Reactions of the Progress - of Municipal Socialism.--Militant Socialism Abandoned but not - Dishonored. Page 169. - - THE OUTLOOK BY HUBERT BLAND. - - THE CONDITION OF ENGLISH PARTIES. The Lines of Progress.--The - Rate of Progress in Thought and Industry Compared with that in - Politics.--Alleged Disappearance of the Whig. Page 184. - - THE SOCIALIZING OF POLITICS. Political Myopia.--Sham Socialism.--Red - Herrings.--Dreams of Permeating the Liberal - Party.--Disillusionment.--The New Departure. Page 189. - - THE DUTIES OF THE HOUR. The True Line of Cleavage.--Hopes - and Fears.--The Solidarity of the Workers. Page 198. - - - INDEX. Page 203. - - - - -THE FABIAN SOCIETY AND ITS WORK. - - - - -PREFACE TO THE 1908 EDITION - - -Since 1889 the Socialist movement has been completely transformed -throughout Europe; and the result of the transformation may fairly be -described as Fabian Socialism. In the eighteen-eighties, when Socialism -revived in England for the first time since the suppression of the -Paris Commune in 1871, it was not at first realized that what had -really been suppressed for good and all was the romantic revolutionary -Liberalism and Radicalism of 1848, to which the Socialists had attached -themselves as a matter of course, partly because they were themselves -romantic and revolutionary, and partly because both Liberals and -Socialists had a common object in Democracy. - -Besides this common object the two had a common conception of -method in revolution. They were both catastrophists. Liberalism had -conquered autocracy and bureaucracy by that method in England and -France, and then left industry to make what it could of the new -political conditions by the unregulated action of competition between -individuals. Briefly, the Liberal plan was to cut off the King’s head, -and leave the rest to Nature, which was supposed to gravitate towards -economic harmonies when not restrained by tyrannical governments. The -Socialists were very far ahead of the Liberals in their appreciation -of the preponderant importance of industry, even going so far as to -maintain, with Buckle and Marx, that all social institutions whatever -were imposed by economic conditions, and that there was fundamentally -only one tyranny: the tyranny of Capital. Yet even the Socialists -had so far formed their political habits in the Liberal school that -they were quite disposed to believe that if you cut off the head of -King Capital, you might expect to see things come right more or less -spontaneously. - -No doubt this general statement shews the Revolutionaries of 1848-71 -as simpler than they appear on their own records. Proudhon was full of -proposals: one of them, the minimum wage, turns out to be of the very -first importance now that Mr. and Mrs. Sidney Webb have put the case -for it on an invincible basis of industrial fact and economic theory. -Lassalle really knew something of the nature of law, the practice -of Government, and the mind of the governing classes. Marx, though -certainly a bit of a Liberal fatalist (did he not say that force is -the midwife of progress without reminding us that force is equally -the midwife of chaos, and chaos the midwife of martial law?), was at -all events no believer in _Laisser-faire_. Socialism involves the -introduction of design, contrivance, and co-ordination, by a nation -consciously seeking its own collective welfare, into the present -industrial scramble for private gain; and as it is clear that this -cannot be a spontaneous result of a violent overthrow of the existing -order, and as the Socialists of 1848-71 were not blind, it would be -impossible to substantiate a claim for Fabian Essays as the first -text-book of Socialism in which catastrophism is repudiated as a method -of Socialism. - -Therefore we must not say that the Revolutionists and Internationalists -of 1848-71 believed in a dramatic overthrow of the capitalist system -in a single convulsion, followed by the establishment of a new heaven, -a new earth, and a new humanity. They were visionaries, no doubt: -all political idealists are; but they were quite as practical as the -Conservatives and Liberals who now believe that the triumph of their -party will secure the happiness and peace of the country. All the -same, it was almost impossible to induce them to speak or think of the -Socialist state of the future in terms of the existing human material -for it. They talked of Communes, and, more vaguely and less willingly, -of central departments to co-ordinate the activities of the Communes; -but if you ventured to point out that these apparently strange and -romantic inventions were simply city corporations under the Local -Government Board, they vehemently repudiated such a construction, -and accused you of reading the conditions of the present system into -Socialism. They had all the old Liberal mistrust of governments and -bureaucracy and all the old tendency of bourgeois revolutionists -to idolize the working class. They had no suspicion of the extent -to which the very existence of society depends on the skilled work -of administrators and experts, or how much wisdom and strength of -character is required for their control by popular representatives. -They actually believed that when their efforts throughout Europe had -demonstrated the economics of Socialism to the proletariats of the -great capitals, the cry “Proletarians of all lands: unite,” would be -responded to; and that Capitalism would fall before an International -Federation of the working classes of Europe, not in the sense in -which some future historian will summarize two or three centuries -(in which sense they may prove right enough), but as an immediate -practical plan of action likely to be carried through in twenty years -by Socialist societies holding completely and disdainfully aloof from -ordinary politics. In short, they were romantic amateurs, and, as -such, were enormously encouraged and flattered when Marx and Engels -insisted on the “scientific” character of their movement in contrast -to the “Utopian” Socialism of Owen, Fourier, St. Simon, and the men -of the 1820-48 phase. When the events of 1871 in Paris tested them -practically, their hopeless public incapacity forced their opponents to -exterminate them in the most appalling massacre of modern times--all -the more ghastly because it was a massacre of the innocents. - -Public opinion in Europe was reconciled to the massacre by the usual -process of slandering the victims. Now had Europe been politically -educated no slanders would have been necessary; for even had it been -humanly possible that all the Federals mown down with mitrailleuses -in Paris were incendiaries and assassins, it would still have been -questionable whether indiscriminate massacre is the right way to deal -with incendiaries and assassins. But there can be no question as to -what must be done with totally incompetent governors. The one thing -that is politically certain nowadays is that if a body of men upset the -existing government of a modern state without sufficient knowledge and -capacity to continue the necessary and honest part of its work, and -if, being unable to do that work themselves, they will not let anyone -else do it either, their extermination becomes a matter of immediate -necessity. It will avail them nothing that they aim higher than their -fathers did; that their intentions are good, their action personally -disinterested, and their opponents selfish and venal routineers who -would themselves be equally at a loss if they had to create a new -order instead of merely pulling the wires of an old one. Anyone who -looks at the portraits of the members of the Paris Commune can see at -a glance that they compared very favorably in all the external signs -of amiability and refinement with any governing body then or now in -power in Europe. But they could not manage the business they took upon -themselves; and Thiers could. Marx’s demonstration that they were -heroes and martyrs and that Thiers and his allies were rascals did -not help in the least, though it was undeniably the ablest document -in the conflict of moral clap-trap that obscured the real issues--so -able indeed as a piece of literature, that more than thirty years after -its publication it struck down the Marquis de Gallifet as if it had -appeared in the _Temps_ or _Débats_ of the day before. It was amiable -of the Federals to be so much less capable of exterminating Thiers than -he was of exterminating them; but sentimental amiability is not by -itself a qualification for administering great modern States. - -Now the Fabian Society, born in 1884, and reaching the age of -discretion in less than two years, had no mind to be exterminated. -Martyrdom was described by one of us as “the only way in which a man -can become famous without ability.” Further, we had no illusions as -to the treatment we should receive if, like the Paris Federals, we -terrified the property classes before they were disabled by a long -series of minor engagements. In Paris in 1871, ordinary sane people -hid themselves in their houses for weeks under the impression that -the streets were not safe: they did not venture out until they ran a -serious risk of being shot at sight by their own partisans in the orgy -of murder and cruelty that followed the discovery that the Commune -could fight only as a rat fights in a corner. Human nature has not -changed since then. In 1906 a Fabian essayist stood one May morning -in the Rue de Rivoli, and found himself almost the only soul in the -west end of Paris who dared appear there. The cultured inhabitants of -that select quarter were hiding in their houses as before, with their -larders full of hams and their baths full of live fish to provision -them for a siege. There was much less danger of a revolution that -day than there is of Primrose Hill becoming an active volcano at six -o’clock this evening; and the purpose of the Government and its party -newspapers in manufacturing the scare to frighten the bourgeoisie -into supporting them at the general election just then beginning was -obvious, one would have thought, to the dimmest political perspicacity. -In the evening that same essayist, in the Place de la Révolution, saw -a crowd of sightseers assembled to witness the promised insurrection, -and the troops and the police assembled to save society from it. It -was very like Trafalgar Square in 1887, when the same violent farce -was enacted in London. Occasionally the troops rode down some of the -sightseers and the police arrested some of them. Enough persons lost -their temper to make a few feeble attempts at riot, and to supply -arrests for the morning papers. Next day Society, saved, came out of -its hiding places; sold the fish from its baths and the hams from -its larders at a sacrifice (the weather being very hot and the hams -in questionable condition); and voted gratefully for the government -that had frightened it out of its senses with an imaginary revolution -and a ridiculous “complot.” England laughed at the Parisians (though -plenty of English visitors had left Paris to avoid the threatened Reign -of Terror); yet in the very next month our own propertied classes -in Cairo, terrified by the Nationalist movement in Egypt, fell into -a paroxysm of cowardice and cruelty, and committed the Denshawai -atrocity, compared to which the massacre of Glencoe was a trifle. The -credulity which allows itself to be persuaded by reiteration of the -pious word Progress that we live in a gentler age than our fathers, -and that the worst extremities of terror and vengeance are less to be -apprehended from our newly enriched automobilist classes than they -were from the aristocracies of the older orders, is not a Fabian -characteristic. The Fabian knows that property does not hesitate to -shoot, and that now, as always, the unsuccessful revolutionist may -expect calumny, perjury, cruelty, judicial and military massacre -without mercy. And the Fabian does not intend to get thus handled if he -can help it. If there is to be any shooting, he intends to be at the -State end of the gun. And he knows that it will take him a good many -years to get there. Still, he thinks he sees his way--or rather the -rest of his way; for he is already well on the road. - -It was in 1885 that the Fabian Society, amid the jeers of the -catastrophists, turned its back on the barricades and made up its -mind to turn heroic defeat into prosaic success. We set ourselves two -definite tasks: first, to provide a parliamentary program for a Prime -Minister converted to Socialism as Peel was converted to Free Trade; -and second, to make it as easy and matter-of-course for the ordinary -respectable Englishman to be a Socialist as to be a Liberal or a -Conservative. - -These tasks we have accomplished, to the great disgust of our more -romantic comrades. Nobody now conceives Socialism as a destructive -insurrection ending, if successful, in millennial absurdities. -Membership of the Fabian Society, though it involves an express -avowal of Socialism, excites no more comment than membership of the -Society of Friends, or even of the Church of England. Incidentally, -Labor has been organized as a separate political interest in the -House of Commons, with the result that in the very next Budget it was -confessed for the first time that there are unearned as well as earned -incomes in the country; an admission which, if not a surrender of the -Capitalist citadel to Socialism, is at all events letting down the -drawbridge; for Socialism, on its aggressive side, is, and always has -been, an attack on idleness. The resolution to make an end of private -property is gathering force every day: people are beginning to learn -the difference between a man’s property in his walking stick, which -is strictly limited by the public condition that he shall not use it -to break his neighbor’s head or extort money with menaces, and those -private rights of property which enable the idle to levy an enormous -tribute, amounting at present to no less than £630,000,000 a year, on -the earnings of the rest of the community. The old attempt to confuse -the issue by asserting that the existence of the family, religion, -marriage, etc., etc., are inextricably bound up with the toleration -of senseless social theft no longer imposes on anyone: after a whole -year of unexampled exploitation of this particular variety of obscene -vituperation by the most widely read cheap newspapers in London, no -Socialist is a penny the worse for it. - -The only really effective weapon of the press against Socialism is -silence. Even Bishops cannot get reported when they advocate Socialism -and tear to pieces the old pretence that political economy, science, -and religion are in favor of our existing industrial system. Socialist -speakers now find audiences so readily that, even with comparatively -high charges for admission, large halls can be filled to hear them -without resorting to the usual channels of advertisement. Their -speeches are crammed with facts and figures and irresistible appeals to -the daily experience and money troubles of the unfortunate ratepayers -and rent-payers who are too harassed by money worries to care about -official party politics; but not a word of these is allowed to leak -through to the public through the ordinary channels of newspaper -reporting. However, the conspiracy of silence has its uses to us. We -have converted the people who have actually heard us. The others, -having no news of our operations, have left us unmolested until our -movement has secured its grip of the public. Now that the alarm has -at last been given, nobody, it seems, is left in the camp of our -enemies except the ignorant, the politically imbecile, the corruptly -interested, and the retinue of broken, drunken, reckless mercenaries -who are always ready to undertake a campaign of slander against the -opponents of any vested interest which has a bountiful secret service -fund. This may seem a strong thing to say; but it is impossible not to -be struck by the feebleness and baseness of the opposition to Socialism -to-day as compared with the opposition of twenty years ago. In the days -when Herbert Spencer’s brightest pupils, from Mrs. Sidney Webb to Grant -Allen, turned from him to the Socialism in which he could see nothing -but “the coming slavery,” we could respect him whilst confuting him. -To-day we neither respect our opponents nor confute them. We simply, -like Mrs. Stetson Gillman’s prejudice slayer, “walk through them as if -they were not there.” - -Still, we do not affect to underrate the huge public danger of a press -which is necessarily in the hands of the very people whose idleness and -extravagance keep the nation poor and miserable in spite of its immense -resources. It costs quarter of a million to start a London daily paper -with any chance of success; and every man who writes for it risks -his livelihood every time he pens a word that threatens the incomes -of the proprietors and their class. The quantity of snobbish and -anti-social public opinion thus manufactured is formidable; and a new -sort of crime--the incitement by newspapers of mobs to outrage and even -murder--hitherto tried only on religious impostors, is beginning to be -applied to politics. The result is likely to be another illustration -of the impossibility of combining individual freedom with economic -slavery. We have had to throw freedom of contract to the winds to save -the working classes from extermination as a result of “free” contracts -between penniless fathers of starving families and rich employers. -Freedom of the press is hardly less illusory when the press belongs to -the slave owners of the nation, and not a single journalist is really -free. We think it well therefore at this moment to warn our readers not -to measure the extent of our operations or our influence, much less -the strength of our case, by what they read of us in the papers. The -taste for spending one’s life in drudgery and never-ending pecuniary -anxiety solely in order that certain idle and possibly vicious people -may fleece you for their own amusement, is not so widespread as the -papers would have us think. Even that timidest of Conservatives, the -middle class man with less than £500 a year (sometimes less than £100) -is beginning to ask himself why his son should go, half-educated, to -a clerk’s desk at fifteen, to enable another man’s son to go to a -university and complete an education of which, as a hereditary idler, -he does not intend to make use. To tell him that such self-questioning -is a grave symptom of Free Love and Atheism may terrify him; but it -does not convince. And the evolution of Socialism from the Red spectre -on the barricade, with community of wives (all petroleuses), and -Compulsory Atheism, to the Fabian Society and the Christian Social -Union, constitutional, respectable, even official, eminent, and titled, -is every day allaying his dread of it and increasing his scepticism as -to the inevitability of the ever more and more dreaded knock of the -ground landlord’s agent and the rate collector. - -Now, as everyone knows, the course of evolution, in Socialism or -anything else, does not involve the transformation of the earlier -forms into the later. The earlier forms persist side by side with the -later until they are either deliberately exterminated by them or put -out of countenance so completely that they lose the heart to get born. -This is what has happened in the evolution of Fabian Socialism. Fabian -Socialism has not exterminated the earlier types; and though it has -put them so much out of countenance that they no longer breed freely, -still there they are still, preaching, collecting subscriptions, and -repulsing from Socialism many worthy citizens who are quite prepared -to go as far, and farther, than the Fabian Society. Occasionally they -manage even to contest a Parliamentary seat in the name of Socialism, -and to reassure the Capitalist parties by coming out at the foot of -the poll with fewer votes than one would have thought possible for -any human candidate, were he even a flat-earth-man, in these days -when everyone can find a following of some sort. More often, however, -they settle down into politically negligible sects, with a place of -weekly meeting in which they preach to one another every week, except -in the summer months, when they carry the red flag into the open air -and denounce society as it passes or loiters to listen. Now far be -it from us to repudiate these comrades. If a man has been brought -to conviction of sin by the Countess of Huntingdon’s Connexion, and -subsequently enters the Church and becomes an Archbishop, he will -always have sufficient tenderness for the Connexion to refrain from -attacking it, and to remember that many of its members are better -Christians and better men than the more worldly-wise pillars of the -Church. The principal leaders of the Fabian movement are in the same -position with regard to many little societies locally known as “the -Socialists.” We know that their worship of Marx (of whose works -they are for the most part ignorant, and of whose views they are -intellectually incapable) and their repetition of shibboleths about -the Class War and the socialization of all the means of production, -distribution, and exchange have no more application to practical -politics than the Calvinistic covenants which so worried Cromwell when -he, too, tried to reconcile his sectarian creed with the practical -exigencies of government and administration. We know also, and are -compelled on occasion to say bluntly out, that these little sects are -ignorant and incapable in public affairs; that in many cases their -assumption of an extreme position is an excuse for doing nothing under -cover of demanding the impossible; and that their inability to initiate -any practical action when they do by chance get represented on public -bodies often leads to their simply voting steadily for our opponents by -way of protest against what they consider the compromising opportunism -of the Fabians. There are moments when they become so intolerable a -nuisance to the main body of the movement that we are sorely tempted to -excommunicate them formally, and warn the public that they represent -nobody but their silly selves. But such a declaration, though it would -be perfectly true as far as political and administrative action is -concerned, would be misleading on the whole. In England, everyone -begins by being absurdly ignorant of public life and inept at public -action. Just as the Conservative and Liberal Parties are recruited -at Primrose League meetings and Liberal and Radical demonstrations -at which hardly one word of sense or truth is uttered, but at which -nevertheless the novice finds himself in a sympathetic atmosphere, so -even the Fabian Society consists largely of Socialists who sowed their -wild oats in one or other of these little sects of Impossibilists. -Therefore we not only suffer them as gladly as human nature allows, -but give them what help and countenance we can when we can do so -without specifically endorsing their blunders. Fortunately the immense -additions which have been made to the machinery of democracy in -England in the last twenty years, from the County Councils of 1888 to -the education authorities of 1902, have acted as schools of public -life to thousands of men of small means who in the old days must have -remained Impossibilists from want of public experience. One hour on -a responsible committee of a local authority which has to provide -for some public want and spend some public money, were it but half a -crown, will cure any sensible man of Impossibilism for the rest of his -life. And such cures are taking place every day, and converting futile -enthusiasts into useful Fabians. - -A word as to this book. It is not a new edition of Fabian Essays. They -are reprinted exactly as they appeared in 1889, nothing being changed -but the price. No other course was possible. When the essays were -written, the Essayists were in their thirties: they are now in their -fifties, except the one, William Clarke, who is in his grave. We were -then regarded as young desperadoes who had sacrificed their chances in -life by committing themselves publicly to Socialism: we are now quoted -as illustrations of the new theory that Socialists, like Quakers, -prosper in this world. It is a dangerous theory; for Socialism, like -all religions and all isms, can turn weak heads as well as inspire -and employ strong ones; but we, at all events, have been fortunate -enough to have had our claim to public attention admitted in the -nineteen years which have elapsed since our youthful escapade as Fabian -Essayists. - -It goes without saying that in our present position, and with the -experience we have gained, we should produce a very different book if -the work were to be done anew. We should not waste our time in killing -dead horses, however vigorously they were kicking in 1889. We should -certainly be much more careful not to give countenance to the notion -that the unemployed can be set to work to inaugurate Socialism; though -it remains true that the problem of the unemployed, from the moment -when we cease to abandon them callously to their misery or soothe -our consciences foolishly by buying them off with alms, will force -us to organize them, provide for them, and train them; but the very -first condition of success in this will be the abandonment of the -old idea that the unemployed tailor can be set to make clothes for -the unemployed bootmaker and the unemployed bootmaker to make boots -for the unemployed tailor, the real difficulty being, not a scarcity -of clothes and boots, but a stupid misdistribution of the money to -buy them. We should also probably lay more stress on human volition -and less on economic pressure and historic evolution as making for -Socialism. We should, in short, give the dry practice of our solutions -of social problems instead of the inspiration and theory of them. But -we should also produce a volume which, though it might appeal more than -the present one to administrative experts, to bankers, lawyers, and -constructive statesmen, would have much less charm for the young, and -for the ordinary citizen who is in these matters an amateur. - -Besides, the difference between the view of the young and the -elderly is not necessarily a difference between wrong and right. The -Tennysonian process of making stepping stones of our dead selves to -higher things is pious in intention, but it sometimes leads downstairs -instead of up. When Herbert Spencer in his later days expunged from -his Social Statics the irresistible arguments for Land Nationalization -by which he anticipated Henry George, we could not admit that the old -Spencer had any right to do this violence to the young Spencer, or -was less bound either to confute his position or admit it than if the -two had been strangers to one another. Having had this lesson, we do -not feel free to alter even those passages which no longer represent -our latest conclusions. Fortunately, in the main we have nothing to -withdraw, nothing to regret, nothing to apologize for, and much to be -proud of. So we leave our book as it first came into the world, merely -writing “Errors Excepted” as solicitors do: that is, with the firm -conviction that the errors, if they exist at all, do not greatly matter. - -_21st May, 1908._ - - - - -THE FABIAN SOCIETY. - -BY WILLIAM CLARKE, M.A. - - -No visitor to the British capital will mingle very long in the -political life of London before he will hear of the Fabian Society. Few -readers have not heard of the Roman general, Quinctus Fabius Maximus, -_qui cunctando restituit rem_, and who consequently received the title -of Cunctator. That illustrious man is the patron saint of the society, -through which, being dead, he yet speaketh. - -The Fabian Society proposes then to conquer by delay; to carry its -programmes, not by a hasty rush, but through the slower but, as it -thinks, surer methods of patient discussion, exposition, and political -action of those who are absolutely convinced in their own minds. For a -convenient motto the society has taken the following sentence: “For the -right moment you must wait, as Fabius did, most patiently, when warring -against Hannibal, though many censured his delays; but when the time -comes you must strike hard, as Fabius did, or your waiting will be in -vain and fruitless.” This double policy then, of waiting and striking, -is the general idea of the society. - -What now are the aims of the society? I quote from the official -programme: “The Fabian Society consists of Socialists. It therefore -aims at the reorganization of society by the emancipation of land and -industrial capital from individual and class ownership, and the vesting -of them in the community for the general benefit. In this way only can -the natural and acquired advantages of the country be equitably shared -by the whole people. The society accordingly works for the extinction -of private property in land, and of the consequent individual -appropriation, in the form of rent, of the price paid for permission -to use the earth, as well as for the advantages of superior soils and -sites. The society, further, works for the transfer to the community -of the administration of such industrial capital as can be managed -socially. For, owing to the monopoly of the means of production in the -past, industrial inventions and the transformation of surplus income -into capital have mainly enriched the proprietary class, the workers -being now dependent on that class for leave to earn a living.” To bring -this condition of things about, the programme continues, the society -looks to the spread of Socialist opinions, and it seeks to promote -these by the general dissemination of knowledge as to the relation -between the individual and society in its economic, ethical, and -political aspects. - -These, then, are the fundamental ideas of the Fabian Society. Before -describing its growth, work and personnel, let me give an account and -explanation of its origin. The effective modern Socialist movement -in England began in 1881. In that year a conference was held at the -Westminster Palace Hotel in London, at which were present the venerable -Francis W. Newman, brother of the late cardinal; Helen Taylor, the -step-daughter of John Stuart Mill; Mr. Hyndman, the Socialist author -and leader; some men now in Parliament, others who have been there, -and a small number of energetic people well known in London, but not -equally well known in America. These persons and others formed, after -much discussion, the Democratic Federation, a body which at first -appeared to be nothing more than a vigorous Radical protest against the -Irish coercive policy of the Gladstone Cabinet then in power. Immense -demonstrations, some of the biggest ever held in London, were got up -by the Federation, who secured the adherence in this cause of some of -the Irish members of Parliament. But gradually the mere Radicalism -dropped out of the Federation’s programme; and under the stimulating -influence of Mr. Henry George, who was then in England, whose book was -being read everywhere, and who enjoyed much influence then in England, -the Federation preached the doctrine of the “land for the people.” But -a still further stage in its evolution was to be reached; and by the -autumn of 1883 it came out as a full-blown Socialist organization, and -published a little pamphlet entitled “Socialism Made Plain,” which had -a great run and which, singular as it may seem now, created a perfect -consternation among persons who supposed that Socialism was merely a -French or German eccentricity, due to militarism and protectionism, -and that it could never rear its head in “free” England. Mr. Herbert -Spencer, among others, took alarm and predicted a “coming slavery,” -and the venerable _Quarterly Review_ shook its venerable head and -marvelled, like Mrs. Sarah Gamp, at the “brajian imperence” of these -wicked agitators. It was perfectly evident that a new political force -was come into being. - -But there were those in London who, sympathizing deeply with the new -movement, nevertheless could not throw themselves heartily into it, for -two reasons: first, it assumed that a revolutionary change affecting -the very bases of society could be brought about all at once; second, -it appeared to ignore what may be called the spiritual side of life, -and to disregard the ethical changes necessary to render a different -social system possible. Such was the state of things in the autumn of -1883, when a very able man, Mr. Thomas Davidson, of New York, whom all -who have meet him know to be a man of exceptional force and enthusiasm, -spent some weeks in London. Mr. Davidson, noting the condition of -things, gathered round him little conferences of men, at several of -which I was present; and while he was in London, and for several months -after, these purely informal conferences went on at different people’s -houses. It would be too long a tale to tell of the endless discussions -which took place, of the dull men and the brilliant men, the cranks and -the thinkers, the men with long hair and the women with short hair, -who debated and argued, and went for one another, and then debated and -argued again. The main upshot was that these persons found themselves -ultimately divided into two camps, not necessarily hostile, but laying -emphasis on different aspects of the social movement. One of these was -composed of persons who laid supreme stress on the need for ethical and -spiritual change as a constant factor in the social movement, and as a -coefficient with the material changes. These persons formed themselves -into a little body called the New Fellowship, which still exists, small -in numbers, but very earnest in purpose, and which publishes a small -quarterly journal called _Seedtime_. The other class, which agreed -with the Social Democratic Federation as to the urgent need for social -and political change, but thought this must be very gradual, and its -leaders persons of some culture and grasp of economics, formed the -Fabian Society. This is the genesis of this active body. - -There is a prevalent view, expressed sometimes in American newspapers, -that the Socialist movement is largely made up of cranks and -scoundrels--a view shared in a less degree by a portion of the English -press. I believe there is in every country and age an abundant crop -of both these classes; and assuredly the Socialist, like every other -movement, has had its share of both. But to suppose that a great -movement which is sweeping Europe from end to end, which has given -birth to the largest single political party in Germany, which has -gained victories innumerable in France, which is modifying the whole of -English political life--to suppose that this movement is the outcome of -the delusions of a few wicked or foolish men, is itself the delusion -of people who are probably themselves not over-good or over-wise. In -Marx, Lassalle, Rodbertus, Malon and others, the Socialist movement -has been served by some of the best brains of our century; and it -was no idle boast of Lassalle that he was equipped with all the best -culture of his time. I know the inside of the Socialist movement well, -and it certainly numbers among its adherents the ablest men I know. -The Fabian Society contains not a few of these men. Walter Crane, -the artist; Stopford Brooke, the preacher and man of letters; Grant -Allen, one of the most versatile and accomplished men living; George -Bernard Shaw, one of the most brilliant albeit whimsical of musical -and dramatic critics; Miss Willard, one of America’s women reformers; -Professor Shuttleworth, now London’s most popular and able Broad -Church clergyman; Mr. D. G. Ritchie, of Oxford, foremost among English -philosophic thinkers; Mrs. Theodore Wright, one of our most powerful -actresses; Sergius Stepniak, next to Tolstoi the first of living -Russians; Alfred Hayes, one of the first of our younger poets; Dr. -Furnival, most learned and active of old English scholars,--these are -among its members. - -But it is not, of course, the mere inclusion of eminent people that -gives a society force and authority. It is the being grounded in -knowledge and ideas; and here the society is strong. It was recognized -from the first by its members that the social problem cannot be -solved by mere sentiment, though sentiment must be a factor in its -solution. There must be a deal of hard thinking and severe study, not -altogether in books (many of which on the economic problems before us -are worthless), but in social facts. Its critics think the society -has erred on the other side, and become too hard, and even cynical; -but I confess I think that better than talking mere gushing moral -platitudes which people applaud and then forget all about. The society -has always steadily kept before it the idea that we are not looking -for any millennium, any perfectly blissful earthly paradise, but that -we are considering the much more prosaic question, how the economic -interests of society are to be served, how the economic arrangements -of society are to be carried on. Hence its members determined to equip -themselves for their work by hard reading and thinking and by very -stiff discussion of the crucial problems in history, economics and -political philosophy. To this end they were greatly aided by a useful -little Historical Society, which was formed in one of the suburbs of -London, where every week an essay was read and completely discussed. I -do not believe there are any better read or more acute minds in England -than these of the young men who formed this group and who have largely -remained the nucleus of the Fabian Society,--and this though they have -their faults, like other people. - -At first the idea was to have a very small number of members, scarcely -more than could be gathered in a good-sized room in a private house. -These were to be well trained and to be apostles. Gradually, however, -the society grew and grew, the barriers of exclusion were broken -down, and persons of less knowledge and experience were brought in. -At the present time I think almost all callings are represented in -the society. I find in the last list of members, lawyers, artists, -journalists, doctors, workingmen, clergymen, teachers, trade-union -leaders, literary people, shop-keepers and persons of no occupation. -There are no millionnaires in the society, as there are no paupers, but -there are a few quite well-to-do people. A large proportion are bright -young men, and there are not a few bright and active women. Individual -instances of the sort of people who belong and what they do are better -than mere vague generalizations. Here are cases:-- - -A young man employed in the Central Post-Office at a salary of $650 a -year. He has married a very charming and able girl, also a member. They -occupy two or three rooms in a suburban house. The young lady has been -elected as a guardian of the poor, the only woman among a number of -men. Her husband devotes nearly all his spare time after office-hours -to the society’s propaganda. He has had a little portable desk and -stand made for himself, and at this he speaks in open spaces on street -corners or wherever he can get an audience. His wife accompanies him -and sells literature. Do not suppose that these are a blatant young -demagogue and a conventional, strong-minded woman. Both are educated, -intelligent, of sweet disposition; but the Socialist movement has taken -hold of them and given them something they needed, lifted them above -the region of what John Morley calls “greasy domesticity,” and taught -them that there is a great suffering world beyond the four walls of -home to be helped and worked for. Depend upon it, a movement which can -do this has in it some promise of the future. - -Or take the amusing, cynical, remarkable George Bernard Shaw, whose -Irish humor and brilliant gifts have partly helped, partly hindered, -the society’s popularity. This man will rise from an elaborate -criticism of last night’s opera or Richter concert (he is the musical -critic of the _World_), and after a light, purely vegetarian meal, will -go down to some far-off club in South London, or to some street-corner -in East London, or to some recognized place of meeting in one of the -parks, and will there speak to poor men about their economic position -and their political duties. People of this sort, who enjoy books and -music and the theatre and good society, do not go down to dreary slums -or even more dreary lecture-rooms to speak on such themes to the poorer -class of workingmen without some strong impelling power; and it is that -power, that motive force, upon which I dwell, as showing what is doing -in the London of to-day. I am satisfied, from inquiries I have made, -that there is really nothing like this going on in any other country of -the world; but it is a commonplace in London. - -The original parent Fabian Society, after it began to expand and -employ a paid secretary and become a recognized institution, suggested -to people elsewhere that they might have local Fabian Societies; and -the first of these were formed in Birmingham, where several of the -members addressed crowded, very intelligent and very enthusiastic -audiences in a hall in the centre of that city. There are also local -Fabian Societies now in Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol, Leeds, -Newcastle, Plymouth, Wolverhampton, Bradford, York and other English -towns, altogether forty-eight in number; and there is also one in -Adelaide, South Australia, and another in Bombay. Some of these are -quite small, but others are important, and are beginning to exercise a -considerable influence in municipal politics, and in one or two places -in Parliamentary politics also. The society has been represented at -International Labor Congresses in Paris, Brussels, Zürich and Chicago. - -And now what has in the main been the sort of work the society has -done? At first the idea of its members was rather to discuss among -themselves and teach themselves than to teach others. This was the -initial or self-forming stage. Then came the educational stage, and, -third, the political or active stage, though even in this, its third -stage, education is still the main object of the society. Fortnightly -discussions have been kept up continuously, save for a two months’ -summer recess, for years. At these members of the society read papers, -or outsiders, and notably opponents, were invited. The late Charles -Bradlaugh came to oppose, and was very promptly demolished; while, on -the other hand, Oscar Wilde has spoken with eloquence and power on -the relation of art and Socialism. The society tried to get Mr. A. -J. Balfour, the Conservative leader, and Mr. W. H. Mallock, as the -ablest literary opponent of Socialism, to come and argue seriously, -but neither of them would do so. Mr. Haldene, the translator of -Schopenhauer and cultured philosophic member of Parliament, came -to oppose, was handled rather vigorously, and has now been largely -converted to collectivism. Mr. David F. Schloss, whom the British -Government recently sent over to the United States to inquire into -labor matters, has spoken sympathetically; and Mr. Donisthorpe, the -clever, cynical, superficial English individualist, has spoken and -has been mercilessly handled. The result of all this debating is that -the Fabian Society has now some of the best debaters in England. It -has also some of the best lecturers, for it is in lectures that its -work has largely consisted. The society now gives something over one -thousand lectures a year, all free, the lecturers being all unpaid. -Indeed, excepting the secretary’s office, the whole of the society’s -work is voluntary, unpaid work. The majority of these lectures -are given in workmen’s clubs, of which there are some hundreds in -London alone. I take at random from the 1891 list of lectures sample -subjects:-- - -The Socialism of John Ruskin; The Eight Hours’ Bill; Railway Reform; -Liberty, Equality, Fraternity; Methods of Social Evolution; Adam, the -first and last Individualist; Why we want a Labor Party; The Gospel -of getting on; What the Farm Laborers want; The Social Hell and its -Sources; Experiments in Housing the People; Socialism and Individual -Liberty; the Church’s Message to Men of Wealth; Free Comments on the -Population Question; The Worker’s Share of Wealth; The Programme -of Social Democracy; John Lilburne and the Levellers; The Chartist -Movement; The Religion of Socialism; the Industrial History of England; -Gospel of Bread and Butter; Workingmen and their Difficulties; -Co-operative Production and Socialism; Wealth and the Commonwealth; The -French Revolution; The Right to Live; What Socialists Propose to Do; -Twenty Years of the Labor Movement. - -From these it will be seen what extensive ground is covered. These -lectures are for the most part delivered to workingmen, but sometimes -there are middle-class audiences, and I have heard of Fabian lecturers -talking to people in aristocratic drawing-rooms. From the first, the -society has done some publishing, and the last list gives no fewer than -forty-five pamphlets or tracts issued by the society. The first of -these, “Why are the Many Poor?” was a crude one, but good for rousing -attention, which is always the first thing to be done, and quite -justifying some curious Socialistic vagaries. The most valuable of -these pamphlets are “Facts for Socialists,” a really crushing answer -to those whom Matthew Arnold calls the “self-complacent moles,” all -based on the best available statistics; “Facts for Londoners,” an -appalling generalization of the economic condition of London; “What -to Read,” a most admirable and impartially selected list of books for -social reformers, which might with advantage be reprinted in America; -“The Reform of the Poor Law”; and “The Impossibilities of Anarchism,” a -searching criticism of the Anarchist position by George Bernard Shaw. -Remember that the preparation of these has all been voluntary, unpaid -labor, and has involved an immense amount of toil. - -In 1888 the society determined to give a course of lectures by those -of its members who were supposed to be best fitted for the purpose, -setting forth the general principles of Socialism as they understood -them. The lectures were eight in number, and were delivered to densely -packed audiences, making such an impression that it was decided to -publish them in a volume; and in the next year they appeared, under -the title of “Fabian Essays in Socialism.” As it is a case of _quorum -pars magna fui_, I am precluded from giving my estimate of a volume -in which I had a share; but I may say that this work has had a very -great sale--thirty thousand copies, the largest sale of any purely -economic work I know of excepting “Progress and Poverty,”--and that -its respectful and even cordial welcome by the English press was a -surprise. The fact shows that the public mind is being prepared for -great social changes. The ruling idea of the book is that of inevitable -political and industrial evolution,--nothing in the least degree -merely utopian, but an attempted generalization on the lines of modern -scientific ideas. The publication of this book first gave to the Fabian -Society a national instead of a merely local reputation; and I believe -the book has now been widely read in America and Germany, while it was -introduced to France by the _Revue Socialiste_. Several courses of -lectures have since been given by the society, but none of them have -been afterwards published. - -The third phase of the society’s activity is, as I have said, in -practical politics. This was not undertaken without some misgivings. -On the principle that you cannot touch pitch without being defiled, I -confess I doubted whether, until the people had been far more educated -in these ideas, it was wise to enter the somewhat dirty political -arena. But the intense desire to be _doing_ something, to translate -ideas into facts, to organize the people, to help in shaping the -actual progressive movement in England, and above all, perhaps, to -weaken and destroy the individualist wing of the Liberal party,--these -and other motives acted with cumulative force, especially as members -of the society began to find that they had acquired influence over -little groups of workmen here and there. There were great dangers and -difficulties. There was the danger of falling into mere wire-pulling -and making of political “deals,”--a subject about which people in -America know so much that it is not necessary to enlarge upon it; and -then there was the practical difficulty of differences of opinion in -the society, which might cause wreck if political action were indulged -in. I may say at once that these difficulties remain and will continue -to do so, though they have not led to disruption yet. There are -inveterate wire-pullers in the society, and there are those who favor -an independent labor party, those who want to permeate the Radicals and -gradually gain them over; and there are even a few who, as between the -two parties, prefer Tories to Radicals. The first political chance for -the Fabian Society came at the London county council election in 1889, -when the advanced party in London paid the society the compliment of -appropriating its entire pamphlet, “The London Programme,” and making -of it the Progressive platform of the campaign. The Progressives -carried that election, and they carried it on “The London Programme.” -Still more striking was the Progressive victory in 1892, when the -Moderate or Conservative party was almost annihilated at the polls. -The Fabian Society has supplied London with its programme of reforms; -and the reforms were in the direction of what it is now the fashion -to call municipal Socialism. At the second county council election, -several Fabians were candidates, and four of them were actually -elected; while a fifth, Ben Tillett, the labor leader, was afterwards -made an alderman. Three members of the society proved formidable though -unsuccessful candidates at the Parliamentary election two years ago. -A considerable number of members are on local municipal councils and -school boards, and another fought a very remarkable Parliamentary fight -during the last year. So it is clear that the society is largely _en -evidence_. - -As to the general programme of work in which the members are supposed -more or less to take part, I may quote from the printed advice given -to members as to what they can do. First of all, “the need of study” -is insisted on. It is assumed that the member will read all the -society’s publications; and his next duty, it is urged, should be to -read the criticisms on the other side, after the manner of Cicero, who -was always careful to get up his opponent’s case. If a member cannot -read or study alone, he is recommended to set on foot a local reading -circle, and apply to the secretary for literature for the circle. -No public work should be done until this self-education has been -accomplished, and the member is really able to speak with authority -and to deal effectively with an opponent. The opponents of Socialism -in England are usually persons sent out by a body called the Liberty -and Property Defence League, of which the American millionnaire, -Mr. Astor, now a London Tory newspaper proprietor, is a member. -These persons have, as a rule, a remarkable capacity for making -fools of themselves; nevertheless, it is always a tactical blunder -to underestimate the ability of your opponent, and Fabian lecturers -are advised to assume that these Liberty and Property defenders are -acquainted with economics, even though there is good reason to suspect -they are not. There is nothing that kills like ridicule; to gibbet an -ignorant and presumptuous debater, and make him look like a fool before -a large audience, is a source of pleasure to every rightly constituted -mind. Members of the society are also urged to correspond with their -Parliamentary or municipal representative on all vital points, to worry -his life out of him if he is obstinate or wrong-headed or dishonest, -and to make him yearn like the poet for a lodge in some vast wilderness -where he might never receive another letter or vote of censure as long -as he lived. This is a good way to combat what Walt Whitman calls “the -never-ending audacity of elected persons.” The member should always -attend the local caucus meeting, and do what he can there; and if he -has the time to spare, he should be a candidate for any public post, -such as member of Parliament, of county or municipal council, of -school board, guardian of the poor, or member of the parish council -yet to be constituted. The great difficulty in the way of this is that -these public persons are not paid in England, and few of the busy and -impecunious members of the Fabian Society can afford the time for these -things. - -Having thus described the constitution, work, and general character -of the Fabian Society, let me speak on the general intellectual -forces which have been operating in England to bring about this new -political growth among active young men; for it is quite new. My first -acquaintance with anything that could properly be called Socialism -in England was in London in 1879, when I went one evening to hear a -young Jewish gentleman, since deceased, Mr. Montefiore, read a paper -on German Socialism, before the London Dialectical Society. Mr. -Montefiore had but a slender knowledge of his subject, and we had to -wait for speeches by a German friend of Marx, resident in London, and -from a young, dreamy-looking man with long, thick, tousled hair, whom -I learned was Mr. Ernest Belfort Bax, since better known as a prolific -writer on Socialism from the revolutionary, Marxite point of view. At -that time there was not a single young man in London interested in or -in favor of anything like Socialism, excepting Mr. Bax. Now there are -hundreds. What are the reasons for the change? - -(1) The exhaustion of the older Liberalism and the obviously -unsatisfactory character of mere republicanism. And here American -readers must permit me to be plain by saying that the United States -seemed to furnish an object lesson to the world as to the failure of -mere republicanism to solve a single one of our social questions. A -quarter of a century ago the American Republic was the guiding star of -advanced English political thought. It is not so now: candor compels -me to say that. It is not merely a question of machine politics, of -political corruption, of the omnipotent party boss; though supine -Americans who do nothing to overthrow those purely political evils -should be reminded that Europe as well as America is involved in -and has to pay for their cowardice and indifference. But over and -beyond this is the great fact of the division between rich and poor, -millionnaires at one end, tramps at the other, a growth of monopolies -unparalleled, crises producing abject poverty just as in Europe. These -facts proved to men clearly that new institutions were of no use along -with the old forms of property; that a mere theoretic democracy, -unaccompanied by any social changes, was a delusion and a snare. The -result of this is that the old enthusiasm for mere republicanism has -died away, and that, though twenty-five years ago there was a good -sprinkling of republican clubs in England, there is not a single one of -them left now. - -(2) The second cause I take to be a new spirit in literature. The -genteel, the conventional, the thinner kind of romantic literature -began to die out; and the powerful realistic school began to attract -men’s minds. There was a desire to know things as they are, to sound -the plummet in the sea of social misery, to have done with make-believe -and get at realities. The Russian writers, with their intense -Socialistic feeling, attracted great numbers of readers, who seemed to -find in them something entirely new and immensely powerful. I should -name among individual writers who have powerfully aided the growth, I -do not say of Socialism itself, but of the feeling in the soil of which -Socialism is easily developed, Dickens, Victor Hugo, Carlyle, Whitman, -Ruskin, Tolstoi, Zola and Arnold. A curious and medley list, you may -say, and so it is; but I am certain that each of these great writers -has contributed a distinct element to the expansion and liberation of -the minds that have been formed, say, during the last twenty years. For -among all these writers, varied as they are, it is the social feeling -which is the most powerful impulse. - -(3) Along with the new literature has grown a new art feeling, an -intense hatred of the smug and respectable, and a love to be surrounded -by attractive objects. Ruskin, Morris, and Walter Crane have shown -why it is that the true artist is at war with commercialism, with -the notion that things are to be produced for a profit, no matter -what abominations you may turn out. The conception that no person -has any right to inflict an ugly object of any sort on the world, -especially for the sake of making gain out of it, has taken hold on the -imaginative mind of the younger people of our cultivated classes. - -(4) In the fourth place, the old political economy is absolutely dead -in England, although you might not perhaps guess it from some of the -English economic writers. The influence of German thought in this, -as in other departments, has affected men’s minds. Take a series of -books like the Social Science Series, published by Sonnenschein; -half those books are Socialistic,--and that would have been an -impossibility twenty years ago. Of the “Fabian Essays in Socialism,” -it may be said that the publisher, as well as the Society, reaped -large profits from it. I mention such works as these, rather than -romances like Morris’s “News from Nowhere,” or Bellamy’s “Looking -Backward.” The charm of Morris’s style and the ingenuity of Bellamy’s -narrative would be sufficient to account for their success; but the -popularity of these other works represents a body of serious interest -in advanced economics, which may well be considered startling when the -old hidebound prejudices of orthodox English economics are taken into -consideration. - -(5) _Laissez-faire_ individualist political philosophy is dead. In -vain does poor Mr. Herbert Spencer endeavor to stem the torrent. His -political ideas are already as antiquated as Noah’s ark. I do not know -a single one of the younger men in England who is influenced by them -in the slightest degree, though one hears of one occasionally, just -as one hears of a freak in a dime museum. For all practical purposes, -philosophic Radicalism, as it was called, is as extinct as the dodo. - -(6) There is another cause which cannot be ignored, though I speak upon -it with some hesitation, as I purposely avoid, as far as possible, the -difficult questions of religion and the deeper ethics. I mean that -the old dualism, with its creed of other-worldliness, has gone by the -board. Whatever men’s theoretical views are upon many transcendental -matters, there is a general feeling now that the world is one, and -that actual life here is just as sacred, normal, good, as it ever was -or ever will be in any hypothetical past or future; that if there is -any heaven for us we have to make it, and that such heaven is a state -of the mind, of human relationships, and not a place to be reached at -a definite period of time. Perhaps I may quote the eloquent words of -William Morris in his “Dream of John Ball”: “Fellowship is heaven, and -the lack of fellowship is hell.” This idea is, I say, a powerful factor -in leading the minds of the younger men to the views of which I am -speaking. But men are not altogether influenced by their theoretical -or even spiritual ideas; they are also moved, and so long as they have -material bodies to be fed and clothed they will continue to be moved, -by purely self-regarding and economic considerations. Let us never be -deluded into supposing that altruistic feelings alone will induce men -to make great social changes; egotistic considerations will prompt them -as well, the desire of self-preservation working along with the desire -for a better and more harmonious social order than exists. It is not -only upon the working classes that capitalist monopoly tells; it tells -also upon the educated middle classes who are not in the monopoly. They -find the avenues of livelihood and preferment one after another closed -to them; and just as education spreads, this will become more and more -the case. When a small number of persons in a large community are -highly educated, they have what economists call a monopoly value; they -can get a good price for their services, because they possess something -which few people have. Spread this higher education and the monopoly -is broken down. Now, this is roughly what is going on in society; -democracy is levelling all up to a common level, however gradual may be -the process; and consequently highly educated men with their special -gifts find their rates of remuneration becoming lower and lower, unless -they possess some rare gift of genius, as a Sara Bernhardt in acting, -a Paderewski in playing, a Stevenson in story-telling, a Mascagni as -a composer. These rare people still command their monopoly value; but -for the rest it has disappeared. Thus even more than the workingmen, -perhaps, it has been the educated young men of the middle class -(and the young women, too) who have been hardest hit by the modern -development. Fifty years ago you could have gathered all the press -writers of London into a single moderate-sized room. To-day all told -they number nearly ten thousand. Everybody with a pen, ink and paper -and any capacity for turning out “copy” is a journalist; and you see -at once that it is impossible for all these men to earn a living. They -don’t, and can’t. There are scores of highly educated people who work -every day in the British Museum for eight or nine hours a day and earn -less than a mechanic in constant occupation. It is the same in all the -professions. Only fifteen per cent of London advocates ever get briefs -at all; the other eighty-five per cent get nothing. In the medical -profession it is the same. The prizes go to about five per cent of the -profession; as for the average medical man in the London suburbs, the -rates are so cut that I am credibly informed by one of them who studied -at Cambridge and Heidelberg, and on whose education hundreds of pounds -were spent, the fee for attendance and prescription in his suburban -district has been brought down to twenty-five cents. It will be seen -that it is not a question of making money or of the disgusting progress -towards smug respectability, which is known as “getting on,”--it is -positively a question of a bare living. Now, while a workingman who has -never known comfort, whose father has never known it before him, can -often stand a frightful amount of poverty without getting desperate, -the well-bred young man cannot; and the result is that the keenest and -most dangerous discontent comes from the educated classes, who are -leading the Socialist masses all over Europe. Some superficial people -think the remedy is to be found in inducing young men of the better -classes to abandon the so-called “respectable” occupations and go in -for manual labor. Let them cease, by all means, to be “respectable,” -but let not any one lay the flattering unction to his soul that this, -under existing economic conditions, is any solution. For what is the -difficulty about manual labor now? Why, that thousands of those already -engaged in it are not wanted; it is the difficulty of the unemployed, -the difficulty of over-production. In 1886, according to the Report -of the Washington Bureau of Statistics, there were at least one and -one-half million of unemployed men in the United States; and this state -of things has been almost if not quite paralleled in 1893. In London -lack of employment is chronic, and is growing to such huge proportions -that our cowardly, blind, public men dare not grapple with it. In -Australia the unemployed have been walking the streets of Melbourne by -the thousand. How absurd then it is to propose to add to the numbers of -workingmen when those already in the ranks cannot find means of living! -There is one method, alas, open to men, as there is always one method -open to tempted, poverty-stricken women,--the method of what I may call -intellectual prostitution; and many there be that go in at that gate. -Sick and weary of the penury and struggle that go with honesty, young -men of ability will deliberately sell themselves to the capitalist -who has cornered our intellectual as he has cornered our material -production, and will serve him for a good living. What numbers I have -known choose this path!--and I cannot blame them, for they are forced -into it by the conditions of modern life. It is useless preaching fine -morals to them; the conditions of life must be adapted to human nature -as it is, for human nature will not, you may be quite sure, suddenly -transform itself to suit the conditions. These, then, are the economic -motives which, combined with the moral and intellectual motives to -which I have previously given expression, are forcing young men of -education and good breeding into the ranks of the Socialists, and which -especially operate in the case of a body like the Fabian Society. - -Readers will be asking by this time whether I am not going to set -forth the actual political programme or “platform,” as it is called -in America, of the Fabian Society. Yes, that is just what I am going -to do. As the Fabian Society holds that social transformation must -be gradual, unless there is to be a general smash-up, it proposes a -series of reforms for effecting the gradual change of society into -a really social democratic state. But these reforms, it will be -understood, are adopted with a distinct end in view, which fact makes -all the difference between people of principle and mere opportunists -who have no end in view other than the personal end of lining their -own pockets. The following, then, are the planks of the Fabian -political platform: Adult suffrage, Parliamentary and municipal, -one vote for each man and each woman of twenty-one and upwards who -are not in prison or in a lunatic asylum. The second ballot, as in -France, Germany and Switzerland, so that whoever is elected will have -an absolute majority of the votes polled. Payment of members by the -state and of election expenses by the district (it must be remembered -that at present representatives are not paid in England). Taxation of -unearned incomes by such means as a land tax, heavy death duties to -go to municipalities, and a progressive income tax. Municipalization -of land and local industries, so that free and honorable municipal -employment may be substituted for private charity, which, to vary a -well-known line of Shakespeare, is twice cursed,--it curseth him who -gives and him who takes. All education to be at the public cost for all -classes, including manual as well as book training. Nationalization -of all canals and railways, so that the public highways may belong to -the public, as they always did until the new era of steam, when they -got into the hands of capitalists. It is as ridiculous to pay Mr. -Vanderbilt if you happen to want to go from New York to Chicago as it -would be to pay him if you desired to take a walk down Fifth Avenue. -The eight hours day for wage-workers in all government and municipal -offices, in all monopolies like coal mines and railways, and in all -industries where the workers want it. Parish councils for the laborers, -with compulsory power to acquire land to build dwellings, to administer -schools and charities, and to engage in co-operative farming. - -Such is the programme through the adoption of which the Fabian Society -believes that the country once called “merry England,” but the greater -portion of which is now dreary and sordid and cursed with poverty, -might again be really happy and be converted into a land of real and -not of sham freedom. And now a word, in conclusion, on an important -point,--the relation of the intellectual proletariat, as it has been -called, to the masses, of the educated young men to the bulk of -the working classes. Most of the members of the Fabian Society are -educated, middle-class people, though there are workingmen connected -with it also. What is to be the relation of these educated middle-class -people to the swarming multitudes of workers? This is a vital social -question, the most vital we have immediately before us. One remembers -what Matthew Arnold said in America,--that the salvation of modern -society lay in the hands of a remnant. I should be inclined to put it -rather differently, and to say that, if the social evolution is to be -peaceful and rational, it must be effected by the union of a cultivated -remnant with the masses of the toiling people. American optimism may -chafe at the little word “if.” Can there be any doubt, you may ask, -that we shall go on prosperously and peacefully? I reply, yes, there is -quite good enough ground for doubting this. As Mr. Pearson, the author -of that remarkable book on “National Life and Character,” which has -impressed us in England very deeply, has said, ancient civilization in -the times of the Antonines seemed as firm and strong as does ours, nay, -stronger, for it had, in the main, lasted as many centuries as ours has -lasted decades. - - Stout was its arm, each nerve and bone - Seemed puissant and alive. - -Had you predicted then to a Roman senator that the splendid Greco-Roman -cities would be given to the flames, and that the Roman Senate and -legions would be trampled down by ignorant hordes of barbarians, he -would have smiled, offered you another cup of Falernian wine, and -changed the subject. Yet we know this happened; and I confess I can -see nothing in our mushroom civilization which we have any particular -right to regard as inherently more enduring than the elaborate and -stately organism of Roman jurisprudence. But there are no barbarians! -Yes, there are; but they are not outside us,--they are in our midst. -Do you suppose that the grim victim of crushing poverty in a London -attic or a Berlin cellar cares one pin’s head for all the heritage -of the world’s thought which appeals to the highly educated? How are -these huge masses of poor people to be welded into a great phalanx, -to be induced to subordinate their passions to the demands of reason, -to look not merely at the needs of the moment, but at those of next -year, to realize that the world cannot be remade in a day, but yet -that it can be so reconstituted as to give all opportunities to live -as human beings should? Silly people are always talking nonsense about -the danger of “agitators.” I know all about agitators. I know nearly -every prominent agitator in Great Britain; and I can say confidently -that it is the agitators who have to hold back, to restrain the people -from rash and even mad action. The record of every English strike would -show that this was the case. If all the labor leaders and agitators -were silenced, it would be the very worst thing that could befall the -capitalist class. The masses are at present, at the very best, an army -of privates without officers. This is not their fault; it is their -misfortune. They have not had the training, the culture, which enables -them to meet rich men and their agents on equal ground. An English -statesman, whose name is known the world over, said privately to me -not long ago: “The labor men here in the House of Commons are all good -fellows, but they are no use as leaders; the principal men of either -party can twist them round their fingers with the greatest ease. If the -labor movement is to be a success, it must be led by educated men.” I -believe that verdict of one of the ablest and best-informed public men -now living to be true. To what does it point? To the union of culture -with labor, to reform this badly-jointed system. Only, be it observed, -it must be union on equal terms. There must be no lofty condescension -on the part of culture any more than base truckling on the part of -labor. It must be an equal copartnership, where each partner recognizes -that the other has something which he needs. And let me say, as one -who knows workmen, that, in a certain and very real way, culture has -as much to learn from labor as labor from culture. Let the cultured -man approach the laboring man on perfectly equal terms, in a cordial -and open way; and let both unite to deliver a groaning world from the -bondage of riches. English experience shows that this can be done; -and this idea is to a very great degree the _idée mère_ of the Fabian -Society, whose members have no higher ambition than to mingle freely -with the workmen and share in the common life. By this means the hatred -and suspicion felt by the French and German workmen towards any one who -wears a black coat is eliminated, and both labor and culture gain in -breadth, knowledge and sympathy, and the cause of rational progress is -rendered more secure. Walt Whitman has told us, in “Leaves of Grass,” -how he went “freely with powerful, uneducated persons,”--a gospel which -Mr. John Addington Symonds, in his essay on Whitman, tells us, saved -him from being a prig. And this gospel of free intercourse with the -so-called “common people,” who are neither saints nor great sinners, -but real men, more real than the conventional middle-class man can -ever afford to be, is the healthiest, best advice which I can give to -cultivated men. - - - - -THE FABIAN ESSAYS. - - - - -PREFACE. - - -The essays in this volume were prepared last year as a course of -lectures for delivery before mixed audiences in London and the -provinces. They have been revised for publication, but not recast. The -matter is put, not as an author would put it to a student, but as a -speaker with only an hour at his disposal has to put it to an audience. -Country readers may accept the book as a sample of the propaganda -carried on by volunteer lecturers in the workmen’s clubs and political -associations of London.[1] Metropolitan readers will have the advantage -of making themselves independent of the press critic by getting face -to face with the writers, stripping the veil of print from their -personality, cross-examining, criticising, calling them to account -amid surroundings which inspire no awe, and before the most patient -of audiences. For any Sunday paper which contains a lecture list will -shew where some, if not all, of the seven essayists may be heard for -nothing; and on all such occasions questions and discussion form part -of the procedure. - -The projection and co-ordination of these lectures is not the work -of any individual. The nominal editor is only the member told off to -arrange for the publication of the papers, and see them through the -press with whatever editorial ceremony might be necessary. Everything -that is usually implied by the authorship and editing of a book has in -this case been done by the seven essayists, associated as the Executive -Council of the Fabian Society; and not one of the essays could be -what it is had the writer been a stranger to his six colleagues and -to the Society. But there has been no sacrifice of individuality--no -attempt to cut out every phrase and opinion the responsibility for -which would not be accepted by every one of the seven. Had the sections -been differently allotted, they would have been differently treated, -though the net result would probably have been the same. The writers -are all Social Democrats, with a common conviction of the necessity of -vesting the organization of industry and the material of production in -a State identified with the whole people by complete Democracy. But -that conviction is peculiar to no individual bias: it is a Capitol to -which all roads lead; and at least seven of them are represented in -these Fabian Essays; so that the reader need not fear oppression here, -any more than in the socialized State of the future, by the ascendancy -of one particular cast of mind. - -There are at present no authoritative teachers of Socialism. The -essayists make no claim to be more than communicative learners. - - LONDON, December, 1889. - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[1] In the year ending April, 1889, the number of lectures delivered by -members of the Fabian Society alone was upwards of 700. - - - - -THE BASIS OF SOCIALISM. - - - - -ECONOMIC. - -BY G. BERNARD SHAW. - - -All economic analyses begin with the cultivation of the earth. To the -mind’s eye of the astronomer, the earth is a ball spinning in space -without ulterior motives. To the bodily eye of the primitive cultivator -it is a vast green plain, from which, by sticking a spade into it, -wheat and other edible matters can be made to spring. To the eye of the -sophisticated city man, this vast green plain appears rather as a great -gaming-table, your chances in the game depending chiefly on the place -where you deposit your stakes. To the economist, again, the green plain -is a sort of burial-place of hidden treasure, where all the forethought -and industry of man are set at naught by the caprice of the power which -hid the treasure. The wise and patient workman strikes his spade in -here, and with heavy toil can discover nothing but a poor quality of -barley, some potatoes and plentiful nettles, with a few dock leaves -to cure his stings. The foolish spendthrift on the other side of the -hedge, gazing idly at the sand glittering in the sun, suddenly realizes -that the earth is offering him gold--is dancing it before his listless -eyes lest it should escape him. Another man, searching for some more -of this tempting gold, comes upon a great hoard of coal, or taps a jet -of petroleum. Thus is Man mocked by Earth, his step-mother, and never -knows as he tugs at her closed hand whether it contains diamonds or -flints, good red wheat or a few clayey and blighted cabbages. Thus, -too, he becomes a gambler, and scoffs at the theorists who prate of -industry and honesty and equality. Yet against this fate he eternally -rebels. For since in gambling the many must lose in order that the few -may win; since dishonesty is mere shadow-grasping where every one is -dishonest; and since inequality is bitter to all except the highest, -and miserably lonely for him, men come greatly to desire that these -capricious gifts of Nature might be intercepted by some agency having -the power and the goodwill to distribute them justly according to the -labor done by each in the collective search for them. This desire is -Socialism; and, as a means to its fulfilment, Socialists have devised -communes, kingdoms, principalities, churches, manors, and finally, -when all these had succumbed to the old gambling spirit, the Social -Democratic State, which yet remains to be tried. As against Socialism, -the gambling spirit urges man to allow no rival to come between his -private individual powers and Step-mother Earth, but rather to secure -some acres of her and take his chance of getting diamonds instead of -cabbages. This is Private Property, or Unsocialism. Our own choice -is shewn by our continual aspiration to possess property, our common -hailing of it as sacred, our setting apart of the word Respectable for -those who have attained it, our ascription of pre-eminent religiousness -to commandments forbidding its violation, and our identification of law -and order among men with its protection. Therefore is it vital to a -living knowledge of our society that Private Property should be known -in every step of its progress from its source in cupidity to its end in -confusion. - -Let us, in the manner of the Political Economist, trace the effects -of settling a country by private property with undisturbed law and -order. Figure to yourself the vast green plain of a country virgin -to the spade, awaiting the advent of man. Imagine then the arrival -of the first colonist, the original Adam, developed by centuries of -civilization into an Adam Smith, prospecting for an suitable patch of -Private Property. Adam is, as Political Economy fundamentally assumes -him to be, “on the make”; therefore he drives his spade into, and sets -up his stockade around, the most fertile and favorably situated patch -he can find. When he has tilled it, Political Economy inspired to -prophesy by the spectacle, metaphorically exhibits Adam’s little patch -of cultivation as a pool that will yet rise and submerge the whole -land. Let us not forget this trope: it is the key to the ever-recurring -phrase, “margin of cultivation,” in which, as may now be perceived, -there lurks a little unsuspected poetry. And truly the pool soon -spreads. Other Adams come, all on the make, and therefore all sure to -pre-empt patches as near as may be to that of the first Adam’s, partly -because he has chosen the best situation, partly for the pleasure of -his society and conversation, and partly because where two men are -assembled together there is a two-man power that is far more than -double one-man power, being indeed in some instances a quite new force, -totally destructive of the idiotic general hypothesis that society -is no more than the sum of the units which compose it. These Adams, -too, bring their Cains and Abels, who do not murder one another, but -merely pre-empt adjacent patches. And so the pool rises, and the margin -spreads more and more remote from the centre, until the pool becomes a -lake, and the lake an inland sea. - - -RENT. - -But in the course of this inundation the caprices of Nature begin to -operate. That specially fertile region upon which Adam pitched is -sooner or later all pre-empted; and there is nothing for the new-comer -to pre-empt save soil of the second quality. Again, division of labor -sets in among Adam’s neighbors; and with it, of course, comes the -establishment of a market for the exchange of the products of their -divided labor. Now it is not well to be far afield from that market, -because distance from it involves extra cost for roads, beasts of -burden, time consumed in travelling thither and back again. All this -will be saved to Adam at the centre of cultivation, and incurred -by the new-comer at the margin of cultivation. Let us estimate the -annual value of Adam’s produce at £1,000, and the annual produce of -the new-comer’s land on the margin of cultivation at £500, assuming -that Adam and the new-comer are equally industrious. Here is a clear -advantage of £500 a year to the first comer. This £500 is economic -rent. It matters not at all that it is merely a difference of income, -and not an overt payment from a tenant to a landlord. The two men labor -equally; and yet one gets £500 a year more than the other through the -superior fertility of his land and convenience of its situation. The -excess due to that fertility is rent; and before long we shall find it -recognized as such and paid in the fashion with which we are familiar. -For why should not Adam let his patch to the new-comer at a rent of -£500 a year? Since the produce will be £1,000, the new-comer will have -£500 left for himself, or as much as he could obtain by cultivating a -patch of his own at the margin; and it is pleasanter, besides, to be -in the centre of society than on the outskirts of it. The new-comer -will himself propose the arrangement; and Adam may retire as an idle -landlord with a perpetual pension of £500 rent. The excess of fertility -in Adam’s land is thenceforth recognized as rent and paid, as it is -to-day, regularly by a worker to a drone. A few samples of the way -in which this simple and intelligible transaction is stated by our -economists may now, I hope, be quoted without any danger of their -proving so difficult as they appear in the text-books from which I have -copied them. - -Stuart Mill[2] says that “the rent of land consists of the excess -of its return above the return to the worst land in cultivation.” -Fawcett[3] says that “the rent of land represents the pecuniary value -of the advantages which such land possesses over the worst land in -cultivation.” Professor Marshall[4] says that “the rent of a piece -of land is the excess of its produce over the produce of an adjacent -piece of land which would not be cultivated at all if rent were paid -for it.” Professor Sidgwick[5] cautiously puts it that “the normal -rent _per acre_ of any piece” [of land] “is the surplus of the value -of its produce over the value of the net produce per acre of the -least advantageous land that it is profitable to cultivate.” General -Walker[6] declares that “specifically, the rent of any piece of land is -determined by the difference between its annual yield and that of the -least productive land actually cultivated for the supply of the same -market, it being assumed that the quality of the land as a productive -agent is, in neither case, impaired or improved by such cultivation.” -All these definitions are offered by the authors as elaborations of -that given by their master Ricardo,[7] who says, “Rent is that portion -of the produce of the earth which is paid to the landlord for the use -of the original and indestructible powers of the soil.” - - -THE COUNTY FAMILY. - -Let us return to our ideal country. Adam is retiring from productive -industry on £500 a year; and his neighbors are hastening to imitate -him as fresh tenants present themselves. The first result is the -beginning of a tradition that the oldest families in the country -enjoy a superior position to the rest, and that the main advantage of -their superior position is that they enjoy incomes without working. -Nevertheless, since they still depend on their tenants’ labor for their -subsistence, they continue to pay Labor, with a capital L, a certain -meed of mouth honor; and the resultant association of prosperity with -idleness, and praise with industry, practically destroys morality by -setting up that incompatibility between conduct and principle which -is the secret of the ingrained cynicism of our own time, and which -produces the curious Ricardian phenomenon of the man of business -who goes on Sunday to the church with the regularity of the village -blacksmith, there to renounce and abjure before his God the line of -conduct which he intends to pursue with all his might during the -following week. - -According to our hypothesis, the inland sea of cultivation has now -spread into the wilderness so far that at its margin the return to -a man’s labor for a year is only £500. But as there is always a -flood-tide in that sea, caused by the incessant increase of population, -the margin will not stop there; it will at last encroach upon every -acre of cultivable land, rising to the snow line on the mountains and -falling to the coast of the actual salt water sea, but always reaching -the barrenest places last of all, because the cultivators are still, -as ever, on the make, and will not break bad land when better is to be -had. But suppose that now, at last, the uttermost belt of free land is -reached, and that upon it the yield to a man’s year’s labor is only -£100. Clearly now the rent of Adam’s primeval patch has risen to £900, -since that is the excess of its produce over what is by this time all -that is to be had rent free. But Adam has yielded up his land for £500 -a year to a tenant. It is this tenant accordingly who now lets Adam’s -patch for £900 a year to the new-comer, who of course loses nothing -by the bargain, since it leaves him the £100 a year with which he -must be content anyhow. Accordingly he labors on Adam’s land; raises -£1,000 a year from it; keeps £100 and pays £900 to Adam’s tenant, who -pays £500 to Adam, keeping £400 for himself, and thus also becoming an -idle gentleman, though with a somewhat smaller income than the man of -older family. It has, in fact, come to this, that the private property -in Adam’s land is divided between three men, the first doing none of -the work and getting half the produce; the second doing none of the -work and getting two-fifths of the produce; and the third doing all -the work and getting only one-tenth of the produce. Incidentally also, -the moralist who is sure to have been prating somewhere about private -property leading to the encouragement of industry, the establishment -of a healthy incentive, and the distribution of wealth according to -exertion, is exposed as a futile purblind person, starting _a priori_ -from blank ignorance, and proceeding deductively to mere contradiction -and patent folly. - -All this, however, is a mere trifle compared to the sequel. When the -inland sea has risen to its confines--when there is nothing but a strip -of sand round the coast between the furrow and the wave--when the very -waves themselves are cultivated by fisherfolk--when the pastures and -timber forests have touched the snow line--when, in short, the land is -all private property, yet every man is a proprietor, though it may be -only of a tenant right. He enjoys fixity of tenure at what is called -a fair rent; that is, he fares as well as he could on land wholly his -own. All the rent is economic rent; the landlord cannot raise it nor -the tenant lower it; it is fixed naturally by the difference between -the fertility of the land for which it is paid and that of the worst -land in the country. Compared with the world as we know it, such a -state of things is freedom and happiness. - - -THE PROLETARIAT. - -But at this point there appears in the land a man in a strange -plight--one who wanders from snow line to sea coast in search of land, -and finds none that is not the property of some one else. Private -property had forgotten this man. On the roads he is a vagrant; off -them he is a trespasser; he is the first disinherited son of Adam, -the first proletarian, one in whose seed all the generations of the -earth shall yet be blest, but who is himself for the present foodless, -homeless, shiftless, superfluous, and everything that turns a man into -a tramp or a thrall. Yet he is still a man with brain and muscle, -able to devise and execute, able to deal puissantly with land if he -only could get access to it. But how to get that access! Necessity is -the mother of Invention. It may be that this second Adam, the first -father of the great proletariat, has one of those scarce brains which -are not the least of Nature’s capricious gifts. If the fertile field -yields rent, why not the fertile brain? Here is the first Adam’s patch -still yielding its £1,000 a year to the labor of the tenant who, as we -have seen, has to pay £900 away in rent. How if the proletarian were -boldly to bid £1,000 a year to that man for the property? Apparently -the result would be the starvation of the proletarian, since he would -have to part with all the produce. But what if the proletarian can -contrive--invent--anticipate a new want--turn the land to some hitherto -undreamt-of use--wrest £1,500 a year from the soil and site that -only yielded £1,000 before? If he can do this, he can pay the full -£1,000 rent, and have an income of £500 left for himself. This is his -profit--the rent of his ability--the excess of its produce over that -of ordinary stupidity. Here then is the opportunity of the cunning -proletarian, the hero of that modern Plutarch, Mr. Samuel Smiles. -Truly, as Napoleon said, the career is open to the talented. But alas! -the social question is no more a question of the fate of the talented -than of the idiotic. In due replenishment of the earth there comes -another proletarian who is no cleverer than other men, and can do as -much, but not more than they. For him there is no rent of ability. How -then is he to get a tenant right? Let us see. It is certain that by -this time not only will the new devices of the renter of ability have -been copied by people incapable of inventing them; but division of -labor, the use of tools and money, and the economies of civilization -will have greatly increased man’s power of extracting wealth from -Nature. All this increase will be so much gain to the holder of a -tenant right, since his rent is a fixed payment out of the produce of -his holding, and the balance is his own. Therefore an addition to the -produce not foreseen by the landlord enriches the tenant. So that it -may well be that the produce of land on the margin of cultivation, -which, as we have seen, fixes the produce left to the cultivators -throughout the whole area, may rise considerably. Suppose the yield to -have doubled; then our old friends who paid £900 rent, and kept £100 -for themselves, have now, though they still pay £900 rent, £1,100 for -themselves, the total produce having risen to £2,000. Now here is an -opportunity for our proletarian who is not clever. He can very well -offer to cultivate the land subject to a payment of, for instance, -£1,600 a year, leaving himself £400 a year. This will enable the last -holder of the tenant right to retire as an idle gentleman receiving a -net income of £700 a year, and a gross income of £1,600, out of which -he pays £900 a year rent to a landlord who again pays to the head -landlord £500. But it is to be marked that this £700 a year net is -not economic rent. It is not the difference between the best and the -worst land. It has nothing to do with the margin of cultivation. It is -a payment for the privilege of using land at all--for access to that -which is now a close monopoly; and its amount is regulated, not by what -the purchaser could do for himself on land of his own at the margin, -but simply by the landholder’s eagerness to be idle on the one hand, -and the proletarian’s need of subsistence on the other. In current -economic terms the price is regulated by supply and demand. As the -demand for land intensifies by the advent of fresh proletarians, the -price goes up; and the bargains are made more stringent. Tenant rights, -instead of being granted in perpetuity, and so securing for ever to -the tenant the increase due to unforeseen improvements in production, -are granted on leases for finite terms, at the expiration of which the -landlord can revise the terms or eject the tenant. The payments rise -until the original head rents and quit rents appear insignificant in -comparison with the incomes reaped by the intermediate tenant right -holders or middlemen. Sooner or later the price of tenant right will -rise so high that the actual cultivator will get no more of the produce -than suffices him for subsistence. At that point there is an end of -sub-letting tenant rights. The land’s absorption of the proletarians as -tenants paying more than the economic rent stops. - -And now what is the next proletarian to do? For all his forerunners we -have found a way of escape: for him there seems none. The board is at -the door, inscribed “Only standing room left”; and it might well bear -the more poetic legend, _Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’ entrate_. -This man, born a proletarian, must die a proletarian, and leave his -destitution as an only inheritance to his son. It is not yet clear -that there is ten days’ life in him; for whence is his subsistence to -come if he cannot get at the land? Food he must have, and clothing; -and both promptly. There is food in the market, and clothing also; -but not for nothing: hard money must be paid for it, and paid on the -nail too; for he who has no property gets no credit. Money then -is a necessity of life; and money can only be procured by selling -commodities. This presents no difficulty to the cultivators of the -land, who can raise commodities by their labor; but the proletarian, -being landless, has neither commodities nor means of producing them. -Sell something he must. Yet he has nothing to sell--except himself. -The idea seems a desperate one; but it proves quite easy to carry out. -The tenant cultivators of the land have not strength enough or time -enough to exhaust the productive capacity of their holdings. If they -could buy men in the market for less than these men’s labor would add -to the produce, then the purchase of such men would be a sheer gain. -It would indeed be only a purchase in form: the men would literally -cost nothing, since they would produce their own price, with a surplus -for the buyer. Never in the history of buying and selling was there -so splendid a bargain for buyers as this. Aladdin’s uncle’s offer of -new lamps for old ones, was in comparison a catch-penny. Accordingly, -the proletarian no sooner offers himself for sale than he finds a rush -of bidders for him, each striving to get the better of the others by -offering to give him more and more of the produce of his labor, and to -content themselves with less and less surplus. But even the highest -bidder must have some surplus, or he will not buy. The proletarian, in -accepting the highest bid, sells himself openly into bondage. He is not -the first man who has done so; for it is evident that his forerunners, -the purchasers of tenant right, had been enslaved by the proprietors -who lived on the rents paid by them. But now all the disguise falls -off; the proletarian renounces not only the fruit of his labor, but -also his right to think for himself and to direct his industry as he -pleases. The economic change is merely formal; the moral change is -enormous. Soon the new direct traffic in men overspreads the whole -market, and takes the place formerly held by the traffic in tenant -rights. In order to understand the consequences, it is necessary to -undertake an analysis of the exchange of commodities in general, since -labor power is now in the market on the same footing as any other ware -exposed there for sale. - - -EXCHANGE VALUE. - -It is evident that the custom of exchange will arise in the first -instance as soon as men give up providing each for his own needs by -his own labor. A man who makes his own tables and chairs, his own poker -and kettle, his own bread and butter, and his own house and clothes, -is jack-of-all-trades and master of none. He finds that he would get -on much faster if he stuck to making tables and chairs, and exchanged -them with the smith for a poker and kettle, with bakers and dairymen -for bread and butter, and with builders and tailors for a house and -clothes. In doing this, he finds that his tables and chairs are worth -so much--that they have an exchange value, as it is called. As a matter -of general convenience, some suitable commodity is set up to measure -this value. We set up gold, which in this particular use of it, is -called money. The chairmaker finds how much money his chairs are worth, -and exchanges them for it. The blacksmith finds out how much money his -pokers are worth, and exchanges them for it. Thus, by employing money -as a go-between, chairmakers can get pokers in exchange for their -chairs, and blacksmiths chairs for their pokers. This is the mechanism -of exchange; and once the values of the commodities are ascertained it -works simply enough. But it is a mere mechanism, and does not fix the -values or explain them. And the attempt to discover what does fix them -is beset with apparent contradictions which block up the right path, -and with seductive coincidences which make the wrong seem the more -promising. - -The apparent contradictions soon shew themselves. It is evident that -the exchange value of anything depends on its utility, since no mortal -exertion can make a useless thing exchangeable. And yet fresh air and -sunlight, which are so useful as to be quite indispensable, have no -exchange value; whilst a meteoric stone, shot free of charge from the -firmament into the back garden, has a considerable exchange value, -although it is an eminently dispensable curiosity. We soon find that -this somehow depends on the fact that fresh air is plenty and meteoric -stones scarce. If by any means the supply of fresh air could be -steadily diminished, and the supply of meteoric stones, by celestial -cannonade or otherwise, steadily increased, the fresh air would -presently acquire an exchange value which would gradually rise, whilst -the exchange value of meteoric stones would gradually fall, until at -last fresh air would be supplied through a meter and charged for like -gas, and meteoric stones would be as unsaleable as ordinary pebbles. -The exchange value, in fact, decreases with the supply. This is due to -the fact that the supply decreases in utility as it goes on, because -when people have had some of a commodity, they are partly satisfied, -and do not value the rest so much. The usefulness of a pound of bread -to a man depends on whether he has already eaten some. Every man wants -a certain number of pounds of bread per week, no man wants much more; -and if more is offered he will not give much for it--perhaps not -anything. One umbrella is very useful: a second umbrella is a luxury: -a third is mere lumber. Similarly, the curators of our museums want a -moderate collection of meteoric stones; but they do not want a cartload -apiece of them. Now the exchange value is fixed by the utility, not of -the most useful, but of the least useful part of the stock. Why this -is so can readily be made obvious by an illustration. If the stock of -umbrellas in the market were sufficiently large to provide two for each -umbrella carrier in the community, then, since a second umbrella is -not so useful as the first, the doctrinaire course would be to ticket -half the umbrellas at, say, fifteen shillings, and the other half at -eight and sixpence. Unfortunately, no man will give fifteen shillings -for an article which he can get for eight and sixpence; and when the -public came to buy, they would buy up all the eight and sixpenny -umbrellas. Each person being thus supplied with an umbrella, the -remainder of the stock, though marked fifteen shillings, would be in -the position of second umbrellas, only worth eight and sixpence. This -is how the exchange value of the least useful part of the supply fixes -the exchange value of all the rest. Technically, it occurs by “the law -of indifference.” And since the least useful unit of the supply is -generally that which is last produced, its utility is called the final -utility of the commodity. The utility of the first or most useful unit -is called the total utility of the commodity. If there were but one -umbrella in the world, the exchange value of its total utility would be -what the most delicate person would pay for it on a very wet day sooner -than go without it. But practically, thanks to the law of indifference, -the most delicate person pays no more than the most robust: that -is, both pay alike the exchange value of the utility of the last -umbrella produced--or of the final utility of the whole stock of -umbrellas. These terms--law of indifference, total utility, and final -utility--though admirably expressive and intelligible when you know -beforehand exactly what they mean, are, taken by themselves, failures -in point of lucidity and suggestiveness. Some economists, transferring -from cultivation to utility our old metaphor of the spreading pool, -call final utility “marginal utility.” Either will serve our present -purpose, as I do not intend to use the terms again. The main point to -be grasped is, that however useful any commodity may be, its exchange -value can be run down to nothing by increasing the supply until there -is more of it than is wanted. The excess, being useless and valueless, -is to be had for nothing; and nobody will pay anything for a commodity -as long as plenty of it is to be had for nothing. This is why air -and other indispensable things have no exchange value, whilst scarce -gewgaws fetch immense prices. - -These, then, are the conditions which confront man as a producer and -exchanger. If he produces a useless thing, his labor will be wholly -in vain: he will get nothing for it. If he produces a useful thing, -the price he will get for it will depend on how much of it there is -for sale already. If he increases the supply by producing more than is -sufficient to replace the current consumption, he inevitably lowers the -value of the whole. It therefore behooves him to be wary in choosing -his occupation, as well as industrious in pursuing it. His choice will -naturally fall on the production of those commodities whose value -stands highest relatively to the labor required to produce them--which -fetch the highest price in proportion to their cost, in fact. Suppose, -for example, that a maker of musical instruments found that it cost him -exactly as much to make a harp as to make a pianoforte, but that harps -were going out of fashion and pianofortes coming in. Soon there would -be more harps than were wanted, and fewer pianofortes: consequently -the value of harps would fall, and that of pianofortes rise. Since -the labor cost of both would be the same, he would immediately devote -all his labor to pianoforte-making; and other manufacturers would -do the same, until the increase of supply brought down the value of -pianofortes to the value of harps. Possibly fashion then might veer -from pianofortes to American organs, in which case he would make less -pianofortes and more American organs. When these, too, had increased -sufficiently, the exertions of the Salvation Army might create such a -demand for tambourines as to make them worth four times their cost of -production, whereupon there would instantly be a furious concentration -of the instrument-making energy on the manufacture of tambourines; and -this concentration would last until the supply had brought down the -profit[8] to less than might be gained by gratifying the public craving -for trombones. At last, as pianofortes were cheapened until they were -no more profitable than harps; then American organs until they were no -more profitable than pianos; and then tambourines until they were level -with American organs; so eventually trombones will pay no better than -tambourines; and a general level of profit will be attained, indicating -the proportion in which the instruments are wanted by the public. But -to skim off even this level of profit, more of the instruments may be -produced in the ascertained proportion until their prices fall to their -costs of production, when there will be no profit. Here the production -will be decisively checked, since a further supply would cause only -a loss; and men can lose money, without the trouble of producing -commodities, by the simple process of throwing it out of a window. - -What occurred with the musical instruments in this illustration occurs -in practice with the whole mass of manufactured commodities. Those -which are scarce, and therefore relatively high in value, tempt us to -produce them until the increase of the supply reduces their value to -a point at which there is no more profit to be made out of them than -out of other commodities. The general level of profit thus attained is -further exploited until the general increase brings down the price of -all commodities to their cost of production, the equivalent of which -is sometimes called their normal value. And here a glance back to our -analysis of the spread of cultivation, and its result in the phenomenon -of rent, suggests the question What does the cost of production of -a commodity mean? We have seen that, owing to the differences in -fertility and advantage of situation between one piece of land and -another, cost of production varies from district to district, being -highest at the margin of cultivation. But we have also seen how the -landlord skims off as economic rent all the advantages gained by the -cultivators of superior soils and sites. Consequently, the addition -of the landlord’s rent to the expenses of production brings them up -even on the best land to the level of those incurred on the worst. -Cost of production, then, means cost of production on the margin of -cultivation, and is equalized to all producers, since what they may -save in labor per commodity is counterbalanced by the greater mass of -commodities they must produce in order to bring in the rent. It is -only by a thorough grasp of this levelling-down action that we can -detect the trick by which the ordinary economist tries to cheat us into -accepting the private property system as practically just. He first -shews that economic rent does not enter into cost of production on the -margin of cultivation. Then he shews that the cost of production on the -margin of cultivation determines the price of a commodity. Therefore, -he argues, first, that rent does not enter into price; and second, that -the value of commodities is fixed by their cost of production, the -implication being that the landlords cost the community nothing, and -that commodities exchange in exact proportion to the labor they cost. -This trivially ingenious way of being disingenuous is officially taught -as political economy in our schools to this day. It will be seen at -once that it is mere thimblerig. So far from commodities exchanging, -or tending to exchange, according to the labor expended in their -production, commodities produced well within the margin of cultivation -will fetch as high a price as commodities produced at the margin with -much greater labor. So far from the landlord costing nothing, he costs -all the difference between the two. - -This, however, is not the goal of our analysis of value. We now see -how Man’s control over the value of commodities consists solely in his -power of regulating their supply. Individuals are constantly trying to -decrease supply for their own advantage. Gigantic conspiracies have -been entered into to forestall the world’s wheat and cotton harvests, -so as to force their value to the highest possible point. Cargoes of -East Indian spices have been destroyed by the Dutch as cargoes of -fish are now destroyed in the Thames, to maintain prices by limiting -supply. All rings, trusts, corners, combinations, monopolies and trade -secrets have the same object. Production and the development of the -social instincts are alike hindered by each man’s consciousness that -the more he stints the community the more he benefits himself, the -justification, of course, being that when every man has benefited -himself at the expense of the community, the community will benefit by -every man in it being benefited. From one thing the community is safe. -There will be no permanent conspiracies to reduce values by increasing -supply. All men will cease producing when the value of their product -falls below its cost of production, whether in labor or in labor _plus_ -rent. No man will keep on producing bread until it will fetch nothing, -like the sunlight, or until it becomes a nuisance, like the rain in -the summer of 1888. So far, our minds are at ease as to the excessive -increase of commodities voluntarily produced by the labor of man. - - -WAGES. - -I now ask you to pick up the dropped subject of the spread of -cultivation. We had got as far as the appearance in the market of -a new commodity--of the proletarian man compelled to live by the -sale of himself! In order to realize at once the latent horror of -this, you have only to apply our investigation of value, with its -inevitable law that only by restricting the supply of a commodity -can its value be kept from descending finally to zero. The commodity -which the proletarian sells is one over the production of which he -has practically no control. He is himself driven to produce it by an -irresistible impulse. It was the increase of population that spread -cultivation and civilization from the centre to the snowline, and at -last forced men to sell themselves to the lords of the soil: it is the -same force that continues to multiply men so that their exchange falls -slowly and surely until it disappears altogether--until even black -chattel slaves are released as not worth keeping in a land where men -of all colors are to be had for nothing. This is the condition of our -English laborers to-day: they are no longer even dirt cheap: they are -valueless, and can be had for nothing. The proof is the existence of -the unemployed, who can find no purchasers. By the law of indifference, -nobody will buy men at a price when he can obtain equally serviceable -men for nothing. What, then, is the explanation of the wages given to -those who are in employment, and who certainly do not work for nothing? -The matter is deplorably simple. Suppose that horses multiplied in -England in such quantities that they were to be had for the asking, -like kittens condemned to the bucket. You would still have to feed -your horse--feed him and lodge him well if you used him as a smart -hunter--feed him and lodge him wretchedly if you used him only as a -drudge. But the cost of keeping would not mean that the horse had an -exchange value. If you got him for nothing in the first instance--if -no one would give you anything for him when you were done with him, -he would be worth nothing, in spite of the cost of his keep. That is -just the case of every member of the proletariat who could be replaced -by one of the unemployed to-day. Their wage is not the price of -themselves; for they are worth nothing: it is only their keep. For bare -subsistence wages you can get as much common labor as you want, and do -what you please with it within the limits of a criminal code which is -sure to be interpreted by a proprietary-class judge in your favor. If -you have to give your footman a better allowance than your wretched -hewer of match wood, it is for the same reason that you have to give -your hunter beans and a clean stall instead of chopped straw and a -sty.[9] - - -CAPITALISM. - -At this stage the acquisition of labor becomes a mere question of -provender. If a railway is required, all that is necessary is to -provide subsistence for a sufficient number of laborers to construct -it. If, for example, the railway requires the labor of a thousand -men for five years, the cost to the proprietors of the site is the -subsistence of a thousand men for five years. This subsistence is -technically called capital. It is provided for by the proprietors not -consuming the whole excess over wages of the produce of the labor of -their other wage workers, but setting aside enough for the subsistence -of the railway makers. In this way capital can claim to be the result -of saving, or, as one ingenious apologist neatly put it, the reward of -abstinence, a gleam of humor which still enlivens treatises on capital. -The savers, it need hardly be said, are those who have more money than -they want to spend: the abstainers are those who have less. At the -end of the five years, the completed railway is the property of the -capitalists; and the railway makers fall back into the labor market -as helpless as they were before. Sometimes the proprietors call the -completed railway their capital; but, strictly, this is only a figure -of speech. Capital is simply spare subsistence. Its market value, -indicated by the current rate of interest, falls with the increase of -population, whereas the market value of established stock rises with -it.[10] If Mr. Goschen, encouraged by his success in reducing Consols, -were to ask the proprietors of the London and North Western Railway to -accept as full compensation for their complete expropriation capital -just sufficient to make the railway anew, their amazement at his -audacity would at once make him feel the difference between a railway -and capital. Colloquially, one property with a farm on it is said to -be land yielding rent; whilst another, with a railway on it, is called -capital yielding interest. But economically there is no distinction -between them when they once become sources of revenue. This would -be quite clearly seen if costly enterprises like railways could be -undertaken by a single landlord on his own land out of his own surplus -wealth. It is the necessity of combining a number of possessors of -surplus wealth, and devising a financial machinery for apportioning -their shares in the produce to their shares in the capital contributed, -that modifies the terminology and external aspect of the exploitation. -But the modification is not an alteration: shareholder and landlord -live alike on the produce extracted from their property by the labor of -the proletariat. - - -“OVERPOPULATION.” - -The introduction of the capitalistic system is a sign that the -exploitation of the laborer toiling for a bare subsistence wage has -become one of the chief arts of life among the holders of tenant -rights. It also produces a delusive promise of endless employment -which blinds the proletariat to those disastrous consequences of rapid -multiplication which are obvious to the small cultivator and peasant -proprietor. But indeed the more you degrade the workers, robbing them -of all artistic enjoyment, and all chance of respect and admiration -from their fellows, the more you throw them back, reckless, on the -one pleasure and the one human tie left to them--the gratification of -their instinct for producing fresh supplies of men. You will applaud -this instinct as divine until at last the excessive supply becomes -a nuisance: there comes a plague of men; and you suddenly discover -that the instinct is diabolic, and set up a cry of “overpopulation.” -But your slaves are beyond caring for your cries; they breed like -rabbits; and their poverty breeds filth, ugliness, dishonesty, disease, -obscenity, drunkenness, and murder. In the midst of the riches which -their labor piles up for you, their misery rises up too and stifles -you. You withdraw in disgust to the other end of the town from them; -you appoint special carriages on your railways and special seats in -your churches and theatres for them; you set your life apart from -theirs by every class barrier you can devise; and yet they swarm about -you still: your face gets stamped with your habitual loathing and -suspicion of them; your ears get so filled with the language of the -vilest of them that you break into it when you lose your self-control; -they poison your life as remorselessly as you have sacrificed theirs -heartlessly. You begin to believe intensely in the devil. Then comes -the terror of their revolting; the drilling and arming of bodies of -them to keep down the rest; the prison, the hospital, paroxysms of -frantic coercion, followed by paroxysms of frantic charity. And in the -meantime, the population continues to increase! - - -“ILLTH.” - -It is sometimes said that during this grotesquely hideous march of -civilization from bad to worse, wealth is increasing side by side -with misery. Such a thing is eternally impossible; wealth is steadily -decreasing with the spread of poverty. But riches are increasing, which -is quite another thing. The total of the exchange values produced in -the country annually is mounting perhaps by leaps and bounds. But the -accumulation of riches, and consequently of an excessive purchasing -power, in the hands of a class, soon satiates that class with socially -useful wealth, and sets them offering a price for luxuries. The moment -a price is to be had for a luxury, it acquires exchange value, and -labor is employed to produce it. A New York lady, for instance, having -a nature of exquisite sensibility, orders an elegant rosewood and -silver coffin, upholstered in pink satin, for her dead dog. It is made; -and meanwhile a live child is prowling barefooted and hunger-stunted in -the frozen gutter outside. The exchange-value of the coffin is counted -as part of the national wealth; but a nation which cannot afford food -and clothing for its children cannot be allowed to pass as wealthy -because it has provided a pretty coffin for a dead dog. Exchange value -itself, in fact, has become bedevilled like everything else, and -represents, no longer utility, but the cravings of lust, folly, vanity, -gluttony, and madness, technically described by genteel economists as -“effective demand.” Luxuries are not social wealth; the machinery for -producing them is not social wealth; labor skilled only to manufacture -them is not socially useful labor; the men, women, and children who -make a living by producing them are no more self-supporting than -the idle rich for whose amusement they are kept at work. It is the -habit of counting as wealth the exchange values involved in these -transactions that makes us fancy that the poor are starving in the -midst of plenty. They are starving in the midst of plenty of jewels, -velvets, laces, equipages, and race-horses; but not in the midst of -plenty of food. In the things that are wanted for the welfare of the -people we are abjectly poor; and England’s social policy to-day may be -likened to the domestic policy of those adventuresses who leave their -children half-clothed and half-fed in order to keep a carriage and -deal with a fashionable dressmaker. But it is quite true that whilst -wealth and welfare are decreasing, productive power is increasing; and -nothing but the perversion of this power to the production of socially -useless commodities prevents the apparent wealth from becoming real. -The purchasing power that commands luxuries in the hands of the rich, -would command true wealth in the hands of all. Yet private property -must still heap the purchasing power upon the few rich and withdraw it -from the many poor. So that, in the end, the subject of the one boast -that private property can make--the great accumulation of so-called -“wealth” which it points so proudly to as the result of its power to -scourge men and women daily to prolonged and intense toil, turns out -to be a simulacrum. With all its energy, its Smilesian “self-help,” -its merchant-princely enterprise, its ferocious sweating and -slave-driving, its prodigality of blood, sweat and tears, what has it -heaped up, over and above the pittance of its slaves? Only a monstrous -pile of frippery, some tainted class literature and class art, and not -a little poison and mischief. - - * * * * * - -This, then, is the economic analysis which convicts Private Property of -being unjust even from the beginning, and utterly impossible as a final -solution of even the individualist aspect of the problem of adjusting -the share of the worker in the distribution of wealth to the labor -incurred by him in its production. All attempts yet made to construct -true societies upon it have failed; the nearest things to societies so -achieved have been civilizations, which have rotted into centres of -vice and luxury, and eventually been swept away by uncivilized races. -That our own civilization is already in an advanced stage of rottenness -may be taken as statistically proved. That further decay instead of -improvement must ensue if the institution of private property be -maintained, is economically certain. Fortunately, private property -in its integrity is not now practicable. Although the safety-valve -of emigration has been furiously at work during this century, yet -the pressure of population has forced us to begin the restitution -to the people of the sums taken from them for the ground landlords, -holders of tenant right, and capitalists, by the imposition of an -income tax, and by compelling them to establish out of their revenues -a national system of education, besides imposing restrictions--as yet -only of the forcible-feeble sort--on their terrible power of abusing -the wage contract. These, however, are dealt with by Mr. Sidney Webb -in the historic essay which follows. I should not touch upon them at -all, were it not that experience has lately convinced all economists -that no exercise in abstract economics, however closely deduced, is -to be trusted unless it can be experimentally verified by tracing -its expression in history. It is true that the process which I have -presented as a direct development of private property between free -exchangers had to work itself out in the Old World indirectly and -tortuously through a struggle with political and religious institutions -and survivals quite antagonistic to it. It is true that cultivation -did not begin in Western Europe with the solitary emigrant pre-empting -his private property, but with the tribal communes in which arose -subsequently the assertion of the right of the individual to private -judgment and private action against the tyranny of primitive society. -It is true that cultivation has not proceeded by logical steps from -good land to less good; from less good to bad; and from bad to worse: -the exploration of new countries and new regions, and the discovery of -new uses for old products, has often made the margin of cultivation -more fruitful than the centre, and, for the moment (whilst the centre -was shifting to the margin), turned the whole movement of rent and -wages directly counter to the economic theory. Nor is it true that, -taking the world as one country, cultivation has yet spread from the -snowline to the water’s edge. There is free land still for the poorest -East End match-box maker if she could get there, reclaim the wilderness -there, speak the language there, stand the climate there, and be -fed, clothed, and housed there whilst she cleared her farm; learned -how to cultivate it; and waited for the harvest. Economists have -been ingenious enough to prove that this alternative really secures -her independence; but I shall not waste time in dealing with that. -Practically, if there is no free land in England, the economic analysis -holds good of England, in spite of Siberia, Central Africa, and the -Wild West. Again, it is not immediately true that men are governed in -production solely by a determination to realize the maximum of exchange -value. The impulse to production often takes specific direction in the -first instance; and a man will insist on producing pictures or plays -although he might gain more money by producing boots or bonnets. But, -his specific impulse once gratified, he will make as much money as he -can. He will sell his picture or play for a hundred pounds rather than -for fifty. In short, though there is no such person as the celebrated -“economic man,” man being wilful rather than rational, yet when the -wilful man has had his way he will take what else he can get; and so -he always does appear, finally if not primarily, as the economic man. -On the whole, history, even in the Old World, goes the way traced -by the economist. In the New World the correspondence is exact. The -United States and the Colonies have been peopled by fugitives from -the full-blown individualism of Western Europe, pre-empting private -property precisely as assumed in this investigation of the conditions -of cultivation. The economic relations of these cultivators have not -since put on any of the old political disguises. Yet among them, in -confirmation of the validity of our analysis, we see all the evils of -our old civilizations growing up; and though with them the end is not -yet, still it is from them to us that the great recent revival of the -cry for nationalization of the land has come, articulated by a man who -had seen the whole tragedy of private property hurried through its acts -with unprecedented speed in the mushroom cities of America. - -On Socialism the analysis of the economic action of Individualism -bears as a discovery, in the private appropriation of land, of the -source of those unjust privileges against which Socialism is aimed. -It is practically a demonstration that public property in land is the -basic economic condition of Socialism. But this does not involve at -present a literal restoration of the land to the people. The land is -at present in the hands of the people: its proprietors are for the -most part absentees. The modern form of private property is simply a -legal claim to take a share of the produce of the national industry -year by year without working for it. It refers to no special part -or form of that produce; and in process of consumption its revenue -cannot be distinguished from earnings, so that the majority of -persons, accustomed to call the commodities which form the income -of the proprietor his private property, and seeing no difference -between them and the commodities which form the income of a worker, -extend the term private property to the worker’s subsistence also, -and can only conceive an attack on private property as an attempt to -empower everybody to rob everybody else all round. But the income of a -private proprietor can be distinguished by the fact that he obtains it -unconditionally and gratuitously by private right against the public -weal, which is incompatible with the existence of consumers who do not -produce. Socialism involves discontinuance of the payment of these -incomes, and addition of the wealth so saved to incomes derived from -labor. As we have seen, incomes derived from private property consist -partly of economic rent; partly of pensions, also called rent, obtained -by the sub-letting of tenant rights; and partly of a form of rent -called interest, obtained by special adaptations of land to production -by the application of capital: all these being finally paid out of the -difference between the produce of the worker’s labor and the price -of that labor sold in the open market for wages, salary, fees, or -profits.[11] The whole, except economic rent, can be added directly to -the incomes of the workers by simply discontinuing its exaction from -them. Economic rent, arising as it does from variations of fertility -or advantages of situation, must always be held as common or social -wealth, and used, as the revenues raised by taxation are now used, for -public purposes, among which Socialism would make national insurance -and the provision of capital matters of the first importance. - -The economic problem of Socialism is thus solved; and the political -question of how the economic solution is to be practically applied -does not come within the scope of this essay. But if we have got -as far as an intellectual conviction that the source of our social -misery is no eternal well-spring of confusion and evil, but only an -artificial system susceptible of almost infinite modification and -readjustment--nay, of practical demolition and substitution at the will -of Man, then a terrible weight will be lifted from the minds of all -except those who are, whether avowedly to themselves or not, clinging -to the present state of things from base motives. We have had in this -century a stern series of lessons on the folly of believing anything -for no better reason than that it is pleasant to believe it. It was -pleasant to look round with a consciousness of possessing a thousand -a year, and say, with Browning’s David, “All’s love; and all’s law.” -It was pleasant to believe that the chance we were too lazy to take in -this world would come back to us in another. It was pleasant to believe -that a benevolent hand was guiding the steps of society; overruling -all evil appearances for good; and making poverty here the earnest of -a great blessedness and reward hereafter. It was pleasant to lose the -sense of worldly inequality in the contemplation of our equality before -God. But utilitarian questioning and scientific answering turned all -this tranquil optimism into the blackest pessimism. Nature was shewn -to us as “red in tooth and claw”: if the guiding hand were indeed -benevolent, then it could not be omnipotent; so that our trust in it -was broken: if it were omnipotent, it could not be benevolent; so that -our love of it turned to fear and hatred. We had never admitted that -the other world, which was to compensate for the sorrows of this, was -open to horses and apes (though we had not on that account been any -the more merciful to our horses); and now came Science to shew us the -corner of the pointed ear of the horse on our own heads, and present -the ape to us as our blood relation. No proof came of the existence of -that other world and that benevolent power to which we had left the -remedy of the atrocious wrongs of the poor; proof after proof came -that what we called Nature knew and cared no more about our pains -and pleasures than we know or care about the tiny creatures we crush -underfoot as we walk through the fields. Instead of at once perceiving -that this meant no more than that Nature was unmoral and indifferent, -we relapsed into a gross form of devil worship, and conceived Nature -as a remorselessly malignant power. This was no better than the old -optimism, and infinitely gloomier. It kept our eyes still shut to the -truth that there is no cruelty and selfishness outside Man himself; -and that his own active benevolence can combat and vanquish both. When -the Socialist came forward as a meliorist on these lines, the old -school of political economists, who could see no alternative to private -property, put forward in proof of the powerlessness of benevolent -action to arrest the deadly automatic production of poverty by the -increase of population, the very analysis I have just presented. Their -conclusions exactly fitted in with the new ideas. It was Nature at -it again--the struggle for existence--the remorseless extirpation of -the weak--the survival of the fittest--in short, natural selection -at work. Socialism seemed too good to be true: it was passed by as -merely the old optimism foolishly running its head against the stone -wall of modern science. But Socialism now challenges individualism, -scepticism, pessimism, worship of Nature personified as a devil, -on their own ground of science. The science of the production and -distribution of wealth is Political Economy. Socialism appeals to -that science, and, turning on Individualism its own guns, routs it -in incurable disaster. Henceforth the bitter cynic who still finds -the world an eternal and unimprovable doghole, with the placid person -of means who repeats the familiar misquotation, “The poor ye shall -have always with you,” lose their usurped place among the cultured, -and pass over to the ranks of the ignorant, the shallow, and the -superstitious. As for the rest of us, since we were taught to revere -proprietary respectability in our unfortunate childhood, and since we -found our childish hearts so hard and unregenerate that they secretly -hated and rebelled against respectability in spite of that teaching, -it is impossible to express the relief with which we discover that -our hearts were all along right, and that the current respectability -of to-day is nothing but a huge inversion of righteous and scientific -social order weltering in dishonesty, uselessness, selfishness, wanton -misery, and idiotic waste of magnificent opportunities for noble and -happy living. It was terrible to feel this, and yet to fear that it -could not be helped--that the poor must starve and make you ashamed -of your dinner--that they must shiver and make you ashamed of your -warm overcoat. It is to economic science--once the Dismal, now the -Hopeful--that we are indebted for the discovery that though the evil -is enormously worse than we knew, yet it is not eternal--not even very -long lived, if we only bestir ourselves to make an end of it. - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[2] “Principles of Political Economy,” Vol. I, Index to chap. xvi -(1865). - -[3] “Manual of Political Economy,” Book II, chap. iii, p. 116 (1876). - -[4] “Economics of Industry,” Book II, chap. iii, sec. 3, p. 84 (1879). - -[5] “Principles of Political Economy,” Book II, chap. vii, p. 301 -(1883). - -[6] “Brief Text-book of Political Economy,” chap. ii, sec. 216, p. 173 -(1885). - -[7] “Principles of Political Economy and Taxation,” chap. ii. p. 34 -(1817). - -[8] Profit is here used colloquially to denote the excess of the value -of an article over its cost. - -[9] When one of the conditions of earning a wage is the keeping up -of a certain state, subsistence wages may reach a figure to which -the term seems ludicrously inappropriate. For example, a fashionable -physician in London cannot save out of £1,000 a year; and the post -of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland can only be filled by a man who brings -considerable private means to the aid of his official salary of £20,000. - -[10] The current rate must, under present conditions, eventually fall -to zero, and even become “negative.” By that time shares which now -bring in a dividend of 100 per cent, may very possibly bring in 200 -or more. Yet the fall of the rate has been mistaken for a tendency of -interest to disappear. It really indicates a tendency of interest to -increase. - -[11] This excess of the product of labor over its price is treated as -a single category with impressive effect by Karl Marx, who called it -“surplus value” (_mehrwerth_). - - - - -HISTORIC. - -BY SIDNEY WEBB. - - -THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC IDEAL. - -In discussing the historic groundwork of Socialism, it is worth -remembering that no special claim is made for Socialism in the -assertion that it possesses a basis in history. Just as every human -being has an ancestry, unknown to him though it may be; so every idea, -every incident, every movement has in the past its own long chain of -causes, without which it could not have been. Formerly we were glad to -let the dead bury their dead: nowadays we turn lovingly to the records, -whether of persons or things; and we busy ourselves willingly among -origins, even without conscious utilitarian end. We are no longer -proud of having ancestors, since every one has them; but we are more -than ever interested in our ancestors, now that we find in them the -fragments which compose our very selves. The historic ancestry of the -English social organization during the present century stands witness -to the irresistible momentum of the ideas which Socialism denotes. The -record of the century in English social history begins with the trial -and hopeless failure of an almost complete industrial individualism, -in which, however, unrestrained private ownership of land and capital -was accompanied by subjection to a political oligarchy. So little -element of permanence was there in this individualistic order that, -with the progress of political emancipation, private ownership of the -means of production has been, in one direction or another, successively -regulated, limited and superseded, until it may now fairly be claimed -that the Socialist philosophy of to-day is but the conscious and -explicit assertion of principles of social organization which have been -already in great part unconsciously adopted. The economic history -of the century is an almost continuous record of the progress of -Socialism.[12] - -Socialism, too, has in the record of its internal development a history -of its own. Down to the present generation, the aspirant after social -regeneration naturally vindicated the practicability of his ideas by -offering an elaborate plan with specifications of a new social order -from which all contemporary evils were eliminated. Just as Plato had -his Republic and Sir Thomas More his Utopia, so Babœuf had his Charter -of Equality, Cabet his Icaria, St. Simon his Industrial System, and -Fourier his ideal Phalanstery. Robert Owen spent a fortune in pressing -upon an unbelieving generation his New Moral World; and even Auguste -Comte, superior as he was to many of the weaknesses of his time, must -needs add a detailed Polity to his Philosophy of Positivism. - -The leading feature of all these proposals was what may be called their -statical character. The ideal society was represented as in perfectly -balanced equilibrium, without need or possibility of future organic -alteration. Since their day we have learned that social reconstruction -must not be gone at in this fashion. Owing mainly to the efforts of -Comte, Darwin and Herbert Spencer, we can no longer think of the -ideal society as an unchanging state. The social ideal, from being -static, has become dynamic. The necessity of the constant growth and -development of the social organism has become axiomatic. No philosopher -now looks for anything but the gradual evolution of the new order -from the old, without breach of continuity or abrupt change of the -entire social tissue at any point during the process. The new becomes -itself old, often before it is consciously recognized as new; and -history shews us no example of the sudden substitutions of Utopian and -revolutionary romance. - -Though Socialists have learnt this lesson[13] better than most of -their opponents, the common criticism of Socialism has not yet noted -the change, and still deals mainly with the obsolete Utopias of the -pre-evolutionary age. Parodies of the domestic details of an imaginary -Phalanstery, and homilies on the failure of Brook Farm or Icaria, may -be passed over as belated and irrelevant now that Socialists are only -advocating the conscious adoption of a principle of social organization -which the world has already found to be the inevitable outcome of -Democracy and the Industrial Revolution. For Socialism is by this time -a wave surging throughout all Europe; and for want of a grasp of the -series of apparently unconnected events by which and with which it has -been for two generations rapidly coming upon us--for want, in short, -of knowledge of its intellectual history, we in England to-day see -our political leaders in a general attitude of astonishment at the -changing face of current politics; both great parties drifting vaguely -before a nameless undercurrent which they fail utterly to recognize or -understand.[14] With some dim impression that Socialism is one of the -Utopian dreams they remember to have heard comfortably disposed of in -their academic youth as the impossible ideal of Humanity-intoxicated -Frenchmen, they go their ways through the nineteenth century as a -countryman blunders through Cheapside. One or two are history fanciers, -learned in curious details of the past: the present eludes these no -less than the others. They are so near to the individual events that -they are blind to the onward sweep of the column. They cannot see the -forest for the trees. - -History not only gives the clue to the significance of contemporary -events; it also enables us to understand those who have not yet found -that clue. We learn to class men and ideas in a kind of geological -order in time. The Comte de Paris gives us excellent proofs that -in absolute monarchy lies the only safety of social order. He is -a survival: the type flourished in the sixteenth century; and the -splendid fossils of that age can be studied in any historic museum. -Lord Bramwell will give cogent reasons for the belief that absolute -freedom of contract, subject to the trifling exception of a drastic -criminal law, will ensure a perfect State. His lordship is a survival -from a nearer epoch: about 1840 this was as far as social science had -got; and there are still persons who have learnt nothing of later -date. When I see the Hipparion at South Kensington I do not take his -unfamiliar points to be those of a horse of a superior kind: I know -that he is an obsolete and superseded pattern, from which the horse has -developed. Historic fossils are more dangerous; for they are left at -large, and are not even excluded from Downing Street or Westminster. -But against the stream of tendencies they are ultimately powerless. -Though they sometimes appear victorious, each successive struggle takes -place further down the current which they believe themselves to be -resisting. - -The main stream which has borne European society towards Socialism -during the past one hundred years is the irresistible progress of -Democracy. De Tocqueville drove and hammered this truth into the -reluctant ears of the Old World two generations ago; and we have all -pretended to carry it about as part of our mental furniture ever -since. But like most epigrammatic commonplaces, it is not generally -realized; and De Tocqueville’s book has, in due course, become a -classic which every one quotes and nobody reads. The progress of -Democracy is, in fact, often imagined, as by Sir Henry Maine, to -be merely the substitution of one kind of political machinery for -another; and there are many political Democrats to-day who cannot -understand why social or economic matters should be mixed up with -politics at all. It was not for this that they broke the power of -the aristocracy: they were touched not so much with love of the many -as with hatred of the few;[15] and, as has been acutely said--though -usually by foolish persons--they are Radicals merely because they are -not themselves lords. But it will not long be possible for any man to -persist in believing that the political organization of society can be -completely altered without corresponding changes in economic and social -relations. De Tocqueville expressly pointed out that the progress -of Democracy meant nothing less than a complete dissolution of the -nexus by which society was held together under the old _régime_. This -dissolution is followed by a period of anarchic spiritual isolation -of the individual from his fellows, and to that extent by a general -denial of the very idea of society. But man is a social animal; and -after more or less interval there necessarily comes into existence a -new nexus, differing so entirely from the old-fashioned organization -that the historic fossil goes about denying that it is a nexus at all, -or that any new nexus is possible or desirable. To him, mostly through -lack of economics, the progress of Democracy is nothing more than the -destruction of old political privileges; and, naturally enough, few can -see any beauty in mere dissolution and destruction. Those few are the -purely political Radicals abhorred of Comte and Carlyle: they are in -social matters the empiricist survivals from a pre-scientific age. - -The mere Utopians, on the other hand, who wove the baseless fabric of -their visions of reconstructed society on their own private looms, -equally failed, as a rule, to comprehend the problem of the age. They -were, in imagination, resuscitated Joseph the Seconds, benevolent -despots who would have poured the old world, had it only been fluid, -into their new moulds. Against their crude plans the Statesman, the -Radical, and the Political Economist were united; for they took no -account of the blind social forces which they could not control, -and which went on inexorably working out social salvation in ways -unsuspected by the Utopian. - -In the present Socialist movement these two streams are united: -advocates of social reconstruction have learnt the lesson of Democracy, -and know that it is through the slow and gradual turning of the popular -mind to new principles that social reorganization bit by bit comes. -All students of society who are abreast of their time, Socialists -as well as Individualists, realize that important organic changes -can only be (1) democratic, and thus acceptable to a majority of the -people, and prepared for in the minds of all; (2) gradual, and thus -causing no dislocation, however rapid may be the rate of progress; -(3) not regarded as immoral by the mass of the people, and thus not -subjectively demoralizing to them; and (4) in this country at any rate, -constitutional and peaceful. Socialists may therefore be quite at one -with Radicals in their political methods. Radicals, on the other hand, -are perforce realizing that mere political levelling is insufficient to -save a State from anarchy and despair. Both sections have been driven -to recognize that the root of the difficulty is economic; and there is -every day a wider consensus that the inevitable outcome of Democracy is -the control by the people themselves, not only of their own political -organization, but, through that also, of the main instruments of -wealth production; the gradual substitution of organized co-operation -for the anarchy of the competitive struggle; and the consequent -recovery, in the only possible way, of what John Stuart Mill calls “the -enormous share which the possessors of the instruments of industry are -able to take from the produce.”[16] The economic side of the democratic -ideal is, in fact, Socialism itself. - - -THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE OLD SYNTHESIS. - -At the middle of the last century Western Europe was still organized on -a system of which the basis was virtually a surviving feudalism. The -nexus between man and man was essentially a relation of superiority and -inferiority. Social power still rested either with the monarch, or with -the owners of large landed estates. Some inroads had already been made -in the perfect symmetry of the organization, notably by the growth of -towns, and the rise of the still comparatively small trading class; but -the bulk of the population was arranged in an hierarchical series of -classes, linked to one another by the bond of Power. - -We are apt to think of England as differing in this respect from -Continental Europe, and to imagine that our popular freedom was won -in 1688, if not in 1648, or even as far back as Magna Charta itself. -But as regards the people at large, this was, in the main, merely a -difference in political form. In England the aristocratic oligarchy had -prevailed over the monarch; in France the King had defeated the Fronde. -For the mass of the people in either country there was nothing but -obedience. - -Even in England the whole political administration was divided between -the king and the great families; and not one person in 500 possessed -so much as a vote. As lately as 1831 one hundred and fifty persons -returned a majority of the House of Commons (Molesworth, “History of -the Reform Bill,” p. 347). The Church, once a universal democratic -organization of international fraternity, had become a mere _appanage_ -of the landed gentry. The administration of justice and of the -executive government was entirely in their hands, while Parliament was -filled with their leaders or nominees. No avenue of advancement existed -for even exceptionally gifted sons of the people; and the masses found -themselves born into a position of lifelong dependence upon a class of -superior birth. - -The economic organization was of a similar character. Two-thirds of -the population tilled the soil, and dwelt in lonely hamlets scattered -about the still sparsely inhabited country. Though possessing the -remnants of ancient communal rights, they were practically dependent on -the farmers of the parish, who fixed their wages by a constant tacit -conspiracy.[17] The farmers themselves were the obedient serfs of the -large proprietors, to whom they paid a customary rent. Though nominally -free to move, both farmers and laborers were practically fettered to -the manor by their ignorance and their poverty;[18] and though the lord -had lost the criminal jurisdiction of his manorial courts, his powers -as Justice of the Peace formed a full equivalent. His unrestrained -ownership of the land enabled him to take for himself as rent the -whole advantage of all but the very worst of the soils in use; and -the lingering manorial rights gave him toll even from that worst. -Throughout the countryside his word was law and his power irresistible. -It was a world whose nexus was might, economic and political, tempered -only by custom and lack of stimulus to change. The poor were not -necessarily worse off in material matters than they are now; the -agricultural laborer, indeed, was apparently better off in 1750 than -at any other time between 1450 and 1850.[19] But it was a world still -mainly mediæval in political, in economic, and in social relations; -a world of status and of permanent social inequalities not differing -essentially from the feudalism of the past. - -The system had, however, already begun to decay. The rise of the towns -by the growth of trade gradually created new centres of independence -and new classes who broke the bonds of innate status. The intrusion -of the moneyed city classes and the Indian “Nabobs” into the rural -districts tended to destroy the feudal idea. The growth of new sects -in religion made fresh points of individual resistance, degenerating -often into spiritual anarchy or unsocial quietism. The spread of -learning built up a small but active disintegrating force of those -who had detected the shams around them. But the real Perseus who was -to free the people from their political bondage was Newcomen or Watt, -Hargreaves or Crompton, Kay or Arkwright, whichever may be considered -to have contributed the main stroke towards the Industrial Revolution -of the last century.[20] From the inventions of these men came the -machine industry with its innumerable secondary results--the Factory -System and the upspringing of the Northern and Midland industrial -towns,[21] and the evangelization of the waste places of the earth -by the sale of grey shirtings. Throughout one-third of England the -manor gave way to the mill or the mine; and the feudal lord had to -slacken his hold of political and social power in order to give full -play to the change which enriched him with boundless rents and mining -royalties. And so it happened in England that the final collapse of -mediævalism came, not by the Great Rebellion nor by the Whig Treason of -1688, nor yet by the rule of the Great Commoner, but by the Industrial -Revolution of the eighteenth century, which created the England of -to-day. Within a couple of generations the squire faded away before -the mill-owner; and feudalism lingered thenceforth only in the rapidly -diminishing rural districts, and in the empty remnants of ceremonial -organization. The mediæval arrangement, in fact, could not survive the -fall of the cottage industry; and it is, fundamentally, the use of new -motors which has been for a generation destroying the individualist -conception of property. The landlord and the capitalist are both -finding that the steam-engine is a Frankenstein which they had better -not have raised; for with it comes inevitably urban Democracy, the -study of Political Economy, and Socialism. - -The event which brought to a head the influences making for political -change was the French Revolution. The fall of the Bastille was hailed -by all who had been touched by the new ideas. “How much the greatest -event it is that ever happened in the world! and how much the best!” -wrote Charles James Fox.[22] It shewed, or seemed to shew, to men that -a genuine social reconstruction was not only desirable, but possible. -The National Assembly, respectable old oligarchy as it was, pointed the -way to legislative fields not even yet completely worked out. - -When the rulers of England perceived that in France at least Humpty -Dumpty was actually down, the effect at first was to tighten the -existing organization. The mildest agitation was put down with a -cruelly strong hand. The Whig party in the House of Commons sank to -half-a-dozen members. Prices were kept up and wages down, while the -heaviest possible load of taxation was imposed on the suffering people. -Then came the Peace, and Castlereagh’s “White Terror,” culminating in -the “massacre of Peterloo” (1819) and Lord Sidmouth’s infamous “Six -Acts.” But the old order was doomed. The suicide of Castlereagh was -not only the end of the man, but also the sign of the collapse of the -system. With a series of political wrenches there came the Repeal of -the Test and Corporation Acts (1828), Catholic Emancipation (1829), the -beginnings of legal and administrative reform, and finally the great -Reform Bill of 1832, by which the reign of the middle class superseded -aristocratic rule. But the people were no more enfranchised than they -had been before. The Factory had beaten the Manor for the benefit, not -of the factory hand, but of the millowner. Democracy was at the gates; -but it was still on the wrong side of them. Its entry, however, was -only a matter of time. Since 1832 English political history is the -record of the reluctant enfranchisement of one class after another, by -mere force of the tendencies of the age. None of these enfranchised -classes has ever sincerely desired to admit new voters to share the -privileges and submerge the power which it had won; but each political -party in turn has been driven to “shoot Niagara” in order to compete -with its opponents. The Whig Bill of 1832 enfranchised the middle-class -for Parliament: the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 gave them the -control of the provincial towns. After a generation of agitation, -it was ultimately the Tory party which gave the townspeople in 1867 -Household Suffrage. Eleven years later a Conservative majority passed -Sir Charles Dilke’s Act enfranchising the tenement occupier (1878). -In 1885 the Liberals, intending permanently to ruin their opponents, -gave the vote to the agricultural laborer; and last year (1888) it was -the Tories, not to be outdone, who gave him the control of the local -administration of the counties, and placed the government of London in -the hands of a popularly elected council. Neither party can claim much -credit for its reform bills, extorted as they have been, not by belief -in Democracy, but by fear of the opposing faction. Even now the citizen -is tricked out of his vote by every possible legal and administrative -technicality; so that more than one-third of our adult men are -unenfranchised,[23] together with the whole of the other sex. Neither -the Conservative party nor the self-styled “Party of the Masses” gives -proof of any real desire to give the vote to this not inconsiderable -remnant; but both sides pay lip-homage to Democracy; and everyone knows -that it is merely a waiting race between them as to which shall be -driven to take the next step. The virtual completion of the political -revolution is already in sight; and no more striking testimony can be -given of the momentum of the new ideas which the Fall of the Bastille -effectually spread over the world than this democratic triumph in -England, within less than a century, over the political mediævalism of -ten centuries growth. - -The full significance of this triumph is as yet unsuspected by the -ordinary politician. The industrial evolution has left the stranger -a landless stranger in his own country. The political evolution is -rapidly making him its ruler. Samson is feeling for his grip on the -pillars. - - -THE PERIOD OF ANARCHY. - -The result of the industrial revolution, with its dissolution of -mediævalism amid an impetuous reaction against the bureaucratic tyranny -of the past, was to leave all the new elements of society in a state -of unrestrained license. Individual liberty, in the sense of freedom to -privately appropriate the means of production, reached its maximum at -the commencement of the century. No sentimental regulations hindered -the free employment of land and capital to the greatest possible -pecuniary gain of the proprietors, however many lives of men, women -and children were used up in the process. Ignorant or unreflecting -capitalists still speak of that terrible time with exultation. “It was -not five per cent or ten per cent,” says one, “but thousands per cent -that made the fortunes of Lancashire.” - -Mr. Herbert Spencer and those who agree in his worship of -Individualism[24] apparently desire to bring back the legal position -which made possible the “white slavery” of which the “sins of -legislators” have deprived us; but no serious attempt has ever been -made to get repealed any one of the Factory Acts. Women working half -naked in the coal mines; young children dragging trucks all day in the -foul atmosphere of the underground galleries; infants bound to the -loom for fifteen hours in the heated air of the cotton mill, and kept -awake only by the onlooker’s lash; hours of labor for all, young and -old, limited only by the utmost capabilities of physical endurance; -complete absence of the sanitary provisions necessary to a rapidly -growing population: these and other nameless iniquities will be found -recorded as the results of freedom of contract and complete _laisser -faire_ in the impartial pages of successive blue-book reports.[25] But -the Liberal mill-owners of the day, aided by some of the political -economists, stubbornly resisted every attempt to interfere with their -freedom to use “their” capital and “their” hands as they found most -profitable, and (like their successors to-day) predicted of each -restriction as it arrived that it must inevitably destroy the export -trade and deprive them of all profit whatsoever. - -But this “acute outbreak of individualism, unchecked by the old -restraints, and invested with almost a religious sanction by a certain -soulless school of writers,”[26] was inevitable, after the economic -blundering of governments in the eighteenth century. Prior to the -scientific investigation of economic laws, men had naturally interfered -in social arrangements with very unsatisfactory results. A specially -extravagant or a specially thrifty king debased the currency, and then -was surprised to find that in spite of stringent prohibitions prices -went up and all good money fled the country. Wise statesmen, to keep -up wages, encouraged the woollen manufactures of England by ruining -those of Ireland, and were then astonished to find English wages cut -by Irish pauper immigration. Benevolent parliaments attempted to raise -the worker’s income by poor law allowances, and then found that they -had lowered it. Christian kings eliminated half the skilled artisans -from their kingdoms, and then found that they had ruined the rest by -disabling industry. Government inspectors ordered how the cloth should -be woven, what patterns should be made, and how broad the piece should -be, until the manufacturers in despair cried out merely to be let alone. - -When the early economists realized how radically wrong had been even -the well-meant attempts to regulate economic relations by legislation, -and how generally these attempts multiplied private monopolies, they -leaned in their deductions heavily towards complete individual liberty. -The administration of a populous state is such a very difficult -matter, and when done on false principles is so certain to be badly -done, that it was natural to advocate rather no administration at all -than the interference of ignorant and interested bunglers. Nature, -glorified by the worship of a famous school of French philosophers -and English poets, and as yet unsuspected of the countless crimes of -“the struggle for existence,” appeared at least more trustworthy than -Castlereagh. Real Democratic administration seemed, in the time of -the “White Terror,” and even under the milder Whig hypocrisy which -succeeded it, hopelessly remote. The best thing to work and fight for -was, apparently, the reduction to impotence and neutrality of all the -“Powers that Be.” Their influence being for the moment hostile to the -people, it behooved the people to destroy their influence altogether. -And so grew up the doctrine of what Professor Huxley has since called -“Administrative Nihilism.” It was the apotheosis of _Laisser Faire, -Laisser Aller_. - -Though the economists have since had to bear all the blame for what -nearly everyone now perceives to have been an economic and social -mistake, neither Hume nor Adam Smith caught the _laisser faire_ fever -to as great an extent as their French contemporaries and imitators. The -English industrial position was not the same as that of France. The -“mercantile system” by which, as by “Fair Trade” to-day, foreign trade -was to be regulated and encouraged according as it tended to cause -the stock of goods, especially coin and bullion, to increase in the -country, was the same on both sides of the Channel. But our political -revolution had already been partly accomplished; and the more obvious -shackles of feudalism had been long since struck off. No Englishman was -compelled to grind his corn at the mill of the lord of the manor;[27] -to give up unpaid days to plough the lord’s field and cart the lord’s -hay; or to spend his nights in beating the waters of the lord’s marsh -so that the croaking of the frogs might not disturb the lord’s repose. -Our labor dues had long before been commuted for money payments; -and these had become light owing to the change in currency values. -Our apprenticeship laws and guild regulations were becoming rapidly -inoperative. No vexatious excise or gabelle hampered our manufactures. - -Tyranny there was, enough and to spare, and economic spoliation; but -they did not take the form of personal interferences and indignities. -The non-noble Frenchman was bond, and he knew it; the middle-class -Englishman to a great extent thought himself free: his economic -servitude, though it galled him, was not clearly distinguishable -from the niggardliness of nature. The landlord in France was an -obvious tyrant: here he certainly caused (by the abstraction of the -economic rent) an artificial barrenness of the workers’ labor; but -the barrenness was so old and had been so constant that it was not -seen to be artificial, and was not resented as such. No peasant rebels -against the blight. Accordingly, we have, since 1381, never had in -England a burning of the _chateaux_; and, accordingly, too, Adam Smith -is no complete champion of _laisser faire_, though his great work -was effective mainly in sweeping away foreign trade restrictions and -regulations, and in giving viability to labor by establishing the -laborer’s geographical freedom to move and to enter into the wage -contract when and where he best could. The English economists, stopping -illogically short of the complete freedom preached by Rousseau and -Godwin and the scientific Anarchists of to-day, advocated just as much -freedom as sufficed to make the fortunes of Lancashire capitalists and -to create the modern proletariat. The Utilitarians are appropriately -coupled with the Political Economists in connexion with this phase of -thought. Although Adam Smith did not belong to their school, almost -the whole work of developing and popularizing the new science was done -by them. It was not until after the Peace--when Bentham and James Mill -were in full vigor, and soon to be reinforced by Austin, Villiers, -John Stuart Mill, Roebuck, Grote, Ricardo, and others--that Political -Economy became a force in England. The motive and enthusiasm for the -new science undoubtedly came from the Utilitarian ethics. If the sole -masters of man were pleasure and pain, the knowledge of the natural -laws expressing the course of social action, and thus regulating -pleasure and pain, became of vital importance. If it is God’s will, as -Paley and Austin asserted, that men should seek for happiness, than -the study of how to obtain economic comfort becomes a sacred duty, -and has ever been so regarded by such rational divines as Malthus, -Chalmers, Maurice, Kingsley, and the young High Church party of to-day. -Christianity and the course of modern thought began to join hands; -and we may see in Bishop Berkeley and Paley the forerunners of such a -development as the Guild of St. Matthew.[28] - -The Utilitarian philosophy, besides aiding in the popularization of -economic science, strongly influenced its early character. The tendency -to _Laisser Faire_ inherited from the country and century of upheaval -and revolt against authority, was fostered by Bentham’s destructive -criticism of all the venerable relics of the past. What is the use -of it, he asked, of every shred of social institution then existing. -What is the net result of its being upon individual happiness? Few -of the laws and customs--little, indeed, of the social organization -of that time could stand this test. England was covered with rotten -survivals from bygone circumstances; the whole administration was an -instrument for class domination and parasite nurture; the progress -of the industrial revolution was rapidly making obsolete all laws, -customs, proverbs, maxims, and nursery tales; and the sudden increase -of population was baffling all expectations and disconcerting all -arrangements. At last it came to be carelessly accepted as the teaching -both of philosophy and of experience that every man must fight for -himself; and “the devil take the hindmost” became the accepted -social creed of what was still believed to be a Christian nation. -Utilitarianism became the Protestantism of Sociology, and “how to make -for self and family the best of both worlds” was assumed to be the -duty, as it certainly was the aim, of every practical Englishman. - - -THE INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL REVOLT, AND ITS POLITICAL OUTCOME. - -The new creed of “Philosophic Radicalism” did not have matters all its -own way. Its doctrines might suit mill-owners and merchant princes, -and all who were able to enjoy the delight of their own strength in -the battle of life. But it was essentially a creed of Murdstones and -Gradgrinds; and the first revolt came from the artistic side. The “nest -of singing birds” at the Lakes would have none of it, though De Quincey -worked out its abstract economics in a manner still unsurpassed. -Coleridge did his best to drown it in German Transcendentalism. Robert -Owen and his following of enthusiastic communistic co-operators -steadfastly held up a loftier ideal. The great mass of the wage earners -never bowed the knee to the principles upon which the current “White -Slavery” was maintained. But the first man who really made a dint in -the individualist shield was Carlyle, who knew how to compel men to -listen to him. Oftener wrong than right in his particular proposals, he -managed to keep alive the faith in nobler ends than making a fortune -in this world and saving one’s soul in the next. Then came Maurice, -Kingsley, Ruskin, and others who dared to impeach the current middle -class cult; until finally, through Comte and John Stuart Mill, Darwin -and Herbert Spencer, the conception of the Social Organism has at last -penetrated to the minds, though not yet to the books, even of our -professors of Political Economy. - -Meanwhile, caring for none of these things, the practical man had been -irresistibly driven in the same direction. In the teeth of the current -Political Economy, and in spite of all the efforts of the millowning -Liberals, England was compelled to put forth her hand to succor and -protect her weaker members. Any number of Local Improvement Acts, -Drainage Acts, Truck Acts, Mines Regulation Acts, Factory Acts, Public -Health Acts, Adulteration Acts, were passing into law.[29] The liberty -of the property owner to oppress the propertyless by the levy of the -economic tribute of rent and interest began to be circumscribed, pared -away, obstructed and forbidden in various directions. Slice after slice -has gradually been cut from the profits of capital, and therefore -from its selling value, by socially beneficial restrictions on its -user’s liberty to do as he liked with it. Slice after slice has been -cut off the incomes from rent and interest by the gradual shifting of -taxation from consumers to persons enjoying incomes above the average -of the kingdom.[30] Step by step the political power and political -organization of the country have been used for industrial ends, until -to-day the largest employer of labor is one of the ministers of the -Crown (the Postmaster-General); and almost every conceivable trade -is, somewhere or other, carried on by parish, municipality, or the -National Government itself without the intervention of any middleman -or capitalist. The theorists who denounce the taking by the community -into its own hands of the organization of its own labor as a thing -economically unclean, repugnant to the sturdy individual independence -of Englishmen, and as yet outside the sphere of practical politics, -seldom have the least suspicion of the extent to which it has already -been carried.[31] Besides our international relations and the army, -navy, police, and the courts of justice, the community now carries on -for itself, in some part or another of these islands, the post-office, -telegraphs, carriage of small commodities, coinage, surveys, the -regulation of the currency and note issue, the provision of weights -and measures, the making, sweeping, lighting, and repairing of -streets, roads, and bridges, life insurance, the grant of annuities, -shipbuilding, stockbroking, banking, farming, and money-lending. It -provides for many thousands of us from birth to burial--midwifery, -nursery, education, board and lodging, vaccination, medical attendance, -medicine, public worship, amusements, and interment. It furnishes -and maintains its own museums, parks, art galleries, libraries, -concert-halls, roads, streets, bridges, markets, slaughter-houses, -fire-engines, lighthouses, pilots, ferries, surf-boats, steam-tugs, -life-boats, cemeteries, public baths, washhouses, pounds, harbors, -piers, wharves, hospitals, dispensaries, gasworks, waterworks, -tramways, telegraph cables, allotments, cow meadows, artizans’ -dwellings, schools, churches, and reading-rooms. It carries on and -publishes its own researches in geology, meteorology, statistics, -zoology, geography, and even theology. In our Colonies the English -Government further allows and encourages the communities to provide for -themselves railways, canals, pawn-broking, theatres, forestry, cinchona -farms, irrigation, leper villages, casinos, bathing establishments, -and immigration, and to deal in ballast, guano, quinine, opium, salt, -and what not. Every one of these functions, with those of the army, -navy, police, and courts of justice, were at one time left to private -enterprise, and were a source of legitimate individual investment -of capital. Step by step the community has absorbed them, wholly or -partially; and the area of private exploitation has been lessened. -Parallel with this progressive nationalization or municipalization of -industry, there has gone on the elimination of the purely personal -element in business management. The older economists doubted whether -anything but banking and insurance could be carried on by joint -stock enterprise: now every conceivable industry, down to baking and -milk-selling, is successfully managed by the salaried officers of large -corporations of idle shareholders. More than one-third of the whole -business of England, measured by the capital employed,[32] is now done -by joint stock companies, whose shareholders could be expropriated by -the community with no more dislocation of the industries carried on -by them than is caused by the daily purchase of shares on the Stock -Exchange. - -Besides its direct supersession of private enterprise, the State now -registers, inspects, and controls nearly all the industrial functions -which it has not yet absorbed. In addition to births, marriages, -deaths, and electors, the State registers all solicitors, barristers, -notaries, patent agents, brokers, newspaper proprietors, playing-card -makers, brewers, bankers, seamen, captains, mates, doctors, cabmen, -hawkers, pawnbrokers, tobacconists, distillers, plate dealers, -game dealers; all insurance companies, friendly societies, endowed -schools and charities, limited companies, lands, houses, deeds, bills -of sale, compositions, ships, arms, dogs, cabs, omnibuses, books, -plays, pamphlets, newspapers, raw cotton movements, trademarks, and -patents; lodging-houses, public-houses, refreshment-houses, theatres, -music-halls, places of worship, elementary schools, and dancing rooms. - -Nor is the registration a mere form. Most of the foregoing are also -inspected and criticised, as are all railways, tramways, ships, -mines, factories, canal-boats, public conveyances, fisheries, -slaughter-houses, dairies, milkshops, bakeries, baby-farms, gasmeters, -schools of anatomy, vivisection laboratories, explosive works, Scotch -herrings, and common lodging-houses. - -The inspection is often detailed and rigidly enforced. The State in -most of the larger industrial operations prescribes the age of the -worker, the hours of work, the amount of air, light, cubic space, heat, -lavatory accommodation, holidays and mealtimes; where, when and how -wages shall be paid; how machinery staircases, lift holes, mines and -quarries are to be fenced and guarded; how and when the plant shall -be cleaned, repaired and worked. Even the kind of package in which -some articles shall be sold is duly prescribed, so that the individual -capitalist shall take no advantage of his position. On every side he is -being registered, inspected, controlled and eventually superseded by -the community; and in the meantime he is compelled to cede for public -purposes an ever-increasing share of his rent and interest. - -Even in the fields still abandoned to private enterprise, its -operations are thus every day more closely limited, in order that the -anarchic competition of private greed, which at the beginning of the -century was set up as the only infallible beneficent principle of -social action, may not utterly destroy the State. All this has been -done by “practical” men, ignorant, that is to say, of any scientific -sociology, believing Socialism to be the most foolish of dreams, -and absolutely ignoring, as they thought, all grandiloquent claims -for social reconstruction. Such is the irresistible sweep of social -tendencies, that in their every act they worked to bring about the very -Socialism they despised; and to destroy the Individualistic faith which -they still professed. They builded better than they knew. - -It must by no means be supposed that these beginnings of social -reorganization have been effected, or the proposals for their -extension brought to the front, without the conscious efforts of -individual reformers. The “Zeitgeist” is potent; but it does not pass -Acts of Parliament without legislators, or erect municipal libraries -without town councillors. Though our decisions are moulded by the -circumstances of the time, and the environment at least roughhews our -ends, shape them as we will; yet each generation decides for itself. -It still rests with the individual to resist or promote the social -evolution, consciously or unconsciously, according to his character -and information. The importance of complete consciousness of the -social tendencies of the age lies in the fact that its existence and -comprehensiveness often determine the expediency of our particular -action: we move with less resistance with the stream than against it. - -The general failure to realize the extent to which our unconscious -Socialism has already proceeded--a failure which causes much time -and labor to be wasted in uttering and elaborating on paper the -most ludicrously unpractical anti-Socialistic demonstrations of the -impossibility of matters of daily occurrence--is due to the fact that -few know anything of local administration outside their own town. It is -the municipalities which have done most to “socialize” our industrial -life; and the municipal history of the century is yet unwritten. A few -particulars may here be given as to this progressive “municipalization” -of industry. Most of us know that the local governments have assumed -the care of the roads, streets and bridges, once entirely abandoned -to individual enterprise, as well as the lighting and cleansing of -all public thoroughfares, and the provision of sewers, drains and -“storm-water courses.” It is, perhaps, not so generally known that no -less than £7,500,000 is annually expended on these services in England -and Wales alone, being about five per cent of the rent of the country. -The provision of markets, fairs, harbors, piers, docks, hospitals, -cemeteries and burial-grounds is still shared with private capitalists; -but those in public hands absorb nearly £2,000,000 annually. Parks, -pleasure grounds, libraries, museums, baths and washhouses cost the -public funds over half a million sterling. All these are, however, -comparatively unimportant services. It is in the provision of gas, -water and tramways that local authorities organize labor on a large -scale. Practically half the gas consumers in the kingdom are supplied -by public gas works, which exist in 168 separate localities, with -an annual expenditure of over three millions.[33] It need hardly be -added that the advantage to the public is immense, in spite of the -enormous price paid for the work in many instances; and that the -further municipalization of the gas industry is proceeding with great -rapidity, no fewer than twelve local authorities having obtained loans -for the purpose (and one for electric lighting) in a single year -(Local Government Board Report, 1887-8, c--5526, pp. 319-367). With -equal rapidity is the water supply becoming a matter of commercial -organization, the public expenditure already reaching nearly a million -sterling annually. Sixty-five local authorities borrowed money for -water supply in 1887-8, rural and urban districts being equally -represented (c--5550, pp. 319-367). Tramways and ferries are undergoing -the same development. About thirty-one towns, including nearly all -the larger provincial centres, own some or all of their own tramways. -Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham, Oldham, Sunderland and Greenock lease -their undertakings; but among the municipalities Huddersfield has the -good sense to work its lines without any “middleman” intervention, -with excellent public results. The tramway mileage belonging to local -authorities has increased five-fold since 1878, and comprises more than -a quarter of the whole (House of Commons Return, 1887-8, No. 347). The -last important work completed by the Metropolitan Board of Works was -the establishment of a “free steam ferry” on the Thames, charged upon -the rates. This is, in some respects, the most significant development -of all. The difference between a free steam ferry and a free railway is -obviously only one of degree. - -A few more cases are worth mentioning. Glasgow builds and maintains -seven public “common lodging houses”; Liverpool provides science -lectures; Manchester builds and stocks an art gallery; Birmingham -runs schools of design; Leeds creates extensive cattle markets; and -Bradford supplies water below cost price. There are nearly one hundred -free libraries and reading rooms. The minor services now performed by -public bodies are innumerable.[34] This “Municipal Socialism” has been -rendered possible by the creation of a local debt now reaching over -£181,000,000.[35] Nearly £10,000,000 is annually paid as interest and -sinking fund on the debt; and to this extent the pecuniary benefit of -municipalization is diminished. The full advantages[36] of the public -organization of labor remain, besides a considerable pecuniary profit; -whilst the objective differentiation of the economic classes (by the -separation of the idle _rentier_ from the manager or _entrepreneur_) -enormously facilitates popular comprehension of the nature of the -economic tribute known as interest. To the extent, moreover, that -additional charges are thrown upon the rates, the interest paid to -the capitalist is levied mainly at the cost of the landlord, and we -have a corresponding “nationalization” of so much of the economic -rent. The increase in the local rates has been 36 per cent, or nearly -£7,000,000, in eleven years, and is still growing. They now amount to -over twenty-six millions sterling in England and Wales alone, or about -17 per cent of the rental of the country (C--5550, p. clxxiv). - -Nor is there any apparent prospect of a slackening of the pace of this -unconscious abandonment of individualism. No member of Parliament -has so much as introduced a Bill to give effect to the anarchist -principles of Mr. Herbert Spencer’s “Man _versus_ the State.” The -not disinterested efforts of the Liberty and Property Defence League -fail to hinder even Conservative Parliament from further Socialistic -legislation. Mr. Gladstone remarked to a friend in 1886 that the Home -Rule question would turn the Liberal party into a Radical party. He -might have said that it would make both parties Socialistic. Free -elementary and public technical education is now practically accepted -on both sides of the House, provided that the so-called “voluntary -schools,” themselves half maintained from public funds, are not -extinguished. Mr. Chamberlain and the younger Conservatives openly -advocate far reaching projects of social reform through state and -municipal agency, as a means of obtaining popular support. The National -Liberal Federation adopts the special taxation of urban ground values -as the main feature in its domestic programme,[37] notwithstanding -that this proposal is characterized by old-fashioned Liberals as sheer -confiscation of so much of the landlords’ property. The London Liberal -and Radical Union, which has Mr. John Morley for its president, even -proposes that the County Council shall have power to rebuild the London -slums at the sole charge of the ground landlord.[38] It is, therefore, -not surprising that the Trades Union Congress should now twice have -declared in favor of “Land Nationalization” by large majorities, or -that the bulk of the London County Council should be returned on -an essentially Socialistic platform. The whole of the immediately -practicable demands of the most exacting Socialists are, indeed, now -often embodied in the current Radical programme; and the following -exposition of it, from the pages of the _Star_ newspaper, August 8, -1888, may serve as a statement of the current Socialist demands for -further legislation.[39] - -REVISION OF TAXATION. - - _Object._--Complete shifting of burden from the workers, of whatever - grade, to the recipients of rent and interest, with a view to the - ultimate and gradual extinction of the latter class. - - _Means._--1. Abolition of all customs and excise duties, except those - on spirits. 2. Increase of income tax, differentiating in favor of - earned as against unearned incomes, and graduating cumulatively by - system of successive levels of abatement. 3. Equalization and increase - of death duties and the use of the proceeds as capital, not income. - 4. Shifting of local rates and house duty from occupier to owner, any - contract to the contrary notwithstanding. 5. Compulsory redemption of - existing land tax and reimposition on all ground rents and increased - values. 6. Abolition of fees on licenses for employment. 7. Abolition - of police-court fees. - -EXTENSION OF FACTORY ACTS. - - _Object._--To raise, universally, the standard of comfort by obtaining - the general recognition of a minimum wage and a maximum working day. - - _Means._--1. Extension of the general provisions of the Factory - and Workshops Acts (or the Mines Regulation Acts, as the case may - be) to all employers of labor. 2. Compulsory registration of all - employers of more than three (?) workers. 3. Largely increased number - of inspectors, and these to include women, and to be mainly chosen - from the wage-earning class. 4. Immediate reduction of maximum hours - to eight per day in all Government and municipal employment, in all - mines, and in all licensed monopolies such as railways, tramways, - gasworks, waterworks, docks, harbors, etc.; and in any trade in which - a majority of the workers desire it. 5. The compulsory insertion - of clauses in all contracts for Government or municipal supplies, - providing (_a_) that there shall be no sub-contracting, (_b_) that no - worker shall be employed more than eight hours per day, and (_c_) that - no wages less than a prescribed minimum shall be paid. - -EDUCATIONAL REFORM. - - _Object._--To enable all, even the poorest, children to obtain not - merely some, but the best education they are capable of. - - _Means._--1. The immediate abolition of all fees in public elementary - schools, Board or voluntary, with a corresponding increase in the - Government grant. 2. Creation of a Minister for Education, with - control over the whole educational system, from the elementary school - to the University, and over all educational endowments. 3. Provision - of public technical and secondary schools wherever needed, and - creation of abundant public secondary scholarships. 4. Continuation, - in all cases, of elementary education at evening schools. 5. - Registration and inspection of all private educational establishments. - -RE-ORGANIZATION OF POOR LAW ADMINISTRATION. - - _Object._--To provide generously, and without stigma, for the aged, - the sick, and those destitute through temporary want of employment, - without relaxing the “tests” against the endowment of able-bodied - idleness. - - _Means._--1. The separation of the relief of the aged and the sick - from the workhouse system, by a universal system of aged pensions, - and public infirmaries. 2. The industrial organization and technical - education of all able-bodied paupers. 3. The provision of temporary - relief works for the unemployed. 4. The supersession of the Boards of - Guardians by the local municipal authorities. - -EXTENSION OF MUNICIPAL ACTIVITY. - - _Object._--The gradual public organization of labor for all public - purposes, and the elimination of the private capitalist and middleman. - - _Means._--1. The provision of increased facilities for the acquisition - of land, the destruction without compensation of all dwellings found - unfit for habitation, and the provision of artisan dwellings by the - municipality. 2. The facilitation of every extension of municipal - administration, in London and all other towns, of gas, water, markets, - tramways, hospitals, cemeteries, parks, museums, art galleries, - libraries, reading-rooms, schools, docks, harbors, rivers, etc. 3. The - provision of abundant facilities for the acquisition of land by local - rural authorities, for allotments, common pastures, public halls, - reading-rooms, etc. - -AMENDMENT OF POLITICAL MACHINERY. - - _Object._--To obtain the most accurate representation and expression - of the desires of the majority of the people at every moment. - - _Means._--1. Reform of registration so as to give a vote, both - Parliamentary and municipal, to every adult. 2. Abolition of any - period of residence as a qualification for registration. 3. Bi-annual - registration by special public officer. 4. Annual Parliaments. - 5. Payment of election expenses, including postage of election - addresses and polling cards. 6. Payment of all public representatives, - parliamentary, county, or municipal. 7. Second ballot. 8. Abolition or - painless extinction of the House of Lords.[40] - -This is the programme to which a century of industrial revolution has -brought the Radical working man. Like John Stuart Mill,[41] though less -explicitly, he has turned from mere political Democracy to a complete, -though unconscious, Socialism.[42] - - -THE NEW SYNTHESIS. - -It need hardly be said that the social philosophy of the time did -not remain unaffected by the political evolution and the industrial -development. Slowly sinking into men’s minds all this while was the -conception of a new social nexus, and a new end of social life. It -was discovered (or rediscovered) that a society is something more -than an aggregate of so many individual units--that it possesses -existence distinguishable from those of any of its components. A -perfect city became recognized as something more than any number of -good citizens--something to be tried by other tests, and weighed in -other balances than the individual man. The community must necessarily -aim, consciously or not, at its continuance as a community; its life -transcends that of any of its members; and the interests of the -individual unit must often clash with those of the whole. Though -the social organism has itself evolved from the union of individual -men, the individual is now created by the social organism of which -he forms a part: his life is born of the larger life; his attributes -are moulded by the social pressure; his activities, inextricably -interwoven with others, belong to the activity of the whole. Without -the continuance and sound health of the social organism, no man can -now live or thrive; and its persistence is accordingly his paramount -end. His conscious motive for action may be, nay, always must be, -individual to himself; but where such action proves inimical to the -social welfare, it must sooner or later be checked by the whole, lest -the whole perish through the error of its member. The conditions of -social health are accordingly a matter for scientific investigation. -There is, at any moment, one particular arrangement of social relations -which involves the minimum of human misery then and there possible -amid the “niggardliness of nature.” Fifty years ago it would have been -assumed that absolute freedom in the sense of individual or “manly” -independence, plus a criminal code, would spontaneously result in -such an arrangement for each particular nation; and the effect was -the philosophic apotheosis of _Laisser Faire_. To-day every student -is aware that no such optimistic assumption is warranted by the facts -of life.[43] We know now that in natural selection at the stage of -development where the existence of civilized mankind is at stake, the -units selected from are not individuals, but societies. Its action at -earlier stages, though analogous, is quite dissimilar. Among the lower -animals physical strength or agility is the favored quality; if some -heaven-sent genius among the cuttlefish developed a delicate poetic -faculty, this high excellence would not delay his succumbing to his -hulking neighbor. When, higher up in the scale, mental cunning became -the favored attribute, an extra brain convolution, leading primitive -man to the invention of fire or tools, enabled a comparatively puny -savage to become the conqueror and survivor of his fellows. - -Brain culture accordingly developed apace; but we do not yet thoroughly -realize that this has itself been superseded as the “selected” -attribute, by social organization. The cultivated Athenians, Saracens, -and Provençals went down in the struggle for existence before their -respective competitors, who, individually inferior, were in possession -of a, at that time, more valuable social organization. The French -nation was beaten in the last war, not because the average German was -an inch and a half taller than the average Frenchman, or because he -had read five more books, but because the German social organism, was, -for the purposes of the time, superior in efficiency to the French. -If we desire to hand on to the after-world our direct influence, and -not merely the memory of our excellence, we must take even more care -to improve the social organism of which we form part, than to perfect -our own individual developments. Or rather, the perfect and fitting -development of each individual is not necessarily the utmost and -highest cultivation of his own personality, but the filling, in the -best possible way, of his humble function in the great social machine. -We must abandon the self-conceit of imagining that we are independent -units, and bend our jealous minds, absorbed in their own cultivation, -to this subjection to the higher end, the Common Weal. Accordingly, -conscious “direct adaptation” steadily supplants the unconscious and -wasteful “indirect adaptation” of the earlier form of the struggle for -existence; and with every advance in sociological knowledge, Man is -seen to assume more and more, not only the mastery of “things,” but -also a conscious control over social destiny itself. - -This new scientific conception of the Social Organism, has put -completely out of countenance the cherished principles of the Political -Economist and the Philosophic Radical. We left them sailing gaily -into Anarchy on the stream of _Laisser Faire_. Since then the tide -has turned. The publication of John Stuart Mill’s “Political Economy” -in 1848 marks conveniently the boundary of the old individualist -Economics. Every edition of Mill’s book became more and more -Socialistic. After his death the world learnt the personal history, -penned by his own hand,[44] of his development from a mere political -democrat to a convinced Socialist. - -The change in tone since then has been such that one competent -economist, professedly[45] anti-Socialist, publishes regretfully to the -world that all the younger men are now Socialists, as well as many of -the older Professors. It is, indeed, mainly from these that the world -has learnt how faulty were the earlier economic generalizations, and -above all, how incomplete as guides for social or political action. -These generalizations are accordingly now to be met with only in -leading articles, sermons, or the speeches of Ministers or Bishops.[46] -The Economist himself knows them no more. - -The result of this development of Sociology is to compel a revision -of the relative importance of liberty and equality as principles to -be kept in view in social administration. In Bentham’s celebrated -“ends” to be aimed at in a civil code, liberty stands predominant -over equality, on the ground that full equality can be maintained -only by the loss of security for the fruits of labor. That exposition -remains as true as ever; but the question for decision remains, how -much liberty? Economic analysis has destroyed the value of the old -criterion of respect for the equal liberty of others. Bentham, whose -economics were weak, paid no attention to the perpetual tribute on the -fruits of others’ labor which full private property in land inevitably -creates. In his view, liberty and security to property meant that every -worker should be free to obtain the full result of his own labor; and -there appeared no inconsistency between them. The political economist -now knows that with free competition and private property in land and -capital, no individual can possibly obtain the full result of his -own labor. The student of industrial development, moreover, finds it -steadily more and more impossible to trace what is precisely the result -of each separate man’s toil. Complete rights of liberty and property -necessarily involve, for example, the spoliation of the Irish cottier -tenant for the benefit of Lord Clanricarde. What then becomes of the -Benthamic principle of the greatest happiness of the greatest number? -When the Benthamite comes to understand the Law of Rent, which of the -two will he abandon? For he cannot escape the lesson of the century, -taught alike by the economists, the statesmen, and the “practical men,” -that complete individual liberty, with unrestrained private ownership -of the instruments of wealth production, is irreconcilable with the -common weal. The free struggle for existence among ourselves menaces -our survival as a healthy and permanent social organism. Evolution, -Professor Huxley[47] declares, is the substitution of consciously -regulated co-ordination among the units of each organism, for blind -anarchic competition. Thirty years ago Herbert Spencer demonstrated -the incompatibility of full private property in land with the modern -democratic State;[48] and almost every economist now preaches the -same doctrine. The Radical is rapidly arriving, from practical -experience, at similar conclusions; and the steady increase of the -government regulation of private enterprise, the growth of municipal -administration, and the rapid shifting of the burden of taxation -directly to rent and interest, mark in treble lines the statesman’s -unconscious abandonment of the old Individualism, and our irresistible -glide into collectivist Socialism. - -It was inevitable that the Democracy should learn this lesson. With the -masses painfully conscious of the failure of Individualism to create -a decent social life for four-fifths of the people,[49] it might have -been foreseen that Individualism could not survive their advent to -political power. If private property in land and capital necessarily -keeps the many workers permanently poor (through no fault of their -own), in order to make the few idlers rich (from no merit of their -own), private property in land and capital will inevitably go the way -of the feudalism which it superseded. The economic analysis confirms -the rough generalization of the suffering people. The history of -industrial evolution points to the same result; and for two generations -the world’s chief ethical teachers have been urging the same lesson. No -wonder the heavens of Individualism are rolling up before our eyes like -a scroll; and even the Bishops believe and tremble.[50] - -It is, of course, possible, as Sir Henry Maine and others have -suggested, that the whole experience of the century is a mistake, and -that political power will once more swing back into the hands of a -monarch or an aristocratic oligarchy. It is, indeed, want of faith in -Democracy which holds back most educated sympathisers with Socialism -from frankly accepting its principles. What the economic side of such -political atavism would be it is not easy to forecast. The machine -industry and steam power could hardly be dismissed with the caucus -and the ballot-box. So long, however, as Democracy in political -administration continues to be the dominant principle, Socialism may -be quite safely predicted as its economic obverse, in spite of those -freaks or aberrations of Democracy which have already here and there -thrown up a short-lived monarchy or a romantic dictatorship. Every -increase in the political power of the proletariat will most surely be -used by them for their economic and social protection. In England, at -any rate, the history of the century serves at once as their guide and -their justification. - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[12] See “Socialism in England” (American Economic Association, vol. -iv, part 2, May, 1889), in which a portion of this essay has been -embodied. - -[13] “I am aware that there are some who suppose that our present -bourgeois arrangements must be totally destroyed and others substituted -almost at a blow. But however successful a revolution might be, it -is certain that mankind cannot change its whole nature all at once. -Break the old shell, certainly; but never forget the fact that the new -forms _must_ grow out of the old” (H. M. Hyndman, “Historical Basis of -Socialism,” 1883, p. 305). - -[14] See the article on “Socialism in English Politics,” by William -Clarke, in the _Political Science Quarterly_, December, 1888. - -[15] Even Bentham said this of James Mill (Bain’s Life of J. M., p. -461), of whom it was hardly true. - -[16] “Principles of Political Economy,” last edition, 1865, p. 477 -(quoting from Feugueray.) - -[17] Referred to in a celebrated passage by Adam Smith, “Wealth of -Nations,” book 1, chap. viii. - -[18] Not to mention the restrictions imposed by the law of “Settlement” -(13 and 14 Charles II., chap. 12), which enabled two justices summarily -to send back to his village any migrating laborer. - -[19] This was noticed by Malthus, “Principles of Political Economy,” -p. 225; see also Prof. Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and -Prices,” and “Six Centuries of Work and Wages.” - -[20] Further detail will be found in the following essay. See also -Arnold Toynbee’s “Industrial Revolution.” - -[21] Between 1801-1845 the population of Manchester grew 109 per cent, -Glasgow 108 per cent, Liverpool 100 per cent, and Leeds 99 per cent -(Report of Commissioners on State of Health of Large Towns, 1843-45). - -[22] W. J. Lecky, “History of the Eighteenth Century,” vol. v, p. 453. - -[23] The number of registered electors at the date of the last Election -(1886) was 5,707,823, out of an adult male population of over nine -millions. - -[24] Few, however, of Mr. Spencer’s followers appear to realize that -he presupposes Land Nationalization as the necessary condition of an -Individualist community (see “Social Statics,” _passim_). - -[25] It is sometimes asserted nowadays that the current descriptions -of factory life under the _régime_ of freedom of contract are much -exaggerated. This is not the case. The horrors revealed in the reports -of official enquiries even exceed those commonly quoted. For a full -account of the legislation, and the facts on which it was founded, see -Von Plener’s “English Factory Legislation.” The chief official reports -are those of the House of Commons Committee of 1815-6, House of Lords -Committee, 1819, and Royal Commission, 1840. Marx (“Capital”) gives -many other references. See also F. Engels’ “Condition of the English -Working Classes.” - -[26] Prof. H. S. Foxwell (University College, London, p. 249 of Essay -on the “Claims of Labor” (Edinburgh: Co-operative Printing Company, -1886).) - -[27] This statement, though generally true of England, is not -absolutely so. It needed an Act of Parliament in 1758 (32 George II, -c. 61) to free the inhabitants of the “village” of Manchester from the -obligation to grind all their corn and grain at the manorial watermills -(Clifford’s “History of Private Bill Legislation,” vol. ii, p. 478). -Even so late as 1809 they had to obtain the consent of Sir Oswald -Mosley, the lord of the manor, before a company could be incorporated -to provide a water supply (_Ibid._, p. 480). Leeds was theoretically -compelled to grind its corn, grain and malt at the lord’s mills down to -1839, and actually had then to pay £13,000 to extinguish this feudal -“due” (_Ibid._, p. 498). - -[28] See its organ, the _Church Reformer_. London; 8 Duke Street, -Adelphi. - -[29] The beginning of factory legislation is to be found in the “Morals -and Health Act,” 42 Geo. III, c. 73 (1802). Others followed in 1819, -1825, and 1831; but their provisions were almost entirely evaded owing -to the absence of inspectors. After the Reform Bill more stringent -enactments in 1833, 1844, and 1847 secured some improvement. The Act -of 1878 consolidated the law on the subject. The Radical and Socialist -proposals for further development in this direction will be found at -page 55. Nearly 400 Local Improvement Acts had been passed up to 1845. -In the succeeding years various general Acts were passed, which were -henceforth incorporated by reference in all local Acts. The first -“Public Health Act” was passed in 1848; and successive extensions were -given to this restrictive legislation with sanitary ends in 1855, -1858, 1861, and 1866. Consolidating Acts in 1871, and finally in 1875, -complete the present sanitary code, which now forms a thick volume of -restrictions upon the free use of land and capital. - -[30] The _minimum_ income chargeable to Income Tax (£150) closely -corresponds with the _average_ family income. See Fabian Tract, No. 5, -“Facts for Socialists.” - -[31] See “The Progress of Socialism.” (London: The Modern Press, 13 -Paternoster Row, E. C. Price One Penny.) - -[32] See “Capital and Land” (Fabian Tract, No. 7), page 7. - -[33] Government Return for 1887-8, see “Board of Trade Journal,” -January, 1889, pp. 76-8. - -[34] It is not generally known that the Corporation of London actually -carried on the business of fire insurance from 1681 to 1683, but was -compelled to abandon it through the opposition of those interested in -private undertakings, who finally obtained a mandamus in the Court of -King’s Bench to restrain the civic competitor (Walford’s Insurance -Cyclopædia, vol. iii, pp. 445-446). - -[35] C--5550, p. 436. This, by the way, is just about one year’s -rental. We pay every year to the landlords for permission to live -in England as much as the whole outstanding cost of the magnificent -property of the local governing authorities. - -[36] See “The Government Organization of Labor,” Report by a Committee -of the Fabian Society, 1886. - -[37] See Report of the Annual Meeting at Birmingham, September, 1888. - -[38] See resolutions adopted by the Council, at the instance of the -Executive and General Committee, February 8th, 1889. (_Daily News_, 9th -February.) Professor Stuart, M.P., has now introduced a Bill embodying -these astonishing proposals. - -[39] It is interesting to compare this programme, with its primary -insistence on economic and social reform, with the bare political -character of the “Five Points” of the Chartists, viz., Manhood -Suffrage, Vote by Ballot, Annual Parliaments, Payment of Members -relieved from the property qualification, and Equal Electoral Districts. - -[40] It need hardly be said that schemes of “free land,” peasant -proprietorship, or leasehold enfranchisement, find no place in the -modern programme of the Socialist Radical, or Social Democrat. They -are survivals of the Individualistic Radicalism which is passing -away. Candidates seeking a popular “cry” more and more avoid these -reactionary proposals. - -[41] “Autobiography,” p. 231-2. See also Book IV. of the “Principles of -Political Economy” (Popular edition, 1865). - -[42] For a forecast of the difficulties which this programme will -have to encounter as its full scope and intention become more clearly -realized, see the eighth essay in this volume, by Hubert Bland. - -[43] See “Darwinism and Politics,” by D. G. Ritchie, Fellow and Tutor -of Jesus College, Oxford (London: Swan, Sonneshein & Co., 1889). - -[44] “Autobiography,” pp. 231-2. - -[45] Rev. F. W. Aveling, Principal of Taunton Independent College, in -leaflet “Down with the Socialists,” August, 1888. See also Professor H. -Sedgwick on “Economic Socialism,” _Contemporary Review_, November, 1886. - -[46] That is to say, unfortunately, in nearly all the utterances which -profess to guide our social and political action. - -[47] _Contemporary Review_, February, 1888. - -[48] “Social Statistics,” _passim_. - -[49] See Professor Leone Levi’s letter to the _Times_, 13th August, -1886, and Mr. Frederic Harrison’s speech at the Industrial Remuneration -Conference held in January, 1885 (Report, p. 429). - -[50] See Report of the Lambeth Episcopal Conference, 1888; subject, -“Socialism”: also the proceedings of the Central Conference of Diocesan -Councils, June, 1889 (paper on Socialism by Canon Furse). - - - - -INDUSTRIAL. - -BY WILLIAM CLARKE, M.A. - - -My object in the following paper is to present a brief narrative of -the economic history of the last century or century and a half. From -this I wish to draw a moral. That moral is that there has been and -is proceeding an economic evolution, practically independent of our -individual desires or prejudices; an evolution which has changed for -us the whole social problem by changing the conditions of material -production, and which _ipso facto_ effects a revolution in our modern -life. To learn clearly what that revolution is, and to prepare -ourselves for taking advantage of it in due course--this I take to be -briefly what is meant by Socialism. The ignorant public, represented -by, let us say, the average bishop or member of Parliament, hears of -the “Social Revolution” and instantly thinks of street riots, noyades, -with a _coup d’état_: a 10th of August, followed perhaps by its Nemesis -in an 18th Brumaire. But these are not the Social Revolution. That -great change is proceeding silently every day. Each new line of railway -which opens up the trackless desert, every new machine which supplants -hand labor, each fresh combination formed by capitalists, every new -labor organization, every change in prices, each new invention--all -these forces and many more are actually working out a social revolution -before our eyes: for they are changing fundamentally the economic basis -of life. There may possibly come some one supreme moment of time in -which a great dramatic incident will reveal to men the significance -of the changes which have led up to it, and of which it is merely -the final expression. And future historians may write of that as The -Revolution just as historians now write of the fall of the Bastille, -or the execution of Louis XVI, as though these events constituted the -French Revolution, instead of being the final terms in a long series -of events which had been loosening the fabric of French feudalism -through several generations. The true prophet is not an ignorant -soothsayer who foretells some Armageddon, but rather he who perceives -the inevitable drift and tendency of things. Somewhat in this spirit -we may consider the economic history of the modern industrial era in -order to discern its meaning, to see what it has led up to, and what, -consequently, are the problems with which we find ourselves confronted -to-day. - -Had we visited a village or small town in England where industrial -operations were going on one hundred and fifty years ago, what should -we have found? No tall chimney, vomiting its clouds of smoke, would -have been visible; no huge building with its hundred windows blazing -with light would have loomed up before the traveller as he entered the -town at dusk; no din of machinery would have been heard; no noise of -steam hammers; no huge blast furnaces would have met his eye, nor would -miles of odors wafted from chemical works have saluted his nostrils. If -Lancashire had been the scene of his visit he would have found a number -of narrow red-brick houses with high steps in front, and outside wooden -shutters such as one may still see in the old parts of some Lancashire -towns to-day. Inside each of these houses was a little family workshop, -containing neither master nor servant, in which the family jointly -contributed to produce by the labor of their hands a piece of cotton -cloth. The father provided his own warp of linen yarn, and his cotton -wool for weft. He had purchased the yarn in a prepared state, while -the wool for the weft was carded and spun by his wife and daughters, -and the cloth was woven by himself and his sons. There was a simple -division of labor in the tiny cottage factory; but all the implements -necessary to produce the cotton cloth were owned by the producers. -There was neither capitalist nor wage-receiver: the weaver controlled -his own labor, effected his own exchange, and received himself the -equivalent of his own product. Such was the germ of the great English -cotton manufacture. Ferdinand Lasselle said: “Society consists of -ninety-six proletaires and four capitalists. That is your State.” But -in old Lancashire there was neither capitalist nor proletaire. - -Or even much later had one visited--Stafford, let us say, one would -not have found the large modern shoe-factory, with its bewildering -variety of machines, each one with a human machine by its side. For -shoemaking then was a pure handicraft, requiring skill, judgment and -some measure of artistic sense. Each shoemaker worked in his own little -house, bought his own material from the leather merchant, and fashioned -every part of the shoe with his own hand, aided by a few simple and -inexpensive tools. He believed there was “nothing like leather,” and -had not yet learned the art of putting on cheap soles, _not_ made of -leather, to cheap boots, which, in a month’s time, will be almost worn -out. Very likely the shoemaker had no vote; but he was never liable -to be locked out by his employer, or to be obliged to go on strike -against a reduction of wages, with his boy in prison for satisfying -hunger at the expense of the neighboring baker, or his girl on the -streets to pay for her new dress. Such was the simple industrialism of -our great-great-grandfathers. But their mode of life was destined to -change. All progress, says Mr. Herbert Spencer, is differentiation; and -this formidable factor began to appear in the quiet, sleepy, English -country. About 1760 a large share of calico-printing was transferred -from London to Lancashire, where labor was then cheaper. There was a -consequent fall in prices, and an increased demand for calicoes of -linen warp and cotton weft. Then the Manchester dealers, instead of -buying fustians and calicoes from the weaver, began to furnish him -with the materials for his cloth, and to pay him a fixed price per -piece for the work when executed. So the Manchester dealer became -what the French call an _entrepreneur_; and the transformation of -the independent weaver into a wage receiver began. The iron law of -wages and the unemployed question also began to loom dimly up. For -as the weaver came to hire himself to the dealer, so the weaver let -out part of his work; and it frequently happened that the sum which -the master weaver received from his employer was less than what he -found himself compelled to pay to those whom he employed in spinning. -“He durst not, however, complain,” says Mr. Watts in his article on -cotton (Encyclopædia Britannica), “much less abate the spinner’s price, -lest his looms should be unemployed.” The quantity of yarn producible -under this simple system by the aid of the one-thread wheel was very -small. The whole did not exceed in quantity what 50,000 spindles of -our present machinery can yield. As one man can now superintend 2,000 -spindles, it will be seen that twenty-five men with machinery can -produce as much as the whole population of old Lancashire. In 1750 the -first important invention in the cotton industry was made in the shape -of the fly-shuttle, invented by Kaye of Bury. In 1760 improvements were -made in the carding process. In 1767 the spinning-jenny was invented by -Hargreaves, and this was at length brought to work as many as eighty -spindles. The ingenious Hargreaves had ample opportunity for practical -study of the “unemployed” question; for the spinners, some of whom were -forced into idleness by the new invention, broke into his house and -destroyed his machine. Shortly after, there was a general rising over -industrial Lancashire: the poor hand-workers, whose prophetic souls -were evidently dreaming on things to come, scouring the country and -breaking in pieces every carding and spinning machine they could find. - -Progress by differentiation, however, heeded not the second sight of -Lancashire workers. In 1769, Arkwright contrived the spinning frame, -and obtained his patent for spinning with rollers. In 1775, Crompton, -of Bolton, invented the mule-jenny, enabling warps of the finest -quality to be spun. In 1792, further improvements in this machine -were made by Pollard, of Manchester, and Kelly, of Glasgow. In 1785, -steam was first applied to the spinning of cotton in Nottinghamshire. -In 1784 the Rev. E. Cartwright, of Kent, invented power-loom weaving, -and completed and patented his invention in August, 1787. Here, then, -within a period of about forty years, was a series of mechanical -inventions which had the effect of absolutely changing the method of -production, and enormously increasing the output; of dividing the -labor of producing, which had formerly been effected by a single -family within the walls of a single room, between scores and hundreds -of people, each of whom only undertook a single process in a complex -operation; of massing together hundreds of thousands of people under -new conditions; of bringing a heretofore isolated district into -intimate relations with distant foreign lands: and of separating the -work of spinning or weaving from the ownership of the instruments by -whose aid the work was done. The independent weaver was gone; or rather -he was subjected, like an amœba, to a process of fission, but with -this difference: that whereas the amœba produces by fission other -similar amœbæ, the weaver was differentiated into a person called an -employer and another called an employé or “hand.” Multiply this “hand” -by thousands, and we get the mill or factory, divided into departments, -each with its special detail of work, each detail fitting into all the -rest, each machine taking up the work where the last machine left it, -and each contributing its share to the joint product. Multiply the -employer; add enormously to the aggregate of his capital; remove the -barrier of national frontiers from his operations; relieve him of the -duty of personal supervision; and we get the joint-stock capitalist. - -Pause a moment to consider the famous world-events which made so much -noise while these industrial processes were going on. The conquest -of Canada, the victories of Clive in India, the Seven Years’ War, -the successful revolt of the American colonies, the Declaration of -Independence and formation of the American Constitution, the deeds of -Frederic the Great, Pitt’s accession to power, Washington’s election -to the Presidency, the Fall of the Bastille, the death of Mirabeau, -the fall of the old French monarchy, the National Convention--all -these great events which shook the world were contemporary with the -industrial revolution in England; and that revolution was in promise -and potency more important than them all. - -I will glance at the development of another great industry, that of -iron. In former times iron was largely worked in the south of England, -notably in Sussex, in a district now purely agricultural. By the middle -of the 18th century, important iron industries had begun to cluster -round Coalbrookdale; and here many of the industrial changes in the -working of iron were first introduced. From 1766 to 1784 improvements -were made in the mode of working malleable iron and of transferring -cast into wrought iron. The puddling forge was invented in 1784; and -it gave an immense impetus to the manufacture. In 1828 the use of the -hot blast was substituted for cold air; in 1842 Nasmyth invented the -steam-hammer; and in 1856 the Bessemer process of making steel was -patented. Subsequently we have the Siemens regenerative furnace and -gas producer, the use of machinery in lieu of hand labor for puddling, -the casting of steel under great pressure, and the improvements in -the Bessemer process. As a result of these inventions the increase -in the production of steel during the last few years, especially in -the United States and Great Britain, has been enormous. In all this -we see the same series of phenomena, all tending to huge monopolies. -Machinery supplants hand labor; production is greatly stimulated; the -immense capital needed enables only the large producers to survive in -the competitive conflict; and we get as the net result well defined -aggregations of capital on the one hand, and dependent machine minders -on the other. - -I have alluded to the shoe industry as having been formerly a pure -handicraft. Simple machine processes for fastening soles and heels to -inner soles began to be adopted in 1809; and from that time onward -successive inventions have converted the pure handicraft into one of -the most mechanical industries in the world. In the United States in -1881 no less than 50,000,000 pairs of boots and shoes were sewn by -the Blake-Mackay machines. A visitor to a shoe factory to-day will -see the following machines: for cutting leather, for pressing rollers -for sole leather, for stamping out sole and heel pieces, for blocking -and crimping, for moulding uppers or vamps, for vamp-folding, for -eyeletting, lasting, trimming and paring, scouring, sand-papering -and burnishing, for stamping, peg-cutting, and nail-rasping. It is -well to witness all these processes going on in one large factory in -order to grasp fully the idea that the old individual industry of the -last century is almost as extinct as the mastodon--that the worker in -a shoe factory to-day is, so to speak, a machine in a vast complex -system. The great industry has supplanted the small one; such great -industry involves the aggregation of capital: consequently competition -on the part of the small producer is hopeless and impossible. Thus -in the proletarian class the intensity of the struggle for existence -is increased, keeping down wages and ever widening the margin of the -unemployed class. The small producer must become a wage earner either -as manager, foreman, or workman. As well attempt to meet Gatling guns -with bow and arrows, or steel cruisers armed with dynamite bombs -with the little cockle-shells in which Henry V’s army crossed over -to win the field of Agincourt, as to set up single shoe-makers or -cotton-weavers against the vast industrial armies of the world of -machinery. The revolution is confined to no one industry, to no one -land. While most fully developed in England, it is extending to most -industries and to all lands. Prince Kropotkin, it is true, reminds us -in an interesting article in the _Nineteenth Century_ for October, -1888, that a number of small industries can still be found in town -and country. That is so, no doubt; and it is not unlikely that for -a long time to come many small trades may exist, and some may even -flourish. But the countries in which small industries flourish most -are precisely those in which there is least machine industry, and -where consequently capitalism is least developed. In no country, says -Kropotkin, are there so many small producers as in Russia. Exactly: -and in no country is there so little machinery or such an inefficient -railway system in proportion to population and resources. On the other -hand, in no country is machinery so extensively used as in the United -States; and it is precisely that country which contains the fewest -small industries in proportion to population and resources. Many of the -small industries, too, as Kropotkin admits, are carried on by persons -who have been displaced by machines, and who have thus been thrown -unemployed on the labor market; or who have drifted into large towns, -especially into London, because in the country there was no work for -them. At best the great majority of these people earn but a scanty and -precarious living; and, judging from the number of hawkers and vendors -who wander about suburban streets and roads without selling anything, -one would imagine that great numbers can scarcely make any living at -all. - -Furthermore, when Kropotkin refers to the sweaters’ victims, and to the -people in country places who make on a small scale clothes or furniture -which they dispose of to the dealers in large towns, and so forth, let -it be remembered that so long as human labor is cheaper than machinery -it will be utilized by capitalists in this way. The capitalist uses -or does not use machinery according as it pays or does not pay; and -if he can draw to an unlimited extent on the margin of unemployed -labor, paying a bare subsistence wage, he will do so, as the evidence -given before the House of Lords Committee on Sweating shews. While -admitting then that a good many small industries exist, and that some -will continue to exist for an indefinite time, I do not think that -such facts make against the general proposition that the tendency is -to large production by machinery, involving the grouping of men and -the massing of capital, with all the economic and social consequences -thereby involved. - -Even agriculture, that one occupation in which old-fashioned -individualism might be supposed safe, is being subjected to capitalism. -The huge farms of Dakota and California, containing single fields -of wheat miles long, are largely owned by joint stock corporations -and cultivated exclusively by machinery. It was the displacement of -human labor by machinery on these farms as well as the crises in -mining operations which helped to bring about the phenomenon of an -unemployed class in the richest region of the world, and led Mr. -Henry George to write his “Progress and Poverty.” These huge farms, -combined with the wheat “corners” in New York and Chicago and the great -railway corporations of America, have played havoc with many of the -small farmers of the Mississippi Valley, as the statistics respecting -mortgaged farms will show. And when it is remembered that the American -farmer will be more and more obliged to meet the growing competition of -the wheat of India, produced by the cheapest labor in the world, his -prospect does not appear to be very bright. - -In order to perceive clearly the immense development of machine -industry and the consequent displacement of labor, one must resort -to figures, mere rhetoric being of no avail. The following figures -are cited from the United States, because American public statistics -are so much better than British, being both more complete and more -accessible. The facts are taken from the first Annual Report of the -United States Commissioner of Labor Statistics in Washington for 1886. -The Commissioner, inquiring into the industrial crisis, finds that it -is mainly due to the immense development of machine industry under the -joint-stock system; and he takes up various trades one after another -to show how labor has been displaced by machinery. In the timber -business, he says, twelve laborers with a Bucker machine will dress -12,000 staves. The same number of men by hand labor would have dressed -in the same time only 2,500. In the manufacture of paper a machine -now used for drying and cutting, run by four men and six girls, will -do the work formerly done by 100 persons, and do it much better. In -the manufacture of wall-paper the best evidence puts the displacement -in the proportion of a hundred to one. In a phosphate mine in South -Carolina ten men accomplish with machinery what 100 men handle without -it in the same time. There has been a displacement of 50 per cent in -the manufacture of rubber boots and shoes. In South Carolina pottery -the product is ten times greater by machine processes than by muscular -labor. In the manufacture of saws, experienced men consider that there -has been a displacement of three men out of five. In the weaving of -silk the displacement has been 95 per cent, and in the winding of silk -90 per cent. A large soap manufacturing concern carefully estimates the -displacement of labor in its works at 50 per cent. In making wine in -California a crushing machine has been introduced with which one man -can crush and stem 80 tons of grapes in a day, representing an amount -of work formerly requiring eight men. In woollen goods modern machinery -has reduced muscular labor 33 per cent in the carding department, 50 -per cent in the spinning, and 25 per cent in the weaving. In some -kinds of spinning one hundred to one represents the displacement. In -the whole United States in 1886 the machinery was equal to 3,500,000 -horse power. If men only had been employed, it would have required -21,000,000 to turn out the actual total product: the real number was -four millions. To do the work accomplished in 1886 in the United -States by power machinery and on the railways would have required men -representing a population of 172,500,000. The actual population of the -United States in 1886 was something under 60,000,000, or a little more -than one-third. - -Commenting on these very remarkable statistics, the Labor Commissioner -says: “The apparent evils resulting from the introduction of machinery -and the consequent subdivision of labor have to a large extent, of -course, been offset by advantages gained; but it must stand as a -positive statement, which cannot be successfully controverted, that -this wonderful introduction and extension of power machinery is one -of the prime causes, if not the prime cause, of the novel industrial -condition in which the manufacturing nations find themselves.” One of -the results of the “novel industrial condition” in America in 1885, was -an unemployed class variously estimated at from one to two millions -of men, the condition of many of whom as tramps, furnished subjects -for some very sorry jests to the American press. Such facts as are -here suggested, will show how a new country may soon be reduced to a -condition which aggregated capital on the one hand and unemployed labor -on the other, render little better than that of an old European State -with its centuries of misery and oppression. And incidentally they also -show that such a nostrum as emigration, if intended not as a palliative -but as a solution, is simply quackery. The inference would seem to -be irresistible. Just as fast as capitalists find it profitable to -introduce improved machinery, as fast also will the helplessness of a -growing number of the proletariat increase. The “unemployed” question -is the sphinx which will devour us if we cannot answer her riddle. - -The wonderful expansion of Lancashire perhaps affords the best -illustration of the change from individual to collective industry. -A cotton-mill in one of the dismal “hell-holes,” called towns in -Lancashire, is a wonderful place, full of bewildering machines. Here -is a machine called an “opener,” by which 15,000 lbs. of cotton can be -opened in 56 hours. There is a throstle, the spindles of which make -from 6,000 to 7,000 revolutions per minute. Here is a man who, with -the aid of two piecers to take up and join the broken ends, can work -2,000 spindles. Among the distinct separate machines used are opener, -scutcher and lap machine, drawing frame, slubbing frame, intermediate -frame, roving frame, throstle, self-acting mule and hand mule, doubling -frame, and mule doublers or twiners. By means of these appliances -the following results have been attained. Within eight years, from -1792 to 1800, the quantity of cotton exported from the United States -to Lancashire had increased from 138,000 lbs. to 18,000,000 lbs. In -1801 Lancashire took 84,000 bales of cotton from the United States; -in 1876 she took 2,075,000 bales; and whereas in the former year only -14,000 bales came from India, in 1876 from that country came 775,000 -bales, besides a great increase in Brazilian cotton, and a new import -of 332,000 bales from Egypt. In 1805, one million pieces of calico -were sold in the Blackburn market during the whole year; and that was -considered a very large sale. In 1884, according to Ellison’s Annual -Review of the Cotton Trade, there were exported 4,417,000,000 yards of -piece goods besides the vast quantity produced for home consumption. -In 1875, in place of the little cottages with their hand-looms of -a century before, Lancashire contained 2,655 cotton factories with -37,515,772 spinning spindles and 463,118 power looms; and she produced -yarn and piece goods to the weight of 1,088,890,000 lbs. and of the -value of £95,447,000. See, too, how through the use of machinery the -cost of production had been lowered. In 1790 the price of spinning the -yarn known technically as No. 100 was 4s. per lb.: in 1826 it had been -reduced to 6¹⁄₂d. The sale price of yarn No. 100 in 1786 was 38s.: in -1793 it was reduced to 15s. 1d., in 1803 to 8s. 4d., in 1876 to 2s. -6d. The decreased cost in each case followed on economy in production, -itself dependent on increased differentiation in machinery; that in -turn involving larger and larger capital, and that again necessitating -aggregation and the crushing out of small concerns which could not -command machinery or sell at a profit in competition with it. - -Speculating on the possibility of foreign competition destroying -the industrial supremacy of Lancashire, Mr. Watts writes in the -Encyclopædia Britannica: “It may perhaps be sufficient to recall to -our readers the small part of the cost of the commodity which now -belongs to the labor of the hand, and the daily diminution which is -taking place even of that part, by the introduction of new mechanical -substitutes.”[51] Mr. Watts wrote as a expert; and the inference -one is compelled to draw from his dictum is that concentration of -capital and growth of monopoly must continue to develop; and that the -“unemployed” problem must force itself on Lancashire. One who is not -an expert will only venture to criticise with great diffidence Mr. -Watts’s optimistic tone; but it is well to point out that in India -capitalists can command the cheapest labor in the world--labor too, at -present entirely unregulated by law. The cotton of India, and also of -Asiatic Russia, is spun and woven near to where it is grown, and where -it can easily command the great Asiatic market. One is not surprised to -find therefore that the Bombay cotton mills are already giving cause -for some anxiety in Lancashire; and there seems no rational ground for -supposing that that anxiety will decrease; in which case the increasing -competition would seem to involve in Lancashire either immense -development of machinery or reduction in wages in order to cheapen -the cost of production. Either alternative forces the social problem -forward. - -I now pass on to consider the social problem as it has actually been -forced on the attention of the British Government through the new -industrial conditions. - -The unrestrained power of capitalism very speedily reduced a large -part of England to a deplorable condition. The Mrs. Jellybys of the -philanthropic world were busy ministering to the wants of Borioboola -Gha by means of tracts and blankets, neither of which were of the -slightest use to those for whom they were intended. But Borioboola Gha -was an earthly paradise compared with civilized England. There was -not a savage in the islands of the Pacific who was not better fed, -happier, healthier, and more contented than the majority of the workers -in the industrial parts of England. Children, it was discovered, were -transferred in large numbers to the north, where they were housed in -pent-up buildings adjoining the factories, and kept to long hours of -labor. The work was carried on day and night without intermission; so -that the beds were said never to become cold, inasmuch as one batch -of children rested while another batch went to the looms, only half -the requisite number of beds being provided for all. Epidemic fevers -were rife in consequence. Medical inspectors reported the rapid spread -of malformation of the bones, curvature of the spine, heart diseases, -rupture, stunted growth, asthma, and premature old age among children -and young persons: the said children and young persons being worked by -manufacturers without any kind of restraint. Manufacturing profits in -Lancashire were being at the same time reckoned at hundreds and even -thousands per cent. The most terrible condition of things existed in -the mines, where children of both sexes worked together, half naked, -often for sixteen hours a day. In the fetid passages, children of -seven, six, and even four years of age, were found at work. Women were -employed underground, many of them even while pregnant, at the most -exhausting labor. After a child was born, its mother was at work again -in less than a week, in an atmosphere charged with sulphuric acid. In -some places women stood all day knee-deep in water and subject to an -intense heat. One woman when examined avowed that she was wet through -all day long, and had drawn coal carts till her skin came off. Women -and young children of six years old drew coal along the passages of -the mines, crawling on all fours with a girdle passing round their -waists, harnessed by a chain between their legs to the cart. A -sub-commissioner in Scotland reported that he “found a little girl, -six years of age, carrying half a cwt., and making regularly fourteen -long journeys a day. The height ascended and the distance along the -road exceeded in each journey the height of St. Paul’s Cathedral.” -“I have repeatedly worked,” said one girl seventeen years of age, -“for twenty-four hours.” The ferocity of the men was worse than that -of wild beasts; and children were often maimed and sometimes killed -with impunity. Drunkenness was naturally general. Short lives and -brutal ones were the rule. The men, it was said, “die off like rotten -sheep; and each generation is commonly extinct soon after fifty.” -Such was a large part of industrial England under the unrestrained -rule of the capitalist. There can be no doubt that far greater misery -prevailed than in the Southern States during the era of slavery. The -slave was property--often valuable property; and it did not pay his -owner to ill-treat him to such a degree as to render him useless as a -wealth-producer. But if the “free” Englishman were injured or killed, -thousands could be had to fill his place for nothing. - -Had this state of things continued we should have returned to a state -of nature with a vengeance. Of man thus depicted we may say with -Tennyson: - - “Dragons of the prime, - That tare each other in their slime, - Were mellow music match’d with him.” - -It was evident that capitalist monopoly must be restrained, reluctant -as English statesmen brought up under the commercial system were to -interfere. The zenith of _laisser faire_ was at the close of the last -century; but a great fabric often looks most imposing shortly before -it begins to collapse. The first piece of labor legislation was the -Morals and Health Act of 1802, which interfered with the accommodation -provided to children by the employers, to which reference has been -made. The Cotton Mills Act was passed in 1819, partly owing to the -exertions of Robert Owen. It limited the age at which children -might work in factories; and it limited the time of their labor to -seventy-two hours per week. Seventy-two hours for a child of nine who -ought to have been playing in the green fields! And even that was a -vast improvement on the previous state of things. Saturday labor was -next shortened by an Act passed by the Radical politician, Sir John -Cam Hobhouse, in 1825. Workmen, Radicals, Tories and Philanthropists -then joined in an agitation under Mr. Richard Oastler, a Conservative -member of Parliament, to secure a Ten Hours’ Bill. Hobhouse tried by -a Bill introduced in 1831 to reduce the time in textile industries; -but he was beaten by the northern manufacturers. However, Althorp, the -Whig leader, who had helped to defeat Hobhouse, was obliged himself -to introduce a measure by which night work was prohibited to young -persons, and the hours of work were reduced to sixty-nine a week. -Cotton-mill owners were at the same time disqualified for acting as -justices in cases of infringement of the law. This measure is regarded -by Dr. E. Von Plener in his useful manual as the first real Factory -Act. Mr. Thomas Sadler, who had succeeded Oastler as leader in the -cause of the factory operatives, brought in a Bill in 1832 limiting the -hours of labor for persons under eighteen; but it was met by a storm of -opposition from manufacturing members and withdrawn. - -To Sadler succeeded that excellent man, who has perhaps done more for -the working-classes than any other public man of our time, Lord Ashley, -better known as Lord Shaftesbury. And here let me pause to point out -that it was the Radicals and a large section of the Tories who took -the side of the operatives against the Whigs, official Conservatives -and manufacturing class. The latter class is sometimes regarded as -Liberal. I think the truth is, that it captured and held for some -time the Liberal fort, and made Liberalism identical with its policy -and interests. If the men of this class had the cynical candor of -Mr. Jay Gould, they might have imitated his reply when examined by a -legislative committee: “What are your politics, Mr. Gould?” “Well, -in a Republican district I am Republican, in a Democratic district -I am a Democrat; but I am always an Erie Railroad man.” One of Lord -Ashley’s strong opponents was Sir Robert Peel, the son of a Lancashire -capitalist; but the most bitter and persistent was Mr. John Bright. -Lord Ashley introduced a Ten Hours’ Bill which included adults. Lord -Althorp refused to legislate for adults, but himself passed an Act in -1833 prohibiting night work to those under eighteen; fixing forty-eight -hours per week as the maximum for children, and sixty-nine for young -persons; also providing for daily attendance at school, and certain -holidays in the year. As this Act repealed that of 1831, manufacturers -were again eligible to sit as justices in factory cases; and although -numerous infractions were reported by inspectors, the offenders in many -cases got off scot free. In 1840 Lord Ashley brought to the notice of -Parliament the condition of young people employed in mines; and through -his activity was passed the first Mining Act, prohibiting underground -work by women and by boys under ten. Peel then passed a consolidating -Factory Act in 1844. Lord Ashley proposed to restrict to ten per day -the working hours for young persons; but Peel defeated the proposal by -threatening to resign if it were carried. By the Act of 1844 the labor -of children was limited to six and a half hours per day; and they had -to attend school three hours daily during the first five days of the -week. The next year, 1845, Lord Ashley secured the passage of a Bill -forbidding night work to women. In 1847 Mr. Fielden introduced a Bill -limiting the time of labor for all women and young persons to eleven -hours per day, and after May, 1848, to ten hours. Peel and the factory -owners opposed; but the Bill was carried. The Act of 1850 further -reduced the legal working day for women and young persons; and an Act -of 1853 prohibited the employment of children before 6 A.M. or after 6 -P.M. In 1860 bleaching and dyeing works were subjected to the factory -laws. Further legislation on this branch of industry took place in -1870. A Mines Act was passed in 1860, and made more stringent in 1862 -with reference to safety and ventilation. Acts with reference to the -lace industry were passed in the years 1861-64, to bakehouses in 1863, -chimney-sweeping and pottery works in 1864. The Workshops Regulation -Act, relating to small trades and handicrafts, was passed in 1867, and -a consolidating Factory and Workshops Act in 1871. The Act now in force -is the Factory and Workshops Act, 1878, modified in respect of certain -industries by the Act of 1883. Further Acts relative to the regulations -of mines were passed in 1872 and 1887. - -This brief and imperfect survey of the legislation which has destroyed -the _régime_ of _laisser faire_ is sufficient for my purpose to -prove: (1) That with private property in the necessary instruments of -production, individual liberty as understood by the eighteenth century -reformers must be more and more restricted, _i. e._, that in our -existing economic condition individualism is impossible and absurd. -(2) That even hostile or indifferent politicians have been compelled -to recognize this. (3) That unrestrained capitalism tends as surely to -cruelty and oppression as did feudalism or chattel slavery. (4) That -the remedy has been, as a matter of fact, of a Socialistic character, -involving collective checking of individual greed and the paring of -slices off the profits of capital in the interests of the working -community. These four propositions can scarcely be contested. - -The immense development of English industry under the conditions -previously set forth was due in great degree to the fact that England -had secured an immense foreign market in which she had for a long time -no formidable rival. Most of the wars in which England was engaged -during the eighteenth century are quite unintelligible until it is -understood that they were commercial wars intended to secure commercial -supremacy for England. The overthrow of the Stuart monarchy was -directly associated with the rise to supreme power of the rich middle -class, especially the London merchants. The revolution of 1688 marks -the definite advent to political power of this class, which found -the Whig party the great instrument for effecting its designs. The -contrast between the old Tory squire who stood for Church and King, -and the new commercial magnate who stood by the Whigs and the House -of Hanover, is well drawn by Sir Walter Scott in “Rob Roy.” The Banks -of England and Scotland and the National Debt are among the blessings -conferred on their descendants by the new mercantile rulers. They also -began the era of corruption in politics which is always connected -closely with predominance of capitalists in the State, as we see in -France, the United States and the British Colonies. “The desire of -the moneyed classes,” says Mr. Lecky,[52] “to acquire political power -at the expense of the country gentlemen was the first and one of the -chief causes of that political corruption which soon overspread the -whole system of parliamentary government.” What remained of the old -aristocracy often found it convenient to form alliances with the new -plutocracy; and it was this combination which governed England during -the eighteenth century, and which specially determined her foreign -policy. That policy was directed towards the securing of foreign -markets and the extension of English trade. Napoleon’s sneer at the -“nation of shopkeepers” was not undeserved. The conquest of Canada, the -conquest of India under Clive and Warren Hastings--the latter an agent -of a great capitalist body, who illustrated well in his Indian career -the methods of his class--the Colonial policy, the base destruction of -Irish manufactures in the interest of English capitalists, were all -part of the same scheme. The policy was successfully consummated in -the war waged by Pitt against the French Revolution. That revolution -was itself brought about mainly by poverty. Not only was the French -peasantry beggared; but some of the new machinery which had been -brought from England had thrown many persons out of work. It was mainly -unemployed workmen who stormed and captured the Bastille.[53] The chief -counterblast to the Revolution was prepared by Pitt. What were his -motives? The Austrian and Prussian monarchs, the emigrant nobles, the -imbecile English king and the Tory English bishops may perhaps have -seriously believed that England was fighting for altar and throne. But -Pitt was under no such delusion. While he derived from his illustrious -father a real pride in England, his divinities were rather the ledger -and the cash-box. He was no bigot: even while an undergraduate at -Cambridge he was a close student of Adam Smith; he started in public -life as a reformer, and his refusal to bow to the ignorant prejudices -of George III cost him office in 1801. It has been abundantly proved -that at first he felt no violent antipathy to the Revolution. A long -period elapsed before he was brought to join the monarchical alliance. -But he was essentially the great capitalist statesman, the political -successor of Walpole, the political predecessor of Peel. He saw that -French conquest might threaten seriously the English social fabric, and -that if England’s chief rival were struck down, the English commercial -class might gain control of the world’s commerce. To secure that end he -skilfully welded together all the moneyed interests, the contractors, -landlords, financiers and shopkeepers; and he tried to persuade the -simpler portion of the country that he was fighting for the sacred -cause of religion and morality. Those who resisted him he flung into -prison or transported beyond the seas. When the long war was brought to -an end, the working-classes were in a wretched condition; although in -those days also there were sophistical politicians who tried to prove -that never had the people so much reason to be contented. When, in -1823, the Lancashire weavers petitioned Parliament to look into their -grievances, an honorable member, who had presumably dined well if -not wisely, had the audacity to declare that the weavers were better -off than the capitalists--an observation not dissimilar to those we -have heard in more recent times. As a matter of fact, the landlords, -through protection and high rents--the capitalists, through enormous -profits, were enriched “beyond the dreams of avarice.” But the time -had come for a conflict between these two classes: the conflict which -is known as the Free Trade controversy. Protection was no longer -needed by the manufacturers, who had supremacy in the world-market, -unlimited access to raw material, and a long start of the rest of the -world in the development of machinery and in industrial organization. -The landlord class, on the other hand, was absolutely dependent on -Protection, because the economic isolation of England by means of -import duties maintained the high prices of food which were the source -of the high agricultural rents. Capitalist interests, on the contrary, -were bound up with the interaction between England and the rest of the -world; and the time had come when the barriers which had prevented that -interaction must be pulled down. The triumph of Free Trade therefore -signifies economically the decay of the old landlord class pure and -simple, and the victory of capitalism. The capitalist class was -originally no fonder of Free Trade than the landlords. It destroyed in -its own interest the woollen manufacture in Ireland; and it would have -throttled the trade of the Colonies had it not been for the successful -resistance of Massachusetts and Virginia. It was Protectionist so long -as it suited its purpose to be so. But when cheap raw material was -needed for its looms, and cheap bread for its workers: when it feared -no foreign competitor, and had established itself securely in India, in -North America, in the Pacific; then it demanded Free Trade. “Nothing in -the history of political imposture,” says Mr. Lecky, “is more curious -than the success with which, during the Anti-Corn Law agitation, the -notion was disseminated that on questions of Protection and Free Trade -the manufacturing classes have been peculiarly liberal and enlightened, -and the landed classes peculiarly selfish and ignorant. It is indeed -true that when in the present century the pressure of population -on subsistence had made a change in the Corn Laws inevitable, the -manufacturing classes placed themselves at the head of a Free Trade -movement from which they must necessarily have derived the chief -benefit, while the entire risk and sacrifice were thrown upon others. -But it is no less true that there is scarcely a manufacture in England -which has not been defended in the spirit of the narrowest and most -jealous monopoly; and the growing ascendancy of the commercial classes -after the Revolution is nowhere more apparent than in the multiplied -restrictions of the English Commercial Code.”[54] - -Cheap raw material having been secured by the English manufacturer -through a series of enactments extending over a generation; and -machinery having been so developed as to enormously increase -production, England sent her textile and metal products all over the -world; and her manufacturers supported exactly that policy which -enabled them to secure markets for their goods or raw produce to work -up in their mills. Cobdenism was in the ascendant; and the State was -more and more regarded from the commercial point of view. The so-called -“Manchester school” was in the main a peace party, because war weakens -that confidence on which commerce is based. But this attachment to -peace principles did not prevent Cobden himself from declaring for a -powerful navy as an instrument of commercial insurance. Nor did it -prevent Manchester from supporting Palmerston’s nefarious Chinese -policy in 1857, or the equally nefarious aggression in Egypt in 1882: -both being regarded as helpful to Manchester trade. In behalf of this -extension of English trade to new markets war has been made on China, -Egypt, the Soudan, Burmah, and Thibet. Germany follows England with -cautious tread. Adventurers like Emin, Stanley, and Bartelott are -employed to “open up” Africa to the gentle influences of civilization -by the agency of rum and revolver, under the pretence of putting down -the slave trade. France, not to be behind, exploits Tonquin in the -interests of Paris speculators. An unscrupulous government in Italy -attempts to divert the attention of the country from domestic reforms -to expeditions in Africa in the interests of moneyed people in Europe. -Perhaps the greatest move is yet to come: the move on the vast market -of China. For this England, America, France, and Germany will compete. -Tentative steps are already being taken. By her absorption of Burmah -and her operations in Thibet, England is approaching nearer to China. -By her acquisition of Tonquin, France has been brought into actual -contact with China. America will probably, by a judicious reduction -of her tariff, compete with England all over the Pacific, and will -send her goods from the Atlantic ports through the Panama or Nicaragua -Canal of the near future. In short, the machinery for the wholesale -exploitation of Asia and Africa is in rapid progress. The whole globe -will soon be the private property of the capitalist class. - -The appropriation of the planet has been powerfully aided by the -developments of transport and communication in our time: indeed, it -would have been impossible without them. The mere application of -machinery to production could not have produced the economic results -of to-day but for the shrinkage of the globe caused by railways and -telegraphs. For it is through these inventions that the capitalist -class has become cosmopolitan, has broken up old habits, destroyed -local associations, spared nothing either beautiful or venerable -where profit was concerned. It has assimilated the conditions of life -in various lands, and has brought about a general uniformity which -accounts for much of the ennui felt in modern life. - -As England was the first country to develop machine industry, so -was she the first to develop railways and to form a powerful steam -mercantile marine. Through the latter agency she has now in her -hands about sixty-four per cent of the carrying trade of the world. -Within sixty years about 350,000 miles of railway have been built -throughout the globe. Atlantic and Pacific are united by several -lines of steel; while the locomotive has penetrated remote regions -of Africa inhabited by barbarous tribes, and wastes of central Asia -where it confronts the relics of the dead and buried civilizations. -This immense power, the greatest in the modern world, is mainly in -the hands of monopolist corporations, among whom there is the same -necessary tendency to aggregation, only far more marked, as is found -in productive industries. The first small lines built to connect towns -not far off have been added to others bit by bit; as from the original -Stockton and Darlington Railway, less than twenty miles long, we get -the great and wealthy North Eastern Railway of to-day. In America a -single corporation controls as much as 7,000 miles of rail: and the -end of the century will perhaps see the great Siberian Pacific in -actual existence. As in railways, so in steam vessels. Huge fleets -like the Cunard, the Orient, the Messageries Maritimes, are owned by -cosmopolitan capital, and sustain the traffic and commerce, not of a -country, not even of a continent, but of the whole world. Such is the -immense revolution in the methods of distribution effected in our time -by the operation of capitalism. - -We must now consider what the term “capitalist” is coming to signify. -Had the term been used half a century ago it would have connoted a -class, unscrupulous perhaps in the main, with low aims, little culture, -and less fine sympathy or imagination. It was nevertheless a socially -useful class, which at that time performed real service. It is a -leading thought in modern philosophy that in its process of development -each institution tends to cancel itself. Its special function is born -out of social necessities: its progress is determined by attractions -or repulsions which arise in society, producing a certain effect which -tends to negate the original function. Thus early society among the -Aryan peoples of Europe develops a leader in war or council who grows, -by processes which in England, _e. g._, can be clearly traced, into a -king with genuine functions, a leader of the people in war like William -I, or a powerful civil ruler and statesman like Henry I. The fact that -such men were brutal or wicked is of little account: the important -fact about them is, that in a barbarous chaotic society they performed -some indispensable services. But the very putting forth of the kingly -power arouses antagonism; then produces armed resistance by a combined -group; and finally leads to overthrow either by the destruction of the -king or by depriving him of all real power and reducing him to a mere -ornamental puppet. The very power originally believed to be beneficent -becomes tyrannical: it needs to be checked more and more, until finally -it practically ceases to exist, and the curious paradox is seen of a -monarch who does not rule. History proves abundantly that men do not -rise and overthrow wicked and corrupt rulers merely because they are -wicked and corrupt. It is part of the terrible irony of history that -a Louis XV dies in his bed, while a William the Silent or a Lincoln -falls a victim to the assassin. What men do not long tolerate is either -obstructiveness or uselessness. - -Now, if we apply these ideas to the evolution of the capitalist, -what is it we see? The capitalist was originally an _entrepreneur_, -a manager who worked hard at his business, and who received what -economists have called the “wages of superintendence.” So long as -the capitalist occupied that position, he might be restrained and -controlled in various ways; but he could not be got rid of. His “wages -of superintendence” were certainly often exorbitant; but he performed -real functions; and society, as yet unprepared to take those functions -upon itself, could not afford to discharge him. Yet, like the King, he -had to be restrained by the legislation already referred to; for his -power involved much suffering to his fellows. But now the capitalist is -fast becoming absolutely useless. Finding it easier and more rational -to combine with others of his class in a large undertaking, he has -now abdicated his position of overseer, has put in a salaried manager -to perform his work for him, and has become a mere rent or interest -receiver. The rent or interest he receives is paid for the use of a -monopoly which not he, but a whole multitude of people, created by -their joint efforts. - -It was inevitable that this differentiation of manager and capitalist -should arise. It is part of the process of capitalist evolution due -to machine industry. As competition led to waste in production, so it -led to the cutting of profits among capitalists. To prevent this the -massing of capital was necessary, by which the large capitalists could -undersell his small rivals by offering, at prices below anything they -could afford to sell at, goods produced by machinery and distributed -by a plexus of agencies initially too costly for any individual -competitor to purchase or set on foot. Now for such massive capitals, -the contributions of several capitalists are needed; and hence has -arisen the Joint Stock Company or _Compagnie Anonyme_. Through this new -capitalist agency a person in England can hold stock in an enterprise -at the Antipodes which he has never visited and never intends to -visit, and which, therefore, he cannot “superintend” in any way. He -and the other shareholders put in a manager with injunctions to be -economical. The manager’s business is to earn for his employers the -largest dividends possible: if he does not do so he is dismissed. The -old personal relation between the workers and the employer is gone; -instead thereof remains merely the cash nexus. To secure high dividends -the manager will lower wages. If that is resisted there will probably -be either a strike or lock-out. Cheap labor will be perhaps imported by -the manager; and if the work-people resist by intimidation or organized -boycotting, the forces of the State (which they help to maintain) will -be used against them. In the majority of cases they must submit. -Such is a not unfair picture of the relation of capitalist to workman -to-day: the former having become an idle dividend-receiver. The dictum -of orthodox political economy, uttered by so competent an authority as -the late Professor Cairnes, runs:-- - - “It is important, on moral no less than on economic grounds, to - insist upon this, that no public benefit of any kind arises from the - existence of an idle rich class. The wealth accumulated by their - ancestors and others on their behalf, where it is employed as capital, - no doubt helps to sustain industry; but what they consume in luxury - and idleness is not capital, and helps to sustain nothing but their - own unprofitable lives. By all means they must have their rents and - interest, as it is written in the bond; but let them take their proper - place as drones in the hive, gorging at a feast to which they have - contributed nothing.”[55] - -The fact that the modern capitalist may be not only useless but -positively obstructive was well illustrated at a meeting of the -shareholders of the London and South Western Railway on 7th February -last. Three shareholders urged a reduction in third-class fares. The -chairman pointed out the obvious fact that such a reduction would -probably lower the dividend, and asked the meeting if that was what -they wished. He was, of course, answered by a chorus of “No, no!” and -all talk of reduction of fares was at an end. Here is a plain sample -(hundreds might be quoted) of the evident interests of the public being -sacrificed to those of the capitalist. - -That joint-stock capitalism is extending rapidly everyone knows. In -the United States, according to Mr. Bryce, the wealth of joint-stock -corporations is estimated at one-fourth of the total value of all -property.[56] In England every kind of business, from breweries, banks, -and cotton-mills down to automatic sweetmeat machines, is falling into -the hands of the joint-stock capitalist, and must continue to do so. -Twenty years ago who would have supposed that a brewery like that of -Guinness or such a banking firm as Glyn Mills, and Co. would become -a joint-stock company? Yet we know it is so to-day. Capitalism is -becoming impersonal and cosmopolitan. And the combinations controlling -production become larger and fewer. Baring’s are getting hold of the -South African diamond fields: A few companies control the whole -anthracite coal produce of Pennsylvania. Each one of us is quite “free” -to “compete” with these gigantic combinations, as the Principality of -Monaco is “free” to go to war with France should the latter threaten -her interests. The mere forms of freedom remain; but monopoly renders -them nugatory. The modern State, having parted with the raw material -of the globe, cannot secure freedom of competition to its citizens; -and yet it was on the basis of free competition that capitalism rose. -Thus we see that capitalism has cancelled its original principle--is -itself negating its own existence. Before considering its latest -forms, attention may here be conveniently directed to the Co-operative -movement, which is, on one side at any rate, closely allied to the -joint-stock development. - -The Co-operative movement had in England a Socialistic origin: for -its founder was Robert Owen. As Mr. Seligman says very truly in -the _Political Science Quarterly_: “Owen was the founder of the -Co-operative movement in England, a fact often ignored by those who -glibly use the word to-day with an utter failure to discern its -true significance.” And Owen himself avowed that his grand ultimate -object was “community in land,” with which he hoped would be combined -“unrestrained co-operation on the part of all, for every purpose of -human life.” It is thus important to associate co-operation with Robert -Owen--_clarum et venerabile nomen_--because there are many persons who -suppose that co-operation began with the Rochdale Pioneers in 1844. -What the Rochdale movement really did was to commence the process of -joint-stock shop-keeping, a very different thing from that which Owen -had in view. - -A powerful impetus was given to co-operation by the Christian Socialist -movement under Maurice and Kingsley. “Of all narrow, conceited, -hypocritical, anarchic and atheistic schemes of the Universe,” said -Kingsley, “The Cobden and Bright one is exactly the worst.” The -orthodox economic conclusions of the day fared badly at Kingsley’s -hands. “The man who tells us,” said he, “that we ought to investigate -Nature, simply to sit patiently under her, and let her freeze, and -ruin, and starve, and stink us to death, is a goose, whether he -calls himself a chemist or a political economist.” These Christian -Socialist leaders felt deeply the anguish and poverty of the workers -and the selfish apathy of the rich. “Mammon,” says Kingsley, “shrieks -benevolently whenever a drunken soldier is flogged; but he trims his -paletot and adorns his legs with the flesh of men and the skins of -women, with degradation, pestilence, heathendom, and despair; and then -chuckles complacently over his tailor’s bills. Hypocrite! straining -at a gnat and swallowing a camel.” All this is very admirable; but -cheap clothes are not made solely or chiefly for Mammon, but for -the masses, who are poor people. It is part of the sad irony of the -situation that the great majority are obliged to accept the alternative -of cheap clothes or none at all. And as the English climate and the -British matron combine to exercise an absolute veto over the latter -form of prehistoric simplicity, it follows that one portion of the -working-classes must, in order to be clothed, connive at the sweating -of another portion. - -The _Christian Socialist_, which was the organ of Maurice and -Kingsley, betrayed great simplicity as to the real nature of the -economic problem. It neglected Owen’s principle of “community in -land,” and supposed that by working together and selling articles -of good quality at a fair price poverty could be eliminated, while -yet every worker in the community was paying his tribute of economic -rent to the owners of the instruments of production. Thus the -movement had no economic basis; and when the moral idealism had -departed from it, no wonder that it degenerated into mere “divvy” -hunting and joint-stock shop-keeping. The economic advantages of -joint-stock shop-keeping are thus summed up by Mr. Robert Somers in -the “Encyclopædia Britannica” (Art., “Co-operation”): “Wholesome -commodities, ready-money payments, a dividend of from five to ten -per cent on share capital, and a bonus to non-members on the amount -of their purchases.” As joint-stock shop-keeping, co-operation is a -useful and cheap method of distribution, which has doubtless benefited -a considerable number of persons; but the notion that it can solve the -economic problem before society is “chimerical,” as Dr. J. K. Ingram -tells us is the opinion of modern economists.[57] This, indeed, might -only be expected from the fact that 961 out of every 1,000 persons -in England die without furniture, investments, or effects worth -£300.[58] Economically considered, co-operation is, now that the -initial enthusiasm has died out of it, a subsidiary branch of the great -joint-stock enterprise. Ethically considered, its results are often -doubtful. In its chief stronghold, Lancashire, one observes a narrow -selfishness among its votaries, which could not be surpassed in the -most genteel quarters of Bayswater. Its ideal is not the raising of -the working class as a whole, but the raising of certain persons out -of the working into the middle class. If the advocates of co-operation -will abate their pretensions, and claim merely (1) that their method -is a useful and economic means of distribution among the lower-middle -and upper-working classes; and (2) that by its agency working men can -learn the important functions of organization and administration, their -claim will be freely admitted. But if they go further their vaulting -ambition will o’erleap itself. At the present rate of progress made -by co-operative societies as compared with joint-stock capitalist -companies, several generations will be in their graves before any deep -or general impression is made. And meanwhile, unless economic rent is -diverted from the class which at present absorbs it to the community -which creates it, co-operators, like the rest of us, must pay tribute -to the lords of the soil and of money. But the noteworthy fact about -co-operation, is that its very existence testifies to the process of -industrial and capitalist aggregation here insisted on as the great -social factor of our period. For co-operative societies supersede -individual by social distribution, effecting it without the waste -attendant on a number of little shops all competing against each other, -the owners of none of which can make a decent living. Co-operation, -therefore, well illustrates the economic evolution of the present age. - -I now come to treat of the latest forms of capitalism, the “ring” and -the “trust,” whereby capitalism cancels its own principles, and, as a -seller, replaces competition by combination. When capitalism buys labor -as a commodity it effects the purchase on the competitive principle. -Its indefinitely extended market enables it to do so; for it knows -that the workman must sell his labor to secure the means to live. -Other things being equal, therefore, it buys its labor in the cheapest -market. But when it turns round to face the public as a seller, it -casts the maxims of competition to the winds, and presents itself as -a solid combination. Competition, necessary at the outset, is found -ultimately, if unchecked, to be wasteful and ruinous. It entails -great expense in advertising; it necessitates the employment of much -unproductive labor; it tends to the indefinite lowering of prices; it -produces gluts and crises, and renders business operations hazardous -and precarious. To escape these consequences, the competing persons or -firms agree to form a close combination to keep up prices, to augment -profits, to eliminate useless labor, to diminish risk, and to control -the output. This is a “ring,” which is thus a federation of companies. -The best examples of “rings” and “pools” are to be found in America, -where capitalism is more unrestrained and bolder in its operations than -in Europe; and also where nearly all the active intellect is attracted -to those commercial pursuits that dominate American life. - -The individualist devotees of _laisser faire_ used to teach us -that when restrictions were removed, free competition would settle -everything. Prices would go down, and fill the “consumer” with joy -unspeakable; the fittest would survive; and as for the rest--it was -not very clear what would become of them, and it really didn’t matter. -No doubt the “consumer” has greatly benefited by the increase in -production and the fall in prices; but where is “free competition” -now? Almost the only persons still competing freely are the small -shopkeepers, trembling on the verge of insolvency, and the workingmen, -competing with one another for permission to live by work. Combination -is absorbing commerce. Here are a few instances of the formation of -rings. - -A steel rail combination was some years ago formed among previously -competing firms in America. This combination discovered that too many -rails were being made and that prices were being cut. Accordingly, one -of the mills in the combination--the Vulcan mill of St. Louis--was -closed, and stood smokeless for years: its owners meanwhile receiving a -subsidy of $400,000 a year from the other mills in the combination for -_not_ making rails. That is how the owners of the Vulcan mill earned -their “wages of superintendence.” It is needless to add that no payment -was made to the men for _not_ working: they were thrown on the streets -to meditate on the right to “liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” -secured to them by the Declaration of Independence. - -Or, again, take the case of the anthracite coal lands of Pennsylvania, -occupying an area of some 270,000 acres, and held by the Reading -Coal and Iron Company, the Lehigh Valley Railroad, the Delaware, -Lackawanna and Western Railroad, the Delaware and Hudson Railroad, -the Pennsylvania Railroad, the Pennsylvania Coal Company, and smaller -firms and corporations tributary to these. The rich owners, popularly -known as the “coal barons,” agree to fix absolutely the wholesale price -of coal, always securing an immense rise just before the winter sets -in. There is no such thing known or possible as free trade or open -competition in the anthracite coal produce of America. - -Combinations in the United States have been made by the Western -millers, the New York icemen, Boston fish dealers, manufacturers of -sewer-pipe, copper miners, makers of lamps, pottery, glass, hoop-iron, -shot, rivets, candy, starch, sugar, preserved fruits, glucose, chairs, -vapor stoves, lime, rubber, screws, chains, harvesting machinery, pins, -salt, hardware, type, brass tubing, silk and wire. In these trades -freedom of production and sale has been for a time partially or wholly -destroyed. The American business man is very angry when boycotting -is resorted to by workmen; but he is quite ready to boycott others -when his interests lead that way. The stamped tinware makers in 1882, -formed a ring and expelled members who sold at lower prices than the -fixed rates, and refused to allow anyone in the pool to sell to the -offenders. Some of the previous facts are taken from an article by Mr. -Henry D. Lloyd,[59] who has investigated capitalist combinations with -much knowledge and insight. From the same article I quote the following: - - “On the 1st of April, 1882, when the rest of us were lost in the - reckless gaity of All Fools’ Day, forty-one tack manufacturers - found out that there were too many tacks, and formed the Central - Manufacturing Company of Boston, with 3,000,000 dollars capital. The - tack-mills in the combination ran about three days in the week. When - this combination a few weeks ago silenced a Pittsburg rival by buying - him out, they did not remove the machinery. The dead chimneys and idle - machines will discourage new men from starting another factory, or can - be run to ruin them if they are not to be discouraged in any other - way. The first fruits of the tack-pool were an increase of prices to - twice what they had been.” - -Again I quote Mr. Lloyd: - - “The men who make our shrouds and coffins have formed a close - corporation known as the ‘National Burial Case Association,’ and held - their annual convention in Chicago last year. Their action to keep up - prices and keep down the number of coffins was secret, lest mortality - should be discouraged.” - -From coffins to crackers is a short step in the study of capitalist -methods: - - “The Western Cracker Bakers’ Association met in Chicago, in February, - to consider among other things ‘the reprehensible system of cutting - prices’ (_i. e._, the reprehensible system of free competition which - capitalists in buying labor tell us is our salvation). They first had - a banquet. After their ‘merriment and diversion’ the revellers, true - to Adam Smith’s description, turned to consider ‘some contrivance to - raise prices.’ ‘The price-lists were perfected,’ said the newspaper - report; ‘and then they adjourned.’” - -In 1875 broke out a severe competition among the fire insurance -companies, upon the collapse of a previous pool; and the competition -cost them in New York City alone $17,500,000 in seven years. -Consequently in 1882 they made a new combination which covered the -whole country, and which Mr. Lloyd declares to be wealthy, cohesive, -and powerful. Though there is no pool or ring, I am credibly informed -that there is a common understanding among the fire insurance companies -of London. One of the most noted of combinations has been the great -Copper Syndicate which attracted world-wide attention early in 1888. -It was formed by some French speculators in October, 1887, and during -the eighteen months of its existence, maintained copper at a purely -arbitrary price in all the markets of the world. At its head was M. -Eugène Secretan, managing director of the Société des Métaux, the -world’s largest buyer of, and dealer in, manufactured copper. The -syndicate’s agents bought all the copper that was visible and for -sale, the result of their speculation being that the price of copper -in the London market rose from less than £40 to over £80 a ton, and -the price of Lake Superior copper in America rose from 10¹⁄₂ cents to -17³⁄₄ cents per pound. M. Secretan informed a London journal that his -designs were purely philanthropic. “Our only purpose,” said he, “is -that every miner, dealer and manufacturer should have fair remuneration -for his work.” Thanks to M. Secretan’s philanthropy, copper, tin, lead -and spelter rose enormously in price; several trades were more or -less paralysed; and in France large numbers of workmen were thrown -out of employment. And let it not be supposed that the suicide of M. -Denfert-Rochereau, which heralded the collapse of this first attempt -to corner the world’s copper--a collapse due to a miscalculation of -the extent to which the supply of copper could increase under the -stimulus of high prices--offers us any security against a repetition -of the attempt. On the contrary, it has shewn how the thing may be -safely done. The metal hoarded by the unlucky speculators is still so -far cornered that it has been kept off the market up to the present, -prices being not yet normal. “To a regular trust it must and will come -at last,” says Mr. E. Benjamin Andrews, of Cornell University. “Nor -has aught taken place to indicate that a Copper Trust, organized like -the Standard Oil Trust, with its energy and relentless methods, would -fail.”[60] - -The Individualist who supposes that Free Trade plus private property -will solve all economic problems is naturally surprised at these -“rings,” which upset all his crude economic notions; and he very -illogically asks for legislation to prevent the natural and inevitable -results of the premises with which he starts. It is amusing to note -that those who advocate what they call self-reliance and self-help are -the first to call on the State to interfere with the natural results of -that self-help, of that private enterprise, when it has overstepped a -purely arbitrary limit. Why, on ordinary commercial principles, should -not a copper syndicate grasp all the copper in the world? It is merely -the fittest surviving. The whole case against Socialism is assumed by -its most intelligent opponents to lie in that Darwinian theory. And yet -when the copper syndicate or the “coal barons” survive, they arouse -against themselves the fiercest and, from the commercial point of view, -the most unreasonable antagonism. As sin when it is finished is said -to bring forth death, so capitalism when it is finished brings forth -monopoly. And one might as well quarrel with that plain fact as blame -thorns because they do not produce grapes, or thistles because they are -barren of figs. - -The story of the growth of capitalism is not yet complete. The -“ring” is being succeeded by a more elaborate organization known as -the “trust.” Although in England great combinations like the Salt -Union are rapidly rising, yet we must again travel to America to -learn what the so-called “trust” is. The fullest information on the -subject of trusts is contained in a report of a Committee of the New -York State Legislature, which was appointed to investigate the new -combination. The following trusts were inquired into: Sugar, milk, -rubber, cotton-seed oil, envelope, elevator, oil-cloth, Standard oil, -butchers’, glass, and furniture. A trust is defined by the Committee as -a combination “to destroy competition and to restrain trade through the -stockholders therein combining with other corporations or stockholders -to form a joint-stock company of corporations, in effect renouncing -the powers of such several corporations, and placing all powers in the -hands of trustees.” The general purposes and effects are stated to -be “to control the supply of commodities and necessities; to destroy -competition; to regulate the quality; and to keep the cost to the -consumer at prices far beyond their fair and equitable value.” It -is unnecessary to deal with all these trusts, which possess certain -features in common. I will select one or two, particularly the great -Standard Oil Trust and the Cotton-seed Oil Trust. - -The Standard Oil Trust is probably the largest single business -monopoly in the world, the value of all its included interests being -estimated, according to the evidence submitted, at £29,600,000. In the -report it is described as “one of the most active and possibly the -most formidable monied power on this continent. Its influence reaches -into every State, and is felt in remote villages; and the products of -its refineries seek a market in almost every seaport on the globe.” -The germ of this huge monopoly was a small petroleum refinery near -Cleveland, bought by one Rockefeller, a book-keeper in a store, and a -friend of his, a porter, with borrowed money. Rockefeller formed an -acquaintance with a rich whiskey distiller, who advanced money and -put his son-in-law Flagler into the business. This person’s doctrines -are thus described: “He says that there is no damned sentiment about -business; that he knows no friendship in trade; and that if he gets -his business rival in a hole he means to keep him there.” Such a man -is eminently fitted to be the founder of a monopoly: he is a hero of -self-help; for he helps himself to anything he can lay his hands on. -A second refinery was established in Ohio, and a warehouse opened in -New York. The concern grew, and was incorporated as the Standard Oil -Company. It is charged with having secured special legislation by -judicious expenditure in the lobbies of the Ohio and Pennsylvania -Legislatures. By entering into arrangements with the trunk railway -lines, it secured special rates for transit. New refineries were -established and new oil lands in Pennsylvania acquired; the capital -was increased; and an enormous yearly business was done. After a time -the company controlled every avenue of transportation; managed all -the largest refineries in the land; and was able to shut off every -competitor from either receiving supplies or shipping its products. -New companies, nominally distinct, but all under the control of the -same men, were incorporated in New Jersey, Ohio, West Virginia and -other States. The monopoly elected one of its chief stockholders -into the United States Senate, it is said, through bribery in the -Ohio Legislature over which body it certainly acquired strong hold. -These tactics were known as “coal oil politics.” All the dirty work -was, of course, done through agents, the directors pretending perfect -innocence. In 1882 the Standard Oil Companies were consolidated in the -Standard Oil Trust.[61] The stockholders surrendered their stock to the -trustees, nine in number, created under the agreement, and received -certificates in the place thereof, the representatives of the trust -and the stockholders in the refineries making a joint valuation of the -refineries, and the certificates being issued to that amount. Thus the -separate concerns were merged in one gigantic business, controlled by -nine men (owning a majority of the stock), having a monopoly of nearly -all the oil lands in America, controlling legislative votes, forming a -solid alliance with the railway and shipping interests, and determining -to a gallon how much oil shall be produced and refined, and to a -fraction of a cent what shall be its price. In 1887 there was a cash -dividend of 10 per cent. declared, besides a stock dividend of 20 per -cent. on the certificates of four years’ aggregation. In addition to -the enormous stock they hold, the trustees receive an annual salary of -£5,000. What are the economic results of this combination? It has not -raised prices, as the trusts were charged by the committee with doing. -On the contrary there has been a steady decrease in price during the -decade 1877-1887. The consumption of oil has also enormously increased. -The working and producing expenses have been greatly lowered by the -dismissal of needless labor and vast improvements in machinery; the -pipe lines controlled by the trust having displaced 5,700 teams of -horses and 11,400 men in handling the oil. Thus of this trust we may -say that though the means used to establish it were morally doubtful or -even bad, the political results disastrous, the economic results have -been beneficial, except in the matter of helping to form an unemployed -class through the dismissal of needless labor consequent on the -development of machinery. - -The Cotton-seed Oil Trust was organized two or three years ago in the -State of Arkansas.[62] Upwards of seventy different companies had been -competing with each other and consequently suffering heavy losses. -Their mills being comparatively small and equipped with imperfect -machinery, they were glad to combine; and those that did not were -forced to close. The seventy corporations, the vast majority of the -members of which had agreed to the combination, surrendered their stock -to a body of trustees and received in return $100 certificates. The -various mills send a monthly report to the trust; and if the officers -in a given mill do not sell at the terms imposed, they are dismissed -by the trust.[63] The object of the trust was declared by a witness -to be to prevent bankruptcy, to improve methods, to find markets, to -develop the enterprise and to make money. The economic result has been -displacement of labor by the machinery and great economy in production. -Incidentally it came out that much cotton-seed oil was sold to the -French and Italian buyers, who mix it with a little olive oil and -export it back to America and to England, where a confiding public -purchases it as pure Tuscan olive oil--an interesting illustration of -international trade morality. - -An examination of the milk and butchers’ trust ought to be a revelation -to those who imagine that trade is “free,” and that competition rules. -On April 29th, 1885, the directors of the Milk Exchange met in New York -and unanimously resolved: - - “That on the first day of May next, and until otherwise ordered, - the market price of milk produced from meadow hay and sound cereals - be 2¹⁄₂ cents per quart, and that produced from brewers’ grains and - glucose and corn starch refuse be 2 cents per quart.”[64] - - -A representative of the Sheep and Lamb Butchers’ Mutual Benefit -Association testified that the members of that body agreed that they -would only buy sheep and calves from the Sheep Brokers’ Association, -a penalty for violation of this rule being imposed at the rate of 15 -cents a head per sheep or calf. The absolute despotism, and the system -of espionage involved in such regulation is obvious. Here is a copy of -a document issued by this body: - - “New York, January 9, 1888. Permission has been granted by the board - of trustees of this association to Simon Strauss to buy sheep and - lambs in New York markets, providing he buys no sheep and lambs from - outsiders, under penalty of 15 cents per head fine. Richard S. Tobin, - Secretary.”[65] - -Occasionally the Association relaxed. On November 5th, 1887, according -to its minutes, - - “The application of John Healey, No. 2, to be granted the privilege of - buying a few sheep and lambs without the 15 cents being charged to the - brokers, was favorably acted upon.” - -This is not a record of Bagdad under the caliphs, but of the Republican -State of New York! The threatened despotism of Socialism has been often -eloquently dwelt on; but what of the actual despotism of to-day? - -Now what does this examination of trusts show? That, granted private -property in the raw material out of which wealth is created on a huge -scale by the new inventions which science has placed in our hands, the -ultimate effect must be the destruction of that very freedom which -the modern democratic State posits as its first principle. Liberty to -trade, liberty to exchange products, liberty to buy where one pleases, -liberty to transport one’s goods at the same rate and on the same terms -enjoyed by others, subjection to no _imperium in imperio_: these surely -are all fundamental democratic principles. Yet by monopolies every one -of them is either limited or denied. Thus capitalism is apparently -inconsistent with democracy as hitherto understood. The development -of capitalism and that of democracy cannot proceed without check on -parallel lines. Rather are they comparable to two trains approaching -each other from different directions on the same line. Collision -between the opposing forces seems inevitable. - -But both democracy and the new capitalist combinations which threaten -it are inevitable growths of an evolutionary process. We are therefore -brought to consider the question whether the ring, syndicate, or trust -either can or ought to be destroyed. These combinations can be shown to -be the most economical and efficient methods of organizing production -and exchange. They check waste, encourage machinery, dismiss useless -labor, facilitate transport, steady prices, and raise profits--i.e., -they best effect the objects of trade from the capitalist’s point -of view. Now, the opponents of Socialism say that without this -enterprising capitalist we cannot live. He “provides employment,” they -say. Well, if we need him, we must obviously pay his price. If he has -a natural monopoly of a function indispensable to social progress, -society must concede the terms he imposes. These terms are briefly -large combinations of capitalist ownership. In this way he can best -organize business; if we do not choose to let him do it in this way, -he will not do it for us at all. From his point of view that is a fair -position to take up; and it places the Individualist opponent of trusts -in an awkward dilemma. For he must either submit to trusts or give up -capitalists, in which latter case he becomes a Socialist. The answer of -Socialism to the capitalist is that society can do without him, just -as society now does without the slave-owner or feudal lord, both of -whom were formerly regarded as necessary to the well-being and even the -very existence of society. In organizing its own business for itself, -society can employ, at whatever rate of remuneration may be needed to -call forth their powers, those capitalists who are skilled organizers -and administrators. But those who are mere dividend-receivers will no -longer be permitted to levy a contribution on labor, but must earn -their living by useful industry as other and better people have to do. - -It may be said that society is not yet ripe for this transformation, -nor is it. The forms of the democratic State are not yet perfected, nor -has the economic evolution yet proceeded generally far enough, even in -England, not to speak of the less advanced European countries. Much yet -remains to be done through both the education of the intellect and the -development of a nobler public spirit. But on the other hand we seem -to be rapidly approaching such an _impasse_ that some very large and -definite extension of collective authority must be made. This would -seem to involve on one side general reduction of the hours of labor, -and on the other an attempt to absorb by the community a portion of -those social values which it creates. In reference to ground values it -may be anticipated that local democratic authorities will secure them -for the benefit of the people by any means which may be found expedient. - -As regards the great combinations of capital, State action may take -one of three courses. It may prohibit and dissolve them; it may tax -and control them; or it may absorb and administer them. In either -case the Socialist theory is _ipso facto_ admitted, for each is a -confession that it is well to exercise a collective control over -industrial capital. If the first of these courses is taken a distinctly -retrogressive policy is definitely adopted, a policy of alarm at what -Mr. Cleveland called the “communism of capital,” a policy of reversion -to the chaos of “free competition,” and of cession of the undoubted -benefits which combination has secured. Such a policy would signify the -forcible prevention of acquisition of property, the very thing dearest -to the Individualist. If the powers of acquisition, now evidently -dependent on combination, are to be restricted, what becomes of the -“incentive to industry,” the “reward of abstinence,” and all the rest -of the worn out phrases which have so often done duty in the place -of argument? If the syndicate or the trust represents the legitimate -outcome of capitalism--if it is necessary to give order to trade and -to prevent the ruinous waste of unrestricted competition, how absurd -it is for the State to say to the capitalist: “You shall carry your -privileges of acquisition just up to the point where competition is -likely to ruin you; but there you shall stop. Immediately you and -your friends combine to prevent waste, to regulate production and -distribution, to apply new methods of manufacture, we shall absolutely -prevent you or restrain you by vexatious regulations.” To which the -capitalist may be supposed to reply: “I cannot fulfil my function in -society at this serious risk. I shall never know security--never be -even moderately sure of reaping that reward to which I am admittedly -entitled. If you intend to fetter my action in this way after having -proclaimed me free to own the raw material out of which wealth is -made--if you compel me to stop at a purely arbitrary line, I must -inform you that I am not going to undertake business on such terms.” -Would not the capitalist say something like this; and from his point of -view would he not be right? - -If it were instantly possible to do so, we should take the capitalist -at his word; appropriate the necessary instruments of production; -and make them common property, the values they create accruing to -the community. But the human race generally contrives to exhaust -every device which stupidity can suggest before the right line of -action is ultimately taken. I think therefore that some probably -inefficient method of taxation and public control over combinations -will, as a matter of fact, be adopted. Such legislation will immensely -restrict individual liberty in certain directions, will produce much -friction, and may possibly hamper production; until by a long series -of experiments men shall discover what is the most reasonable way of -acquiring for the community as a whole the wealth which it produces. -But in any case individualism or anything whatever in the nature of -_laisser faire_ goes by the board. - -And now, finally, what is the immediate policy for rational students -of economics and genuine social reformers to adopt? Their motto must -be, _Nulla vestigia retrorsum_. To all quack proposals they must offer -a steady resistance. These proposals will take the form of attempts to -bring back some economic condition out of which society has emerged. -One quack will desire to revive the old British yeomanry; another will -talk nonsense about “Fair Trade;” a third will offer to the rustic -“three acres and a cow”; while a fourth will see salvation in getting -rid of primogeniture and entail and “planting” prosperous laborers -on the soil--as though the laborers grew there like trees. Those who -understand the economic crisis may be ready and eager to support any -reform, however small, which is a genuine step forward: but they cannot -support any effort to call back the past. They may help to build a -new bridge across the gulf that separates us from the Co-operative -Commonwealth; but they can never repair the old broken-down structure -which leads back to Individualism. Instead, therefore, of attempting -to undo the work which capitalists are unconsciously doing for the -people, the real reformer will rather prepare the people, educated -and organized as a true industrial democracy, to take up the threads -when they fall from the weak hands of a useless possessing class. By -this means will the class struggle, with its greed, hate, and waste, -be ended, and the life hinted at by Whitman in his “Song of the -Exposition” be attained: - - “Practical, peaceful life, the people’s life, the People themselves, - Lifted, illumined, bathed in peace--elate, secure in peace.” - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[51] Enc. Brit., art. “Cotton.” - -[52] “History of the Eighteenth Century,” i. 202. - -[53] See the evidence contained in Vol. I of Mr. Morse Stephen’s -“History of the French Revolution.” - -[54] History of the Eighteenth Century, iv, 450. - -[55] “Some Leading Principles of Political Economy,” p. 32. - -[56] “The American Commonwealth,” iii, note on p. 421. - -[57] “Encyclopædia Britannica”: Art., “Political Economy.” - -[58] Mulhall: “Dictionary of Statistics.” - -[59] “Lords of Industry.” _North American Review_, June, 1884. - -[60] Quarterly Journal of Economics, July, 1889. - -[61] Report of Senate Committee, p. 419. - -[62] Report of Senate Committee, p. 233, _et seq._ - -[63] Report, p. 244. - -[64] Report of Senate Committee, p. 305. - -[65] Report of Senate Committee, p. 497. - - - - -MORAL. - -BY SYDNEY OLIVIER. - - -The argument of this fourth instalment of Socialist criticism may be -provisionally described as an attempt to justify Socialist ideals -by the appeals to canons of moral judgment accepted generally and -supported by the results of positive ethical science. The previous -essays have made it clear that we are dealing with Socialism in -that restricted sense in which it is defined by Schaeffle,[66] as -having for its aim “the replacement of private capital by collective -capital: that is, by a method of production which, upon the basis of -the collective property of the sum of all the members of the society -in the instruments of production, seeks to carry on a co-operative -organization of national work.” We are not dealing with Socialism as a -religion, nor as concerned with questions of sex or family: we treat it -throughout as primarily a property-form, as the scheme of an industrial -system for the supply of the material requisites of human social -existence. - -If it were admitted that the establishment of such a system would -guarantee just this much--that abject poverty should be done away, and -that every man and woman should be ensured the opportunity of obtaining -sufficient food and covering in return for a moderate day’s work, we -might still be far from convincing some people that the realization of -that ideal will be a good thing for the world. There are still a great -many who, though they may not join in the common prophecy that the -chief results of such a system would be an increase in beer-drinking -and other stupid self-indulgence,[67] yet regard starvation and misery -as part of the inevitable order of nature, and as necessary conditions -of progress, conducive to the survival of what they are pleased to -call the “fittest” types of life. Such critics see danger to progress -in any attempt to enrol intelligence and adaptiveness into conscious -combination against starvation and misery, to extinguish by concerted -effort survivals of the accidents of primitive barbarism against -which as individuals we are always struggling. This aim of Socialism, -accordingly, does not wholly commend itself to their moral judgment, -to their opinion of what is _good_ in the widest sense, although -they may willingly admit that the aim possesses a certain element of -shortsighted good intention. Other persons, influenced by religious -conceptions older than that of progress, and regarding morality less -as determined by reference to that end than as a concern of the -individual, a certain state of the soul of each man, are inclined to -view the material evils which Socialists desire to get rid of, as a -necessary schooling and discipline without which individual morality -would decay. - -Against these doctrines Socialists would maintain that the ordering -of our national life, and of the relations between individuals and -social groups throughout the world in accordance with the principles -of Socialism, is the effectual and indispensable process for ensuring -to the mass of mankind the advantages of progress already effected and -its continued and orderly development, and for the realisation, in -individuals and the State, of the highest morality as yet imagined by -us. - -It may be well at this point to anticipate a challenge to define what -is meant by the word “Morality,” and to briefly explain the position -which will be assumed, and the method which will be followed throughout -the succeeding observations. It must be remembered that the subject -of this essay is “The Moral Aspect of the Basis of Socialism,” and -not “The Socialist View of the Basis of Morals.” We may therefore -conscientiously steer clear of the whirlpool of agelong controversy as -to what that basis is, merely noting as we pass that any metaphysic -of Ethics being necessarily universal, there is in this sense no -special ethic or morality of Socialism. By such cautious procedure we -sacrifice indeed the fascinating ambition to exhibit, by impressive -dialectic pageant of deduction from first principles, the foundation -of formal Socialism in the Idea that informs the universe. But we also -avoid the certainty of losing, at the very outset of our attempted -demonstration, the company of all but that minority who might assent -to our fundamental propositions. A further sacrifice we shall make, in -descending to the unpretentious methods of empiricism; for we thereby -renounce the right of appeal to that theologic habit of mind common -to Socialists with other pious persons. Mr. Henry George, educated -under the American Constitution, may share the familiarity of its -framers with the intentions of the Creator and the natural rights of -Man. He may prove, as did Mr. Herbert Spencer in his generous youth, -that private property in land is incompatible with the fundamental -right of each individual to live and to own the product of his labor. -But positive ethical science knows nothing of natural and fundamental -rights: it knows nothing of individual liberty, nothing of equality, -nothing of underlying unity. Yet here again our loss has some redress; -for a brief survey will assure us that various schools of moral -philosophy, differing in their characteristic first principles, are -converging in the justification of Socialism; and that the practical -judgments of contemporary mankind as to what sort of conduct is -“moral,” and what conditions make for the increase of “common -morality,” are in practice largely coincident. They offer, at least, -a body of provisional opinion, or prejudice, to which we can appeal -in presenting Socialism for criticism of its morality. The tribunal -is by no means infallible: still, the common contemporary sense of -humanity may count for something. But in approaching the criticism of -Socialism from the point of view of ethics, we are bound to go a little -deeper than this. While accepting the phenomena of current opinion on -morality as part of our material, we must follow the explorations of -ethical speculation into the causes and history of the development -of those opinions. By examining the genesis of convictions that this -or that kind of action is good or bad, moral or immoral, we shall be -helped to form a judgment as to which appears likely to persist and -be strengthened, and which to be modified, weakened, or forgotten. If -the claim of Socialism rests on judgments of the latter class, we may -know that it is a moribund bantling; if they preponderate among the -obstacles to its credit, we may prophesy encouragingly of it; if it is -supported by those judgments whose persistence seems essential to the -survival of the individual and of society, we may be assured of its -realisation in the future. - -Socialism appears as the offspring of Individualism, as the outcome -of individualist struggle, and as the necessary condition for the -approach to the individualist ideal. The opposition commonly assumed -in contrasting the two is an accident of the now habitual confusion -between personality and personalty, between a man’s life and the -abundance of things that he has. Socialism is merely Individualism -rationalized, organized, clothed, and in its right mind. Socialism is -taking form in advanced societies and the social revolution must be -brought to its formal accomplishment through the conscious action of -innumerable individuals seeking an avenue to rational and pleasant -existence for themselves and for those whose happiness and freedom -they desire as they do their own. All conscious action, all conscious -modification of conditions, is inspired by the desire of such personal -relief, satisfaction, or expression, by the attempt to escape from -some physical or intellectual distress. “Subjective volition, passion -it is,” says Hegel, “that sets men in activity: men will not interest -themselves for anything unless they find their individuality gratified -by its attainment.” This common end, this desire of personal relief -or satisfaction, we see throughout recorded or indicated history -impelling every living creature on the earth; merging itself, as we -trace it backwards, in the mere apparent will to live of organisms -not recognized as conscious, and in the indestructible energy of the -inorganic. The field of activity thus conceived presents a panorama of -somewhat large extent; but a very small division of it is all that we -shall have to do with. For morality, whatever be its nature and basis, -certainly does not become recognizable to us, we cannot attribute the -quality of rightness or wrongness, until the formation of society has -begun, until individuals are in conscious relation with individuals -other than themselves. - -If we could imagine an individual absolutely isolated, and having -no relation at all with other sentient beings, _we_ could not say -that it was moral or immoral for him to eat, drink, sleep, breathe, -wash himself, take exercise, cough, sneeze, and the like, just as -much or as little, when or where he felt inclined. His conduct in -these activities must appear to us absolutely indifferent. We may -have some vague reflected suppositions as to what is necessary for -the dignity and development of the man’s “self,” as we might call -it; but this is a matter about which the man may pretend to know -as much as we do; and we have really no valid ground for prejudice -against the habits of the recluse Indian fakir, who has, on the -other hand, considerable claims to be regarded as a peculiarly holy -individual. But of every man living in society we can say, that if he -starves himself into inefficiency; if he gorges or fuddles himself; -if he sleeps unseasonably; if he abstains from the fresh air, the -cleanliness, and the exercise, necessary to keep his body healthy and -his presence pleasant; if he destroys his powers by over-work; then he -is acting wrongly, immorally, unreasonably, in extreme cases insanely. -(Insanity is only the name we give to abnormal deviation from what -are accepted as reasonable and intelligible desires and behavior.) -And if this is the case with actions of the kind loosely described as -self-regarding, with those which most nearly concern the agent’s own -person, much more is it so with the kind of actions which necessarily -and invariably affect other persons. Those relations of the individual -with his fellows in which subjective morality is chiefly recognized, -have no existence at all apart from society. Subjective morality, -then, being only distinguishable in the State, the extent of our -panorama is already much diminished; for in every gentile or national -society, and to some degree in the World-State of to-day, we find the -individualist activity, the desire and passion of the human unit, very -largely exercising itself in accordance with what we call a moral -habit. Innumerable types of society have been formed in the process of -life-development. In the oldest of these we recognize the elements of a -conventional morality, similar to that by which our own human society -is held together. We consider the ways of the ant; and we see that they -are wise. - -We find that in all societies those actions and habits are approved as -moral which tend to preserve the existence of society and the cohesion -and convenience of its members; and that those which are or seem to be -fraught with contrary tendencies are considered immoral. It is plain -that no society in which these judgments were habitually reversed -could continue in existence; and this fact will account for much of -that general inherited disposition to actions socially beneficial, -and inherited repugnance to those presumably the reverse, which form -so large a part of what we speak of as conscience. So deep in grain -have many of these common judgments come to be that their influence -has passed out of consciousness; and they are obeyed automatically or -instinctively without any reflexion as to their moral aspect arising in -the agent’s mind. It is, for example, so necessary for the existence -of society that the citizen should abstain from slaughtering at large, -such self-restraint is so evidently reasonable, its non-observance -so contrary to common sense, that when we find a murder done for -mere desire of bloodshed and under the impulse of no other passion -whatsoever, we do not think of the murderer as immoral, but rather -as insane, judging the man who would destroy the life of society as -coroners’ juries by their habitual verdict upon suicides pronounce of -the man who destroys his own. - -Most of the habits of activity and avoidance, necessary for the mere -physical existence of the individual as moral actions and abstentions -are necessary for the existence of society, have long ago become -automatic, and are sunk, so far as common opinion is concerned, -permanently out of the purview of moral criticism. All the involuntary -functions of the human body which conduce to its nutrition and -maintenance in health have been gradually acquired in the course of -ages, as the conditions necessary for the expression of the mere animal -will to live the largest and freest life permitted by the physical -environment. And as the bodily form and functions of the typical -individual of each species have accrued and become established as the -indispensable mechanic of the mere determination to exist, so the form -and institution of society, and the relations and mutual behavior of -its individuals, have been adjusted and established as the equally -indispensable conditions for the expression of the determination to -exist more fully, for the enlargement of freedom and opportunity for -the gratification of those passions and aspirations, the display of -those energies and activities which characterize the more complex forms -of life as it passes from the inorganic and vegetative to the conscious -and self-conscious stages of its evolution. - -The primitive forms of human society we must infer to have grown up -and survived simply because they increased the efficiency of man -as a feeding and a fighting animal, just as did those of the wolf, -the beaver, and the ant. Society has now grown to be for man the -indispensable guarantee not only of nutrition and protection, but of -the opportunity to imagine and attain a thousand varieties of more -refined satisfaction. So far as man has attained freedom to do and -be as he desires, he has attained it only through the evolution of -society. When a society perishes, as societies organically weak among -stronger competitors have done and will do, the individual perishes -with it, or is forced backwards with impaired freedom until a fresh -social integration renews and extends his powers of self-development. -Societies, as has been pointed out by Sidney Webb on page 51, must -safeguard their existence to-day for the very same reasons for which -society has formed itself. It has grown up for the convenience of -individuals, for their defence and relief under the pressure of -all that was not themselves--of Nature, as we call it--beasts, and -competing men, to give a little breathing space, a little elbow -room, amid the storm and stress of primæval existence; and from -that beginning it has been unfolded and elaborated, each step of -progress effected for the convenience of active individuals, until the -individual of to-day is born as a leaf upon a mighty tree, or a coral -insect in a sponge, himself to live his individual life, and in living -it to modify the social organism in which he has his being. - -Reviewing the development in society of the conditions for the -satisfaction of the individual will to live, and to live in the best -way conceivable, we see in the progress of moral ideas the progress of -discovery of the most reasonable manner of ordering the life of the -individual and the form of social institutions under the contemporary -environment. It has already been pointed out that some kinds of -anti-social action are so unreasonable, so obviously prejudicial -to the attainment of the common end of conscious individuals, that -we brand them unhesitatingly as insane. Instances suggested were -extreme personal uncleanliness or dissipation, and extreme cruelty -or blood-thirstiness. The reason why other anti-social or indirectly -suicidal kinds of action are not yet classed as madness, though there -is a steady tendency towards so treating them, is plainly that some -activities of the individual, though hurtful to other citizens just -as the activity of a pack of wolves or a predatory tribe is hurtful -to adjacent societies, are commonly aimed at gratifying impulses and -passions which are not yet grown so rare as blood-thirst, are not yet -recognized as irrational or valueless, or even are acknowledged to be -in their proper scope harmless, desirable, or necessary. - -It is an established social convention (in England) that it is immoral -to steal or to defraud. Only in very extreme cases do we account these -pursuits as evidences of mania; for though injustice and dishonesty are -incompatible with the health of society, and thus actually unreasonable -and indirectly suicidal, the desires which prompt men to them are only -at worst exaggerations of the desire for wealth or subsistence, which -everyone recognizes as a necessary condition of the mere continuance -of life. Nay, where the alternative is death for lack of subsistence, -many consider that neither are immoral. At the other extreme, when the -instinct prompts aggression in defiance of the conscious reason and -without assignable purpose of gain, when Jean Valjean robs the little -Savoyard, or a noble earl pockets the sugar-tongs, we speak of mental -aberration or of kleptomania. - -The case of self-defence is similar. Quarrelsomeness and violence -are destructive of social existence, or at best impede its higher -elaboration. But readiness of resentment and quickness of fist were -for ages and ages necessities for individual survival; and for ages -and ages more their kindred social qualities or spirit and valor were -necessary for social survival, and accordingly ranked as virtues. The -instruction to turn the other cheek to the smiter is even now, perhaps, -an exaggeration of the precept commendable to Socialists when charged -by the London police: to suffer one’s self to be killed without reason -is clearly and unmistakably immoral. As the western world advances -out of warfare into industry, more and more of what was once military -virtue becomes immorality in the individual; until an habitual ferocity -which might once have qualified its subject for chieftainship may -nowadays consign him to penal servitude or Bedlam. - -The foregoing illustrations have been treated, for the present purpose, -with reference only to the effect of the behavior of the individual -upon society. It is indeed certain that anti-social action does not, -as a rule, effect permanent satisfaction for the individual (isolated -instances, of the type of Shelley’s Count Cenci, notwithstanding); but, -independently of this, the actions and propensities of the individual -have always, it appears, been judged by his fellows moral or immoral -chiefly according to their supposed effects upon society. The object of -every living creature being to do as he pleases, if what he pleases to -do incommodes other people they will take measures to restrain him from -doing it. This they strive to effect by means of laws and conventional -codes of morality, the main difference between the two being that the -code of law is enforced by the infliction of direct personal punishment -by the officers of the State. This acceptance of codes of laws and -conventions of morality leads to a secondary series of judgments as -to right and wrong; for it comes to be accounted immoral to break the -law whether the law itself be good or not, and reprehensible to depart -from convention whether convention be any longer reasonable or not. -This secondary morality is as it were the bud-sheath of the individual, -which support he cannot dispense with until he has come to his full -powers, but which he must dispense with if he is to fully realise his -own freedom. Customary morality prevents him during the process of his -education from pursuing his own satisfaction across the corns of his -fellow creatures. In the process of education he learns that for the -unit in society the word _self_ includes more than the individual: -the infant very soon finds out that what disagrees with his mother -disagrees with him; the child, that the failure of his father’s income -means misery and hunger to the family. To say nothing of the facts -of sympathy, every man born into an advanced society is early made -aware that the satisfaction of his mere material needs depends upon -the activities of that society around him quite as much as upon his -own. All through the growth of nations and societies the complexity -of this interdependence of individuals has increased, the areas of -social consciousness have been extended and unified, from the solitary -cave-dweller to the family or horde, from the tribe to the nation, and -from the nation, by commerce, to the world, till the fortunes of each -people have power over the hopes and fears of workers in every other, -and the arts, the learning, and the literature of a hundred painful -civilizations are available for us to-day, all the kingdoms of the -earth and their glory displayed in a moment of time. - -But not by bread alone does mankind live. Very early in the course of -human evolution must the type of individual to whom all society was -repugnant have been eliminated and suppressed by natural selection. -The social instinct, the disposition to find comfort in comradeship -independently of its material advantages, is of such evident -antiquity in Man that we are justified in speaking of it as one of -his fundamental and elementary characteristics. It is easy enough to -suggest theories of the origin of this adhesiveness, this affection, -this sympathy, in the conditions of racial survival: the important fact -for us is its remarkable susceptibility of cultivation and extension. -The individual in society does that which is pleasant to his friends, -and abstains from doing that which is unpleasant, not because he likes -to be thought a good fellow, or expects benefits in return, but simply -because it gives him immediate pleasure so to act. He is sensitive to -that which hurts them, not because he fears that his own defences are -weakened by their injury, but because they have actually become part of -himself by the extension of his consciousness over them. This social -instinct, this disposition to benevolent sympathy, appears almost -as inextinguishable as the personal desire of life: in innumerable -instances it has proved far stronger. - -The recognition by each individual of his dependence on society or -sensitiveness to his own interest, and his affection towards society -or sensitiveness to its interest: these two faces of the same fact -represent an intricate tissue of social consciousness extremely -sensitive to all kinds of anti-social, or immoral, action. The moral -education of the individual appears formally as the process of -learning, by sheer extension of knowledge and experience, and nothing -else, how he may harmonise and follow out his own desires in these two -aspects and their combinations. He has to learn how to provide for the -needs of his bodily life in a manner that will not interfere with the -freedom of others to do the same. Laws and conventions of morality -guide him at first in this respect; but the man cannot be said to be -free until he acts morally because, foreseeing that on the satisfaction -of these primary needs new desires will emerge whose satisfaction -will give him a more exquisite contentment, he perceives that it is -reasonable so to act. The existence and stability of society are the -indispensable guarantee for the general satisfaction of the primary -desires of individuals, therefore it is unreasonable to weaken society -by immoral action; but much more are the existence and health of -society indispensable conditions for the common birth and satisfaction -of the secondary desires, the desires which have created all that is -most valuable in civilisation and which find their satisfaction in -art, in culture, in human intercourse, in love. The moral education -of the individual is the lesson, not that desire is evil, and that he -can only attain his freedom by ceasing to desire, for this is death, -or desertion, and the army of the living presses on to fuller life; -but that the wider, fuller satisfaction is built upon the simpler, and -common morality a condition of its possibility; that there are certain -manners and methods in which, if he goes about to save his life, he -most infallibly will lose it; and that love, the social instinct, and -science, which is ordered knowledge, are his only reliable tutors in -practical morality. - -But man in society not only lives his individual life: he also -modifies the form of social institutions in the direction indicated by -reason--in such a manner, that is, as it seems to his understanding -will render them more efficient for securing freedom for that life -of his. And just as certain forms of individual activity, in their -passage into and through the field of positive criticism, appear first -as indifferent, because they seem to concern the individual only, then -as moral or immoral, because recognized as affecting society, later -as simply rational or insane, morality having here formally attained -its identification with reason and immorality with folly, and at -last become habitual, instinctive, and unconscious; so institutions, -originating in modes apparently accidental, come to be recognized -as useful and valuable additions to the machinery of existence, are -buttressed with all the authority and sanction of religion, and finally -pass into unquestioned acceptance by the common-sense of men. In time -some fundamental change in the conditions of the life of individuals -is introduced by causes similarly unforeseen: the form of the old -institution ceases to subserve the common end: it begins to cramp the -freedom of the majority, who no longer require its support. Meanwhile -it has established a minority, ostensibly controlling it for the -common weal, in a position to administer it in the sole interest of -their class. These, as their existence appears dependent on their -so administering it, cannot be untaught the habit except by such -modification of the institution as will render it again impossible for -any class to have a special interest in its contemporary form. - -This process is so familiar in history that it would be a waste of -time here to illustrate it by tracing it in the growth of monarchies, -aristocracies, priesthoods, chattel slavery, feudal bondage, -representative government, or others of its innumerable manifestations. -The institution of private property in certain things is in many -respects so reasonable and convenient for the majority of mankind, -and was so conspicuously advantageous for those stronger individuals -under whose leadership the beginnings of tribal civilisations were -developed, that very early in their history it received the sanction -of moral convention, religion, and law. It was obviously necessary -for the establishment of industrial society, that each man should own -the product of his labor and the tools necessary for him to labor -effectually. But the Industrial Revolution described in the third paper -of this series has entirely changed the conditions under which men -produce wealth, and the character of the tools with which they work, -while the sanctions of law and conventional morality still cling to -all that has been imported under the old definition of property. If -the idea so constantly appealed to in justification of property law -is to be realised; if the fruits of each man’s labor[68] are to be -guaranteed to him and he is to own the instruments with which he works; -if the laws of property are not to establish a parasitic class taking -tribute from the labor of others in the forms of Rent and Interest, -then we must modify our administration of property. We must admit that -as the agricultural laborer cannot individually own the farm he works -on and its stock, as the factory hand cannot individually own the mill, -land and industrial capital are things in which private property is -impossible, except on condition of a small minority owning all such -property and the great majority none at all. - -Socialists contend that this system of private property in land and -capital is actively destructive of the conditions in which alone the -common morality necessary for happy social life is possible. Without -any demand upon the faith of those persons who deny the capacity of -average human nature for the temperance and kindliness indispensable -for the success of a true co-operative commonwealth, they assert that -this modern development of the property system (a development of the -last few generations only, and unprecedented in the history of the -world), is more and more forcing the individual into anti-social -disposition and action, and thereby destroying the promise of free and -full existence, which only the health and progressive development of -the social organism can give him. It has become plainly reasonable that -when this is the effect of our property system, we should modify our -institutions in the directions which will give us freedom, just as we -modified the institutions which subjected us to a feudal aristocracy, -and abolished for ever the laws which enabled one man to hold another -as his chattel slave. - -There is on record a Greek proverb, that so soon as a man has ensured -a livelihood, then he should begin to practise virtue. We all protest -that he will do well to practise virtue under any circumstances; -but we admit on reflection that our judgment as to what is virtuous -action, depends upon the circumstances under which action is to be -taken. Whether we approve the killing of one man by another, depends -entirely on the circumstances of the case; and there is scarcely one -of the acts which our laws regard as criminal, which could not, under -imaginable circumstances, be justified. Our laws, and our conventional -opinions, as to what conduct is moral or immoral, are adapted to the -ordinary circumstances of the average man in society, society being in -them presumed to be homogeneous, not to contain in itself essential -distinctions between classes, or great contrasts between the conditions -of individuals. - -But that element in our private property system which is at present -the main object of the Socialist attack, the individual ownership of -the instruments of production, land and capital, in an age when the -use of those instruments has become co-operative, results, and must -inevitably result, as the foregoing dissertations have sought to prove, -in the division of society into two classes, whose very livelihood is -ensured to them by methods essentially different. The livelihood of -the typical proletarian is earned by the exercise of his faculties for -useful activity: the livelihood of the typical capitalist, or owner of -property, is obtained, without any contribution of his or her activity, -in the form of a pension called rent, interest, or dividend, guaranteed -by law out of the wealth produced from day to day by the activities of -the proletariat. - -Observe the effect of this distinction in moral phenomena. Most of our -common opinions as to social morality, are adapted to a society in -which every citizen is contributing active service. The most ancient -and universal judgments of mankind as to the virtues of industry, of -honesty, of loyalty and forbearance between man and man, of temperance, -fortitude and just dealing, point to the elementary conditions -necessary for the survival and strengthening of societies of equal and -free individuals dependent for their subsistence upon the exercise -of each one’s abilities, and upon his fitness for co-operation with -his fellows. But where a class or society exists, not dependent upon -its own industry, but feeding like a parasite upon another society -or class; when the individuals of such a parasitic society in no way -depend for their livelihood or their freedom upon their fitness for -co-operation one with another upon themselves, or upon any personal -relation with the class that feeds them; then the observation of the -moral conventions of industrial and co-operative societies is in many -respects quite unnecessary for the continuance of the life of the -parasitic society, or for the pleasant existence of the individuals -composing it. All that is necessary is that the established laws and -conventions should continue to be observed by the industrial class -(“it is required _in stewards_ that a man be found faithful”); and -as the existence of the propertied class in modern societies, does -depend ultimately upon the observance by the bulk of the people of -this conventional morality, the propertied class professes publicly -to venerate and observe conventions, which, in its private practice, -it has long admitted to be obsolete. This complication is a perennial -source of cant. To this we owe the spectacle of Sir William Harcourt -advocating total abstinence, of Mr. Arthur Balfour commending -Christianity; to this the continual inculcation of industry and thrift -by idle and extravagant people, with many another edifying variation on -the theme of Satan’s reproval of sin. Temperance, Christian morality, -industry, and economy are of considerable social utility; but for -the members of a propertied class they are not necessitated by the -conditions of its existence, and consequently in such classes are -neither observed nor commonly made the subject of moral criticism. - -Consider the case of industry alone--of the moral habit of earning -one’s subsistence by useful activity. Assuming sustenance to be -guaranteed, there is no obvious and pressing social necessity for -such exertion. No doubt the paradise of the maid-of-all-work--where -she means to do _nothing_ for ever and ever--is the paradise of an -undeveloped intelligence. A society relieved of the function of -providing its own material sustenance need not relapse into general -torpor, though the result is very commonly that an individual so -circumstanced relapses into uselessness. It will be vain to preach to -such an individual that he will find his fullest satisfaction in honest -toil: he will simply laugh in your face, and go out partridge shooting, -hunting, or yachting, or to Monte Carlo or the Rocky Mountains, finding -in such an exercise of his capacities the keenest imaginable enjoyment -for months in succession. He may feel no inclination at all to work -for the benefit of the people whose work is supporting him: all that -he, like the rest of us, requires is to find some means of passing his -time in an agreeable or exciting manner. Accordingly, in that section -of our nation which speaks of itself as “society,” being indeed a -society separated by economic parasitism from the common mass, we find -that the characteristic activity is the provision of agreeable and -exciting methods of passing time. This being the end of fashionable -society, its code of morality is naturally quite different from the -code suitable for industrial societies. Truthfulness is preached in -these as a cardinal virtue. Lying is of course common enough in all -classes, and is generally immoral; but in the fashionable world it -is not only a perfectly legitimate means of avoiding an undesired -visitor, or almost any other unpleasant experience: it is a positive -necessity of conventional politeness and good manners. It is really -harmless here, almost a virtue. To return to the virtue of industry: -though the conventional morality of the people, necessary for the life -of the nation, permeates with its vibrations this parasitic society -which it enfolds; and though the unfailing contentment which a really -intelligent man finds in social activity keeps a good many of the -propertied class usefully occupied, the actual public opinion of that -class is absolutely in accordance with the conditions of their life. -The clerk in a Government office is congratulated by middle-class -acquaintances on his luck in obtaining a berth where he need do no -more work than he chooses; and it is habitually assumed that he will -choose, like the Trafalgar Square fountains, to play from ten to four, -with an interval for lunch. That may or may not be an adequate account -of his activities: the significant thing is that such an assumption -should not be considered insulting. But how indignantly will the very -same acquaintances denounce the idleness and untrustworthiness of a -British working man suspected, in the service of a private master, of -interpreting his time work as most servants of the public are good -humoredly assumed, without hint of disapproval, to interpret theirs! - -This obsolescence of elementary social morality is most noticeable in -women dependent upon incomes from property. They are doubly removed -from the primary conditions of life; they are less likely than their -men folk to be engaged in any work of perceptible social utility -outside of their own homes; and their intellectual education being -generally far more imperfect, it is only natural that their ideas of -morality should be still more intimately adapted to the conditions -of their class, and less to the general conditions of human society. -The angels of heaven, we have always understood, are exempt from the -apparatus of digestion, and are clothed as freely as the lilies of the -field. In any society where all common needs are so supplied it would -be immoral, surely, because a waste of time, to work as for a living. -Now the universal ideal of capitalism is that man, being created a -little lower than the angels, should raise himself to their level in -this respect by the acquisition of property, a process pleasantly -described as attaining a competence or independence, that is to say -the right to be dependent and incompetent. The result of this has -been a prejudice, which only within quite recent years has begun to -be seriously shaken, that it is humiliating, even disgraceful, for a -lady to have to earn her own living at all, for a gentleman to practise -a handicraft for money, for a nobleman to go into trade: a prejudice -for which, in a class society, there was much justification, but -which is obviously a fragment of class morality directly antagonistic -to the common social morality which recognises all useful industry -as praiseworthy. It is now yielding to economic pressure and to the -stimulus of the desire to get rich. Ladies are being driven, and in -spite of Mr. Walter Besant’s protestations will continue to be driven, -into most of the female handicrafts, though some are still outside the -pale of respectability. Ranching in America, though not yet drovering -and butchering in England, is suitable occupation for the aristocracy. -The “directing” of companies and the patronizing of nitrogenous -Volunteer Colonels are legitimate modes of exploiting of a title. The -prejudice against useful employments is balanced for decency’s sake by -a hypocritical laudation of useless ones. The fiction so dear to the -Primrose Dame, that the rich are the employers of the poor, the idlers -the supporters of the industrious, takes nowadays forms more insidious -than the rugged proposition that private vices are public benefits. The -amusements, the purely recreational activities, of country gentlemen -are glorified in the _National Review_[69] as “hard work.” It is -pretended that the leisured class is the indispensable patron and -promoter of culture and the fine arts. The claim that such functions -are virtues is a direct concession to the feeling that some effort must -be made to exhibit the practices of parasitic society as compatible -with its preaching of the common social morality. - -The same necessity causes an exaggerated tribute of praise to be -paid to such really useful work as is done under no compulsion but -that of the social instinct. This kind of activity is habitually -pointed to, by the friends of those who are engaged in it, as -evidence of extraordinary virtue. A few hours of attention every week -to the condition of the poor, a few gratuitously devoted to local -administration, a habit of industry in any branch of literature or -science: these are imputed as an excess of righteousness by persons -who denounce the wage laborer as an idler and a shirk. Such activity -is work of supererogation, approved but not required or expected. The -motto of “noblesse oblige” has not been adopted by the plutocracy. -Similar approbation and admiration are extended to those who, while -already earning their living by a reasonable day’s work, employ their -spare time, or a part of it, in gratuitous activities of the kinds -referred to. It may be safely said that by far the greater portion of -this kind of work is done by people who are simultaneously earning an -income in middle class professions or by the less exhausting forms of -wage labor. Most of them have probably had experience of the ridiculous -inappropriateness of the commendation usually paid to their gratuitous -energy by well-to-do friends. The activity is moral, no doubt; but -its exercise gives no sensation of virtue or praiseworthiness; it is -followed because it is seen to be reasonable, because it is the path -indicated by common-sense towards the satisfaction of the individual -passion for the extension of freedom and love. - -The phenomena of class morality are ancient and familiar enough. -They have varied throughout history with the changing character of -the basis of class distinctions. The great permanent distinction of -sex, and the social relations between man and woman which have arisen -thereout in the period of civilisation from which the world is now -emerging, have resulted not only in the establishment of distinct codes -of chastity for the sexes, but also in innumerable prejudices against -the participation of one sex or the other in activities having nothing -whatever to do with physiological distinction. They have even succeeded -in producing, through inequality of freedom and education, well marked -differences in mental habit, which show themselves continually when -men and women are confronted with the same questions of truthfulness, -honor, or logic. It is hardly necessary to observe that most of these -differences are distinctly traceable to the institution of private -property, and to its concentration in the hands of the male as the -stronger individual in a competitive society. The class moralities -of societies whose orders have been based immediately on status or -caste have formed the subject of an extensive literature. The tracing -of all such distinctions to their root in economic circumstances is -scarcely less interesting than the investigation of the same foundation -for sex morality. But even the interpreters of the Church Catechism -have abandoned the appeal to status as the basis of duty; the idea -of hereditary aristocracy is dead; and class distinctions and their -appurtenant ethics are now founded directly and obviously on property. - -We have glanced at some effects of our present property system which -work continually for the destruction of the traditions of social -morality in the capitalist class. The fundamental idea of that system, -that man can live without working, as the angels of heaven, is -(fortunately) self-contradictory in this respect, that in human society -no class can so live except by the double labor of another class or -classes. The would-be angelic society on earth must either own chattel -slaves, or be a military caste taking tribute, or a parasitical and -exploiting class extracting rent and interest by the operation of -the industrial system analysed in the preceding papers. Such a class -and such a system are, as we are all becoming aware, more virulently -revolutionary in their operation, and more certain to bring about their -own destruction than either chattel slavery or feudalism. Of these -three phases of human injustice that of wage slavery will surely be -the shortest. But meanwhile the propertied class assumes to represent -civilisation; its approved morality is preached and taught in church -and schools; it debases our public opinion; and it directly poisons all -that host of workers who are at present hangers-on of the rich, whether -as menial servants or as ministering to their especial amusements and -extravagance. There is no such snob as a fashionable dressmaker; and -there is no class of the proletariat so dehumanised as the class of -domestic servants. - -Now if these results are effected in the class whose livelihood is -assured, and whose education and culture have given it a hold on the -higher inducements to morality--if we here find morality strangled at -the root and starving, what shall we find when we turn to the masses -whose livelihood is not assured them? Our Greek, perhaps, would say -that it was impossible for them to practise virtue, just as Plato in -his “Republic” suggested that only the philosophic class could be -really moral, since slaves and the proletariat could not receive the -intellectual education necessary to train the reason. The great bulk -of the wage earning class in modern civilised countries is so far -assured of its livelihood that it remains thoroughly permeated with -common social morality. It is, from habit and preference, generally -industrious and kindly, thus exhibiting the two most important -qualifications for social life. It remains to a great extent honest, -though competition and capitalism are directly antagonistic to -honesty. The decalogue of commercial morality has its own peculiar -interpretation of stealing, murder, false witness and coveting; and -yet the most unscrupulous wrecker in the City will be outraged in his -finest feelings by the class morality of the plumber, who, called in -to bring the gas to reason, takes the opportunity to disorganise the -water-supply and introduce a duster into the drain. The employer is -aghast at the increase of idleness and bad workmanship under a system -in which the good workman knows that to work his best will not only not -be worth his while but will lead to the exaction of heavier tasks from -his fellows. - -But it is not in the mass of the proletariat that the action of our -property system in destroying elementary morality is most conspicuous. -It is in those whom it excludes even from the proletariat proper that -this extreme result is clearest. The characteristic operation of the -modern industrial economy is continually and repeatedly to thrust -out individuals or bodies of the workers from their settlement in -the social organism--to eject, as it were, the coral insect from the -cell in which he is developing. The capitalist farming system expels -the agricultural laborer from the village; the machine expels the -craftsman from the ranks of skilled labor; the perpetual competition -and consolidation of capital in every trade alternately destroys -employment in that trade and disorganises others. Overproduction in one -year leaves thousands of workers wageless in the next. The ranks of -unskilled labor, the army of the unemployed, are day by day recruited -in these fashions. An inveterate social habit, an almost indestructible -patience, a tenacious identification of his own desire with the -desire of those whom he loves, in most cases preserve the worker from -accepting the sentence of exclusion from society. If he is able-bodied, -intelligent and fortunate, he will struggle with hard times till he -finds fresh occupation among strange surroundings; but woe to him if -he be weakly, or old, or unpractical. In such a case he will almost -infallibly become a pauper or an outcast, one of that residuum of -unskilled, unemployed, unprofitable and hopeless human beings which -in all great cities festers about the base of the social pyramid. And -his children will become the street Arabs and the corner-boys and the -child-whores and the sneak-thieves who, when they come of age, accept -their position as outside of social life and resume the existence of -the wild beasts that fathered man--the purely predatory and unsocial -activity of harrying their neighbors for their own support. Before -society was, morality was not: those who have no part nor lot in the -ends for which society exists will adapt their morality to suit their -outcast state: there will indeed be honor among thieves, just as there -will be cant and insincerity among the parasitic rich; but the youth -who has been nurtured between the reformatory and the slum has little -chance of finding a foothold, if he would, in the restless whirl of -modern industry, and still less of retaining permanently such foothold -as he may manage to find. - -When the conditions of social life are such that the individual may -be excluded through no unfitness of his own for co-operation, or may -be born without a chance of acquiring fitness for it, we are brought -face to face with the conditions of primitive ages. And if you force -him back upon the elemental instincts, one of two things will happen. -Either, if the individual is weak through physical deterioration or -incapacity to combine with his fellow outcasts, he will be crushed -and killed by society and putrefy about its holy places; or, if he -has indomitable life and vigor, he will revert to the argument of -elemental forces: he will turn and explode society. Here, then, we -should fear explosion, for we are not as submissive in extremities as -the proletariats of arrested Indian civilisations. But with us the -class whose freedom is incessantly threatened by the operation of -private capitalism is the class which by its political position holds -in its hands the key to the control of industrial form: that is to say, -its members can modify, as soon as they elect to, the laws of property -and inheritance in this State of Britain. They can, as soon as they -see clearly what is needed supersede institutions now immoral because -useless and mischievous by institutions which shall re-establish the -elementary conditions of social existence and the possibility of the -corresponding morality--namely, the opportunity for each individual to -earn his living and the compulsion upon him to do so. - -Returning from the consideration of the “residuum” and the “criminal -classes,” we find that even the workers of the employed proletariat are -by no means wholly moral. In spite of the massive healthiness of their -behavior in ordinary relations, they are generally coarse in their -habits; they lack intelligence in their amusements and refinement in -their tastes. The worst result of this is the popularity of boozing -and gambling and allied forms of excitement, with their outcomes in -violence and meanness. But when once society has ensured for man the -opportunity for satisfying his primary needs--once it has ensured him -a healthy body and a wholesome life, his advance in the refinements of -social morality, in the conception and satisfaction of his secondary -and more distinctly human desires, is solely and entirely a matter of -education. This will be attested by every man and woman who has at all -passed through the primary to the secondary passions. But education in -the sense alluded to is impossible for the lad who leaves school at -fourteen and works himself weary six days in the week ever afterwards. - -The oldest Socialistic institution of considerable importance and -extent is the now decrepit Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has -always insisted on the duty of helping the poor, not on the ground -of the social danger of a “residuum,” but by the nobler appeal to -the instinct of human benevolence. The Catholic Church developed, -relatively to the enlightenment of its age, the widest and freest -system of education the world has ever seen before this century. -Catholic Christianity, by its revolutionary conception that God -was incarnated in Man, exploding the hideous superstition that the -imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart was only to do evil -continually, and substituting the faith in the perfectibility of each -individual soul; by its brilliant and powerful generalisations that God -must be Love, because there is nothing better, and that man is freed -from the law by the inward guidance of grace, has done more for social -morality than any other religion of the world. - -Protestant Individualism in England shattered the Catholic Church; -founded the modern land system upon its confiscated estates; destroyed -the mediæval machinery of charity and education; and in religion -rehabilitated the devil, and the doctrines of original sin and the -damnable danger of reason and good works. - -Out of the wreckage of the Catholic Church, and amid the dissolution -of the Protestant religion, there successively emerged, at an interval -of some three hundred years, the two great socialistic institutions of -the Poor Law and the People’s Schools. As the pretence of a foundation -of Christian obligation withered from out of the Poor Law, till it has -come to be outspokenly recognised as nothing but a social safety-valve, -the individualist and commercial administration of this rudimentary -socialistic machinery deprived it of its efficiency even in this -elementary function. He to whom the workhouse means the break up of his -home, and his own condemnation to a drudgery insulting because useless -and wasteful, would as lief take his exclusion from society in another -and a less degrading way, either by death, or by reluctant enrolment in -the “residuum”; and so it has come to pass that outside of their use -as hospitals for the aged and infirm, the poor-houses are principally -employed as the club-houses and hotels of the great fraternity of -habitual tramps and cadgers; and not till he has sunk to this level -does the struggling proletarian seek “work” there. - -Socialists would realize the idea of the Poor Law, regarding that -society as deadly sick in which the individual cannot find subsistence -by industry, in the only way in which it can be realised: namely, by -the organisation of production and the resumption of its necessary -instruments. It is not so great a matter in their eyes that the -perpetual toll of rent and interest deprives the workers of the wealth -which their activities produce; nor is it the actual pressure of this -heavy tribute that would force on the Social Revolution, if the -system only left men the assurance of the comforts of tame beasts. It -is the constant disquiet and uncertainty, the increasing frequency of -industrial crises, that are the revolutionary preachers of our age; and -it is the disappearance at the base and at the summit of society of the -conditions of social morality, that rouses those whose mere material -interests remain unaffected. - -But though it is not envy or resentment at this tribute that mostly -moves us to our warfare, this tribute we must certainly resume if the -ideal of the school is to effect its social purpose. For the ideal of -the school implies, in the first place, leisure to learn: that is to -say, the release of children from all non-educational labor until mind -and physique have had a fair start and training, and the abolition of -compulsion on the adult to work any more than the socially necessary -stint. The actual expenditure on public education must also be -considerably increased, at any rate until parents are more generally -in a position to instruct their own children. But as soon as the mind -has been trained to appreciate the inexhaustible interest and beauty of -the world, and to distinguish good literature from bad, the remainder -of education, granted leisure, is a comparatively inexpensive matter. -Literature is become dirt-cheap; and all the other educational arts can -be communally enjoyed. The schools of the adult are the journal and the -library, social intercourse, fresh air, clean and beautiful cities, -the joy of the fields, the museum, the art-gallery, the lecture-hall, -the drama, and the opera; and only when these schools are free and -accessible to all will the reproach of proletarian coarseness be done -away. - -Yet the most important influence in the repairing of social morality -may perhaps be looked for not so much from the direct action of -these elements of the higher education, as from those very socialist -forms of property and industry, which we believe to be the primary -condition for allowing such higher education to affect the majority at -all. Nothing so well trains the individual to identify his life with -the life of society as the identification of the conditions of his -material sustenance with those of his fellows, in short, as industrial -co-operation. Not for many centuries has there been such compulsion as -now for the individual to acknowledge a social ethic. For now, for the -first time since the dissolution of the early tribal communisms, and -over areas a hundred times wider than theirs, the individual worker -earns his living, fulfils his most elementary desire, not by direct -personal production, but by an intricate co-operation in which the -effect and value of his personal effort are almost indistinguishable. -The apology for individualist appropriation is exploded by the logic -of the facts of communist production: no man can pretend to claim the -fruits of his own labor; for his whole ability and opportunity for -working are plainly a vast inheritance and contribution of which he is -but a transient and accidental beneficiary and steward; and his power -of turning them to his own account depends entirely upon the desires -and needs of other people for his services. The factory system, the -machine industry, the world commerce, have abolished individualist -production; and the completion of the co-operative form towards which -the transition stage of individualist capitalism is hurrying us, will -render a conformity with social ethics, a universal condition of -tolerable existence for the individual. - -This expectation is already justified by the phenomena of contemporary -opinion. The moral ideas appropriate to Socialism are permeating the -whole of modern society. They are clearly recognisable not only in -the proletariat, but also in the increasing philanthropic activity of -members of the propertied class, who, while denouncing Socialism as a -dangerous exaggeration of what is necessary for social health, work -honestly enough for alleviatory reforms which converge irresistibly -towards it. The form, perhaps, does not outrun the spirit, any more -than the spirit anticipates the form; and it may have been sufficient -in this paper to have shown some grounds for the conviction that -Socialist morality, like that of all preceding systems, is only that -morality which the conditions of human existence have made necessary; -that it is only the expression of the eternal passion of life seeking -its satisfaction through the striving of each individual for the -freest and fullest activity; that Socialism is but a stage in the -unending progression out of the weakness and the ignorance in which -society and the individual alike are born, towards the strength and -the enlightenment in which they can see and choose their own way -forward--from the chaos where morality is not to the consciousness -which sees that morality is reason; and to have made some attempt to -justify the claim that the cardinal virtue of Socialism is nothing else -than Common Sense. - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[66] “The Quintessence of Socialism.” Swan, Sonnenschein and Co. - -[67] _E. G._, see “Communism and Socialism,” by Theodore D. Woolsey -Sampson, Low and Co., London. - -[68] To the intelligent Socialist this phrase has, of course, no -meaning. But against the non-Socialist who employs it, it may be -legitimately used, _ad captandum_. - -[69] See _National Review_ for February, 1888, “Are Rich Landowners -Idle?” by Lady Janetta Manners (now Duchess of Rutland). - - - - -THE ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY. - - - - -PROPERTY UNDER SOCIALISM. - -BY GRAHAM WALLAS. - - -In the early days of Socialism no one who was not ready with a complete -description of Society as it ought to be, dared come forward to -explain any point in the theory. Each leader had his own method of -organising property, education, domestic life, and the production of -wealth. Each was quite sure that mankind had only to fashion themselves -after his model in order, like the prince and princess in the fairy -story, to live happily ever after. Every year would then be like the -year before; and no more history need be written. Even now a thinker -here and there like Gronlund or Bebel sketches in the old spirit an -ideal commonwealth; though he does so with an apology for attempting -to forecast the unknowable. But Socialists generally have become, if -not wiser than their spiritual fathers, at least less willing to use -their imagination. The growing recognition, due in part to Darwin, -of causation in the development of individuals and societies; the -struggles and disappointments of half a century of agitation; the -steady introduction of Socialistic institutions by men who reject -Socialist ideas, all incline us to give up any expectation of a final -and perfect reform. We are more apt to regard the slow and often -unconscious progress of the Time spirit as the only adequate cause of -social progress, and to attempt rather to discover and proclaim what -the future _must_ be, than to form an organisation of men determined to -make the future what it should be. - -But the new conception of Socialism has its dangers as well as the old. -Fifty years ago Socialists were tempted to exaggerate the influence -of the ideal, to expect everything from a sudden impossible change of -all mens’ hearts. Nowadays we are tempted to under-value the ideal--to -forget that even the Time spirit itself is only the sum of individual -strivings and aspirations, and that again and again in history changes -which might have been delayed for centuries or might never have come at -all, have been brought about by the persistent preaching of some new -and higher life, the offspring not of circumstance but of hope. And of -all the subjects upon which men require to be brought to a right mind -and a clear understanding, there is, Socialists think, none more vital -to-day than Property. - -The word Property has been used in nearly as many senses as the word -Law. The best definition I have met with is John Austin’s “any right -which gives to the entitled party such a power or liberty of using -or disposing of the subject ... as is merely limited generally by -the rights of all other persons.”[70] This applies only to private -property. It will be convenient in discussing the various claims of the -State, the municipality, and the individual, to use the word in a wider -sense to denote not only the “power or liberty” of the individual, but -also the “rights of all other persons.” In this sense I shall speak -of the property of the State or municipality. I shall also draw a -distinction, economic perhaps rather than legal, between property in -things, or the exclusive right of access to defined material objects, -property in debts and future services, and property in ideas (copyright -and patent right). - -The material things in which valuable property rights can exist, may -be roughly divided into means of production and means of consumption. -Among those lowest tribes of savages who feed on fruit and insects, -and build themselves at night a rough shelter with boughs of trees, -there is little distinction between the acts of production and -consumption. But in a populous and civilised country very few even of -the simplest wants of men are satisfied directly by nature. Nearly -every commodity which man consumes is produced and renewed by the -deliberate application of human industry to material objects. The -general stock of materials on which such industry works is “Land.” Any -materials which have been separated from the general stock or have -been already considerably modified by industry, are called capital -if they are either to be used to aid production or are still to be -worked on before they are consumed. When they are ready to be consumed -they are “wealth for consumption.” Such an analysis, though generally -employed by political economists, is of necessity very rough. No one -can tell whether an object is ready for immediate consumption or not, -unless he knows the way in which it is to be consumed. A pine forest -in its natural condition is ready for the consumption of a duke with -a taste for the picturesque; for he will let the trees rot before -his eyes. Cotton-wool, a finished product in the hands of a doctor, -is raw material in the hands of a spinner. But still the statement -that Socialists work for the owning of the means of production by the -community and the means of consumption by individuals, represents -fairly enough their practical aim. Not that they desire to prevent -the community from using its property whenever it will for direct -consumption, as, for instance, when a piece of common land is used -for a public park, or the profits of municipal waterworks are applied -to keep up a municipal library. Nor do they contemplate any need for -preventing individuals from working at will on their possessions in -such a way as to make them more valuable. Even Gronlund, with all -his hatred of private industry, could not, if he would, prevent any -citizen from driving a profitable trade by manufacturing bread into -buttered toast at the common fire. But men are as yet more fit for -association in production, with a just distribution of its rewards, -than for association in the consumption of the wealth produced. It is -true indeed that the economies of associated consumption promise to be -quite as great as those of associated production; and it was of these -that the earlier Socialists mainly thought. They believed always that -if a few hundred persons could be induced to throw their possessions -and earnings into a common stock to be employed according to a common -scheme, a heaven on earth would be created. Since then, an exhaustive -series of experiments has proved that in spite of its obvious economy -any system of associated consumption as complete as Fourier’s -“Phalanstère” or Owen’s “New Hampshire” is, except under very unusual -conditions, distasteful to most men as they now are. Our picture -galleries, parks, workmen’s clubs, or the fact that rich people are -beginning to live in flats looked after by a common staff of servants, -do indeed shew that associated consumption is every year better -understood and enjoyed; but it remains true that pleasures chosen by -the will of the majority are often not recognised as pleasures at all. - -As long as this is so, private property and even private industry must -exist along with public property and public production. For instance, -each family now insists on having a separate home, and on cooking -every day a separate series of meals in a separate kitchen. Waste -and discomfort are the inevitable result; but families at present -prefer waste and discomfort to that abundance which can only be bought -by organisation and publicity. Again, English families constitute -at present isolated communistic groups, more or less despotically -governed. Our growing sense of the individual responsibility and -individual rights of wives and children seems already to be lessening -both the isolation of these groups and their internal coherency; but -this tendency must go very much further before society can absorb the -family life, or the industries of the home be managed socially. Thus, -associated production of all the means of family life may be developed -to a very high degree before we cease to feel that an Englishman’s -home should be his castle, with free entrance and free egress alike -forbidden. It is true that the ground on which houses are built -could immediately become the property of the community; and when one -remembers how most people in England are now lodged, it is obvious that -they would gladly inhabit comfortable houses built and owned by the -State. But they certainly would at present insist on having their own -crockery and chairs, books and pictures, and on receiving a certain -proportion of the value they produce in the form of a yearly or weekly -income to be spent or saved as they pleased. Now whatever things of -this kind we allow a man to possess, we must allow him to exchange, -since exchange never takes place unless both parties believe themselves -to benefit by it. Further, bequest must be allowed, since any but a -moderate probate duty or personalty would, unless supported by a strong -and searching public opinion, certainly be evaded. Moreover, if we -desire the personal independence of women and children, then their -property, as far as we allow property at all, must for a long time to -come be most carefully guarded. - -There would remain therefore to be owned by the community the land -in the widest sense of the word, and the materials of those forms of -production, distribution, and consumption, which can conveniently be -carried on by associations larger than the family group. Here the main -problem is to fix in each case the area of ownership. In the case of -the principal means of communication and of some forms of industry, it -has been proved that the larger the area controlled, the greater is the -efficiency of management; so that the postal and railway systems, and -probably the materials of some of the larger industries, would be owned -by the English nation until that distant date when they might pass to -the United States or the British Empire, or the Federal Republic of -Europe. Land is perhaps generally better held by smaller social units. -The rent of a town or an agricultural district depends only partly on -those natural advantages which can be easily estimated once for all -by an imperial commissioner. The difference in the rateable value of -Warwick and of Birmingham is due, not so much to the sites of the two -towns, as to the difference in the industry and character of their -inhabitants. If the Birmingham men prefer, on the average, intense -exertion resulting in great material wealth, to the simpler and quieter -life lived at Warwick, it is obviously as unjust to allow the Warwick -men to share equally in the Birmingham ground rents, as it would be -to insist on one standard of comfort being maintained in Paris and in -Brittany. - -At the same time, those forms of natural wealth which are the -necessities of the whole nation and the monopolies of certain -districts, mines for instance, or harbors, or sources of water-supply, -must be “nationalised.” The salt and coal rings of to-day would be -equally possible and equally inconvenient under a system which made the -mining populations absolute joint owners of the mines. Even where the -land was absolutely owned by local bodies, those bodies would still -have to contribute to the national exchequer some proportion of their -income. The actual size of the units would in each case be fixed by -convenience; and it is very likely that the development of the County -Government Act and of the parochial and municipal systems will soon -provide us with units of government which could easily be turned into -units of ownership. - -The savings of communities--if I may use the word community to express -any Social Democratic unit from the parish to the nation--would -probably take much the same form that the accumulation of capital -takes nowadays: that is to say, they would consist partly of mills, -machinery, railways, schools, and the other specialised materials -of future industry, and partly of a stock of commodities such as -food, clothing, and money, by which workers might be supported -while performing work not immediately remunerative. The savings of -individuals would consist partly of consumable commodities or of the -means of such industry as had not been socialised, and partly of -deferred pay for services rendered to the community, such pay taking -the form of a pension due at a certain age, or of a sum of commodities -or money payable on demand. - -Voluntary associations of all kinds, whether joint-stock companies, -religious corporations, or communistic groups would, in the eyes of -the Social Democratic State, consist simply of so many individuals -possessing those rights of property which are allowed to individuals. -They might perform many very useful functions in the future as in the -past; but the history of the city companies, of the New River company, -the Rochdale Pioneers, or the Church of England shows the danger of -granting perpetual property rights to any association not co-extensive -with the community, although such association may exist for professedly -philanthropic objects. Even in the case of universities, where the -system of independent property-owning corporations has been found -to work best, the rights of the State should be delegated and not -surrendered. - -On this point the economic position of modern Social Democrats differs -widely from the transfigured joint stockism of the present co-operative -movement or from the object of the earlier Socialists, for whose -purposes complete community was always more important than complete -inclusiveness. Even Socialist writers of to-day do not always see -that the grouping of the citizens for the purpose of property holding -must be either on the joint-stock basis or on the territorial basis. -Gronlund, in spite of contradictory matter in other parts of his -“Co-operative Commonwealth,” still declares that “each group of workers -will have the power of distributing among themselves the whole exchange -value of their work,” which either means that they will, as long as -they are working, be the absolute joint owners of the materials which -they use, or means nothing at all. Now the proposal that any voluntary -association of citizens should hold absolute and perpetual property -rights in the means of production, seems to be not a step towards -Social Democracy, but a negation of the whole Social Democratic -idea. This of course brings us to the following difficulty. If our -communities even when originally inclusive of the whole population -are closed: that is, are confined to original members and their -descendants, new comers will form a class like the plebians in Rome, -or the “metoeci” in Athens, without a share in the common property -though possessed of full personal freedom; and such a class must be a -continual social danger. On the other hand, if all newcomers receive -at once full economic rights, then any country in which Socialism -or anything approaching it is established, will be at once over-run -by proletarian immigrants, from those countries in which the means -of production are still strictly monopolised. If this were allowed, -then, through the operation of the law of diminishing return and the -law of population based on it, the whole body of the inhabitants -even of a Socialist State, might conceivably be finally brought down -to the bare means of subsistence. It does not seem necessary to -conclude that Socialism must be established over the whole globe if -it is to be established anywhere. What is necessary is that we face -the fact, every day becoming plainer, that any determined attempt to -raise the condition of the proletariat in any single European country -must be accompanied by a law of aliens considerate enough to avoid -cruelty to refugees, or obstruction to those whose presence would -raise our intellectual or industrial average, but stringent enough to -exclude the unhappy “diluvies gentium,” the human rubbish which the -military empires of the continent are so ready to shoot upon any open -space. Such a law would be in itself an evil. It might be unfairly -administered; it might increase national selfishness and would probably -endanger international good will; it would require the drawing of a -great many very difficult lines of distinction; but no sufficient -argument has been yet advanced to disprove the necessity of it. - -On the question of private property in debts, the attitude of the law -in Europe has changed fundamentally in historical times. Under the -old Roman law, the creditor became the absolute owner of his debtor. -Nowadays, not only may a man by becoming bankrupt and surrendering all -his visible property, repudiate his debts and yet retain his personal -liberty; but in Factory Acts, Employers’ Liability Acts, Irish Land -Acts, etc., certain contracts are illegal under all circumstances. -With the growth of Socialism, this tendency would be quickened. The -law would look with extreme jealously upon any agreement by which one -party would be reduced even for a time to a condition of slavery, -or the other enabled to live even for a time without performing any -useful social function. And since it has been clearly recognised that -a certain access to the means of industry is a first condition of -personal freedom, the law would refuse to recognise any agreement to -debar a man from such access, or deprive him of the results of it. -No one would need to get into debt in order to provide himself with -the opportunity of work, nor would anyone be allowed to give up the -opportunity of work in order to obtain a loan. This, by making it more -difficult for creditors to recover debts, would also make it more -difficult for would-be debtors to obtain credit. The present homestead -law would, in fact, be extended to include everything which the State -thought necessary for a complete life. But as long as private industry -and exchange go on to such an extent as to make a private commercial -system convenient, so long will promises to pay circulate, and, if -necessary, be legally enforced under the conditions above marked out. - -To whatever extent private property is permitted, to that same extent -the private taking of Rent and Interest must be also permitted. If you -allow a selfish man to own a picture by Raphael, he will lock it up -in his own room unless you let him charge something for the privilege -of looking at it. Such a charge is at once Interest. If we wish all -Raphael’s pictures to be freely accessible to everyone, we must prevent -men not merely from exhibiting them for payment, but from owning them. - -This argument applies to other things besides Raphael’s pictures. -If we allow a man to own a printing press, or a plough, or a set of -bookbinders’ tools, or a lease of a house or farm, we must allow him so -to employ his possession that he may, without injuring his neighbor, -get from it the greatest possible advantage. Otherwise, seeing that the -community is not responsible for its intelligent use, any interference -on the part of the community may well result in no intelligent use -being made of it at all; in which event all privately owned materials -of industry not actually being used by their owners would be as -entirely wasted as if they were the subjects of a chancery suit. It -is easy to see that the Duke of Bedford is robbing the community of -the rent of Covent Garden. It is not so easy to see that the owners -of the vacant land adjoining Shaftesbury Avenue have been robbing the -community for some years past of the rent which ought to have been -made out of the sites which they have left desolate. I know that it -has been sometimes said by Socialists: “Let us allow the manufacturer -to keep his mill and the Duke of Argyle to keep his land, as long as -they do not use them for exploitation by letting them out to others on -condition of receiving a part of the wealth created by those others.” -Then, we are told, the manufacturer or Duke will soon discover that he -must work hard for a living. Such sentiments are seldom ill received -by men in the humor to see dukes and capitalists earning, as painfully -as may be, their daily bread. Unluckily, there are no unappropriated -acres and factory sites in England sufficiently advantageous to be used -as efficient substitutes for those upon which private property has -fastened; and the community would be wise if it paid the Duke of Argyle -and Mr. Chamberlain anything short of the full economic rent of their -properties rather than go further and fare worse. Therefore, if we -refused either to allow these gentlemen to let their property to those -who would use it, or hesitated to take it and use it for ourselves, -we should be actually wasting labor. The progressive socialisation of -land and capital must proceed by direct transference of them to the -community through taxation of rent and interest and public organisation -of labor with the capital so obtained; not solely by a series of -restrictions upon their use in private exploitation. Such concurrent -private exploitation, however unrestricted, could not in any case bring -back the old evils of capitalism; for any change in the habits of the -people or in the methods of industry which made associated production -of any commodity on a large scale convenient and profitable, would -result at once in the taking over of that industry by the State exactly -as the same conditions now in America result at once in the formation -of a ring. - -It is because full ownership is necessary to the most intelligent and -effective use of any materials, that no mere system of taxation of -Rent and Interest, even when so drastic as Mr. Henry George’s scheme -of universal State absentee landlordism, is likely to exist except as -a transition stage towards Social Democracy. Indeed the anarchist idea -which allows the State to receive Rent and Interest, but forbids it to -employ labor, is obviously impracticable. Unless we are willing to pay -every citizen in hard cash a share of the State Rent of the future, -it, like the taxes of to-day, must be wholly invested in payments for -work done. It would always be a very serious difficulty for a Socialist -legislature to decide how far communities should be allowed to incur -debts or pay interest. Socialism once established, the chief danger -to its stability would be just at this point. We all know the inept -attack on Socialism which comes from a debating-society orator who -considers the subject for the first time, or from the cultured person -who has been brought up on the _Saturday Review_. He tells us that if -property were equally divided to-morrow, there would be for the next -ten years forty men out of every hundred working extremely hard, and -the other sixty lazy. After that time, the sixty would have to work -hard and keep the forty, who would then be as lazy as the sixty were -before. It is very easy to explain that we do not want to divide all -property equally; but it is not so easy to guard against any result -of that tendency in human nature on which the argument is grounded. -Men differ so widely in their comparative appreciation of present and -future pleasures, that wherever life can be supported by four hours’ -work a day, there will always be some men anxious to work eight hours -in order to secure future benefits for themselves or their children, -and others anxious to avoid their four hours’ work for the present -by pledging themselves or their children to any degree of future -privation. As long as this is so, communities as well as individuals -will be tempted to avail themselves of the freely offered services of -the exceptionally energetic and farsighted, and to incur a common debt -under the excuse that they are spreading the payment of such services -over all those benefited by them. The municipalities, Boards of Works, -School Boards, etc., of England have already created enormous local -debts; and unless men grow wiser in the next few months the new County -Councils will probably add to the burden. As we sit and think, it may -seem easy to prevent any such trouble in the future by a law forbidding -communities to incur debts under any circumstances. But in the case -of a central and supreme government such a law would, of course, -be an absurdity. No nation can escape a national debt or any other -calamity if the majority in that nation desire to submit to it. It is -reassuring to see how the feeling that national governments should -pay their way from year to year grows stronger and stronger. National -debts no longer even in France go up with the old light-hearted leaps -and bounds. But local debts still increase. In Preston the local debt -is said to amount to seven times the annual rating valuation. And -although at present (November, 1888), since the “surf at the edge of -civilisation” is only thundering to the extent of three small colonial -wars, our own national debt is slowly going down; still if war were -declared to-morrow with any European State no ministry would dare to -raise all the war expenses by immediate taxation either on incomes -or on property. It may be objected that no such danger would arise -under Socialism; for there would be no fund from which a loan could be -offered that would not be equally easily reached by a direct levy. But -if we are speaking of society in the near future there would certainly -be plenty of members of non-Socialist States, or English holders of -property in them, ready to lend money on good security to a timid or -desperate or dishonest Socialist government. Again, in times of extreme -stress a government might believe itself to require even personal -possessions; and it might be difficult under such circumstances not to -offer to restore them with or without interest. In any case there would -be no more economic difference between the new fund-holders and the old -landlords than between Lord Salisbury as owner of the Strand district -and Lord Salisbury now that he has sold his slums and bought consols. -Perhaps the most serious danger of the creation of a common debt would -arise from the earnings of exceptional ability. Modern Socialists have -learnt, after a long series of co-operative experiments and failures, -that the profits of private adventure will withdraw men of exceptional -business talent from communal service unless work of varying scarcity -and intensity is paid for at varying rates. How great this variation -need be in order to ensure full efficiency can only be decided by -experience, and as the education and moralisation of society improves, -and industry becomes so thoroughly socialised that the alternative of -private enterprise will be less practicable, something like equality -may at last be found possible. But, meanwhile, comparatively large -incomes will be earned by men leading busy and useful lives, but often -keenly anxious to secure leisure and comfort for their old age and -aggrandisement for their family.[71] I have already suggested that some -of the earnings of a man employed by the community might be left for -a time in the common treasury to accumulate without interest. Now, it -would suit both these men and the lazier of their contemporaries that -the reward of their services should be fixed at a very high rate, and -be left to the next generation for payment; while the next generation -might prefer a small permanent charge to any attempt to pay off the -capital sum. It is often hinted that one way to obviate this would be -for each generation to cultivate a healthy indifference to the debts -incurred on its behalf by its forefathers. But the citizens of each new -generation attain citizenship not in large bodies at long intervals, -but in small numbers every week. One has only to warn sanguine lenders -that veiled repudiations may always be effected in such emergencies -by a judicious application of the Income Tax, and to hope that the -progress of education under Socialism would tend to produce and -preserve on such matters a certain general minimum of common sense. If -this minimum is sufficient to control the central government the debts -of local bodies can be easily and sternly restricted. - -Property in services means of course property in future services. The -wealth which past services may have produced can be exchanged or owned; -but the services themselves cannot. Now all systems of law which we -know have allowed private persons to contract with each other for the -future performance of certain services, and have punished, or allowed -to be punished, the breach of such contracts. Here as in the case -of debts, our growing respect for personal liberty has made the law -look jealously on all onerous agreements made either by the citizen -himself or for him by others. In fact, as Professor Sidgwick points -out: “In England hardly any engagement to render personal service gives -the promisee a legal claim to more than pecuniary damages--to put it -otherwise, almost all such contracts, if unfulfilled, turn into mere -debts of money so far as their legal force goes.”[72] The marriage -contract forms the principal exception to this rule; but even in this -case there seems to be a tendency in most European countries to relax -the rigidity of the law. - -On the other hand the direct claims of the State to the services of its -citizens shew at present no signs of diminishing. Compulsory military -service and compulsory attendance at school already take up a not -inconsiderable share of the life of every male inhabitant of France -and Germany. So far in England the compulsion of grown men to serve -in any capacity has been condemned for a century past, because it is -considered wasteful and oppressive as compared with the free contract -system of the open market. Most English Socialists seem inclined to -believe that all work for the State should be voluntarily engaged and -paid for out of the produce of common industry. - -In considering how far the State has a claim upon the services of its -members, we come upon the much larger question--How far are we working -for Socialism; and how far for Communism? Under pure Socialism, to use -the word in its narrowest sense, the State would offer no advantage at -all to any citizen except at a price sufficient to pay all the expenses -of producing it. In this sense the Post Office, for example, is now a -purely Socialistic institution. Under such conditions the State would -have no claim at all on the services of its members; and compulsion to -work would be produced by the fact that if a man chose not to work he -would be in danger of starvation. Under pure Communism, on the other -hand, as defined by Louis Blanc’s dictum: “From every man according -to his powers; to every man according to his wants,” the State would -satisfy without stint and without price all the reasonable wants -of any citizen. Our present drinking fountains are examples of the -numerous cases of pure communism which surround us. But since nothing -can be made without labor, the commodities provided by the State must -be produced by the services, voluntary or forced, of the citizens. -Under pure communism, if any compulsion to work were needed, it would -have to be direct. Some communistic institutions we must have; and -as a matter of fact there is an increasing number of them already in -England. Indeed, if the whole or any part of that Rent Fund which is -due to the difference between the best and worst materials of industry -in use be taken for the State, by taxation or otherwise, it, or rather -the advantages produced by its expenditure, can hardly be distributed -otherwise than communistically. For, as men are now, saturated with -immoral principles by our commercial system, the State would have to be -exceedingly careful in deciding what wants could be freely satisfied -without making direct compulsion to labor necessary. It would cost -by no means an impossible sum to supply a tolerable shelter with a -bed, and a sufficient daily portion of porridge, or bread and cheese, -or even of gin and water, to each citizen; but no sane man would -propose to do so in the existing state of public morals. For more than -a century the proletarians of Europe have been challenged by their -masters to do as little work as they can. They have been taught by -the practical economists of the Trades Unions, and have learnt for -themselves by bitter experience, that every time any of them in a -moment of ambition or goodwill does one stroke of work not in his bond, -he is increasing the future unpaid labor not only of himself but of his -fellows. At the same time every circumstance of monotony, ugliness, and -anxiety has made the work as wearisome and disgusting as possible. All, -almost without exception, now look upon the working day as a period of -slavery, and find such happiness as they can get only in a few hours -or minutes that intervene between work and sleep. For a few, that -happiness consists in added toil of thought and speech in the cause -of themselves and their comrades. The rest care only for such rough -pleasures as are possible to men both poor and over-worked. There would -be plenty of excuse if under these circumstances they dreamt, as they -are accused of dreaming, of some universal division of the good things -of the earth--of some means of being utterly at leisure, if only for a -week or two. - -But there are products of labor which the workmen in their time of -triumph might freely offer each other without causing the weakest -brother to forego any form of useful social work. Among such products -are those ideas which we have brought under the dominion of private -property by means of copyright and patent right. Luckily for us the -dominion is neither complete nor permanent. If the Whig landlords who -are responsible for most of the details of our glorious constitution -had been also authors and inventors for profit, we should probably -have had the strictest rights of perpetual property or even of entail -in ideas; and there would now have been a Duke of Shakspere to whom -we should all have had to pay two or three pounds for the privilege -of reading his ancestor’s works, provided that we return the copy -uninjured at the end of a fortnight. But even for the years during -which copyright and patents now last, the system which allows an author -or inventor a monopoly in his ideas is a stupid and ineffective way -either of paying for his work or of satisfying the public wants. In -each case the author or inventor obtains a maximum nett return by -leaving unsatisfied the wants, certainly of many, probably of most of -those who desire to read his book or use his invention. We all know -that the public got a very good bargain when it paid the owners of -Waterloo Bridge more than they could possibly have made by any scheme -of tolls. In the same way it is certain that any government which aimed -at the greatest happiness of the greatest number could afford to pay a -capable artist or author possibly even more than he gets from the rich -men who are his present patrons, and certainly more than he could get -by himself selling or exhibiting his productions in a society where -few possessed wealth for which they had not worked. Although the State -could thus afford to pay an extravagantly large reward for certain -forms of intellectual labor, it does not therefore follow that it would -be obliged to do so in the absence of any other important bidder. - -There would always remain the sick, the infirm, and the school -children, whose wants could be satisfied from the general stock without -asking them to bear any part of the general burden. In particular, it -would be well to teach the children by actual experience the economy -and happiness which arise in the case of those who are fitly trained -from association applied to the direct satisfaction of wants, as well -as from association in the manufacture of material wealth. If we -wish to wean the children from the selfish isolation of the English -family, from the worse than savage habits produced by four generations -of capitalism, from that longing for excitement, and incapacity for -reasonable enjoyment, which are the natural results of workdays spent -in English factories, and English Sundays spent in English streets, -then we must give freely and generously to our schools. If this -generation were wise it would spend on education not only more than any -other generation has ever spent before, but more than any generation -would ever need to spend again. It would fill the school buildings -with the means not only of comfort, but even of the higher luxury; -it would serve the associated meals on tables spread with flowers, -in halls surrounded with beautiful pictures, or even, as John Milton -proposed, filled with the sounds of music; it would seriously propose -to itself the ideal of Ibsen, that every child should be brought up as -a nobleman. Unfortunately, this generation is not wise. - -In considering the degree in which common owning of property would be -possible among a people just at that stage of industrial and moral -development at which we now find ourselves, it is expedient to dwell, -as I have dwelt, rather upon the necessary difficulties and limitations -of Socialism, than upon its hopes of future development. But we must -always remember that the problems which Socialism attempts to solve, -deal with conditions which themselves are constantly changing. Just as -anything like what we call Socialism would be impossible in a nation -of individualist savages like the Australian blacks, and could not, -perhaps, be introduced except by external authority among a people like -the peasants of Brittany, for whom the prospect of absolute property -in any portion of land, however small, is at once their strongest -pleasure and their only sufficient incentive to industry; so among a -people further advanced, socially and industrially, than ourselves, a -social condition would be possible which we do not now dare to work -for or even try to realise. The tentative and limited Social-Democracy -which I have sketched is the necessary and certain step to that better -life which we hope for. The interests which each man has in common with -his fellows tend more and more to outweigh those which are peculiar -to himself. We see the process even now beginning. Already, as soon -as a public library is started, the workman finds how poor a means -for the production of happiness are the few books on his own shelf, -compared with the share he has in the public collection, though that -share may have cost even less to produce. In the same way the score or -two of pounds which a workman may possess are becoming daily of less -and less advantage in production; so that the man who a few years ago -would have worked by himself as a small capitalist, goes now to work -for wages in some great business, and treats his little savings as a -fund to provide for a few months of sickness or years of old age. He -will soon see how poor a means for the production of food is his own -fire when compared with the public kitchen; and he will perhaps at -last not only get his clothes from the public store, but the delight -of his eyes from the public galleries and theatres, the delight of his -ears from the public opera, and it may be, when our present anarchy -of opinion be overpast, the refreshment of his mind from the publicly -chosen teacher. Then at last such a life will be possible for all as -not even the richest and most powerful can live to-day. The system of -property holding which we call Socialism is not in itself such a life -any more than a good system of drainage is health, or the invention -of printing is knowledge. Nor indeed is Socialism the only condition -necessary to produce complete human happiness. Under the justest -possible social system we might still have to face all those vices and -diseases which are not the direct result of poverty and over-work; we -might still suffer all the mental anguish and bewilderment which are -caused, some say by religious belief, others by religious doubt; we -might still witness outbursts of national hatred and the degradation -and extinction of weaker peoples; we might still make earth a hell for -every species except our own. But in the households of the five men out -of six in England who live by weekly wage, Socialism would indeed be -a new birth of happiness. The long hours of work done as in a convict -prison, without interest and without hope; the dreary squalor of their -homes; above all that grievous uncertainty, that constant apprehension -of undeserved misfortune which is the peculiar result of capitalist -production: all this would be gone; and education, refinement, leisure, -the very thought of which now maddens them, would be part of their -daily life. Socialism hangs above them as the crown hung in Bunyan’s -story above the man raking the muck heap--ready for them if they will -but lift their eyes. And even to the few who seem to escape and even -profit by the misery of our century, Socialism offers a new and nobler -life, when full sympathy with those about them, springing from full -knowledge of their condition, shall be a source of happiness, and not, -as now, of constant sorrow--when it shall no longer seem either folly -or hypocrisy for a man to work openly for his highest ideal. To them -belongs the privilege that for each one of them the revolution may -begin as soon as he is ready to pay the price. They can live as simply -as the equal rights of their fellows require: they can justify their -lives by work in the noblest of all causes. For their reward, if they -desire any, they, like the rest, must wait. - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[70] Lectures on Jurisprudence. Lecture XLVIII. - -[71] Happily, the ordinary anxieties as to the fate of children left -without property, especially weaklings or women unlikely to attract -husbands, may be left out of account in speculations concerning -socialised communities. - -[72] “Principles of Political Economy,” p. 435. - - - - -INDUSTRY UNDER SOCIALISM. - -BY ANNIE BESANT. - - -There are two ways in which a scheme for a future organisation of -industry may be constructed. Of these, by far the easier and less -useful is the sketching of Utopia, an intellectual gymnastic in which -a power of coherent and vivid imagination is the one desideratum. The -Utopist needs no knowledge of facts; indeed such a knowledge is a -hindrance: for him the laws of social evolution do not exist. He is a -law unto himself; and his men and women are not the wayward, spasmodic, -irregular organisms of daily life, but automata, obeying the strings -he pulls. In a word, he creates, he does not construct: he makes alike -his materials and the laws within which they work, adapting them all -to an ideal end. In describing a new Jerusalem, the only limits to its -perfection are the limits of the writer’s imagination. - -The second way is less attractive, less easy, but more useful. Starting -from the present state of society, it seeks to discover the tendencies -underlying it; to trace those tendencies to their natural outworking -in institutions; and so to forecast, not the far-off future, but the -next social stage. It fixes its gaze on the vast changes wrought by -evolution, not the petty variations made by catastrophes; on the -Revolutions which transform society, not the transient riots which -merely upset thrones and behead kings. This second way I elect to -follow; and this paper on industry under Socialism therefore starts -from William Clarke’s exposition of the industrial evolution which -has been in progress during the last hundred and fifty years. In thus -building forward--in thus forecasting the transitions through which -society will probably pass, I shall scarcely touch on the ideal Social -State that will one day exist; and my sketch must lay itself open to -all the criticisms which may be levelled against a society not ideally -perfect. It is therefore necessary to bear in mind that I am only -trying to work out changes practicable among men and women as we know -them; always seeking to lay down, not what is ideally best, but what is -possible; always choosing among the possible changes that which is on -the line towards the ideal, and will render further approach easier. In -fact this paper is an attempt to answer the “How?” so often heard when -Socialism is discussed. Large numbers of people accept, wholly or in -part, the Socialist theory: they are intellectually convinced of its -soundness or emotionally attracted by its beauty; but they hesitate to -join in its propaganda, because they “don’t see where you are going to -begin,” or “don’t see where you are going to stop.” Both difficulties -are disposed of by the fact that we are not “going to begin.” There -will never be a point at which a society crosses from Individualism to -Socialism. The change is ever going forward; and our society is well on -the way to Socialism. All we can do is to consciously co-operate with -the forces at work, and thus render the transition more rapid than it -would otherwise be. - -The third Fabian essay shews us the success of capitalism bringing -about a position which is at once intolerable to majority, and easy of -capture by them. At this point the destruction of the small industries -has broken down most of the gradations which used to exist between the -large employer and the hired laborer, and has left in their place a -gulf across which a few capitalists and a huge and hungry proletariat -face each other. The denial of human sympathy by the employer in his -business relations with his “hands” has taught the “hands” to regard -the employer as outside the pale of their sympathy. The “respect of the -public conscience for the rights of property,” which was at bottom the -private interest of each in his own little property, has diminished -since the many lost their individual possessions, and saw property -accumulate in the hands of the few: it is now little more than a -tradition inherited from a former social state. The “public conscience” -will soon condone, nay, it will first approve, and then demand, -the expropriation of capital which is used antisocially instead of -socially, and which belongs to that impersonal abstraction, a company, -instead of to our next door neighbor. To the average person it is one -thing for the State to seize the little shop of James Smith who married -our sister, or the thriving business of our Sam who works early and -late for his living; and quite another when James and Sam, ruined by -a big Company made up of shareholders of whom nobody knows anything -but that they pay low wages and take high dividends, have been obliged -to become hired servants of the Company, instead of owning their own -shops and machinery. Whose interest will it be to protest against the -State taking over the capital, and transforming James and Sam from -wage-slaves at the mercy of a foreman, into shareholders and public -functionaries, with a voice in the management of the business in which -they are employed? - -Let us suppose, then, that the evolution of the capitalist system has -proceeded but a little further along the present lines, concentrating -the control of industry, and increasingly substituting labor-saving -machinery for human beings. It is being accompanied, and must continue -to be accompanied, by a growth of the numbers of the unemployed. These -numbers may ebb and flow, as some of the waves of a rising tide run -forward some feet and then a few touch a lower level; but as the tide -rises despite the fluctuations of the ripples, so the numbers of the -unemployed will increase despite transient mountings and fallings. With -these, probably, will begin the tentative organisation of industry by -the State; but this organisation will soon be followed by the taking -over by the community of some of the great Trusts. - -The division of the country into clearly defined areas, each with -its elected authority, is essential to any effective scheme of -organisation. It is one of the symptoms of the coming change, that, -in perfect unconsciousness of the nature of his act, Mr. Ritchie has -established the Commune. He has divided England into districts ruled -by County Councils, and has thus created the machinery without which -Socialism was impracticable. True, he has only made an outline which -needs to be filled in; but Socialists can fill in, whereas they had -no power to outline. It remains to give every adult a vote in the -election of Councillors; to shorten their term of office to a year; to -pay the Councillors, so that the public may have a right to the whole -of their working time; to give the Councils power to take and hold -land--a reform already asked for by the Liberal and Radical Union, a -body not consciously Socialist; and to remove all legal restrictions, -so as to leave them as free to act corporately as an individual is to -act individually. These measures accomplished, the rapidity with which -our institutions are socialised, depends on the growth of Socialism -among the people. It is essential to the stability of the changed -forms of industry that they shall be made by the people, not imposed -upon them; hence the value of Mr. Ritchie’s gift of Local Government, -enabling each locality to move swiftly or slowly, to experiment on a -comparatively small scale, even to blunder without widespread disaster. -The _mot d’ordre_ for Socialists now is “Convert the electors; and -capture the County Councils.” These Councils, administering local -affairs, with the national Executive, administering national affairs, -are all destined to be turned into effective industrial organisers; and -the unit of administration must depend on the nature of the industry. -The post, the telegraph, the railways, the canals, and the great -industries capable of being organised into Trusts, will, so far as we -can see now, be best administered each from a single centre for the -whole kingdom. Tramways, gasworks, water-works, and many of the smaller -productive industries, will be best managed locally. In marking the -lines of division, convenience and experience must be our guides. The -demarcations are of expediency, not of principle. - -The first great problem that will press on the County Council for -solution will be that of the unemployed. Wisely or unwisely, it will -have to deal with them: wisely, if it organises them for productive -industry; unwisely, if it opens “relief works,” and tries, like an -enlarged Bumble, to shirk the difficulty by enforcing barren and -oppressive toil upon outlawed wretches at the expense of the rest -of the community. Many of the unemployed are unskilled laborers: a -minority are skilled. They must first be registered as skilled and -unskilled, and the former enrolled under their several trades. Then -can begin the rural organisation of labor on county farms, held by the -County Councils. The Council will have its agricultural committee, -charged with the administrative details; and this committee will choose -well-trained, practical agriculturists, as directors of the farm -business. To the County Farm will be drafted from the unemployed in the -towns, the agricultural laborers who have wandered townwards in search -of work, and many of the unskilled laborers. On these farms every -advantage of machinery, and every discovery in agricultural science, -should be utilised to the utmost. The crops should be carefully chosen -with reference to soil and aspect--cereals, fruit, vegetables--and the -culture adapted to the crop, the one aim being to obtain the largest -amount of produce with the least expenditure of human labor. Whether -land is most profitably cultivated in large or small parcels depends on -the crop; and in the great area of the County Farm, _la grande et la -petite culture_ might each have its place. Economy would also gain by -the large number of laborers under the direction of the head farmer, -since they could be concentrated when required at any given spot, as -in harvest time, and dispersed to work at the more continuous kinds of -tillage when the seasonal task was over. - -To these farms must also be sent some skilled laborers from among the -unemployed, shoemakers, tailors, smiths, carpenters, etc.; so that the -County Farm may be self-supporting as far as it can be without waste -of productive power. All the small industries necessary in daily life -should be carried on in it, and an industrial commune thus built up. -The democracy might be trusted to ordain that an eight hours’ day, and -a comfortable home, should be part of the life-conditions on the County -Farm. Probably each large farm would soon have its central store, -with its adjacent railway station, in addition to the ordinary farm -buildings; its public hall in the centre of the farm village to be used -for lectures, concerts, and entertainments of all sorts; its public -schools, elementary and technical; and soon, possibly from the outset, -its public meal-room, saving time and trouble to housewives, and, while -economising fuel and food, giving a far greater choice and variety of -dishes. Large dwellings, with suites of rooms, might perhaps replace -old-fashioned cottages; for it is worth noting, as showing the tendency -already existing among ourselves to turn from isolated self-dependence -to the advantages of associated living, that many modern flats are -being built without servants’ rooms, the house-cleaning, etc., being -done by persons engaged for the whole block, and the important meals -being taken at restaurants, so as to avoid the trouble and expense of -private cooking. It will surely be well in initiating new organisations -of industry to start on the most advanced lines, and take advantage of -every modern tendency towards less isolated modes of living. Socialists -must work hard to make municipal dealings with the unemployed avenues -to the higher life, not grudging utilisation of pauper labor. And as -they know their aim, and the other political parties live but from -hand to mouth, they ought to be able to exercise a steady and uniform -pressure, which, just because it is steady and uniform, will impress -its direction on the general movement. - -The note of urban industrial organisation, as of all other, must be -that each person shall be employed to do what he can do best, not -what he does worst. It may be desirable for a man to have two trades; -but watch-making and stone-breaking are not convenient alternative -occupations. Where the skilled unemployed belong to trades carried on -everywhere, such as baking, shoemaking, tailoring, etc., they should be -employed at their own trades in municipal workshops, and their products -garnered in municipal stores. These workshops will be under the -direction of foremen, thoroughly skilled workmen, able to superintend -and direct as though in private employment. The working-day must be of -eight hours, and the wages, for the present, the Trades Union minimum. -Then, instead of tailors and shoemakers tramping the streets ragged -and barefoot, the tailors will be making clothes and the shoemakers -boots and shoes; and the shoemaker with the wages he earns will buy -the tailor’s products, and the tailor the shoemaker’s. Then, instead -of supporting the unemployed by rates levied on the employed they will -be set to work to supply their own necessities, and be producers of -the wealth they consume instead of consuming, in enforced idleness -or barren penal exercises in the stoneyard, the wealth produced by -others. Masons, bricklayers, plumbers, carpenters, etc., might be set -to work in building decent and pleasant dwellings--in the style of -the blocks of flats, not of the barracks called model dwellings--for -the housing of the municipal industrial army. I lay stress on the -pleasantness of the dwellings. These places are to be dwellings for -citizens, not prisons for paupers; and there is no possible reason why -they should not be made attractive. Under Socialism the workers are to -be the nation, and all that is best is for their service; for, be it -remembered, our faces are set towards Socialism, and our organisation -of labor is to be on Socialist lines. - -It is very likely that among the unemployed some will be found whose -trade can only be carried on by large numbers, and is not one of the -industries of the town into which their unlucky fate has drifted them. -These should be sent into municipal service in the towns where their -trade is the staple industry, there to be employed in the municipal -factory. - -Concurrently with this rural and urban organisation of non-centralised -industries will proceed the taking over of the great centralised -industries, centralised for us by capitalists, who thus unconsciously -pave the way for their own supersession. Everything which has been -organised into a Trust, and has been worked for a time in the Trust -fashion, is ripe for appropriation by the community. All minerals -would be most properly worked in this centralised way; and it will -probably be found most convenient to work all the big productive -industries--such as the textile--in similar fashion. It is idle to -say that it cannot be done by the State when it is being done by a -ring of capitalists: a Local Board, an Iron Board, a Tin Board, can -be as easily held responsible to the nation as to a casual crowd of -shareholders. There need be no dislocation of production in making the -transference: the active organisers and directors of a Trust do not -necessarily, or even usually, own the capital invested in it. If the -State finds it convenient to hire these organisers and directors, there -is nothing to prevent its doing so for as long or as short a period -as it chooses. The temporary arrangements made with them during the -transition period must be governed by expediency. - -Let us pause for a moment to estimate the position so far. The -unemployed have been transformed into communal workers--in the country -on great farms, improvements of the Bonanza farms in America--in the -towns in various trades. Public stores for agricultural and industrial -products are open in all convenient places, and filled with the goods -thus communally produced. The great industries, worked as Trusts, -are controlled by the State instead of by capitalist rings. The -private capitalist, however, will still be in business, producing -and distributing on his own account in competition with the communal -organisations, which at present will have occupied only part of the -industrial field. But apart from a pressure which will be recognised -when we come to deal with the remuneration of labor, these private -enterprises will be carried on under circumstances of ever-increasing -difficulty. In face of the orderly communal arrays, playing into -each other’s hands, with the credit of the country behind them, the -ventures of the private capitalist will be at as great a disadvantage -as the cottage industries of the last century in face of the factory -industries of our own period. The Trusts have taught us how to drive -competing capitals out of the market by associated capitals. The -Central Boards or County Councils will be able to utilise this power -of association further than any private capitalists. Thus the economic -forces which replaced the workshop by the factory, will replace the -private shop by the municipal store and the private factory by the -municipal one. And the advantages of greater concentration of capital -and of the association of labor will not be the only ones enjoyed by -the communal workers. All waste will be checked, every labor-saving -appliance utilised to the utmost, where the object is the production -of general wealth and not the production of profit to be appropriated -by a class; for in the one case it is the interest of the producers to -produce--inasmuch as their enjoyment depends on the productivity of -their labor--whereas in the other it is their interest to sterilise -their labor as far as they dare in order to render more of it necessary -and so keep up its price. As the organisation of the public industry -extends, and supplants more and more the individualist producer, the -probable demand will be more easily estimated, and the supply regulated -to meet it. The Municipalities and Central Boards will take the place -of the competing small capitalists and the rings of large ones; and -production will become ordered and rational instead of anarchical and -reckless as it is to-day. After awhile the private producers will -disappear, not because there will be any law against individualist -production, but because it will not pay. No one will care to face the -worries, the harassments, the anxieties, of individual struggling for -livelihood, when ease, freedom, and security can be enjoyed in the -communal services. - -The best form of management during the transition period, and possibly -for a long time to come, will be through the Communal Councils, -which will appoint committees to superintend the various branches -of industry. These committees will engage the necessary manager and -foreman for each shop, factory, etc., and will hold the power of -dismissal as of appointment. I do not believe that the direct election -of the manager and foreman by the employees would be found to work -well in practice, or to be consistent with the discipline necessary -in carrying on any large business undertaking. It seems to me better -that the Commune should elect its Council--thus keeping under its own -control the general authority--but should empower the Council to select -the officials, so that the power of selection and dismissal within the -various sub-divisions should lie with the nominees of the whole Commune -instead of with the particular group immediately concerned. - -There is no practical difficulty in the way of the management of -the ordinary productive industries, large or small. The Trusts and -Co-operation have, between them, solved, or put us in the way of -solving, all problems connected with these. But there are difficulties -in connexion with the industries concerned in the production of such -commodities as books and newspapers. During the transitional stage -these difficulties will not arise; but when all industries are carried -on by the Commune, or the Nation, how will books and newspapers be -produced? I only throw out the following suggestions. Printing, like -baking, tailoring, shoemaking, is a communal rather than a national -industry. Suppose we had printing offices controlled by the Communal -Council. The printing committee might be left free to accept any -publication it thought valuable, as a private firm to-day may take the -risk of publication, the arrangement with the author being purchase -outright, or royalty on copies sold, in each case so much to be put to -his credit at the Communal Bank. But there are many authors whose goods -are desired by no one: it would be absurd to force the community to -publish all minor poetry. Why not accept the principle that in every -case where the printing committee declines to print at the communal -risk, the author may have his work printed by transferring from his -credit at the Communal Bank to the account of the printing committee -sufficient to cover the cost of printing? The committee should have -no power to refuse to print, where the cost was covered. Thus liberty -of expression would be guarded as a constitutional right, while the -community would not be charged with the cost of printing every stupid -effusion that its fond composer might deem worthy of publicity. - -Newspapers might be issued on similar terms; and it would always be -open to individuals, or to groups of individuals, to publish anything -they pleased on covering the cost of publication. With the comparative -affluence which would be enjoyed by each member of the community, -anyone who really cared to reach the public ear would be able to do so -by diminishing his expenditure in other directions. - -Another difficulty which will meet us although not immediately, is the -competition for employment in certain pleasanter branches of industry. -At present an unemployed person would catch eagerly at the chance of -any well-paid work he was able to perform. If he were able both to set -type and to stitch coats, he would not dream of grumbling if he were -by chance offered the job he liked the less of the two: he would be -only too glad to get either. But it is quite possible that as the vast -amelioration of life-conditions proceeds, Jeshurun will wax fat and -kick if, when he prefers to make microscopic lenses, he is desired to -make mirrors. Under these circumstances, Jeshurun will, I fear, have -to accommodate himself to the demand. If the number of people engaged -in making lenses suffices to meet the demand for lenses, Jeshurun must -consent to turn his talents for the time to mirror-making. After all, -his state will not be very pitiable, though Socialism will have failed, -it is true, to make 2 + 2 = 5. - -This, however, hardly solves the general question as to the -apportioning of laborers to the various forms of labor. But a solution -has been found by the ingenious author of “Looking Backward, from A.D. -2000.” Leaving young men and women free to choose their employments, he -would equalise the rates of volunteering by equalising the attractions -of the trades. In many cases natural bent, left free to develop itself -during a lengthened educational term, will determine the choice of -avocation. Human beings are fortunately very varied in their capacities -and tastes; that which attracts one repels another. But there are -unpleasant and indispensable forms of labor which, one would imagine, -can attract none--mining, sewer-cleaning, &c. These might be rendered -attractive by making the hours of labor in them much shorter than the -normal working day of pleasanter occupations. Many a strong, vigorous -man would greatly prefer a short spell of disagreeable work to a long -one at a desk. As it is well to leave the greatest possible freedom to -the individual, this equalising of advantages in all trades would be -far better than any attempt to perform the impossible task of choosing -an employment for each. A person would be sure to hate any work into -which he was directly forced, even though it were the very one he would -have chosen had he been left to himself. - -Further, much of the most disagreeable and laborious work might be -done by machinery, as it would be now if it were not cheaper to exploit -a helot class. When it became illegal to send small boys up chimneys, -chimneys did not cease to be swept: a machine was invented for sweeping -them. Coal-cutting might now be done by machinery, instead of by a man -lying on his back, picking away over his head at the imminent risk of -his own life; but the machine is much dearer than men, so the miners -continue to have their chests crushed in by the falling coal. Under -Socialism men’s lives and limbs will be more valuable than machinery; -and science will be tasked to substitute the one for the other. - -In truth the extension of machinery is very likely to solve many of -the problems connected with differential advantages in employment; -and it seems certain that, in the very near future, the skilled -worker will not be the man who is able to perform a particular set of -operations, but the man who has been trained in the use of machinery. -The difference of trade will be in the machine rather than in the man: -whether the produce is nails or screws, boots or coats, cloth or silk, -paper-folding or type-setting, will depend on the internal arrangements -of the mechanism and not on the method of applying the force. What we -shall probably do will be to instruct all our youth in the principles -of mechanics and in the handling of machines; the machines will be -constructed so as to turn the force into the various channels required -to produce the various articles; and the skilled workman will be the -skilled _mechanic_, not the skilled printer or bootmaker. At the -present time a few hours’ or a few days’ study will make the trained -mechanician master of any machine you can place before him. The line -of progress is to substitute machines for men in every department of -production: let the brain plan, guide, control; but let iron and steel, -steam and electricity, that do not tire and cannot be brutalised, do -the whole of the heavy toil that exhausts human frames to-day. There -is not the slightest reason to suppose that we are at the end of an -inventive era. Rather are we only just beginning to grope after the -uses of electricity: and machinery has before it possibilities almost -undreamed of now, the men produced by our system being too rough-handed -for the manipulation of delicate and complicated contrivances. I -suggest this only as a probable simplification of balancing the supply -and demand in various forms of labor in the future: our immediate -method of regulation must be the equalising of advantages in them. - -One may guess that in each nation all the Boards and communal -authorities will ultimately be represented in some central Executive, -or Industrial Ministry; that the Minister of Agriculture, of Mineral -Industries, of Textile Industries, and so on, will have relations with -similar officers in other lands; and that thus, internationally as well -as nationally, co-operation will replace competition. But that end is -not yet. - -We now approach a yet more thorny subject than the organisation of the -workers. What should be the remuneration of labor--what the share of -the product taken respectively by the individual, the municipality, and -the State? - -The answer depends on the answer to a previous question. Is the -organisation of the unemployed to be undertaken in order to transform -them into self-supporting, self-respecting citizens; or is it to be -carried on as a form of exploitation, utilising pauper labor for the -production of profit for non-paupers? The whole matter turns on this -point; and unless we know our own minds, and fight for the right method -and against the wrong from the very beginning, the organisation of the -unemployed will be a buttress for the present system instead of a step -towards a better. Already there is talk of establishing labor colonies -in connexion with workhouses; and there is no time to be lost if we are -to take advantage of the good in the proposal and exclude the bad. The -County Councils also will lead to an increase of municipal employment; -and the method of that employment is vital. - -The ordinary vestryman, driven by the force of circumstances into -organising the unemployed, will try to extract a profit to the -ratepayers from pauper farms by paying the lowest rates of wages. He -would find this way of proceeding very congenial, and would soon, -if permitted, simply municipalise slave-driving. In this way the -municipal and rural organisation of labor, even when its necessity and -its advantages are realised, can do nothing but change the form of -exploitation of labor if the workers in public employ are to be paid a -wage fixed by the competition of the market, and the profits of their -labor used only for the relief of the rates. Under such circumstances -we should have the whole of the rates paid by the communal workers, -while the private employers would go free. This would not be a -transition to Socialism, but only a new way of creating a class of -municipal serfs, which would make our towns burlesques of the ancient -Greek slaveholding “democracies.” We shall find surer ground by -recalling and applying the principle of Socialism that the laborers -shall enjoy the full product of their toil. It seems to me that this -might be worked out somewhat in the following way: - -Out of the value of the communal produce must come rent of land -payable to the local authority, rent of plant needed for working -the industries, wages advanced and fixed in the usual way, taxes, -reserve fund, accumulation fund, and the other charges necessary for -the carrying on of the communal business. All these deducted, the -remaining value should be divided among the communal workers as a -“bonus.” It would be obviously inconvenient, if not impossible, for -the district authority to sub-divide this value and allot so much to -each of its separate undertakings--so much left over from gas works -for the men employed there, so much from the tramways for the men -employed on them, and so on. It would be far simpler and easier for the -municipal employees to be regarded as a single body, in the service of -a single employer, the local authority; and that the surplus from the -whole of the businesses carried on by the Communal Council should be -divided without distinction among the whole of the communal employees. -Controversy will probably arise as to the division: shall all the -shares be equal; or shall the workers receive in proportion to the -supposed dignity or indignity of their work? Inequality, however, would -be odious; and I have already suggested (p. 145) a means of adjusting -different kinds of labor to a system of equal division of net product. -This meets the difficulty of the varying degrees of irksomeness -without invidiously setting up any kind of socially useful labor as -more honorable than any other--a distinction essentially unsocial -and pernicious. But since in public affairs ethics are apt to go to -the wall, and appeals to social justice too often fall on deaf ears, -it is lucky that in this case ethics and convenience coincide. The -impossibility of estimating the separate value of each man’s labor with -any really valid result, the friction which would arise, the jealousies -which would be provoked, the inevitable discontent, favoritism and -jobbery that would prevail: all these things will drive the Communal -Council into the right path, equal remuneration of all workers. That -path once entered on, the principle of simplification will spread; and -presently it will probably be found convenient that all the Communal -Councils shall send in their reports to a Central Board, stating the -number of their employees, the amount of the values produced, the -deductions for rent and other charges, and their available surplus. -All these surpluses added together would then be divided by the total -number of communal employees, and the sum thus reached would be the -share of each worker. The national trusts would at first be worked -separately on lines analogous to those sketched for the Communes; -but later these would be lumped in with the rest, and still further -equalise the reward of labor. As private enterprises dwindle, more -and more of the workers will pass into communal employ, until at last -the Socialist ideal is touched of a nation in which all adults are -workers, and all share the national product. But be it noted that all -this grows out of the first organisation of industry by Municipalities -and County Councils, and will evolve just as fast or just as slowly -as the community and its sections choose. The values dealt with, and -the numbers employed at first, would not imply as much complexity of -detail as is involved in many of the great businesses now carried on by -individuals and by companies. The same brains will be available for the -work as are now hired by individuals; and it is rather the novelty of -the idea than the difficulty of its realisation which will stand in the -way of its acceptance. - -It is probable, however, that for some time to come, the captains -of industry will be more highly paid than the rank and file of the -industrial army, not because it is just that they should receive higher -remuneration, but because they, having still the alternative of private -enterprise, will be able to demand their ordinary terms, at which -it will pay the community better to engage them than to do without -them--which would be indeed impossible. But their remuneration will -fall as education spreads: their present value is a scarcity value, -largely dependent on their monopoly of the higher education; and as the -wider training is thrown open to all, an ever-increasing number will -become qualified to act as organisers and directors. - -The form in which the worker’s share is paid to him is not a matter of -primary importance. It would probably be convenient to have Communal -Banks, issuing cheques like those of the Cheque Bank; and these banks -could open credits to the workers to the amount of their remuneration. -The way in which each worker expended his wealth would of course be his -own business. - -The above method of dealing with the surplus remaining from communal -labor after rent and other charges had been paid to the Municipality, -would prove the most potent factor in the supersession of private -enterprises. The amounts produced by the communal organisations would -exceed those produced under individualist control; but even if this -were not so, yet the shares of the communal workers, as they would -include the produce now consumed by idlers, would be higher than any -wage which could be paid by the private employer. Hence competition to -enter the communal service, and a constant pressure on the Communal -Councils to enlarge their undertakings. - -It should be added that children and workers incapacitated by age or -sickness should receive an equal share with the communal employees. As -all have been children, are at times sick, and hope to live to old age, -all in turn would share the advantage; and it is only just that those -who have labored honestly in health and through maturity should enjoy -the reward of labor in sickness and through old age. - -The shares of individuals and of Municipalities being thus apportioned, -there remains only a word to say as to the Central National -Council--the “State” _par excellence_. This would derive the revenues -necessary for the discharge of its functions, from contributions -levied on the Communal Councils. It is evident that in the adjustment -of these contributions could be effected the “nationalisation” of any -special natural resources, such as mines, harbors, &c., enjoyed by -exceptionally well situated Communes. The levy would be, in fact, of -the nature of an income tax. - -Such a plan of Distribution--especially that part of it which equalises -the shares in the product--is likely to provoke the question: “What -will be the stimulus to labor under the proposed system? Will not -the idle evade their fair share of labor, and live in clover on the -industry of their neighbors?” - -The general stimulus to labor will be, in the first place, then -as now, the starvation which would follow the cessation of labor. -Until we discover the country in which jam-rolls grow on bushes, and -roasted sucking-pigs run about crying “Come eat me!” we are under an -imperious necessity to produce. We shall work because, on the whole, -we prefer work to starvation. In the transition to Socialism, when the -organisation of labor by the Communal Councils begins, the performance -of work will be the condition of employment; and as non-employment will -mean starvation--for when work is offered, no relief of any kind need -be given to the healthy adult who refuses to perform it--the strongest -possible stimulus will force men to work. In fact, “work or starve” -will be the alternative set before each communal employee; and as men -now prefer long-continued and ill-paid work to starvation, they will -certainly, unless human nature be entirely changed, prefer short and -well-paid work to starvation. The individual shirker will be dealt with -much as he is to-day: he will be warned, and, if he prove incorrigibly -idle, discharged from the communal employ. The vast majority of men -now seek to retain their employment by a reasonable discharge of their -duty: why should they not do the same when the employment is on easier -conditions? At first, discharge would mean being flung back into the -whirlpool of competition, a fate not lightly to be challenged. Later, -as the private enterprises succumbed to the competition of the Commune, -it would mean almost hopelessness of obtaining a livelihood. When -social reorganisation is complete, it would mean absolute starvation. -And as the starvation would be deliberately incurred and voluntarily -undergone, it would meet with no sympathy and no relief. - -The next stimulus would be the appetite of the worker for the result -of the communal toil, and the determination of his fellow-workers to -make him take his fair share of the work of producing it. It is found -at the present time that a very small share of the profits arising -from associated labor acts as a tremendous stimulus to each individual -producer. Firms which allot a part of their profits for division among -their employees, find the plan profitable to themselves. The men work -eagerly to increase the common product, knowing that each will have a -larger bonus as the common product is larger: they become vigilant as -to waste in production; they take care of the machinery; they save gas, -etc. In a word, they lessen the cost as much as they can, because each -saving means gain to them. We see from the experiments of Leclaire and -Godin that inventiveness also is stimulated by a share in the common -produce. The workers in these businesses are ever trying to discover -better methods to improve their machinery, in a word to progress, -since each step forward brings improvement of their lot. Inventions -come from a desire to save trouble, as well as from the impulse of -inventive genius, the joy in accomplishing an intellectual triumph, -and the delight of serving the race. Small inventions are continually -being made by clever workmen to facilitate their operations, even -when they are not themselves personally gainers by them; and there -is no reason to fear that this spontaneous exercise of inventiveness -will cease when the added productivity of labor lightens the task or -increases the harvest of the laborer. Is it to be argued that men will -be industrious, careful, and inventive when they get only a fraction -of the result of their associated labor, but will plunge into sloth, -recklessness and stagnation when they get the whole? that a little gain -stimulates, but any gain short of complete satisfaction would paralyse? -If there is one vice more certain than another to be unpopular in a -Socialistic community, it is laziness. The man who shirked would find -his mates making his position intolerable, even before he suffered the -doom of expulsion. - -But while these compelling motives will be potent in their action -on man as he now is, there are others, already acting on some men, -which will one day act on all men. Human beings are not the simple -and onesided organisms they appear to the superficial glance of the -Individualist--moved only by a single motive, the desire for pecuniary -gain--by one longing, the longing for wealth. Under our present social -system, the struggle for riches assumes an abnormal and artificial -development: riches mean nearly all that makes life worth having, -security against starvation, gratification of taste, enjoyment of -pleasant and cultured society, superiority to many temptations, -self-respect, consideration, comfort, knowledge, freedom, as far as -these things are attainable under existing conditions. In a society -where poverty means social discredit, where misfortune is treated as a -crime, where the prison of the workhouse is a guerdon of failure, and -the bitter carking harassment of daily wants unmet by daily supply is -ever hanging over the head of each worker, what wonder that money seems -the one thing needful, and that every other thought is lost in the -frensied rush to escape all that is summed up in the one word Poverty? - -But this abnormal development of the gold-hunger would disappear upon -the certainty for each of the means of subsistence. Let each individual -feel absolutely secure of subsistence, let every anxiety as to the -material wants of his future be swept away; and the longing for wealth -will lose its leverage. The daily bread being certain, the tyranny of -pecuniary gain will be broken; and life will begin to be used in living -and not in struggling for the chance to live. Then will come to the -front all those multifarious motives which are at work in the complex -human organism even now, and which will assume their proper importance -when the basis of physical life is assured. The desire to excel, the -joy in creative work, the longing to improve, the eagerness to win -social approval, the instinct of benevolence; all these will start -into full life, and will serve at once as the stimulus to labor and -the reward of excellence. It is instructive to notice that these very -forces may already be seen at work in every case in which subsistence -is secured, and they alone supply the stimulus to action. The soldier’s -subsistence is certain, and does not depend on his exertions. At once -he becomes susceptible to appeals to his patriotism, to his _esprit -de corps_, to the honor of his flag; he will dare anything for glory, -and value a bit of bronze, which is the “reward of valor,” far more -than a hundred times its weight in gold. Yet many of the private -soldiers come from the worst of the population; and military glory -and success in murder are but poor objects to aim at. If so much can -be done under circumstances so unpromising, what may we not hope from -nobler aspirations? Or take the eagerness, self-denial, and strenuous -effort, thrown by young men into their mere games! The desire to be -captain of the Oxford eleven, stroke of the Cambridge boat, victor -in the foot-race or the leaping, in a word, the desire to excel, is -strong enough to impel to exertions which often ruin physical health. -Everywhere we see the multiform desires of humanity assert themselves -when once livelihood is secure. It is on the devotion of these to the -service of Society, as the development of the social instincts teaches -men to identify their interests with those of the community, that -Socialism must ultimately rely for progress; but in saying this we are -only saying that Socialism relies for progress on human nature as a -whole, instead of on that mere fragment of it known as the desire for -gain. If human nature should break down, then Socialism will break -down; but at least we have a hundred strings to our Socialist bow, -while the Individualist has only one. - -But Humanity will not break down. The faith which is built on it is -faith founded on a rock. Under healthier and happier conditions, -Humanity will rise to heights undreamed of now; and the most exquisite -Utopias, as sung by the poet and idealist, shall, to our children, seem -but dim and broken lights compared with their perfect day. All that we -need are courage, prudence, and faith. Faith, above all, which dares to -believe that justice and love are not impossible; and that more than -the best that man can dream of shall one day be realised by men. - - - - -THE TRANSITION TO SOCIAL DEMOCRACY. - - - - -TRANSITION.[73] - -BY G. BERNARD SHAW. - - -When the British Association honored me by an invitation to take part -in its proceedings, I proposed to do so by reading a paper entitled -“_Finishing_ the Transition to Social Democracy.” The word “finishing” -has been, on consideration, dropped. In modern use it has gathered -a certain sudden and sinister sense which I desire carefully to -dissociate from the process to be described. I suggested it in the -first instance only to convey in the shortest way that we are in the -middle of the transition instead of shrinking from the beginning of -it; and that I propose to deal with the part of it that lies before us -rather than that which we have already accomplished. Therefore, though -I shall begin at the beginning, I shall make no apology for traversing -centuries by leaps and bounds at the risk of sacrificing the dignity of -history to the necessity for coming to the point as soon as possible. - -Briefly, then, let us commence by glancing at the Middle Ages. There -you find, theoretically, a much more orderly England than the England -of to-day. Agriculture is organised on an intelligible and consistent -system in the feudal manor or commune; handicraft is ordered by the -guilds of the towns. Every man has his class, and every class its -duties. Payments and privileges are fixed by law and custom, sanctioned -by the moral sense of the community, and revised by the light of that -moral sense whenever the operation of supply and demand disturbs -their adjustment. Liberty and Equality are unheard of; but so is Free -Competition. The law does not suffer a laborer’s wife to wear a silver -girdle; neither does it force her to work sixteen hours a day for -the value of a modern shilling. Nobody entertains the idea that the -individual has any right to trade as he pleases without reference to -the rest. When the townsfolk, for instance, form a market, they quite -understand that they have not taken that trouble in order to enable -speculators to make money. If they catch a man buying goods solely in -order to sell them a few hours later at a higher price, they treat that -man as a rascal; and he never, as far as I have been able to ascertain, -ventures to plead that it is socially beneficent, and indeed a pious -duty, to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest. If he did, -they would probably burn him alive, not altogether inexcusably. As to -Protection, it comes naturally to them. - -This Social Order, relics of which are still to be found in all -directions, did not collapse because it was unjust or absurd. It -was burst by the growth of the social organism. Its machinery was -too primitive, and its administration too naïve, too personal, -too meddlesome to cope with anything more complex than a group of -industrially independent communes, centralised very loosely, if at -all, for purely political purposes. Industrial relation with other -countries were beyond its comprehension. Its grasp of the obligations -of interparochial morality was none of the surest: of international -morality it had no notion. A Frenchman or a Scotchman was a natural -enemy: a Muscovite was a foreign devil: the relationship of a negro -to the human race was far more distant than that of a gorilla is -now admitted to be. Thus, when the discovery of the New World began -that economic revolution which changed every manufacturing town into -a mere booth in the world’s fair, and quite altered the immediate -objects and views of producers, English adventurers took to the sea -in a frame of mind peculiarly favorable to commercial success. They -were unaffectedly pious, and had the force of character which is only -possible to men who are founded on convictions. At the same time, they -regarded piracy as a brave and patriotic pursuit, and the slave trade -as a perfectly honest branch of commerce, adventurous enough to be -consistent with the honor of a gentleman, and lucrative enough to make -it well worth the risk. When they stole the cargo of a foreign ship, or -made a heavy profit on a batch of slaves, they regarded their success -as a direct proof of divine protection. The owners of accumulated -wealth hastened to “venture” their capital with these men. Persons of -all the richer degrees, from Queen Elizabeth downward, took shares -in the voyages of the merchant adventurers. The returns justified -their boldness; and the foundation of the industrial greatness and -the industrial shame of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was -laid; modern Capitalism thus arising in enterprises for which men are -now, by civilised nations, hung or shot as human vermin. And it is -curious to see still, in the commercial adventurers of our own time, -the same incongruous combination of piety and rectitude with the most -unscrupulous and revolting villainy. We all know the merchant princes -whose enterprise, whose steady perseverance, whose high personal honor, -blameless family relations, large charities, and liberal endowment -of public institutions mark them out as very pillars of society; and -who are nevertheless grinding their wealth out of the labor of women -and children with such murderous rapacity that they have to hand over -the poorest of their victims to sweaters whose sole special function -is the evasion of the Factory Acts. They have, in fact, no more sense -of social solidarity with the wage-workers than Drake had with the -Spaniards or negroes. - -With the rise of foreign trade and Capitalism, industry so far outgrew -the control, not merely of the individual, but of the village, the -guild, the municipality, and even the central government, that it -seemed as if all attempt at regulation must be abandoned. Every law -made for the better ordering of business either did not work at all, or -worked only as a monopoly enforced by exasperating official meddling, -directly injuring the general interest, and reacting disastrously on -the particular interest it was intended to protect. The laws, too, -had ceased to be even honestly intended, owing to the seizure of -political power by the capitalist classes, which had been prodigiously -enriched by the operation of economic laws which were not then -understood.[74] Matters reached a position in which legislation and -regulation were so mischievous and corrupt, that anarchy became the -ideal of all progressive thinkers and practical men. The intellectual -revolt formally inaugurated by the Reformation was reinforced in the -eighteenth century by the great industrial revolution which began with -the utilisation of steam and the invention of the spinning jenny.[75] -Then came chaos. The feudal system became an absurdity when its basis -of communism with inequality of condition had changed into private -property with free contract and competition rents. The guild system had -no machinery for dealing with division of labor, the factory system, or -international trade: it recognized in competitive individualism only -something to be repressed as diabolical. But competitive individualism -simply took possession of the guilds, and turned them into refectories -for aldermen, and notable additions to the grievances and laughing -stocks of posterity. - -The desperate effort of the human intellect to unravel this tangle of -industrial anarchy brought modern political economy into existence. -It took shape in France, where the confusion was thrice confounded; -and proved itself a more practical department of philosophy than the -metaphysics of the schoolmen, the Utopian socialism of More, or the -sociology of Hobbes. It could trace its ancestry to Aristotle; but -just then the human intellect was rather tired of Aristotle, whose -economics, besides, were those of slave holding republics. Political -economy soon declared for industrial anarchy; for private property; for -individual recklessness of everything except individual accumulation -of riches; and for the abolition of all the functions of the State -except those of putting down violent conduct and invasions of private -property. It might have echoed Jack Cade’s exclamation, “But then are -we in order, when we are most out of order.” - -Although this was what political economy decreed, it must not be -inferred that the greater economists were any more advocates of mere -license than Prince Kropotkin, or Mr. Herbert Spencer, or Mr. Benjamin -Tucker of Boston, or any other modern Anarchist. They did not admit -that the alternative to State regulation was anarchy; they held that -Nature had provided an all-powerful automatic regulator in Competition; -and that by its operation self-interest would evolve order out of chaos -if only it were allowed its own way. They loved to believe that a right -and just social order was not an artificial and painfully maintained -legal edifice, but a spontaneous outcome of the free play of the forces -of Nature. They were reactionaries against feudal domineering and -medieval meddling and ecclesiastical intolerance; and they were able -to shew how all three had ended in disgraceful failure, corruption -and self-stultification. Indignant at the spectacle of the peasant -struggling against the denial of those rights of private property -which his feudal lord had successfully usurped, they strenuously -affirmed the right of private property for all. And whilst they were -dazzled by the prodigious impulse given to production by the industrial -revolution under competitive private enterprise, they were at the -same time, for want of statistics, so optimistically ignorant of the -condition of the masses, that we find David Hume, in 1766, writing to -Turgot that “no man is so industrious but he may add some hours more in -the week to his labor; and scarce anyone is so poor but he can retrench -something of his expense.” No student ever gathers from a study of the -individualist economists that the English proletariat was seething -in horror and degradation whilst the riches of the proprietors were -increasing by leaps and bounds. - -The historical ignorance of the economists did not, however, disable -them for the abstract work of scientific political economy. All their -most cherished institutions and doctrines succumbed one by one to -their analysis of the laws of production and exchange. With one law -alone--the law of rent--they destroyed the whole series of assumptions -upon which private property is based. The apriorist notion that among -free competitors wealth must go to the industrious, and poverty be -the just and natural punishment of the lazy and improvident, proved -as illusory as the apparent flatness of the earth. Here was a vast -mass of wealth called economic rent, increasing with the population, -and consisting of the difference between the product of the national -industry as it actually was and as it would have been if every acre of -land in the country had been no more fertile or favorably situated than -the very worst acre from which a bare living could be extracted: all -quite incapable of being assigned to this or that individual or class -as the return to his or its separate exertions: all purely social or -common wealth, for the private appropriation of which no permanently -valid and intellectually honest excuse could be made. Ricardo was quite -as explicit and far more thorough on the subject than Mr. Henry George. -He pointed out--I quote his own words--that “the whole surplus produce -of the soil, after deducting from it only such moderate profits as -are sufficient to encourage accumulation, must finally rest with the -landlord.”[76] - -It was only by adopting a preposterous theory of value that Ricardo -was able to maintain that the laborer, selling himself for wages to -the proprietor, would always command his cost of production, _i.e._, -his daily subsistence. Even that slender consolation vanished later -on before the renewed investigation of value made by Jevons,[77] -who demonstrated that the value of a commodity is a function of the -quantity available, and may fall to zero when the supply outruns the -demand so far as to make the final increment of the supply useless.[78] -A fact which the unemployed had discovered, without the aid of the -differential calculus, before Jevons was born. Private property, in -fact, left no room for new comers. Malthus pointed this out, and -urged that there should be no newcomers, that the population should -remain stationary. But the population took exactly as much notice of -this modest demand for stagnation, as the incoming tide took of King -Canute’s ankles. Indeed the demand was the less reasonable since the -power of production per head was increasing faster than the population -(as it still is), the increase of poverty being produced simply by the -increase and private appropriation of rent. After Ricardo had completed -the individualist synthesis of production and exchange, a dialectical -war broke out. Proudhon had only to skim through a Ricardian treatise -to understand just enough of it to be able to shew that political -economy was a _reductio ad absurdum_ of private property instead of a -justification of it. Ferdinand Lassalle, with Ricardo in one hand and -Hegel in the other, turned all the heavy guns of the philosophers and -economists on private property with such effect, that no one dared to -challenge his characteristic boasts of the irresistible equipment of -Social Democracy in point of culture. Karl Marx, without even giving up -the Ricardian value theory, seized on the blue books which contained -the true history of the leaps and bounds of England’s prosperity, -and convicted private property of wholesale spoliation, murder and -compulsory prostitution; of plague, pestilence, and famine; battle, -murder, and sudden death. This was hardly what had been expected from -an institution so highly spoken of. Many critics said that the attack -was not fair: no one ventured to pretend that the charges were not -true. The facts were not only admitted; they had been legislated -upon. Social Democracy was working itself out practically as well as -academically. Before I recite the steps of the transition, I will, as -a matter of form, explain what Social Democracy is, though doubtless -nearly all my hearers are already conversant with it. - -What the achievement of Socialism involves economically, is the -transfer of rent from the class which now appropriates it to the whole -people. Rent being that part of the produce which is individually -unearned, this is the only equitable method of disposing of it. There -is no means of getting rid of economic rent. So long as the fertility -of land varies from acre to acre, and the number of persons passing by -a shop window per hour varies from street to street, with the result -that two farmers or two shopkeepers of exactly equal intelligence and -industry will reap unequal returns from their year’s work, so long -will it be equitable to take from the richer farmer or shopkeeper the -excess over his fellow’s gain which he owes to the bounty of Nature -or the advantage of situation, and divide that excess of rent equally -between the two. If the pair of farms or shops be left in the hands of -a private landlord, he will take the excess, and, instead of dividing -it between his two tenants, live on it himself idly at their expense. -The economic object of Socialism is not, of course, to equalise farmers -and shopkeepers in couples, but to carry out the principle over the -whole community by collecting all rents and throwing them into the -national treasury. As the private proprietor has no reason for clinging -to his property except the legal power to take the rent and spend it -on himself--this legal power being in fact what really constitutes -him a proprietor--its abrogation would mean his expropriation. The -socialisation of rent would mean the socialisation of the sources of -production by the expropriation of the present private proprietors, and -the transfer of their property to the entire nation. This transfer, -then, is the subject matter of the transition to Socialism, which began -some forty-five years ago, as far as any phase of social evolution can -be said to begin at all. - -It will be at once seen that the valid objections to Socialism consist -wholly of practical difficulties. On the ground of abstract justice, -Socialism is not only unobjectionable, but sacredly imperative. I -am afraid that in the ordinary middle-class opinion Socialism is -flagrantly dishonest, but could be established off-hand to-morrow with -the help of a guillotine, if there were no police, and the people were -wicked enough. In truth, it is as honest as it is inevitable; but all -the mobs and guillotines in the world can no more establish it than -police coercion can avert it. The first practical difficulty is raised -by the idea of the entire people collectively owning land, capital, or -anything else. Here is the rent arising out of the people’s industry: -here are the pockets of the private proprietors. The problem is to -drop that rent, not into those private pockets, but into the people’s -pocket. Yes; but where is the people’s pocket? Who is the people? -what is the people? Tom we know, and Dick: also Harry; but solely and -separately as individuals: as a trinity they have no existence. Who is -their trustee, their guardian, their man of business, their manager, -their secretary, even their stakeholder? The Socialist is stopped -dead at the threshold of practical action by this difficulty until he -bethinks himself of the State as the representative and trustee of the -people. Now if you will just form a hasty picture of the governments -which called themselves States in Ricardo’s day, consisting of rich -proprietors legislating either by divine right or by the exclusive -suffrage of the poorer proprietors, and filling the executives with the -creatures of their patronage and favoritism; if you look beneath their -oratorical parliamentary discussions, conducted with all the splendor -and decorum of an expensive sham fight; if you consider their class -interests, their shameless corruption, and the waste and mismanagement -which disgraced all their bungling attempts at practical business -of any kind, you will understand why Ricardo, clearly as he saw the -economic consequences of private appropriation of rent, never dreamt of -State appropriation as a possible alternative. The Socialist of that -time did not greatly care: he was only a benevolent Utopian who planned -model communities, and occasionally carried them out, with negatively -instructive and positively disastrous results. When his successors -learned economies from Ricardo, they saw the difficulty quite as -plainly as Ricardo’s vulgarisers, the Whig doctrinaires who accepted -the incompetence and corruption of States as permanent inherent State -qualities, like the acidity of lemons. Not that the Socialists were not -doctrinaires too; but outside economics they were pupils of Hegel, -whilst the Whigs were pupils of Bentham and Austin. Bentham’s was not -the school in which men learned to solve problems to which history -alone could give the key, or to form conceptions which belonged to -the evolutional order. Hegel, on the other hand, expressly taught the -conception of the perfect State; and his pupils saw that nothing in -the nature of things made it impossible, or even specially difficult, -to make the existing State, if not absolutely perfect, at least -practically trustworthy. They contemplated the insolent and inefficient -government official of their day without rushing to the conclusion that -the State uniform had a magic property of extinguishing all business -capacity, integrity, and common civility in the wearer. When State -officials obtained their posts by favoritism and patronage, efficiency -on their part was an accident, and politeness a condescension. When -they retained their posts without any effective responsibility to the -public, they naturally defrauded the public by making their posts -sinecures, and insulted the public when, by personal inquiry, it made -itself troublesome. But every successfully conducted private business -establishment in the kingdom was an example of the ease with which -public ones could be reformed as soon as there was the effective will -to find out the way. Make the passing of a sufficient examination -an indispensable preliminary to entering the executive; make the -executive responsible to the government and the government responsible -to the people; and State departments will be provided with all the -guarantees for integrity and efficiency that private money-hunting -pretends to. Thus the old bugbear of State imbecility did not terrify -the Socialist: it only made him a Democrat. But to call himself so -simply, would have had the effect of classing him with the ordinary -destructive politician who is a Democrat without ulterior views for -the sake of formal Democracy--one whose notion of Radicalism is the -pulling up of aristocratic institutions by the roots--who is, briefly, -a sort of Universal Abolitionist. Consequently, we have the distinctive -term Social Democrat, indicating the man or woman who desires through -Democracy to gather the whole people into the State, so that the State -may be trusted with the rent of the country, and finally with the land, -the capital, and the organisation of the national industry--with all -the sources of production, in short, which are now abandoned to the -cupidity of irresponsible private individuals. - -The benefits of such a change as this are so obvious to all except -the existing private proprietors and their parasites, that it is very -necessary to insist on the impossibility of effecting it suddenly. The -young Socialist is apt to be catastrophic in his views--to plan the -revolutionary programme as an affair of twenty-four lively hours, with -Individualism in full swing on Monday morning, a tidal wave of the -insurgent proletariat on Monday afternoon, and Socialism in complete -working order on Tuesday. A man who believes that such a happy despatch -is possible, will naturally think it absurd and even inhuman to stick -at bloodshed in bringing it about. He can prove that the continuance -of the present system for a year costs more suffering than could be -crammed into any Monday afternoon, however sanguinary. This is the -phase of conviction in which are delivered those Socialist speeches -which make what the newspapers call “good copy,” and which are the only -ones they as yet report. Such speeches are encouraged by the hasty -opposition they evoke from thoughtless persons, who begin by tacitly -admitting that a sudden change is feasible, and go on to protest that -it would be wicked. The experienced Social Democrat converts his too -ardent follower by first admitting that if the change could be made -catastrophically it would be well worth making, and then proceeding -to point out that as it would involve a readjustment of productive -industry to meet the demand created by an entirely new distribution -of purchasing power, it would also involve, in the application of -labor and industrial machinery, alterations which no afternoon’s work -could effect. You cannot convince any man that it is impossible to -tear down a government in a day; but everybody is convinced already -that you cannot convert first and third class carriages into second -class; rookeries and palaces into comfortable dwellings; and jewellers -and dressmakers into bakers and builders, by merely singing the -“Marseillaise.” No judicious person, however deeply persuaded that the -work of the court dressmaker has no true social utility, would greatly -care to quarter her idly on the genuinely productive workers pending -the preparation of a place for her in their ranks. For though she is -to all intents and purposes quartered on them at present, yet she at -least escapes the demoralisation of idleness. Until her new place is -ready, it is better that her patrons should find dressmaking for her -hands to do, than that Satan should find mischief. Demolishing a -Bastille with seven prisoners in it is one thing: demolishing one with -fourteen million prisoners is quite another. I need not enlarge on the -point: the necessity for cautious and gradual change must be obvious -to everyone here, and could be made obvious to everyone elsewhere if -only the catastrophists were courageously and sensibly dealt with in -discussion. - -What then does a gradual transition to Social Democracy mean -specifically? It means the gradual extension of the franchise; and the -transfer of rent and interest to the State, not in one lump sum, but -by instalments. Looked at in this way, it will at once be seen that -we are already far on the road, and are being urged further by many -politicians who do not dream that they are touched with Socialism--nay, -who would earnestly repudiate the touch as a taint. Let us see how far -we have gone. In 1832 the political power passed into the hands of -the middle class; and in 1838 Lord John Russell announced finality. -Meanwhile, in 1834, the middle class had swept away the last economic -refuge of the workers, the old Poor Law, and delivered them naked to -the furies of competition.[79] Ten years turmoil and active emigration -followed; and then the thin end of the wedge went in. The Income -Tax was established; and the Factory Acts were made effective. The -Income Tax (1842), which is on individualist principles an intolerable -spoliative anomaly, is simply a forcible transfer of rent, interest, -and even rent of ability, from private holders to the State without -compensation. It excused itself to the Whigs on the ground that those -who had most property for the State to protect should pay _ad valorem_ -for its protection. The Factory Acts swept the anarchic theory of the -irresponsibility of private enterprise out of practical politics; -made employers accountable to the State for the well-being of their -employees; and transferred a further instalment of profits directly -to the worker by raising wages. Then came the gold discoveries in -California (1847) and Australia (1851), and the period of leaps and -bounds, supported by the economic rent of England’s mineral fertility, -which kindled Mr. Gladstone’s retrogressive instincts to a vain hope of -abolishing the Income Tax. These events relieved the pressure set up -by the New Poor Law. The workers rapidly organized themselves in Trades -Unions, which were denounced then for their tendency to sap the manly -independence which had formerly characterized the British workman,[80] -and which are to-day held up to him as the self-helpful perfection of -that manly independence. Howbeit, self-help flourished, especially at -Manchester and Sheffield; State help was voted grandmotherly; wages -went up; and the Unions, like the fly on the wheel, thought that they -had raised them. They were mistaken; but the value of Trade Unionism -in awakening the social conscience of the skilled workers was immense, -though to this there was a heavy set-off in its tendency to destroy -their artistic conscience by making them aware that it was their duty -to one another to discourage rapid and efficient workmanship by every -means in their power. An extension of the franchise, which was really -an instalment of Democracy, and not, like the 1832 Reform Bill, only an -advance towards it, was gained in 1867; and immediately afterwards came -another instalment of Socialism in the shape of a further transfer of -rent and interest from private holders to the State for the purpose of -educating the people. In the meantime, the extraordinary success of the -post-office, which, according to the teaching of the Manchester school, -should have been a nest of incompetence and jobbery, had not only shewn -the perfect efficiency of State enterprise when the officials are made -responsible to the class interested in its success, but had also proved -the enormous convenience and cheapness of socialistic or collectivist -charges over those of private enterprise. For example, the Postmaster -General charges a penny for sending a letter weighing an ounce from -Kensington to Bayswater. Private enterprise would send half a pound the -same distance for a farthing, and make a handsome profit on it. But the -Postmaster General also sends an ounce letter from Land’s End to John -o’ Groat’s House for a penny. Private enterprise would probably demand -at least a shilling, if not five, for such a service; and there are -many places in which private enterprise could not on any terms maintain -a post-office. Therefore a citizen with ten letters to post saves -considerably by the uniform socialistic charge, and quite recognises -the necessity for rigidly protecting the Postmaster’s monopoly. - -After 1875,[81] leaping and bounding prosperity, after a final spurt -during which the Income Tax fell to twopence, got out of breath, and -has not yet recovered it. Russia and America, among other competitors, -began to raise the margin of cultivation at a surprising rate. -Education began to intensify the sense of suffering, and to throw light -upon its causes in dark places. The capital needed to keep English -industry abreast of the growing population began to be attracted -by the leaping and bounding of foreign loans and investments,[82] -and to bring to England, in payment of interest, imports that were -not paid for by exports--a phenomenon inexpressibly disconcerting -to the Cobden Club. The old pressure of the eighteen-thirties came -back again; and presently, as if Chartism and Fergus O’Connor had -risen from the dead, the Democratic Federation and Mr. H. M. Hyndman -appeared in the field, highly significant as signs of the times, and -looming hideously magnified in the guilty eye of property, if not -of great account as direct factors in the course of events. Numbers -of young men, pupils of Mill, Spencer, Comte, and Darwin, roused by -Mr. Henry George’s “Progress and Poverty,” left aside evolution and -freethought; took to insurrectionary economics; studied Karl Marx; and -were so convinced that Socialism had only to be put clearly before -the working-classes to concentrate the power of their immense numbers -in one irresistible organization, that the Revolution was fixed for -1889--the anniversary of the French Revolution--at latest. I remember -being asked satirically and publicly at that time how long I thought -it would take to get Socialism into working order if I had my way. I -replied, with a spirited modesty, that a fortnight would be ample for -the purpose. When I add that I was frequently complimented on being one -of the more reasonable Socialists, you will be able to appreciate the -fervor of our conviction, and the extravagant levity of our practical -ideas. The opposition we got was uninstructive: it was mainly founded -on the assumption that our projects were theoretically unsound but -immediately possible, whereas our weak point lay in the case being -exactly the reverse. However, the ensuing years sifted and sobered -us. “The Socialists,” as they were called, have fallen into line as a -Social Democratic party, no more insurrectionary in its policy than any -other party. But I shall not present the remainder of the transition -to Social Democracy as the work of fully conscious Social Democrats. -I prefer to ignore them altogether--to suppose, if you will, that the -Government will shortly follow the advice of the _Saturday Review_, -and, for the sake of peace and quietness, hang them. - -First, then, as to the consummation of Democracy. Since 1885 every man -who pays four shillings a week rent can only be hindered from voting -by anomalous conditions of registration which are likely to be swept -away very shortly. This is all but manhood suffrage; and it will soon -complete itself as adult suffrage. However, I may leave adult suffrage -out of the question, because the outlawry of women, monstrous as it -is, is not a question of class privilege, but of sex privilege. To -complete the foundation of the democratic State, then, we need manhood -suffrage, abolition of all poverty disqualifications, abolition of -the House of Lords, public payment of candidature expenses, public -payment of representatives, and annual elections. These changes are now -inevitable, however unacceptable they may appear to those of us who -are Conservatives. They have been for half a century the commonplaces -of Radicalism. We have next to consider that the State is not merely -an abstraction: it is a machine to do certain work; and if that work -be increased and altered in its character, the machinery must be -multiplied and altered too. Now, the extension of the franchise does -increase and alter the work very considerably; but it has no direct -effect on the machinery. At present the State machine has practically -broken down under the strain of spreading democracy, the work being -mainly local, and the machinery mainly central. Without efficient local -machinery the replacing of private enterprise by State enterprise is -out of the question; and we shall presently see that such replacement -is one of the inevitable consequences of Democracy. A democratic State -cannot become a _Social_-Democratic State unless it has in every -centre of population a local governing body as thoroughly democratic -in its constitution as the central Parliament. This matter is also -well in train. In 1888 a Government avowedly reactionary passed a -Local Government Bill which effected a distinct advance towards the -democratic municipality.[83] It was furthermore a Bill with no single -aspect of finality anywhere about it. Local Self-Government remains -prominent within the sphere of practical politics. When it is achieved, -the democratic State will have the machinery for Socialism. - -And now, how is the raw material of Socialism--otherwise the -Proletarian man--to be brought to the Democratic State machinery? Here -again the path is easily found. Politicians who have no suspicion -that they are Socialists, are advocating further instalments of -Socialism with a recklessness of indirect results which scandalizes the -conscious Social Democrat. The phenomenon of economic rent has assumed -prodigious proportions in our great cities. The injustice of its -private appropriation is glaring, flagrant, almost ridiculous. In the -long suburban roads about London, where rows of exactly similar houses -stretch for miles countrywards, the rent changes at every few thousand -yards by exactly the amount saved or incurred annually in travelling -to and from the householder’s place of business. The seeker after -lodgings, hesitating between Bloomsbury and Tottenham, finds every -advantage of situation skimmed off by the landlord with scientific -precision. As lease after lease falls in, houses, shops, goodwills of -businesses which are the fruits of the labor of lifetimes, fall into -the maw of the ground landlord. Confiscation of capital, spoliation -of households, annihilation of incentive, everything that the most -ignorant and credulous fundholder ever charged against the Socialist, -rages openly in London, which begins to ask itself whether it exists -and toils only for the typical duke and his celebrated jockey and his -famous racehorse. Lord Hobhouse and his unimpeachably respectable -committee for the taxation of ground values are already in the field -claiming the value of the site of London for London collectively; and -their agitation receives additional momentum from every lease that -falls in. Their case is unassailable; and the evil they attack is one -that presses on the ratepaying and leaseholding classes as well as upon -humbler sufferers. This economic pressure is reinforced formidably by -political opinion in the workmen’s associations. Here the moderate -members are content to demand a progressive Income Tax, which is -virtually Lord Hobhouse’s proposal; and the extremists are all for Land -Nationalisation, which is again Lord Hobhouse’s principle. The cry for -such taxation cannot permanently be resisted. And it is very worthy -of remark that there is a new note in the cry. Formerly taxes were -proposed with a specific object--as to pay for a war, for education, -or the like. Now the proposal is to tax the landlords in order to get -some of _our_ money back from them--take it from them first and find -a use for it afterwards. Ever since Mr. Henry George’s book reached -the English Radicals, there has been a growing disposition to impose -a tax of twenty shillings in the pound on obviously unearned incomes; -that is, to dump four hundred and fifty millions[84] a year down on -the Exchequer counter; and then retire with three cheers for the -restoration of the land to the people. - -The results of such a proceeding, if it actually came off, would -considerably take its advocates aback. The streets would presently -be filled with starving workers of all grades, domestic servants, -coach-builders, decorators, jewellers, lace-makers, fashionable -professional men, and numberless others whose livelihood is at present -gained by ministering to the wants of these and of the proprietary -class. “This,” they would cry, “is what your theories have brought -us to! Back with the good old times, when we received our wages, -which were at least better than nothing.” Evidently the Chancellor -of the Exchequer would have three courses open to him. (1) He would -give the money back again to the landlords and capitalists with an -apology. (2) He could attempt to start State industries with it for the -employment of the people. (3) Or he could simply distribute it among -the unemployed. The last is not to be thought of: anything is better -than _panem et circenses_. The second (starting State industries) -would be far too vast an undertaking to get on foot soon enough to -meet the urgent difficulty. The first (the return with an apology) -would be a _reductio ad absurdum_ of the whole affair--a confession -that the private proprietor, for all his idleness and his voracity, -is indeed performing an indispensable economic function--the function -of capitalising, however wastefully and viciously, the wealth -which surpasses his necessarily limited power of immediate personal -consumption. And here we have checkmate to mere Henry Georgism, or -State appropriation of rent without Socialism. It is easy to shew that -the State is entitled to the whole income of the Duke of Westminster, -and to argue therefrom that he should straightway be taxed twenty -shillings in the pound. But in practical earnest the State has no right -to take five farthings of capital from the Duke or anybody else until -it is ready to invest them in productive enterprise. The consequences -of withdrawing capital from private hands merely to lock it up -unproductively in the treasury would be so swift and ruinous, that no -statesman, however fortified with the destructive resources of abstract -economics, could persist in it. It will be found in the future as in -the past that governments will raise money only because they want it -for specific purposes, and not on _a priori_ demonstrations that they -have a right to it. But it must be added that when they _do_ want it -for a specific purpose, then, also in the future as in the past, they -will raise it without the slightest regard to _a priori_ demonstrations -that they have no right to it. - -Here then we have got to a dead lock. In spite of democrats and land -nationalisers, rent cannot be touched unless some pressure from -quite another quarter forces productive enterprise on the State. -Such pressure is already forthcoming. The quick starvation of the -unemployed, the slow starvation of the employed who have no relatively -scarce special skill, the unbearable anxiety or dangerous recklessness -of those who are employed to-day and unemployed to-morrow, the rise in -urban rents, the screwing down of wages by pauper immigration and home -multiplication, the hand-in-hand advance of education and discontent, -are all working up to explosion point. It is useless to prove by -statistics that most of the people are better off than before, true as -that probably is, thanks to instalments of Social Democracy. Yet even -that is questionable; for it is idle to claim authority for statistics -of things that have never been recorded. Chaos has no statistics: it -has only statisticians; and the ablest of them prefaces his remarks -on the increased consumption of rice by the admission that “no one -can contemplate the present condition of the masses without desiring -something like a revolution for the better.”[85] The masses themselves -are being converted so rapidly to that view of the situation, that we -have Pan-Anglican Synods, bewildered by a revival of Christianity, -pleading that though Socialism is eminently Christian, yet “the Church -must act safely as well as sublimely.”[86] During the agitation made -by the unemployed last winter (1887-8), the Chief Commissioner of -Police in London started at his own shadow, and mistook Mr. John Burns -for the French Revolution, to the great delight of that genial and -courageous champion of his class.[87] The existence of the pressure -is further shewn by the number and variety of safety valves proposed -to relieve it--monetization of silver, import duties, “leaseholds -enfranchisement,” extension of joint-stock capitalism masquerading as -co-operation,[88] and other irrelevancies. My own sudden promotion from -the street corner to this platform is in its way a sign of the times. -But whilst we are pointing the moral and adorning the tale according -to our various opinions, an actual struggle is beginning between the -unemployed who demand work and the local authorities appointed to -deal with the poor. In the winter, the unemployed collect round red -flags, and listen to speeches for want of anything else to do. They -welcome Socialism, insurrectionism, currency craze--anything that -passes the time and seems to express the fact that they are hungry. -The local authorities, equally innocent of studied economic views, -deny that there is any misery; send leaders of deputations to the -Local Government Board, who promptly send them back to the guardians; -try bullying; try stoneyards; try bludgeoning; and finally sit down -helplessly and wish it were summer again or the unemployed at the -bottom of the sea. Meanwhile the charity fund, which is much less -elastic than the wages fund, overflows at the Mansion House only to -run dry at the permanent institutions. So unstable a state of things -cannot last. The bludgeoning, and the shocking clamor for bloodshed -from the anti-popular newspapers, will create a revulsion among the -humane section of the middle class. The section which is blinded -by class prejudice to all sense of social responsibility, dreads -personal violence from the working class with a superstitious terror -that defies enlightenment or control.[89] Municipal employment must -be offered at last. This cannot be done in one place alone: the rush -from other parts of the country would swamp an isolated experiment. -Wherever the pressure is, the relief must be given on the spot. -And since public decency, as well as consideration for its higher -officials, will prevent the County Council from instituting a working -day of sixteen hours at a wage of a penny an hour or less, it will -soon have on its hands not only the unemployed, but also the white -slaves of the sweater, who will escape from their dens and appeal to -the municipality for work the moment they become aware that municipal -employment is better than private sweating. Nay, the sweater himself, -a mere slave driver paid “by the piece,” will in many instances be -as anxious as his victims to escape from his hideous trade. But the -municipal organisation of the industry of these people will require -capital. Where is the municipality to get it? Raising the rates is -out of the question: the ordinary tradesmen and householders are -already rated and rented to the limit of endurance: further burdens -would almost bring them into the street with a red flag. Dreadful -dilemma! in which the County Council, between the devil and the deep -sea, will hear Lord Hobhouse singing a song of deliverance, telling -a golden tale of ground values to be municipalised by taxation. The -land nationalisers will swell the chorus: the Radical progressive -income taxers singing together, and the ratepaying tenants shouting -for joy. The capital difficulty thus solved--for we need not seriously -anticipate that the landlords will actually fight, as our President[90] -once threatened--the question of acquiring land will arise. The -nationalisers will declare for its annexation by the municipality -without compensation; but that will be rejected as spoliation, worthy -only of revolutionary Socialists. The no-compensation cry is indeed -a piece of unpractical catastrophic insurrectionism; for whilst -compensation would be unnecessary and absurd if every proprietor -were expropriated simultaneously, and the proprietary system at once -replaced by full blown Socialism, yet when it is necessary to proceed -by degrees, the denial of compensation would have the effect of -singling out individual proprietors for expropriation whilst the others -remained unmolested, and depriving them of their private means long -before there was suitable municipal employment ready for them. The -land, as it is required, will therefore be honestly purchased; and the -purchase money, or the interest thereon, will be procured, like the -capital, by taxing rent. Of course this will be at bottom an act of -expropriation just as much as the collection of Income Tax to-day is an -act of expropriation. As such, it will be denounced by the landlords -as merely a committing of the newest sin the oldest kind of way. In -effect, they will be compelled at each purchase to buy out one of their -body and present his land to the municipality, thereby distributing the -loss fairly over their whole class, instead of placing it on one man -who is no more responsible than the rest. But they will be compelled to -do this in a manner that will satisfy the moral sense of the ordinary -citizen as effectively as that of the skilled economist. - -We now foresee our municipality equipped with land and capital for -industrial purposes. At first they will naturally extend the industries -they already carry on, road making, gas works, tramways, building, and -the like. It is probable that they will for the most part regard their -action as a mere device to meet a passing emergency. The Manchester -School will urge its Protectionist theories as to the exemption of -private enterprise from the competition of public enterprise, in one -supreme effort to practise for the last time on popular ignorance of -the science which it has consistently striven to debase and stultify. -For a while the proprietary party will succeed in hampering and -restricting municipal enterprise;[91] in attaching the stigma of -pauperism to its service; in keeping the lot of its laborers as nearly -as possible down to private competition level in point of hard work -and low wages. But its power will be broken by the disappearance of -that general necessity for keeping down the rates which now hardens -local authority to humane appeals. The luxury of being generous at -someone else’s expense will be irresistible. The ground landlord will -be the municipal milch cow; and the ordinary ratepayers will feel the -advantage of sleeping in peace, relieved at once from the fear of -increased burdens and of having their windows broken and their premises -looted by hungry mobs, nuclei of all the socialism and scoundrelism of -the city. They will have just as much remorse in making the landlord -pay as the landlord has had in making them pay--just as much and -no more. And as the municipality becomes more democratic, it will -find landlordism losing power, not only relatively to democracy, but -absolutely. - -The ordinary ratepayer, however, will not remain unaffected for long. -At the very outset of the new extension of municipal industries, the -question of wage will arise. A minimum wage must be fixed; and though -at first, to avoid an overwhelming rush of applicants for employment, -it must be made too small to tempt any decently employed laborer to -forsake his place and run to the municipality, still, it will not be -the frankly infernal competition wage. It will be, like mediæval wages, -fixed with at least some reference to public opinion as to a becoming -standard of comfort. Over and above this, the municipality will -have to pay to its organisers, managers, and incidentally necessary -skilled workers the full market price of their ability, minus only -what the superior prestige and permanence of public employment may -induce them to accept. But whilst these high salaries will make no -more disturbance in the labor market than the establishment of a new -joint-stock company would, the minimum wage for laborers will affect -that market perceptibly. The worst sort of sweaters will find that if -they are to keep their “hands,” they must treat them at least as well -as the municipality. The consequent advance in wage will swallow up the -sweater’s narrow margin of profit. Hence the sweater must raise the -price per piece against the shops and wholesale houses for which he -sweats. This again will diminish the profits of the wholesale dealers -and shopkeepers, who will not be able to recover this loss by raising -the price of their wares against the public, since, had any such step -been possible, they would have taken it before. But fortunately for -them, the market value of their ability as men of business is fixed -by the same laws that govern the prices of commodities. Just as the -sweater is worth his profit, so they are worth their profit; and just -as the sweater will be able to exact from them his old remuneration in -spite of the advance in wages, so they will be able to exact their old -remuneration in spite of the advance in sweaters’ terms. But from whom, -it will be asked, if not from the public by raising the price of the -wares? Evidently from the landlord upon whose land they are organising -production. In other words, they will demand and obtain a reduction of -rent. Thus the organiser of industry, the employer pure and simple, the -_entrepreneur_, as he is often called in economic treatises nowadays, -will not suffer. In the division of the product his share will remain -constant; whilst the industrious wage-worker’s share will be increased, -and the idle proprietor’s share diminished. This will not adjust itself -without friction and clamor; but such friction is constantly going on -under the present system in the opposite direction, _i.e._, by the -raising of the proprietor’s share at the expense of the worker’s. - -The contraction of landlords’ incomes will necessarily diminish -the revenue from taxation on such incomes. Let us suppose that the -municipality, to maintain its revenue, puts on an additional penny -in the pound. The effect will be to burn the landlord’s candle at -both ends--obviously not a process that can be continued to infinity. -But long before taxation fails as a source of municipal capital, the -municipalities will have begun to save capital out of the product of -their own industries. In the market the competition of those industries -with the private concerns will be irresistible. Unsaddled with a single -idle person, and having, therefore, nothing to provide for after paying -their employees except extension of capital, they will be able to offer -wages that no business burdened with the unproductive consumption of -an idle landlord or shareholder could afford, unless it yielded a -heavy rent in consequence of some marked advantage of site. But even -rents, when they are town rents, are at the mercy of a municipality -in the long run. The masters of the streets and the traffic can nurse -one site and neglect another. The rent of a shop depends on the number -of persons passing its windows per hour. A skilfully timed series of -experiments in paving, a new bridge, a tramway service, a barracks, -or a small-pox hospital are only a few of the circumstances of which -city rents are the creatures. The power of the municipality to control -these circumstances is as obvious as the impotence of competing private -individuals. Again, competing private individuals are compelled to sell -their produce at a price equivalent to the full cost of production at -the margin of cultivation.[92] The municipality could compete against -them by reducing prices to the average cost of production over the -whole area of municipal cultivation. The more favorably situated -private concerns could only meet this by ceasing to pay rent; the less -favorably situated would succumb without remedy. It would be either -stalemate or checkmate. Private property would either become barren, or -it would yield to the actual cultivator of average ability no better an -income than could be obtained more securely in municipal employment. -To the mere proprietor it would yield nothing. Eventually the land and -industry of the whole town would pass by the spontaneous action of -economic forces into the hands of the municipality; and, so far, the -problem of socialising industry would be solved. - -Private property, by cheapening the laborer to the utmost in order -to get the greater surplus out of him, lowers the margin of human -cultivation, and so raises the “rent of ability.” The most important -form of that rent is the profit of industrial management. The gains -of a great portrait painter or fashionable physician are much less -significant, since these depend entirely on the existence of a very -rich class of patrons subject to acute vanity and hypochondriasis. But -the industrial organiser is independent of patrons: instead of merely -attracting a larger share of the product of industry to himself, he -increases the product by his management. The market price of such -ability depends upon the relation of the supply to the demand: the -more there is of it the cheaper it is: the less, the dearer. Any cause -that increases the supply lowers the price. Now it is evident that -since a manager must be a man of education and address, it is useless -to look ordinarily to the laboring class for a supply of managerial -skill. Not one laborer in a million succeeds in raising himself on -the shoulders of his fellows by extraordinary gifts, or extraordinary -luck, or both. The managers must be drawn from the classes which -enjoy education and social culture; and their price, rapidly as it -is falling with the spread of education and the consequent growth of -the “intellectual proletariat,” is still high. It is true that a very -able and highly-trained manager can now be obtained for about £800 a -year, provided his post does not compel him to spend two-thirds of -his income on what is called “keeping up his position,” instead of on -his own gratification.[93] Still, when it is considered that laborers -receive less than £50 a year, and that the demand for laborers is -necessarily vast in proportion to the demand for able managers, nay, -that there is an inverse ratio between them, since the manager’s talent -is valuable in proportion to quantity of labor he can organise, it will -be admitted that £800 a year represents an immense rent of ability. -But if the education and culture which are a practically indispensable -part of the equipment of competitors for such posts were enjoyed by -millions instead of thousands, that rent would fall considerably. Now -the tendency of private property is to keep the masses mere beasts of -burden. The tendency of Social Democracy is to educate them, to make -men of them. Social Democracy would not long be saddled with the rents -of ability which have during the last century made our born captains of -industry our masters and tyrants instead of our servants and leaders. -It is even conceivable that rent of managerial ability might in course -of time become negative,[94] astonishing as that may seem to the many -persons who are by this time so hopelessly confused amid existing -anomalies, that the proposition that “whosoever of you will be the -chiefest, shall be servant of all,” strikes them rather as a Utopian -paradox than as the most obvious and inevitable of social arrangements. -The fall in the rent of ability will, however, benefit not only the -municipality, but also its remaining private competitors. Nevertheless, -as the prestige of the municipality grows, and as men see more and -more clearly what the future is to it, able organisers will take lower -salaries for municipal than for private employment; whilst those who -can beat even the municipality at organising, or who, as professional -men, can deal personally with the public without the intervention of -industrial organisation, will pay the rent of their places of business -either directly to the municipality, or to the private landlord whose -income the municipality will absorb by taxation. Finally, when rents -of ability had reached their irreducible natural level, they could be -dealt with by a progressive Income Tax in the very improbable case of -their proving a serious social inconvenience. - -It is not necessary to go further into the economic detail of the -process of the extinction of private property. Much of that process -as sketched here may be anticipated by sections of the proprietary -class successively capitulating, as the net closes about their special -interests, on such terms as they may be able to stand out for before -their power is entirely broken.[95] - -We may also safely neglect for the moment the question of the -development of the House of Commons into the central government which -will be the organ for federating the municipalities, and nationalising -inter-municipal rents by an adjustment of the municipal contributions -to imperial taxation: in short, for discharging national as distinct -from local business. One can see that the Local Government Board of -the future will be a tremendous affair; that foreign States will be -deeply affected by the reaction of English progress; that international -trade, always the really dominant factor in foreign policy, will have -to be reconsidered from a new point of view when profit comes to -be calculated in terms of net social welfare instead of individual -pecuniary gain; that our present system of imperial aggression, in -which, under pretext of exploration and colonisation, the flag follows -the filibuster and trade follows the flag, with the missionary bringing -up the rear, must collapse when the control of our military forces -passes from the capitalist class to the people; that the disappearance -of a variety of classes with a variety of what are now ridiculously -called “public opinions” will be accompanied by the welding of society -into one class with a public opinion of inconceivable weight; that this -public opinion will make it for the first time possible effectively -to control the population; that the economic independence of women, -and the supplanting of the head of the household by the individual as -the recognized unit of the State, will materially alter the status of -children and the utility of the institution of the family; and that the -inevitable reconstitution of the State Church on a democratic basis -may, for example, open up the possibility of the election of an avowed -Freethinker like Mr. John Morley or Mr. Bradlaugh to the deanery of -Westminster. All these things are mentioned only for the sake of a -glimpse of the fertile fields of thought and action which await us when -the settlement of our bread and butter question leaves us free to use -and develop our higher faculties. - -This, then, is the humdrum programme of the practical Social Democrat -to-day. There is not one new item in it. All are applications of -principles already admitted, and extensions of practices already in -full activity. All have on them that stamp of the vestry which is so -congenial to the British mind. None of them compel the use of the words -Socialism or Revolution: at no point do they involve guillotining, -declaring the Rights of Man, swearing on the altar of the country, -or anything else that is supposed to be essentially un-English. And -they are all sure to come--landmarks on our course already visible to -farsighted politicians even of the party which dreads them. - -Let me, in conclusion, disavow all admiration for this inevitable, but -sordid, slow, reluctant, cowardly path to justice. I venture to claim -your respect for those enthusiasts who still refuse to believe that -millions of their fellow creatures must be left to sweat and suffer -in hopeless toil and degradation, whilst parliaments and vestries -grudgingly muddle and grope towards paltry instalments of betterment. -The right is so clear, the wrong so intolerable, the gospel so -convincing, that it seems to them that it _must_ be possible to enlist -the whole body of workers--soldiers, policemen, and all--under the -banner of brotherhood and equality; and at one great stroke to set -Justice on her rightful throne. Unfortunately, such an army of light -is no more to be gathered from the human product of nineteenth century -civilisation than grapes are to be gathered from thistles. But if we -feel glad of that impossibility; if we feel relieved that the change -is to be slow enough to avert personal risk to ourselves; if we feel -anything less than acute disappointment and bitter humiliation at -the discovery that there is yet between us and the promised land a -wilderness in which many must perish miserably of want and despair: -then I submit to you that our institutions have corrupted us to the -most dastardly degree of selfishness. The Socialists need not be -ashamed of beginning as they did by proposing militant organisation -of the working classes and general insurrection. The proposal proved -impracticable; and it has now been abandoned--not without some -outspoken regrets--by English Socialists. But it still remains as the -only finally possible alternative to the Social Democratic programme -which I have sketched to-day. - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[73] An address delivered on the 7th September, 1888, to the Economic -Section of the British Association at Bath. - -[74] Explained in the first essay in this volume. - -[75] See page 57-61. - -[76] “Principles of Political Economy,” chap. xxiv, p. 202. - -[77] “Theory of Political Economy.” By W. Stanley Jevons (London: -Macmillan & Co.). See also “The Alphabet of Economic Science.” Part by -Philip H. Wicksteed. (Same publishers.) - -[78] See pp. 7-9 _ante_. - -[79] The general impression that the old Poor Law had become an -indefensible nuisance is a correct one. All attempts to mitigate -Individualism by philanthropy instead of replacing it by Socialism are -foredoomed to confusion. - -[80] See Final Report of Royal Commission on Trade Unions, 1869. Vol. -i, p. xvii, sec. 46. - -[81] See Mr. Robert Giffen’s address on “The Recent Rate of Material -Progress in England.” Proceedings of the British Association at -Manchester in 1887, page 806. - -[82] See Mr. Robert Giffen on Import and Export Statistics, “Essays on -Finance,” Second Series, p. 194. (London: G. Bell & Sons. 1886.) - -[83] This same Government, beginning to realise what it has -unintentionally done for Social Democracy, is already (1889) doing what -it can to render the new County Councils socialistically impotent by -urgently reminding them of the restrictions which hamper their action. - -[84] The authority for this figure will be found in Fabian Tract, No. -5, “Facts for Socialists.” - -[85] Mr. R. Giffen, “Essays in Finance,” Second Series, p. 393. - -[86] Proceedings of the Pan-Anglican Synod: Lambeth, 1888. Report of -Committee on Socialism. - -[87] Finally, the Commissioner was superseded; and Mr. Burns was -elected a member of the first London County Council by a large majority. - -[88] It is due to the leaders of the Co-operative movement to say here -that they are no parties to the substitution of dividend-hunting by -petty capitalists for the pursuit of the ideal of Robert Owen, the -Socialist founder of Co-operation; and that they are fully aware that -Co-operation must be a political as well as a commercial movement if it -is to achieve a final solution of the labor question. - -[89] Ample material for a study of West End mob panic may be found in -the London newspapers of February, 1886, and November, 1887. - -[90] Lord Bramwell, President of the Economic Section of the British -Association in 1888. - -[91] See note, p. 171. - -[92] The meaning of these terms will be familiar to readers of the -first essay. - -[93] See note, p. 16. - -[94] That is, the manager would receive less for his work than the -artisan. Cases in which the profits of the employer are smaller than -the wages of the employee are by no means uncommon in certain grades of -industry where small traders have occasion to employ skilled workmen. - -[95] Such capitulations occur already when the Chancellor of the -Exchequer takes advantage of the fall in the current rate of interest -(explained on page 20) to reduce Consols. This he does by simply -threatening to pay off the stockholders with money freshly borrowed at -the current rate. They, knowing that they could not reinvest the money -on any better terms than the reduced ones offered by the Chancellor, -have to submit. There is no reason why the municipalities should not -secure the same advantages for their constituents. For example, the -inhabitants of London now pay the shareholders of the gas companies a -million and a half annually, or 11 per cent on the £13,650,000 which -the gas works cost. The London County Council could raise that sum for -about £400,000 a year. By threatening to do this and start municipal -gas works, it could obviously compel the shareholders to hand over -their works for £400,000 a year, and sacrifice the extra 8 per cent -now enjoyed by them. The saving to the citizens of London would be -£1,000,000 a year, sufficient to defray the net cost of the London -School Board. Metropolitan readers will find a number of cognate -instances in Fabian Tract No. 8, “Facts for Londoners.” - - - - -THE OUTLOOK. - -BY HUBERT BLAND. - - -Mr. Webb’s historical review brought us from the “break up of the -old synthesis” (his own phrase), a social system founded on a basis -of religion, a common belief in a divine order, to the point where -perplexed politicians, recognising the futility of the principle of -Individualism to keep the industrial machine in working order, with -“freedom of contract” upon their lips spent their nights in passing -Factory Acts, and devoted their fiscal ingenuity to cutting slice after -slice off incomes derived from rent and interest. His paper was an -inductive demonstration of the failure of anarchy to meet the needs of -real concrete men and women--a proof from history that the world moves -from system, through disorder, back again to system. - -Mr. Clarke showed us, also by the historic method, that given a -few more years of economic progress on present lines, and we shall -reach, _via_ the Ring and the Trust, that period of “well defined -confrontation of the rich and poor” upon which German thought has -settled as the brief stage of sociological evolution immediately -preceding organic change. - -The truth of this postulate of Teutonic philosophers and economists no -one who has given to it a moment’s serious thought is likely to call in -question. Nor does anyone who has followed the argument developed in -these lectures believe that the transition from mitigated individualism -to full collectivity can be made until the capitalist system has worked -itself out to its last logical expression. Till then, no political or -social upheaval, however violent, nay, even though the “physical force -revolutionists” should chase the Guards helter-skelter down Parliament -Street and the Executive Committee of the Fabian Society hold its -meetings in the Council Chamber of Windsor Castle, will be anything -more than one of those “transient riots,” spoken of by Mrs. Besant, -which “merely upset thrones and behead monarchs.”[96] All sociologists -I think, all Socialists I am sure, are agreed that until the economic -moment has arrived, although the hungry or the ignorant may kick up a -dust in Whitechapel and make a bloody puddle in Trafalgar Square, the -Social Revolution is impossible. But I, for my part, do not believe in -the even temporary rout of the Household Brigade, nor indeed in any -popular outbreak not easily suppressible by the Metropolitan police; -and I shall waste no time in discussing that solution of the social -problem of which more was heard in the salad days of the English -Socialist movement--in its pre-Fabian era--than now, _viz._, physical -force employed by a vigorous few. The physical force man, like the -privileged Tory, has failed to take note of the flux of things, and -to recognise the change brought about by the ballot. Under a lodger -franchise the barricade is the last resort of a small and desperate -minority, a frank confession of despair, a reduction to absurdity -of the whole Socialist case. Revolutionary heroics, natural and -unblameable enough in exuberant puerility, are imbecile babblement in -muscular adolescence, and in manhood would be criminal folly. - -Let us assume then that the present economic progress will continue -on its present lines. That machinery will go on replacing hand labor; -that the joint-stock company will absorb the private firm, to be, -in its turn, swallowed up in the Ring and the Trust. That thus the -smaller producers and distributors will gradually, but at a constantly -increasing pace, be squeezed out and reduced to the condition of -employees of great industrial and trade corporations, managed by highly -skilled captains of industry, in the interests of idle shareholders. - -In a parliamentarian State like ours, the economic cleavage, which -divides the proprietors from the propertyless, ever growing wider and -more clearly defined, must have its analogue in the world of politics. -The revolution of the last century, which ended in the installation -of the Grand Industry, was the last of the great unconscious world -changes. It was helped by legislation of course; but the help was -only of the negative and destructive sort. “Break our fetters and -let us alone,” was the cry of the revolutionists to Parliament. The -lawmakers, not knowing quite what they were doing, responded, and then -blythely contracted debts, and voted money for commercial wars. Such a -sight will never be seen again. The repeated extension of the suffrage -has done more than make the industrial masses articulate, it has given -them consciousness; and for the future the echo of the voices of those -who suffer from economic changes will be heard clamoring for relief -within the walls of St. Stephen’s and the urban guildhalls. - -Thus the coming struggle between “haves” and “have nots” will be a -conflict of parties, each perfectly conscious of what it is fighting -about and fully alive to the life and death importance of the issues at -stake. - -I say “will be”; for one has only to read a few speeches of political -leaders or attend a discussion at a workman’s club to be convinced that -at present it is only the keener and more alert minds on either side -which are more than semi-conscious of the true nature of the campaign -of which the first shots may even now be heard at every bye-election. - -But as nothing makes one so entirely aware of one’s own existence as -a sharp spasm of pain; so it is to the suffering--the hunger, the -despair of to-morrow’s dinner, the anxiety about the next new pair -of trousers--wrought by the increasing economic pressure upon the -enfranchised and educated proletariat that we must look to awaken that -free self-consciousness which will give the economic changes political -expression and enable the worker to make practical use of the political -weapons which are his. - -The outlook then from the point of view of this paper is a political -one--one in which we should expect to see the world political gradually -becoming a reflex of the world economic. That political should be -slow in coming into line with economic facts is only in accordance -with all that the past history of our country has to teach us. For -years and decades the squirearchy retained an influence in the House -of Commons out of all proportion to its potency as an economic force; -and even at this moment the “landed interest” bears a much larger -part in law-making than that to which its real importance entitles -it. Therefore we must be neither surprised nor dispirited if, in a -cold-blooded envisagement of the condition of English parties, the -truth is borne in upon us that the pace of political progress has -no proper relation to the rate at which we are travelling towards -Socialism in the spheres of thought and industry. - -This fact is probably--nay almost certainly--very much more patent -to the Socialist and the political student than to the man in the -street, or even to him of the first class railway carriage. The noisy -jubilation of the Radical press over the victory of a Home Ruler -at a bye-election, at a brief and vague reference to the “homes of -the people” in a two hours’ speech from a Liberal leader, or at the -insertion of a “social” plank in a new annual programme, is well and -cleverly calculated to beguile the ardent Democrat, and strike cold -terror to the heart of the timorous Tory. But a perfectly impartial -analysis of the present state of parties will convince the most -sanguine that the breath of the great economic changes dealt with in -Mr. Clarke’s paper has as yet scarcely ruffled the surface of the House -of Commons. - -When the syllabus of this course of lectures was drawn up, those who -were responsible for it suggested as the first subheading of this -paper, the well worn phrase, “The disappearance of the Whig.” It is a -happy expression, and one from the contemplation of which much comfort -may be derived by an optimistic and unanalytical temperament. Printed -are at this disadvantage compared with spoken words, they fail to -convey the nicer _nuances_ of meaning bestowed by tone and emphasis; -and thus the word “disappearance” meets the eye, carrying with it no -slightest suggestion of irony. Yet the phrase is pointless, if not -“meant surcarstic”; for so far is the Whig from “disappearing,” that -he is the greatest political fact of the day. To persons deafened -by the daily democratic shouting of the Radical newspapers this -assertion may require some confirmation and support. Let us look at -the facts then. The first thing which strikes us in connexion with -the present Parliament is that it no longer consists of two distinct -parties, _i.e._, of two bodies of men differentiated from each other -by the holding of _fundamentally_ different principles. Home Rule -left out,[97] there remains no reason whatever, except the quite -minor question of Disestablishment, why even the simulacrum of party -organisation should be maintained, or why the structural arrangements -of the House of Commons should not be so altered as to resemble those -of a town hall, in which all the seats face the chair. - -But fifty years ago the floor of the House was a frontier of genuine -significance; and the titles “Whig” and “Tory” were word-symbols of -real inward and spiritual facts. The Tory party was mostly made up of -men who were conscientiously opposed to popular representation, and -prepared to stand or fall by their opposition. They held, as a living -political creed, that the government of men was the eternal heritage of -the rich, and especially of those whose riches spelt rent. The Whigs, -on the other hand, believed, or said they believed, in the aphorism -“_Vox populi, vox Dei_”; and they, on the whole, consistently advocated -measures designed to give that voice a distincter and louder utterance. -Here, then, was one of those fundamental differences in the absence of -which party nomenclature is a sham. But there was another. In the first -half of this century the Tories, hidebound in historic traditions and -deaf to the knell of the old _régime_ tolling in the thud, thud, of the -piston rods of the new steam engines, clung pathetically to the old -idea of the functions of the State and to territorial rights. The Whigs -went for _laisser faire_ and the consequent supremacy of the business -man. I am making a perfectly provable proposition when I say that all -the political disputes[98] which arose between the Revolution of 1688 -and the enfranchisement of the £10 householder by Disraeli had their -common cause in one of these two root differences. But the battle has -long ago been lost and won. The Whigs have triumphed all along the -line. The Tories have not only been beaten, they have been absorbed. A -process has gone on like that described by Macaulay as following on the -Norman invasion, when men gradually ceased to call themselves Saxon and -Norman and proudly boasted of being English. The difference in the case -before us is that while the Tories have accepted the whole of the Whig -principles they still abjure the Whig name. - -No so-called Conservative to-day will venture on opposing an extension -of the franchise on the plain ground of principle. At most he will but -temporise and plead for delay. No blush of conscious inconsistency -suffused Mr. Ritchie’s swarthy features when introducing his “frankly -democratic” Local Government Bill. And rightly not; for he was doing no -violence to party principles. - -In the matter of the functions of the State, the absorption of the Tory -is not quite so obvious, because there never has been, and, as long -as society lasts, never can be, a _parti serieux_ of logical _laisser -faire_. Even in the thick of the Industrial Revolution, the difference -between the two great parties was mainly one of tendency--of attitude -of mind. The Tory had a certain affection for the State--a natural -self-love: the Whig distrusted it. This distrust is now the sentiment -of the whole of our public men. They see, some of them perhaps more -clearly than others, that there is much the State must do; but they all -wish that much to be as little as possible. Even when, driven by an -irresistible force which they feel but do not understand (which none -but the Socialist does or can understand), they bring forward measures -for increasing the power of the whole over the part, their arguments -are always suffused in a sickly halo of apology: their gestures are -always those of timorous deprecation and fretful diffidence. They are -always nervously anxious to explain that the proposal violates no -principle of political economy, and with them political economy means, -not Professor Sidgwick, but Adam Smith. - -The reason why this unanimity of all prominent politicians on great -fundamental principles is not manifest to the mind of the average man -is that, although there is nothing left to get hot or even moderately -warm about, the political temperature is as high as ever. It is not in -the dust of the arena, but only in the repose of the auditorium that -one is able to realise that men will fight as fiercely and clapper-claw -each other as spitefully over a dry bone as over a living principle. -One has to stand aside awhile to see that politicians are like the -theological controversialists of whom Professor Seeley somewhere says -that they never get so angry with each other as when their differences -are almost imperceptible, except perhaps when they are quite so. - -Both the efficient and the final cause of this unanimity is a -sort of unconscious or semi-conscious recognition of the fact that -the word “State” has taken to itself new and diverse connotations, -that the State idea has changed its content. Whatever State control -may have meant fifty years ago it never meant hostility to private -property as such. Now, for us, and for as far ahead as we can see, -it means that and little else. So long as the State interfered with -the private property and powers of one set of proprietors with a view -only to increasing those of another, the existence of parties for -and against such interference was a necessity of the case. A duty on -foreign corn meant the keeping up of incomes drawn from rent:[99] -its abolition meant a rise of manufacturers’ profits. “Free Trade” -swelled the purses of the new _bourgeoisie_: the Factory Acts depleted -them, and gave a sweet revenge to the rent-docked squire. But of this -manipulation of the legislative machine for proprietors’ purposes we -are at, or at least in sight of, the end. The State has grown bigger -by an immense aggregation of units, who were once to all intents -and purposes separate from it; and now its action generally points -not to a readjustment of private property and privileges as between -class and class, but to their complete disappearance. So then the -instinct which is welding together the propertied politicians is truly -self-preservative. - -But, it may be asked by the bewildered Radical, by the tremulous -Conservative, by the optimistic Socialist, if the political leaders -are really opposed to State augmentation, how comes it that every new -measure of reform introduced into the House of Commons is more or less -colored with Socialism, and that no popular speaker will venture to -address a public meeting without making some reference of a socialistic -sort to the social problem? Why, for instance, does that extremely -well oiled and accurately poised political weathercock, Sir William -Harcourt, pointing to the dawn, crow out that “we are all Socialists -now”? - -To these questions (and I have not invented them) I answer: in the -first place because the opposition of the political leaders _is_ -instinctive, and only, as yet, semi-conscious, even in the most -hypocritical; in the second place, that a good deal of the legislative -Socialism appears more in words than in deeds; in the third place that -the famous flourish of Sir William Harcourt was a rhetorical falsehood; -and fourthly, because, fortunately for the progress of mankind, -self-preservative instincts are not peculiar to the propertied classes. - -For it is largely instinctive and wholly self preservative, this change -in the position of the working people towards the State, this change by -which, from fearing it as an actual enemy, they have come to look to -it as a potential savior. I know that this assertion will be violently -denied by many of my Socialist brethren. The fly on the wheel, not -unnaturally, feels wounded at being told that he is, after all, not the -motive power; and the igniferous orators of the Socialist party are -welcome, so far as I am concerned, to all the comfort they can get from -imagining that they, and not any great, blind, evolutionary forces are -the dynamic of the social revolution. Besides, the metaphor of the fly -really does not run on all fours (I forget, for the moment, how many -legs a fly has); for the Socialist does at least know in what direction -the car is going, even though he is not the driving force. Yet it seems -to me the part being, and to be, played by the Socialist, is notable -enough in all conscience; for it is he who is turning instinct into -self-conscious reason; voicing a dumb demand; and giving intelligent -direction to a thought wave of terrific potency. - -There is a true cleavage being slowly driven through the body politic; -but the wedge is still beneath the surface. The signs of its workings -are to be found in the reactionary measures of pseudo reform advocated -by many prominent politicians; in the really Socialist proposals of -some of the obscurer men; in the growing distaste of the political club -man for a purely political pabulum; and in the receptive attitude of a -certain portion of the cultivated middle class towards the outpourings -of the Fabian Society. - -This conscious recognition of the meaning of modern tendencies, this -defining of the new line of cleavage, while it is the well-spring of -most of the Socialist hopes, is no less the source of some lively fear. -At present it is only the acuter and more far seeing of the minds -amongst the propertied classes who are at all alive to the real nature -of the attack. One has but to listen to the chatter of the average -Liberal candidate, to note how hopelessly blind the man is to the fact -that the existence of private property in the means of production, -forms any factor at all in the social problem; and what is true of the -rank and file is true only in a less degree of the chiefs themselves. -Ignorance of economics and inability to shake their minds free of -eighteenth century political philosophy,[100] at present hinders the -leaders of the “party of progress” from taking up a definite position -either for or against the advance of the new ideas. The number of -English statesmen, who, like Prince Bismarck, see in Socialism a -swelling tide whose oceanic rush must be broken by timely legislative -breakwaters, is still only to be expressed by a minus quantity. But -this political myopia is not destined to endure. Every additional -vote cast for avowed Socialist candidates at municipal and other -elections, will help to bring home to the minds of the Liberals, that -the section of the new democracy which regards the ballot merely as a -war-engine with which to attack capitalism, is a growing one. At last -our Liberal will be face to face with a logical but irritating choice. -Either to throw over private capital or to frankly acknowledge that -it is a distinction without a difference which separates him from the -Conservatives, against whom he has for years been fulminating. - -At first sight it looks as though this political moment in the history -of the Liberal party would be one eminently auspicious for the -Socialist cause. But although I have a lively faith in the victory of -logic in the long run, I have an equally vivid knowledge that to assure -the triumph the run must be a very long one; and above all I have a -profound respect for the staying powers of politicians, and their -ability to play a waiting game. It is one thing to offer a statesman -the choice of one of two logical courses: it is another to prevent his -seeing a third, and an illogical one, and going for it. Such prevention -in the present case will be so difficult as to be well nigh impossible; -for the Liberal hand still holds a strong suit--the cards political. - -It is quite certain that the social programme of our party will -become a great fact long before all the purely political proposals -of the Liberals have received the Royal assent; and the game of the -politician will be to hinder the adoption of the former by noisily -hustling forward the latter. Unfortunately for us it will be an -easy enough game to play. The scent of the non-Socialist politician -for political red herrings is keen, and his appetite for political -Dead Sea fruit prodigious. The number of “blessed words,” the mere -sound of which carries content to his soul, would fill a whole page. -In an age of self-seeking his pathetic self-abnegation would be -refreshing were it not so desperately silly. The young artizan on -five-and-twenty shillings a week, who with his wife and children -occupies two rooms in “a model,” and who is about as likely to become -a Lama as a leaseholder, will shout himself hoarse over Leaseholds’ -Enfranchisement, and sweat great drops of indignation at the plunder -of rich West End tradesmen by rich West End landlords. The “out of -work,” whose last shirt is in pawn, will risk his skull’s integrity in -Trafalgar Square in defence of Mr. O’Brien’s claim to dress in gaol -like a gentleman. - -Of course all this is very touching: indeed, to be quite serious, it -indicates a nobility of character and breadth of human sympathy in -which lies our hope of social salvation. But its infinite potentiality -must not blind us to the fact that in its actuality the dodgy Liberal -will see his chance of the indefinite postponement of the socialising -of politics. Manhood suffrage, female suffrage, the woes of deceased -wives’ sisters, the social ambition of dissenting ministers, the legal -obstacles to the “free” acquirement of landed property, home rule -for “dear old Scotland” and “neglected little Wales,” extraordinary -tithes, reform of the House of Lords: all these and any number of other -obstacles may be successfully thrown in the way of the forward march -of the Socialist army. And the worst of it all is that in a great part -of his obstructive tactics the Liberal will have us on the hip; for -to out-and-out democratisation we are fully pledged, and must needs -back up any attack on hereditary or class privilege, come it from what -quarter it may. - -But, to get back to our metaphor of the card table (a metaphor much -more applicable to the games of political men), the political suit does -not exhaust the Liberal hand. There still remains a card to play--a -veritable trump. Sham Socialism is the name of it, and Mr. John Morley -the man to plank it down. - -I have said above that the trend of things to Socialism is best -shewn by the changed attitude of men towards State interference -and control; and this is true. Still it must not be forgotten that -although Socialism involves State control, State control does not imply -Socialism--at least in any modern meaning of the term. It is not so -much to the thing the State does, as to the end for which it does it -that we must look before we can decide whether it is a Socialist State -or not. Socialism is the common holding of the means of production -and exchange, and _the holding of them for the equal benefit of all_. -In view of the tone now being adopted by some of us[101] I cannot too -strongly insist upon the importance of this distinction; for the losing -sight of it by friends, and its intentional obscuration by enemies, -constitute a big and immediate danger. To bring forward sixpenny -telegrams as an instance of State Socialism may be a very good method -of scoring a point off an individualist opponent in a debate before -a middle-class audience; but from the standpoint of the proletariat -a piece of State management which spares the pockets only of the -commercial and leisured classes is no more Socialism than were the -_droits de Seigneur_ of the middle ages. Yet this is the sort of sham -Socialism which it is as certain as death will be doled out by the -popular party in the hope that mere State action will be mistaken for -really Socialist legislation. And the object of these givers of Greek -gifts will most infallibly be attained if those Socialists who know -what they want hesitate (from fear of losing popularity, or from any -more amiable weakness) to clamor their loudest against any and every -proposal whose adoption would prolong the life of private capital a -single hour. - -But leaving sham Socialism altogether out of account, there are other -planks in the Liberal “and Radical” programme which would make stubborn -barriers in the paths of the destroyers of private capital. Should, for -instance, Church disestablishment come upon us while the _personnel_ of -the House of Commons is at all like what it is at present, few things -are more certain than that a good deal of what is now essentially -collective property will pass into private hands; that the number of -individuals interested in upholding ownership will be increased; and -that the only feelings gratified will be the acquisitiveness of these -persons and the envy of Little Bethel. - -Again, the general state of mind of the Radical on the land question -is hardly such as to make a Socialist hilarious. It is true your -“progressive” will cheer Henry George, and is sympathetically inclined -to nationalisation (itself a “blessed word”); but he is not at all sure -that nationalisation, free land, and peasant proprietorship, are not -three names for one and the same proposal. And, so far as the effective -members of the Liberal party are concerned, there is no question at -all that the second and third of these “solutions” find much more -favor than the first. In fact, in this matter of the land, the method -of dealing with which is of the very propædeutics of Socialism, the -Radical who goes for “free sale” or for peasant ownership, is a less -potent revolutionary force than the Tory himself; for this latter only -seeks to maintain in land the state of things which the Ring and Trust -maker is working to bring about in capital[102]--and on the part which -_he_ is playing in economic evolution we are all agreed. - -From such dangers as these the progress of Democracy is, by itself, -powerless to save us; for although always and everywhere Democracy -holds Socialism in its womb, the birth may be indefinitely delayed by -stupidity on one side and acuteness on the other. - -I have gone at some length into an analysis of the possible artificial -hindrances to Socialism, because, owing to the amiability and -politeness shown us by the Radical left wing during the last twelve -months; to the successes which Radical votes have given to some of our -candidates at School Board and other elections; and to the friendly -patronage bestowed upon us by certain “advanced” journals, some of our -brightest, and otherwise most clear-sighted, spirits have begun to base -high hopes upon what they call “the permeation” of the Liberal party. -These of our brothers have a way of telling us that the transition to -Socialism will be so gradual as to be imperceptible, and that there -will never come a day when we shall be able to say “now we have a -Socialist State.” They are fond of likening the simpler among us who -disagree with them as to the extreme protraction of the process, to -children who having been told that when it rains a cloud falls, looks -disappointedly out of the window on a wet day, unconscious that the -cloud is falling before their eyes in the shape of drops of water. To -these cautious souls I reply that although there is much truth in their -contention that the process will be gradual, we shall be able to say -that we have a Socialist State on the day on which no man or group of -men holds, over the means of production, property rights by which the -labor of the producers can be subjected to exploitation; and that while -their picturesque metaphor is a happy as well as a poetic conceit, it -depends upon the political acumen of the present and next generation of -Socialist men whether the “cloud” shall fall in refreshing Socialist -showers or in a dreary drizzle of Radicalism, bringing with it more -smuts than water, fouling everything and cleansing nowhere. - -This permeation of the Radical Left, undoubted fact though it is of -present day politics, is worth a little further attention; for there -are two possible and tenable views as to its final outcome. One is -that it will end in the slow absorption of the Socialist in the -Liberal party, and that by the action of this sponge-like organism, -the whole of the Rent and Interest will pass into collective control, -without there ever having been a party definitely and openly pledged -to that end. According to this theory there will come a time, and that -shortly, when the avowed Socialists and the much socialised Radicals -will be strong enough to hold the balance in many constituencies, and -sufficiently powerful in all to drive the advanced candidate many -pegs further than his own inclination would take him. Then, either -by abstention or by actual support of the reactionary champion at -elections, they will be able to threaten the Liberals with certain -defeat. The Liberals, being traditionally squeezable folk (like all -absorbent bodies), will thus be forced to make concessions and to -offer compromises; and will either adopt a certain minimum number of -the Socialis_tic_ proposals, or allow to Socialists a share in the -representation itself. Such concessions and compromises will grow in -number and importance with each successive appeal to the electorate, -until at last the game is won. - -Now it seems to me that these hopefuls allow their desires to distort -their reason. The personal equation plays too large a part in the -prophecy. They are generally either not yet wholly socialised Radicals -or Socialists who have quite recently broken away from mere political -Radicalism, and are still largely under the influence of party ties -and traditions. They find it almost impossible to believe that the -party with which they acted so long, so conscientiously, and with -so much satisfaction to themselves, is, after all, not the party to -which belongs the future. They are in many cases on terms of intimate -private friendship with some of the lesser lights of Radicalism, and -occasionally bask in the patronizing radiance shed by the larger -luminaries. A certain portion of the “advanced” press is open to -them for the expression of their views political. Of course none of -these considerations are at all to their discredit, or reflect in -the very least upon their motives or sincerity; but they do color -their judgment and cause them to reckon without their host. They are -a little apt to forget that a good deal of the democratic programme -has yet (as I have said above) to be carried. Manhood suffrage, the -abolition of the Lords, disestablishment, the payment of members: -all these may be, and are, quite logically desired by men who cling -as pertinaciously to private capital as the doughtiest knight of the -Primrose League. Such men regard the vital articles of the Socialist -creed as lying altogether outside the concrete world--“the sphere of -practical politics.” Meanwhile the Socialist votes and voices are well -within that sphere; and it is every day becoming more evident that -without them the above-mentioned aspirations have a meagre chance of -realisation. Now, from the eminently business-like Liberal stand-point, -there is no reason whatever why concessions should not be made to the -Socialist at the polling booth so long as none are asked for in the -House of Commons. And even when they are demanded, what easier than to -make some burning political question play the part which Home Rule is -playing now? Thus an endless vista of office opens before the glowing -eyes of the practical politician, those short-sighted eyes which see so -little beyond the nose, and which, at that distance only, enable their -owner to hit the white. - -The Radical is right as usual in counting on the Socialist alliance -up to a certain point. For us the complete democratisation of -institutions is a political necessity. But long before that complete -democratisation has been brought about, we shall have lost our patience -and the Radicals their temper. - -For as Mr. Hyndman tells the world with damnable (but most veracious) -iteration, we are “a growing party.” We recruit by driblets; but we -do recruit; and those who come to us come, like all the new American -newspapers, “to stay.” Our _faith_, our reason, our knowledge, tell -us that the great evolutionary forces are with us; and every addition -to our ranks causes us, in geometrical proportion, to be less and -less tolerant of political prevarication. Directly we feel ourselves -strong enough to have the slightest chance of winning off our own bat, -we shall be compelled both by principle and inclination to send an -eleven to the wickets. They will have to face the opposition, united or -disunited, of both the orthodox parties, as did the defeated Socialist -candidates at the School Board election in November, 1888. And whether -our success be great or small, or even non-existent, we shall be -denounced by the Radical wire-pullers and the now so complaisant and -courteous Radical press. The alliance will be at an end. - -There is yet another way in which we may win the ill-will of our -temporary allies and, at present, very good friends. I have spoken -above of certain reactionary items of a possible Radical programme, -which, although they have a grotesque resemblance to Socialism, are -worlds away from being the thing itself. These proposals we not only -cannot support, but must and shall actively and fiercely oppose. At the -first signs of such opposition to whoever may be the Liberal shepherd -of the moment, the whole flock of party sheep will be in full cry upon -our track. The ferocity of the _mouton enragé_ is proverbial; and we -shall be treated to the same rancour, spleen, and bile which is now so -plenteously meted out to the Liberal Unionists. - -The immediate result of this inevitable split will be the formation -of a definitely Socialist party, _i.e._, a party pledged to the -communalisation of all the means of production and exchange, and -prepared to subordinate every other consideration to that one end. Then -the House of Commons will begin dimly to reflect the real condition of -the nation outside; and in it we shall see as in a glass, darkly, or -smudgedly, something of that “well defined confrontation of rich and -poor,” of which all who attend Socialist lectures hear so much, and to -which _ex hypothesi_, the world, day by day, draws nearer. Then, also, -will begin that process which, I submit, is more likely than either the -absorption of the Socialist or the prolonged permeation of the Radical: -namely, the absorption of the Radical himself into the definitely -pro-private capital party on the one side, and the definitely -anti-private capital party on the other. - -A really homogeneous Socialist party once formed, the world political -reflects the world economic, and there is no longer any room for the -Radical, as we know the wonder. Each fresh Socialist victory, each -outpost driven in, each entrenchment carried, will be followed by a -warren-like scuttle of alarmed and well-to-do Radicals across the floor -of the House of Commons, which will once more become a true frontier; -and, finally, the political battle array will consist of a small -opposition, fronting a great and powerful majority, made up of all -those whose real or fancied interests would suffer from expropriation. - -Thus far the outlook has been clear and focusable enough; and it has -needed no extra-human illumination to see the details. All that has -been wanted has been normal vision and a mind fairly free of the -idols of the cave. But here the prospect becomes dim and uncertain; -and little purpose would be served by trying to pierce the mist which -enshrouds the distant future. - -Much, very much, will depend upon the courage, the magnanimity, -the steadfastness, the tact, the foresight, and above all upon the -incorruptibility of those whose high mission it will be to frame the -policy and direct the strategy of the Socialist party in those early -days of its parliamentary life. It will have sore need of a leader as -able as, and more conscientious than, any of the great parliamentary -figures of the past. The eye expectant searches in vain for such a man -now among the younger broods of the new democracy. He is probably at -this moment in his cradle or equitably sharing out toys or lollipops -to his comrades of the nursery. And this is well; for he must be a man -quit of all recollections of these days of _Sturm und Drang_, of petty -jealousies, constant errors, and failing faith. He must bring to his -task a record free from failure and without suspicion of stain. - -But whatever may be the difficulties in store for us who name the name -of Socialism, of one thing at least they who have followed this course -of lectures may make quite sure. That, however long and wearisome the -struggle, each day brings us nearer victory. Those who resist Socialism -fight against principalities and powers in economic places. Every new -industrial development will add point to our arguments and soldiers -to our ranks. The continuous perfecting of the organisation of labour -will hourly quicken in the worker the consciousness that his is a -collective, not an individual life. The proletariat is even now the -only real class: its units are the only human beings who have nothing -to hope for save from the levelling up of the aggregate of which they -form a part. The intensifying of the struggle for existence, while -it sets _bourgeois_ at the throat of _bourgeois_, is forcing union -and solidarity upon the workers. And the _bourgeois_ ranks themselves -are dwindling. The keenness of competition, making it every year more -obviously impossible for those who are born without capital ever to -achieve it, will deprive the capitalist class of the support it now -receives from educated and cultivated but impecunious young men whose -material interest must finally triumph over their class sympathies; and -from that section of workmen whose sole aspiration is to struggle out -of the crowd. The rising generation of wage workers, instead of as now -being befogged and bedevilled by the dust and smoke of mere faction -fight, will be able at a glance to distinguish the uniforms of friend -and foe. Despair will take sides with Hope in doing battle for the -Socialist cause. - -These lectures have made it plain enough to those who have hearing -ears and understanding brains that mere material self-interest alone -will furnish a motive strong enough to shatter monopoly; and after -monopoly comes Socialism or--chaos. But the interest of the smaller -self is not the only force which aids us in the present, or will guide -us in the future. The angels are on our side. The constant presence -of a vast mass of human misery is generating in the educated classes -a deep discontent, a spiritual unrest, which drives the lower types -to pessimism, the higher to enquiry. Pessimism paralyses the arms and -unnerves the hearts of those who would be against us. Enquiry proves -that Socialism is founded upon a triple rock, historical, ethical, and -economic. It gives, to those who make it, a great hope--a hope which, -once it finds entrance into the heart of man, stays to soften life -and sweeten death. By the light of the Socialist Ideal he sees the -evil--yet sees it pass. Then and now he begins to live in the cleaner, -braver, holier life of the future; and he marches forward, steeled and -stimulated, with resolute step, with steadfast eye, with equal pulse. - -It is just when the storm winds blow and the clouds lour and the -horizon is at its blackest that the ideal of the Socialist shines with -divinest radiance, bidding him trust the inspiration of the poet rather -than heed the mutterings of the perplexed politician, bidding him -believe that - - “For a’ that, for a’ that, - Its coming yet for a’ that, - That man to man the world o’er - Shall brothers be for a’ that.” - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[96] It is to the half-conscious recognition of this generalisation -that the disappearance of militant Republicanism among the English -working classes is owing. - -[97] The difference of principle here is more apparent than real. The -Gladstonians repudiate any desire for separation, and affirm their -intention of maintaining the absolute veto of the imperial Parliament; -while the Unionists avow their ultimate intention of giving to Ireland -the same powers of self-government now enjoyed, or to be enjoyed by -England and Scotland. - -[98] The battles for Catholic Emancipation and the removal of the -religious disabilities were fought on sectarian rather than on -political grounds. - -[99] This is perhaps not, historically, quite true; but the landlords -believed that their own prosperity depended upon the exclusion of -foreign corn, and that is sufficient for the purpose of my argument. - -[100] _Cf._ The speeches of Mr. John Morley on the eight hours’ -proposal and the taxation of ground rents. Also the recent writings of -Mr. Bradlaugh, _passim_. - -[101] One of the most indefatigable and prolific members of the -Socialist party, in a widely circulated tract, has actually adduced the -existence of _hawkers’ licenses_ as an instance of the “Progress of -Socialism”! - -[102] It is worth noting that those organs of the press which are -devoted more particularly to the landed interest have been the first to -hint at the probable desirability of dealing with great _industrial_ -monopolies by means of legislation. - - - - -INDEX. - - - Absentee Proprietors, 22 - - Abstinence, Reward of, 17 - - Abstract method in Economics, 21 - - Administrative Errors, 37 - - “Administrative Nihilism”, 38 - - Adulteration Acts, 41 - - Aged, Treatment of the, 150 - - Agriculture and Machinery, 62 - - Aladdin’s uncle outdone, 9 - - Aliens, Necessity under Socialism for a law of, 125 - - Althorp, Lord, 69 - - America (See UNITED STATES). - - American Independence, Declaration of, 60 - - Anarchists, Modern, 160 - - Anarchy preferred to corrupt State regulation by progressive thinkers, - 160 - - Andrews, E. Benjamin, on Trusts, 85 - - Angels, Constitution and status of, 108 - - Angels, condition of their imitation on earth, 110 - - Argyle, Duke of, 127 - - Aristotle, 160 - - Arkwright’s inventions, 33, 59 - - Aristocratic employments, 109 - - Ashley, Lord (See LORD SHAFTESBURY). - - Associated Capitals, Competitive force of, 142 - - Associations, Legal position under Socialism of voluntary, 126 - - Austin, John, 39, 120, 165 - - Autobiography of John Stuart Mill, 50, 52 - - Aveling, Rev. F. W., 52 - - - Balfour, Right Hon. A. J., 106 - - Barbarous Countries, Exploitation of, 74 - - Bastille, Fall of the, 34, 60 - - Bebel, August, 119 - - Bedford, Duke of, 127 - - Bellamy, E. (author of “Looking Backward”), 145 - - Benefit Association, Sheep and Lamb Butcher’s Mutual, 88 - - Benevolence and Omnipotence, The dilemma between, 23 - - Bentham, Jeremy, 29, 39, 40, 53, 165 - - Bequest, 122 - - Berkeley, Bishop, 39 - - Besant, Annie, 136 - - ” Walter: His belated chivalry, 108 - - Bimetalism suggested as a solution of the social problem, 174 - - Birmingham, 46 - - ” compared with Warwick, 123 - - Bismarck, Socialism and Prince, 192 - - Blanc, Louis, His Definition of Communism, 131 - - Bland, Hubert, 50, 184 - - Bloodshed: How to argue with its advocates, 166-7 - - Bonanza farms, 62, 142 - - Bourgeoisie, The Factory Acts and the, 190 - Free Trade and the, 190 - - Bradford, 46 - - Bradlaugh, Charles, 182 - - Bramwell, Lord, 28, 175 - - Bright, John, 69, 79 - - Brittany, Standard of comfort in, 123 - Peasants of, 134 - - British Association, 157 - - ” Mind, The Vestry stamp upon the, 182 - - Bryce, James, 78 - - Brook Farm, 28 - - Browning, Robert, 23 - - Burns, John, 174 - - Bunyan, John, 135 - - - Cade, Jack, 160 - - Cairnes, J. E., on the idle rich, 78 - - Canada, Conquest of, 60, 71 - - Canals, Socialization of, 141 - - Cant: Its Source, 4, 106 - - Capital: Is not machinery, 16 - Is the result of saving, 17 - Is spare subsistence, 17 - Cannot be safely taken by the State except for immediate employment - as capital, 173 - Source of municipal capital, 175 - Provision for municipal accumulation, 178 - - “Capital” (Karl Marx’s work), 23, 36 - - “Capital and Land” (Fabian Tract), 43 - - Capitals, Competitive force of associated, 142 - - Capitalism, 16 - Unscrupulousness of, 69 - Its idea self-destructive, 110 - Morals of, 69, 106, 109 - Characteristic effects of, 111 - Its origin in piracy and slave-trading, 158 - - Capitalist: Separation of his function from that of the - _entrepreneur_, 76 - Regulation of the, 43 - Type of the, 105 - - Capitalist combinations and State action, 91 - - Capitulations by proprietary classes, 181 - - Career open to the talented, 7 - - Carlyle, Thomas, 30, 41 - - Cartwright, Rev. Edmund, Inventions of, 59 - - Caste (see CLASS). - - Castlereagh, Viscount, 34 - - Catastrophic Socialism, 136, 166, 183, 185 - - Catechism, Misquotation of the Church, 110 - - Catholic Church, Socialism of the, 113 - - Catholic Emancipation, 34, 188 - - Centralization of State industries, 142, 181 - - Chalmers, Rev. Thomas, 39 - - Charity, 19, 169, 174 - - “Charter, The People’s”, 48 - - Chartism, 48, 169 - - Cheque Bank: Suggestion as to Communal currency, 150 - - Children: In Communes, 150 - Effect of Socialism on the status of, 182 - - “Christian Socialism”, 79, 80 - - Church Catechism, The, 110 - - Church, The Catholic, 113 - - Church of England: A mere appanage of the landed gentry, 31 - - Church of England: Effect of property holding on the, 124 - Democratization of the, 182 - - “Church Reformer, The”, 39 - - Churches, 2 - - Church-going, Hypocrisies of, 5 - - Church, Declaration of the Pan-Anglican Synod concerning Socialism - and the, 174 - - Civilizations and Societies, 20 - - Civil Servants: Their reputation for unconscientiousness, 107, 165 - - “Claims of Labor, The”, 36 - - Clanricarde, Lord, 53 - - Clarke, William, 28, 56, 136, 183 - - Class Feeling and Morality, 17, 103, 105, 106, 108-110 - - Classes, Separation of, 17 - - Cleavage, Economic, 185 - - Clive, Robert, 60, 71 - - Coal mining, Application of machinery to, 151 - - Coal monopoly in the Unite States, 78 - - Cobden Club disconcerted by the appearance of Imports not paid for by - Exports, 169 - - Cobden, Richard, 74, 79 - - Colonization, Modern, 21, 182 - - Coleridge, S. T., 40 - - Combination, 14 - Benefits of, 91 - - Commercial policy of England under Capitalism, 71 - - Commodities: Exchange of, 9 - Process by which their value is reduced to the cost of production of - the most costly unit of the supply, 12, 178 - - Common Sense, 94, 116 - - Commune: Its establishment in England already accomplished, 143 - - Communes, 2 - - Communism defined, 131 - - Communities, Savings of, 123 - Debts of, 128 - - Compensation for expropriated proprietors, 175 - - Competition: Theory of, 161 - Decline of, 81 - Effect on wages, 171 - - Comte, Auguste, 27, 30, 169 - - Comte de Paris, 28 - - “Condition of the Working Classes” (F. Engels’ work), 36 - - Conduct and Principle, Incompatibility set up by Private Property - between, 4 - - Conscience, Social, 137 - - Conservatives, Present attitude of, 188 - - Consols: - Nature of the operation called “reducing”, 181 - - Consumption, Associated, 121, 133 - - Contracts restricted in England, 130 - - Contradictions apparently besetting the investigation of value, 10 - - Conventions as to Morality, 100, 101 - - Cooking, Public and private, 140 - - Co-operative Movement, 41, 81, 124, 144 - Socialist origin of the, 79, 174 - Aims of the leaders, 174 - - Co-operative Experiments, 129 - - Co-ordination, Social, 54 - - Copyright, 120, 132, 133 - - Copper, The “corner” in, 84 - - Corners, 14 - - Cost of Production: What it means, 13 - Reduction of value to, 13 - On inferior soils, 4 - - Cotton Manufacture, Progress of the, 66 - - Cotton-seed Oil Trust, 88 - - County Councils, The new, 35, 123, 128, 138, 171, 181 - - County Council, The London, 181 - - County Family, Origin of the, 4 - - County Farms, Organization of, 139 - - County Government Act (See COUNTY COUNCILS). - - Covert Garden Market and the Duke of Bedford, 127 - - Crime: Its relativity, 105 - - Criminal Class: Its formation, 18, 112 - - Cromptom, Samuel, Inventions of, 33 - - Cultivation of the Earth, 1 - Its beginning, 2 - Its “margin”, 3, 5 - Effect of exploration on the progress of, 20 - - Cultivation of the Earth: - Discrepancies between its actual progress and that deduced from - abstract economics, 20 - - Culture: - Effect on profits of industrial management of the spread of, 179 - - Currency, Suggestion as to communal, 150 - - Cynicism of our time, 5 - - ” Routed by Socialism, 24 - - - Dante, 8 - - Darwin, Charles, 41, 85, 169 - - “Darwinism and Politics”, 51 - - Darwinian theory appealed to by monopolists, 85 - By Socialists, 51 - - Day, The working, 141 - - Debt, The National, 129 - - Debts, Law as to, 125 - Of Communities, 128 - - Decentralization, Necessity for, 170 - - Definitions of economic rent, 4 - - Demand, Effective, 19 - Supply and, 8 - - Democracy: Import of, 29, 30, 35, 54, 55, 195 - Instability of, 55 - Postulated by Socialism, 166 - Further steps necessary to consummate, 170 - - Democrat, Distinction between the Ordinary and the Social, 166 - - Democratic Federation (See S. D. F.) - - De Quincey, Thomas, 40 - - Desire as a social motor, 96, 102 - - Detailed suggestions for social organization of unemployed labor, 140 - - De Tocqueville. A. C. H. C., 29 - - Devil worship, 24 - - Diocesan Councils, Central Conference of, 54 - - Dirty Work, 145 - - Discipline in socialized industries, 143 - - Discovery of new countries, 21 - - Disestablishment of the Church, 188 - - Dishonesty a product of Capitalism, 111 - - Disingenuousness of Class Economics, 14, 19, 21 - - Dismal Science now the Hopeful, 25 - - Dismissal, Power of, 143 - - Dissolution of the Old Synthesis, 31 - - Division of labor, 3 - - Drainage Acts, 41 - - Drinking Fountains, Communism exemplified in, 131 - - Drone and Worker, 4 - - - Earnings distinguished from the revenue of Private Property, 20 - - Ecclesiastical intolerance, Reaction against mediæval, 161 - - Economics (See POLITICAL ECONOMY). - - Economists (See POLITICAL ECONOMISTS). - - Education: Reform of, 49 - Moral, 102 - A necessity for morality, 111 - Socialist ideal of, 115, 134 - Effect on profits of industrial management, 179 - Tendency of Social Democracy to encourage, 180 - - Eight Hours, Working day of, 141 - - Electors, Number of, 35 - - Elizabethan merchant adventurers, 159 - - Emigration, 167 - - Employer: Differentiated from Capitalist, 76 - And laborer, 137 - Not harmed by Socialism, 177 - - Engels, F., 36 - - England: Her social policy to-day, 19 - In 1750, 30 - Her foreign policy dictated by Capitalism, 73, 74 - Her mineral fertility, 167 - - “English Factory Legislation.” (See also FACTORY LEGISLATION), 36 - - _Entrepreneur_ (See EMPLOYER). - - Episcopal Conference, 54 - - Equality of remuneration, 148, 149 - - Errors (See MISTAKES exposed by Socialism). - - Ethics: Metaphysic of, 94 - Positive science of, 95 - - Evolution, Effect of Hypothesis of, 24, 51 - - Exchange of Commodities, 12 - Mechanism of, 10 - - Exchange Value (See VALUE), 9 - - Exploitation, 18 - - - Factories before the Factory Act, 36, 67 - - Factory Legislation, 36, 41, 70, 125, 167, 190 - - Factory System, Introduction of the, 33, 59 - - “Facts for Londoners”, 181 - - “Fair Trade”, 92 - - Family: Effect of Socialism on the, 182 - Origin of the County, 4 - Isolation of the, 122, 133 - - Farms: Organization of County, 139 - Bonanza, 142 - - Fawcett, Henry, 4 - - Federation of Municipalities, 181 - - Feudalism: Survival of, 31 - Reaction against its domineering, 160 - Feudal dues, 38 - - Fielden, John, 70 - - Filibuster, The Colonizing, 182 - - Final Utility, Theory of, 11, 12 - - Flag, Trade following the, 182 - - Flats, Living in, 121 - - Fly-Shuttle, Invention of the, 59 - - Foreign Investments, Interest on, 169 - - Foreign Markets, The fight for, 74, 181 - - Foreign Policy: Effect of Capitalism upon, 71 - Effect of Socialism upon, 181 - - Foreign Trade following the Flag, 182 - - Forestalling, 14 - - Fourier, F. C. M., 121 - - Fox, Charles James, 34 - - Foxwell, Professor H. S., 37 - - Free Ferry, The London, 47 - - “Free Land” and the Radical party, 50, 195 - - Free Trade Movement, 73 - Foreign investments left out of account by the, 169 - The bourgeoisie and the, 190 - - Freethinker, Possible Election to the Deanery of Westminster of an - avowed, 182 - - French Revolution, 34, 60, 174 - - Friction caused by introduction of Municipal Socialism, 178 - - Furse, Canon, 54 - - - Gambling, 2 - - Gasworks, Socialization of, 45, 139, 181 - - George III, 72 - - George, Henry, 95, 127, 161, 169, 172 - - Georgism, Checkmate to, 173 - - Giffen, Robert, 169, 173 - - Gladstone, Right Hon. W. E., 47 - Retrogressive instincts of, 161 - - Glasgow, 47 - Growth of, 33 - - Godin and Leclaire, Experiments of, 151 - - Godwin, William, 39 - - Gold: As money, 10 - Effect of Discoveries in California and Australia, 167 - - Goschen, Right Hon. G. J., 181 - - Gould, Jay, 69 - - Government: In 1750, 32 - Industries carried on by, 42 - “Government Organization of Labor”, 46 - - Gradual Socialization, 31 - Compensation a condition of, 175 - - Greek Republics, 125, 148, 160 - - Greenock, 46 - - Gronlund, Laurence, 119, 121, 125 - - Grote, George, 39 - - Ground values, Municipilization of, 175 - - Growth of Towns, 32 - - Guild of St. Matthew, 39 - - Guillotining, 182 - - - Habits: Moral, 97 - Automatic, 98 - - Harbors, Nationalization of, 149 - - Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. V., 106 - On the teetotal stump, 106 - “We are all Socialists now”, 190 - - Hargreaves, James, The Inventions of, 33, 59 - - Harrison, Frederic, 54 - - Hastings, Warren, 71 - - Haves and Have-nots, 186 - - Head Rents, Relative Insignificance of, 8 - - Hegel, G. W. F., 162, 165 - - High Church Party, 39 - - Historical: Method in Economics, 20 - Development of Private Property, 20 - Basis of Socialism, 26 - “Historical Basis of Socialism” (Hyndman’s work), 27 - - “History”: “Of Agriculture and Prices”, 32 - “Of the 18th Century”, 34 - “Of Private Bill Legislation”, 38 - “Of the Reform Bill”, 31 - - Hobbes, Thomas, 160 - - Hobhouse, Lord, 171, 175 - - Hobhouse, Sir John Cam, 68 - - Homestead Law, 126 - - Hospital, The, 18 - - House of Commons, 181 - - House of Lords, Abolition of, 170 - - Household Suffrage, 34 - - Huddersfield, 46 - - Human Life, Disregard of Capital for, 146 - - Hume, David, 38, 161 - - Huxley, Professor, 53 - - Hyndman, H. M., 27, 169 - - Hypocrisy, 5, 158 - - - Ibsen, Henrik, 134 - - Icaria, 28 - - Idleness, Association of prosperity with, 5 - - Idlers: their fate under Socialism, 151 - - Illth, 18 - - Illusions, Economic, 161 - - Immigration, Pauper, 125, 173 - - Improvement in Production, 6 - Effect of unforeseen, 8 - - Incentive to Labor: Under Socialism, 151 - Under Leasehold system, 171 - - Income Tax, 130, 150, 167 - An instrument of expropriation, 176 - “Rent of ability” recoverable by, 181 - - Independent Weaver, Transformation of the, 59 - - India, Conquest of, under Clive and Warren Hastings, 60, 71 - - Indifference, Law of, 11 - - Individualism: Outbreak of, 37 - Abandonment of, 54 - The change to Socialism from, 137 - Confusedly opposed to Socialism, 96 - Its moralization, 97, 102 - Anti-Social manifestation, 104 - Protestant form of, 114 - Abolished in production, 116 - - Industrial Organization, Centralization of, 147, 181 - - Industrial Remuneration Conference, 54 - - Industrial Revolution, 33-35, 41, 56, 136, 159 - Attitude of parties during, 189 - - Industrialism, Evil effects of, 67 - - Industry: Under Socialism, 136 - Nationalization of, 43 - As virtue or vice, 106, 108 - Disgraceful for women, 108 - _La grande industrie_, 185 - - Inequality, 1 - Mischief of, 20 - Sense of it lost in contemplation of equality before God, 23 - - Inferior soils, Resort to, 3 - - Ingram, J. K., 80 - - Injustices produced by private appropriation of land, 5 - - Insanity, Definition of, 97, 100 - - Inspection of Industry, 43 - - Institutions, History of, 103 - - Insurance: National, 23 - Municipal, 47 - - Insurrectionism, 165, 176 - - Intellectual Revolt, The, 185 - - Interest, 16 - Fall in the current rate often mistaken for a tendency in Interest - to disappear, 17 - Mr. Goschen’s operation for securing to the community the advantage - of the fall in the current rate, 17 - A tribute, 105, 114 - - Interest, Class, 103 - - International Morality in the Middle Ages, 157 - - International Trade the dominant factor in foreign policy, 72, 181 - - Invention, Consequences of, 146 - - Inventor, The first, 6 - - Iron Industry, 60 - - - Jevons, W. Stanley, 162 - - Joint Stock Companies: Development of, 43, 78 - Not objects of public sympathy, 138 - - Joseph the Second, 30 - - - Kaye of Bury, 33 - - Kingsley, Charles, 39, 41, 79 - - Kitchens: Separate, 122 - Public, 134 - - Kropotkin, Peter, 61, 160 - - - Labor: Mouth honor to, 5 - In the market as a commodity, 9 - Displaced by machinery, 63 - Fruits of, 104 - Municipal organization of, 140, 174 - Labor colonies, 147 - Beginning of State organization of, 175 - - Laborer and Employer, 137 - (See also PROLETARIAN.) - - _Laisser-faire_, 36, 38, 39, 51, 70, 160 - - Lancashire, Old, 57 - Expansion of, 65 - Weavers’ grievances, 72 - - Land, Rent of, 3-5 - Point at which it becomes a close monopoly, 7 - Powers of the County Councils to hold, 139 - Nationalization of, 47, 172 - - Landlord, What he costs, 14 - - Landed Interest, Its policy, 187 - - Lassalle, Ferdinand, 57, 162 - - Law of Indifference, 11, 12 - - “ “ Rent (See also RENT), 4, 53, 161 - - “Leaseholds Enfranchisement”, 51, 174 - - Leaseholds: Origin of, 8 - Confiscation at expiry of, 171 - - Lecky, W. J., 34, 71, 73 - - Leclaire and Godin, Experiments of, 151 - - Leed, 33, 38, 47 - - Legislation: Breakdown of mediæval, 160 - (See also FACTORY LEGISLATION.) - - Leveling-down action of Private Property, 14 - - Levi, Leone, 54 - - Liberal and Radical Union in favor of County Councils holding land, - 47, 138 - - Libraries, Public, 134 - - Liberal Party, Its policy on Socialism, 190-192 - - Liberty and Equality, 53, 157 - - Liberty and Property Defence League, 47 - - Lincoln, Abraham: The moral of his assassination, 74 - - Liverpool, Growth of, 33 - - Lloyd, Henry D., on “Lords of Industry”, 83 - - Local: Improvement Acts, 41 - Self-Government, 171 - Government Boards dealings with the unemployed, 174 - Government Board of the future, 181 - - Lodging Houses, Municipal, 47 - - London: Facts concerning, 181 - The County Council, 181 - Extraordinary proportions reached by Economic Rent in, 171 - Liberal and Radical Union, 47, 138 - London and Southwestern Railway shareholders, 78 - - “Looking Backward”, 145 - - Louis XVI, 56 - - Lying, As vice or virtue, 107 - - - Machinery: Shoemaking by, 61 - Agriculture by, 62 - Displacement of hand labor by, 63 - Progress of, 138, 146 - Substitution for hand labor in disagreeable employments, 145 - Chimney Sweeping by, 146 - - Maine, Sir Henry, 29, 54 - - Malthus, Rev. T. R., 32, 39, 162 - - Man as producer and exchanger, 12 - - “Man _versus_ the State”, 47 - - Management, Profits of industrial, 179 - - Managers, Qualifications and present value of industrial, 179-80 - - Manchester, 33, 38, 46 - - Manchester School, 74, 168 - Its advocacy of Protection, 176 - - Manners, Lady Janette on “Are Rich Landowners Idle?”, 109 - - Manorial Rights, 32, 38 - Mills, 38 - - Manors, 2, 32, 38 - - Marginal Utility (See FINAL UTILITY). - - Margin of Cultivation, 2, 5 - Obligation of private competitors to charge the full cost of - production at, 178-9 - - Markets: Effect on rent of proximity to, 3 - The fight for foreign, 74, 181 - - Marriage, Contract of, 131 - - Marshall, Alfred, and Mary Paley--Definition of rent, 4 - - Marx, Karl, 36, 162, 169 - - Matthew, Guild of St., 39 - - Maurice, F. Denison, 39, 41, 79 - - Meliorism, 24 - - Men, Traffic in, 9 - - Mercantile System, 38 - - Method of Criticism on Moral Basis, 95 - - Metœci in Athens, 125 - - Middle Ages: Social Organization in the, 157 - - Middle Class: Its callousness, 73 - Its moral ideas, 108-110 - Its misunderstandings of Socialism, 164 - Its dread of mob violence, 175 - - Militant organization of the working class for forcible revolution, - 182, 184 - - Militarism and immigration, 125 - - Military Service, 131 - Empires of the Continent, 125 - - Mill, James, 29, 33 - - Mill, John Stuart, 4, 31, 39, 41, 50, 52, 168 - - Milk Exchange of New York, 88 - - Milton, John, Proposal as to schools, 134 - - Mines: Their horrors before the legislation initiated by Lord Ashley, - 61 - Nationalization of, 150 - Mines Regulation Acts, 41 - - Minor poetry, Socialist provision for the publication of, 144 - - Mirabeau, 60 - - Missionaries, 181 - - Mistakes exposed by Socialism: - That Society is no more than the sum of its units, 3, 50 - That Private Property encourages industry, 6 - That Private Property establishes healthy incentive, 6 - That Private Property distributes wealth according to exertion, 6 - That Rent does not enter into price, 14 - That Exchange Value is a measure of true wealth, 19 - That “the poor ye shall have always with you”, 24 - That riots, regicide and bloodshed make Revolutions, 56, 166 - - Mob Violence, Middle-class dread of, 175 - - Molesworth, W. N., 31 - - Money, Function of, 10 - - Monopolies, 14 - And Democracy, 89 - Necessity for protecting the Postmaster’s, 168 - - Moral Basis of Socialism, 93 - Habits and their origin, 98 - Education of the Individual, 102 - And of Society, 115 - - Moralists, Foolish, 6 - - Morality, 94 - Relativity of, 96 - Recognizable only in Society, 97 - Conventional, 98, 100, 106, 108 - Natural, 101, 109 - Practical, 103 - Class, 5, 23, 108, 109, 110, 159 - Elementary conditions of, 113 - Developed conditions of, 115, 116 - Socialistic, 117 - Medieval, 137, 158 - Elizabethan, 159 - - “Morals and Health Act” (1802), 41, 160 - - More, Sir Thomas, 160 - - Morley, Right Hon. John, 47, 182, 192, 193 - - Motors, Influence of new, 33 - - Municipal: Corporations Act, 34 - Action, 46 - Socialism, 46, 175 - Debt, 47 - Development, 49 - Prestige of Municipal Employment, 177 - - Municipalities, Growth of, 33, 35, 45, 46, 47 - (See also COUNTY COUNCILS.) - - - Nabob, The appearance in English social life of the, 33 - - Napoleon: “The career is open to the talented”, 7 - “A nation of shopkeepers”, 71 - - Nasmyth, James, invents the steam-hammer, 60 - - National Insurance, 23 - - National Liberal Federation, 48 - - “National Review, The”, 109 - - Nationalization of Rent, 22, 47 - It results if unaccompanied by Socialistic organization of labor, - 172 - Inter-municipal rent, 181 - Rent of ability, 179-80 - (See also PROGRESS AND POVERTY.) - - Nature: Caprices of, 3, 7 - “Red in tooth and claw”, 23 - Unmorality of, 24 - The cause of Society, 98 - - Newspapers under Socialism, 144 - - New Hampshire, 121 - - New Motors, Influence of, 33 - - New River Company, 124 - - New York Legislature--Committee on Trusts, 86 - - Newcommen, Thomas, 33 - - Nexus, The social, 30, 32, 50 - - - Oastler, Richard, 68 - - O’Connor, Fergus, 169 - - Oldest Families--Tradition of their superiority, 5 - - Oldham, 46 - - Olivier, Sydney, 93 - - Omnipotence and Benevolence, The Dilemma of, 23 - - Optimism: rebuked by Science, 24 - The individual economists and their, 161 - - Organism, The Social, 50 - - Outlook, The political, 184 - - Over-population, 17 - - Owen, Robert, 40, 79, 121, 174 - - - Painters, Gains of fashionable, 179 - - Paley, Rev. William, 39, 40 - - Palmerston, Chinese policy of Lord, 74 - - _Panem et Circenses_, 172 - - Parasitism, Economic, 107 - - Parliaments, Annual, 170 - - Parks, Public, 187-8 - - Parties, State and fundamental differences of, 120, 132 - - Patent rights, 155 - - Patronage in the public service, 165 - Effect of appointments by, 165 - - Pauper Labor, How to deal with, 140 - - Payment of representatives, 170 - - Peasant Proprietorship, 50 - - Period of Anarchy, 35 - - Perpetual pension, Privately appropriated Rent is of the nature of - a, 4 - - Pessimism, 23, 200 - - Peterloo, 34 - - Philanthropy, Futility of, 167 - - “Philosophic Radicalism,” 40, 167 - - Physical force, 136, 166, 184 - Advocated by Lord Bramwell, 175 - - Physicians, Gains of fashionable, 179 - - Piracy and the Slave Trade in the 16th century, 158 - - Pitt, William: His motives, 72 - - Piener, E. von, 69 - - Plebeians in ancient Rome, 125 - - Plato, 111 - - Police: Conduct of Socialists charged upon by the, 100 - Recent action of the ex-Chief Commissioner of, 174 - - Political: Tendencies, 48, 186 - Reform, 51, 192 - “Political Science Quarterly,” 28, 79 - Economy (See POLITICAL ECONOMY). - - Political Economy, 2 - Basis of Socialism in, 1 - Definition of Rent in treatises, 4 - Theory apparently contradicted by history, 20 - Untrustworthiness of abstract, 20 - Its guns turned against Private Property, 24 - Old school and new, 24 - John Stuart Mill, 31, 50, 52 - Ricardo, 162 - Jevons, 162 - Rise of modern, 39, 160 - Perceived to be a _reductio ad absurdum_ of Private Property, 162 - Present political parties and, 190 - - Poor Law: A Socialistic institution degraded, 114 - Reform, 49 - The old and the new, 167 - - Post Office: A Socialistic institution, 131 - Socialization of the postal system, 139 - Economy of collectivist charges exemplified by, 168 - - Population: Increase and its effects, 5, 15, 161, 174 - Its control by public opinion, 182 - (See also OVERPOPULATION.) - - Press: Its liberty after the socialization of printing, 144 - Clamor for bloodshed from the newspapers of the proprietary - class, 175 - - Preston, 46 - Its public debt, 127 - - Prices cannot be raised to compensate diminished profits, 177 - - Printing, Socialization of, 144 - - Private Property: Beginning of, 2 - Its levelling-down action, 14 - Injustice of, 20 - Not now practicable in its integrity, 21 - Its abrogation conceived as an attempt to empower everyone to rob - everyone else, 22 - Its revenue distinguished from earnings, 22 - Composition of incomes derived from, 22 - Institution of, 103 - Conditions of its possibility, 104 - Effect on sex relations, 110 - Idea of, 111 - Rights of, 138 - Cheapens the laborer, 179 - Tends to make the majority mere beasts of burden, 180 - Process of extinction of, 181 - The State and, 190 - (See also PROPERTY.) - - Private Enterprise compared with Public, 168 - - Produce: Unjust division resulting from private appropriation of - land, 5 - - Production: Improvements in, 6 - Effect of unforeseen improvements in, 12 - Conditions of production and exchange, 12 - Associated, 121, 133 - - Profit, 6, 13 - Sweater’s, 177 - Most important form of “Rent of Ability,” 179 - Effect of calculating it in net social welfare instead of individual - pecuniary gain, 181 - - “Profit Sharing”, 151 - - Programme of Social Democracy, 182 - - Progress: Conditions of, 94 - Rate of in politics, industry and thought, 186 - - “Progress and Poverty,” 23-5, 162, 169, 172 - - “Progress of Socialism,” 41 - - Proletarian: The first, 6 - Predicament of landless, 8 - End of his absorption by the land as tenant, 9 - Sold into bondage, 10 - Operation of the law of value on his position as a vendor of - labor, 15 - How the Democratic State will deal with him, 173 - (See also PROLETARIAT.) - - Proletariat: Origin of the, 6 - Exploitation of, 17 - Physical degradation of, 67 - Type of, 105 - Morals of, 110-13 - So-called “intellectual,” 180 - (See also PROLETARIAN.) - - Property: Under Socialism, 119 - Definition and economic analysis of, 120 - (See also PRIVATE PROPERTY.) - - Prosperity, Association of idleness with, 4 - - Prostitutes, their making, 112 - - Protection: Decay of, 73 - In the Middle Ages, 158 - Advocated by the Manchester School, 176 - - Proudhon, P. J., 162 - - Public Health Acts, 41 - - Public Opinion, 182 - - Purchasing Power--Pernicious effect of its unequal distribution, 19 - - - Quit Rents, 8 - - - Radicalism: Philosophic, 40 - The modern Radical Programme, 48 - Ordinary destructive variety, 164 - Permeation of by Socialism, 196 - Absorption of, 199 - The land question and, 104 - - Railways: Requisites for making them under Capitalism, 16 - Development of, 75 - Socialization of, 139 - - Raphael’s pictures, 126 - - Ratepayer, How Socialism will first affect the, 177 - - Rates, Growth of, 46 - - Reactionary Legislation, Danger of, 92 - - Reform Bills, 34, 168 - - Regicide: Its victims, 84 - Its futility, 136 - - Registration, Anomalous condition of voters’, 170 - - Regulation of Industry: Medieval, 37, 157-8 - Modern (See FACTORY LEGISLATION). - - Rent: Recognized and paid by worker to drone, 3 - Definitions of economic rent by standard economists, 3, 4 - Point at which rent ceases to be strictly “economic rent,” 8 - Enters into price of all commodities except those produced at margin - of cultivation, 13 - Relation to cost of production, 13 - Nationalization of, 21, 46, 182 - Is common wealth, not individually earned, 22 - Moral Aspect of, 104, 110, 113 - Case of Birmingham and Warwick, 123 - Law of, 161 - Illustration of economic rent, 163 - Urban, 171 - Effect of municipal Socialism on, 177 - How County Councils can manipulate, 178 - Nationalizing inter-municipal, 181 - Effect of Free Trade on agricultural, 190 - Rent of ability, 7, 177 - Industrial profit the most important form of, 179 - Raised by Private Property, 179 - May become negative, 180 - - Republicanism: Disappearance of militant Republicanism in England, 185 - - Residuum: Genesis of the, 113 - Its appreciation of public hospitality, 114 - - Respectability, Falsehood of current, 24 - - Reward of Abstinence, 16 - ” of effort in the cause of Socialism, 135 - - Revolt, The Intellectual, 40 - - Revolution: Middle class notions of, 56 - Socialistic attempt to organize militant, 182 - (See also INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION and PHYSICAL FORCE.) - - Ricardo, David, 4, 39, 162 - - Riches are not Wealth, 18 - - Rights of Man, Declaring the, 182 - - Rings, Growth of capitalist, 82, 127, 184 - - Ritchie, Right Hon. C. T., 138 - - Ritchie, D. G., 50 - - Rochdale Pioneers, 124 - - Roebuck, J. A., 39 - - Rogers, Professor Thorold E., 32 - - Rousseau, J. J., 39 - - Rural economy in 1750, 32 - - Russell, Lord John, announces finality, 167 - - Ruskin, John, 41 - - Russia’s industrial competition in the world market, 169 - - Rutland, Duchess of, on the hard work of country gentlemen, 109 - - Ryot, Suppression of Indian, 113 - - - S. D. F. (Social Democratic Federation), 169 - - Sadler, Michael Thomas, 69 - - Salisbury, Rt. Hon., the Marquess of, 129 - - Satan: His moral activity, 106 - Rehabilitation of, 114 - - “Saul”: Optimism as expressed in Robert Browning’s poem, 23 - - Saving: Capital the result of, 16 - Savings of communities and of individuals, 123 - - Schools as they should be, 133 - - Scott, Sir Walter, Political types in “Rob Roy”, 71 - - Secretan, Eugène, 84 - - Seeley, J. R., 189 - - Self, Extension of, 101 - - Self-defence, Origin of the Noble Art, 100 - - “Self-help”, 19, 168 - - Seligman, E. R. A., 79 - - Servants, Domestic, 111, 172 - - Servantgalism an Effect of Capitalism, 111 - - Services, Property in, 130 - - Settlement, Law of, 31 - - Seven Years’ War, The, 60 - - Sewer Cleaning under Socialism, 145 - - Shaftesbury, Lord, 69 - - Shaftesbury Avenue, Land near, 127 - - Shakspere, Suggested Duke of, 132 - - Shaw, G. Bernard, 1, 157 - - Shelley, P. B., 100 - - Shoemaking by hand, 58 - By machinery, 61 - - Shopkeeping, Joint-Stock, 80 - - Sidgwick, Henry, 4, 52, 130 - - Sidmouth, Lord, 34 - - Six Acts, The, 34 - - “Six Centuries of Work and Wages,” 32 - - Slave Trade, The, 158 - - Slavery, The White, 36 - - Slaves Released when not worth keeping, 15 - - Smiles, Samuel, 7 - - Smith, Adam, 32, 38 - - Societies: Failure of previous attempts to establish true, 20 - Societies and Civilizations, 21 - (See also SOCIETY.) - - Society: Hypothesis that it is no more than the sum of its - Units, 3, 50 - The Matrix of Morality, 96 - Evolution of Primitive, 96, 98, 101, 103, 112 - Industrial, 104 - Parasitic, 106-7 - Fashionable, 107 - (See also SOCIETIES.) - - Soils, Resort to Inferior, 3 - - Somers, Robert, 80 - - Social: Utility Divorced from Exchange Value, 18 - Character of Social Changes, 30 - Evolution, 30, 44, 53 - “Social Statics,” 36, 54 - Health, 51 - Organization, 51, 136 - Instinct, 101, 109 - Social Democratic Federation, 169 - Social Democracy and Social Democrat. (See SOCIALISM and SOCIALIST.) - - Socialism, 2, 22, 131, 163, 166, 182, 190, 194-95 - Economic basis of, 1 - Bearing of Economic Analysis of Individualism on, 22 - Substitutes Meliorism for Pessimism, 24, 200 - Historic Aspect, 26 - “Socialism in England,” 27 - Change in, 27, 119 - Early or Utopian, 27, 30, 119, 136, 160, 164 - Industrial Aspect, 56 - The Capitalist and, 90 - Moral Aspect, 93 - Its Genesis, 96 - New Conception of, 119 - Property under, 119 - Definition of pure, 131 - Industry under, 136 - Change from Individualism to, 137, 157 - Local machinery of, 139, 169 - Dirty Work under, 145 - Transition to, 157 - Practical difficulties of, 163 - Honesty of, 164 - Must be introduced gradually, 166 - Solution of the Compensation difficulty, 175 - Effect on Rent, 177 - Friction caused by introduction of, 178 - Outlook toward, 184 - Prince Bismarck’s view of, 192 - The Liberal Party and, 192 - True and False, 193-4 - Two views of the future of, 195 - Practical politicians and, 196 - (See also the Index Generally.) - - Socialist Politics, 47 - Programme, 48 - Formation of party, 198 - - Socialists and the police, 100 - Early (See UTOPIAN SOCIALISM). - The _mot d’ordre_ for, 139 - Social Democrats fall into line as a political party, 170 - The Radical Press and, 195 - Parliament and, 197 - Future leader for, 199 - - Spencer, Herbert, 36, 41, 47, 58, 95, 160, 169 - - St. Matthew, Guild of, 39 - - Standard Oil Trust, 85 - - “Star, The,” 48 - - State: Social Democratic, 2 - Functions under Socialism, 149 - Corruption of the, 164 - Whig conception of the, 165 - Conception of the perfect, 165 - Decentralization in the Social Democratic, 170 - Private Property and the, 190 - Attitude of parties towards the, 190 - Idea and content of the, 191 - The working-class and the, 191 - - Statistics and Statisticians, 173 - - Steam applied to cotton spinning, 59 - - Stuart, Professor James, 48 - - Subletting of Tenant Right, 5 - - Subsistence Wages, _Rationale_ of, 16 - - Sunday: Hypocrisies of church going, 5 - The English, 133 - - Sunderland, 46 - - Supply and Demand: Action of, 8, 179 - Value decreases with Supply, 10 - Final effect on wage-labor, 16, 17 - - Sweating, How to defeat, 175 - - Sweeping Chimneys: Replacement of boy labor by machinery in, 146 - - Syndicate of Copper Cornerers, 84 - - Synthesis: The old, 31, 157 - The new, 50 - - - Talent, Career open to, 7 - - Taxation: Reform, 48 - Of ground values, 171 - Novel character of recent demands for, 172 - - Telegraphs, Socialization of, 139 - - Ten Hours’ Bill, The, 69 - - Tenant Rights: Perpetual, 4, 5, 6 - Replaced by finite leases, 8 - - Tennyson, Alfred, 68 - - Test and Corporation Acts repealed, 34 - - Theatres, Communal, 135 - - Tocqueville, A. C. H. C. de, 29 - - Tory of fifty years ago, 188-9 - Absorption of the party, 189 - - Tonquin, French policy in, 75 - - “Total Utility,” 11 - - Toynbee, Arnold, 33 - - Trade: Secrets of, 14 - Discredit and rehabilitation of as a pursuit for the nobility and - gentry, 108 - - Trade Unions, 48, 132, 168 - Wages in, 141 - Royal Commission (1869), 169 - - Trafalgar Square: The police in, 100, 174 - The Fountains in, 107 - - Traffic in Men, 9 - - Tramways, Socialization of, 46, 139 - - Transition to Social Democracy, 157 - - Truck Acts, 41 - - Trusts, 14, 138, 143, 185 - - Tucker, Benjamin R., 160 - - Turgot, A. R. J., 161 - - Two-man power more than double One-man power, 3 - - - Unemployed: Their existence a proof that the labor they could replace - has no exchange value, 139 - Social pressure created by the, 172 - - United States: Results of Individualism plus political liberty in - the, 21 - Declaration of Independence, 60 - Growth of Monopoly in the, 78 - Extent to which monopoly has gone in the, 82 - - Unskilled Labor, Fate of, 112 - - Unsocialism, 2 - - Utilitarian questioning and scientific answering, 23 - - Utilitarians, The, 38 - - Utility: Its relation to Value, 10 - “Total Utility,” “Marginal,” or “Final Utility,” 11, 12 - Divorce from Exchange Value, 19 - - Utopian Socialism, 27, 30, 119, 136, 160, 164 - - - Valjean, Jean, 100 - - Value in Exchange, 9 - Not explained by the money mechanism, 10 - Man’s control over it consists in his power of regulating supply, 14 - Divorced from social utility, 19 - Theory of, 162 - - Voluntary Associations: Their legal position under Socialism, 124 - - Von Plener, E., 36 - - Vestrydom congenial to British mind, 182 - - Villiers, C. P., 39 - - Virtues conditioned by social evolution, 99, 100-6 - - - Wages, 15 - Subsistence level, 16 - Adjustment, 148 - Rise after 1840, 167 - Apparently raised by Trade Unions, 168 - Competition wages, 176 - Socialistic wages, 147, 177-8 - - Walford’s Insurance Cyclopædia, 46 - - Walker, F. A., 4 - - Wallas, Graham, 119 - - Walpole, Sir Robert, 72 - - Warren, Sir Charles, 174 - - Wars for foreign markets, 75, 181, 182 - - Warwick compared with Birmingham, 123 - - Watt, James, 33 - - Watts, Isaac, on the cotton manufacture, 66 - - Waterloo Bridge, Socialization of, 133 - - Waterworks, Socialization of, 46, 139 - - Wealth: Divorced from Exchange Value, 19 - - Wealth: Distinguished from “Illth,” 19 - “Wealth of Nations,” 32 - - Weaver, Extirpation of the hand-loom, 60, 72 - - Webb, Sidney, 26, 27, 99, 184 - - Westminster, Duke of, 173 - - Whig Philosophy, 164 - Economics, 164 - Disappearance of the, 188 - The Whig of fifty years ago, 188-9 - - White Slavery, 36, 40 - - “White Terror, The,” 34 - - Whitman, Walt, 92 - - Wicksteed, P. H., 162 - - William the Silent, Assassination of, 76 - - Women: Effect of Property System on, 108-10 - Outlawry of, 176 - Economic independence of, 182 - - Worker and Drone, 3 - - Working class: Militant organization of, 183 - The State and the, 190 - Political superstitions of the, 192 - - - Zeitgeist, Effect of the, 44 - - - - -Transcriber’s Notes - -Errors and omissions in punctuation were corrected. - -The page reference in the Table of Contents to the start of William -Clarke’s article on the Fabian Society and its work has been corrected. - -Page xiii: “or _Debats_” changed to “or _Débats_” - -Page xxxiii: “ignorant and presumptous” changed to “ignorant and -presumptuous” - -Page 14: “being disengenuous” changed to “being disingenuous” - -Page 30: “wider concensus” changed to “wider consensus” - -Page 33: “of these man” changed to “of these men” - -Page 38: “French contempories” changed to “French contemporaries” - -Page 40: “nett result” changed to “net result” - -Page 52: “not neccessarily” changed to “not necessarily” - -Page 71: “conquest or Canada” changed to “conquest of Canada” - -Page 79: “conceited, hyprocritical” changed to “conceited, hypocritical” - -Page 162: “dialectrical war” changed to “dialectical war” - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FABIAN ESSAYS IN -SOCIALISM *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/69088-0.zip b/old/69088-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 67317e4..0000000 --- a/old/69088-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/69088-h.zip b/old/69088-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9675b5c..0000000 --- a/old/69088-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/69088-h/69088-h.htm b/old/69088-h/69088-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 0fba714..0000000 --- a/old/69088-h/69088-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,11995 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> -<head> - <meta charset="UTF-8" /> - <title> - Fabian Essays in Socialism, by G. Bernard Shaw—A Project Gutenberg eBook - </title> - <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover" /> - <style> /* <![CDATA[ */ - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; - text-indent: 1em; -} - -.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} -.p4 {margin-top: 4em;} - -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: 33.5%; - margin-right: 33.5%; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;} -hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} -@media print { hr.chap {display: none; visibility: hidden;} } - -hr.r5 {width: 5%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 47.5%; margin-right: 47.5%;} - -div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} -h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} - -ul.index { list-style-type: none; margin-top: 2em;} -li.ifrst { - margin-top: 1em; - text-indent: -2em; - padding-left: 1em; -} -li.isuba { - text-indent: -2em; - padding-left: 2em; -} -li.isubb { - text-indent: -2em; - padding-left: 3em; -} - -table { - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; -} -table.autotable { border-collapse: collapse; width: 60%;} -table.autotable td, -table.autotable th { padding: 4px; } -.x-ebookmaker table {width: 95%;} - -.tdl {text-align: left; vertical-align: top;} -.tdr {text-align: right; vertical-align: top;} -.tdc {text-align: center; vertical-align: top;} -.page {width: 15em;} - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; - font-style: normal; - font-weight: normal; - font-variant: normal; - text-indent: 0; -} - -.blockquot { - margin-left: 5%; - margin-right: 5%; -} - -.bt {border-top: 1px solid;} - -.bbox {border: 2px solid; width: 80%; margin-left: 10%} - -.center {text-align: center; text-indent: 0em;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;} - -/* Footnotes */ -.footnotes {border: 1px dashed; margin-top: 1em;} - -.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} - -.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - -/* Poetry */ -.poetry {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%; text-indent: 0em;} -/* uncomment the next line for centered poetry in browsers */ -/* .poetry {display: inline-block;} */ -/* large inline blocks don't split well on paged devices */ -@media print { .poetry {display: block;} } -.x-ebookmaker .poetry {display: block;} - -/* Transcriber's notes */ -.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - font-size:smaller; - padding:0.5em; - margin-bottom:5em; - font-family:sans-serif, serif; } - -.big {font-size: 1.2em;} -.small {font-size: 0.8em;} - -abbr[title] { - text-decoration: none; -} - - /* ]]> */ </style> -</head> -<body> -<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Fabian Essays in Socialism, by George Bernard Shaw</p> -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online -at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you -are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this eBook. -</div> - -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: Fabian Essays in Socialism</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: George Bernard Shaw</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Contributors: Sydney Olivier</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em;'>Sidney Webb</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em;'>Annie Besant</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em;'>William Clarke</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: October 2, 2022 [eBook #69088]</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p> - <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)</p> -<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FABIAN ESSAYS IN SOCIALISM ***</div> - - - -<div class="bbox"> - - -<h1> FABIAN<br />ESSAYS IN SOCIALISM</h1> - -<p class="center"> -<span class="small">BY</span><br /> -<br /> -G. BERNARD SHAW<br /> -SIDNEY WEBB<br /> -WILLIAM CLARKE<br /> -SYDNEY OLIVIER<br /> -ANNIE BESANT<br /> -GRAHAM WALLAS<br /> -<br /> -<span class="small">AND</span><br /> -<br /> -HUBERT BLAND<br /> -</p> - -<p class="center p4"> -<span class="small">EDITED BY</span><br /> -G. BERNARD SHAW<br /> -</p> - -<p class="center p2"> -<i>With a new preface for this edition by <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Shaw</i><br /> -</p> - -<p class="center p4"> -BOSTON<br /> -<span class="big">THE BALL PUBLISHING CO.</span><br /> -1911<br /> -</p> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p class="center"> -<i>Copyright, 1908</i><br /> -<span class="smcap">By George Bernard Shaw</span><br /> -</p></div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_iii">[iii]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CONTENTS">CONTENTS.</h2> -</div> - -<hr class="r5" /> - -<table class="autotable"> -<tr> -<td class="tdl" colspan="2"> -<a href="#THE_FABIAN_SOCIETY">THE FABIAN SOCIETY AND ITS WORK.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">By</span> WILLIAM CLARKE. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_xxiii">Page xxiii.</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdc bt" colspan="2"> -<a href="#THE_BASIS_OF_SOCIALISM">THE BASIS OF SOCIALISM.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#ECONOMIC">ECONOMIC</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> G. BERNARD SHAW.</td> -</tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Rent.</span> The Cultivation and Population of the Earth.—Economic - Origin of the County Family.—Economic Rent of Land and Ability.—Tenant - Right.—The Advent of the Proletarian. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_1">Page 1.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Value.</span> Mechanism of Exchange.—Price and Utility.—Effects - of Supply.—Law of Indifference.—Total and Final Utility.—Relation - of Value to Cost of Production. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_9">Page 9.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Wages.</span> The Proletariat.—Sale of Labor.—Subsistence Wage.—Capitalism.—Increase - of Riches and Decrease of Wealth.—Divorce - of Exchange Value from Social Utility. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_15">Page 15.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Conclusion.</span> Apparent Discrepancies between History and Theory.—Socialism.—Pessimism - and Private Property.—Economic - Soundness of Meliorism. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_20">Page 20.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#HISTORIC">HISTORIC</a></td><td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B., <span class="smcap">Barrister at Law, - Lecturer on Political Economy at the City of London College</span>. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Development of the Democratic Ideal.</span> Ancestry of - English Socialism.—The Utopians.—Introduction of the Conception - of Evolution.—The Lesson of Democracy. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_26">Page 26.</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_iv">[iv]</span> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> -<span class="smcap">The Disintegration of the Old Synthesis.</span> The Decay of Medievalism.—The Industrial Revolution.—The French Revolution.—The - Progress of Democracy. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_31">Page 31.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Period of Anarchy.</span> Individualism.—Philosophic Radicalism - and <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laisser-faire</i>.—The Utilitarian Analysis. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_35">Page 35.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Intellectual and Moral Revolt; and its Political - Outcome.</span> The Poets, Communists, Philosophers, Christian Socialists, - and Evolutionists.—The Extension of State Activity.—Existing State - Registration, Inspection, and Direct Organization of Labor.—The - Radical Programme. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_40">Page 40.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The New Synthesis.</span> Evolution and the Social Organism.—Liberty - and Equality.—Social Health. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_50">Page 50.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#INDUSTRIAL">INDUSTRIAL</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> WILLIAM CLARKE, M.A., <span class="smcap">Cambridge</span>. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Supersession of Individualist Production.</span> The Cottage - Industry.—The Mechanical Inventions.—The Factory System. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_56">Page 56.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Growth of the Great Industry.</span> The Expansion of Lancashire.—The - White Slavery.—State Interference. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_65">Page 65.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Development of the World-Commerce.</span> The Triumph - of Free Trade.—The Fight for New Markets.—The Carriers of the - World. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_71">Page 71.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Differentiation of Manager and Capitalist.</span> The Rise - of Co-operation and the Joint Stock Company.—The “Ring” and the - “Trust.”—The Despotism of Capitalist Communism. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_76">Page 76.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#MORAL">MORAL</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> SYDNEY OLIVIER, B.A., <span class="smcap">Oxford</span>. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Evolution of Morality.</span> The Common End.—The Conditions - of Freedom.—The Individual and the Race.—The Growth of - Social Consciousness.—Convention and Law. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_93">Page 93.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Property and Morals.</span> The Reaction of Property-Forms on - Moral Ideas.—Class Morality.—Negation of the Conditions of Freedom.—Social - Dissolution. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_104">Page 104.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Re-integration of Society.</span> The Ordering of the Primary - Conditions.—The Idea of the Poor Law.—Secondary Conditions.—Morality - and Reason.—The Idea of the School. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_112">Page 112.</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_v">[v]</span> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdc" colspan="2"> -<a href="#THE_ORGANIZATION_OF_SOCIETY">THE ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY.</a></td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#PROPERTY_UNDER_SOCIALISM">PROPERTY UNDER SOCIALISM.</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> GRAHAM WALLAS, M.A., <span class="smcap">Oxford</span>. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Visible Wealth.</span> Consumers’ Capital.—Producers’ Capital. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_120">Page 120.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Debts and Services.</span> Deferred and Anticipated Consumption.—Interest. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_125">Page 125.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Ideas.</span> Copyright and Patent Right.—Education. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_132">Page 132.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#INDUSTRY_UNDER_SOCIALISM">INDUSTRY UNDER SOCIALISM</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> ANNIE BESANT. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Organization of Labor.</span> Rural.—Urban.—International. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_136">Page 136.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Distribution of the Product.</span> The Individual.—The - Municipality.—The State. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_147">Page 147.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Social Safeguards.</span> The Stimulus to Labor.—The Provision - for Initiative.—The Reward of Excellence. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_150">Page 150.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdc" colspan="2"> -<a href="#THE_TRANSITION_TO_SOCIAL_DEMOCRACY">THE TRANSITION TO SOCIAL DEMOCRACY.</a></td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#TRANSITION73">TRANSITION</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> G. BERNARD SHAW. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Medievalism to Capitalism.</span> The Old Order.—Merchant Adventurer, - Pirate, Slave-Trader, Capitalist.—The Old Order burst by the - New Growth.—Chaos. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_157">Page 157.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">Anarchy to State Interference.</span> Political Economy.—Hegelian - Conception of the Perfect State.—Socialism: Its Practical Difficulties.—Impracticability - of Catastrophic Change.—Democracy the - Antidote to Bureaucracy.—The State Interferes. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_160">Page 160.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">State Interference to State Organization.</span> Hard Times.—Revival - of Revolutionary Socialism.—Remaining Steps to the Consummation - of Democracy.—Machinery of Socialism.—Social Pressure.—Urban - Rents.—The New Taxation.—State Organization of - Labor its Indispensable Complement.—The Unemployed.—Solution - of the Compensation Difficulty.—Economic Reactions of the Progress - of Municipal Socialism.—Militant Socialism Abandoned but not Dishonored. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_169">Page 169.</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_vi">[vi]</span> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#THE_OUTLOOK">THE OUTLOOK</a></td> -<td class="tdr"><span class="smcap">By</span> HUBERT BLAND. -</td></tr><tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Condition of English Parties.</span> The Lines of Progress.—The - Rate of Progress in Thought and Industry Compared with that in - Politics.—Alleged Disappearance of the Whig. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_184">Page 184.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Socializing of Politics.</span> Political Myopia.—Sham Socialism.—Red - Herrings.—Dreams of Permeating the Liberal Party.—Disillusionment.—The - New Departure. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_189">Page 189.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr><td class="tdl"> - <span class="smcap">The Duties of the Hour.</span> The True Line of Cleavage.—Hopes - and Fears.—The Solidarity of the Workers. -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_198">Page 198.</a> -</td></tr> -<tr class="bt"><td class="tdl"> -<a href="#INDEX">INDEX.</a> -</td><td class="tdr page"><a href="#Page_203">Page 203.</a> -</td></tr> -</table> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_vii">[vii]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_ix">[ix]</span></p> -<h2 id="FABIAN_WORK">THE FABIAN SOCIETY AND ITS WORK.</h2> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h3 class="nobreak" id="PREFACE_TO_THE_1908_EDITION">PREFACE TO THE 1908 EDITION</h3> -</div> -<hr class="r5" /> - -<p>Since 1889 the Socialist movement has been completely transformed -throughout Europe; and the result of the transformation may fairly be -described as Fabian Socialism. In the eighteen-eighties, when Socialism -revived in England for the first time since the suppression of the -Paris Commune in 1871, it was not at first realized that what had -really been suppressed for good and all was the romantic revolutionary -Liberalism and Radicalism of 1848, to which the Socialists had attached -themselves as a matter of course, partly because they were themselves -romantic and revolutionary, and partly because both Liberals and -Socialists had a common object in Democracy.</p> - -<p>Besides this common object the two had a common conception of -method in revolution. They were both catastrophists. Liberalism had -conquered autocracy and bureaucracy by that method in England and -France, and then left industry to make what it could of the new -political conditions by the unregulated action of competition between -individuals. Briefly, the Liberal plan was to cut off the King’s head, -and leave the rest to Nature, which was supposed to gravitate towards -economic harmonies when not restrained by tyrannical governments. The -Socialists were very far ahead of the Liberals in their appreciation -of the preponderant importance of industry, even going so far as to -maintain, with Buckle and Marx, that all social institutions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_x">[x]</span> whatever -were imposed by economic conditions, and that there was fundamentally -only one tyranny: the tyranny of Capital. Yet even the Socialists -had so far formed their political habits in the Liberal school that -they were quite disposed to believe that if you cut off the head of -King Capital, you might expect to see things come right more or less -spontaneously.</p> - -<p>No doubt this general statement shews the Revolutionaries of 1848-71 -as simpler than they appear on their own records. Proudhon was full of -proposals: one of them, the minimum wage, turns out to be of the very -first importance now that <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> and Mrs. Sidney Webb have put the case -for it on an invincible basis of industrial fact and economic theory. -Lassalle really knew something of the nature of law, the practice -of Government, and the mind of the governing classes. Marx, though -certainly a bit of a Liberal fatalist (did he not say that force is -the midwife of progress without reminding us that force is equally the -midwife of chaos, and chaos the midwife of martial law?), was at all -events no believer in <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laisser-faire</i>. Socialism involves the -introduction of design, contrivance, and co-ordination, by a nation -consciously seeking its own collective welfare, into the present -industrial scramble for private gain; and as it is clear that this -cannot be a spontaneous result of a violent overthrow of the existing -order, and as the Socialists of 1848-71 were not blind, it would be -impossible to substantiate a claim for Fabian Essays as the first -text-book of Socialism in which catastrophism is repudiated as a method -of Socialism.</p> - -<p>Therefore we must not say that the Revolutionists and Internationalists -of 1848-71 believed in a dramatic overthrow of the capitalist system -in a single convulsion, followed by the establishment of a new heaven, -a new earth, and a new humanity. They were visionaries, no doubt: -all political idealists are; but they were quite as practical as the -Conservatives and Liberals who now believe that the triumph of their -party will secure the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xi">[xi]</span> happiness and peace of the country. All the -same, it was almost impossible to induce them to speak or think of the -Socialist state of the future in terms of the existing human material -for it. They talked of Communes, and, more vaguely and less willingly, -of central departments to co-ordinate the activities of the Communes; -but if you ventured to point out that these apparently strange and -romantic inventions were simply city corporations under the Local -Government Board, they vehemently repudiated such a construction, -and accused you of reading the conditions of the present system into -Socialism. They had all the old Liberal mistrust of governments and -bureaucracy and all the old tendency of bourgeois revolutionists -to idolize the working class. They had no suspicion of the extent -to which the very existence of society depends on the skilled work -of administrators and experts, or how much wisdom and strength of -character is required for their control by popular representatives. -They actually believed that when their efforts throughout Europe had -demonstrated the economics of Socialism to the proletariats of the -great capitals, the cry “Proletarians of all lands: unite,” would be -responded to; and that Capitalism would fall before an International -Federation of the working classes of Europe, not in the sense in -which some future historian will summarize two or three centuries -(in which sense they may prove right enough), but as an immediate -practical plan of action likely to be carried through in twenty years -by Socialist societies holding completely and disdainfully aloof from -ordinary politics. In short, they were romantic amateurs, and, as -such, were enormously encouraged and flattered when Marx and Engels -insisted on the “scientific” character of their movement in contrast -to the “Utopian” Socialism of Owen, Fourier, <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Simon, and the men -of the 1820-48 phase. When the events of 1871 in Paris tested them -practically, their hopeless public incapacity forced their opponents to -exterminate them in the most appalling massacre<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xii">[xii]</span> of modern times—all -the more ghastly because it was a massacre of the innocents.</p> - -<p>Public opinion in Europe was reconciled to the massacre by the usual -process of slandering the victims. Now had Europe been politically -educated no slanders would have been necessary; for even had it been -humanly possible that all the Federals mown down with mitrailleuses -in Paris were incendiaries and assassins, it would still have been -questionable whether indiscriminate massacre is the right way to deal -with incendiaries and assassins. But there can be no question as to -what must be done with totally incompetent governors. The one thing -that is politically certain nowadays is that if a body of men upset the -existing government of a modern state without sufficient knowledge and -capacity to continue the necessary and honest part of its work, and -if, being unable to do that work themselves, they will not let anyone -else do it either, their extermination becomes a matter of immediate -necessity. It will avail them nothing that they aim higher than their -fathers did; that their intentions are good, their action personally -disinterested, and their opponents selfish and venal routineers who -would themselves be equally at a loss if they had to create a new -order instead of merely pulling the wires of an old one. Anyone who -looks at the portraits of the members of the Paris Commune can see at -a glance that they compared very favorably in all the external signs -of amiability and refinement with any governing body then or now in -power in Europe. But they could not manage the business they took upon -themselves; and Thiers could. Marx’s demonstration that they were -heroes and martyrs and that Thiers and his allies were rascals did -not help in the least, though it was undeniably the ablest document -in the conflict of moral clap-trap that obscured the real issues—so -able indeed as a piece of literature, that more than thirty years after -its publication it struck down the Marquis de Gallifet as if it had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xiii">[xiii]</span> -appeared in the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Temps</i> or <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Débats</i> of the day before. It was -amiable of the Federals to be so much less capable of exterminating -Thiers than he was of exterminating them; but sentimental amiability is -not by itself a qualification for administering great modern States.</p> - -<p>Now the Fabian Society, born in 1884, and reaching the age of -discretion in less than two years, had no mind to be exterminated. -Martyrdom was described by one of us as “the only way in which a man -can become famous without ability.” Further, we had no illusions as -to the treatment we should receive if, like the Paris Federals, we -terrified the property classes before they were disabled by a long -series of minor engagements. In Paris in 1871, ordinary sane people -hid themselves in their houses for weeks under the impression that -the streets were not safe: they did not venture out until they ran a -serious risk of being shot at sight by their own partisans in the orgy -of murder and cruelty that followed the discovery that the Commune -could fight only as a rat fights in a corner. Human nature has not -changed since then. In 1906 a Fabian essayist stood one May morning -in the Rue de Rivoli, and found himself almost the only soul in the -west end of Paris who dared appear there. The cultured inhabitants of -that select quarter were hiding in their houses as before, with their -larders full of hams and their baths full of live fish to provision -them for a siege. There was much less danger of a revolution that -day than there is of Primrose Hill becoming an active volcano at six -o’clock this evening; and the purpose of the Government and its party -newspapers in manufacturing the scare to frighten the bourgeoisie -into supporting them at the general election just then beginning was -obvious, one would have thought, to the dimmest political perspicacity. -In the evening that same essayist, in the Place de la Révolution, saw -a crowd of sightseers assembled to witness the promised insurrection, -and the troops and the police assembled to save<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xiv">[xiv]</span> society from it. It -was very like Trafalgar Square in 1887, when the same violent farce -was enacted in London. Occasionally the troops rode down some of the -sightseers and the police arrested some of them. Enough persons lost -their temper to make a few feeble attempts at riot, and to supply -arrests for the morning papers. Next day Society, saved, came out of -its hiding places; sold the fish from its baths and the hams from -its larders at a sacrifice (the weather being very hot and the hams -in questionable condition); and voted gratefully for the government -that had frightened it out of its senses with an imaginary revolution -and a ridiculous “complot.” England laughed at the Parisians (though -plenty of English visitors had left Paris to avoid the threatened Reign -of Terror); yet in the very next month our own propertied classes -in Cairo, terrified by the Nationalist movement in Egypt, fell into -a paroxysm of cowardice and cruelty, and committed the Denshawai -atrocity, compared to which the massacre of Glencoe was a trifle. The -credulity which allows itself to be persuaded by reiteration of the -pious word Progress that we live in a gentler age than our fathers, -and that the worst extremities of terror and vengeance are less to be -apprehended from our newly enriched automobilist classes than they -were from the aristocracies of the older orders, is not a Fabian -characteristic. The Fabian knows that property does not hesitate to -shoot, and that now, as always, the unsuccessful revolutionist may -expect calumny, perjury, cruelty, judicial and military massacre -without mercy. And the Fabian does not intend to get thus handled if he -can help it. If there is to be any shooting, he intends to be at the -State end of the gun. And he knows that it will take him a good many -years to get there. Still, he thinks he sees his way—or rather the -rest of his way; for he is already well on the road.</p> - -<p>It was in 1885 that the Fabian Society, amid the jeers of the -catastrophists, turned its back on the barricades and made up<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xv">[xv]</span> its -mind to turn heroic defeat into prosaic success. We set ourselves two -definite tasks: first, to provide a parliamentary program for a Prime -Minister converted to Socialism as Peel was converted to Free Trade; -and second, to make it as easy and matter-of-course for the ordinary -respectable Englishman to be a Socialist as to be a Liberal or a -Conservative.</p> - -<p>These tasks we have accomplished, to the great disgust of our more -romantic comrades. Nobody now conceives Socialism as a destructive -insurrection ending, if successful, in millennial absurdities. -Membership of the Fabian Society, though it involves an express -avowal of Socialism, excites no more comment than membership of the -Society of Friends, or even of the Church of England. Incidentally, -Labor has been organized as a separate political interest in the -House of Commons, with the result that in the very next Budget it was -confessed for the first time that there are unearned as well as earned -incomes in the country; an admission which, if not a surrender of the -Capitalist citadel to Socialism, is at all events letting down the -drawbridge; for Socialism, on its aggressive side, is, and always has -been, an attack on idleness. The resolution to make an end of private -property is gathering force every day: people are beginning to learn -the difference between a man’s property in his walking stick, which -is strictly limited by the public condition that he shall not use it -to break his neighbor’s head or extort money with menaces, and those -private rights of property which enable the idle to levy an enormous -tribute, amounting at present to no less than £630,000,000 a year, on -the earnings of the rest of the community. The old attempt to confuse -the issue by asserting that the existence of the family, religion, -marriage, etc., etc., are inextricably bound up with the toleration -of senseless social theft no longer imposes on anyone: after a whole -year of unexampled exploitation of this particular variety of obscene -vituperation by the most widely read cheap<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xvi">[xvi]</span> newspapers in London, no -Socialist is a penny the worse for it.</p> - -<p>The only really effective weapon of the press against Socialism is -silence. Even Bishops cannot get reported when they advocate Socialism -and tear to pieces the old pretence that political economy, science, -and religion are in favor of our existing industrial system. Socialist -speakers now find audiences so readily that, even with comparatively -high charges for admission, large halls can be filled to hear them -without resorting to the usual channels of advertisement. Their -speeches are crammed with facts and figures and irresistible appeals to -the daily experience and money troubles of the unfortunate ratepayers -and rent-payers who are too harassed by money worries to care about -official party politics; but not a word of these is allowed to leak -through to the public through the ordinary channels of newspaper -reporting. However, the conspiracy of silence has its uses to us. We -have converted the people who have actually heard us. The others, -having no news of our operations, have left us unmolested until our -movement has secured its grip of the public. Now that the alarm has -at last been given, nobody, it seems, is left in the camp of our -enemies except the ignorant, the politically imbecile, the corruptly -interested, and the retinue of broken, drunken, reckless mercenaries -who are always ready to undertake a campaign of slander against the -opponents of any vested interest which has a bountiful secret service -fund. This may seem a strong thing to say; but it is impossible not to -be struck by the feebleness and baseness of the opposition to Socialism -to-day as compared with the opposition of twenty years ago. In the days -when Herbert Spencer’s brightest pupils, from Mrs. Sidney Webb to Grant -Allen, turned from him to the Socialism in which he could see nothing -but “the coming slavery,” we could respect him whilst confuting him. -To-day we neither respect our<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xvii">[xvii]</span> opponents nor confute them. We simply, -like Mrs. Stetson Gillman’s prejudice slayer, “walk through them as if -they were not there.”</p> - -<p>Still, we do not affect to underrate the huge public danger of a press -which is necessarily in the hands of the very people whose idleness and -extravagance keep the nation poor and miserable in spite of its immense -resources. It costs quarter of a million to start a London daily paper -with any chance of success; and every man who writes for it risks -his livelihood every time he pens a word that threatens the incomes -of the proprietors and their class. The quantity of snobbish and -anti-social public opinion thus manufactured is formidable; and a new -sort of crime—the incitement by newspapers of mobs to outrage and even -murder—hitherto tried only on religious impostors, is beginning to be -applied to politics. The result is likely to be another illustration -of the impossibility of combining individual freedom with economic -slavery. We have had to throw freedom of contract to the winds to save -the working classes from extermination as a result of “free” contracts -between penniless fathers of starving families and rich employers. -Freedom of the press is hardly less illusory when the press belongs to -the slave owners of the nation, and not a single journalist is really -free. We think it well therefore at this moment to warn our readers not -to measure the extent of our operations or our influence, much less -the strength of our case, by what they read of us in the papers. The -taste for spending one’s life in drudgery and never-ending pecuniary -anxiety solely in order that certain idle and possibly vicious people -may fleece you for their own amusement, is not so widespread as the -papers would have us think. Even that timidest of Conservatives, the -middle class man with less than £500 a year (sometimes less than £100) -is beginning to ask himself why his son should go, half-educated, to -a clerk’s desk at fifteen, to enable another man’s son to go<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xviii">[xviii]</span> to a -university and complete an education of which, as a hereditary idler, -he does not intend to make use. To tell him that such self-questioning -is a grave symptom of Free Love and Atheism may terrify him; but it -does not convince. And the evolution of Socialism from the Red spectre -on the barricade, with community of wives (all petroleuses), and -Compulsory Atheism, to the Fabian Society and the Christian Social -Union, constitutional, respectable, even official, eminent, and titled, -is every day allaying his dread of it and increasing his scepticism as -to the inevitability of the ever more and more dreaded knock of the -ground landlord’s agent and the rate collector.</p> - -<p>Now, as everyone knows, the course of evolution, in Socialism or -anything else, does not involve the transformation of the earlier -forms into the later. The earlier forms persist side by side with the -later until they are either deliberately exterminated by them or put -out of countenance so completely that they lose the heart to get born. -This is what has happened in the evolution of Fabian Socialism. Fabian -Socialism has not exterminated the earlier types; and though it has -put them so much out of countenance that they no longer breed freely, -still there they are still, preaching, collecting subscriptions, and -repulsing from Socialism many worthy citizens who are quite prepared -to go as far, and farther, than the Fabian Society. Occasionally they -manage even to contest a Parliamentary seat in the name of Socialism, -and to reassure the Capitalist parties by coming out at the foot of -the poll with fewer votes than one would have thought possible for -any human candidate, were he even a flat-earth-man, in these days -when everyone can find a following of some sort. More often, however, -they settle down into politically negligible sects, with a place of -weekly meeting in which they preach to one another every week, except -in the summer months, when they carry the red flag into the open air -and denounce society as it passes or loiters to listen. Now far be -it from us to repudiate<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xix">[xix]</span> these comrades. If a man has been brought -to conviction of sin by the Countess of Huntingdon’s Connexion, and -subsequently enters the Church and becomes an Archbishop, he will -always have sufficient tenderness for the Connexion to refrain from -attacking it, and to remember that many of its members are better -Christians and better men than the more worldly-wise pillars of the -Church. The principal leaders of the Fabian movement are in the same -position with regard to many little societies locally known as “the -Socialists.” We know that their worship of Marx (of whose works -they are for the most part ignorant, and of whose views they are -intellectually incapable) and their repetition of shibboleths about -the Class War and the socialization of all the means of production, -distribution, and exchange have no more application to practical -politics than the Calvinistic covenants which so worried Cromwell when -he, too, tried to reconcile his sectarian creed with the practical -exigencies of government and administration. We know also, and are -compelled on occasion to say bluntly out, that these little sects are -ignorant and incapable in public affairs; that in many cases their -assumption of an extreme position is an excuse for doing nothing under -cover of demanding the impossible; and that their inability to initiate -any practical action when they do by chance get represented on public -bodies often leads to their simply voting steadily for our opponents by -way of protest against what they consider the compromising opportunism -of the Fabians. There are moments when they become so intolerable a -nuisance to the main body of the movement that we are sorely tempted to -excommunicate them formally, and warn the public that they represent -nobody but their silly selves. But such a declaration, though it would -be perfectly true as far as political and administrative action is -concerned, would be misleading on the whole. In England, everyone -begins by being absurdly ignorant of public life and inept at public -action. Just as the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xx">[xx]</span> Conservative and Liberal Parties are recruited -at Primrose League meetings and Liberal and Radical demonstrations -at which hardly one word of sense or truth is uttered, but at which -nevertheless the novice finds himself in a sympathetic atmosphere, so -even the Fabian Society consists largely of Socialists who sowed their -wild oats in one or other of these little sects of Impossibilists. -Therefore we not only suffer them as gladly as human nature allows, -but give them what help and countenance we can when we can do so -without specifically endorsing their blunders. Fortunately the immense -additions which have been made to the machinery of democracy in -England in the last twenty years, from the County Councils of 1888 to -the education authorities of 1902, have acted as schools of public -life to thousands of men of small means who in the old days must have -remained Impossibilists from want of public experience. One hour on -a responsible committee of a local authority which has to provide -for some public want and spend some public money, were it but half a -crown, will cure any sensible man of Impossibilism for the rest of his -life. And such cures are taking place every day, and converting futile -enthusiasts into useful Fabians.</p> - -<p>A word as to this book. It is not a new edition of Fabian Essays. They -are reprinted exactly as they appeared in 1889, nothing being changed -but the price. No other course was possible. When the essays were -written, the Essayists were in their thirties: they are now in their -fifties, except the one, William Clarke, who is in his grave. We were -then regarded as young desperadoes who had sacrificed their chances in -life by committing themselves publicly to Socialism: we are now quoted -as illustrations of the new theory that Socialists, like Quakers, -prosper in this world. It is a dangerous theory; for Socialism, like -all religions and all isms, can turn weak heads as well as inspire -and employ strong ones; but we, at all events, have been fortunate -enough to have had our claim to public attention<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxi">[xxi]</span> admitted in the -nineteen years which have elapsed since our youthful escapade as Fabian -Essayists.</p> - -<p>It goes without saying that in our present position, and with the -experience we have gained, we should produce a very different book if -the work were to be done anew. We should not waste our time in killing -dead horses, however vigorously they were kicking in 1889. We should -certainly be much more careful not to give countenance to the notion -that the unemployed can be set to work to inaugurate Socialism; though -it remains true that the problem of the unemployed, from the moment -when we cease to abandon them callously to their misery or soothe -our consciences foolishly by buying them off with alms, will force -us to organize them, provide for them, and train them; but the very -first condition of success in this will be the abandonment of the -old idea that the unemployed tailor can be set to make clothes for -the unemployed bootmaker and the unemployed bootmaker to make boots -for the unemployed tailor, the real difficulty being, not a scarcity -of clothes and boots, but a stupid misdistribution of the money to -buy them. We should also probably lay more stress on human volition -and less on economic pressure and historic evolution as making for -Socialism. We should, in short, give the dry practice of our solutions -of social problems instead of the inspiration and theory of them. But -we should also produce a volume which, though it might appeal more than -the present one to administrative experts, to bankers, lawyers, and -constructive statesmen, would have much less charm for the young, and -for the ordinary citizen who is in these matters an amateur.</p> - -<p>Besides, the difference between the view of the young and the -elderly is not necessarily a difference between wrong and right. The -Tennysonian process of making stepping stones of our dead selves to -higher things is pious in intention, but it sometimes leads downstairs -instead of up. When Herbert Spencer in his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxii">[xxii]</span> later days expunged from -his Social Statics the irresistible arguments for Land Nationalization -by which he anticipated Henry George, we could not admit that the old -Spencer had any right to do this violence to the young Spencer, or -was less bound either to confute his position or admit it than if the -two had been strangers to one another. Having had this lesson, we do -not feel free to alter even those passages which no longer represent -our latest conclusions. Fortunately, in the main we have nothing to -withdraw, nothing to regret, nothing to apologize for, and much to be -proud of. So we leave our book as it first came into the world, merely -writing “Errors Excepted” as solicitors do: that is, with the firm -conviction that the errors, if they exist at all, do not greatly matter.</p> - -<p><i>21st May, 1908.</i></p> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxiii">[xxiii]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="THE_FABIAN_SOCIETY">THE FABIAN SOCIETY.</h2> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY WILLIAM CLARKE, M.A.</p> - - -<p>No visitor to the British capital will mingle very long in the -political life of London before he will hear of the Fabian Society. Few -readers have not heard of the Roman general, Quinctus Fabius Maximus, -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">qui cunctando restituit rem</i>, and who consequently received the -title of Cunctator. That illustrious man is the patron saint of the -society, through which, being dead, he yet speaketh.</p> - -<p>The Fabian Society proposes then to conquer by delay; to carry its -programmes, not by a hasty rush, but through the slower but, as it -thinks, surer methods of patient discussion, exposition, and political -action of those who are absolutely convinced in their own minds. For a -convenient motto the society has taken the following sentence: “For the -right moment you must wait, as Fabius did, most patiently, when warring -against Hannibal, though many censured his delays; but when the time -comes you must strike hard, as Fabius did, or your waiting will be in -vain and fruitless.” This double policy then, of waiting and striking, -is the general idea of the society.</p> - -<p>What now are the aims of the society? I quote from the official -programme: “The Fabian Society consists of Socialists. It therefore -aims at the reorganization of society by the emancipation of land and -industrial capital from individual and class ownership, and the vesting -of them in the community for the general benefit. In this way only can -the natural and acquired advantages of the country be equitably shared -by the whole people. The society accordingly works for the extinction -of private property in land, and of the consequent individual -appropriation, in the form of rent, of the price paid for permission -to use the earth, as well as for the advantages of superior soils and -sites. The society, further, works for the transfer to the community -of the administration of such industrial capital as can be managed -socially. For, owing to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxiv">[xxiv]</span> monopoly of the means of production in the -past, industrial inventions and the transformation of surplus income -into capital have mainly enriched the proprietary class, the workers -being now dependent on that class for leave to earn a living.” To bring -this condition of things about, the programme continues, the society -looks to the spread of Socialist opinions, and it seeks to promote -these by the general dissemination of knowledge as to the relation -between the individual and society in its economic, ethical, and -political aspects.</p> - -<p>These, then, are the fundamental ideas of the Fabian Society. Before -describing its growth, work and personnel, let me give an account and -explanation of its origin. The effective modern Socialist movement -in England began in 1881. In that year a conference was held at the -Westminster Palace Hotel in London, at which were present the venerable -Francis W. Newman, brother of the late cardinal; Helen Taylor, the -step-daughter of John Stuart Mill; <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Hyndman, the Socialist author -and leader; some men now in Parliament, others who have been there, -and a small number of energetic people well known in London, but not -equally well known in America. These persons and others formed, after -much discussion, the Democratic Federation, a body which at first -appeared to be nothing more than a vigorous Radical protest against the -Irish coercive policy of the Gladstone Cabinet then in power. Immense -demonstrations, some of the biggest ever held in London, were got up -by the Federation, who secured the adherence in this cause of some of -the Irish members of Parliament. But gradually the mere Radicalism -dropped out of the Federation’s programme; and under the stimulating -influence of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Henry George, who was then in England, whose book was -being read everywhere, and who enjoyed much influence then in England, -the Federation preached the doctrine of the “land for the people.” But -a still further stage in its evolution was to be reached; and by the -autumn of 1883 it came out as a full-blown Socialist organization, and -published a little pamphlet entitled “Socialism Made Plain,” which had -a great run and which, singular as it may seem now, created a perfect -consternation among persons who supposed that Socialism was merely a -French or German eccentricity, due to militarism and protectionism, -and that it could never rear its head in “free” England. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert -Spencer, among others, took alarm and predicted a “coming<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxv">[xxv]</span> slavery,” -and the venerable <i>Quarterly Review</i> shook its venerable head and -marvelled, like Mrs. Sarah Gamp, at the “brajian imperence” of these -wicked agitators. It was perfectly evident that a new political force -was come into being.</p> - -<p>But there were those in London who, sympathizing deeply with the new -movement, nevertheless could not throw themselves heartily into it, for -two reasons: first, it assumed that a revolutionary change affecting -the very bases of society could be brought about all at once; second, -it appeared to ignore what may be called the spiritual side of life, -and to disregard the ethical changes necessary to render a different -social system possible. Such was the state of things in the autumn of -1883, when a very able man, <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Thomas Davidson, of New York, whom all -who have meet him know to be a man of exceptional force and enthusiasm, -spent some weeks in London. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Davidson, noting the condition of -things, gathered round him little conferences of men, at several of -which I was present; and while he was in London, and for several months -after, these purely informal conferences went on at different people’s -houses. It would be too long a tale to tell of the endless discussions -which took place, of the dull men and the brilliant men, the cranks and -the thinkers, the men with long hair and the women with short hair, -who debated and argued, and went for one another, and then debated and -argued again. The main upshot was that these persons found themselves -ultimately divided into two camps, not necessarily hostile, but laying -emphasis on different aspects of the social movement. One of these was -composed of persons who laid supreme stress on the need for ethical and -spiritual change as a constant factor in the social movement, and as a -coefficient with the material changes. These persons formed themselves -into a little body called the New Fellowship, which still exists, small -in numbers, but very earnest in purpose, and which publishes a small -quarterly journal called <i>Seedtime</i>. The other class, which agreed -with the Social Democratic Federation as to the urgent need for social -and political change, but thought this must be very gradual, and its -leaders persons of some culture and grasp of economics, formed the -Fabian Society. This is the genesis of this active body.</p> - -<p>There is a prevalent view, expressed sometimes in American newspapers, -that the Socialist movement is largely made up of cranks and -scoundrels—a view shared in a less degree by a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxvi">[xxvi]</span> portion of the English -press. I believe there is in every country and age an abundant crop -of both these classes; and assuredly the Socialist, like every other -movement, has had its share of both. But to suppose that a great -movement which is sweeping Europe from end to end, which has given -birth to the largest single political party in Germany, which has -gained victories innumerable in France, which is modifying the whole of -English political life—to suppose that this movement is the outcome of -the delusions of a few wicked or foolish men, is itself the delusion -of people who are probably themselves not over-good or over-wise. In -Marx, Lassalle, Rodbertus, Malon and others, the Socialist movement -has been served by some of the best brains of our century; and it -was no idle boast of Lassalle that he was equipped with all the best -culture of his time. I know the inside of the Socialist movement well, -and it certainly numbers among its adherents the ablest men I know. -The Fabian Society contains not a few of these men. Walter Crane, -the artist; Stopford Brooke, the preacher and man of letters; Grant -Allen, one of the most versatile and accomplished men living; George -Bernard Shaw, one of the most brilliant albeit whimsical of musical -and dramatic critics; Miss Willard, one of America’s women reformers; -Professor Shuttleworth, now London’s most popular and able Broad -Church clergyman; <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> D. G. Ritchie, of Oxford, foremost among English -philosophic thinkers; Mrs. Theodore Wright, one of our most powerful -actresses; Sergius Stepniak, next to Tolstoi the first of living -Russians; Alfred Hayes, one of the first of our younger poets; <abbr title="doctor">Dr.</abbr> -Furnival, most learned and active of old English scholars,—these are -among its members.</p> - -<p>But it is not, of course, the mere inclusion of eminent people that -gives a society force and authority. It is the being grounded in -knowledge and ideas; and here the society is strong. It was recognized -from the first by its members that the social problem cannot be -solved by mere sentiment, though sentiment must be a factor in its -solution. There must be a deal of hard thinking and severe study, not -altogether in books (many of which on the economic problems before us -are worthless), but in social facts. Its critics think the society -has erred on the other side, and become too hard, and even cynical; -but I confess I think that better than talking mere gushing moral -platitudes which people applaud and then forget all about.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxvii">[xxvii]</span> The society -has always steadily kept before it the idea that we are not looking -for any millennium, any perfectly blissful earthly paradise, but that -we are considering the much more prosaic question, how the economic -interests of society are to be served, how the economic arrangements -of society are to be carried on. Hence its members determined to equip -themselves for their work by hard reading and thinking and by very -stiff discussion of the crucial problems in history, economics and -political philosophy. To this end they were greatly aided by a useful -little Historical Society, which was formed in one of the suburbs of -London, where every week an essay was read and completely discussed. I -do not believe there are any better read or more acute minds in England -than these of the young men who formed this group and who have largely -remained the nucleus of the Fabian Society,—and this though they have -their faults, like other people.</p> - -<p>At first the idea was to have a very small number of members, scarcely -more than could be gathered in a good-sized room in a private house. -These were to be well trained and to be apostles. Gradually, however, -the society grew and grew, the barriers of exclusion were broken -down, and persons of less knowledge and experience were brought in. -At the present time I think almost all callings are represented in -the society. I find in the last list of members, lawyers, artists, -journalists, doctors, workingmen, clergymen, teachers, trade-union -leaders, literary people, shop-keepers and persons of no occupation. -There are no millionnaires in the society, as there are no paupers, but -there are a few quite well-to-do people. A large proportion are bright -young men, and there are not a few bright and active women. Individual -instances of the sort of people who belong and what they do are better -than mere vague generalizations. Here are cases:—</p> - -<p>A young man employed in the Central Post-Office at a salary of $650 a -year. He has married a very charming and able girl, also a member. They -occupy two or three rooms in a suburban house. The young lady has been -elected as a guardian of the poor, the only woman among a number of -men. Her husband devotes nearly all his spare time after office-hours -to the society’s propaganda. He has had a little portable desk and -stand made for himself, and at this he speaks in open spaces on street -corners or wherever he can get an audience. His wife accompanies<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxviii">[xxviii]</span> him -and sells literature. Do not suppose that these are a blatant young -demagogue and a conventional, strong-minded woman. Both are educated, -intelligent, of sweet disposition; but the Socialist movement has taken -hold of them and given them something they needed, lifted them above -the region of what John Morley calls “greasy domesticity,” and taught -them that there is a great suffering world beyond the four walls of -home to be helped and worked for. Depend upon it, a movement which can -do this has in it some promise of the future.</p> - -<p>Or take the amusing, cynical, remarkable George Bernard Shaw, whose -Irish humor and brilliant gifts have partly helped, partly hindered, -the society’s popularity. This man will rise from an elaborate -criticism of last night’s opera or Richter concert (he is the musical -critic of the <i>World</i>), and after a light, purely vegetarian -meal, will go down to some far-off club in South London, or to some -street-corner in East London, or to some recognized place of meeting in -one of the parks, and will there speak to poor men about their economic -position and their political duties. People of this sort, who enjoy -books and music and the theatre and good society, do not go down to -dreary slums or even more dreary lecture-rooms to speak on such themes -to the poorer class of workingmen without some strong impelling power; -and it is that power, that motive force, upon which I dwell, as showing -what is doing in the London of to-day. I am satisfied, from inquiries I -have made, that there is really nothing like this going on in any other -country of the world; but it is a commonplace in London.</p> - -<p>The original parent Fabian Society, after it began to expand and -employ a paid secretary and become a recognized institution, suggested -to people elsewhere that they might have local Fabian Societies; and -the first of these were formed in Birmingham, where several of the -members addressed crowded, very intelligent and very enthusiastic -audiences in a hall in the centre of that city. There are also local -Fabian Societies now in Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol, Leeds, -Newcastle, Plymouth, Wolverhampton, Bradford, York and other English -towns, altogether forty-eight in number; and there is also one in -Adelaide, South Australia, and another in Bombay. Some of these are -quite small, but others are important, and are beginning to exercise a -considerable influence in municipal politics, and in one or two places -in Parliamentary politics also. The society<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxix">[xxix]</span> has been represented at -International Labor Congresses in Paris, Brussels, Zürich and Chicago.</p> - -<p>And now what has in the main been the sort of work the society has -done? At first the idea of its members was rather to discuss among -themselves and teach themselves than to teach others. This was the -initial or self-forming stage. Then came the educational stage, and, -third, the political or active stage, though even in this, its third -stage, education is still the main object of the society. Fortnightly -discussions have been kept up continuously, save for a two months’ -summer recess, for years. At these members of the society read papers, -or outsiders, and notably opponents, were invited. The late Charles -Bradlaugh came to oppose, and was very promptly demolished; while, on -the other hand, Oscar Wilde has spoken with eloquence and power on -the relation of art and Socialism. The society tried to get <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> A. -J. Balfour, the Conservative leader, and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> W. H. Mallock, as the -ablest literary opponent of Socialism, to come and argue seriously, -but neither of them would do so. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Haldene, the translator of -Schopenhauer and cultured philosophic member of Parliament, came -to oppose, was handled rather vigorously, and has now been largely -converted to collectivism. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> David F. Schloss, whom the British -Government recently sent over to the United States to inquire into -labor matters, has spoken sympathetically; and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Donisthorpe, the -clever, cynical, superficial English individualist, has spoken and -has been mercilessly handled. The result of all this debating is that -the Fabian Society has now some of the best debaters in England. It -has also some of the best lecturers, for it is in lectures that its -work has largely consisted. The society now gives something over one -thousand lectures a year, all free, the lecturers being all unpaid. -Indeed, excepting the secretary’s office, the whole of the society’s -work is voluntary, unpaid work. The majority of these lectures -are given in workmen’s clubs, of which there are some hundreds in -London alone. I take at random from the 1891 list of lectures sample -subjects:—</p> - -<p>The Socialism of John Ruskin; The Eight Hours’ Bill; Railway Reform; -Liberty, Equality, Fraternity; Methods of Social Evolution; Adam, the -first and last Individualist; Why we want a Labor Party; The Gospel -of getting on; What the Farm Laborers want; The Social Hell and its -Sources; Experiments in Housing the People; Socialism and Individual<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxx">[xxx]</span> -Liberty; the Church’s Message to Men of Wealth; Free Comments on the -Population Question; The Worker’s Share of Wealth; The Programme -of Social Democracy; John Lilburne and the Levellers; The Chartist -Movement; The Religion of Socialism; the Industrial History of England; -Gospel of Bread and Butter; Workingmen and their Difficulties; -Co-operative Production and Socialism; Wealth and the Commonwealth; The -French Revolution; The Right to Live; What Socialists Propose to Do; -Twenty Years of the Labor Movement.</p> - -<p>From these it will be seen what extensive ground is covered. These -lectures are for the most part delivered to workingmen, but sometimes -there are middle-class audiences, and I have heard of Fabian lecturers -talking to people in aristocratic drawing-rooms. From the first, the -society has done some publishing, and the last list gives no fewer than -forty-five pamphlets or tracts issued by the society. The first of -these, “Why are the Many Poor?” was a crude one, but good for rousing -attention, which is always the first thing to be done, and quite -justifying some curious Socialistic vagaries. The most valuable of -these pamphlets are “Facts for Socialists,” a really crushing answer -to those whom Matthew Arnold calls the “self-complacent moles,” all -based on the best available statistics; “Facts for Londoners,” an -appalling generalization of the economic condition of London; “What -to Read,” a most admirable and impartially selected list of books for -social reformers, which might with advantage be reprinted in America; -“The Reform of the Poor Law”; and “The Impossibilities of Anarchism,” a -searching criticism of the Anarchist position by George Bernard Shaw. -Remember that the preparation of these has all been voluntary, unpaid -labor, and has involved an immense amount of toil.</p> - -<p>In 1888 the society determined to give a course of lectures by those -of its members who were supposed to be best fitted for the purpose, -setting forth the general principles of Socialism as they understood -them. The lectures were eight in number, and were delivered to densely -packed audiences, making such an impression that it was decided to -publish them in a volume; and in the next year they appeared, under the -title of “Fabian Essays in Socialism.” As it is a case of <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">quorum -pars magna fui</i>, I am precluded from giving my estimate of a volume -in which I had a share; but I may say that this work has had a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxi">[xxxi]</span> very -great sale—thirty thousand copies, the largest sale of any purely -economic work I know of excepting “Progress and Poverty,”—and that -its respectful and even cordial welcome by the English press was a -surprise. The fact shows that the public mind is being prepared for -great social changes. The ruling idea of the book is that of inevitable -political and industrial evolution,—nothing in the least degree -merely utopian, but an attempted generalization on the lines of modern -scientific ideas. The publication of this book first gave to the Fabian -Society a national instead of a merely local reputation; and I believe -the book has now been widely read in America and Germany, while it was -introduced to France by the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Revue Socialiste</i>. Several courses of -lectures have since been given by the society, but none of them have -been afterwards published.</p> - -<p>The third phase of the society’s activity is, as I have said, in -practical politics. This was not undertaken without some misgivings. -On the principle that you cannot touch pitch without being defiled, I -confess I doubted whether, until the people had been far more educated -in these ideas, it was wise to enter the somewhat dirty political -arena. But the intense desire to be <em>doing</em> something, to -translate ideas into facts, to organize the people, to help in shaping -the actual progressive movement in England, and above all, perhaps, to -weaken and destroy the individualist wing of the Liberal party,—these -and other motives acted with cumulative force, especially as members -of the society began to find that they had acquired influence over -little groups of workmen here and there. There were great dangers and -difficulties. There was the danger of falling into mere wire-pulling -and making of political “deals,”—a subject about which people in -America know so much that it is not necessary to enlarge upon it; and -then there was the practical difficulty of differences of opinion in -the society, which might cause wreck if political action were indulged -in. I may say at once that these difficulties remain and will continue -to do so, though they have not led to disruption yet. There are -inveterate wire-pullers in the society, and there are those who favor -an independent labor party, those who want to permeate the Radicals and -gradually gain them over; and there are even a few who, as between the -two parties, prefer Tories to Radicals. The first political chance for -the Fabian Society came at the London county council election in 1889, -when the advanced<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxii">[xxxii]</span> party in London paid the society the compliment of -appropriating its entire pamphlet, “The London Programme,” and making -of it the Progressive platform of the campaign. The Progressives -carried that election, and they carried it on “The London Programme.” -Still more striking was the Progressive victory in 1892, when the -Moderate or Conservative party was almost annihilated at the polls. -The Fabian Society has supplied London with its programme of reforms; -and the reforms were in the direction of what it is now the fashion -to call municipal Socialism. At the second county council election, -several Fabians were candidates, and four of them were actually -elected; while a fifth, Ben Tillett, the labor leader, was afterwards -made an alderman. Three members of the society proved formidable though -unsuccessful candidates at the Parliamentary election two years ago. -A considerable number of members are on local municipal councils and -school boards, and another fought a very remarkable Parliamentary fight -during the last year. So it is clear that the society is largely <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">en -evidence</i>.</p> - -<p>As to the general programme of work in which the members are supposed -more or less to take part, I may quote from the printed advice given -to members as to what they can do. First of all, “the need of study” -is insisted on. It is assumed that the member will read all the -society’s publications; and his next duty, it is urged, should be to -read the criticisms on the other side, after the manner of Cicero, who -was always careful to get up his opponent’s case. If a member cannot -read or study alone, he is recommended to set on foot a local reading -circle, and apply to the secretary for literature for the circle. -No public work should be done until this self-education has been -accomplished, and the member is really able to speak with authority -and to deal effectively with an opponent. The opponents of Socialism -in England are usually persons sent out by a body called the Liberty -and Property Defence League, of which the American millionnaire, -<abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Astor, now a London Tory newspaper proprietor, is a member. -These persons have, as a rule, a remarkable capacity for making -fools of themselves; nevertheless, it is always a tactical blunder -to underestimate the ability of your opponent, and Fabian lecturers -are advised to assume that these Liberty and Property defenders are -acquainted with economics, even though there is good reason to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxiii">[xxxiii]</span> suspect -they are not. There is nothing that kills like ridicule; to gibbet an -ignorant and presumptuous debater, and make him look like a fool before -a large audience, is a source of pleasure to every rightly constituted -mind. Members of the society are also urged to correspond with their -Parliamentary or municipal representative on all vital points, to worry -his life out of him if he is obstinate or wrong-headed or dishonest, -and to make him yearn like the poet for a lodge in some vast wilderness -where he might never receive another letter or vote of censure as long -as he lived. This is a good way to combat what Walt Whitman calls “the -never-ending audacity of elected persons.” The member should always -attend the local caucus meeting, and do what he can there; and if he -has the time to spare, he should be a candidate for any public post, -such as member of Parliament, of county or municipal council, of -school board, guardian of the poor, or member of the parish council -yet to be constituted. The great difficulty in the way of this is that -these public persons are not paid in England, and few of the busy and -impecunious members of the Fabian Society can afford the time for these -things.</p> - -<p>Having thus described the constitution, work, and general character -of the Fabian Society, let me speak on the general intellectual -forces which have been operating in England to bring about this new -political growth among active young men; for it is quite new. My first -acquaintance with anything that could properly be called Socialism -in England was in London in 1879, when I went one evening to hear a -young Jewish gentleman, since deceased, <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Montefiore, read a paper -on German Socialism, before the London Dialectical Society. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> -Montefiore had but a slender knowledge of his subject, and we had to -wait for speeches by a German friend of Marx, resident in London, and -from a young, dreamy-looking man with long, thick, tousled hair, whom -I learned was <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Ernest Belfort Bax, since better known as a prolific -writer on Socialism from the revolutionary, Marxite point of view. At -that time there was not a single young man in London interested in or -in favor of anything like Socialism, excepting <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Bax. Now there are -hundreds. What are the reasons for the change?</p> - -<p>(1) The exhaustion of the older Liberalism and the obviously -unsatisfactory character of mere republicanism. And here American -readers must permit me to be plain by saying that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxiv">[xxxiv]</span> the United States -seemed to furnish an object lesson to the world as to the failure of -mere republicanism to solve a single one of our social questions. A -quarter of a century ago the American Republic was the guiding star of -advanced English political thought. It is not so now: candor compels -me to say that. It is not merely a question of machine politics, of -political corruption, of the omnipotent party boss; though supine -Americans who do nothing to overthrow those purely political evils -should be reminded that Europe as well as America is involved in -and has to pay for their cowardice and indifference. But over and -beyond this is the great fact of the division between rich and poor, -millionnaires at one end, tramps at the other, a growth of monopolies -unparalleled, crises producing abject poverty just as in Europe. These -facts proved to men clearly that new institutions were of no use along -with the old forms of property; that a mere theoretic democracy, -unaccompanied by any social changes, was a delusion and a snare. The -result of this is that the old enthusiasm for mere republicanism has -died away, and that, though twenty-five years ago there was a good -sprinkling of republican clubs in England, there is not a single one of -them left now.</p> - -<p>(2) The second cause I take to be a new spirit in literature. The -genteel, the conventional, the thinner kind of romantic literature -began to die out; and the powerful realistic school began to attract -men’s minds. There was a desire to know things as they are, to sound -the plummet in the sea of social misery, to have done with make-believe -and get at realities. The Russian writers, with their intense -Socialistic feeling, attracted great numbers of readers, who seemed to -find in them something entirely new and immensely powerful. I should -name among individual writers who have powerfully aided the growth, I -do not say of Socialism itself, but of the feeling in the soil of which -Socialism is easily developed, Dickens, Victor Hugo, Carlyle, Whitman, -Ruskin, Tolstoi, Zola and Arnold. A curious and medley list, you may -say, and so it is; but I am certain that each of these great writers -has contributed a distinct element to the expansion and liberation of -the minds that have been formed, say, during the last twenty years. For -among all these writers, varied as they are, it is the social feeling -which is the most powerful impulse.</p> - -<p>(3) Along with the new literature has grown a new art feeling,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxv">[xxxv]</span> an -intense hatred of the smug and respectable, and a love to be surrounded -by attractive objects. Ruskin, Morris, and Walter Crane have shown -why it is that the true artist is at war with commercialism, with -the notion that things are to be produced for a profit, no matter -what abominations you may turn out. The conception that no person -has any right to inflict an ugly object of any sort on the world, -especially for the sake of making gain out of it, has taken hold on the -imaginative mind of the younger people of our cultivated classes.</p> - -<p>(4) In the fourth place, the old political economy is absolutely dead -in England, although you might not perhaps guess it from some of the -English economic writers. The influence of German thought in this, -as in other departments, has affected men’s minds. Take a series of -books like the Social Science Series, published by Sonnenschein; -half those books are Socialistic,—and that would have been an -impossibility twenty years ago. Of the “Fabian Essays in Socialism,” -it may be said that the publisher, as well as the Society, reaped -large profits from it. I mention such works as these, rather than -romances like Morris’s “News from Nowhere,” or Bellamy’s “Looking -Backward.” The charm of Morris’s style and the ingenuity of Bellamy’s -narrative would be sufficient to account for their success; but the -popularity of these other works represents a body of serious interest -in advanced economics, which may well be considered startling when the -old hidebound prejudices of orthodox English economics are taken into -consideration.</p> - -<p>(5) <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laissez-faire</i> individualist political philosophy is dead. In -vain does poor <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert Spencer endeavor to stem the torrent. His -political ideas are already as antiquated as Noah’s ark. I do not know -a single one of the younger men in England who is influenced by them -in the slightest degree, though one hears of one occasionally, just -as one hears of a freak in a dime museum. For all practical purposes, -philosophic Radicalism, as it was called, is as extinct as the dodo.</p> - -<p>(6) There is another cause which cannot be ignored, though I speak upon -it with some hesitation, as I purposely avoid, as far as possible, the -difficult questions of religion and the deeper ethics. I mean that -the old dualism, with its creed of other-worldliness, has gone by the -board. Whatever men’s theoretical views are upon many transcendental -matters, there is a general<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxvi">[xxxvi]</span> feeling now that the world is one, and -that actual life here is just as sacred, normal, good, as it ever was -or ever will be in any hypothetical past or future; that if there is -any heaven for us we have to make it, and that such heaven is a state -of the mind, of human relationships, and not a place to be reached at -a definite period of time. Perhaps I may quote the eloquent words of -William Morris in his “Dream of John Ball”: “Fellowship is heaven, and -the lack of fellowship is hell.” This idea is, I say, a powerful factor -in leading the minds of the younger men to the views of which I am -speaking. But men are not altogether influenced by their theoretical -or even spiritual ideas; they are also moved, and so long as they have -material bodies to be fed and clothed they will continue to be moved, -by purely self-regarding and economic considerations. Let us never be -deluded into supposing that altruistic feelings alone will induce men -to make great social changes; egotistic considerations will prompt them -as well, the desire of self-preservation working along with the desire -for a better and more harmonious social order than exists. It is not -only upon the working classes that capitalist monopoly tells; it tells -also upon the educated middle classes who are not in the monopoly. They -find the avenues of livelihood and preferment one after another closed -to them; and just as education spreads, this will become more and more -the case. When a small number of persons in a large community are -highly educated, they have what economists call a monopoly value; they -can get a good price for their services, because they possess something -which few people have. Spread this higher education and the monopoly -is broken down. Now, this is roughly what is going on in society; -democracy is levelling all up to a common level, however gradual may be -the process; and consequently highly educated men with their special -gifts find their rates of remuneration becoming lower and lower, unless -they possess some rare gift of genius, as a Sara Bernhardt in acting, -a Paderewski in playing, a Stevenson in story-telling, a Mascagni as -a composer. These rare people still command their monopoly value; but -for the rest it has disappeared. Thus even more than the workingmen, -perhaps, it has been the educated young men of the middle class -(and the young women, too) who have been hardest hit by the modern -development. Fifty years ago you could have gathered all the press -writers of London<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxvii">[xxxvii]</span> into a single moderate-sized room. To-day all told -they number nearly ten thousand. Everybody with a pen, ink and paper -and any capacity for turning out “copy” is a journalist; and you see -at once that it is impossible for all these men to earn a living. They -don’t, and can’t. There are scores of highly educated people who work -every day in the British Museum for eight or nine hours a day and earn -less than a mechanic in constant occupation. It is the same in all the -professions. Only fifteen per cent of London advocates ever get briefs -at all; the other eighty-five per cent get nothing. In the medical -profession it is the same. The prizes go to about five per cent of the -profession; as for the average medical man in the London suburbs, the -rates are so cut that I am credibly informed by one of them who studied -at Cambridge and Heidelberg, and on whose education hundreds of pounds -were spent, the fee for attendance and prescription in his suburban -district has been brought down to twenty-five cents. It will be seen -that it is not a question of making money or of the disgusting progress -towards smug respectability, which is known as “getting on,”—it is -positively a question of a bare living. Now, while a workingman who has -never known comfort, whose father has never known it before him, can -often stand a frightful amount of poverty without getting desperate, -the well-bred young man cannot; and the result is that the keenest and -most dangerous discontent comes from the educated classes, who are -leading the Socialist masses all over Europe. Some superficial people -think the remedy is to be found in inducing young men of the better -classes to abandon the so-called “respectable” occupations and go in -for manual labor. Let them cease, by all means, to be “respectable,” -but let not any one lay the flattering unction to his soul that this, -under existing economic conditions, is any solution. For what is the -difficulty about manual labor now? Why, that thousands of those already -engaged in it are not wanted; it is the difficulty of the unemployed, -the difficulty of over-production. In 1886, according to the Report -of the Washington Bureau of Statistics, there were at least one and -one-half million of unemployed men in the United States; and this state -of things has been almost if not quite paralleled in 1893. In London -lack of employment is chronic, and is growing to such huge proportions -that our cowardly, blind, public men dare not grapple with it.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxviii">[xxxviii]</span> In -Australia the unemployed have been walking the streets of Melbourne by -the thousand. How absurd then it is to propose to add to the numbers of -workingmen when those already in the ranks cannot find means of living! -There is one method, alas, open to men, as there is always one method -open to tempted, poverty-stricken women,—the method of what I may call -intellectual prostitution; and many there be that go in at that gate. -Sick and weary of the penury and struggle that go with honesty, young -men of ability will deliberately sell themselves to the capitalist -who has cornered our intellectual as he has cornered our material -production, and will serve him for a good living. What numbers I have -known choose this path!—and I cannot blame them, for they are forced -into it by the conditions of modern life. It is useless preaching fine -morals to them; the conditions of life must be adapted to human nature -as it is, for human nature will not, you may be quite sure, suddenly -transform itself to suit the conditions. These, then, are the economic -motives which, combined with the moral and intellectual motives to -which I have previously given expression, are forcing young men of -education and good breeding into the ranks of the Socialists, and which -especially operate in the case of a body like the Fabian Society.</p> - -<p>Readers will be asking by this time whether I am not going to set -forth the actual political programme or “platform,” as it is called -in America, of the Fabian Society. Yes, that is just what I am going -to do. As the Fabian Society holds that social transformation must -be gradual, unless there is to be a general smash-up, it proposes a -series of reforms for effecting the gradual change of society into -a really social democratic state. But these reforms, it will be -understood, are adopted with a distinct end in view, which fact makes -all the difference between people of principle and mere opportunists -who have no end in view other than the personal end of lining their -own pockets. The following, then, are the planks of the Fabian -political platform: Adult suffrage, Parliamentary and municipal, -one vote for each man and each woman of twenty-one and upwards who -are not in prison or in a lunatic asylum. The second ballot, as in -France, Germany and Switzerland, so that whoever is elected will have -an absolute majority of the votes polled. Payment of members by the -state and of election expenses by the district (it must be remembered -that at present<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxix">[xxxix]</span> representatives are not paid in England). Taxation of -unearned incomes by such means as a land tax, heavy death duties to -go to municipalities, and a progressive income tax. Municipalization -of land and local industries, so that free and honorable municipal -employment may be substituted for private charity, which, to vary a -well-known line of Shakespeare, is twice cursed,—it curseth him who -gives and him who takes. All education to be at the public cost for all -classes, including manual as well as book training. Nationalization -of all canals and railways, so that the public highways may belong to -the public, as they always did until the new era of steam, when they -got into the hands of capitalists. It is as ridiculous to pay <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> -Vanderbilt if you happen to want to go from New York to Chicago as it -would be to pay him if you desired to take a walk down Fifth Avenue. -The eight hours day for wage-workers in all government and municipal -offices, in all monopolies like coal mines and railways, and in all -industries where the workers want it. Parish councils for the laborers, -with compulsory power to acquire land to build dwellings, to administer -schools and charities, and to engage in co-operative farming.</p> - -<p>Such is the programme through the adoption of which the Fabian Society -believes that the country once called “merry England,” but the greater -portion of which is now dreary and sordid and cursed with poverty, -might again be really happy and be converted into a land of real and -not of sham freedom. And now a word, in conclusion, on an important -point,—the relation of the intellectual proletariat, as it has been -called, to the masses, of the educated young men to the bulk of -the working classes. Most of the members of the Fabian Society are -educated, middle-class people, though there are workingmen connected -with it also. What is to be the relation of these educated middle-class -people to the swarming multitudes of workers? This is a vital social -question, the most vital we have immediately before us. One remembers -what Matthew Arnold said in America,—that the salvation of modern -society lay in the hands of a remnant. I should be inclined to put it -rather differently, and to say that, if the social evolution is to be -peaceful and rational, it must be effected by the union of a cultivated -remnant with the masses of the toiling people. American optimism may -chafe at the little word “if.” Can<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xl">[xl]</span> there be any doubt, you may ask, -that we shall go on prosperously and peacefully? I reply, yes, there is -quite good enough ground for doubting this. As <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Pearson, the author -of that remarkable book on “National Life and Character,” which has -impressed us in England very deeply, has said, ancient civilization in -the times of the Antonines seemed as firm and strong as does ours, nay, -stronger, for it had, in the main, lasted as many centuries as ours has -lasted decades.</p> - -<p class="poetry"> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Stout was its arm, each nerve and bone</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Seemed puissant and alive.</span><br /> -</p> - -<p>Had you predicted then to a Roman senator that the splendid Greco-Roman -cities would be given to the flames, and that the Roman Senate and -legions would be trampled down by ignorant hordes of barbarians, he -would have smiled, offered you another cup of Falernian wine, and -changed the subject. Yet we know this happened; and I confess I can -see nothing in our mushroom civilization which we have any particular -right to regard as inherently more enduring than the elaborate and -stately organism of Roman jurisprudence. But there are no barbarians! -Yes, there are; but they are not outside us,—they are in our midst. -Do you suppose that the grim victim of crushing poverty in a London -attic or a Berlin cellar cares one pin’s head for all the heritage -of the world’s thought which appeals to the highly educated? How are -these huge masses of poor people to be welded into a great phalanx, -to be induced to subordinate their passions to the demands of reason, -to look not merely at the needs of the moment, but at those of next -year, to realize that the world cannot be remade in a day, but yet -that it can be so reconstituted as to give all opportunities to live -as human beings should? Silly people are always talking nonsense about -the danger of “agitators.” I know all about agitators. I know nearly -every prominent agitator in Great Britain; and I can say confidently -that it is the agitators who have to hold back, to restrain the people -from rash and even mad action. The record of every English strike would -show that this was the case. If all the labor leaders and agitators -were silenced, it would be the very worst thing that could befall the -capitalist class. The masses are at present, at the very best, an army -of privates without officers. This is not their fault; it is their -misfortune. They have not had the training,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xli">[xli]</span> the culture, which enables -them to meet rich men and their agents on equal ground. An English -statesman, whose name is known the world over, said privately to me -not long ago: “The labor men here in the House of Commons are all good -fellows, but they are no use as leaders; the principal men of either -party can twist them round their fingers with the greatest ease. If the -labor movement is to be a success, it must be led by educated men.” I -believe that verdict of one of the ablest and best-informed public men -now living to be true. To what does it point? To the union of culture -with labor, to reform this badly-jointed system. Only, be it observed, -it must be union on equal terms. There must be no lofty condescension -on the part of culture any more than base truckling on the part of -labor. It must be an equal copartnership, where each partner recognizes -that the other has something which he needs. And let me say, as one -who knows workmen, that, in a certain and very real way, culture has -as much to learn from labor as labor from culture. Let the cultured -man approach the laboring man on perfectly equal terms, in a cordial -and open way; and let both unite to deliver a groaning world from the -bondage of riches. English experience shows that this can be done; and -this idea is to a very great degree the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">idée mère</i> of the Fabian -Society, whose members have no higher ambition than to mingle freely -with the workmen and share in the common life. By this means the hatred -and suspicion felt by the French and German workmen towards any one who -wears a black coat is eliminated, and both labor and culture gain in -breadth, knowledge and sympathy, and the cause of rational progress is -rendered more secure. Walt Whitman has told us, in “Leaves of Grass,” -how he went “freely with powerful, uneducated persons,”—a gospel which -<abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Addington Symonds, in his essay on Whitman, tells us, saved -him from being a prig. And this gospel of free intercourse with the -so-called “common people,” who are neither saints nor great sinners, -but real men, more real than the conventional middle-class man can -ever afford to be, is the healthiest, best advice which I can give to -cultivated men.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xliii">[xliii]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xlv">[xlv]</span></p> -<h2 id="FABIAN_ESSAYS">THE FABIAN ESSAYS.</h2> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h3 class="nobreak" id="PREFACE">PREFACE.</h3> -</div> -<hr class="r5" /> - -<p>The essays in this volume were prepared last year as a course of -lectures for delivery before mixed audiences in London and the -provinces. They have been revised for publication, but not recast. The -matter is put, not as an author would put it to a student, but as a -speaker with only an hour at his disposal has to put it to an audience. -Country readers may accept the book as a sample of the propaganda -carried on by volunteer lecturers in the workmen’s clubs and political -associations of London.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> Metropolitan readers will have the advantage -of making themselves independent of the press critic by getting face -to face with the writers, stripping the veil of print from their -personality, cross-examining, criticising, calling them to account -amid surroundings which inspire no awe, and before the most patient -of audiences. For any Sunday paper which contains a lecture list will -shew where some, if not all, of the seven essayists may be heard for -nothing; and on all such occasions questions and discussion form part -of the procedure.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xlvi">[xlvi]</span></p> - -<p>The projection and co-ordination of these lectures is not the work -of any individual. The nominal editor is only the member told off to -arrange for the publication of the papers, and see them through the -press with whatever editorial ceremony might be necessary. Everything -that is usually implied by the authorship and editing of a book has in -this case been done by the seven essayists, associated as the Executive -Council of the Fabian Society; and not one of the essays could be -what it is had the writer been a stranger to his six colleagues and -to the Society. But there has been no sacrifice of individuality—no -attempt to cut out every phrase and opinion the responsibility for -which would not be accepted by every one of the seven. Had the sections -been differently allotted, they would have been differently treated, -though the net result would probably have been the same. The writers -are all Social Democrats, with a common conviction of the necessity of -vesting the organization of industry and the material of production in -a State identified with the whole people by complete Democracy. But -that conviction is peculiar to no individual bias: it is a Capitol to -which all roads lead; and at least seven of them are represented in -these Fabian Essays; so that the reader need not fear oppression here, -any more than in the socialized State of the future, by the ascendancy -of one particular cast of mind.</p> - -<p>There are at present no authoritative teachers of Socialism. The -essayists make no claim to be more than communicative learners.</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><span class="smcap">London</span>, December, 1889.</p> -</div> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> In the year ending April, 1889, the number of lectures -delivered by members of the Fabian Society alone was upwards of 700.</p> - -</div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xlvii">[xlvii]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[1]</span></p> -<h2 id="THE_BASIS_OF_SOCIALISM">THE BASIS OF SOCIALISM.</h2> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h3 class="nobreak" id="ECONOMIC">ECONOMIC.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY G. BERNARD SHAW.</p> - - -<p>All economic analyses begin with the cultivation of the earth. To the -mind’s eye of the astronomer, the earth is a ball spinning in space -without ulterior motives. To the bodily eye of the primitive cultivator -it is a vast green plain, from which, by sticking a spade into it, -wheat and other edible matters can be made to spring. To the eye of the -sophisticated city man, this vast green plain appears rather as a great -gaming-table, your chances in the game depending chiefly on the place -where you deposit your stakes. To the economist, again, the green plain -is a sort of burial-place of hidden treasure, where all the forethought -and industry of man are set at naught by the caprice of the power which -hid the treasure. The wise and patient workman strikes his spade in -here, and with heavy toil can discover nothing but a poor quality of -barley, some potatoes and plentiful nettles, with a few dock leaves -to cure his stings. The foolish spendthrift on the other side of the -hedge, gazing idly at the sand glittering in the sun, suddenly realizes -that the earth is offering him gold—is dancing it before his listless -eyes lest it should escape him. Another man, searching for some more -of this tempting gold, comes upon a great hoard of coal, or taps a jet -of petroleum. Thus is Man mocked by Earth, his step-mother, and never -knows as he tugs at her closed hand whether it contains diamonds or -flints, good red wheat or a few clayey and blighted cabbages. Thus, -too, he becomes a gambler, and scoffs at the theorists who prate of -industry and honesty and equality. Yet against this fate he eternally -rebels. For since in gambling the many must lose in order that the few -may win; since dishonesty is mere shadow-grasping where every one is -dishonest; and since inequality is bitter to all except the highest, -and miserably lonely for him, men come<span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[2]</span> greatly to desire that these -capricious gifts of Nature might be intercepted by some agency having -the power and the goodwill to distribute them justly according to the -labor done by each in the collective search for them. This desire is -Socialism; and, as a means to its fulfilment, Socialists have devised -communes, kingdoms, principalities, churches, manors, and finally, -when all these had succumbed to the old gambling spirit, the Social -Democratic State, which yet remains to be tried. As against Socialism, -the gambling spirit urges man to allow no rival to come between his -private individual powers and Step-mother Earth, but rather to secure -some acres of her and take his chance of getting diamonds instead of -cabbages. This is Private Property, or Unsocialism. Our own choice -is shewn by our continual aspiration to possess property, our common -hailing of it as sacred, our setting apart of the word Respectable for -those who have attained it, our ascription of pre-eminent religiousness -to commandments forbidding its violation, and our identification of law -and order among men with its protection. Therefore is it vital to a -living knowledge of our society that Private Property should be known -in every step of its progress from its source in cupidity to its end in -confusion.</p> - -<p>Let us, in the manner of the Political Economist, trace the effects -of settling a country by private property with undisturbed law and -order. Figure to yourself the vast green plain of a country virgin -to the spade, awaiting the advent of man. Imagine then the arrival -of the first colonist, the original Adam, developed by centuries of -civilization into an Adam Smith, prospecting for an suitable patch of -Private Property. Adam is, as Political Economy fundamentally assumes -him to be, “on the make”; therefore he drives his spade into, and sets -up his stockade around, the most fertile and favorably situated patch -he can find. When he has tilled it, Political Economy inspired to -prophesy by the spectacle, metaphorically exhibits Adam’s little patch -of cultivation as a pool that will yet rise and submerge the whole -land. Let us not forget this trope: it is the key to the ever-recurring -phrase, “margin of cultivation,” in which, as may now be perceived, -there lurks a little unsuspected poetry. And truly the pool soon -spreads. Other Adams come, all on the make, and therefore all sure to -pre-empt patches as near as may be to that of the first Adam’s, partly -because he has chosen the best situation, partly for the pleasure of -his society<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[3]</span> and conversation, and partly because where two men are -assembled together there is a two-man power that is far more than -double one-man power, being indeed in some instances a quite new force, -totally destructive of the idiotic general hypothesis that society -is no more than the sum of the units which compose it. These Adams, -too, bring their Cains and Abels, who do not murder one another, but -merely pre-empt adjacent patches. And so the pool rises, and the margin -spreads more and more remote from the centre, until the pool becomes a -lake, and the lake an inland sea.</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">Rent.</span></h4> - -<p>But in the course of this inundation the caprices of Nature begin to -operate. That specially fertile region upon which Adam pitched is -sooner or later all pre-empted; and there is nothing for the new-comer -to pre-empt save soil of the second quality. Again, division of labor -sets in among Adam’s neighbors; and with it, of course, comes the -establishment of a market for the exchange of the products of their -divided labor. Now it is not well to be far afield from that market, -because distance from it involves extra cost for roads, beasts of -burden, time consumed in travelling thither and back again. All this -will be saved to Adam at the centre of cultivation, and incurred -by the new-comer at the margin of cultivation. Let us estimate the -annual value of Adam’s produce at £1,000, and the annual produce of -the new-comer’s land on the margin of cultivation at £500, assuming -that Adam and the new-comer are equally industrious. Here is a clear -advantage of £500 a year to the first comer. This £500 is economic -rent. It matters not at all that it is merely a difference of income, -and not an overt payment from a tenant to a landlord. The two men labor -equally; and yet one gets £500 a year more than the other through the -superior fertility of his land and convenience of its situation. The -excess due to that fertility is rent; and before long we shall find it -recognized as such and paid in the fashion with which we are familiar. -For why should not Adam let his patch to the new-comer at a rent of -£500 a year? Since the produce will be £1,000, the new-comer will have -£500 left for himself, or as much as he could obtain by cultivating a -patch of his own at the margin; and it is pleasanter, besides, to be -in the centre of society than on the outskirts of it. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[4]</span> new-comer -will himself propose the arrangement; and Adam may retire as an idle -landlord with a perpetual pension of £500 rent. The excess of fertility -in Adam’s land is thenceforth recognized as rent and paid, as it is -to-day, regularly by a worker to a drone. A few samples of the way -in which this simple and intelligible transaction is stated by our -economists may now, I hope, be quoted without any danger of their -proving so difficult as they appear in the text-books from which I have -copied them.</p> - -<p>Stuart Mill<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> says that “the rent of land consists of the excess -of its return above the return to the worst land in cultivation.” -Fawcett<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> says that “the rent of land represents the pecuniary value -of the advantages which such land possesses over the worst land in -cultivation.” Professor Marshall<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> says that “the rent of a piece -of land is the excess of its produce over the produce of an adjacent -piece of land which would not be cultivated at all if rent were paid -for it.” Professor Sidgwick<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> cautiously puts it that “the normal -rent <em>per acre</em> of any piece” [of land] “is the surplus of the -value of its produce over the value of the net produce per acre of the -least advantageous land that it is profitable to cultivate.” General -Walker<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> declares that “specifically, the rent of any piece of land is -determined by the difference between its annual yield and that of the -least productive land actually cultivated for the supply of the same -market, it being assumed that the quality of the land as a productive -agent is, in neither case, impaired or improved by such cultivation.” -All these definitions are offered by the authors as elaborations of -that given by their master Ricardo,<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> who says, “Rent is that portion -of the produce of the earth which is paid to the landlord for the use -of the original and indestructible powers of the soil.”</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">The County Family.</span></h4> - -<p>Let us return to our ideal country. Adam is retiring from productive -industry on £500 a year; and his neighbors are hastening<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[5]</span> to imitate -him as fresh tenants present themselves. The first result is the -beginning of a tradition that the oldest families in the country -enjoy a superior position to the rest, and that the main advantage of -their superior position is that they enjoy incomes without working. -Nevertheless, since they still depend on their tenants’ labor for their -subsistence, they continue to pay Labor, with a capital L, a certain -meed of mouth honor; and the resultant association of prosperity with -idleness, and praise with industry, practically destroys morality by -setting up that incompatibility between conduct and principle which -is the secret of the ingrained cynicism of our own time, and which -produces the curious Ricardian phenomenon of the man of business -who goes on Sunday to the church with the regularity of the village -blacksmith, there to renounce and abjure before his God the line of -conduct which he intends to pursue with all his might during the -following week.</p> - -<p>According to our hypothesis, the inland sea of cultivation has now -spread into the wilderness so far that at its margin the return to -a man’s labor for a year is only £500. But as there is always a -flood-tide in that sea, caused by the incessant increase of population, -the margin will not stop there; it will at last encroach upon every -acre of cultivable land, rising to the snow line on the mountains and -falling to the coast of the actual salt water sea, but always reaching -the barrenest places last of all, because the cultivators are still, -as ever, on the make, and will not break bad land when better is to be -had. But suppose that now, at last, the uttermost belt of free land is -reached, and that upon it the yield to a man’s year’s labor is only -£100. Clearly now the rent of Adam’s primeval patch has risen to £900, -since that is the excess of its produce over what is by this time all -that is to be had rent free. But Adam has yielded up his land for £500 -a year to a tenant. It is this tenant accordingly who now lets Adam’s -patch for £900 a year to the new-comer, who of course loses nothing -by the bargain, since it leaves him the £100 a year with which he -must be content anyhow. Accordingly he labors on Adam’s land; raises -£1,000 a year from it; keeps £100 and pays £900 to Adam’s tenant, who -pays £500 to Adam, keeping £400 for himself, and thus also becoming an -idle gentleman, though with a somewhat smaller income than the man of -older family. It has, in fact, come to this, that the private property -in Adam’s land is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[6]</span> divided between three men, the first doing none of -the work and getting half the produce; the second doing none of the -work and getting two-fifths of the produce; and the third doing all -the work and getting only one-tenth of the produce. Incidentally also, -the moralist who is sure to have been prating somewhere about private -property leading to the encouragement of industry, the establishment -of a healthy incentive, and the distribution of wealth according -to exertion, is exposed as a futile purblind person, starting <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">a -priori</i> from blank ignorance, and proceeding deductively to mere -contradiction and patent folly.</p> - -<p>All this, however, is a mere trifle compared to the sequel. When the -inland sea has risen to its confines—when there is nothing but a strip -of sand round the coast between the furrow and the wave—when the very -waves themselves are cultivated by fisherfolk—when the pastures and -timber forests have touched the snow line—when, in short, the land is -all private property, yet every man is a proprietor, though it may be -only of a tenant right. He enjoys fixity of tenure at what is called -a fair rent; that is, he fares as well as he could on land wholly his -own. All the rent is economic rent; the landlord cannot raise it nor -the tenant lower it; it is fixed naturally by the difference between -the fertility of the land for which it is paid and that of the worst -land in the country. Compared with the world as we know it, such a -state of things is freedom and happiness.</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">The Proletariat.</span></h4> - -<p>But at this point there appears in the land a man in a strange -plight—one who wanders from snow line to sea coast in search of land, -and finds none that is not the property of some one else. Private -property had forgotten this man. On the roads he is a vagrant; off -them he is a trespasser; he is the first disinherited son of Adam, -the first proletarian, one in whose seed all the generations of the -earth shall yet be blest, but who is himself for the present foodless, -homeless, shiftless, superfluous, and everything that turns a man into -a tramp or a thrall. Yet he is still a man with brain and muscle, -able to devise and execute, able to deal puissantly with land if he -only could get access to it. But how to get that access! Necessity is -the mother of Invention. It may be that this second Adam, the first -father of the great proletariat, has one of those scarce<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[7]</span> brains which -are not the least of Nature’s capricious gifts. If the fertile field -yields rent, why not the fertile brain? Here is the first Adam’s patch -still yielding its £1,000 a year to the labor of the tenant who, as we -have seen, has to pay £900 away in rent. How if the proletarian were -boldly to bid £1,000 a year to that man for the property? Apparently -the result would be the starvation of the proletarian, since he would -have to part with all the produce. But what if the proletarian can -contrive—invent—anticipate a new want—turn the land to some hitherto -undreamt-of use—wrest £1,500 a year from the soil and site that -only yielded £1,000 before? If he can do this, he can pay the full -£1,000 rent, and have an income of £500 left for himself. This is his -profit—the rent of his ability—the excess of its produce over that -of ordinary stupidity. Here then is the opportunity of the cunning -proletarian, the hero of that modern Plutarch, <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Samuel Smiles. -Truly, as Napoleon said, the career is open to the talented. But alas! -the social question is no more a question of the fate of the talented -than of the idiotic. In due replenishment of the earth there comes -another proletarian who is no cleverer than other men, and can do as -much, but not more than they. For him there is no rent of ability. How -then is he to get a tenant right? Let us see. It is certain that by -this time not only will the new devices of the renter of ability have -been copied by people incapable of inventing them; but division of -labor, the use of tools and money, and the economies of civilization -will have greatly increased man’s power of extracting wealth from -Nature. All this increase will be so much gain to the holder of a -tenant right, since his rent is a fixed payment out of the produce of -his holding, and the balance is his own. Therefore an addition to the -produce not foreseen by the landlord enriches the tenant. So that it -may well be that the produce of land on the margin of cultivation, -which, as we have seen, fixes the produce left to the cultivators -throughout the whole area, may rise considerably. Suppose the yield to -have doubled; then our old friends who paid £900 rent, and kept £100 -for themselves, have now, though they still pay £900 rent, £1,100 for -themselves, the total produce having risen to £2,000. Now here is an -opportunity for our proletarian who is not clever. He can very well -offer to cultivate the land subject to a payment of, for instance, -£1,600 a year, leaving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[8]</span> himself £400 a year. This will enable the last -holder of the tenant right to retire as an idle gentleman receiving a -net income of £700 a year, and a gross income of £1,600, out of which -he pays £900 a year rent to a landlord who again pays to the head -landlord £500. But it is to be marked that this £700 a year net is -not economic rent. It is not the difference between the best and the -worst land. It has nothing to do with the margin of cultivation. It is -a payment for the privilege of using land at all—for access to that -which is now a close monopoly; and its amount is regulated, not by what -the purchaser could do for himself on land of his own at the margin, -but simply by the landholder’s eagerness to be idle on the one hand, -and the proletarian’s need of subsistence on the other. In current -economic terms the price is regulated by supply and demand. As the -demand for land intensifies by the advent of fresh proletarians, the -price goes up; and the bargains are made more stringent. Tenant rights, -instead of being granted in perpetuity, and so securing for ever to -the tenant the increase due to unforeseen improvements in production, -are granted on leases for finite terms, at the expiration of which the -landlord can revise the terms or eject the tenant. The payments rise -until the original head rents and quit rents appear insignificant in -comparison with the incomes reaped by the intermediate tenant right -holders or middlemen. Sooner or later the price of tenant right will -rise so high that the actual cultivator will get no more of the produce -than suffices him for subsistence. At that point there is an end of -sub-letting tenant rights. The land’s absorption of the proletarians as -tenants paying more than the economic rent stops.</p> - -<p>And now what is the next proletarian to do? For all his forerunners we -have found a way of escape: for him there seems none. The board is at -the door, inscribed “Only standing room left”; and it might well bear -the more poetic legend, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’ entrate</i>. -This man, born a proletarian, must die a proletarian, and leave his -destitution as an only inheritance to his son. It is not yet clear -that there is ten days’ life in him; for whence is his subsistence to -come if he cannot get at the land? Food he must have, and clothing; -and both promptly. There is food in the market, and clothing also; -but not for nothing: hard money must be paid for it, and paid on the -nail too; for he who has no property gets no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[9]</span> credit. Money then -is a necessity of life; and money can only be procured by selling -commodities. This presents no difficulty to the cultivators of the -land, who can raise commodities by their labor; but the proletarian, -being landless, has neither commodities nor means of producing them. -Sell something he must. Yet he has nothing to sell—except himself. -The idea seems a desperate one; but it proves quite easy to carry out. -The tenant cultivators of the land have not strength enough or time -enough to exhaust the productive capacity of their holdings. If they -could buy men in the market for less than these men’s labor would add -to the produce, then the purchase of such men would be a sheer gain. -It would indeed be only a purchase in form: the men would literally -cost nothing, since they would produce their own price, with a surplus -for the buyer. Never in the history of buying and selling was there -so splendid a bargain for buyers as this. Aladdin’s uncle’s offer of -new lamps for old ones, was in comparison a catch-penny. Accordingly, -the proletarian no sooner offers himself for sale than he finds a rush -of bidders for him, each striving to get the better of the others by -offering to give him more and more of the produce of his labor, and to -content themselves with less and less surplus. But even the highest -bidder must have some surplus, or he will not buy. The proletarian, in -accepting the highest bid, sells himself openly into bondage. He is not -the first man who has done so; for it is evident that his forerunners, -the purchasers of tenant right, had been enslaved by the proprietors -who lived on the rents paid by them. But now all the disguise falls -off; the proletarian renounces not only the fruit of his labor, but -also his right to think for himself and to direct his industry as he -pleases. The economic change is merely formal; the moral change is -enormous. Soon the new direct traffic in men overspreads the whole -market, and takes the place formerly held by the traffic in tenant -rights. In order to understand the consequences, it is necessary to -undertake an analysis of the exchange of commodities in general, since -labor power is now in the market on the same footing as any other ware -exposed there for sale.</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">Exchange Value.</span></h4> - -<p>It is evident that the custom of exchange will arise in the first -instance as soon as men give up providing each for his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[10]</span> own needs by -his own labor. A man who makes his own tables and chairs, his own poker -and kettle, his own bread and butter, and his own house and clothes, -is jack-of-all-trades and master of none. He finds that he would get -on much faster if he stuck to making tables and chairs, and exchanged -them with the smith for a poker and kettle, with bakers and dairymen -for bread and butter, and with builders and tailors for a house and -clothes. In doing this, he finds that his tables and chairs are worth -so much—that they have an exchange value, as it is called. As a matter -of general convenience, some suitable commodity is set up to measure -this value. We set up gold, which in this particular use of it, is -called money. The chairmaker finds how much money his chairs are worth, -and exchanges them for it. The blacksmith finds out how much money his -pokers are worth, and exchanges them for it. Thus, by employing money -as a go-between, chairmakers can get pokers in exchange for their -chairs, and blacksmiths chairs for their pokers. This is the mechanism -of exchange; and once the values of the commodities are ascertained it -works simply enough. But it is a mere mechanism, and does not fix the -values or explain them. And the attempt to discover what does fix them -is beset with apparent contradictions which block up the right path, -and with seductive coincidences which make the wrong seem the more -promising.</p> - -<p>The apparent contradictions soon shew themselves. It is evident that -the exchange value of anything depends on its utility, since no mortal -exertion can make a useless thing exchangeable. And yet fresh air and -sunlight, which are so useful as to be quite indispensable, have no -exchange value; whilst a meteoric stone, shot free of charge from the -firmament into the back garden, has a considerable exchange value, -although it is an eminently dispensable curiosity. We soon find that -this somehow depends on the fact that fresh air is plenty and meteoric -stones scarce. If by any means the supply of fresh air could be -steadily diminished, and the supply of meteoric stones, by celestial -cannonade or otherwise, steadily increased, the fresh air would -presently acquire an exchange value which would gradually rise, whilst -the exchange value of meteoric stones would gradually fall, until at -last fresh air would be supplied through a meter and charged for like -gas, and meteoric stones would be as unsaleable as ordinary pebbles.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[11]</span> -The exchange value, in fact, decreases with the supply. This is due to -the fact that the supply decreases in utility as it goes on, because -when people have had some of a commodity, they are partly satisfied, -and do not value the rest so much. The usefulness of a pound of bread -to a man depends on whether he has already eaten some. Every man wants -a certain number of pounds of bread per week, no man wants much more; -and if more is offered he will not give much for it—perhaps not -anything. One umbrella is very useful: a second umbrella is a luxury: -a third is mere lumber. Similarly, the curators of our museums want a -moderate collection of meteoric stones; but they do not want a cartload -apiece of them. Now the exchange value is fixed by the utility, not of -the most useful, but of the least useful part of the stock. Why this -is so can readily be made obvious by an illustration. If the stock of -umbrellas in the market were sufficiently large to provide two for each -umbrella carrier in the community, then, since a second umbrella is -not so useful as the first, the doctrinaire course would be to ticket -half the umbrellas at, say, fifteen shillings, and the other half at -eight and sixpence. Unfortunately, no man will give fifteen shillings -for an article which he can get for eight and sixpence; and when the -public came to buy, they would buy up all the eight and sixpenny -umbrellas. Each person being thus supplied with an umbrella, the -remainder of the stock, though marked fifteen shillings, would be in -the position of second umbrellas, only worth eight and sixpence. This -is how the exchange value of the least useful part of the supply fixes -the exchange value of all the rest. Technically, it occurs by “the law -of indifference.” And since the least useful unit of the supply is -generally that which is last produced, its utility is called the final -utility of the commodity. The utility of the first or most useful unit -is called the total utility of the commodity. If there were but one -umbrella in the world, the exchange value of its total utility would be -what the most delicate person would pay for it on a very wet day sooner -than go without it. But practically, thanks to the law of indifference, -the most delicate person pays no more than the most robust: that -is, both pay alike the exchange value of the utility of the last -umbrella produced—or of the final utility of the whole stock of -umbrellas. These terms—law of indifference, total utility, and final -utility—though admirably expressive and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[12]</span> intelligible when you know -beforehand exactly what they mean, are, taken by themselves, failures -in point of lucidity and suggestiveness. Some economists, transferring -from cultivation to utility our old metaphor of the spreading pool, -call final utility “marginal utility.” Either will serve our present -purpose, as I do not intend to use the terms again. The main point to -be grasped is, that however useful any commodity may be, its exchange -value can be run down to nothing by increasing the supply until there -is more of it than is wanted. The excess, being useless and valueless, -is to be had for nothing; and nobody will pay anything for a commodity -as long as plenty of it is to be had for nothing. This is why air -and other indispensable things have no exchange value, whilst scarce -gewgaws fetch immense prices.</p> - -<p>These, then, are the conditions which confront man as a producer and -exchanger. If he produces a useless thing, his labor will be wholly -in vain: he will get nothing for it. If he produces a useful thing, -the price he will get for it will depend on how much of it there is -for sale already. If he increases the supply by producing more than is -sufficient to replace the current consumption, he inevitably lowers the -value of the whole. It therefore behooves him to be wary in choosing -his occupation, as well as industrious in pursuing it. His choice will -naturally fall on the production of those commodities whose value -stands highest relatively to the labor required to produce them—which -fetch the highest price in proportion to their cost, in fact. Suppose, -for example, that a maker of musical instruments found that it cost him -exactly as much to make a harp as to make a pianoforte, but that harps -were going out of fashion and pianofortes coming in. Soon there would -be more harps than were wanted, and fewer pianofortes: consequently -the value of harps would fall, and that of pianofortes rise. Since -the labor cost of both would be the same, he would immediately devote -all his labor to pianoforte-making; and other manufacturers would -do the same, until the increase of supply brought down the value of -pianofortes to the value of harps. Possibly fashion then might veer -from pianofortes to American organs, in which case he would make less -pianofortes and more American organs. When these, too, had increased -sufficiently, the exertions of the Salvation Army might create such a -demand for tambourines as to make them worth four times their cost of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[13]</span> -production, whereupon there would instantly be a furious concentration -of the instrument-making energy on the manufacture of tambourines; and -this concentration would last until the supply had brought down the -profit<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> to less than might be gained by gratifying the public craving -for trombones. At last, as pianofortes were cheapened until they were -no more profitable than harps; then American organs until they were no -more profitable than pianos; and then tambourines until they were level -with American organs; so eventually trombones will pay no better than -tambourines; and a general level of profit will be attained, indicating -the proportion in which the instruments are wanted by the public. But -to skim off even this level of profit, more of the instruments may be -produced in the ascertained proportion until their prices fall to their -costs of production, when there will be no profit. Here the production -will be decisively checked, since a further supply would cause only -a loss; and men can lose money, without the trouble of producing -commodities, by the simple process of throwing it out of a window.</p> - -<p>What occurred with the musical instruments in this illustration occurs -in practice with the whole mass of manufactured commodities. Those -which are scarce, and therefore relatively high in value, tempt us to -produce them until the increase of the supply reduces their value to -a point at which there is no more profit to be made out of them than -out of other commodities. The general level of profit thus attained is -further exploited until the general increase brings down the price of -all commodities to their cost of production, the equivalent of which -is sometimes called their normal value. And here a glance back to our -analysis of the spread of cultivation, and its result in the phenomenon -of rent, suggests the question What does the cost of production of -a commodity mean? We have seen that, owing to the differences in -fertility and advantage of situation between one piece of land and -another, cost of production varies from district to district, being -highest at the margin of cultivation. But we have also seen how the -landlord skims off as economic rent all the advantages gained by the -cultivators of superior soils and sites. Consequently, the addition -of the landlord’s rent to the expenses of production brings them<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[14]</span> up -even on the best land to the level of those incurred on the worst. -Cost of production, then, means cost of production on the margin of -cultivation, and is equalized to all producers, since what they may -save in labor per commodity is counterbalanced by the greater mass of -commodities they must produce in order to bring in the rent. It is -only by a thorough grasp of this levelling-down action that we can -detect the trick by which the ordinary economist tries to cheat us into -accepting the private property system as practically just. He first -shews that economic rent does not enter into cost of production on the -margin of cultivation. Then he shews that the cost of production on the -margin of cultivation determines the price of a commodity. Therefore, -he argues, first, that rent does not enter into price; and second, that -the value of commodities is fixed by their cost of production, the -implication being that the landlords cost the community nothing, and -that commodities exchange in exact proportion to the labor they cost. -This trivially ingenious way of being disingenuous is officially taught -as political economy in our schools to this day. It will be seen at -once that it is mere thimblerig. So far from commodities exchanging, -or tending to exchange, according to the labor expended in their -production, commodities produced well within the margin of cultivation -will fetch as high a price as commodities produced at the margin with -much greater labor. So far from the landlord costing nothing, he costs -all the difference between the two.</p> - -<p>This, however, is not the goal of our analysis of value. We now see -how Man’s control over the value of commodities consists solely in his -power of regulating their supply. Individuals are constantly trying to -decrease supply for their own advantage. Gigantic conspiracies have -been entered into to forestall the world’s wheat and cotton harvests, -so as to force their value to the highest possible point. Cargoes of -East Indian spices have been destroyed by the Dutch as cargoes of -fish are now destroyed in the Thames, to maintain prices by limiting -supply. All rings, trusts, corners, combinations, monopolies and trade -secrets have the same object. Production and the development of the -social instincts are alike hindered by each man’s consciousness that -the more he stints the community the more he benefits himself, the -justification, of course, being that when every man has benefited -himself at the expense of the community, the community will benefit by -every man in it being<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[15]</span> benefited. From one thing the community is safe. -There will be no permanent conspiracies to reduce values by increasing -supply. All men will cease producing when the value of their product -falls below its cost of production, whether in labor or in labor -<em>plus</em> rent. No man will keep on producing bread until it will -fetch nothing, like the sunlight, or until it becomes a nuisance, like -the rain in the summer of 1888. So far, our minds are at ease as to the -excessive increase of commodities voluntarily produced by the labor of -man.</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">Wages.</span></h4> - -<p>I now ask you to pick up the dropped subject of the spread of -cultivation. We had got as far as the appearance in the market of -a new commodity—of the proletarian man compelled to live by the -sale of himself! In order to realize at once the latent horror of -this, you have only to apply our investigation of value, with its -inevitable law that only by restricting the supply of a commodity -can its value be kept from descending finally to zero. The commodity -which the proletarian sells is one over the production of which he -has practically no control. He is himself driven to produce it by an -irresistible impulse. It was the increase of population that spread -cultivation and civilization from the centre to the snowline, and at -last forced men to sell themselves to the lords of the soil: it is the -same force that continues to multiply men so that their exchange falls -slowly and surely until it disappears altogether—until even black -chattel slaves are released as not worth keeping in a land where men -of all colors are to be had for nothing. This is the condition of our -English laborers to-day: they are no longer even dirt cheap: they are -valueless, and can be had for nothing. The proof is the existence of -the unemployed, who can find no purchasers. By the law of indifference, -nobody will buy men at a price when he can obtain equally serviceable -men for nothing. What, then, is the explanation of the wages given to -those who are in employment, and who certainly do not work for nothing? -The matter is deplorably simple. Suppose that horses multiplied in -England in such quantities that they were to be had for the asking, -like kittens condemned to the bucket. You would still have to feed -your horse—feed him and lodge him well if you used him as a smart -hunter—feed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[16]</span> him and lodge him wretchedly if you used him only as a -drudge. But the cost of keeping would not mean that the horse had an -exchange value. If you got him for nothing in the first instance—if -no one would give you anything for him when you were done with him, -he would be worth nothing, in spite of the cost of his keep. That is -just the case of every member of the proletariat who could be replaced -by one of the unemployed to-day. Their wage is not the price of -themselves; for they are worth nothing: it is only their keep. For bare -subsistence wages you can get as much common labor as you want, and do -what you please with it within the limits of a criminal code which is -sure to be interpreted by a proprietary-class judge in your favor. If -you have to give your footman a better allowance than your wretched -hewer of match wood, it is for the same reason that you have to give -your hunter beans and a clean stall instead of chopped straw and a -sty.<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">Capitalism.</span></h4> - -<p>At this stage the acquisition of labor becomes a mere question of -provender. If a railway is required, all that is necessary is to -provide subsistence for a sufficient number of laborers to construct -it. If, for example, the railway requires the labor of a thousand -men for five years, the cost to the proprietors of the site is the -subsistence of a thousand men for five years. This subsistence is -technically called capital. It is provided for by the proprietors not -consuming the whole excess over wages of the produce of the labor of -their other wage workers, but setting aside enough for the subsistence -of the railway makers. In this way capital can claim to be the result -of saving, or, as one ingenious apologist neatly put it, the reward of -abstinence, a gleam of humor which still enlivens treatises on capital. -The savers, it need hardly be said, are those who have more money than -they want to spend: the abstainers are those who have less. At the -end of the five years, the completed railway<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[17]</span> is the property of the -capitalists; and the railway makers fall back into the labor market -as helpless as they were before. Sometimes the proprietors call the -completed railway their capital; but, strictly, this is only a figure -of speech. Capital is simply spare subsistence. Its market value, -indicated by the current rate of interest, falls with the increase of -population, whereas the market value of established stock rises with -it.<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> If <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Goschen, encouraged by his success in reducing Consols, -were to ask the proprietors of the London and North Western Railway to -accept as full compensation for their complete expropriation capital -just sufficient to make the railway anew, their amazement at his -audacity would at once make him feel the difference between a railway -and capital. Colloquially, one property with a farm on it is said to -be land yielding rent; whilst another, with a railway on it, is called -capital yielding interest. But economically there is no distinction -between them when they once become sources of revenue. This would -be quite clearly seen if costly enterprises like railways could be -undertaken by a single landlord on his own land out of his own surplus -wealth. It is the necessity of combining a number of possessors of -surplus wealth, and devising a financial machinery for apportioning -their shares in the produce to their shares in the capital contributed, -that modifies the terminology and external aspect of the exploitation. -But the modification is not an alteration: shareholder and landlord -live alike on the produce extracted from their property by the labor of -the proletariat.</p> - - -<h4>“<span class="smcap">Overpopulation.</span>”</h4> - -<p>The introduction of the capitalistic system is a sign that the -exploitation of the laborer toiling for a bare subsistence wage has -become one of the chief arts of life among the holders of tenant -rights. It also produces a delusive promise of endless employment -which blinds the proletariat to those disastrous consequences of rapid -multiplication which are obvious to the small cultivator and peasant -proprietor. But indeed the more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[18]</span> you degrade the workers, robbing them -of all artistic enjoyment, and all chance of respect and admiration -from their fellows, the more you throw them back, reckless, on the -one pleasure and the one human tie left to them—the gratification of -their instinct for producing fresh supplies of men. You will applaud -this instinct as divine until at last the excessive supply becomes -a nuisance: there comes a plague of men; and you suddenly discover -that the instinct is diabolic, and set up a cry of “overpopulation.” -But your slaves are beyond caring for your cries; they breed like -rabbits; and their poverty breeds filth, ugliness, dishonesty, disease, -obscenity, drunkenness, and murder. In the midst of the riches which -their labor piles up for you, their misery rises up too and stifles -you. You withdraw in disgust to the other end of the town from them; -you appoint special carriages on your railways and special seats in -your churches and theatres for them; you set your life apart from -theirs by every class barrier you can devise; and yet they swarm about -you still: your face gets stamped with your habitual loathing and -suspicion of them; your ears get so filled with the language of the -vilest of them that you break into it when you lose your self-control; -they poison your life as remorselessly as you have sacrificed theirs -heartlessly. You begin to believe intensely in the devil. Then comes -the terror of their revolting; the drilling and arming of bodies of -them to keep down the rest; the prison, the hospital, paroxysms of -frantic coercion, followed by paroxysms of frantic charity. And in the -meantime, the population continues to increase!</p> - - -<h4>“<span class="smcap">Illth.</span>”</h4> - -<p>It is sometimes said that during this grotesquely hideous march of -civilization from bad to worse, wealth is increasing side by side -with misery. Such a thing is eternally impossible; wealth is steadily -decreasing with the spread of poverty. But riches are increasing, which -is quite another thing. The total of the exchange values produced in -the country annually is mounting perhaps by leaps and bounds. But the -accumulation of riches, and consequently of an excessive purchasing -power, in the hands of a class, soon satiates that class with socially -useful wealth, and sets them offering a price for luxuries. The moment -a price is to be had for a luxury, it acquires exchange<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[19]</span> value, and -labor is employed to produce it. A New York lady, for instance, having -a nature of exquisite sensibility, orders an elegant rosewood and -silver coffin, upholstered in pink satin, for her dead dog. It is made; -and meanwhile a live child is prowling barefooted and hunger-stunted in -the frozen gutter outside. The exchange-value of the coffin is counted -as part of the national wealth; but a nation which cannot afford food -and clothing for its children cannot be allowed to pass as wealthy -because it has provided a pretty coffin for a dead dog. Exchange value -itself, in fact, has become bedevilled like everything else, and -represents, no longer utility, but the cravings of lust, folly, vanity, -gluttony, and madness, technically described by genteel economists as -“effective demand.” Luxuries are not social wealth; the machinery for -producing them is not social wealth; labor skilled only to manufacture -them is not socially useful labor; the men, women, and children who -make a living by producing them are no more self-supporting than -the idle rich for whose amusement they are kept at work. It is the -habit of counting as wealth the exchange values involved in these -transactions that makes us fancy that the poor are starving in the -midst of plenty. They are starving in the midst of plenty of jewels, -velvets, laces, equipages, and race-horses; but not in the midst of -plenty of food. In the things that are wanted for the welfare of the -people we are abjectly poor; and England’s social policy to-day may be -likened to the domestic policy of those adventuresses who leave their -children half-clothed and half-fed in order to keep a carriage and -deal with a fashionable dressmaker. But it is quite true that whilst -wealth and welfare are decreasing, productive power is increasing; and -nothing but the perversion of this power to the production of socially -useless commodities prevents the apparent wealth from becoming real. -The purchasing power that commands luxuries in the hands of the rich, -would command true wealth in the hands of all. Yet private property -must still heap the purchasing power upon the few rich and withdraw it -from the many poor. So that, in the end, the subject of the one boast -that private property can make—the great accumulation of so-called -“wealth” which it points so proudly to as the result of its power to -scourge men and women daily to prolonged and intense toil, turns out -to be a simulacrum. With all its energy, its Smilesian “self-help,” -its merchant-princely<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[20]</span> enterprise, its ferocious sweating and -slave-driving, its prodigality of blood, sweat and tears, what has it -heaped up, over and above the pittance of its slaves? Only a monstrous -pile of frippery, some tainted class literature and class art, and not -a little poison and mischief.</p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>This, then, is the economic analysis which convicts Private Property of -being unjust even from the beginning, and utterly impossible as a final -solution of even the individualist aspect of the problem of adjusting -the share of the worker in the distribution of wealth to the labor -incurred by him in its production. All attempts yet made to construct -true societies upon it have failed; the nearest things to societies so -achieved have been civilizations, which have rotted into centres of -vice and luxury, and eventually been swept away by uncivilized races. -That our own civilization is already in an advanced stage of rottenness -may be taken as statistically proved. That further decay instead of -improvement must ensue if the institution of private property be -maintained, is economically certain. Fortunately, private property -in its integrity is not now practicable. Although the safety-valve -of emigration has been furiously at work during this century, yet -the pressure of population has forced us to begin the restitution -to the people of the sums taken from them for the ground landlords, -holders of tenant right, and capitalists, by the imposition of an -income tax, and by compelling them to establish out of their revenues -a national system of education, besides imposing restrictions—as yet -only of the forcible-feeble sort—on their terrible power of abusing -the wage contract. These, however, are dealt with by <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Sidney Webb -in the historic essay which follows. I should not touch upon them at -all, were it not that experience has lately convinced all economists -that no exercise in abstract economics, however closely deduced, is -to be trusted unless it can be experimentally verified by tracing -its expression in history. It is true that the process which I have -presented as a direct development of private property between free -exchangers had to work itself out in the Old World indirectly and -tortuously through a struggle with political and religious institutions -and survivals quite antagonistic to it. It is true that cultivation -did not begin in Western Europe with the solitary emigrant pre-empting -his private property, but with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[21]</span> the tribal communes in which arose -subsequently the assertion of the right of the individual to private -judgment and private action against the tyranny of primitive society. -It is true that cultivation has not proceeded by logical steps from -good land to less good; from less good to bad; and from bad to worse: -the exploration of new countries and new regions, and the discovery of -new uses for old products, has often made the margin of cultivation -more fruitful than the centre, and, for the moment (whilst the centre -was shifting to the margin), turned the whole movement of rent and -wages directly counter to the economic theory. Nor is it true that, -taking the world as one country, cultivation has yet spread from the -snowline to the water’s edge. There is free land still for the poorest -East End match-box maker if she could get there, reclaim the wilderness -there, speak the language there, stand the climate there, and be -fed, clothed, and housed there whilst she cleared her farm; learned -how to cultivate it; and waited for the harvest. Economists have -been ingenious enough to prove that this alternative really secures -her independence; but I shall not waste time in dealing with that. -Practically, if there is no free land in England, the economic analysis -holds good of England, in spite of Siberia, Central Africa, and the -Wild West. Again, it is not immediately true that men are governed in -production solely by a determination to realize the maximum of exchange -value. The impulse to production often takes specific direction in the -first instance; and a man will insist on producing pictures or plays -although he might gain more money by producing boots or bonnets. But, -his specific impulse once gratified, he will make as much money as he -can. He will sell his picture or play for a hundred pounds rather than -for fifty. In short, though there is no such person as the celebrated -“economic man,” man being wilful rather than rational, yet when the -wilful man has had his way he will take what else he can get; and so -he always does appear, finally if not primarily, as the economic man. -On the whole, history, even in the Old World, goes the way traced -by the economist. In the New World the correspondence is exact. The -United States and the Colonies have been peopled by fugitives from -the full-blown individualism of Western Europe, pre-empting private -property precisely as assumed in this investigation of the conditions -of cultivation. The economic relations of these cultivators have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[22]</span> not -since put on any of the old political disguises. Yet among them, in -confirmation of the validity of our analysis, we see all the evils of -our old civilizations growing up; and though with them the end is not -yet, still it is from them to us that the great recent revival of the -cry for nationalization of the land has come, articulated by a man who -had seen the whole tragedy of private property hurried through its acts -with unprecedented speed in the mushroom cities of America.</p> - -<p>On Socialism the analysis of the economic action of Individualism -bears as a discovery, in the private appropriation of land, of the -source of those unjust privileges against which Socialism is aimed. -It is practically a demonstration that public property in land is the -basic economic condition of Socialism. But this does not involve at -present a literal restoration of the land to the people. The land is -at present in the hands of the people: its proprietors are for the -most part absentees. The modern form of private property is simply a -legal claim to take a share of the produce of the national industry -year by year without working for it. It refers to no special part -or form of that produce; and in process of consumption its revenue -cannot be distinguished from earnings, so that the majority of -persons, accustomed to call the commodities which form the income -of the proprietor his private property, and seeing no difference -between them and the commodities which form the income of a worker, -extend the term private property to the worker’s subsistence also, -and can only conceive an attack on private property as an attempt to -empower everybody to rob everybody else all round. But the income of a -private proprietor can be distinguished by the fact that he obtains it -unconditionally and gratuitously by private right against the public -weal, which is incompatible with the existence of consumers who do not -produce. Socialism involves discontinuance of the payment of these -incomes, and addition of the wealth so saved to incomes derived from -labor. As we have seen, incomes derived from private property consist -partly of economic rent; partly of pensions, also called rent, obtained -by the sub-letting of tenant rights; and partly of a form of rent -called interest, obtained by special adaptations of land to production -by the application of capital: all these being finally paid out of the -difference between the produce of the worker’s labor and the price -of that labor sold in the open market for wages, salary,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[23]</span> fees, or -profits.<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> The whole, except economic rent, can be added directly to -the incomes of the workers by simply discontinuing its exaction from -them. Economic rent, arising as it does from variations of fertility -or advantages of situation, must always be held as common or social -wealth, and used, as the revenues raised by taxation are now used, for -public purposes, among which Socialism would make national insurance -and the provision of capital matters of the first importance.</p> - -<p>The economic problem of Socialism is thus solved; and the political -question of how the economic solution is to be practically applied -does not come within the scope of this essay. But if we have got -as far as an intellectual conviction that the source of our social -misery is no eternal well-spring of confusion and evil, but only an -artificial system susceptible of almost infinite modification and -readjustment—nay, of practical demolition and substitution at the will -of Man, then a terrible weight will be lifted from the minds of all -except those who are, whether avowedly to themselves or not, clinging -to the present state of things from base motives. We have had in this -century a stern series of lessons on the folly of believing anything -for no better reason than that it is pleasant to believe it. It was -pleasant to look round with a consciousness of possessing a thousand -a year, and say, with Browning’s David, “All’s love; and all’s law.” -It was pleasant to believe that the chance we were too lazy to take in -this world would come back to us in another. It was pleasant to believe -that a benevolent hand was guiding the steps of society; overruling -all evil appearances for good; and making poverty here the earnest of -a great blessedness and reward hereafter. It was pleasant to lose the -sense of worldly inequality in the contemplation of our equality before -God. But utilitarian questioning and scientific answering turned all -this tranquil optimism into the blackest pessimism. Nature was shewn -to us as “red in tooth and claw”: if the guiding hand were indeed -benevolent, then it could not be omnipotent; so that our trust in it -was broken: if it were omnipotent, it could not be benevolent; so that -our love of it turned to fear and hatred. We had never admitted that -the other world, which was to compensate for the sorrows of this, was -open to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[24]</span> horses and apes (though we had not on that account been any -the more merciful to our horses); and now came Science to shew us the -corner of the pointed ear of the horse on our own heads, and present -the ape to us as our blood relation. No proof came of the existence of -that other world and that benevolent power to which we had left the -remedy of the atrocious wrongs of the poor; proof after proof came -that what we called Nature knew and cared no more about our pains -and pleasures than we know or care about the tiny creatures we crush -underfoot as we walk through the fields. Instead of at once perceiving -that this meant no more than that Nature was unmoral and indifferent, -we relapsed into a gross form of devil worship, and conceived Nature -as a remorselessly malignant power. This was no better than the old -optimism, and infinitely gloomier. It kept our eyes still shut to the -truth that there is no cruelty and selfishness outside Man himself; -and that his own active benevolence can combat and vanquish both. When -the Socialist came forward as a meliorist on these lines, the old -school of political economists, who could see no alternative to private -property, put forward in proof of the powerlessness of benevolent -action to arrest the deadly automatic production of poverty by the -increase of population, the very analysis I have just presented. Their -conclusions exactly fitted in with the new ideas. It was Nature at -it again—the struggle for existence—the remorseless extirpation of -the weak—the survival of the fittest—in short, natural selection -at work. Socialism seemed too good to be true: it was passed by as -merely the old optimism foolishly running its head against the stone -wall of modern science. But Socialism now challenges individualism, -scepticism, pessimism, worship of Nature personified as a devil, -on their own ground of science. The science of the production and -distribution of wealth is Political Economy. Socialism appeals to -that science, and, turning on Individualism its own guns, routs it -in incurable disaster. Henceforth the bitter cynic who still finds -the world an eternal and unimprovable doghole, with the placid person -of means who repeats the familiar misquotation, “The poor ye shall -have always with you,” lose their usurped place among the cultured, -and pass over to the ranks of the ignorant, the shallow, and the -superstitious. As for the rest of us, since we were taught to revere -proprietary respectability in our unfortunate childhood, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[25]</span> since we -found our childish hearts so hard and unregenerate that they secretly -hated and rebelled against respectability in spite of that teaching, -it is impossible to express the relief with which we discover that -our hearts were all along right, and that the current respectability -of to-day is nothing but a huge inversion of righteous and scientific -social order weltering in dishonesty, uselessness, selfishness, wanton -misery, and idiotic waste of magnificent opportunities for noble and -happy living. It was terrible to feel this, and yet to fear that it -could not be helped—that the poor must starve and make you ashamed -of your dinner—that they must shiver and make you ashamed of your -warm overcoat. It is to economic science—once the Dismal, now the -Hopeful—that we are indebted for the discovery that though the evil -is enormously worse than we knew, yet it is not eternal—not even very -long lived, if we only bestir ourselves to make an end of it.</p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> “Principles of Political Economy,” <abbr title="volume">Vol.</abbr> I, Index to <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> -xvi (1865).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> “Manual of Political Economy,” Book II, <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> iii, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 116 -(1876).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> “Economics of Industry,” Book II, <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> iii, <abbr title="section">sec.</abbr> 3, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 84 -(1879).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> “Principles of Political Economy,” Book II, <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> vii, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> -301 (1883).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> “Brief Text-book of Political Economy,” <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> ii, <abbr title="section">sec.</abbr> -216, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 173 (1885).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> “Principles of Political Economy and Taxation,” <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> ii. -<abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 34 (1817).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> Profit is here used colloquially to denote the excess of -the value of an article over its cost.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> When one of the conditions of earning a wage is the -keeping up of a certain state, subsistence wages may reach a figure -to which the term seems ludicrously inappropriate. For example, a -fashionable physician in London cannot save out of £1,000 a year; and -the post of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland can only be filled by a man who -brings considerable private means to the aid of his official salary of -£20,000.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> The current rate must, under present conditions, -eventually fall to zero, and even become “negative.” By that time -shares which now bring in a dividend of 100 per cent, may very possibly -bring in 200 or more. Yet the fall of the rate has been mistaken for a -tendency of interest to disappear. It really indicates a tendency of -interest to increase.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> This excess of the product of labor over its price is -treated as a single category with impressive effect by Karl Marx, who -called it “surplus value” (<i>mehrwerth</i>).</p> - -</div> -</div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[26]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="HISTORIC">HISTORIC.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY SIDNEY WEBB.</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">The Development of the Democratic Ideal.</span></h4> - -<p>In discussing the historic groundwork of Socialism, it is worth -remembering that no special claim is made for Socialism in the -assertion that it possesses a basis in history. Just as every human -being has an ancestry, unknown to him though it may be; so every idea, -every incident, every movement has in the past its own long chain of -causes, without which it could not have been. Formerly we were glad to -let the dead bury their dead: nowadays we turn lovingly to the records, -whether of persons or things; and we busy ourselves willingly among -origins, even without conscious utilitarian end. We are no longer -proud of having ancestors, since every one has them; but we are more -than ever interested in our ancestors, now that we find in them the -fragments which compose our very selves. The historic ancestry of the -English social organization during the present century stands witness -to the irresistible momentum of the ideas which Socialism denotes. The -record of the century in English social history begins with the trial -and hopeless failure of an almost complete industrial individualism, -in which, however, unrestrained private ownership of land and capital -was accompanied by subjection to a political oligarchy. So little -element of permanence was there in this individualistic order that, -with the progress of political emancipation, private ownership of the -means of production has been, in one direction or another, successively -regulated, limited and superseded, until it may now fairly be claimed -that the Socialist philosophy of to-day is but the conscious and -explicit assertion of principles of social organization which have been -already in great part unconsciously<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[27]</span> adopted. The economic history -of the century is an almost continuous record of the progress of -Socialism.<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> - -<p>Socialism, too, has in the record of its internal development a history -of its own. Down to the present generation, the aspirant after social -regeneration naturally vindicated the practicability of his ideas by -offering an elaborate plan with specifications of a new social order -from which all contemporary evils were eliminated. Just as Plato had -his Republic and Sir Thomas More his Utopia, so Babœuf had his Charter -of Equality, Cabet his Icaria, <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Simon his Industrial System, and -Fourier his ideal Phalanstery. Robert Owen spent a fortune in pressing -upon an unbelieving generation his New Moral World; and even Auguste -Comte, superior as he was to many of the weaknesses of his time, must -needs add a detailed Polity to his Philosophy of Positivism.</p> - -<p>The leading feature of all these proposals was what may be called their -statical character. The ideal society was represented as in perfectly -balanced equilibrium, without need or possibility of future organic -alteration. Since their day we have learned that social reconstruction -must not be gone at in this fashion. Owing mainly to the efforts of -Comte, Darwin and Herbert Spencer, we can no longer think of the -ideal society as an unchanging state. The social ideal, from being -static, has become dynamic. The necessity of the constant growth and -development of the social organism has become axiomatic. No philosopher -now looks for anything but the gradual evolution of the new order -from the old, without breach of continuity or abrupt change of the -entire social tissue at any point during the process. The new becomes -itself old, often before it is consciously recognized as new; and -history shews us no example of the sudden substitutions of Utopian and -revolutionary romance.</p> - -<p>Though Socialists have learnt this lesson<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> better than most<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[28]</span> of -their opponents, the common criticism of Socialism has not yet noted -the change, and still deals mainly with the obsolete Utopias of the -pre-evolutionary age. Parodies of the domestic details of an imaginary -Phalanstery, and homilies on the failure of Brook Farm or Icaria, may -be passed over as belated and irrelevant now that Socialists are only -advocating the conscious adoption of a principle of social organization -which the world has already found to be the inevitable outcome of -Democracy and the Industrial Revolution. For Socialism is by this time -a wave surging throughout all Europe; and for want of a grasp of the -series of apparently unconnected events by which and with which it has -been for two generations rapidly coming upon us—for want, in short, -of knowledge of its intellectual history, we in England to-day see -our political leaders in a general attitude of astonishment at the -changing face of current politics; both great parties drifting vaguely -before a nameless undercurrent which they fail utterly to recognize or -understand.<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> With some dim impression that Socialism is one of the -Utopian dreams they remember to have heard comfortably disposed of in -their academic youth as the impossible ideal of Humanity-intoxicated -Frenchmen, they go their ways through the nineteenth century as a -countryman blunders through Cheapside. One or two are history fanciers, -learned in curious details of the past: the present eludes these no -less than the others. They are so near to the individual events that -they are blind to the onward sweep of the column. They cannot see the -forest for the trees.</p> - -<p>History not only gives the clue to the significance of contemporary -events; it also enables us to understand those who have not yet found -that clue. We learn to class men and ideas in a kind of geological -order in time. The Comte de Paris gives us excellent proofs that -in absolute monarchy lies the only safety of social order. He is -a survival: the type flourished in the sixteenth century; and the -splendid fossils of that age can be studied in any historic museum. -Lord Bramwell will give cogent reasons for the belief that absolute -freedom of contract, subject to the trifling exception of a drastic -criminal law, will ensure a perfect State. His lordship is a survival -from a nearer epoch: about 1840 this was as far as social science had -got; and there are still persons who have learnt nothing of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[29]</span> later -date. When I see the Hipparion at South Kensington I do not take his -unfamiliar points to be those of a horse of a superior kind: I know -that he is an obsolete and superseded pattern, from which the horse has -developed. Historic fossils are more dangerous; for they are left at -large, and are not even excluded from Downing Street or Westminster. -But against the stream of tendencies they are ultimately powerless. -Though they sometimes appear victorious, each successive struggle takes -place further down the current which they believe themselves to be -resisting.</p> - -<p>The main stream which has borne European society towards Socialism -during the past one hundred years is the irresistible progress of -Democracy. De Tocqueville drove and hammered this truth into the -reluctant ears of the Old World two generations ago; and we have all -pretended to carry it about as part of our mental furniture ever -since. But like most epigrammatic commonplaces, it is not generally -realized; and De Tocqueville’s book has, in due course, become a -classic which every one quotes and nobody reads. The progress of -Democracy is, in fact, often imagined, as by Sir Henry Maine, to -be merely the substitution of one kind of political machinery for -another; and there are many political Democrats to-day who cannot -understand why social or economic matters should be mixed up with -politics at all. It was not for this that they broke the power of -the aristocracy: they were touched not so much with love of the many -as with hatred of the few;<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> and, as has been acutely said—though -usually by foolish persons—they are Radicals merely because they are -not themselves lords. But it will not long be possible for any man to -persist in believing that the political organization of society can be -completely altered without corresponding changes in economic and social -relations. De Tocqueville expressly pointed out that the progress of -Democracy meant nothing less than a complete dissolution of the nexus -by which society was held together under the old <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">régime</i>. This -dissolution is followed by a period of anarchic spiritual isolation -of the individual from his fellows, and to that extent by a general -denial of the very idea of society. But man is a social animal; and -after more or less interval there necessarily comes into existence a -new nexus, differing so entirely from the old-fashioned<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[30]</span> organization -that the historic fossil goes about denying that it is a nexus at all, -or that any new nexus is possible or desirable. To him, mostly through -lack of economics, the progress of Democracy is nothing more than the -destruction of old political privileges; and, naturally enough, few can -see any beauty in mere dissolution and destruction. Those few are the -purely political Radicals abhorred of Comte and Carlyle: they are in -social matters the empiricist survivals from a pre-scientific age.</p> - -<p>The mere Utopians, on the other hand, who wove the baseless fabric of -their visions of reconstructed society on their own private looms, -equally failed, as a rule, to comprehend the problem of the age. They -were, in imagination, resuscitated Joseph the Seconds, benevolent -despots who would have poured the old world, had it only been fluid, -into their new moulds. Against their crude plans the Statesman, the -Radical, and the Political Economist were united; for they took no -account of the blind social forces which they could not control, -and which went on inexorably working out social salvation in ways -unsuspected by the Utopian.</p> - -<p>In the present Socialist movement these two streams are united: -advocates of social reconstruction have learnt the lesson of Democracy, -and know that it is through the slow and gradual turning of the popular -mind to new principles that social reorganization bit by bit comes. -All students of society who are abreast of their time, Socialists -as well as Individualists, realize that important organic changes -can only be (1) democratic, and thus acceptable to a majority of the -people, and prepared for in the minds of all; (2) gradual, and thus -causing no dislocation, however rapid may be the rate of progress; -(3) not regarded as immoral by the mass of the people, and thus not -subjectively demoralizing to them; and (4) in this country at any rate, -constitutional and peaceful. Socialists may therefore be quite at one -with Radicals in their political methods. Radicals, on the other hand, -are perforce realizing that mere political levelling is insufficient to -save a State from anarchy and despair. Both sections have been driven -to recognize that the root of the difficulty is economic; and there is -every day a wider consensus that the inevitable outcome of Democracy is -the control by the people themselves, not only of their own political -organization, but, through that also, of the main instruments<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[31]</span> of -wealth production; the gradual substitution of organized co-operation -for the anarchy of the competitive struggle; and the consequent -recovery, in the only possible way, of what John Stuart Mill calls “the -enormous share which the possessors of the instruments of industry are -able to take from the produce.”<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> The economic side of the democratic -ideal is, in fact, Socialism itself.</p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">The Disintegration of the Old Synthesis.</span></h4> - -<p>At the middle of the last century Western Europe was still organized on -a system of which the basis was virtually a surviving feudalism. The -nexus between man and man was essentially a relation of superiority and -inferiority. Social power still rested either with the monarch, or with -the owners of large landed estates. Some inroads had already been made -in the perfect symmetry of the organization, notably by the growth of -towns, and the rise of the still comparatively small trading class; but -the bulk of the population was arranged in an hierarchical series of -classes, linked to one another by the bond of Power.</p> - -<p>We are apt to think of England as differing in this respect from -Continental Europe, and to imagine that our popular freedom was won -in 1688, if not in 1648, or even as far back as Magna Charta itself. -But as regards the people at large, this was, in the main, merely a -difference in political form. In England the aristocratic oligarchy had -prevailed over the monarch; in France the King had defeated the Fronde. -For the mass of the people in either country there was nothing but -obedience.</p> - -<p>Even in England the whole political administration was divided -between the king and the great families; and not one person in 500 -possessed so much as a vote. As lately as 1831 one hundred and fifty -persons returned a majority of the House of Commons (Molesworth, -“History of the Reform Bill,” <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 347). The Church, once a universal -democratic organization of international fraternity, had become a mere -<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">appanage</i> of the landed gentry. The administration of justice -and of the executive government was entirely in their hands, while -Parliament<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[32]</span> was filled with their leaders or nominees. No avenue of -advancement existed for even exceptionally gifted sons of the people; -and the masses found themselves born into a position of lifelong -dependence upon a class of superior birth.</p> - -<p>The economic organization was of a similar character. Two-thirds of -the population tilled the soil, and dwelt in lonely hamlets scattered -about the still sparsely inhabited country. Though possessing the -remnants of ancient communal rights, they were practically dependent on -the farmers of the parish, who fixed their wages by a constant tacit -conspiracy.<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> The farmers themselves were the obedient serfs of the -large proprietors, to whom they paid a customary rent. Though nominally -free to move, both farmers and laborers were practically fettered to -the manor by their ignorance and their poverty;<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> and though the lord -had lost the criminal jurisdiction of his manorial courts, his powers -as Justice of the Peace formed a full equivalent. His unrestrained -ownership of the land enabled him to take for himself as rent the -whole advantage of all but the very worst of the soils in use; and -the lingering manorial rights gave him toll even from that worst. -Throughout the countryside his word was law and his power irresistible. -It was a world whose nexus was might, economic and political, tempered -only by custom and lack of stimulus to change. The poor were not -necessarily worse off in material matters than they are now; the -agricultural laborer, indeed, was apparently better off in 1750 than -at any other time between 1450 and 1850.<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> But it was a world still -mainly mediæval in political, in economic, and in social relations; -a world of status and of permanent social inequalities not differing -essentially from the feudalism of the past.</p> - -<p>The system had, however, already begun to decay. The rise of the towns -by the growth of trade gradually created new centres of independence -and new classes who broke the bonds of innate status. The intrusion -of the moneyed city classes and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[33]</span> the Indian “Nabobs” into the rural -districts tended to destroy the feudal idea. The growth of new sects -in religion made fresh points of individual resistance, degenerating -often into spiritual anarchy or unsocial quietism. The spread of -learning built up a small but active disintegrating force of those -who had detected the shams around them. But the real Perseus who was -to free the people from their political bondage was Newcomen or Watt, -Hargreaves or Crompton, Kay or Arkwright, whichever may be considered -to have contributed the main stroke towards the Industrial Revolution -of the last century.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> From the inventions of these men came the -machine industry with its innumerable secondary results—the Factory -System and the upspringing of the Northern and Midland industrial -towns,<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> and the evangelization of the waste places of the earth -by the sale of grey shirtings. Throughout one-third of England the -manor gave way to the mill or the mine; and the feudal lord had to -slacken his hold of political and social power in order to give full -play to the change which enriched him with boundless rents and mining -royalties. And so it happened in England that the final collapse of -mediævalism came, not by the Great Rebellion nor by the Whig Treason of -1688, nor yet by the rule of the Great Commoner, but by the Industrial -Revolution of the eighteenth century, which created the England of -to-day. Within a couple of generations the squire faded away before -the mill-owner; and feudalism lingered thenceforth only in the rapidly -diminishing rural districts, and in the empty remnants of ceremonial -organization. The mediæval arrangement, in fact, could not survive the -fall of the cottage industry; and it is, fundamentally, the use of new -motors which has been for a generation destroying the individualist -conception of property. The landlord and the capitalist are both -finding that the steam-engine is a Frankenstein which they had better -not have raised; for with it comes inevitably urban Democracy, the -study of Political Economy, and Socialism.</p> - -<p>The event which brought to a head the influences making for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[34]</span> political -change was the French Revolution. The fall of the Bastille was hailed -by all who had been touched by the new ideas. “How much the greatest -event it is that ever happened in the world! and how much the best!” -wrote Charles James Fox.<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> It shewed, or seemed to shew, to men that -a genuine social reconstruction was not only desirable, but possible. -The National Assembly, respectable old oligarchy as it was, pointed the -way to legislative fields not even yet completely worked out.</p> - -<p>When the rulers of England perceived that in France at least Humpty -Dumpty was actually down, the effect at first was to tighten the -existing organization. The mildest agitation was put down with a -cruelly strong hand. The Whig party in the House of Commons sank to -half-a-dozen members. Prices were kept up and wages down, while the -heaviest possible load of taxation was imposed on the suffering people. -Then came the Peace, and Castlereagh’s “White Terror,” culminating in -the “massacre of Peterloo” (1819) and Lord Sidmouth’s infamous “Six -Acts.” But the old order was doomed. The suicide of Castlereagh was -not only the end of the man, but also the sign of the collapse of the -system. With a series of political wrenches there came the Repeal of -the Test and Corporation Acts (1828), Catholic Emancipation (1829), the -beginnings of legal and administrative reform, and finally the great -Reform Bill of 1832, by which the reign of the middle class superseded -aristocratic rule. But the people were no more enfranchised than they -had been before. The Factory had beaten the Manor for the benefit, not -of the factory hand, but of the millowner. Democracy was at the gates; -but it was still on the wrong side of them. Its entry, however, was -only a matter of time. Since 1832 English political history is the -record of the reluctant enfranchisement of one class after another, by -mere force of the tendencies of the age. None of these enfranchised -classes has ever sincerely desired to admit new voters to share the -privileges and submerge the power which it had won; but each political -party in turn has been driven to “shoot Niagara” in order to compete -with its opponents. The Whig Bill of 1832 enfranchised the middle-class -for Parliament: the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 gave<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[35]</span> them the -control of the provincial towns. After a generation of agitation, -it was ultimately the Tory party which gave the townspeople in 1867 -Household Suffrage. Eleven years later a Conservative majority passed -Sir Charles Dilke’s Act enfranchising the tenement occupier (1878). -In 1885 the Liberals, intending permanently to ruin their opponents, -gave the vote to the agricultural laborer; and last year (1888) it was -the Tories, not to be outdone, who gave him the control of the local -administration of the counties, and placed the government of London in -the hands of a popularly elected council. Neither party can claim much -credit for its reform bills, extorted as they have been, not by belief -in Democracy, but by fear of the opposing faction. Even now the citizen -is tricked out of his vote by every possible legal and administrative -technicality; so that more than one-third of our adult men are -unenfranchised,<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> together with the whole of the other sex. Neither -the Conservative party nor the self-styled “Party of the Masses” gives -proof of any real desire to give the vote to this not inconsiderable -remnant; but both sides pay lip-homage to Democracy; and everyone knows -that it is merely a waiting race between them as to which shall be -driven to take the next step. The virtual completion of the political -revolution is already in sight; and no more striking testimony can be -given of the momentum of the new ideas which the Fall of the Bastille -effectually spread over the world than this democratic triumph in -England, within less than a century, over the political mediævalism of -ten centuries growth.</p> - -<p>The full significance of this triumph is as yet unsuspected by the -ordinary politician. The industrial evolution has left the stranger -a landless stranger in his own country. The political evolution is -rapidly making him its ruler. Samson is feeling for his grip on the -pillars.</p> - -<div> -<h4><span class="smcap">The Period of Anarchy.</span></h4> - -<p>The result of the industrial revolution, with its dissolution of -mediævalism amid an impetuous reaction against the bureaucratic tyranny -of the past, was to leave all the new elements of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[36]</span> society in a state -of unrestrained license. Individual liberty, in the sense of freedom to -privately appropriate the means of production, reached its maximum at -the commencement of the century. No sentimental regulations hindered -the free employment of land and capital to the greatest possible -pecuniary gain of the proprietors, however many lives of men, women -and children were used up in the process. Ignorant or unreflecting -capitalists still speak of that terrible time with exultation. “It was -not five per cent or ten per cent,” says one, “but thousands per cent -that made the fortunes of Lancashire.”</p> - -<p><abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert Spencer and those who agree in his worship of -Individualism<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> apparently desire to bring back the legal position -which made possible the “white slavery” of which the “sins of -legislators” have deprived us; but no serious attempt has ever been -made to get repealed any one of the Factory Acts. Women working half -naked in the coal mines; young children dragging trucks all day in the -foul atmosphere of the underground galleries; infants bound to the -loom for fifteen hours in the heated air of the cotton mill, and kept -awake only by the onlooker’s lash; hours of labor for all, young and -old, limited only by the utmost capabilities of physical endurance; -complete absence of the sanitary provisions necessary to a rapidly -growing population: these and other nameless iniquities will be found -recorded as the results of freedom of contract and complete <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser -faire</i> in the impartial pages of successive blue-book reports.<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> -But the Liberal mill-owners of the day, aided by some of the political -economists, stubbornly resisted every attempt to interfere with their -freedom to use “their” capital and “their” hands as they found most -profitable, and (like their successors to-day) predicted of each -restriction as it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[37]</span> arrived that it must inevitably destroy the export -trade and deprive them of all profit whatsoever.</p> - -<p>But this “acute outbreak of individualism, unchecked by the old -restraints, and invested with almost a religious sanction by a certain -soulless school of writers,”<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> was inevitable, after the economic -blundering of governments in the eighteenth century. Prior to the -scientific investigation of economic laws, men had naturally interfered -in social arrangements with very unsatisfactory results. A specially -extravagant or a specially thrifty king debased the currency, and then -was surprised to find that in spite of stringent prohibitions prices -went up and all good money fled the country. Wise statesmen, to keep -up wages, encouraged the woollen manufactures of England by ruining -those of Ireland, and were then astonished to find English wages cut -by Irish pauper immigration. Benevolent parliaments attempted to raise -the worker’s income by poor law allowances, and then found that they -had lowered it. Christian kings eliminated half the skilled artisans -from their kingdoms, and then found that they had ruined the rest by -disabling industry. Government inspectors ordered how the cloth should -be woven, what patterns should be made, and how broad the piece should -be, until the manufacturers in despair cried out merely to be let alone.</p> - -<p>When the early economists realized how radically wrong had been even -the well-meant attempts to regulate economic relations by legislation, -and how generally these attempts multiplied private monopolies, they -leaned in their deductions heavily towards complete individual liberty. -The administration of a populous state is such a very difficult -matter, and when done on false principles is so certain to be badly -done, that it was natural to advocate rather no administration at all -than the interference of ignorant and interested bunglers. Nature, -glorified by the worship of a famous school of French philosophers -and English poets, and as yet unsuspected of the countless crimes of -“the struggle for existence,” appeared at least more trustworthy than -Castlereagh. Real Democratic administration seemed, in the time of -the “White Terror,” and even under the milder Whig hypocrisy which -succeeded it, hopelessly remote. The best thing to work and fight for -was, apparently,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[38]</span> the reduction to impotence and neutrality of all the -“Powers that Be.” Their influence being for the moment hostile to the -people, it behooved the people to destroy their influence altogether. -And so grew up the doctrine of what Professor Huxley has since called -“Administrative Nihilism.” It was the apotheosis of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laisser Faire, -Laisser Aller</i>.</p> - -<p>Though the economists have since had to bear all the blame for what -nearly everyone now perceives to have been an economic and social -mistake, neither Hume nor Adam Smith caught the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i> -fever to as great an extent as their French contemporaries and -imitators. The English industrial position was not the same as that of -France. The “mercantile system” by which, as by “Fair Trade” to-day, -foreign trade was to be regulated and encouraged according as it tended -to cause the stock of goods, especially coin and bullion, to increase -in the country, was the same on both sides of the Channel. But our -political revolution had already been partly accomplished; and the -more obvious shackles of feudalism had been long since struck off. No -Englishman was compelled to grind his corn at the mill of the lord of -the manor;<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> to give up unpaid days to plough the lord’s field and -cart the lord’s hay; or to spend his nights in beating the waters of -the lord’s marsh so that the croaking of the frogs might not disturb -the lord’s repose. Our labor dues had long before been commuted for -money payments; and these had become light owing to the change in -currency values. Our apprenticeship laws and guild regulations were -becoming rapidly inoperative. No vexatious excise or gabelle hampered -our manufactures.</p> - -<p>Tyranny there was, enough and to spare, and economic spoliation; but -they did not take the form of personal interferences and indignities. -The non-noble Frenchman was bond, and he knew it; the middle-class -Englishman to a great extent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[39]</span> thought himself free: his economic -servitude, though it galled him, was not clearly distinguishable -from the niggardliness of nature. The landlord in France was an -obvious tyrant: here he certainly caused (by the abstraction of the -economic rent) an artificial barrenness of the workers’ labor; but the -barrenness was so old and had been so constant that it was not seen to -be artificial, and was not resented as such. No peasant rebels against -the blight. Accordingly, we have, since 1381, never had in England a -burning of the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">chateaux</i>; and, accordingly, too, Adam Smith is -no complete champion of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i>, though his great work -was effective mainly in sweeping away foreign trade restrictions and -regulations, and in giving viability to labor by establishing the -laborer’s geographical freedom to move and to enter into the wage -contract when and where he best could. The English economists, stopping -illogically short of the complete freedom preached by Rousseau and -Godwin and the scientific Anarchists of to-day, advocated just as much -freedom as sufficed to make the fortunes of Lancashire capitalists and -to create the modern proletariat. The Utilitarians are appropriately -coupled with the Political Economists in connexion with this phase of -thought. Although Adam Smith did not belong to their school, almost -the whole work of developing and popularizing the new science was done -by them. It was not until after the Peace—when Bentham and James Mill -were in full vigor, and soon to be reinforced by Austin, Villiers, -John Stuart Mill, Roebuck, Grote, Ricardo, and others—that Political -Economy became a force in England. The motive and enthusiasm for the -new science undoubtedly came from the Utilitarian ethics. If the sole -masters of man were pleasure and pain, the knowledge of the natural -laws expressing the course of social action, and thus regulating -pleasure and pain, became of vital importance. If it is God’s will, as -Paley and Austin asserted, that men should seek for happiness, than -the study of how to obtain economic comfort becomes a sacred duty, -and has ever been so regarded by such rational divines as Malthus, -Chalmers, Maurice, Kingsley, and the young High Church party of to-day. -Christianity and the course of modern thought began to join hands; -and we may see in Bishop Berkeley and Paley the forerunners of such a -development as the Guild of <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Matthew.<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[40]</span></p> - -<p>The Utilitarian philosophy, besides aiding in the popularization -of economic science, strongly influenced its early character. The -tendency to <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laisser Faire</i> inherited from the country and -century of upheaval and revolt against authority, was fostered by -Bentham’s destructive criticism of all the venerable relics of the -past. What is the use of it, he asked, of every shred of social -institution then existing. What is the net result of its being upon -individual happiness? Few of the laws and customs—little, indeed, of -the social organization of that time could stand this test. England -was covered with rotten survivals from bygone circumstances; the whole -administration was an instrument for class domination and parasite -nurture; the progress of the industrial revolution was rapidly making -obsolete all laws, customs, proverbs, maxims, and nursery tales; and -the sudden increase of population was baffling all expectations and -disconcerting all arrangements. At last it came to be carelessly -accepted as the teaching both of philosophy and of experience that -every man must fight for himself; and “the devil take the hindmost” -became the accepted social creed of what was still believed to be a -Christian nation. Utilitarianism became the Protestantism of Sociology, -and “how to make for self and family the best of both worlds” was -assumed to be the duty, as it certainly was the aim, of every practical -Englishman.</p> - -</div> -<h4><span class="smcap">The Intellectual and Moral Revolt, and its Political Outcome.</span></h4> - -<p>The new creed of “Philosophic Radicalism” did not have matters all its -own way. Its doctrines might suit mill-owners and merchant princes, -and all who were able to enjoy the delight of their own strength in -the battle of life. But it was essentially a creed of Murdstones and -Gradgrinds; and the first revolt came from the artistic side. The “nest -of singing birds” at the Lakes would have none of it, though De Quincey -worked out its abstract economics in a manner still unsurpassed. -Coleridge did his best to drown it in German Transcendentalism. Robert -Owen and his following of enthusiastic communistic co-operators -steadfastly held up a loftier ideal. The great mass of the wage earners -never bowed the knee to the principles upon which the current “White -Slavery” was maintained. But the first man who really made a dint in -the individualist shield was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[41]</span> Carlyle, who knew how to compel men to -listen to him. Oftener wrong than right in his particular proposals, he -managed to keep alive the faith in nobler ends than making a fortune -in this world and saving one’s soul in the next. Then came Maurice, -Kingsley, Ruskin, and others who dared to impeach the current middle -class cult; until finally, through Comte and John Stuart Mill, Darwin -and Herbert Spencer, the conception of the Social Organism has at last -penetrated to the minds, though not yet to the books, even of our -professors of Political Economy.</p> - -<p>Meanwhile, caring for none of these things, the practical man had been -irresistibly driven in the same direction. In the teeth of the current -Political Economy, and in spite of all the efforts of the millowning -Liberals, England was compelled to put forth her hand to succor and -protect her weaker members. Any number of Local Improvement Acts, -Drainage Acts, Truck Acts, Mines Regulation Acts, Factory Acts, Public -Health Acts, Adulteration Acts, were passing into law.<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> The liberty -of the property owner to oppress the propertyless by the levy of the -economic tribute of rent and interest began to be circumscribed, pared -away, obstructed and forbidden in various directions. Slice after slice -has gradually been cut from the profits of capital, and therefore -from its selling value, by socially beneficial restrictions on its -user’s liberty to do as he liked with it. Slice after slice has been -cut off the incomes from rent and interest by the gradual shifting of -taxation from consumers to persons enjoying incomes above the average -of the kingdom.<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> Step by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[42]</span> step the political power and political -organization of the country have been used for industrial ends, until -to-day the largest employer of labor is one of the ministers of the -Crown (the Postmaster-General); and almost every conceivable trade -is, somewhere or other, carried on by parish, municipality, or the -National Government itself without the intervention of any middleman -or capitalist. The theorists who denounce the taking by the community -into its own hands of the organization of its own labor as a thing -economically unclean, repugnant to the sturdy individual independence -of Englishmen, and as yet outside the sphere of practical politics, -seldom have the least suspicion of the extent to which it has already -been carried.<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> Besides our international relations and the army, -navy, police, and the courts of justice, the community now carries on -for itself, in some part or another of these islands, the post-office, -telegraphs, carriage of small commodities, coinage, surveys, the -regulation of the currency and note issue, the provision of weights -and measures, the making, sweeping, lighting, and repairing of -streets, roads, and bridges, life insurance, the grant of annuities, -shipbuilding, stockbroking, banking, farming, and money-lending. It -provides for many thousands of us from birth to burial—midwifery, -nursery, education, board and lodging, vaccination, medical attendance, -medicine, public worship, amusements, and interment. It furnishes -and maintains its own museums, parks, art galleries, libraries, -concert-halls, roads, streets, bridges, markets, slaughter-houses, -fire-engines, lighthouses, pilots, ferries, surf-boats, steam-tugs, -life-boats, cemeteries, public baths, washhouses, pounds, harbors, -piers, wharves, hospitals, dispensaries, gasworks, waterworks, -tramways, telegraph cables, allotments, cow meadows, artizans’ -dwellings, schools, churches, and reading-rooms. It carries on and -publishes its own researches in geology, meteorology, statistics, -zoology, geography, and even theology. In our Colonies the English -Government further allows and encourages the communities to provide for -themselves railways, canals, pawn-broking, theatres, forestry, cinchona -farms, irrigation, leper villages, casinos, bathing establishments, -and immigration, and to deal in ballast, guano, quinine, opium, salt, -and what not. Every one of these functions, with those of the army, -navy, police, and courts of justice, were at one time left to private<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[43]</span> -enterprise, and were a source of legitimate individual investment -of capital. Step by step the community has absorbed them, wholly or -partially; and the area of private exploitation has been lessened. -Parallel with this progressive nationalization or municipalization of -industry, there has gone on the elimination of the purely personal -element in business management. The older economists doubted whether -anything but banking and insurance could be carried on by joint -stock enterprise: now every conceivable industry, down to baking and -milk-selling, is successfully managed by the salaried officers of large -corporations of idle shareholders. More than one-third of the whole -business of England, measured by the capital employed,<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> is now done -by joint stock companies, whose shareholders could be expropriated by -the community with no more dislocation of the industries carried on -by them than is caused by the daily purchase of shares on the Stock -Exchange.</p> - -<p>Besides its direct supersession of private enterprise, the State now -registers, inspects, and controls nearly all the industrial functions -which it has not yet absorbed. In addition to births, marriages, -deaths, and electors, the State registers all solicitors, barristers, -notaries, patent agents, brokers, newspaper proprietors, playing-card -makers, brewers, bankers, seamen, captains, mates, doctors, cabmen, -hawkers, pawnbrokers, tobacconists, distillers, plate dealers, -game dealers; all insurance companies, friendly societies, endowed -schools and charities, limited companies, lands, houses, deeds, bills -of sale, compositions, ships, arms, dogs, cabs, omnibuses, books, -plays, pamphlets, newspapers, raw cotton movements, trademarks, and -patents; lodging-houses, public-houses, refreshment-houses, theatres, -music-halls, places of worship, elementary schools, and dancing rooms.</p> - -<p>Nor is the registration a mere form. Most of the foregoing are also -inspected and criticised, as are all railways, tramways, ships, -mines, factories, canal-boats, public conveyances, fisheries, -slaughter-houses, dairies, milkshops, bakeries, baby-farms, gasmeters, -schools of anatomy, vivisection laboratories, explosive works, Scotch -herrings, and common lodging-houses.</p> - -<p>The inspection is often detailed and rigidly enforced. The State in -most of the larger industrial operations prescribes the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[44]</span> age of the -worker, the hours of work, the amount of air, light, cubic space, heat, -lavatory accommodation, holidays and mealtimes; where, when and how -wages shall be paid; how machinery staircases, lift holes, mines and -quarries are to be fenced and guarded; how and when the plant shall -be cleaned, repaired and worked. Even the kind of package in which -some articles shall be sold is duly prescribed, so that the individual -capitalist shall take no advantage of his position. On every side he is -being registered, inspected, controlled and eventually superseded by -the community; and in the meantime he is compelled to cede for public -purposes an ever-increasing share of his rent and interest.</p> - -<p>Even in the fields still abandoned to private enterprise, its -operations are thus every day more closely limited, in order that the -anarchic competition of private greed, which at the beginning of the -century was set up as the only infallible beneficent principle of -social action, may not utterly destroy the State. All this has been -done by “practical” men, ignorant, that is to say, of any scientific -sociology, believing Socialism to be the most foolish of dreams, -and absolutely ignoring, as they thought, all grandiloquent claims -for social reconstruction. Such is the irresistible sweep of social -tendencies, that in their every act they worked to bring about the very -Socialism they despised; and to destroy the Individualistic faith which -they still professed. They builded better than they knew.</p> - -<p>It must by no means be supposed that these beginnings of social -reorganization have been effected, or the proposals for their -extension brought to the front, without the conscious efforts of -individual reformers. The “Zeitgeist” is potent; but it does not pass -Acts of Parliament without legislators, or erect municipal libraries -without town councillors. Though our decisions are moulded by the -circumstances of the time, and the environment at least roughhews our -ends, shape them as we will; yet each generation decides for itself. -It still rests with the individual to resist or promote the social -evolution, consciously or unconsciously, according to his character -and information. The importance of complete consciousness of the -social tendencies of the age lies in the fact that its existence and -comprehensiveness often determine the expediency of our particular -action: we move with less resistance with the stream than against it.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[45]</span></p> - -<p>The general failure to realize the extent to which our unconscious -Socialism has already proceeded—a failure which causes much time -and labor to be wasted in uttering and elaborating on paper the -most ludicrously unpractical anti-Socialistic demonstrations of the -impossibility of matters of daily occurrence—is due to the fact that -few know anything of local administration outside their own town. It is -the municipalities which have done most to “socialize” our industrial -life; and the municipal history of the century is yet unwritten. A few -particulars may here be given as to this progressive “municipalization” -of industry. Most of us know that the local governments have assumed -the care of the roads, streets and bridges, once entirely abandoned -to individual enterprise, as well as the lighting and cleansing of -all public thoroughfares, and the provision of sewers, drains and -“storm-water courses.” It is, perhaps, not so generally known that no -less than £7,500,000 is annually expended on these services in England -and Wales alone, being about five per cent of the rent of the country. -The provision of markets, fairs, harbors, piers, docks, hospitals, -cemeteries and burial-grounds is still shared with private capitalists; -but those in public hands absorb nearly £2,000,000 annually. Parks, -pleasure grounds, libraries, museums, baths and washhouses cost the -public funds over half a million sterling. All these are, however, -comparatively unimportant services. It is in the provision of gas, -water and tramways that local authorities organize labor on a large -scale. Practically half the gas consumers in the kingdom are supplied -by public gas works, which exist in 168 separate localities, with -an annual expenditure of over three millions.<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> It need hardly be -added that the advantage to the public is immense, in spite of the -enormous price paid for the work in many instances; and that the -further municipalization of the gas industry is proceeding with great -rapidity, no fewer than twelve local authorities having obtained loans -for the purpose (and one for electric lighting) in a single year -(Local Government Board Report, 1887-8, c—5526, <abbr title="pages">pp.</abbr> 319-367). With -equal rapidity is the water supply becoming a matter of commercial -organization, the public expenditure already reaching nearly a million -sterling annually. Sixty-five local authorities borrowed money for -water supply in 1887-8,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[46]</span> rural and urban districts being equally -represented (c—5550, <abbr title="pages">pp.</abbr> 319-367). Tramways and ferries are undergoing -the same development. About thirty-one towns, including nearly all -the larger provincial centres, own some or all of their own tramways. -Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham, Oldham, Sunderland and Greenock lease -their undertakings; but among the municipalities Huddersfield has the -good sense to work its lines without any “middleman” intervention, -with excellent public results. The tramway mileage belonging to local -authorities has increased five-fold since 1878, and comprises more than -a quarter of the whole (House of Commons Return, 1887-8, No. 347). The -last important work completed by the Metropolitan Board of Works was -the establishment of a “free steam ferry” on the Thames, charged upon -the rates. This is, in some respects, the most significant development -of all. The difference between a free steam ferry and a free railway is -obviously only one of degree.</p> - -<p>A few more cases are worth mentioning. Glasgow builds and maintains -seven public “common lodging houses”; Liverpool provides science -lectures; Manchester builds and stocks an art gallery; Birmingham -runs schools of design; Leeds creates extensive cattle markets; and -Bradford supplies water below cost price. There are nearly one hundred -free libraries and reading rooms. The minor services now performed by -public bodies are innumerable.<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> This “Municipal Socialism” has been -rendered possible by the creation of a local debt now reaching over -£181,000,000.<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> Nearly £10,000,000 is annually paid as interest and -sinking fund on the debt; and to this extent the pecuniary benefit -of municipalization is diminished. The full advantages<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> of the -public organization of labor remain, besides a considerable pecuniary -profit; whilst the objective<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[47]</span> differentiation of the economic classes -(by the separation of the idle <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">rentier</i> from the manager or -<em>entrepreneur</em>) enormously facilitates popular comprehension of -the nature of the economic tribute known as interest. To the extent, -moreover, that additional charges are thrown upon the rates, the -interest paid to the capitalist is levied mainly at the cost of the -landlord, and we have a corresponding “nationalization” of so much of -the economic rent. The increase in the local rates has been 36 per -cent, or nearly £7,000,000, in eleven years, and is still growing. They -now amount to over twenty-six millions sterling in England and Wales -alone, or about 17 per cent of the rental of the country (C—5550, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> -clxxiv).</p> - -<p>Nor is there any apparent prospect of a slackening of the pace of this -unconscious abandonment of individualism. No member of Parliament -has so much as introduced a Bill to give effect to the anarchist -principles of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert Spencer’s “Man <em>versus</em> the State.” The -not disinterested efforts of the Liberty and Property Defence League -fail to hinder even Conservative Parliament from further Socialistic -legislation. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Gladstone remarked to a friend in 1886 that the Home -Rule question would turn the Liberal party into a Radical party. He -might have said that it would make both parties Socialistic. Free -elementary and public technical education is now practically accepted -on both sides of the House, provided that the so-called “voluntary -schools,” themselves half maintained from public funds, are not -extinguished. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Chamberlain and the younger Conservatives openly -advocate far reaching projects of social reform through state and -municipal agency, as a means of obtaining popular support. The National -Liberal Federation adopts the special taxation of urban ground values -as the main feature in its domestic programme,<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> notwithstanding -that this proposal is characterized by old-fashioned Liberals as sheer -confiscation of so much of the landlords’ property. The London Liberal -and Radical Union, which has <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Morley for its president, even -proposes that the County Council shall have power to rebuild the London -slums at the sole charge of the ground landlord.<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> It is, therefore,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[48]</span> -not surprising that the Trades Union Congress should now twice have -declared in favor of “Land Nationalization” by large majorities, or -that the bulk of the London County Council should be returned on -an essentially Socialistic platform. The whole of the immediately -practicable demands of the most exacting Socialists are, indeed, now -often embodied in the current Radical programme; and the following -exposition of it, from the pages of the <i>Star</i> newspaper, August -8, 1888, may serve as a statement of the current Socialist demands for -further legislation.<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Revision of Taxation.</span></h4> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Object.</i>—Complete shifting of burden from the workers, of -whatever grade, to the recipients of rent and interest, with a view to -the ultimate and gradual extinction of the latter class.</p> - -<p><i>Means.</i>—1. Abolition of all customs and excise duties, except -those on spirits. 2. Increase of income tax, differentiating in favor -of earned as against unearned incomes, and graduating cumulatively by -system of successive levels of abatement. 3. Equalization and increase -of death duties and the use of the proceeds as capital, not income. -4. Shifting of local rates and house duty from occupier to owner, any -contract to the contrary notwithstanding. 5. Compulsory redemption of -existing land tax and reimposition on all ground rents and increased -values. 6. Abolition of fees on licenses for employment. 7. Abolition -of police-court fees.</p> -</div> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Extension of Factory Acts.</span></h4> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Object.</i>—To raise, universally, the standard of comfort by -obtaining the general recognition of a minimum wage and a maximum -working day.</p> - -<p><i>Means.</i>—1. Extension of the general provisions of the Factory -and Workshops Acts (or the Mines Regulation Acts, as the case may -be) to all employers of labor. 2. Compulsory registration of all -employers of more than three (?) workers. 3. Largely increased number -of inspectors, and these to include women, and to be mainly chosen -from the wage-earning class. 4. Immediate reduction of maximum hours -to eight per day in all Government and municipal employment, in all -mines, and in all licensed monopolies such as railways, tramways, -gasworks, waterworks, docks, harbors, etc.; and in any trade in which -a majority of the workers desire it. 5. The compulsory insertion -of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[49]</span> clauses in all contracts for Government or municipal supplies, -providing (<i>a</i>) that there shall be no sub-contracting, -(<i>b</i>) that no worker shall be employed more than eight hours per -day, and (<i>c</i>) that no wages less than a prescribed minimum shall -be paid.</p> -</div> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Educational Reform.</span></h4> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Object.</i>—To enable all, even the poorest, children to obtain -not merely some, but the best education they are capable of.</p> - -<p><i>Means.</i>—1. The immediate abolition of all fees in public -elementary schools, Board or voluntary, with a corresponding increase -in the Government grant. 2. Creation of a Minister for Education, with -control over the whole educational system, from the elementary school -to the University, and over all educational endowments. 3. Provision -of public technical and secondary schools wherever needed, and -creation of abundant public secondary scholarships. 4. Continuation, -in all cases, of elementary education at evening schools. 5. -Registration and inspection of all private educational establishments.</p> -</div> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Re-organization of Poor Law Administration.</span></h4> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Object.</i>—To provide generously, and without stigma, for -the aged, the sick, and those destitute through temporary want of -employment, without relaxing the “tests” against the endowment of -able-bodied idleness.</p> - -<p><i>Means.</i>—1. The separation of the relief of the aged and -the sick from the workhouse system, by a universal system of aged -pensions, and public infirmaries. 2. The industrial organization and -technical education of all able-bodied paupers. 3. The provision of -temporary relief works for the unemployed. 4. The supersession of the -Boards of Guardians by the local municipal authorities.</p> -</div> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Extension of Municipal Activity.</span></h4> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Object.</i>—The gradual public organization of labor for all -public purposes, and the elimination of the private capitalist and -middleman.</p> - -<p><i>Means.</i>—1. The provision of increased facilities for the -acquisition of land, the destruction without compensation of all -dwellings found unfit for habitation, and the provision of artisan -dwellings by the municipality. 2. The facilitation of every extension -of municipal administration, in London and all other towns, of gas, -water, markets, tramways, hospitals, cemeteries, parks, museums, art -galleries, libraries, reading-rooms, schools, docks, harbors, rivers, -etc. 3. The provision of abundant facilities for the acquisition of -land by local rural authorities, for allotments, common pastures, -public halls, reading-rooms, etc.</p> -</div> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Amendment of Political Machinery.</span></h4> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><i>Object.</i>—To obtain the most accurate representation and -expression of the desires of the majority of the people at every -moment.</p> - -<p><i>Means.</i>—1. Reform of registration so as to give a vote, both -Parliamentary and municipal, to every adult. 2. Abolition of any -period of residence as a qualification for registration. 3. Bi-annual -registration<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[50]</span> by special public officer. 4. Annual Parliaments. -5. Payment of election expenses, including postage of election -addresses and polling cards. 6. Payment of all public representatives, -parliamentary, county, or municipal. 7. Second ballot. 8. Abolition or -painless extinction of the House of Lords.<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> -</div> - -<p>This is the programme to which a century of industrial revolution has -brought the Radical working man. Like John Stuart Mill,<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> though less -explicitly, he has turned from mere political Democracy to a complete, -though unconscious, Socialism.<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a></p> - - -<h4><span class="smcap">The New Synthesis.</span></h4> - -<p>It need hardly be said that the social philosophy of the time did -not remain unaffected by the political evolution and the industrial -development. Slowly sinking into men’s minds all this while was the -conception of a new social nexus, and a new end of social life. It -was discovered (or rediscovered) that a society is something more -than an aggregate of so many individual units—that it possesses -existence distinguishable from those of any of its components. A -perfect city became recognized as something more than any number of -good citizens—something to be tried by other tests, and weighed in -other balances than the individual man. The community must necessarily -aim, consciously or not, at its continuance as a community; its life -transcends that of any of its members; and the interests of the -individual unit must often clash with those of the whole. Though -the social organism has itself evolved from the union of individual -men, the individual is now created by the social organism of which -he forms a part: his life is born of the larger life; his attributes -are moulded by the social pressure; his activities, inextricably -interwoven with others, belong to the activity of the whole. Without -the continuance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[51]</span> and sound health of the social organism, no man can -now live or thrive; and its persistence is accordingly his paramount -end. His conscious motive for action may be, nay, always must be, -individual to himself; but where such action proves inimical to the -social welfare, it must sooner or later be checked by the whole, lest -the whole perish through the error of its member. The conditions of -social health are accordingly a matter for scientific investigation. -There is, at any moment, one particular arrangement of social relations -which involves the minimum of human misery then and there possible -amid the “niggardliness of nature.” Fifty years ago it would have been -assumed that absolute freedom in the sense of individual or “manly” -independence, plus a criminal code, would spontaneously result in such -an arrangement for each particular nation; and the effect was the -philosophic apotheosis of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laisser Faire</i>. To-day every student -is aware that no such optimistic assumption is warranted by the facts -of life.<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> We know now that in natural selection at the stage of -development where the existence of civilized mankind is at stake, the -units selected from are not individuals, but societies. Its action at -earlier stages, though analogous, is quite dissimilar. Among the lower -animals physical strength or agility is the favored quality; if some -heaven-sent genius among the cuttlefish developed a delicate poetic -faculty, this high excellence would not delay his succumbing to his -hulking neighbor. When, higher up in the scale, mental cunning became -the favored attribute, an extra brain convolution, leading primitive -man to the invention of fire or tools, enabled a comparatively puny -savage to become the conqueror and survivor of his fellows.</p> - -<p>Brain culture accordingly developed apace; but we do not yet thoroughly -realize that this has itself been superseded as the “selected” -attribute, by social organization. The cultivated Athenians, Saracens, -and Provençals went down in the struggle for existence before their -respective competitors, who, individually inferior, were in possession -of a, at that time, more valuable social organization. The French -nation was beaten in the last war, not because the average German was -an inch and a half taller than the average Frenchman, or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[52]</span> because he -had read five more books, but because the German social organism, was, -for the purposes of the time, superior in efficiency to the French. -If we desire to hand on to the after-world our direct influence, and -not merely the memory of our excellence, we must take even more care -to improve the social organism of which we form part, than to perfect -our own individual developments. Or rather, the perfect and fitting -development of each individual is not necessarily the utmost and -highest cultivation of his own personality, but the filling, in the -best possible way, of his humble function in the great social machine. -We must abandon the self-conceit of imagining that we are independent -units, and bend our jealous minds, absorbed in their own cultivation, -to this subjection to the higher end, the Common Weal. Accordingly, -conscious “direct adaptation” steadily supplants the unconscious and -wasteful “indirect adaptation” of the earlier form of the struggle for -existence; and with every advance in sociological knowledge, Man is -seen to assume more and more, not only the mastery of “things,” but -also a conscious control over social destiny itself.</p> - -<p>This new scientific conception of the Social Organism, has put -completely out of countenance the cherished principles of the Political -Economist and the Philosophic Radical. We left them sailing gaily into -Anarchy on the stream of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Laisser Faire</i>. Since then the tide -has turned. The publication of John Stuart Mill’s “Political Economy” -in 1848 marks conveniently the boundary of the old individualist -Economics. Every edition of Mill’s book became more and more -Socialistic. After his death the world learnt the personal history, -penned by his own hand,<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> of his development from a mere political -democrat to a convinced Socialist.</p> - -<p>The change in tone since then has been such that one competent -economist, professedly<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> anti-Socialist, publishes regretfully to the -world that all the younger men are now Socialists, as well as many of -the older Professors. It is, indeed, mainly from these that the world -has learnt how faulty were the earlier economic generalizations, and -above all, how incomplete<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[53]</span> as guides for social or political action. -These generalizations are accordingly now to be met with only in -leading articles, sermons, or the speeches of Ministers or Bishops.<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> -The Economist himself knows them no more.</p> - -<p>The result of this development of Sociology is to compel a revision -of the relative importance of liberty and equality as principles to -be kept in view in social administration. In Bentham’s celebrated -“ends” to be aimed at in a civil code, liberty stands predominant -over equality, on the ground that full equality can be maintained -only by the loss of security for the fruits of labor. That exposition -remains as true as ever; but the question for decision remains, how -much liberty? Economic analysis has destroyed the value of the old -criterion of respect for the equal liberty of others. Bentham, whose -economics were weak, paid no attention to the perpetual tribute on the -fruits of others’ labor which full private property in land inevitably -creates. In his view, liberty and security to property meant that every -worker should be free to obtain the full result of his own labor; and -there appeared no inconsistency between them. The political economist -now knows that with free competition and private property in land and -capital, no individual can possibly obtain the full result of his -own labor. The student of industrial development, moreover, finds it -steadily more and more impossible to trace what is precisely the result -of each separate man’s toil. Complete rights of liberty and property -necessarily involve, for example, the spoliation of the Irish cottier -tenant for the benefit of Lord Clanricarde. What then becomes of the -Benthamic principle of the greatest happiness of the greatest number? -When the Benthamite comes to understand the Law of Rent, which of the -two will he abandon? For he cannot escape the lesson of the century, -taught alike by the economists, the statesmen, and the “practical men,” -that complete individual liberty, with unrestrained private ownership -of the instruments of wealth production, is irreconcilable with the -common weal. The free struggle for existence among ourselves menaces -our survival as a healthy and permanent social organism. Evolution, -Professor Huxley<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> declares, is the substitution of consciously<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[54]</span> -regulated co-ordination among the units of each organism, for blind -anarchic competition. Thirty years ago Herbert Spencer demonstrated -the incompatibility of full private property in land with the modern -democratic State;<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> and almost every economist now preaches the -same doctrine. The Radical is rapidly arriving, from practical -experience, at similar conclusions; and the steady increase of the -government regulation of private enterprise, the growth of municipal -administration, and the rapid shifting of the burden of taxation -directly to rent and interest, mark in treble lines the statesman’s -unconscious abandonment of the old Individualism, and our irresistible -glide into collectivist Socialism.</p> - -<p>It was inevitable that the Democracy should learn this lesson. With the -masses painfully conscious of the failure of Individualism to create -a decent social life for four-fifths of the people,<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> it might have -been foreseen that Individualism could not survive their advent to -political power. If private property in land and capital necessarily -keeps the many workers permanently poor (through no fault of their -own), in order to make the few idlers rich (from no merit of their -own), private property in land and capital will inevitably go the way -of the feudalism which it superseded. The economic analysis confirms -the rough generalization of the suffering people. The history of -industrial evolution points to the same result; and for two generations -the world’s chief ethical teachers have been urging the same lesson. No -wonder the heavens of Individualism are rolling up before our eyes like -a scroll; and even the Bishops believe and tremble.<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a></p> - -<p>It is, of course, possible, as Sir Henry Maine and others have -suggested, that the whole experience of the century is a mistake, and -that political power will once more swing back into the hands of a -monarch or an aristocratic oligarchy. It is, indeed, want of faith in -Democracy which holds back most educated sympathisers with Socialism -from frankly accepting its principles. What the economic side of such -political<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[55]</span> atavism would be it is not easy to forecast. The machine -industry and steam power could hardly be dismissed with the caucus -and the ballot-box. So long, however, as Democracy in political -administration continues to be the dominant principle, Socialism may -be quite safely predicted as its economic obverse, in spite of those -freaks or aberrations of Democracy which have already here and there -thrown up a short-lived monarchy or a romantic dictatorship. Every -increase in the political power of the proletariat will most surely be -used by them for their economic and social protection. In England, at -any rate, the history of the century serves at once as their guide and -their justification.</p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> See “Socialism in England” (American Economic -Association, <abbr title="volume">vol.</abbr> iv, part 2, May, 1889), in which a portion of this -essay has been embodied.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> “I am aware that there are some who suppose that our -present bourgeois arrangements must be totally destroyed and others -substituted almost at a blow. But however successful a revolution -might be, it is certain that mankind cannot change its whole nature -all at once. Break the old shell, certainly; but never forget the fact -that the new forms <em>must</em> grow out of the old” (H. M. Hyndman, -“Historical Basis of Socialism,” 1883, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 305).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> See the article on “Socialism in English Politics,” by -William Clarke, in the <i>Political Science Quarterly</i>, December, -1888.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> Even Bentham said this of James Mill (Bain’s Life of J. -M., <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 461), of whom it was hardly true.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> “Principles of Political Economy,” last edition, 1865, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> -477 (quoting from Feugueray.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Referred to in a celebrated passage by Adam Smith, -“Wealth of Nations,” book 1, <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> viii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> Not to mention the restrictions imposed by the law of -“Settlement” (13 and 14 Charles II., <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> 12), which enabled two -justices summarily to send back to his village any migrating laborer.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> This was noticed by Malthus, “Principles of Political -Economy,” <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 225; see also Prof. Thorold Rogers, “History of -Agriculture and Prices,” and “Six Centuries of Work and Wages.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> Further detail will be found in the following essay. See -also Arnold Toynbee’s “Industrial Revolution.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> Between 1801-1845 the population of Manchester grew 109 -per cent, Glasgow 108 per cent, Liverpool 100 per cent, and Leeds 99 -per cent (Report of Commissioners on State of Health of Large Towns, -1843-45).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> W. J. Lecky, “History of the Eighteenth Century,” <abbr title="volume">vol.</abbr> v, -<abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 453.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> The number of registered electors at the date of the last -Election (1886) was 5,707,823, out of an adult male population of over -nine millions.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> Few, however, of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Spencer’s followers appear to -realize that he presupposes Land Nationalization as the necessary -condition of an Individualist community (see “Social Statics,” -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">passim</i>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> It is sometimes asserted nowadays that the current -descriptions of factory life under the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">régime</i> of freedom of -contract are much exaggerated. This is not the case. The horrors -revealed in the reports of official enquiries even exceed those -commonly quoted. For a full account of the legislation, and the -facts on which it was founded, see Von Plener’s “English Factory -Legislation.” The chief official reports are those of the House of -Commons Committee of 1815-6, House of Lords Committee, 1819, and Royal -Commission, 1840. Marx (“Capital”) gives many other references. See -also F. Engels’ “Condition of the English Working Classes.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> Prof. H. S. Foxwell (University College, London, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 249 -of Essay on the “Claims of Labor” (Edinburgh: Co-operative Printing -Company, 1886).)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> This statement, though generally true of England, is -not absolutely so. It needed an Act of Parliament in 1758 (32 George -II, c. 61) to free the inhabitants of the “village” of Manchester -from the obligation to grind all their corn and grain at the manorial -watermills (Clifford’s “History of Private Bill Legislation,” <abbr title="volume">vol.</abbr> -ii, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 478). Even so late as 1809 they had to obtain the consent of -Sir Oswald Mosley, the lord of the manor, before a company could be -incorporated to provide a water supply (<i>Ibid.</i>, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 480). Leeds -was theoretically compelled to grind its corn, grain and malt at the -lord’s mills down to 1839, and actually had then to pay £13,000 to -extinguish this feudal “due” (<i>Ibid.</i>, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 498).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> See its organ, the <i>Church Reformer</i>. London; 8 Duke -Street, Adelphi.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> The beginning of factory legislation is to be found in -the “Morals and Health Act,” 42 Geo. III, c. 73 (1802). Others followed -in 1819, 1825, and 1831; but their provisions were almost entirely -evaded owing to the absence of inspectors. After the Reform Bill more -stringent enactments in 1833, 1844, and 1847 secured some improvement. -The Act of 1878 consolidated the law on the subject. The Radical and -Socialist proposals for further development in this direction will be -found at page 55. Nearly 400 Local Improvement Acts had been passed -up to 1845. In the succeeding years various general Acts were passed, -which were henceforth incorporated by reference in all local Acts. The -first “Public Health Act” was passed in 1848; and successive extensions -were given to this restrictive legislation with sanitary ends in 1855, -1858, 1861, and 1866. Consolidating Acts in 1871, and finally in 1875, -complete the present sanitary code, which now forms a thick volume of -restrictions upon the free use of land and capital.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> The <em>minimum</em> income chargeable to Income Tax (£150) -closely corresponds with the <em>average</em> family income. See Fabian -Tract, No. 5, “Facts for Socialists.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> See “The Progress of Socialism.” (London: The Modern -Press, 13 Paternoster Row, E. C. Price One Penny.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> See “Capital and Land” (Fabian Tract, No. 7), page 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> Government Return for 1887-8, see “Board of Trade -Journal,” January, 1889, <abbr title="pages">pp.</abbr> 76-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> It is not generally known that the Corporation of London -actually carried on the business of fire insurance from 1681 to 1683, -but was compelled to abandon it through the opposition of those -interested in private undertakings, who finally obtained a mandamus in -the Court of King’s Bench to restrain the civic competitor (Walford’s -Insurance Cyclopædia, <abbr title="volume">vol.</abbr> iii, <abbr title="pages">pp.</abbr> 445-446).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> C—5550, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 436. This, by the way, is just about one -year’s rental. We pay every year to the landlords for permission -to live in England as much as the whole outstanding cost of the -magnificent property of the local governing authorities.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> See “The Government Organization of Labor,” Report by a -Committee of the Fabian Society, 1886.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> See Report of the Annual Meeting at Birmingham, -September, 1888.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> See resolutions adopted by the Council, at the instance -of the Executive and General Committee, February 8th, 1889. (<i>Daily -News</i>, 9th February.) Professor Stuart, M.P., has now introduced a -Bill embodying these astonishing proposals.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> It is interesting to compare this programme, with its -primary insistence on economic and social reform, with the bare -political character of the “Five Points” of the Chartists, viz., -Manhood Suffrage, Vote by Ballot, Annual Parliaments, Payment of -Members relieved from the property qualification, and Equal Electoral -Districts.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> It need hardly be said that schemes of “free land,” -peasant proprietorship, or leasehold enfranchisement, find no place -in the modern programme of the Socialist Radical, or Social Democrat. -They are survivals of the Individualistic Radicalism which is passing -away. Candidates seeking a popular “cry” more and more avoid these -reactionary proposals.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> “Autobiography,” <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 231-2. See also Book IV. of the -“Principles of Political Economy” (Popular edition, 1865).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> For a forecast of the difficulties which this programme -will have to encounter as its full scope and intention become more -clearly realized, see the eighth essay in this volume, by Hubert Bland.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> See “Darwinism and Politics,” by D. G. Ritchie, Fellow -and Tutor of Jesus College, Oxford (London: Swan, Sonneshein & Co., -1889).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> “Autobiography,” <abbr title="pages">pp.</abbr> 231-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> F. W. Aveling, Principal of Taunton Independent -College, in leaflet “Down with the Socialists,” August, 1888. See -also Professor H. Sedgwick on “Economic Socialism,” <i>Contemporary -Review</i>, November, 1886.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> That is to say, unfortunately, in nearly all the -utterances which profess to guide our social and political action.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> <i>Contemporary Review</i>, February, 1888.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> “Social Statistics,” <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">passim</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> See Professor Leone Levi’s letter to the <i>Times</i>, -13th August, 1886, and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Frederic Harrison’s speech at the Industrial -Remuneration Conference held in January, 1885 (Report, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 429).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> See Report of the Lambeth Episcopal Conference, 1888; -subject, “Socialism”: also the proceedings of the Central Conference of -Diocesan Councils, June, 1889 (paper on Socialism by Canon Furse).</p> - -</div> -</div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[56]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="INDUSTRIAL">INDUSTRIAL.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY WILLIAM CLARKE, M.A.</p> - - -<p>My object in the following paper is to present a brief narrative of -the economic history of the last century or century and a half. From -this I wish to draw a moral. That moral is that there has been and -is proceeding an economic evolution, practically independent of our -individual desires or prejudices; an evolution which has changed for -us the whole social problem by changing the conditions of material -production, and which <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ipso facto</i> effects a revolution in our -modern life. To learn clearly what that revolution is, and to prepare -ourselves for taking advantage of it in due course—this I take to be -briefly what is meant by Socialism. The ignorant public, represented -by, let us say, the average bishop or member of Parliament, hears of -the “Social Revolution” and instantly thinks of street riots, noyades, -with a <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">coup d’état</i>: a 10th of August, followed perhaps by its -Nemesis in an 18th Brumaire. But these are not the Social Revolution. -That great change is proceeding silently every day. Each new line of -railway which opens up the trackless desert, every new machine which -supplants hand labor, each fresh combination formed by capitalists, -every new labor organization, every change in prices, each new -invention—all these forces and many more are actually working out a -social revolution before our eyes: for they are changing fundamentally -the economic basis of life. There may possibly come some one supreme -moment of time in which a great dramatic incident will reveal to men -the significance of the changes which have led up to it, and of which -it is merely the final expression. And future historians may write of -that as The Revolution just as historians now write of the fall of -the Bastille, or the execution of Louis XVI, as though these events -constituted the French Revolution, instead of being the final<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[57]</span> terms in -a long series of events which had been loosening the fabric of French -feudalism through several generations. The true prophet is not an -ignorant soothsayer who foretells some Armageddon, but rather he who -perceives the inevitable drift and tendency of things. Somewhat in this -spirit we may consider the economic history of the modern industrial -era in order to discern its meaning, to see what it has led up to, -and what, consequently, are the problems with which we find ourselves -confronted to-day.</p> - -<p>Had we visited a village or small town in England where industrial -operations were going on one hundred and fifty years ago, what should -we have found? No tall chimney, vomiting its clouds of smoke, would -have been visible; no huge building with its hundred windows blazing -with light would have loomed up before the traveller as he entered the -town at dusk; no din of machinery would have been heard; no noise of -steam hammers; no huge blast furnaces would have met his eye, nor would -miles of odors wafted from chemical works have saluted his nostrils. If -Lancashire had been the scene of his visit he would have found a number -of narrow red-brick houses with high steps in front, and outside wooden -shutters such as one may still see in the old parts of some Lancashire -towns to-day. Inside each of these houses was a little family workshop, -containing neither master nor servant, in which the family jointly -contributed to produce by the labor of their hands a piece of cotton -cloth. The father provided his own warp of linen yarn, and his cotton -wool for weft. He had purchased the yarn in a prepared state, while -the wool for the weft was carded and spun by his wife and daughters, -and the cloth was woven by himself and his sons. There was a simple -division of labor in the tiny cottage factory; but all the implements -necessary to produce the cotton cloth were owned by the producers. -There was neither capitalist nor wage-receiver: the weaver controlled -his own labor, effected his own exchange, and received himself the -equivalent of his own product. Such was the germ of the great English -cotton manufacture. Ferdinand Lasselle said: “Society consists of -ninety-six proletaires and four capitalists. That is your State.” But -in old Lancashire there was neither capitalist nor proletaire.</p> - -<p>Or even much later had one visited—Stafford, let us say,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[58]</span> one would -not have found the large modern shoe-factory, with its bewildering -variety of machines, each one with a human machine by its side. For -shoemaking then was a pure handicraft, requiring skill, judgment and -some measure of artistic sense. Each shoemaker worked in his own -little house, bought his own material from the leather merchant, and -fashioned every part of the shoe with his own hand, aided by a few -simple and inexpensive tools. He believed there was “nothing like -leather,” and had not yet learned the art of putting on cheap soles, -<em>not</em> made of leather, to cheap boots, which, in a month’s time, -will be almost worn out. Very likely the shoemaker had no vote; -but he was never liable to be locked out by his employer, or to be -obliged to go on strike against a reduction of wages, with his boy -in prison for satisfying hunger at the expense of the neighboring -baker, or his girl on the streets to pay for her new dress. Such was -the simple industrialism of our great-great-grandfathers. But their -mode of life was destined to change. All progress, says <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert -Spencer, is differentiation; and this formidable factor began to -appear in the quiet, sleepy, English country. About 1760 a large share -of calico-printing was transferred from London to Lancashire, where -labor was then cheaper. There was a consequent fall in prices, and an -increased demand for calicoes of linen warp and cotton weft. Then the -Manchester dealers, instead of buying fustians and calicoes from the -weaver, began to furnish him with the materials for his cloth, and to -pay him a fixed price per piece for the work when executed. So the -Manchester dealer became what the French call an <em>entrepreneur</em>; -and the transformation of the independent weaver into a wage receiver -began. The iron law of wages and the unemployed question also began to -loom dimly up. For as the weaver came to hire himself to the dealer, -so the weaver let out part of his work; and it frequently happened -that the sum which the master weaver received from his employer was -less than what he found himself compelled to pay to those whom he -employed in spinning. “He durst not, however, complain,” says <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> -Watts in his article on cotton (Encyclopædia Britannica), “much less -abate the spinner’s price, lest his looms should be unemployed.” The -quantity of yarn producible under this simple system by the aid of the -one-thread wheel was very small. The whole did not exceed in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[59]</span> quantity -what 50,000 spindles of our present machinery can yield. As one man -can now superintend 2,000 spindles, it will be seen that twenty-five -men with machinery can produce as much as the whole population of -old Lancashire. In 1750 the first important invention in the cotton -industry was made in the shape of the fly-shuttle, invented by Kaye of -Bury. In 1760 improvements were made in the carding process. In 1767 -the spinning-jenny was invented by Hargreaves, and this was at length -brought to work as many as eighty spindles. The ingenious Hargreaves -had ample opportunity for practical study of the “unemployed” question; -for the spinners, some of whom were forced into idleness by the new -invention, broke into his house and destroyed his machine. Shortly -after, there was a general rising over industrial Lancashire: the poor -hand-workers, whose prophetic souls were evidently dreaming on things -to come, scouring the country and breaking in pieces every carding and -spinning machine they could find.</p> - -<p>Progress by differentiation, however, heeded not the second sight of -Lancashire workers. In 1769, Arkwright contrived the spinning frame, -and obtained his patent for spinning with rollers. In 1775, Crompton, -of Bolton, invented the mule-jenny, enabling warps of the finest -quality to be spun. In 1792, further improvements in this machine -were made by Pollard, of Manchester, and Kelly, of Glasgow. In 1785, -steam was first applied to the spinning of cotton in Nottinghamshire. -In 1784 the <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> E. Cartwright, of Kent, invented power-loom weaving, -and completed and patented his invention in August, 1787. Here, then, -within a period of about forty years, was a series of mechanical -inventions which had the effect of absolutely changing the method of -production, and enormously increasing the output; of dividing the -labor of producing, which had formerly been effected by a single -family within the walls of a single room, between scores and hundreds -of people, each of whom only undertook a single process in a complex -operation; of massing together hundreds of thousands of people under -new conditions; of bringing a heretofore isolated district into -intimate relations with distant foreign lands: and of separating the -work of spinning or weaving from the ownership of the instruments by -whose aid the work was done. The independent weaver was gone; or rather -he was subjected, like an amœba, to a process of fission, but with -this difference: that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[60]</span> whereas the amœba produces by fission other -similar amœbæ, the weaver was differentiated into a person called an -employer and another called an employé or “hand.” Multiply this “hand” -by thousands, and we get the mill or factory, divided into departments, -each with its special detail of work, each detail fitting into all the -rest, each machine taking up the work where the last machine left it, -and each contributing its share to the joint product. Multiply the -employer; add enormously to the aggregate of his capital; remove the -barrier of national frontiers from his operations; relieve him of the -duty of personal supervision; and we get the joint-stock capitalist.</p> - -<p>Pause a moment to consider the famous world-events which made so much -noise while these industrial processes were going on. The conquest -of Canada, the victories of Clive in India, the Seven Years’ War, -the successful revolt of the American colonies, the Declaration of -Independence and formation of the American Constitution, the deeds of -Frederic the Great, Pitt’s accession to power, Washington’s election -to the Presidency, the Fall of the Bastille, the death of Mirabeau, -the fall of the old French monarchy, the National Convention—all -these great events which shook the world were contemporary with the -industrial revolution in England; and that revolution was in promise -and potency more important than them all.</p> - -<p>I will glance at the development of another great industry, that of -iron. In former times iron was largely worked in the south of England, -notably in Sussex, in a district now purely agricultural. By the middle -of the 18th century, important iron industries had begun to cluster -round Coalbrookdale; and here many of the industrial changes in the -working of iron were first introduced. From 1766 to 1784 improvements -were made in the mode of working malleable iron and of transferring -cast into wrought iron. The puddling forge was invented in 1784; and -it gave an immense impetus to the manufacture. In 1828 the use of the -hot blast was substituted for cold air; in 1842 Nasmyth invented the -steam-hammer; and in 1856 the Bessemer process of making steel was -patented. Subsequently we have the Siemens regenerative furnace and -gas producer, the use of machinery in lieu of hand labor for puddling, -the casting of steel under great pressure, and the improvements in -the Bessemer process. As a result of these inventions the increase -in the production of steel during the last few years, especially in -the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">[61]</span> United States and Great Britain, has been enormous. In all this -we see the same series of phenomena, all tending to huge monopolies. -Machinery supplants hand labor; production is greatly stimulated; the -immense capital needed enables only the large producers to survive in -the competitive conflict; and we get as the net result well defined -aggregations of capital on the one hand, and dependent machine minders -on the other.</p> - -<p>I have alluded to the shoe industry as having been formerly a pure -handicraft. Simple machine processes for fastening soles and heels to -inner soles began to be adopted in 1809; and from that time onward -successive inventions have converted the pure handicraft into one of -the most mechanical industries in the world. In the United States in -1881 no less than 50,000,000 pairs of boots and shoes were sewn by -the Blake-Mackay machines. A visitor to a shoe factory to-day will -see the following machines: for cutting leather, for pressing rollers -for sole leather, for stamping out sole and heel pieces, for blocking -and crimping, for moulding uppers or vamps, for vamp-folding, for -eyeletting, lasting, trimming and paring, scouring, sand-papering -and burnishing, for stamping, peg-cutting, and nail-rasping. It is -well to witness all these processes going on in one large factory in -order to grasp fully the idea that the old individual industry of the -last century is almost as extinct as the mastodon—that the worker in -a shoe factory to-day is, so to speak, a machine in a vast complex -system. The great industry has supplanted the small one; such great -industry involves the aggregation of capital: consequently competition -on the part of the small producer is hopeless and impossible. Thus -in the proletarian class the intensity of the struggle for existence -is increased, keeping down wages and ever widening the margin of the -unemployed class. The small producer must become a wage earner either -as manager, foreman, or workman. As well attempt to meet Gatling guns -with bow and arrows, or steel cruisers armed with dynamite bombs -with the little cockle-shells in which Henry V’s army crossed over -to win the field of Agincourt, as to set up single shoe-makers or -cotton-weavers against the vast industrial armies of the world of -machinery. The revolution is confined to no one industry, to no one -land. While most fully developed in England, it is extending to most -industries and to all lands. Prince Kropotkin, it is true, reminds us -in an interesting article in the <i>Nineteenth Century</i> for October, -1888, that a number of small<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">[62]</span> industries can still be found in town -and country. That is so, no doubt; and it is not unlikely that for -a long time to come many small trades may exist, and some may even -flourish. But the countries in which small industries flourish most -are precisely those in which there is least machine industry, and -where consequently capitalism is least developed. In no country, says -Kropotkin, are there so many small producers as in Russia. Exactly: -and in no country is there so little machinery or such an inefficient -railway system in proportion to population and resources. On the other -hand, in no country is machinery so extensively used as in the United -States; and it is precisely that country which contains the fewest -small industries in proportion to population and resources. Many of the -small industries, too, as Kropotkin admits, are carried on by persons -who have been displaced by machines, and who have thus been thrown -unemployed on the labor market; or who have drifted into large towns, -especially into London, because in the country there was no work for -them. At best the great majority of these people earn but a scanty and -precarious living; and, judging from the number of hawkers and vendors -who wander about suburban streets and roads without selling anything, -one would imagine that great numbers can scarcely make any living at -all.</p> - -<p>Furthermore, when Kropotkin refers to the sweaters’ victims, and to the -people in country places who make on a small scale clothes or furniture -which they dispose of to the dealers in large towns, and so forth, let -it be remembered that so long as human labor is cheaper than machinery -it will be utilized by capitalists in this way. The capitalist uses -or does not use machinery according as it pays or does not pay; and -if he can draw to an unlimited extent on the margin of unemployed -labor, paying a bare subsistence wage, he will do so, as the evidence -given before the House of Lords Committee on Sweating shews. While -admitting then that a good many small industries exist, and that some -will continue to exist for an indefinite time, I do not think that -such facts make against the general proposition that the tendency is -to large production by machinery, involving the grouping of men and -the massing of capital, with all the economic and social consequences -thereby involved.</p> - -<p>Even agriculture, that one occupation in which old-fashioned -individualism might be supposed safe, is being subjected to capitalism. -The huge farms of Dakota and California, containing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">[63]</span> single fields -of wheat miles long, are largely owned by joint stock corporations -and cultivated exclusively by machinery. It was the displacement of -human labor by machinery on these farms as well as the crises in -mining operations which helped to bring about the phenomenon of an -unemployed class in the richest region of the world, and led <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> -Henry George to write his “Progress and Poverty.” These huge farms, -combined with the wheat “corners” in New York and Chicago and the great -railway corporations of America, have played havoc with many of the -small farmers of the Mississippi Valley, as the statistics respecting -mortgaged farms will show. And when it is remembered that the American -farmer will be more and more obliged to meet the growing competition of -the wheat of India, produced by the cheapest labor in the world, his -prospect does not appear to be very bright.</p> - -<p>In order to perceive clearly the immense development of machine -industry and the consequent displacement of labor, one must resort -to figures, mere rhetoric being of no avail. The following figures -are cited from the United States, because American public statistics -are so much better than British, being both more complete and more -accessible. The facts are taken from the first Annual Report of the -United States Commissioner of Labor Statistics in Washington for 1886. -The Commissioner, inquiring into the industrial crisis, finds that it -is mainly due to the immense development of machine industry under the -joint-stock system; and he takes up various trades one after another -to show how labor has been displaced by machinery. In the timber -business, he says, twelve laborers with a Bucker machine will dress -12,000 staves. The same number of men by hand labor would have dressed -in the same time only 2,500. In the manufacture of paper a machine -now used for drying and cutting, run by four men and six girls, will -do the work formerly done by 100 persons, and do it much better. In -the manufacture of wall-paper the best evidence puts the displacement -in the proportion of a hundred to one. In a phosphate mine in South -Carolina ten men accomplish with machinery what 100 men handle without -it in the same time. There has been a displacement of 50 per cent in -the manufacture of rubber boots and shoes. In South Carolina pottery -the product is ten times greater by machine processes than by muscular -labor. In the manufacture of saws, experienced men consider<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">[64]</span> that there -has been a displacement of three men out of five. In the weaving of -silk the displacement has been 95 per cent, and in the winding of silk -90 per cent. A large soap manufacturing concern carefully estimates the -displacement of labor in its works at 50 per cent. In making wine in -California a crushing machine has been introduced with which one man -can crush and stem 80 tons of grapes in a day, representing an amount -of work formerly requiring eight men. In woollen goods modern machinery -has reduced muscular labor 33 per cent in the carding department, 50 -per cent in the spinning, and 25 per cent in the weaving. In some -kinds of spinning one hundred to one represents the displacement. In -the whole United States in 1886 the machinery was equal to 3,500,000 -horse power. If men only had been employed, it would have required -21,000,000 to turn out the actual total product: the real number was -four millions. To do the work accomplished in 1886 in the United -States by power machinery and on the railways would have required men -representing a population of 172,500,000. The actual population of the -United States in 1886 was something under 60,000,000, or a little more -than one-third.</p> - -<p>Commenting on these very remarkable statistics, the Labor Commissioner -says: “The apparent evils resulting from the introduction of machinery -and the consequent subdivision of labor have to a large extent, of -course, been offset by advantages gained; but it must stand as a -positive statement, which cannot be successfully controverted, that -this wonderful introduction and extension of power machinery is one -of the prime causes, if not the prime cause, of the novel industrial -condition in which the manufacturing nations find themselves.” One of -the results of the “novel industrial condition” in America in 1885, was -an unemployed class variously estimated at from one to two millions -of men, the condition of many of whom as tramps, furnished subjects -for some very sorry jests to the American press. Such facts as are -here suggested, will show how a new country may soon be reduced to a -condition which aggregated capital on the one hand and unemployed labor -on the other, render little better than that of an old European State -with its centuries of misery and oppression. And incidentally they also -show that such a nostrum as emigration, if intended not as a palliative -but as a solution, is simply quackery. The inference would seem to -be irresistible. Just<span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">[65]</span> as fast as capitalists find it profitable to -introduce improved machinery, as fast also will the helplessness of a -growing number of the proletariat increase. The “unemployed” question -is the sphinx which will devour us if we cannot answer her riddle.</p> - -<p>The wonderful expansion of Lancashire perhaps affords the best -illustration of the change from individual to collective industry. -A cotton-mill in one of the dismal “hell-holes,” called towns in -Lancashire, is a wonderful place, full of bewildering machines. Here -is a machine called an “opener,” by which 15,000 lbs. of cotton can be -opened in 56 hours. There is a throstle, the spindles of which make -from 6,000 to 7,000 revolutions per minute. Here is a man who, with -the aid of two piecers to take up and join the broken ends, can work -2,000 spindles. Among the distinct separate machines used are opener, -scutcher and lap machine, drawing frame, slubbing frame, intermediate -frame, roving frame, throstle, self-acting mule and hand mule, doubling -frame, and mule doublers or twiners. By means of these appliances -the following results have been attained. Within eight years, from -1792 to 1800, the quantity of cotton exported from the United States -to Lancashire had increased from 138,000 lbs. to 18,000,000 lbs. In -1801 Lancashire took 84,000 bales of cotton from the United States; -in 1876 she took 2,075,000 bales; and whereas in the former year only -14,000 bales came from India, in 1876 from that country came 775,000 -bales, besides a great increase in Brazilian cotton, and a new import -of 332,000 bales from Egypt. In 1805, one million pieces of calico -were sold in the Blackburn market during the whole year; and that was -considered a very large sale. In 1884, according to Ellison’s Annual -Review of the Cotton Trade, there were exported 4,417,000,000 yards of -piece goods besides the vast quantity produced for home consumption. -In 1875, in place of the little cottages with their hand-looms of -a century before, Lancashire contained 2,655 cotton factories with -37,515,772 spinning spindles and 463,118 power looms; and she produced -yarn and piece goods to the weight of 1,088,890,000 lbs. and of the -value of £95,447,000. See, too, how through the use of machinery the -cost of production had been lowered. In 1790 the price of spinning the -yarn known technically as No. 100 was 4s. per lb.: in 1826 it had been -reduced to 6¹⁄₂d. The sale<span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">[66]</span> price of yarn No. 100 in 1786 was 38s.: in -1793 it was reduced to 15s. 1d., in 1803 to 8s. 4d., in 1876 to 2s. -6d. The decreased cost in each case followed on economy in production, -itself dependent on increased differentiation in machinery; that in -turn involving larger and larger capital, and that again necessitating -aggregation and the crushing out of small concerns which could not -command machinery or sell at a profit in competition with it.</p> - -<p>Speculating on the possibility of foreign competition destroying -the industrial supremacy of Lancashire, <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Watts writes in the -Encyclopædia Britannica: “It may perhaps be sufficient to recall to -our readers the small part of the cost of the commodity which now -belongs to the labor of the hand, and the daily diminution which is -taking place even of that part, by the introduction of new mechanical -substitutes.”<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Watts wrote as a expert; and the inference -one is compelled to draw from his dictum is that concentration of -capital and growth of monopoly must continue to develop; and that the -“unemployed” problem must force itself on Lancashire. One who is not -an expert will only venture to criticise with great diffidence <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> -Watts’s optimistic tone; but it is well to point out that in India -capitalists can command the cheapest labor in the world—labor too, at -present entirely unregulated by law. The cotton of India, and also of -Asiatic Russia, is spun and woven near to where it is grown, and where -it can easily command the great Asiatic market. One is not surprised to -find therefore that the Bombay cotton mills are already giving cause -for some anxiety in Lancashire; and there seems no rational ground for -supposing that that anxiety will decrease; in which case the increasing -competition would seem to involve in Lancashire either immense -development of machinery or reduction in wages in order to cheapen -the cost of production. Either alternative forces the social problem -forward.</p> - -<p>I now pass on to consider the social problem as it has actually been -forced on the attention of the British Government through the new -industrial conditions.</p> - -<p>The unrestrained power of capitalism very speedily reduced a large -part of England to a deplorable condition. The Mrs. Jellybys of the -philanthropic world were busy ministering to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">[67]</span> wants of Borioboola -Gha by means of tracts and blankets, neither of which were of the -slightest use to those for whom they were intended. But Borioboola Gha -was an earthly paradise compared with civilized England. There was -not a savage in the islands of the Pacific who was not better fed, -happier, healthier, and more contented than the majority of the workers -in the industrial parts of England. Children, it was discovered, were -transferred in large numbers to the north, where they were housed in -pent-up buildings adjoining the factories, and kept to long hours of -labor. The work was carried on day and night without intermission; so -that the beds were said never to become cold, inasmuch as one batch -of children rested while another batch went to the looms, only half -the requisite number of beds being provided for all. Epidemic fevers -were rife in consequence. Medical inspectors reported the rapid spread -of malformation of the bones, curvature of the spine, heart diseases, -rupture, stunted growth, asthma, and premature old age among children -and young persons: the said children and young persons being worked by -manufacturers without any kind of restraint. Manufacturing profits in -Lancashire were being at the same time reckoned at hundreds and even -thousands per cent. The most terrible condition of things existed in -the mines, where children of both sexes worked together, half naked, -often for sixteen hours a day. In the fetid passages, children of -seven, six, and even four years of age, were found at work. Women were -employed underground, many of them even while pregnant, at the most -exhausting labor. After a child was born, its mother was at work again -in less than a week, in an atmosphere charged with sulphuric acid. In -some places women stood all day knee-deep in water and subject to an -intense heat. One woman when examined avowed that she was wet through -all day long, and had drawn coal carts till her skin came off. Women -and young children of six years old drew coal along the passages of -the mines, crawling on all fours with a girdle passing round their -waists, harnessed by a chain between their legs to the cart. A -sub-commissioner in Scotland reported that he “found a little girl, -six years of age, carrying half a cwt., and making regularly fourteen -long journeys a day. The height ascended and the distance along the -road exceeded in each journey the height of <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Paul’s Cathedral.” -“I have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">[68]</span> repeatedly worked,” said one girl seventeen years of age, -“for twenty-four hours.” The ferocity of the men was worse than that -of wild beasts; and children were often maimed and sometimes killed -with impunity. Drunkenness was naturally general. Short lives and -brutal ones were the rule. The men, it was said, “die off like rotten -sheep; and each generation is commonly extinct soon after fifty.” -Such was a large part of industrial England under the unrestrained -rule of the capitalist. There can be no doubt that far greater misery -prevailed than in the Southern States during the era of slavery. The -slave was property—often valuable property; and it did not pay his -owner to ill-treat him to such a degree as to render him useless as a -wealth-producer. But if the “free” Englishman were injured or killed, -thousands could be had to fill his place for nothing.</p> - -<p>Had this state of things continued we should have returned to a state -of nature with a vengeance. Of man thus depicted we may say with -Tennyson:</p> - -<p class="poetry"> -<span style="margin-left: 6em;">“Dragons of the prime,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">That tare each other in their slime,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Were mellow music match’d with him.”</span><br /> -</p> - -<p>It was evident that capitalist monopoly must be restrained, reluctant -as English statesmen brought up under the commercial system were to -interfere. The zenith of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i> was at the close of the -last century; but a great fabric often looks most imposing shortly -before it begins to collapse. The first piece of labor legislation -was the Morals and Health Act of 1802, which interfered with the -accommodation provided to children by the employers, to which reference -has been made. The Cotton Mills Act was passed in 1819, partly owing -to the exertions of Robert Owen. It limited the age at which children -might work in factories; and it limited the time of their labor to -seventy-two hours per week. Seventy-two hours for a child of nine who -ought to have been playing in the green fields! And even that was a -vast improvement on the previous state of things. Saturday labor was -next shortened by an Act passed by the Radical politician, Sir John -Cam Hobhouse, in 1825. Workmen, Radicals, Tories and Philanthropists -then joined in an agitation under <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Richard Oastler, a Conservative -member of Parliament, to secure a Ten Hours’ Bill. Hobhouse tried by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_69">[69]</span> -a Bill introduced in 1831 to reduce the time in textile industries; -but he was beaten by the northern manufacturers. However, Althorp, the -Whig leader, who had helped to defeat Hobhouse, was obliged himself -to introduce a measure by which night work was prohibited to young -persons, and the hours of work were reduced to sixty-nine a week. -Cotton-mill owners were at the same time disqualified for acting as -justices in cases of infringement of the law. This measure is regarded -by <abbr title="doctor">Dr.</abbr> E. Von Plener in his useful manual as the first real Factory -Act. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Thomas Sadler, who had succeeded Oastler as leader in the -cause of the factory operatives, brought in a Bill in 1832 limiting the -hours of labor for persons under eighteen; but it was met by a storm of -opposition from manufacturing members and withdrawn.</p> - -<p>To Sadler succeeded that excellent man, who has perhaps done more for -the working-classes than any other public man of our time, Lord Ashley, -better known as Lord Shaftesbury. And here let me pause to point out -that it was the Radicals and a large section of the Tories who took -the side of the operatives against the Whigs, official Conservatives -and manufacturing class. The latter class is sometimes regarded as -Liberal. I think the truth is, that it captured and held for some -time the Liberal fort, and made Liberalism identical with its policy -and interests. If the men of this class had the cynical candor of -<abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Jay Gould, they might have imitated his reply when examined by a -legislative committee: “What are your politics, <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Gould?” “Well, -in a Republican district I am Republican, in a Democratic district -I am a Democrat; but I am always an Erie Railroad man.” One of Lord -Ashley’s strong opponents was Sir Robert Peel, the son of a Lancashire -capitalist; but the most bitter and persistent was <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Bright. -Lord Ashley introduced a Ten Hours’ Bill which included adults. Lord -Althorp refused to legislate for adults, but himself passed an Act in -1833 prohibiting night work to those under eighteen; fixing forty-eight -hours per week as the maximum for children, and sixty-nine for young -persons; also providing for daily attendance at school, and certain -holidays in the year. As this Act repealed that of 1831, manufacturers -were again eligible to sit as justices in factory cases; and although -numerous infractions were reported by inspectors, the offenders in many -cases got off scot free. In 1840 Lord Ashley<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">[70]</span> brought to the notice of -Parliament the condition of young people employed in mines; and through -his activity was passed the first Mining Act, prohibiting underground -work by women and by boys under ten. Peel then passed a consolidating -Factory Act in 1844. Lord Ashley proposed to restrict to ten per day -the working hours for young persons; but Peel defeated the proposal by -threatening to resign if it were carried. By the Act of 1844 the labor -of children was limited to six and a half hours per day; and they had -to attend school three hours daily during the first five days of the -week. The next year, 1845, Lord Ashley secured the passage of a Bill -forbidding night work to women. In 1847 <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Fielden introduced a Bill -limiting the time of labor for all women and young persons to eleven -hours per day, and after May, 1848, to ten hours. Peel and the factory -owners opposed; but the Bill was carried. The Act of 1850 further -reduced the legal working day for women and young persons; and an Act -of 1853 prohibited the employment of children before 6 <span class="allsmcap">A.M.</span> -or after 6 <span class="allsmcap">P.M.</span> In 1860 bleaching and dyeing works were -subjected to the factory laws. Further legislation on this branch of -industry took place in 1870. A Mines Act was passed in 1860, and made -more stringent in 1862 with reference to safety and ventilation. Acts -with reference to the lace industry were passed in the years 1861-64, -to bakehouses in 1863, chimney-sweeping and pottery works in 1864. The -Workshops Regulation Act, relating to small trades and handicrafts, was -passed in 1867, and a consolidating Factory and Workshops Act in 1871. -The Act now in force is the Factory and Workshops Act, 1878, modified -in respect of certain industries by the Act of 1883. Further Acts -relative to the regulations of mines were passed in 1872 and 1887.</p> - -<p>This brief and imperfect survey of the legislation which has destroyed -the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">régime</i> of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i> is sufficient for my purpose -to prove: (1) That with private property in the necessary instruments -of production, individual liberty as understood by the eighteenth -century reformers must be more and more restricted, <i>i. e.</i>, that -in our existing economic condition individualism is impossible and -absurd. (2) That even hostile or indifferent politicians have been -compelled to recognize this. (3) That unrestrained capitalism tends as -surely to cruelty and oppression as did feudalism or chattel slavery. -(4) That the remedy has been, as a matter of fact, of a Socialistic -character, involving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_71">[71]</span> collective checking of individual greed and the -paring of slices off the profits of capital in the interests of the -working community. These four propositions can scarcely be contested.</p> - -<p>The immense development of English industry under the conditions -previously set forth was due in great degree to the fact that England -had secured an immense foreign market in which she had for a long time -no formidable rival. Most of the wars in which England was engaged -during the eighteenth century are quite unintelligible until it is -understood that they were commercial wars intended to secure commercial -supremacy for England. The overthrow of the Stuart monarchy was -directly associated with the rise to supreme power of the rich middle -class, especially the London merchants. The revolution of 1688 marks -the definite advent to political power of this class, which found -the Whig party the great instrument for effecting its designs. The -contrast between the old Tory squire who stood for Church and King, -and the new commercial magnate who stood by the Whigs and the House -of Hanover, is well drawn by Sir Walter Scott in “Rob Roy.” The Banks -of England and Scotland and the National Debt are among the blessings -conferred on their descendants by the new mercantile rulers. They also -began the era of corruption in politics which is always connected -closely with predominance of capitalists in the State, as we see in -France, the United States and the British Colonies. “The desire of -the moneyed classes,” says <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Lecky,<a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> “to acquire political power -at the expense of the country gentlemen was the first and one of the -chief causes of that political corruption which soon overspread the -whole system of parliamentary government.” What remained of the old -aristocracy often found it convenient to form alliances with the new -plutocracy; and it was this combination which governed England during -the eighteenth century, and which specially determined her foreign -policy. That policy was directed towards the securing of foreign -markets and the extension of English trade. Napoleon’s sneer at the -“nation of shopkeepers” was not undeserved. The conquest of Canada, the -conquest of India under Clive and Warren Hastings—the latter an agent -of a great capitalist body, who illustrated well in his Indian<span class="pagenum" id="Page_72">[72]</span> career -the methods of his class—the Colonial policy, the base destruction of -Irish manufactures in the interest of English capitalists, were all -part of the same scheme. The policy was successfully consummated in -the war waged by Pitt against the French Revolution. That revolution -was itself brought about mainly by poverty. Not only was the French -peasantry beggared; but some of the new machinery which had been -brought from England had thrown many persons out of work. It was mainly -unemployed workmen who stormed and captured the Bastille.<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> The chief -counterblast to the Revolution was prepared by Pitt. What were his -motives? The Austrian and Prussian monarchs, the emigrant nobles, the -imbecile English king and the Tory English bishops may perhaps have -seriously believed that England was fighting for altar and throne. But -Pitt was under no such delusion. While he derived from his illustrious -father a real pride in England, his divinities were rather the ledger -and the cash-box. He was no bigot: even while an undergraduate at -Cambridge he was a close student of Adam Smith; he started in public -life as a reformer, and his refusal to bow to the ignorant prejudices -of George III cost him office in 1801. It has been abundantly proved -that at first he felt no violent antipathy to the Revolution. A long -period elapsed before he was brought to join the monarchical alliance. -But he was essentially the great capitalist statesman, the political -successor of Walpole, the political predecessor of Peel. He saw that -French conquest might threaten seriously the English social fabric, and -that if England’s chief rival were struck down, the English commercial -class might gain control of the world’s commerce. To secure that end he -skilfully welded together all the moneyed interests, the contractors, -landlords, financiers and shopkeepers; and he tried to persuade the -simpler portion of the country that he was fighting for the sacred -cause of religion and morality. Those who resisted him he flung into -prison or transported beyond the seas. When the long war was brought to -an end, the working-classes were in a wretched condition; although in -those days also there were sophistical politicians who tried to prove -that never had the people so much reason to be contented. When, in -1823, the Lancashire weavers petitioned Parliament to look into their -grievances, an honorable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">[73]</span> member, who had presumably dined well if -not wisely, had the audacity to declare that the weavers were better -off than the capitalists—an observation not dissimilar to those we -have heard in more recent times. As a matter of fact, the landlords, -through protection and high rents—the capitalists, through enormous -profits, were enriched “beyond the dreams of avarice.” But the time -had come for a conflict between these two classes: the conflict which -is known as the Free Trade controversy. Protection was no longer -needed by the manufacturers, who had supremacy in the world-market, -unlimited access to raw material, and a long start of the rest of the -world in the development of machinery and in industrial organization. -The landlord class, on the other hand, was absolutely dependent on -Protection, because the economic isolation of England by means of -import duties maintained the high prices of food which were the source -of the high agricultural rents. Capitalist interests, on the contrary, -were bound up with the interaction between England and the rest of the -world; and the time had come when the barriers which had prevented that -interaction must be pulled down. The triumph of Free Trade therefore -signifies economically the decay of the old landlord class pure and -simple, and the victory of capitalism. The capitalist class was -originally no fonder of Free Trade than the landlords. It destroyed in -its own interest the woollen manufacture in Ireland; and it would have -throttled the trade of the Colonies had it not been for the successful -resistance of Massachusetts and Virginia. It was Protectionist so long -as it suited its purpose to be so. But when cheap raw material was -needed for its looms, and cheap bread for its workers: when it feared -no foreign competitor, and had established itself securely in India, in -North America, in the Pacific; then it demanded Free Trade. “Nothing in -the history of political imposture,” says <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Lecky, “is more curious -than the success with which, during the Anti-Corn Law agitation, the -notion was disseminated that on questions of Protection and Free Trade -the manufacturing classes have been peculiarly liberal and enlightened, -and the landed classes peculiarly selfish and ignorant. It is indeed -true that when in the present century the pressure of population -on subsistence had made a change in the Corn Laws inevitable, the -manufacturing classes placed themselves at the head of a Free Trade -movement from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">[74]</span> which they must necessarily have derived the chief -benefit, while the entire risk and sacrifice were thrown upon others. -But it is no less true that there is scarcely a manufacture in England -which has not been defended in the spirit of the narrowest and most -jealous monopoly; and the growing ascendancy of the commercial classes -after the Revolution is nowhere more apparent than in the multiplied -restrictions of the English Commercial Code.”<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a></p> - -<p>Cheap raw material having been secured by the English manufacturer -through a series of enactments extending over a generation; and -machinery having been so developed as to enormously increase -production, England sent her textile and metal products all over the -world; and her manufacturers supported exactly that policy which -enabled them to secure markets for their goods or raw produce to work -up in their mills. Cobdenism was in the ascendant; and the State was -more and more regarded from the commercial point of view. The so-called -“Manchester school” was in the main a peace party, because war weakens -that confidence on which commerce is based. But this attachment to -peace principles did not prevent Cobden himself from declaring for a -powerful navy as an instrument of commercial insurance. Nor did it -prevent Manchester from supporting Palmerston’s nefarious Chinese -policy in 1857, or the equally nefarious aggression in Egypt in 1882: -both being regarded as helpful to Manchester trade. In behalf of this -extension of English trade to new markets war has been made on China, -Egypt, the Soudan, Burmah, and Thibet. Germany follows England with -cautious tread. Adventurers like Emin, Stanley, and Bartelott are -employed to “open up” Africa to the gentle influences of civilization -by the agency of rum and revolver, under the pretence of putting down -the slave trade. France, not to be behind, exploits Tonquin in the -interests of Paris speculators. An unscrupulous government in Italy -attempts to divert the attention of the country from domestic reforms -to expeditions in Africa in the interests of moneyed people in Europe. -Perhaps the greatest move is yet to come: the move on the vast market -of China. For this England, America, France, and Germany will compete. -Tentative steps are already being taken. By her absorption of Burmah -and her operations in Thibet, England is approaching<span class="pagenum" id="Page_75">[75]</span> nearer to China. -By her acquisition of Tonquin, France has been brought into actual -contact with China. America will probably, by a judicious reduction -of her tariff, compete with England all over the Pacific, and will -send her goods from the Atlantic ports through the Panama or Nicaragua -Canal of the near future. In short, the machinery for the wholesale -exploitation of Asia and Africa is in rapid progress. The whole globe -will soon be the private property of the capitalist class.</p> - -<p>The appropriation of the planet has been powerfully aided by the -developments of transport and communication in our time: indeed, it -would have been impossible without them. The mere application of -machinery to production could not have produced the economic results -of to-day but for the shrinkage of the globe caused by railways and -telegraphs. For it is through these inventions that the capitalist -class has become cosmopolitan, has broken up old habits, destroyed -local associations, spared nothing either beautiful or venerable -where profit was concerned. It has assimilated the conditions of life -in various lands, and has brought about a general uniformity which -accounts for much of the ennui felt in modern life.</p> - -<p>As England was the first country to develop machine industry, so -was she the first to develop railways and to form a powerful steam -mercantile marine. Through the latter agency she has now in her -hands about sixty-four per cent of the carrying trade of the world. -Within sixty years about 350,000 miles of railway have been built -throughout the globe. Atlantic and Pacific are united by several -lines of steel; while the locomotive has penetrated remote regions -of Africa inhabited by barbarous tribes, and wastes of central Asia -where it confronts the relics of the dead and buried civilizations. -This immense power, the greatest in the modern world, is mainly in -the hands of monopolist corporations, among whom there is the same -necessary tendency to aggregation, only far more marked, as is found -in productive industries. The first small lines built to connect towns -not far off have been added to others bit by bit; as from the original -Stockton and Darlington Railway, less than twenty miles long, we get -the great and wealthy North Eastern Railway of to-day. In America a -single corporation controls as much as 7,000 miles of rail: and the -end of the century will perhaps see the great Siberian Pacific in -actual existence. As in railways, so in steam vessels. Huge fleets -like the Cunard,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_76">[76]</span> the Orient, the Messageries Maritimes, are owned by -cosmopolitan capital, and sustain the traffic and commerce, not of a -country, not even of a continent, but of the whole world. Such is the -immense revolution in the methods of distribution effected in our time -by the operation of capitalism.</p> - -<p>We must now consider what the term “capitalist” is coming to signify. -Had the term been used half a century ago it would have connoted a -class, unscrupulous perhaps in the main, with low aims, little culture, -and less fine sympathy or imagination. It was nevertheless a socially -useful class, which at that time performed real service. It is a -leading thought in modern philosophy that in its process of development -each institution tends to cancel itself. Its special function is born -out of social necessities: its progress is determined by attractions -or repulsions which arise in society, producing a certain effect which -tends to negate the original function. Thus early society among the -Aryan peoples of Europe develops a leader in war or council who grows, -by processes which in England, <i>e. g.</i>, can be clearly traced, -into a king with genuine functions, a leader of the people in war like -William I, or a powerful civil ruler and statesman like Henry I. The -fact that such men were brutal or wicked is of little account: the -important fact about them is, that in a barbarous chaotic society they -performed some indispensable services. But the very putting forth of -the kingly power arouses antagonism; then produces armed resistance -by a combined group; and finally leads to overthrow either by the -destruction of the king or by depriving him of all real power and -reducing him to a mere ornamental puppet. The very power originally -believed to be beneficent becomes tyrannical: it needs to be checked -more and more, until finally it practically ceases to exist, and the -curious paradox is seen of a monarch who does not rule. History proves -abundantly that men do not rise and overthrow wicked and corrupt rulers -merely because they are wicked and corrupt. It is part of the terrible -irony of history that a Louis XV dies in his bed, while a William the -Silent or a Lincoln falls a victim to the assassin. What men do not -long tolerate is either obstructiveness or uselessness.</p> - -<p>Now, if we apply these ideas to the evolution of the capitalist, what -is it we see? The capitalist was originally an <em>entrepreneur</em>, -a manager who worked hard at his business, and who received what -economists have called the “wages of superintendence.”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">[77]</span> So long as -the capitalist occupied that position, he might be restrained and -controlled in various ways; but he could not be got rid of. His “wages -of superintendence” were certainly often exorbitant; but he performed -real functions; and society, as yet unprepared to take those functions -upon itself, could not afford to discharge him. Yet, like the King, he -had to be restrained by the legislation already referred to; for his -power involved much suffering to his fellows. But now the capitalist is -fast becoming absolutely useless. Finding it easier and more rational -to combine with others of his class in a large undertaking, he has -now abdicated his position of overseer, has put in a salaried manager -to perform his work for him, and has become a mere rent or interest -receiver. The rent or interest he receives is paid for the use of a -monopoly which not he, but a whole multitude of people, created by -their joint efforts.</p> - -<p>It was inevitable that this differentiation of manager and capitalist -should arise. It is part of the process of capitalist evolution due -to machine industry. As competition led to waste in production, so it -led to the cutting of profits among capitalists. To prevent this the -massing of capital was necessary, by which the large capitalists could -undersell his small rivals by offering, at prices below anything they -could afford to sell at, goods produced by machinery and distributed -by a plexus of agencies initially too costly for any individual -competitor to purchase or set on foot. Now for such massive capitals, -the contributions of several capitalists are needed; and hence has -arisen the Joint Stock Company or <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Compagnie Anonyme</i>. Through -this new capitalist agency a person in England can hold stock in an -enterprise at the Antipodes which he has never visited and never -intends to visit, and which, therefore, he cannot “superintend” in any -way. He and the other shareholders put in a manager with injunctions -to be economical. The manager’s business is to earn for his employers -the largest dividends possible: if he does not do so he is dismissed. -The old personal relation between the workers and the employer is gone; -instead thereof remains merely the cash nexus. To secure high dividends -the manager will lower wages. If that is resisted there will probably -be either a strike or lock-out. Cheap labor will be perhaps imported by -the manager; and if the work-people resist by intimidation or organized -boycotting, the forces of the State (which they help to maintain) will -be used against<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">[78]</span> them. In the majority of cases they must submit. -Such is a not unfair picture of the relation of capitalist to workman -to-day: the former having become an idle dividend-receiver. The dictum -of orthodox political economy, uttered by so competent an authority as -the late Professor Cairnes, runs:—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“It is important, on moral no less than on economic grounds, to -insist upon this, that no public benefit of any kind arises from the -existence of an idle rich class. The wealth accumulated by their -ancestors and others on their behalf, where it is employed as capital, -no doubt helps to sustain industry; but what they consume in luxury -and idleness is not capital, and helps to sustain nothing but their -own unprofitable lives. By all means they must have their rents and -interest, as it is written in the bond; but let them take their proper -place as drones in the hive, gorging at a feast to which they have -contributed nothing.”<a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p> -</div> - -<p>The fact that the modern capitalist may be not only useless but -positively obstructive was well illustrated at a meeting of the -shareholders of the London and South Western Railway on 7th February -last. Three shareholders urged a reduction in third-class fares. The -chairman pointed out the obvious fact that such a reduction would -probably lower the dividend, and asked the meeting if that was what -they wished. He was, of course, answered by a chorus of “No, no!” and -all talk of reduction of fares was at an end. Here is a plain sample -(hundreds might be quoted) of the evident interests of the public being -sacrificed to those of the capitalist.</p> - -<p>That joint-stock capitalism is extending rapidly everyone knows. In -the United States, according to <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Bryce, the wealth of joint-stock -corporations is estimated at one-fourth of the total value of all -property.<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> In England every kind of business, from breweries, banks, -and cotton-mills down to automatic sweetmeat machines, is falling into -the hands of the joint-stock capitalist, and must continue to do so. -Twenty years ago who would have supposed that a brewery like that of -Guinness or such a banking firm as Glyn Mills, and Co. would become -a joint-stock company? Yet we know it is so to-day. Capitalism is -becoming impersonal and cosmopolitan. And the combinations controlling -production become larger and fewer. Baring’s are getting hold of the -South African diamond fields:<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">[79]</span> A few companies control the whole -anthracite coal produce of Pennsylvania. Each one of us is quite “free” -to “compete” with these gigantic combinations, as the Principality of -Monaco is “free” to go to war with France should the latter threaten -her interests. The mere forms of freedom remain; but monopoly renders -them nugatory. The modern State, having parted with the raw material -of the globe, cannot secure freedom of competition to its citizens; -and yet it was on the basis of free competition that capitalism rose. -Thus we see that capitalism has cancelled its original principle—is -itself negating its own existence. Before considering its latest -forms, attention may here be conveniently directed to the Co-operative -movement, which is, on one side at any rate, closely allied to the -joint-stock development.</p> - -<p>The Co-operative movement had in England a Socialistic origin: for -its founder was Robert Owen. As <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Seligman says very truly in the -<i>Political Science Quarterly</i>: “Owen was the founder of the -Co-operative movement in England, a fact often ignored by those who -glibly use the word to-day with an utter failure to discern its -true significance.” And Owen himself avowed that his grand ultimate -object was “community in land,” with which he hoped would be combined -“unrestrained co-operation on the part of all, for every purpose of -human life.” It is thus important to associate co-operation with Robert -Owen—<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">clarum et venerabile nomen</i>—because there are many persons -who suppose that co-operation began with the Rochdale Pioneers in 1844. -What the Rochdale movement really did was to commence the process of -joint-stock shop-keeping, a very different thing from that which Owen -had in view.</p> - -<p>A powerful impetus was given to co-operation by the Christian Socialist -movement under Maurice and Kingsley. “Of all narrow, conceited, -hypocritical, anarchic and atheistic schemes of the Universe,” said -Kingsley, “The Cobden and Bright one is exactly the worst.” The -orthodox economic conclusions of the day fared badly at Kingsley’s -hands. “The man who tells us,” said he, “that we ought to investigate -Nature, simply to sit patiently under her, and let her freeze, and -ruin, and starve, and stink us to death, is a goose, whether he -calls himself a chemist or a political economist.” These Christian -Socialist leaders felt deeply the anguish and poverty of the workers -and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">[80]</span> the selfish apathy of the rich. “Mammon,” says Kingsley, “shrieks -benevolently whenever a drunken soldier is flogged; but he trims his -paletot and adorns his legs with the flesh of men and the skins of -women, with degradation, pestilence, heathendom, and despair; and then -chuckles complacently over his tailor’s bills. Hypocrite! straining -at a gnat and swallowing a camel.” All this is very admirable; but -cheap clothes are not made solely or chiefly for Mammon, but for -the masses, who are poor people. It is part of the sad irony of the -situation that the great majority are obliged to accept the alternative -of cheap clothes or none at all. And as the English climate and the -British matron combine to exercise an absolute veto over the latter -form of prehistoric simplicity, it follows that one portion of the -working-classes must, in order to be clothed, connive at the sweating -of another portion.</p> - -<p>The <i>Christian Socialist</i>, which was the organ of Maurice and -Kingsley, betrayed great simplicity as to the real nature of the -economic problem. It neglected Owen’s principle of “community in -land,” and supposed that by working together and selling articles -of good quality at a fair price poverty could be eliminated, while -yet every worker in the community was paying his tribute of economic -rent to the owners of the instruments of production. Thus the -movement had no economic basis; and when the moral idealism had -departed from it, no wonder that it degenerated into mere “divvy” -hunting and joint-stock shop-keeping. The economic advantages of -joint-stock shop-keeping are thus summed up by <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Robert Somers in -the “Encyclopædia Britannica” (Art., “Co-operation”): “Wholesome -commodities, ready-money payments, a dividend of from five to ten -per cent on share capital, and a bonus to non-members on the amount -of their purchases.” As joint-stock shop-keeping, co-operation is a -useful and cheap method of distribution, which has doubtless benefited -a considerable number of persons; but the notion that it can solve the -economic problem before society is “chimerical,” as <abbr title="doctor">Dr.</abbr> J. K. Ingram -tells us is the opinion of modern economists.<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> This, indeed, might -only be expected from the fact that 961 out of every 1,000 persons -in England die without furniture, investments, or effects worth -£300.<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> Economically considered,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_81">[81]</span> co-operation is, now that the -initial enthusiasm has died out of it, a subsidiary branch of the great -joint-stock enterprise. Ethically considered, its results are often -doubtful. In its chief stronghold, Lancashire, one observes a narrow -selfishness among its votaries, which could not be surpassed in the -most genteel quarters of Bayswater. Its ideal is not the raising of -the working class as a whole, but the raising of certain persons out -of the working into the middle class. If the advocates of co-operation -will abate their pretensions, and claim merely (1) that their method -is a useful and economic means of distribution among the lower-middle -and upper-working classes; and (2) that by its agency working men can -learn the important functions of organization and administration, their -claim will be freely admitted. But if they go further their vaulting -ambition will o’erleap itself. At the present rate of progress made -by co-operative societies as compared with joint-stock capitalist -companies, several generations will be in their graves before any deep -or general impression is made. And meanwhile, unless economic rent is -diverted from the class which at present absorbs it to the community -which creates it, co-operators, like the rest of us, must pay tribute -to the lords of the soil and of money. But the noteworthy fact about -co-operation, is that its very existence testifies to the process of -industrial and capitalist aggregation here insisted on as the great -social factor of our period. For co-operative societies supersede -individual by social distribution, effecting it without the waste -attendant on a number of little shops all competing against each other, -the owners of none of which can make a decent living. Co-operation, -therefore, well illustrates the economic evolution of the present age.</p> - -<p>I now come to treat of the latest forms of capitalism, the “ring” and -the “trust,” whereby capitalism cancels its own principles, and, as a -seller, replaces competition by combination. When capitalism buys labor -as a commodity it effects the purchase on the competitive principle. -Its indefinitely extended market enables it to do so; for it knows -that the workman must sell his labor to secure the means to live. -Other things being equal, therefore, it buys its labor in the cheapest -market. But when it turns round to face the public as a seller, it -casts the maxims of competition to the winds, and presents itself as -a solid combination. Competition, necessary at the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">[82]</span> outset, is found -ultimately, if unchecked, to be wasteful and ruinous. It entails -great expense in advertising; it necessitates the employment of much -unproductive labor; it tends to the indefinite lowering of prices; it -produces gluts and crises, and renders business operations hazardous -and precarious. To escape these consequences, the competing persons or -firms agree to form a close combination to keep up prices, to augment -profits, to eliminate useless labor, to diminish risk, and to control -the output. This is a “ring,” which is thus a federation of companies. -The best examples of “rings” and “pools” are to be found in America, -where capitalism is more unrestrained and bolder in its operations than -in Europe; and also where nearly all the active intellect is attracted -to those commercial pursuits that dominate American life.</p> - -<p>The individualist devotees of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i> used to teach us -that when restrictions were removed, free competition would settle -everything. Prices would go down, and fill the “consumer” with joy -unspeakable; the fittest would survive; and as for the rest—it was -not very clear what would become of them, and it really didn’t matter. -No doubt the “consumer” has greatly benefited by the increase in -production and the fall in prices; but where is “free competition” -now? Almost the only persons still competing freely are the small -shopkeepers, trembling on the verge of insolvency, and the workingmen, -competing with one another for permission to live by work. Combination -is absorbing commerce. Here are a few instances of the formation of -rings.</p> - -<p>A steel rail combination was some years ago formed among previously -competing firms in America. This combination discovered that too many -rails were being made and that prices were being cut. Accordingly, one -of the mills in the combination—the Vulcan mill of <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Louis—was -closed, and stood smokeless for years: its owners meanwhile receiving -a subsidy of $400,000 a year from the other mills in the combination -for <em>not</em> making rails. That is how the owners of the Vulcan mill -earned their “wages of superintendence.” It is needless to add that no -payment was made to the men for <em>not</em> working: they were thrown -on the streets to meditate on the right to “liberty and the pursuit of -happiness,” secured to them by the Declaration of Independence.</p> - -<p>Or, again, take the case of the anthracite coal lands of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">[83]</span> Pennsylvania, -occupying an area of some 270,000 acres, and held by the Reading -Coal and Iron Company, the Lehigh Valley Railroad, the Delaware, -Lackawanna and Western Railroad, the Delaware and Hudson Railroad, -the Pennsylvania Railroad, the Pennsylvania Coal Company, and smaller -firms and corporations tributary to these. The rich owners, popularly -known as the “coal barons,” agree to fix absolutely the wholesale price -of coal, always securing an immense rise just before the winter sets -in. There is no such thing known or possible as free trade or open -competition in the anthracite coal produce of America.</p> - -<p>Combinations in the United States have been made by the Western -millers, the New York icemen, Boston fish dealers, manufacturers of -sewer-pipe, copper miners, makers of lamps, pottery, glass, hoop-iron, -shot, rivets, candy, starch, sugar, preserved fruits, glucose, chairs, -vapor stoves, lime, rubber, screws, chains, harvesting machinery, pins, -salt, hardware, type, brass tubing, silk and wire. In these trades -freedom of production and sale has been for a time partially or wholly -destroyed. The American business man is very angry when boycotting -is resorted to by workmen; but he is quite ready to boycott others -when his interests lead that way. The stamped tinware makers in 1882, -formed a ring and expelled members who sold at lower prices than the -fixed rates, and refused to allow anyone in the pool to sell to the -offenders. Some of the previous facts are taken from an article by <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> -Henry D. Lloyd,<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> who has investigated capitalist combinations with -much knowledge and insight. From the same article I quote the following:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“On the 1st of April, 1882, when the rest of us were lost in the -reckless gaity of All Fools’ Day, forty-one tack manufacturers -found out that there were too many tacks, and formed the Central -Manufacturing Company of Boston, with 3,000,000 dollars capital. The -tack-mills in the combination ran about three days in the week. When -this combination a few weeks ago silenced a Pittsburg rival by buying -him out, they did not remove the machinery. The dead chimneys and idle -machines will discourage new men from starting another factory, or can -be run to ruin them if they are not to be discouraged in any other -way. The first fruits of the tack-pool were an increase of prices to -twice what they had been.”</p> -</div> - -<p>Again I quote <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Lloyd:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">[84]</span></p><div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“The men who make our shrouds and coffins have formed a close -corporation known as the ‘National Burial Case Association,’ and held -their annual convention in Chicago last year. Their action to keep up -prices and keep down the number of coffins was secret, lest mortality -should be discouraged.”</p> -</div> - -<p>From coffins to crackers is a short step in the study of capitalist -methods:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“The Western Cracker Bakers’ Association met in Chicago, in February, -to consider among other things ‘the reprehensible system of cutting -prices’ (<i>i. e.</i>, the reprehensible system of free competition -which capitalists in buying labor tell us is our salvation). They -first had a banquet. After their ‘merriment and diversion’ the -revellers, true to Adam Smith’s description, turned to consider ‘some -contrivance to raise prices.’ ‘The price-lists were perfected,’ said -the newspaper report; ‘and then they adjourned.’”</p> -</div> - -<p>In 1875 broke out a severe competition among the fire insurance -companies, upon the collapse of a previous pool; and the competition -cost them in New York City alone $17,500,000 in seven years. -Consequently in 1882 they made a new combination which covered the -whole country, and which <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Lloyd declares to be wealthy, cohesive, -and powerful. Though there is no pool or ring, I am credibly informed -that there is a common understanding among the fire insurance companies -of London. One of the most noted of combinations has been the great -Copper Syndicate which attracted world-wide attention early in 1888. -It was formed by some French speculators in October, 1887, and during -the eighteen months of its existence, maintained copper at a purely -arbitrary price in all the markets of the world. At its head was M. -Eugène Secretan, managing director of the Société des Métaux, the -world’s largest buyer of, and dealer in, manufactured copper. The -syndicate’s agents bought all the copper that was visible and for -sale, the result of their speculation being that the price of copper -in the London market rose from less than £40 to over £80 a ton, and -the price of Lake Superior copper in America rose from 10¹⁄₂ cents to -17³⁄₄ cents per pound. M. Secretan informed a London journal that his -designs were purely philanthropic. “Our only purpose,” said he, “is -that every miner, dealer and manufacturer should have fair remuneration -for his work.” Thanks to M. Secretan’s philanthropy, copper, tin, lead -and spelter rose enormously in price; several trades were more or -less paralysed; and in France large numbers of workmen<span class="pagenum" id="Page_85">[85]</span> were thrown -out of employment. And let it not be supposed that the suicide of M. -Denfert-Rochereau, which heralded the collapse of this first attempt -to corner the world’s copper—a collapse due to a miscalculation of -the extent to which the supply of copper could increase under the -stimulus of high prices—offers us any security against a repetition -of the attempt. On the contrary, it has shewn how the thing may be -safely done. The metal hoarded by the unlucky speculators is still so -far cornered that it has been kept off the market up to the present, -prices being not yet normal. “To a regular trust it must and will come -at last,” says <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> E. Benjamin Andrews, of Cornell University. “Nor -has aught taken place to indicate that a Copper Trust, organized like -the Standard Oil Trust, with its energy and relentless methods, would -fail.”<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a></p> - -<p>The Individualist who supposes that Free Trade plus private property -will solve all economic problems is naturally surprised at these -“rings,” which upset all his crude economic notions; and he very -illogically asks for legislation to prevent the natural and inevitable -results of the premises with which he starts. It is amusing to note -that those who advocate what they call self-reliance and self-help are -the first to call on the State to interfere with the natural results of -that self-help, of that private enterprise, when it has overstepped a -purely arbitrary limit. Why, on ordinary commercial principles, should -not a copper syndicate grasp all the copper in the world? It is merely -the fittest surviving. The whole case against Socialism is assumed by -its most intelligent opponents to lie in that Darwinian theory. And yet -when the copper syndicate or the “coal barons” survive, they arouse -against themselves the fiercest and, from the commercial point of view, -the most unreasonable antagonism. As sin when it is finished is said -to bring forth death, so capitalism when it is finished brings forth -monopoly. And one might as well quarrel with that plain fact as blame -thorns because they do not produce grapes, or thistles because they are -barren of figs.</p> - -<p>The story of the growth of capitalism is not yet complete. The -“ring” is being succeeded by a more elaborate organization known as -the “trust.” Although in England great combinations like the Salt -Union are rapidly rising, yet we must again travel<span class="pagenum" id="Page_86">[86]</span> to America to -learn what the so-called “trust” is. The fullest information on the -subject of trusts is contained in a report of a Committee of the New -York State Legislature, which was appointed to investigate the new -combination. The following trusts were inquired into: Sugar, milk, -rubber, cotton-seed oil, envelope, elevator, oil-cloth, Standard oil, -butchers’, glass, and furniture. A trust is defined by the Committee as -a combination “to destroy competition and to restrain trade through the -stockholders therein combining with other corporations or stockholders -to form a joint-stock company of corporations, in effect renouncing -the powers of such several corporations, and placing all powers in the -hands of trustees.” The general purposes and effects are stated to -be “to control the supply of commodities and necessities; to destroy -competition; to regulate the quality; and to keep the cost to the -consumer at prices far beyond their fair and equitable value.” It -is unnecessary to deal with all these trusts, which possess certain -features in common. I will select one or two, particularly the great -Standard Oil Trust and the Cotton-seed Oil Trust.</p> - -<p>The Standard Oil Trust is probably the largest single business -monopoly in the world, the value of all its included interests being -estimated, according to the evidence submitted, at £29,600,000. In the -report it is described as “one of the most active and possibly the -most formidable monied power on this continent. Its influence reaches -into every State, and is felt in remote villages; and the products of -its refineries seek a market in almost every seaport on the globe.” -The germ of this huge monopoly was a small petroleum refinery near -Cleveland, bought by one Rockefeller, a book-keeper in a store, and a -friend of his, a porter, with borrowed money. Rockefeller formed an -acquaintance with a rich whiskey distiller, who advanced money and -put his son-in-law Flagler into the business. This person’s doctrines -are thus described: “He says that there is no damned sentiment about -business; that he knows no friendship in trade; and that if he gets -his business rival in a hole he means to keep him there.” Such a man -is eminently fitted to be the founder of a monopoly: he is a hero of -self-help; for he helps himself to anything he can lay his hands on. -A second refinery was established in Ohio, and a warehouse opened in -New York. The concern grew, and was incorporated as the Standard Oil -Company. It is charged with having secured special legislation by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">[87]</span> -judicious expenditure in the lobbies of the Ohio and Pennsylvania -Legislatures. By entering into arrangements with the trunk railway -lines, it secured special rates for transit. New refineries were -established and new oil lands in Pennsylvania acquired; the capital -was increased; and an enormous yearly business was done. After a time -the company controlled every avenue of transportation; managed all -the largest refineries in the land; and was able to shut off every -competitor from either receiving supplies or shipping its products. -New companies, nominally distinct, but all under the control of the -same men, were incorporated in New Jersey, Ohio, West Virginia and -other States. The monopoly elected one of its chief stockholders -into the United States Senate, it is said, through bribery in the -Ohio Legislature over which body it certainly acquired strong hold. -These tactics were known as “coal oil politics.” All the dirty work -was, of course, done through agents, the directors pretending perfect -innocence. In 1882 the Standard Oil Companies were consolidated in the -Standard Oil Trust.<a id="FNanchor_61" href="#Footnote_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> The stockholders surrendered their stock to the -trustees, nine in number, created under the agreement, and received -certificates in the place thereof, the representatives of the trust -and the stockholders in the refineries making a joint valuation of the -refineries, and the certificates being issued to that amount. Thus the -separate concerns were merged in one gigantic business, controlled by -nine men (owning a majority of the stock), having a monopoly of nearly -all the oil lands in America, controlling legislative votes, forming a -solid alliance with the railway and shipping interests, and determining -to a gallon how much oil shall be produced and refined, and to a -fraction of a cent what shall be its price. In 1887 there was a cash -dividend of 10 per cent. declared, besides a stock dividend of 20 per -cent. on the certificates of four years’ aggregation. In addition to -the enormous stock they hold, the trustees receive an annual salary of -£5,000. What are the economic results of this combination? It has not -raised prices, as the trusts were charged by the committee with doing. -On the contrary there has been a steady decrease in price during the -decade 1877-1887. The consumption of oil has also enormously increased. -The working and producing expenses have been greatly lowered by the -dismissal of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">[88]</span> needless labor and vast improvements in machinery; the -pipe lines controlled by the trust having displaced 5,700 teams of -horses and 11,400 men in handling the oil. Thus of this trust we may -say that though the means used to establish it were morally doubtful or -even bad, the political results disastrous, the economic results have -been beneficial, except in the matter of helping to form an unemployed -class through the dismissal of needless labor consequent on the -development of machinery.</p> - -<p>The Cotton-seed Oil Trust was organized two or three years ago in the -State of Arkansas.<a id="FNanchor_62" href="#Footnote_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> Upwards of seventy different companies had been -competing with each other and consequently suffering heavy losses. -Their mills being comparatively small and equipped with imperfect -machinery, they were glad to combine; and those that did not were -forced to close. The seventy corporations, the vast majority of the -members of which had agreed to the combination, surrendered their stock -to a body of trustees and received in return $100 certificates. The -various mills send a monthly report to the trust; and if the officers -in a given mill do not sell at the terms imposed, they are dismissed -by the trust.<a id="FNanchor_63" href="#Footnote_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> The object of the trust was declared by a witness -to be to prevent bankruptcy, to improve methods, to find markets, to -develop the enterprise and to make money. The economic result has been -displacement of labor by the machinery and great economy in production. -Incidentally it came out that much cotton-seed oil was sold to the -French and Italian buyers, who mix it with a little olive oil and -export it back to America and to England, where a confiding public -purchases it as pure Tuscan olive oil—an interesting illustration of -international trade morality.</p> - -<p>An examination of the milk and butchers’ trust ought to be a revelation -to those who imagine that trade is “free,” and that competition rules. -On April 29th, 1885, the directors of the Milk Exchange met in New York -and unanimously resolved:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“That on the first day of May next, and until otherwise ordered, -the market price of milk produced from meadow hay and sound cereals -be 2¹⁄₂ cents per quart, and that produced from brewers’ grains and -glucose and corn starch refuse be 2 cents per quart.”<a id="FNanchor_64" href="#Footnote_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> -</p> -</div> - -<p>A representative of the Sheep and Lamb Butchers’ Mutual<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">[89]</span> Benefit -Association testified that the members of that body agreed that they -would only buy sheep and calves from the Sheep Brokers’ Association, -a penalty for violation of this rule being imposed at the rate of 15 -cents a head per sheep or calf. The absolute despotism, and the system -of espionage involved in such regulation is obvious. Here is a copy of -a document issued by this body:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“New York, January 9, 1888. Permission has been granted by the board -of trustees of this association to Simon Strauss to buy sheep and -lambs in New York markets, providing he buys no sheep and lambs from -outsiders, under penalty of 15 cents per head fine. Richard S. Tobin, -Secretary.”<a id="FNanchor_65" href="#Footnote_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p> -</div> - -<p>Occasionally the Association relaxed. On November 5th, 1887, according -to its minutes,</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>“The application of John Healey, No. 2, to be granted the privilege of -buying a few sheep and lambs without the 15 cents being charged to the -brokers, was favorably acted upon.”</p> -</div> - -<p>This is not a record of Bagdad under the caliphs, but of the Republican -State of New York! The threatened despotism of Socialism has been often -eloquently dwelt on; but what of the actual despotism of to-day?</p> - -<p>Now what does this examination of trusts show? That, granted private -property in the raw material out of which wealth is created on a huge -scale by the new inventions which science has placed in our hands, the -ultimate effect must be the destruction of that very freedom which -the modern democratic State posits as its first principle. Liberty to -trade, liberty to exchange products, liberty to buy where one pleases, -liberty to transport one’s goods at the same rate and on the same terms -enjoyed by others, subjection to no <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">imperium in imperio</i>: these -surely are all fundamental democratic principles. Yet by monopolies -every one of them is either limited or denied. Thus capitalism is -apparently inconsistent with democracy as hitherto understood. The -development of capitalism and that of democracy cannot proceed without -check on parallel lines. Rather are they comparable to two trains -approaching each other from different directions on the same line. -Collision between the opposing forces seems inevitable.</p> - -<p>But both democracy and the new capitalist combinations<span class="pagenum" id="Page_90">[90]</span> which threaten -it are inevitable growths of an evolutionary process. We are therefore -brought to consider the question whether the ring, syndicate, or trust -either can or ought to be destroyed. These combinations can be shown to -be the most economical and efficient methods of organizing production -and exchange. They check waste, encourage machinery, dismiss useless -labor, facilitate transport, steady prices, and raise profits—i.e., -they best effect the objects of trade from the capitalist’s point -of view. Now, the opponents of Socialism say that without this -enterprising capitalist we cannot live. He “provides employment,” they -say. Well, if we need him, we must obviously pay his price. If he has -a natural monopoly of a function indispensable to social progress, -society must concede the terms he imposes. These terms are briefly -large combinations of capitalist ownership. In this way he can best -organize business; if we do not choose to let him do it in this way, -he will not do it for us at all. From his point of view that is a fair -position to take up; and it places the Individualist opponent of trusts -in an awkward dilemma. For he must either submit to trusts or give up -capitalists, in which latter case he becomes a Socialist. The answer of -Socialism to the capitalist is that society can do without him, just -as society now does without the slave-owner or feudal lord, both of -whom were formerly regarded as necessary to the well-being and even the -very existence of society. In organizing its own business for itself, -society can employ, at whatever rate of remuneration may be needed to -call forth their powers, those capitalists who are skilled organizers -and administrators. But those who are mere dividend-receivers will no -longer be permitted to levy a contribution on labor, but must earn -their living by useful industry as other and better people have to do.</p> - -<p>It may be said that society is not yet ripe for this transformation, -nor is it. The forms of the democratic State are not yet perfected, nor -has the economic evolution yet proceeded generally far enough, even in -England, not to speak of the less advanced European countries. Much yet -remains to be done through both the education of the intellect and the -development of a nobler public spirit. But on the other hand we seem -to be rapidly approaching such an <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">impasse</i> that some very large -and definite extension of collective authority must be made. This would -seem to involve on one side general reduction of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">[91]</span> hours of labor, -and on the other an attempt to absorb by the community a portion of -those social values which it creates. In reference to ground values it -may be anticipated that local democratic authorities will secure them -for the benefit of the people by any means which may be found expedient.</p> - -<p>As regards the great combinations of capital, State action may take -one of three courses. It may prohibit and dissolve them; it may tax -and control them; or it may absorb and administer them. In either -case the Socialist theory is <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ipso facto</i> admitted, for each is -a confession that it is well to exercise a collective control over -industrial capital. If the first of these courses is taken a distinctly -retrogressive policy is definitely adopted, a policy of alarm at what -<abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Cleveland called the “communism of capital,” a policy of reversion -to the chaos of “free competition,” and of cession of the undoubted -benefits which combination has secured. Such a policy would signify the -forcible prevention of acquisition of property, the very thing dearest -to the Individualist. If the powers of acquisition, now evidently -dependent on combination, are to be restricted, what becomes of the -“incentive to industry,” the “reward of abstinence,” and all the rest -of the worn out phrases which have so often done duty in the place -of argument? If the syndicate or the trust represents the legitimate -outcome of capitalism—if it is necessary to give order to trade and -to prevent the ruinous waste of unrestricted competition, how absurd -it is for the State to say to the capitalist: “You shall carry your -privileges of acquisition just up to the point where competition is -likely to ruin you; but there you shall stop. Immediately you and -your friends combine to prevent waste, to regulate production and -distribution, to apply new methods of manufacture, we shall absolutely -prevent you or restrain you by vexatious regulations.” To which the -capitalist may be supposed to reply: “I cannot fulfil my function in -society at this serious risk. I shall never know security—never be -even moderately sure of reaping that reward to which I am admittedly -entitled. If you intend to fetter my action in this way after having -proclaimed me free to own the raw material out of which wealth is -made—if you compel me to stop at a purely arbitrary line, I must -inform you that I am not going to undertake business on such terms.” -Would not the capitalist say something like this; and from his point of -view would he not be right?</p> - -<p>If it were instantly possible to do so, we should take the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_92">[92]</span> capitalist -at his word; appropriate the necessary instruments of production; -and make them common property, the values they create accruing to -the community. But the human race generally contrives to exhaust -every device which stupidity can suggest before the right line of -action is ultimately taken. I think therefore that some probably -inefficient method of taxation and public control over combinations -will, as a matter of fact, be adopted. Such legislation will immensely -restrict individual liberty in certain directions, will produce much -friction, and may possibly hamper production; until by a long series -of experiments men shall discover what is the most reasonable way of -acquiring for the community as a whole the wealth which it produces. -But in any case individualism or anything whatever in the nature of -<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i> goes by the board.</p> - -<p>And now, finally, what is the immediate policy for rational students of -economics and genuine social reformers to adopt? Their motto must be, -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Nulla vestigia retrorsum</i>. To all quack proposals they must offer -a steady resistance. These proposals will take the form of attempts to -bring back some economic condition out of which society has emerged. -One quack will desire to revive the old British yeomanry; another will -talk nonsense about “Fair Trade;” a third will offer to the rustic -“three acres and a cow”; while a fourth will see salvation in getting -rid of primogeniture and entail and “planting” prosperous laborers -on the soil—as though the laborers grew there like trees. Those who -understand the economic crisis may be ready and eager to support any -reform, however small, which is a genuine step forward: but they cannot -support any effort to call back the past. They may help to build a -new bridge across the gulf that separates us from the Co-operative -Commonwealth; but they can never repair the old broken-down structure -which leads back to Individualism. Instead, therefore, of attempting -to undo the work which capitalists are unconsciously doing for the -people, the real reformer will rather prepare the people, educated -and organized as a true industrial democracy, to take up the threads -when they fall from the weak hands of a useless possessing class. By -this means will the class struggle, with its greed, hate, and waste, -be ended, and the life hinted at by Whitman in his “Song of the -Exposition” be attained:</p> - -<p class="poetry"> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">“Practical, peaceful life, the people’s life, the People themselves,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Lifted, illumined, bathed in peace—elate, secure in peace.”</span><br /> -</p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> Enc. Brit., art. “Cotton.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> “History of the Eighteenth Century,” i. 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> See the evidence contained in <abbr title="volume">Vol.</abbr> I of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Morse -Stephen’s “History of the French Revolution.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> History of the Eighteenth Century, iv, 450.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> “Some Leading Principles of Political Economy,” <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> “The American Commonwealth,” iii, note on <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 421.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> “Encyclopædia Britannica”: Art., “Political Economy.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> Mulhall: “Dictionary of Statistics.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> “Lords of Industry.” <i>North American Review</i>, June, -1884.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> Quarterly Journal of Economics, July, 1889.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_61" href="#FNanchor_61" class="label">[61]</a> Report of Senate Committee, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 419.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_62" href="#FNanchor_62" class="label">[62]</a> Report of Senate Committee, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 233, <i>et seq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_63" href="#FNanchor_63" class="label">[63]</a> Report, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 244.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_64" href="#FNanchor_64" class="label">[64]</a> Report of Senate Committee, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 305.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_65" href="#FNanchor_65" class="label">[65]</a> Report of Senate Committee, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 497.</p> - -</div> -</div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">[93]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="MORAL">MORAL.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY SYDNEY OLIVIER.</p> - - -<p>The argument of this fourth instalment of Socialist criticism may be -provisionally described as an attempt to justify Socialist ideals -by the appeals to canons of moral judgment accepted generally and -supported by the results of positive ethical science. The previous -essays have made it clear that we are dealing with Socialism in -that restricted sense in which it is defined by Schaeffle,<a id="FNanchor_66" href="#Footnote_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> as -having for its aim “the replacement of private capital by collective -capital: that is, by a method of production which, upon the basis of -the collective property of the sum of all the members of the society -in the instruments of production, seeks to carry on a co-operative -organization of national work.” We are not dealing with Socialism as a -religion, nor as concerned with questions of sex or family: we treat it -throughout as primarily a property-form, as the scheme of an industrial -system for the supply of the material requisites of human social -existence.</p> - -<p>If it were admitted that the establishment of such a system would -guarantee just this much—that abject poverty should be done away, and -that every man and woman should be ensured the opportunity of obtaining -sufficient food and covering in return for a moderate day’s work, we -might still be far from convincing some people that the realization of -that ideal will be a good thing for the world. There are still a great -many who, though they may not join in the common prophecy that the -chief results of such a system would be an increase in beer-drinking -and other stupid self-indulgence,<a id="FNanchor_67" href="#Footnote_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> yet regard starvation and misery -as part of the inevitable order of nature,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_94">[94]</span> and as necessary conditions -of progress, conducive to the survival of what they are pleased to -call the “fittest” types of life. Such critics see danger to progress -in any attempt to enrol intelligence and adaptiveness into conscious -combination against starvation and misery, to extinguish by concerted -effort survivals of the accidents of primitive barbarism against -which as individuals we are always struggling. This aim of Socialism, -accordingly, does not wholly commend itself to their moral judgment, -to their opinion of what is <em>good</em> in the widest sense, although -they may willingly admit that the aim possesses a certain element of -shortsighted good intention. Other persons, influenced by religious -conceptions older than that of progress, and regarding morality less -as determined by reference to that end than as a concern of the -individual, a certain state of the soul of each man, are inclined to -view the material evils which Socialists desire to get rid of, as a -necessary schooling and discipline without which individual morality -would decay.</p> - -<p>Against these doctrines Socialists would maintain that the ordering -of our national life, and of the relations between individuals and -social groups throughout the world in accordance with the principles -of Socialism, is the effectual and indispensable process for ensuring -to the mass of mankind the advantages of progress already effected and -its continued and orderly development, and for the realisation, in -individuals and the State, of the highest morality as yet imagined by -us.</p> - -<p>It may be well at this point to anticipate a challenge to define what -is meant by the word “Morality,” and to briefly explain the position -which will be assumed, and the method which will be followed throughout -the succeeding observations. It must be remembered that the subject -of this essay is “The Moral Aspect of the Basis of Socialism,” and -not “The Socialist View of the Basis of Morals.” We may therefore -conscientiously steer clear of the whirlpool of agelong controversy as -to what that basis is, merely noting as we pass that any metaphysic -of Ethics being necessarily universal, there is in this sense no -special ethic or morality of Socialism. By such cautious procedure we -sacrifice indeed the fascinating ambition to exhibit, by impressive -dialectic pageant of deduction from first principles, the foundation -of formal Socialism in the Idea that informs the universe. But we also -avoid the certainty of losing, at the very outset of our attempted -demonstration,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">[95]</span> the company of all but that minority who might assent -to our fundamental propositions. A further sacrifice we shall make, in -descending to the unpretentious methods of empiricism; for we thereby -renounce the right of appeal to that theologic habit of mind common -to Socialists with other pious persons. <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Henry George, educated -under the American Constitution, may share the familiarity of its -framers with the intentions of the Creator and the natural rights of -Man. He may prove, as did <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert Spencer in his generous youth, -that private property in land is incompatible with the fundamental -right of each individual to live and to own the product of his labor. -But positive ethical science knows nothing of natural and fundamental -rights: it knows nothing of individual liberty, nothing of equality, -nothing of underlying unity. Yet here again our loss has some redress; -for a brief survey will assure us that various schools of moral -philosophy, differing in their characteristic first principles, are -converging in the justification of Socialism; and that the practical -judgments of contemporary mankind as to what sort of conduct is -“moral,” and what conditions make for the increase of “common -morality,” are in practice largely coincident. They offer, at least, -a body of provisional opinion, or prejudice, to which we can appeal -in presenting Socialism for criticism of its morality. The tribunal -is by no means infallible: still, the common contemporary sense of -humanity may count for something. But in approaching the criticism of -Socialism from the point of view of ethics, we are bound to go a little -deeper than this. While accepting the phenomena of current opinion on -morality as part of our material, we must follow the explorations of -ethical speculation into the causes and history of the development -of those opinions. By examining the genesis of convictions that this -or that kind of action is good or bad, moral or immoral, we shall be -helped to form a judgment as to which appears likely to persist and -be strengthened, and which to be modified, weakened, or forgotten. If -the claim of Socialism rests on judgments of the latter class, we may -know that it is a moribund bantling; if they preponderate among the -obstacles to its credit, we may prophesy encouragingly of it; if it is -supported by those judgments whose persistence seems essential to the -survival of the individual and of society, we may be assured of its -realisation in the future.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_96">[96]</span></p> - -<p>Socialism appears as the offspring of Individualism, as the outcome -of individualist struggle, and as the necessary condition for the -approach to the individualist ideal. The opposition commonly assumed -in contrasting the two is an accident of the now habitual confusion -between personality and personalty, between a man’s life and the -abundance of things that he has. Socialism is merely Individualism -rationalized, organized, clothed, and in its right mind. Socialism is -taking form in advanced societies and the social revolution must be -brought to its formal accomplishment through the conscious action of -innumerable individuals seeking an avenue to rational and pleasant -existence for themselves and for those whose happiness and freedom -they desire as they do their own. All conscious action, all conscious -modification of conditions, is inspired by the desire of such personal -relief, satisfaction, or expression, by the attempt to escape from -some physical or intellectual distress. “Subjective volition, passion -it is,” says Hegel, “that sets men in activity: men will not interest -themselves for anything unless they find their individuality gratified -by its attainment.” This common end, this desire of personal relief -or satisfaction, we see throughout recorded or indicated history -impelling every living creature on the earth; merging itself, as we -trace it backwards, in the mere apparent will to live of organisms -not recognized as conscious, and in the indestructible energy of the -inorganic. The field of activity thus conceived presents a panorama of -somewhat large extent; but a very small division of it is all that we -shall have to do with. For morality, whatever be its nature and basis, -certainly does not become recognizable to us, we cannot attribute the -quality of rightness or wrongness, until the formation of society has -begun, until individuals are in conscious relation with individuals -other than themselves.</p> - -<p>If we could imagine an individual absolutely isolated, and having no -relation at all with other sentient beings, <em>we</em> could not say -that it was moral or immoral for him to eat, drink, sleep, breathe, -wash himself, take exercise, cough, sneeze, and the like, just as -much or as little, when or where he felt inclined. His conduct in -these activities must appear to us absolutely indifferent. We may -have some vague reflected suppositions as to what is necessary for -the dignity and development of the man’s “self,” as we might call -it; but this is a matter about<span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">[97]</span> which the man may pretend to know -as much as we do; and we have really no valid ground for prejudice -against the habits of the recluse Indian fakir, who has, on the -other hand, considerable claims to be regarded as a peculiarly holy -individual. But of every man living in society we can say, that if he -starves himself into inefficiency; if he gorges or fuddles himself; -if he sleeps unseasonably; if he abstains from the fresh air, the -cleanliness, and the exercise, necessary to keep his body healthy and -his presence pleasant; if he destroys his powers by over-work; then he -is acting wrongly, immorally, unreasonably, in extreme cases insanely. -(Insanity is only the name we give to abnormal deviation from what -are accepted as reasonable and intelligible desires and behavior.) -And if this is the case with actions of the kind loosely described as -self-regarding, with those which most nearly concern the agent’s own -person, much more is it so with the kind of actions which necessarily -and invariably affect other persons. Those relations of the individual -with his fellows in which subjective morality is chiefly recognized, -have no existence at all apart from society. Subjective morality, -then, being only distinguishable in the State, the extent of our -panorama is already much diminished; for in every gentile or national -society, and to some degree in the World-State of to-day, we find the -individualist activity, the desire and passion of the human unit, very -largely exercising itself in accordance with what we call a moral -habit. Innumerable types of society have been formed in the process of -life-development. In the oldest of these we recognize the elements of a -conventional morality, similar to that by which our own human society -is held together. We consider the ways of the ant; and we see that they -are wise.</p> - -<p>We find that in all societies those actions and habits are approved as -moral which tend to preserve the existence of society and the cohesion -and convenience of its members; and that those which are or seem to be -fraught with contrary tendencies are considered immoral. It is plain -that no society in which these judgments were habitually reversed -could continue in existence; and this fact will account for much of -that general inherited disposition to actions socially beneficial, -and inherited repugnance to those presumably the reverse, which form -so large a part of what we speak of as conscience. So deep in grain -have many of these common judgments come to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">[98]</span> be that their influence -has passed out of consciousness; and they are obeyed automatically or -instinctively without any reflexion as to their moral aspect arising in -the agent’s mind. It is, for example, so necessary for the existence -of society that the citizen should abstain from slaughtering at large, -such self-restraint is so evidently reasonable, its non-observance -so contrary to common sense, that when we find a murder done for -mere desire of bloodshed and under the impulse of no other passion -whatsoever, we do not think of the murderer as immoral, but rather -as insane, judging the man who would destroy the life of society as -coroners’ juries by their habitual verdict upon suicides pronounce of -the man who destroys his own.</p> - -<p>Most of the habits of activity and avoidance, necessary for the mere -physical existence of the individual as moral actions and abstentions -are necessary for the existence of society, have long ago become -automatic, and are sunk, so far as common opinion is concerned, -permanently out of the purview of moral criticism. All the involuntary -functions of the human body which conduce to its nutrition and -maintenance in health have been gradually acquired in the course of -ages, as the conditions necessary for the expression of the mere animal -will to live the largest and freest life permitted by the physical -environment. And as the bodily form and functions of the typical -individual of each species have accrued and become established as the -indispensable mechanic of the mere determination to exist, so the form -and institution of society, and the relations and mutual behavior of -its individuals, have been adjusted and established as the equally -indispensable conditions for the expression of the determination to -exist more fully, for the enlargement of freedom and opportunity for -the gratification of those passions and aspirations, the display of -those energies and activities which characterize the more complex forms -of life as it passes from the inorganic and vegetative to the conscious -and self-conscious stages of its evolution.</p> - -<p>The primitive forms of human society we must infer to have grown up -and survived simply because they increased the efficiency of man -as a feeding and a fighting animal, just as did those of the wolf, -the beaver, and the ant. Society has now grown to be for man the -indispensable guarantee not only of nutrition and protection, but of -the opportunity to imagine and attain a thousand varieties of more -refined satisfaction. So far<span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">[99]</span> as man has attained freedom to do and -be as he desires, he has attained it only through the evolution of -society. When a society perishes, as societies organically weak among -stronger competitors have done and will do, the individual perishes -with it, or is forced backwards with impaired freedom until a fresh -social integration renews and extends his powers of self-development. -Societies, as has been pointed out by Sidney Webb on page 51, must -safeguard their existence to-day for the very same reasons for which -society has formed itself. It has grown up for the convenience of -individuals, for their defence and relief under the pressure of -all that was not themselves—of Nature, as we call it—beasts, and -competing men, to give a little breathing space, a little elbow -room, amid the storm and stress of primæval existence; and from -that beginning it has been unfolded and elaborated, each step of -progress effected for the convenience of active individuals, until the -individual of to-day is born as a leaf upon a mighty tree, or a coral -insect in a sponge, himself to live his individual life, and in living -it to modify the social organism in which he has his being.</p> - -<p>Reviewing the development in society of the conditions for the -satisfaction of the individual will to live, and to live in the best -way conceivable, we see in the progress of moral ideas the progress of -discovery of the most reasonable manner of ordering the life of the -individual and the form of social institutions under the contemporary -environment. It has already been pointed out that some kinds of -anti-social action are so unreasonable, so obviously prejudicial -to the attainment of the common end of conscious individuals, that -we brand them unhesitatingly as insane. Instances suggested were -extreme personal uncleanliness or dissipation, and extreme cruelty -or blood-thirstiness. The reason why other anti-social or indirectly -suicidal kinds of action are not yet classed as madness, though there -is a steady tendency towards so treating them, is plainly that some -activities of the individual, though hurtful to other citizens just -as the activity of a pack of wolves or a predatory tribe is hurtful -to adjacent societies, are commonly aimed at gratifying impulses and -passions which are not yet grown so rare as blood-thirst, are not yet -recognized as irrational or valueless, or even are acknowledged to be -in their proper scope harmless, desirable, or necessary.</p> - -<p>It is an established social convention (in England) that it is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">[100]</span> immoral -to steal or to defraud. Only in very extreme cases do we account these -pursuits as evidences of mania; for though injustice and dishonesty are -incompatible with the health of society, and thus actually unreasonable -and indirectly suicidal, the desires which prompt men to them are only -at worst exaggerations of the desire for wealth or subsistence, which -everyone recognizes as a necessary condition of the mere continuance -of life. Nay, where the alternative is death for lack of subsistence, -many consider that neither are immoral. At the other extreme, when the -instinct prompts aggression in defiance of the conscious reason and -without assignable purpose of gain, when Jean Valjean robs the little -Savoyard, or a noble earl pockets the sugar-tongs, we speak of mental -aberration or of kleptomania.</p> - -<p>The case of self-defence is similar. Quarrelsomeness and violence -are destructive of social existence, or at best impede its higher -elaboration. But readiness of resentment and quickness of fist were -for ages and ages necessities for individual survival; and for ages -and ages more their kindred social qualities or spirit and valor were -necessary for social survival, and accordingly ranked as virtues. The -instruction to turn the other cheek to the smiter is even now, perhaps, -an exaggeration of the precept commendable to Socialists when charged -by the London police: to suffer one’s self to be killed without reason -is clearly and unmistakably immoral. As the western world advances -out of warfare into industry, more and more of what was once military -virtue becomes immorality in the individual; until an habitual ferocity -which might once have qualified its subject for chieftainship may -nowadays consign him to penal servitude or Bedlam.</p> - -<p>The foregoing illustrations have been treated, for the present purpose, -with reference only to the effect of the behavior of the individual -upon society. It is indeed certain that anti-social action does not, -as a rule, effect permanent satisfaction for the individual (isolated -instances, of the type of Shelley’s Count Cenci, notwithstanding); but, -independently of this, the actions and propensities of the individual -have always, it appears, been judged by his fellows moral or immoral -chiefly according to their supposed effects upon society. The object of -every living creature being to do as he pleases, if what he pleases to -do incommodes other people they will take measures to restrain him from -doing it. This they strive to effect by means of laws and conventional -codes of morality, the main difference between the two<span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">[101]</span> being that the -code of law is enforced by the infliction of direct personal punishment -by the officers of the State. This acceptance of codes of laws and -conventions of morality leads to a secondary series of judgments as -to right and wrong; for it comes to be accounted immoral to break the -law whether the law itself be good or not, and reprehensible to depart -from convention whether convention be any longer reasonable or not. -This secondary morality is as it were the bud-sheath of the individual, -which support he cannot dispense with until he has come to his full -powers, but which he must dispense with if he is to fully realise his -own freedom. Customary morality prevents him during the process of his -education from pursuing his own satisfaction across the corns of his -fellow creatures. In the process of education he learns that for the -unit in society the word <em>self</em> includes more than the individual: -the infant very soon finds out that what disagrees with his mother -disagrees with him; the child, that the failure of his father’s income -means misery and hunger to the family. To say nothing of the facts -of sympathy, every man born into an advanced society is early made -aware that the satisfaction of his mere material needs depends upon -the activities of that society around him quite as much as upon his -own. All through the growth of nations and societies the complexity -of this interdependence of individuals has increased, the areas of -social consciousness have been extended and unified, from the solitary -cave-dweller to the family or horde, from the tribe to the nation, and -from the nation, by commerce, to the world, till the fortunes of each -people have power over the hopes and fears of workers in every other, -and the arts, the learning, and the literature of a hundred painful -civilizations are available for us to-day, all the kingdoms of the -earth and their glory displayed in a moment of time.</p> - -<p>But not by bread alone does mankind live. Very early in the course of -human evolution must the type of individual to whom all society was -repugnant have been eliminated and suppressed by natural selection. -The social instinct, the disposition to find comfort in comradeship -independently of its material advantages, is of such evident -antiquity in Man that we are justified in speaking of it as one of -his fundamental and elementary characteristics. It is easy enough to -suggest theories of the origin of this adhesiveness, this affection, -this sympathy, in the conditions of racial survival: the important fact -for us is its remarkable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">[102]</span> susceptibility of cultivation and extension. -The individual in society does that which is pleasant to his friends, -and abstains from doing that which is unpleasant, not because he likes -to be thought a good fellow, or expects benefits in return, but simply -because it gives him immediate pleasure so to act. He is sensitive to -that which hurts them, not because he fears that his own defences are -weakened by their injury, but because they have actually become part of -himself by the extension of his consciousness over them. This social -instinct, this disposition to benevolent sympathy, appears almost -as inextinguishable as the personal desire of life: in innumerable -instances it has proved far stronger.</p> - -<p>The recognition by each individual of his dependence on society or -sensitiveness to his own interest, and his affection towards society -or sensitiveness to its interest: these two faces of the same fact -represent an intricate tissue of social consciousness extremely -sensitive to all kinds of anti-social, or immoral, action. The moral -education of the individual appears formally as the process of -learning, by sheer extension of knowledge and experience, and nothing -else, how he may harmonise and follow out his own desires in these two -aspects and their combinations. He has to learn how to provide for the -needs of his bodily life in a manner that will not interfere with the -freedom of others to do the same. Laws and conventions of morality -guide him at first in this respect; but the man cannot be said to be -free until he acts morally because, foreseeing that on the satisfaction -of these primary needs new desires will emerge whose satisfaction -will give him a more exquisite contentment, he perceives that it is -reasonable so to act. The existence and stability of society are the -indispensable guarantee for the general satisfaction of the primary -desires of individuals, therefore it is unreasonable to weaken society -by immoral action; but much more are the existence and health of -society indispensable conditions for the common birth and satisfaction -of the secondary desires, the desires which have created all that is -most valuable in civilisation and which find their satisfaction in -art, in culture, in human intercourse, in love. The moral education -of the individual is the lesson, not that desire is evil, and that he -can only attain his freedom by ceasing to desire, for this is death, -or desertion, and the army of the living presses on to fuller life; -but that the wider, fuller satisfaction is built upon the simpler, and -common<span class="pagenum" id="Page_103">[103]</span> morality a condition of its possibility; that there are certain -manners and methods in which, if he goes about to save his life, he -most infallibly will lose it; and that love, the social instinct, and -science, which is ordered knowledge, are his only reliable tutors in -practical morality.</p> - -<p>But man in society not only lives his individual life: he also -modifies the form of social institutions in the direction indicated by -reason—in such a manner, that is, as it seems to his understanding -will render them more efficient for securing freedom for that life -of his. And just as certain forms of individual activity, in their -passage into and through the field of positive criticism, appear first -as indifferent, because they seem to concern the individual only, then -as moral or immoral, because recognized as affecting society, later -as simply rational or insane, morality having here formally attained -its identification with reason and immorality with folly, and at -last become habitual, instinctive, and unconscious; so institutions, -originating in modes apparently accidental, come to be recognized -as useful and valuable additions to the machinery of existence, are -buttressed with all the authority and sanction of religion, and finally -pass into unquestioned acceptance by the common-sense of men. In time -some fundamental change in the conditions of the life of individuals -is introduced by causes similarly unforeseen: the form of the old -institution ceases to subserve the common end: it begins to cramp the -freedom of the majority, who no longer require its support. Meanwhile -it has established a minority, ostensibly controlling it for the -common weal, in a position to administer it in the sole interest of -their class. These, as their existence appears dependent on their -so administering it, cannot be untaught the habit except by such -modification of the institution as will render it again impossible for -any class to have a special interest in its contemporary form.</p> - -<p>This process is so familiar in history that it would be a waste of -time here to illustrate it by tracing it in the growth of monarchies, -aristocracies, priesthoods, chattel slavery, feudal bondage, -representative government, or others of its innumerable manifestations. -The institution of private property in certain things is in many -respects so reasonable and convenient for the majority of mankind, -and was so conspicuously advantageous for those stronger individuals -under whose leadership the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_104">[104]</span> beginnings of tribal civilisations were -developed, that very early in their history it received the sanction -of moral convention, religion, and law. It was obviously necessary -for the establishment of industrial society, that each man should own -the product of his labor and the tools necessary for him to labor -effectually. But the Industrial Revolution described in the third paper -of this series has entirely changed the conditions under which men -produce wealth, and the character of the tools with which they work, -while the sanctions of law and conventional morality still cling to -all that has been imported under the old definition of property. If -the idea so constantly appealed to in justification of property law -is to be realised; if the fruits of each man’s labor<a id="FNanchor_68" href="#Footnote_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> are to be -guaranteed to him and he is to own the instruments with which he works; -if the laws of property are not to establish a parasitic class taking -tribute from the labor of others in the forms of Rent and Interest, -then we must modify our administration of property. We must admit that -as the agricultural laborer cannot individually own the farm he works -on and its stock, as the factory hand cannot individually own the mill, -land and industrial capital are things in which private property is -impossible, except on condition of a small minority owning all such -property and the great majority none at all.</p> - -<p>Socialists contend that this system of private property in land and -capital is actively destructive of the conditions in which alone the -common morality necessary for happy social life is possible. Without -any demand upon the faith of those persons who deny the capacity of -average human nature for the temperance and kindliness indispensable -for the success of a true co-operative commonwealth, they assert that -this modern development of the property system (a development of the -last few generations only, and unprecedented in the history of the -world), is more and more forcing the individual into anti-social -disposition and action, and thereby destroying the promise of free and -full existence, which only the health and progressive development of -the social organism can give him. It has become plainly reasonable that -when this is the effect of our property system, we should modify our -institutions in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">[105]</span> directions which will give us freedom, just as we -modified the institutions which subjected us to a feudal aristocracy, -and abolished for ever the laws which enabled one man to hold another -as his chattel slave.</p> - -<p>There is on record a Greek proverb, that so soon as a man has ensured -a livelihood, then he should begin to practise virtue. We all protest -that he will do well to practise virtue under any circumstances; -but we admit on reflection that our judgment as to what is virtuous -action, depends upon the circumstances under which action is to be -taken. Whether we approve the killing of one man by another, depends -entirely on the circumstances of the case; and there is scarcely one -of the acts which our laws regard as criminal, which could not, under -imaginable circumstances, be justified. Our laws, and our conventional -opinions, as to what conduct is moral or immoral, are adapted to the -ordinary circumstances of the average man in society, society being in -them presumed to be homogeneous, not to contain in itself essential -distinctions between classes, or great contrasts between the conditions -of individuals.</p> - -<p>But that element in our private property system which is at present -the main object of the Socialist attack, the individual ownership of -the instruments of production, land and capital, in an age when the -use of those instruments has become co-operative, results, and must -inevitably result, as the foregoing dissertations have sought to prove, -in the division of society into two classes, whose very livelihood is -ensured to them by methods essentially different. The livelihood of -the typical proletarian is earned by the exercise of his faculties for -useful activity: the livelihood of the typical capitalist, or owner of -property, is obtained, without any contribution of his or her activity, -in the form of a pension called rent, interest, or dividend, guaranteed -by law out of the wealth produced from day to day by the activities of -the proletariat.</p> - -<p>Observe the effect of this distinction in moral phenomena. Most of our -common opinions as to social morality, are adapted to a society in -which every citizen is contributing active service. The most ancient -and universal judgments of mankind as to the virtues of industry, of -honesty, of loyalty and forbearance between man and man, of temperance, -fortitude and just dealing, point to the elementary conditions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">[106]</span> -necessary for the survival and strengthening of societies of equal and -free individuals dependent for their subsistence upon the exercise -of each one’s abilities, and upon his fitness for co-operation with -his fellows. But where a class or society exists, not dependent upon -its own industry, but feeding like a parasite upon another society -or class; when the individuals of such a parasitic society in no way -depend for their livelihood or their freedom upon their fitness for -co-operation one with another upon themselves, or upon any personal -relation with the class that feeds them; then the observation of the -moral conventions of industrial and co-operative societies is in many -respects quite unnecessary for the continuance of the life of the -parasitic society, or for the pleasant existence of the individuals -composing it. All that is necessary is that the established laws and -conventions should continue to be observed by the industrial class -(“it is required <em>in stewards</em> that a man be found faithful”); -and as the existence of the propertied class in modern societies, does -depend ultimately upon the observance by the bulk of the people of -this conventional morality, the propertied class professes publicly -to venerate and observe conventions, which, in its private practice, -it has long admitted to be obsolete. This complication is a perennial -source of cant. To this we owe the spectacle of Sir William Harcourt -advocating total abstinence, of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Arthur Balfour commending -Christianity; to this the continual inculcation of industry and thrift -by idle and extravagant people, with many another edifying variation on -the theme of Satan’s reproval of sin. Temperance, Christian morality, -industry, and economy are of considerable social utility; but for -the members of a propertied class they are not necessitated by the -conditions of its existence, and consequently in such classes are -neither observed nor commonly made the subject of moral criticism.</p> - -<p>Consider the case of industry alone—of the moral habit of earning -one’s subsistence by useful activity. Assuming sustenance to be -guaranteed, there is no obvious and pressing social necessity for -such exertion. No doubt the paradise of the maid-of-all-work—where -she means to do <em>nothing</em> for ever and ever—is the paradise of -an undeveloped intelligence. A society relieved of the function of -providing its own material sustenance need not relapse into general -torpor, though the result is very<span class="pagenum" id="Page_107">[107]</span> commonly that an individual so -circumstanced relapses into uselessness. It will be vain to preach to -such an individual that he will find his fullest satisfaction in honest -toil: he will simply laugh in your face, and go out partridge shooting, -hunting, or yachting, or to Monte Carlo or the Rocky Mountains, finding -in such an exercise of his capacities the keenest imaginable enjoyment -for months in succession. He may feel no inclination at all to work -for the benefit of the people whose work is supporting him: all that -he, like the rest of us, requires is to find some means of passing his -time in an agreeable or exciting manner. Accordingly, in that section -of our nation which speaks of itself as “society,” being indeed a -society separated by economic parasitism from the common mass, we find -that the characteristic activity is the provision of agreeable and -exciting methods of passing time. This being the end of fashionable -society, its code of morality is naturally quite different from the -code suitable for industrial societies. Truthfulness is preached in -these as a cardinal virtue. Lying is of course common enough in all -classes, and is generally immoral; but in the fashionable world it -is not only a perfectly legitimate means of avoiding an undesired -visitor, or almost any other unpleasant experience: it is a positive -necessity of conventional politeness and good manners. It is really -harmless here, almost a virtue. To return to the virtue of industry: -though the conventional morality of the people, necessary for the life -of the nation, permeates with its vibrations this parasitic society -which it enfolds; and though the unfailing contentment which a really -intelligent man finds in social activity keeps a good many of the -propertied class usefully occupied, the actual public opinion of that -class is absolutely in accordance with the conditions of their life. -The clerk in a Government office is congratulated by middle-class -acquaintances on his luck in obtaining a berth where he need do no -more work than he chooses; and it is habitually assumed that he will -choose, like the Trafalgar Square fountains, to play from ten to four, -with an interval for lunch. That may or may not be an adequate account -of his activities: the significant thing is that such an assumption -should not be considered insulting. But how indignantly will the very -same acquaintances denounce the idleness and untrustworthiness of a -British working man suspected, in the service of a private master, of -interpreting his time work as<span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">[108]</span> most servants of the public are good -humoredly assumed, without hint of disapproval, to interpret theirs!</p> - -<p>This obsolescence of elementary social morality is most noticeable in -women dependent upon incomes from property. They are doubly removed -from the primary conditions of life; they are less likely than their -men folk to be engaged in any work of perceptible social utility -outside of their own homes; and their intellectual education being -generally far more imperfect, it is only natural that their ideas of -morality should be still more intimately adapted to the conditions -of their class, and less to the general conditions of human society. -The angels of heaven, we have always understood, are exempt from the -apparatus of digestion, and are clothed as freely as the lilies of the -field. In any society where all common needs are so supplied it would -be immoral, surely, because a waste of time, to work as for a living. -Now the universal ideal of capitalism is that man, being created a -little lower than the angels, should raise himself to their level in -this respect by the acquisition of property, a process pleasantly -described as attaining a competence or independence, that is to say -the right to be dependent and incompetent. The result of this has -been a prejudice, which only within quite recent years has begun to -be seriously shaken, that it is humiliating, even disgraceful, for a -lady to have to earn her own living at all, for a gentleman to practise -a handicraft for money, for a nobleman to go into trade: a prejudice -for which, in a class society, there was much justification, but -which is obviously a fragment of class morality directly antagonistic -to the common social morality which recognises all useful industry -as praiseworthy. It is now yielding to economic pressure and to the -stimulus of the desire to get rich. Ladies are being driven, and in -spite of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Walter Besant’s protestations will continue to be driven, -into most of the female handicrafts, though some are still outside the -pale of respectability. Ranching in America, though not yet drovering -and butchering in England, is suitable occupation for the aristocracy. -The “directing” of companies and the patronizing of nitrogenous -Volunteer Colonels are legitimate modes of exploiting of a title. The -prejudice against useful employments is balanced for decency’s sake by -a hypocritical laudation of useless ones. The fiction so dear to the -Primrose Dame, that the rich are the employers of the poor, the idlers<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">[109]</span> -the supporters of the industrious, takes nowadays forms more insidious -than the rugged proposition that private vices are public benefits. The -amusements, the purely recreational activities, of country gentlemen -are glorified in the <i>National Review</i><a id="FNanchor_69" href="#Footnote_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> as “hard work.” It -is pretended that the leisured class is the indispensable patron and -promoter of culture and the fine arts. The claim that such functions -are virtues is a direct concession to the feeling that some effort must -be made to exhibit the practices of parasitic society as compatible -with its preaching of the common social morality.</p> - -<p>The same necessity causes an exaggerated tribute of praise to be -paid to such really useful work as is done under no compulsion but -that of the social instinct. This kind of activity is habitually -pointed to, by the friends of those who are engaged in it, as -evidence of extraordinary virtue. A few hours of attention every week -to the condition of the poor, a few gratuitously devoted to local -administration, a habit of industry in any branch of literature or -science: these are imputed as an excess of righteousness by persons -who denounce the wage laborer as an idler and a shirk. Such activity -is work of supererogation, approved but not required or expected. The -motto of “noblesse oblige” has not been adopted by the plutocracy. -Similar approbation and admiration are extended to those who, while -already earning their living by a reasonable day’s work, employ their -spare time, or a part of it, in gratuitous activities of the kinds -referred to. It may be safely said that by far the greater portion of -this kind of work is done by people who are simultaneously earning an -income in middle class professions or by the less exhausting forms of -wage labor. Most of them have probably had experience of the ridiculous -inappropriateness of the commendation usually paid to their gratuitous -energy by well-to-do friends. The activity is moral, no doubt; but -its exercise gives no sensation of virtue or praiseworthiness; it is -followed because it is seen to be reasonable, because it is the path -indicated by common-sense towards the satisfaction of the individual -passion for the extension of freedom and love.</p> - -<p>The phenomena of class morality are ancient and familiar enough. -They have varied throughout history with the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">[110]</span> changing character of -the basis of class distinctions. The great permanent distinction of -sex, and the social relations between man and woman which have arisen -thereout in the period of civilisation from which the world is now -emerging, have resulted not only in the establishment of distinct codes -of chastity for the sexes, but also in innumerable prejudices against -the participation of one sex or the other in activities having nothing -whatever to do with physiological distinction. They have even succeeded -in producing, through inequality of freedom and education, well marked -differences in mental habit, which show themselves continually when -men and women are confronted with the same questions of truthfulness, -honor, or logic. It is hardly necessary to observe that most of these -differences are distinctly traceable to the institution of private -property, and to its concentration in the hands of the male as the -stronger individual in a competitive society. The class moralities -of societies whose orders have been based immediately on status or -caste have formed the subject of an extensive literature. The tracing -of all such distinctions to their root in economic circumstances is -scarcely less interesting than the investigation of the same foundation -for sex morality. But even the interpreters of the Church Catechism -have abandoned the appeal to status as the basis of duty; the idea -of hereditary aristocracy is dead; and class distinctions and their -appurtenant ethics are now founded directly and obviously on property.</p> - -<p>We have glanced at some effects of our present property system which -work continually for the destruction of the traditions of social -morality in the capitalist class. The fundamental idea of that system, -that man can live without working, as the angels of heaven, is -(fortunately) self-contradictory in this respect, that in human society -no class can so live except by the double labor of another class or -classes. The would-be angelic society on earth must either own chattel -slaves, or be a military caste taking tribute, or a parasitical and -exploiting class extracting rent and interest by the operation of -the industrial system analysed in the preceding papers. Such a class -and such a system are, as we are all becoming aware, more virulently -revolutionary in their operation, and more certain to bring about their -own destruction than either chattel slavery or feudalism. Of these -three phases of human injustice that of wage slavery will surely be -the shortest. But meanwhile the propertied class assumes to represent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">[111]</span> -civilisation; its approved morality is preached and taught in church -and schools; it debases our public opinion; and it directly poisons all -that host of workers who are at present hangers-on of the rich, whether -as menial servants or as ministering to their especial amusements and -extravagance. There is no such snob as a fashionable dressmaker; and -there is no class of the proletariat so dehumanised as the class of -domestic servants.</p> - -<p>Now if these results are effected in the class whose livelihood is -assured, and whose education and culture have given it a hold on the -higher inducements to morality—if we here find morality strangled at -the root and starving, what shall we find when we turn to the masses -whose livelihood is not assured them? Our Greek, perhaps, would say -that it was impossible for them to practise virtue, just as Plato in -his “Republic” suggested that only the philosophic class could be -really moral, since slaves and the proletariat could not receive the -intellectual education necessary to train the reason. The great bulk -of the wage earning class in modern civilised countries is so far -assured of its livelihood that it remains thoroughly permeated with -common social morality. It is, from habit and preference, generally -industrious and kindly, thus exhibiting the two most important -qualifications for social life. It remains to a great extent honest, -though competition and capitalism are directly antagonistic to -honesty. The decalogue of commercial morality has its own peculiar -interpretation of stealing, murder, false witness and coveting; and -yet the most unscrupulous wrecker in the City will be outraged in his -finest feelings by the class morality of the plumber, who, called in -to bring the gas to reason, takes the opportunity to disorganise the -water-supply and introduce a duster into the drain. The employer is -aghast at the increase of idleness and bad workmanship under a system -in which the good workman knows that to work his best will not only not -be worth his while but will lead to the exaction of heavier tasks from -his fellows.</p> - -<p>But it is not in the mass of the proletariat that the action of our -property system in destroying elementary morality is most conspicuous. -It is in those whom it excludes even from the proletariat proper that -this extreme result is clearest. The characteristic operation of the -modern industrial economy is continually and repeatedly to thrust -out individuals or bodies of the workers from their settlement in -the social organism—to eject, as it were, the coral insect from the -cell in which he is developing.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">[112]</span> The capitalist farming system expels -the agricultural laborer from the village; the machine expels the -craftsman from the ranks of skilled labor; the perpetual competition -and consolidation of capital in every trade alternately destroys -employment in that trade and disorganises others. Overproduction in one -year leaves thousands of workers wageless in the next. The ranks of -unskilled labor, the army of the unemployed, are day by day recruited -in these fashions. An inveterate social habit, an almost indestructible -patience, a tenacious identification of his own desire with the -desire of those whom he loves, in most cases preserve the worker from -accepting the sentence of exclusion from society. If he is able-bodied, -intelligent and fortunate, he will struggle with hard times till he -finds fresh occupation among strange surroundings; but woe to him if -he be weakly, or old, or unpractical. In such a case he will almost -infallibly become a pauper or an outcast, one of that residuum of -unskilled, unemployed, unprofitable and hopeless human beings which -in all great cities festers about the base of the social pyramid. And -his children will become the street Arabs and the corner-boys and the -child-whores and the sneak-thieves who, when they come of age, accept -their position as outside of social life and resume the existence of -the wild beasts that fathered man—the purely predatory and unsocial -activity of harrying their neighbors for their own support. Before -society was, morality was not: those who have no part nor lot in the -ends for which society exists will adapt their morality to suit their -outcast state: there will indeed be honor among thieves, just as there -will be cant and insincerity among the parasitic rich; but the youth -who has been nurtured between the reformatory and the slum has little -chance of finding a foothold, if he would, in the restless whirl of -modern industry, and still less of retaining permanently such foothold -as he may manage to find.</p> - -<p>When the conditions of social life are such that the individual may -be excluded through no unfitness of his own for co-operation, or may -be born without a chance of acquiring fitness for it, we are brought -face to face with the conditions of primitive ages. And if you force -him back upon the elemental instincts, one of two things will happen. -Either, if the individual is weak through physical deterioration or -incapacity to combine with his fellow outcasts, he will be crushed -and killed by society and putrefy about its holy places; or, if he -has indomitable life and vigor,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">[113]</span> he will revert to the argument of -elemental forces: he will turn and explode society. Here, then, we -should fear explosion, for we are not as submissive in extremities as -the proletariats of arrested Indian civilisations. But with us the -class whose freedom is incessantly threatened by the operation of -private capitalism is the class which by its political position holds -in its hands the key to the control of industrial form: that is to say, -its members can modify, as soon as they elect to, the laws of property -and inheritance in this State of Britain. They can, as soon as they -see clearly what is needed supersede institutions now immoral because -useless and mischievous by institutions which shall re-establish the -elementary conditions of social existence and the possibility of the -corresponding morality—namely, the opportunity for each individual to -earn his living and the compulsion upon him to do so.</p> - -<p>Returning from the consideration of the “residuum” and the “criminal -classes,” we find that even the workers of the employed proletariat are -by no means wholly moral. In spite of the massive healthiness of their -behavior in ordinary relations, they are generally coarse in their -habits; they lack intelligence in their amusements and refinement in -their tastes. The worst result of this is the popularity of boozing -and gambling and allied forms of excitement, with their outcomes in -violence and meanness. But when once society has ensured for man the -opportunity for satisfying his primary needs—once it has ensured him -a healthy body and a wholesome life, his advance in the refinements of -social morality, in the conception and satisfaction of his secondary -and more distinctly human desires, is solely and entirely a matter of -education. This will be attested by every man and woman who has at all -passed through the primary to the secondary passions. But education in -the sense alluded to is impossible for the lad who leaves school at -fourteen and works himself weary six days in the week ever afterwards.</p> - -<p>The oldest Socialistic institution of considerable importance and -extent is the now decrepit Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has -always insisted on the duty of helping the poor, not on the ground -of the social danger of a “residuum,” but by the nobler appeal to -the instinct of human benevolence. The Catholic Church developed, -relatively to the enlightenment of its age, the widest and freest -system of education the world has ever seen before this century. -Catholic Christianity, by its revolutionary<span class="pagenum" id="Page_114">[114]</span> conception that God -was incarnated in Man, exploding the hideous superstition that the -imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart was only to do evil -continually, and substituting the faith in the perfectibility of each -individual soul; by its brilliant and powerful generalisations that God -must be Love, because there is nothing better, and that man is freed -from the law by the inward guidance of grace, has done more for social -morality than any other religion of the world.</p> - -<p>Protestant Individualism in England shattered the Catholic Church; -founded the modern land system upon its confiscated estates; destroyed -the mediæval machinery of charity and education; and in religion -rehabilitated the devil, and the doctrines of original sin and the -damnable danger of reason and good works.</p> - -<p>Out of the wreckage of the Catholic Church, and amid the dissolution -of the Protestant religion, there successively emerged, at an interval -of some three hundred years, the two great socialistic institutions of -the Poor Law and the People’s Schools. As the pretence of a foundation -of Christian obligation withered from out of the Poor Law, till it has -come to be outspokenly recognised as nothing but a social safety-valve, -the individualist and commercial administration of this rudimentary -socialistic machinery deprived it of its efficiency even in this -elementary function. He to whom the workhouse means the break up of his -home, and his own condemnation to a drudgery insulting because useless -and wasteful, would as lief take his exclusion from society in another -and a less degrading way, either by death, or by reluctant enrolment in -the “residuum”; and so it has come to pass that outside of their use -as hospitals for the aged and infirm, the poor-houses are principally -employed as the club-houses and hotels of the great fraternity of -habitual tramps and cadgers; and not till he has sunk to this level -does the struggling proletarian seek “work” there.</p> - -<p>Socialists would realize the idea of the Poor Law, regarding that -society as deadly sick in which the individual cannot find subsistence -by industry, in the only way in which it can be realised: namely, by -the organisation of production and the resumption of its necessary -instruments. It is not so great a matter in their eyes that the -perpetual toll of rent and interest deprives the workers of the wealth -which their activities produce; nor is it the actual pressure of this -heavy tribute<span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">[115]</span> that would force on the Social Revolution, if the -system only left men the assurance of the comforts of tame beasts. It -is the constant disquiet and uncertainty, the increasing frequency of -industrial crises, that are the revolutionary preachers of our age; and -it is the disappearance at the base and at the summit of society of the -conditions of social morality, that rouses those whose mere material -interests remain unaffected.</p> - -<p>But though it is not envy or resentment at this tribute that mostly -moves us to our warfare, this tribute we must certainly resume if the -ideal of the school is to effect its social purpose. For the ideal of -the school implies, in the first place, leisure to learn: that is to -say, the release of children from all non-educational labor until mind -and physique have had a fair start and training, and the abolition of -compulsion on the adult to work any more than the socially necessary -stint. The actual expenditure on public education must also be -considerably increased, at any rate until parents are more generally -in a position to instruct their own children. But as soon as the mind -has been trained to appreciate the inexhaustible interest and beauty of -the world, and to distinguish good literature from bad, the remainder -of education, granted leisure, is a comparatively inexpensive matter. -Literature is become dirt-cheap; and all the other educational arts can -be communally enjoyed. The schools of the adult are the journal and the -library, social intercourse, fresh air, clean and beautiful cities, -the joy of the fields, the museum, the art-gallery, the lecture-hall, -the drama, and the opera; and only when these schools are free and -accessible to all will the reproach of proletarian coarseness be done -away.</p> - -<p>Yet the most important influence in the repairing of social morality -may perhaps be looked for not so much from the direct action of -these elements of the higher education, as from those very socialist -forms of property and industry, which we believe to be the primary -condition for allowing such higher education to affect the majority at -all. Nothing so well trains the individual to identify his life with -the life of society as the identification of the conditions of his -material sustenance with those of his fellows, in short, as industrial -co-operation. Not for many centuries has there been such compulsion as -now for the individual to acknowledge a social ethic. For now, for the -first time since the dissolution of the early tribal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_116">[116]</span> communisms, and -over areas a hundred times wider than theirs, the individual worker -earns his living, fulfils his most elementary desire, not by direct -personal production, but by an intricate co-operation in which the -effect and value of his personal effort are almost indistinguishable. -The apology for individualist appropriation is exploded by the logic -of the facts of communist production: no man can pretend to claim the -fruits of his own labor; for his whole ability and opportunity for -working are plainly a vast inheritance and contribution of which he is -but a transient and accidental beneficiary and steward; and his power -of turning them to his own account depends entirely upon the desires -and needs of other people for his services. The factory system, the -machine industry, the world commerce, have abolished individualist -production; and the completion of the co-operative form towards which -the transition stage of individualist capitalism is hurrying us, will -render a conformity with social ethics, a universal condition of -tolerable existence for the individual.</p> - -<p>This expectation is already justified by the phenomena of contemporary -opinion. The moral ideas appropriate to Socialism are permeating the -whole of modern society. They are clearly recognisable not only in -the proletariat, but also in the increasing philanthropic activity of -members of the propertied class, who, while denouncing Socialism as a -dangerous exaggeration of what is necessary for social health, work -honestly enough for alleviatory reforms which converge irresistibly -towards it. The form, perhaps, does not outrun the spirit, any more -than the spirit anticipates the form; and it may have been sufficient -in this paper to have shown some grounds for the conviction that -Socialist morality, like that of all preceding systems, is only that -morality which the conditions of human existence have made necessary; -that it is only the expression of the eternal passion of life seeking -its satisfaction through the striving of each individual for the -freest and fullest activity; that Socialism is but a stage in the -unending progression out of the weakness and the ignorance in which -society and the individual alike are born, towards the strength and -the enlightenment in which they can see and choose their own way -forward—from the chaos where morality is not to the consciousness -which sees that morality is reason; and to have made some attempt to -justify the claim that the cardinal virtue of Socialism is nothing else -than Common Sense.</p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_66" href="#FNanchor_66" class="label">[66]</a> “The Quintessence of Socialism.” Swan, Sonnenschein and -Co.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_67" href="#FNanchor_67" class="label">[67]</a> <i>E. G.</i>, see “Communism and Socialism,” by Theodore -D. Woolsey Sampson, Low and Co., London.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_68" href="#FNanchor_68" class="label">[68]</a> To the intelligent Socialist this phrase has, of course, -no meaning. But against the non-Socialist who employs it, it may be -legitimately used, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ad captandum</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_69" href="#FNanchor_69" class="label">[69]</a> See <i>National Review</i> for February, 1888, “Are Rich -Landowners Idle?” by Lady Janetta Manners (now Duchess of Rutland).</p> - -</div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">[117]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">[119]</span></p> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="THE_ORGANIZATION_OF_SOCIETY">THE ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY.</h2> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h3 class="nobreak" id="PROPERTY_UNDER_SOCIALISM">PROPERTY UNDER SOCIALISM.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY GRAHAM WALLAS.</p> - - -<p>In the early days of Socialism no one who was not ready with a complete -description of Society as it ought to be, dared come forward to -explain any point in the theory. Each leader had his own method of -organising property, education, domestic life, and the production of -wealth. Each was quite sure that mankind had only to fashion themselves -after his model in order, like the prince and princess in the fairy -story, to live happily ever after. Every year would then be like the -year before; and no more history need be written. Even now a thinker -here and there like Gronlund or Bebel sketches in the old spirit an -ideal commonwealth; though he does so with an apology for attempting -to forecast the unknowable. But Socialists generally have become, if -not wiser than their spiritual fathers, at least less willing to use -their imagination. The growing recognition, due in part to Darwin, -of causation in the development of individuals and societies; the -struggles and disappointments of half a century of agitation; the -steady introduction of Socialistic institutions by men who reject -Socialist ideas, all incline us to give up any expectation of a final -and perfect reform. We are more apt to regard the slow and often -unconscious progress of the Time spirit as the only adequate cause -of social progress, and to attempt rather to discover and proclaim -what the future <em>must</em> be, than to form an organisation of men -determined to make the future what it should be.</p> - -<p>But the new conception of Socialism has its dangers as well as the old. -Fifty years ago Socialists were tempted to exaggerate the influence -of the ideal, to expect everything from a sudden impossible change of -all mens’ hearts. Nowadays we are tempted to under-value the ideal—to -forget that even<span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">[120]</span> the Time spirit itself is only the sum of individual -strivings and aspirations, and that again and again in history changes -which might have been delayed for centuries or might never have come at -all, have been brought about by the persistent preaching of some new -and higher life, the offspring not of circumstance but of hope. And of -all the subjects upon which men require to be brought to a right mind -and a clear understanding, there is, Socialists think, none more vital -to-day than Property.</p> - -<p>The word Property has been used in nearly as many senses as the word -Law. The best definition I have met with is John Austin’s “any right -which gives to the entitled party such a power or liberty of using -or disposing of the subject ... as is merely limited generally by -the rights of all other persons.”<a id="FNanchor_70" href="#Footnote_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> This applies only to private -property. It will be convenient in discussing the various claims of the -State, the municipality, and the individual, to use the word in a wider -sense to denote not only the “power or liberty” of the individual, but -also the “rights of all other persons.” In this sense I shall speak -of the property of the State or municipality. I shall also draw a -distinction, economic perhaps rather than legal, between property in -things, or the exclusive right of access to defined material objects, -property in debts and future services, and property in ideas (copyright -and patent right).</p> - -<p>The material things in which valuable property rights can exist, may -be roughly divided into means of production and means of consumption. -Among those lowest tribes of savages who feed on fruit and insects, -and build themselves at night a rough shelter with boughs of trees, -there is little distinction between the acts of production and -consumption. But in a populous and civilised country very few even of -the simplest wants of men are satisfied directly by nature. Nearly -every commodity which man consumes is produced and renewed by the -deliberate application of human industry to material objects. The -general stock of materials on which such industry works is “Land.” Any -materials which have been separated from the general stock or have -been already considerably modified by industry, are called capital -if they are either to be used to aid production or are still to be -worked on before they are consumed.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">[121]</span> When they are ready to be consumed -they are “wealth for consumption.” Such an analysis, though generally -employed by political economists, is of necessity very rough. No one -can tell whether an object is ready for immediate consumption or not, -unless he knows the way in which it is to be consumed. A pine forest -in its natural condition is ready for the consumption of a duke with -a taste for the picturesque; for he will let the trees rot before -his eyes. Cotton-wool, a finished product in the hands of a doctor, -is raw material in the hands of a spinner. But still the statement -that Socialists work for the owning of the means of production by the -community and the means of consumption by individuals, represents -fairly enough their practical aim. Not that they desire to prevent -the community from using its property whenever it will for direct -consumption, as, for instance, when a piece of common land is used -for a public park, or the profits of municipal waterworks are applied -to keep up a municipal library. Nor do they contemplate any need for -preventing individuals from working at will on their possessions in -such a way as to make them more valuable. Even Gronlund, with all -his hatred of private industry, could not, if he would, prevent any -citizen from driving a profitable trade by manufacturing bread into -buttered toast at the common fire. But men are as yet more fit for -association in production, with a just distribution of its rewards, -than for association in the consumption of the wealth produced. It is -true indeed that the economies of associated consumption promise to be -quite as great as those of associated production; and it was of these -that the earlier Socialists mainly thought. They believed always that -if a few hundred persons could be induced to throw their possessions -and earnings into a common stock to be employed according to a common -scheme, a heaven on earth would be created. Since then, an exhaustive -series of experiments has proved that in spite of its obvious economy -any system of associated consumption as complete as Fourier’s -“Phalanstère” or Owen’s “New Hampshire” is, except under very unusual -conditions, distasteful to most men as they now are. Our picture -galleries, parks, workmen’s clubs, or the fact that rich people are -beginning to live in flats looked after by a common staff of servants, -do indeed shew that associated consumption is every year better -understood and enjoyed; but it remains true that pleasures chosen by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">[122]</span> -the will of the majority are often not recognised as pleasures at all.</p> - -<p>As long as this is so, private property and even private industry must -exist along with public property and public production. For instance, -each family now insists on having a separate home, and on cooking -every day a separate series of meals in a separate kitchen. Waste -and discomfort are the inevitable result; but families at present -prefer waste and discomfort to that abundance which can only be bought -by organisation and publicity. Again, English families constitute -at present isolated communistic groups, more or less despotically -governed. Our growing sense of the individual responsibility and -individual rights of wives and children seems already to be lessening -both the isolation of these groups and their internal coherency; but -this tendency must go very much further before society can absorb the -family life, or the industries of the home be managed socially. Thus, -associated production of all the means of family life may be developed -to a very high degree before we cease to feel that an Englishman’s -home should be his castle, with free entrance and free egress alike -forbidden. It is true that the ground on which houses are built -could immediately become the property of the community; and when one -remembers how most people in England are now lodged, it is obvious that -they would gladly inhabit comfortable houses built and owned by the -State. But they certainly would at present insist on having their own -crockery and chairs, books and pictures, and on receiving a certain -proportion of the value they produce in the form of a yearly or weekly -income to be spent or saved as they pleased. Now whatever things of -this kind we allow a man to possess, we must allow him to exchange, -since exchange never takes place unless both parties believe themselves -to benefit by it. Further, bequest must be allowed, since any but a -moderate probate duty or personalty would, unless supported by a strong -and searching public opinion, certainly be evaded. Moreover, if we -desire the personal independence of women and children, then their -property, as far as we allow property at all, must for a long time to -come be most carefully guarded.</p> - -<p>There would remain therefore to be owned by the community the land -in the widest sense of the word, and the materials of those forms of -production, distribution, and consumption,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">[123]</span> which can conveniently be -carried on by associations larger than the family group. Here the main -problem is to fix in each case the area of ownership. In the case of -the principal means of communication and of some forms of industry, it -has been proved that the larger the area controlled, the greater is the -efficiency of management; so that the postal and railway systems, and -probably the materials of some of the larger industries, would be owned -by the English nation until that distant date when they might pass to -the United States or the British Empire, or the Federal Republic of -Europe. Land is perhaps generally better held by smaller social units. -The rent of a town or an agricultural district depends only partly on -those natural advantages which can be easily estimated once for all -by an imperial commissioner. The difference in the rateable value of -Warwick and of Birmingham is due, not so much to the sites of the two -towns, as to the difference in the industry and character of their -inhabitants. If the Birmingham men prefer, on the average, intense -exertion resulting in great material wealth, to the simpler and quieter -life lived at Warwick, it is obviously as unjust to allow the Warwick -men to share equally in the Birmingham ground rents, as it would be -to insist on one standard of comfort being maintained in Paris and in -Brittany.</p> - -<p>At the same time, those forms of natural wealth which are the -necessities of the whole nation and the monopolies of certain -districts, mines for instance, or harbors, or sources of water-supply, -must be “nationalised.” The salt and coal rings of to-day would be -equally possible and equally inconvenient under a system which made the -mining populations absolute joint owners of the mines. Even where the -land was absolutely owned by local bodies, those bodies would still -have to contribute to the national exchequer some proportion of their -income. The actual size of the units would in each case be fixed by -convenience; and it is very likely that the development of the County -Government Act and of the parochial and municipal systems will soon -provide us with units of government which could easily be turned into -units of ownership.</p> - -<p>The savings of communities—if I may use the word community to express -any Social Democratic unit from the parish to the nation—would -probably take much the same form that the accumulation of capital -takes nowadays: that is to say,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">[124]</span> they would consist partly of mills, -machinery, railways, schools, and the other specialised materials -of future industry, and partly of a stock of commodities such as -food, clothing, and money, by which workers might be supported -while performing work not immediately remunerative. The savings of -individuals would consist partly of consumable commodities or of the -means of such industry as had not been socialised, and partly of -deferred pay for services rendered to the community, such pay taking -the form of a pension due at a certain age, or of a sum of commodities -or money payable on demand.</p> - -<p>Voluntary associations of all kinds, whether joint-stock companies, -religious corporations, or communistic groups would, in the eyes of -the Social Democratic State, consist simply of so many individuals -possessing those rights of property which are allowed to individuals. -They might perform many very useful functions in the future as in the -past; but the history of the city companies, of the New River company, -the Rochdale Pioneers, or the Church of England shows the danger of -granting perpetual property rights to any association not co-extensive -with the community, although such association may exist for professedly -philanthropic objects. Even in the case of universities, where the -system of independent property-owning corporations has been found -to work best, the rights of the State should be delegated and not -surrendered.</p> - -<p>On this point the economic position of modern Social Democrats differs -widely from the transfigured joint stockism of the present co-operative -movement or from the object of the earlier Socialists, for whose -purposes complete community was always more important than complete -inclusiveness. Even Socialist writers of to-day do not always see -that the grouping of the citizens for the purpose of property holding -must be either on the joint-stock basis or on the territorial basis. -Gronlund, in spite of contradictory matter in other parts of his -“Co-operative Commonwealth,” still declares that “each group of workers -will have the power of distributing among themselves the whole exchange -value of their work,” which either means that they will, as long as -they are working, be the absolute joint owners of the materials which -they use, or means nothing at all. Now the proposal that any voluntary -association of citizens should hold absolute and perpetual property -rights in the means of production, seems to be not a step towards -Social<span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">[125]</span> Democracy, but a negation of the whole Social Democratic -idea. This of course brings us to the following difficulty. If our -communities even when originally inclusive of the whole population -are closed: that is, are confined to original members and their -descendants, new comers will form a class like the plebians in Rome, -or the “metoeci” in Athens, without a share in the common property -though possessed of full personal freedom; and such a class must be a -continual social danger. On the other hand, if all newcomers receive -at once full economic rights, then any country in which Socialism -or anything approaching it is established, will be at once over-run -by proletarian immigrants, from those countries in which the means -of production are still strictly monopolised. If this were allowed, -then, through the operation of the law of diminishing return and the -law of population based on it, the whole body of the inhabitants -even of a Socialist State, might conceivably be finally brought down -to the bare means of subsistence. It does not seem necessary to -conclude that Socialism must be established over the whole globe if -it is to be established anywhere. What is necessary is that we face -the fact, every day becoming plainer, that any determined attempt to -raise the condition of the proletariat in any single European country -must be accompanied by a law of aliens considerate enough to avoid -cruelty to refugees, or obstruction to those whose presence would -raise our intellectual or industrial average, but stringent enough to -exclude the unhappy “diluvies gentium,” the human rubbish which the -military empires of the continent are so ready to shoot upon any open -space. Such a law would be in itself an evil. It might be unfairly -administered; it might increase national selfishness and would probably -endanger international good will; it would require the drawing of a -great many very difficult lines of distinction; but no sufficient -argument has been yet advanced to disprove the necessity of it.</p> - -<p>On the question of private property in debts, the attitude of the law -in Europe has changed fundamentally in historical times. Under the -old Roman law, the creditor became the absolute owner of his debtor. -Nowadays, not only may a man by becoming bankrupt and surrendering all -his visible property, repudiate his debts and yet retain his personal -liberty; but in Factory Acts, Employers’ Liability Acts, Irish Land<span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">[126]</span> -Acts, etc., certain contracts are illegal under all circumstances. -With the growth of Socialism, this tendency would be quickened. The -law would look with extreme jealously upon any agreement by which one -party would be reduced even for a time to a condition of slavery, -or the other enabled to live even for a time without performing any -useful social function. And since it has been clearly recognised that -a certain access to the means of industry is a first condition of -personal freedom, the law would refuse to recognise any agreement to -debar a man from such access, or deprive him of the results of it. -No one would need to get into debt in order to provide himself with -the opportunity of work, nor would anyone be allowed to give up the -opportunity of work in order to obtain a loan. This, by making it more -difficult for creditors to recover debts, would also make it more -difficult for would-be debtors to obtain credit. The present homestead -law would, in fact, be extended to include everything which the State -thought necessary for a complete life. But as long as private industry -and exchange go on to such an extent as to make a private commercial -system convenient, so long will promises to pay circulate, and, if -necessary, be legally enforced under the conditions above marked out.</p> - -<p>To whatever extent private property is permitted, to that same extent -the private taking of Rent and Interest must be also permitted. If you -allow a selfish man to own a picture by Raphael, he will lock it up -in his own room unless you let him charge something for the privilege -of looking at it. Such a charge is at once Interest. If we wish all -Raphael’s pictures to be freely accessible to everyone, we must prevent -men not merely from exhibiting them for payment, but from owning them.</p> - -<p>This argument applies to other things besides Raphael’s pictures. -If we allow a man to own a printing press, or a plough, or a set of -bookbinders’ tools, or a lease of a house or farm, we must allow him so -to employ his possession that he may, without injuring his neighbor, -get from it the greatest possible advantage. Otherwise, seeing that the -community is not responsible for its intelligent use, any interference -on the part of the community may well result in no intelligent use -being made of it at all; in which event all privately owned materials -of industry not actually being used by their owners<span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">[127]</span> would be as -entirely wasted as if they were the subjects of a chancery suit. It -is easy to see that the Duke of Bedford is robbing the community of -the rent of Covent Garden. It is not so easy to see that the owners -of the vacant land adjoining Shaftesbury Avenue have been robbing the -community for some years past of the rent which ought to have been -made out of the sites which they have left desolate. I know that it -has been sometimes said by Socialists: “Let us allow the manufacturer -to keep his mill and the Duke of Argyle to keep his land, as long as -they do not use them for exploitation by letting them out to others on -condition of receiving a part of the wealth created by those others.” -Then, we are told, the manufacturer or Duke will soon discover that he -must work hard for a living. Such sentiments are seldom ill received -by men in the humor to see dukes and capitalists earning, as painfully -as may be, their daily bread. Unluckily, there are no unappropriated -acres and factory sites in England sufficiently advantageous to be used -as efficient substitutes for those upon which private property has -fastened; and the community would be wise if it paid the Duke of Argyle -and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Chamberlain anything short of the full economic rent of their -properties rather than go further and fare worse. Therefore, if we -refused either to allow these gentlemen to let their property to those -who would use it, or hesitated to take it and use it for ourselves, -we should be actually wasting labor. The progressive socialisation of -land and capital must proceed by direct transference of them to the -community through taxation of rent and interest and public organisation -of labor with the capital so obtained; not solely by a series of -restrictions upon their use in private exploitation. Such concurrent -private exploitation, however unrestricted, could not in any case bring -back the old evils of capitalism; for any change in the habits of the -people or in the methods of industry which made associated production -of any commodity on a large scale convenient and profitable, would -result at once in the taking over of that industry by the State exactly -as the same conditions now in America result at once in the formation -of a ring.</p> - -<p>It is because full ownership is necessary to the most intelligent and -effective use of any materials, that no mere system of taxation of -Rent and Interest, even when so drastic as <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Henry George’s scheme -of universal State absentee landlordism,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_128">[128]</span> is likely to exist except as -a transition stage towards Social Democracy. Indeed the anarchist idea -which allows the State to receive Rent and Interest, but forbids it to -employ labor, is obviously impracticable. Unless we are willing to pay -every citizen in hard cash a share of the State Rent of the future, -it, like the taxes of to-day, must be wholly invested in payments for -work done. It would always be a very serious difficulty for a Socialist -legislature to decide how far communities should be allowed to incur -debts or pay interest. Socialism once established, the chief danger to -its stability would be just at this point. We all know the inept attack -on Socialism which comes from a debating-society orator who considers -the subject for the first time, or from the cultured person who has -been brought up on the <i>Saturday Review</i>. He tells us that if -property were equally divided to-morrow, there would be for the next -ten years forty men out of every hundred working extremely hard, and -the other sixty lazy. After that time, the sixty would have to work -hard and keep the forty, who would then be as lazy as the sixty were -before. It is very easy to explain that we do not want to divide all -property equally; but it is not so easy to guard against any result -of that tendency in human nature on which the argument is grounded. -Men differ so widely in their comparative appreciation of present and -future pleasures, that wherever life can be supported by four hours’ -work a day, there will always be some men anxious to work eight hours -in order to secure future benefits for themselves or their children, -and others anxious to avoid their four hours’ work for the present -by pledging themselves or their children to any degree of future -privation. As long as this is so, communities as well as individuals -will be tempted to avail themselves of the freely offered services of -the exceptionally energetic and farsighted, and to incur a common debt -under the excuse that they are spreading the payment of such services -over all those benefited by them. The municipalities, Boards of Works, -School Boards, etc., of England have already created enormous local -debts; and unless men grow wiser in the next few months the new County -Councils will probably add to the burden. As we sit and think, it may -seem easy to prevent any such trouble in the future by a law forbidding -communities to incur debts under any circumstances. But in the case -of a central and supreme government such a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">[129]</span> law would, of course, -be an absurdity. No nation can escape a national debt or any other -calamity if the majority in that nation desire to submit to it. It is -reassuring to see how the feeling that national governments should -pay their way from year to year grows stronger and stronger. National -debts no longer even in France go up with the old light-hearted leaps -and bounds. But local debts still increase. In Preston the local debt -is said to amount to seven times the annual rating valuation. And -although at present (November, 1888), since the “surf at the edge of -civilisation” is only thundering to the extent of three small colonial -wars, our own national debt is slowly going down; still if war were -declared to-morrow with any European State no ministry would dare to -raise all the war expenses by immediate taxation either on incomes -or on property. It may be objected that no such danger would arise -under Socialism; for there would be no fund from which a loan could be -offered that would not be equally easily reached by a direct levy. But -if we are speaking of society in the near future there would certainly -be plenty of members of non-Socialist States, or English holders of -property in them, ready to lend money on good security to a timid or -desperate or dishonest Socialist government. Again, in times of extreme -stress a government might believe itself to require even personal -possessions; and it might be difficult under such circumstances not to -offer to restore them with or without interest. In any case there would -be no more economic difference between the new fund-holders and the old -landlords than between Lord Salisbury as owner of the Strand district -and Lord Salisbury now that he has sold his slums and bought consols. -Perhaps the most serious danger of the creation of a common debt would -arise from the earnings of exceptional ability. Modern Socialists have -learnt, after a long series of co-operative experiments and failures, -that the profits of private adventure will withdraw men of exceptional -business talent from communal service unless work of varying scarcity -and intensity is paid for at varying rates. How great this variation -need be in order to ensure full efficiency can only be decided by -experience, and as the education and moralisation of society improves, -and industry becomes so thoroughly socialised that the alternative of -private enterprise will be less practicable, something like equality -may at last be found possible. But, meanwhile, comparatively large<span class="pagenum" id="Page_130">[130]</span> -incomes will be earned by men leading busy and useful lives, but often -keenly anxious to secure leisure and comfort for their old age and -aggrandisement for their family.<a id="FNanchor_71" href="#Footnote_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> I have already suggested that some -of the earnings of a man employed by the community might be left for -a time in the common treasury to accumulate without interest. Now, it -would suit both these men and the lazier of their contemporaries that -the reward of their services should be fixed at a very high rate, and -be left to the next generation for payment; while the next generation -might prefer a small permanent charge to any attempt to pay off the -capital sum. It is often hinted that one way to obviate this would be -for each generation to cultivate a healthy indifference to the debts -incurred on its behalf by its forefathers. But the citizens of each new -generation attain citizenship not in large bodies at long intervals, -but in small numbers every week. One has only to warn sanguine lenders -that veiled repudiations may always be effected in such emergencies -by a judicious application of the Income Tax, and to hope that the -progress of education under Socialism would tend to produce and -preserve on such matters a certain general minimum of common sense. If -this minimum is sufficient to control the central government the debts -of local bodies can be easily and sternly restricted.</p> - -<p>Property in services means of course property in future services. The -wealth which past services may have produced can be exchanged or owned; -but the services themselves cannot. Now all systems of law which we -know have allowed private persons to contract with each other for the -future performance of certain services, and have punished, or allowed -to be punished, the breach of such contracts. Here as in the case -of debts, our growing respect for personal liberty has made the law -look jealously on all onerous agreements made either by the citizen -himself or for him by others. In fact, as Professor Sidgwick points -out: “In England hardly any engagement to render personal service gives -the promisee a legal claim to more than pecuniary damages—to put it -otherwise, almost all such contracts, if unfulfilled, turn into mere -debts of money so far as their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_131">[131]</span> legal force goes.”<a id="FNanchor_72" href="#Footnote_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> The marriage -contract forms the principal exception to this rule; but even in this -case there seems to be a tendency in most European countries to relax -the rigidity of the law.</p> - -<p>On the other hand the direct claims of the State to the services of its -citizens shew at present no signs of diminishing. Compulsory military -service and compulsory attendance at school already take up a not -inconsiderable share of the life of every male inhabitant of France -and Germany. So far in England the compulsion of grown men to serve -in any capacity has been condemned for a century past, because it is -considered wasteful and oppressive as compared with the free contract -system of the open market. Most English Socialists seem inclined to -believe that all work for the State should be voluntarily engaged and -paid for out of the produce of common industry.</p> - -<p>In considering how far the State has a claim upon the services of its -members, we come upon the much larger question—How far are we working -for Socialism; and how far for Communism? Under pure Socialism, to use -the word in its narrowest sense, the State would offer no advantage at -all to any citizen except at a price sufficient to pay all the expenses -of producing it. In this sense the Post Office, for example, is now a -purely Socialistic institution. Under such conditions the State would -have no claim at all on the services of its members; and compulsion to -work would be produced by the fact that if a man chose not to work he -would be in danger of starvation. Under pure Communism, on the other -hand, as defined by Louis Blanc’s dictum: “From every man according -to his powers; to every man according to his wants,” the State would -satisfy without stint and without price all the reasonable wants -of any citizen. Our present drinking fountains are examples of the -numerous cases of pure communism which surround us. But since nothing -can be made without labor, the commodities provided by the State must -be produced by the services, voluntary or forced, of the citizens. -Under pure communism, if any compulsion to work were needed, it would -have to be direct. Some communistic institutions we must have; and -as a matter of fact there is an increasing number of them already in -England. Indeed, if the whole or any part of that Rent Fund which is -due to the difference between the best and worst materials of industry -in use be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">[132]</span> taken for the State, by taxation or otherwise, it, or rather -the advantages produced by its expenditure, can hardly be distributed -otherwise than communistically. For, as men are now, saturated with -immoral principles by our commercial system, the State would have to be -exceedingly careful in deciding what wants could be freely satisfied -without making direct compulsion to labor necessary. It would cost -by no means an impossible sum to supply a tolerable shelter with a -bed, and a sufficient daily portion of porridge, or bread and cheese, -or even of gin and water, to each citizen; but no sane man would -propose to do so in the existing state of public morals. For more than -a century the proletarians of Europe have been challenged by their -masters to do as little work as they can. They have been taught by -the practical economists of the Trades Unions, and have learnt for -themselves by bitter experience, that every time any of them in a -moment of ambition or goodwill does one stroke of work not in his bond, -he is increasing the future unpaid labor not only of himself but of his -fellows. At the same time every circumstance of monotony, ugliness, and -anxiety has made the work as wearisome and disgusting as possible. All, -almost without exception, now look upon the working day as a period of -slavery, and find such happiness as they can get only in a few hours -or minutes that intervene between work and sleep. For a few, that -happiness consists in added toil of thought and speech in the cause -of themselves and their comrades. The rest care only for such rough -pleasures as are possible to men both poor and over-worked. There would -be plenty of excuse if under these circumstances they dreamt, as they -are accused of dreaming, of some universal division of the good things -of the earth—of some means of being utterly at leisure, if only for a -week or two.</p> - -<p>But there are products of labor which the workmen in their time of -triumph might freely offer each other without causing the weakest -brother to forego any form of useful social work. Among such products -are those ideas which we have brought under the dominion of private -property by means of copyright and patent right. Luckily for us the -dominion is neither complete nor permanent. If the Whig landlords who -are responsible for most of the details of our glorious constitution -had been also authors and inventors for profit, we should probably -have had the strictest rights of perpetual property or even of entail -in ideas; and there would now have been a Duke of Shakspere to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_133">[133]</span> whom -we should all have had to pay two or three pounds for the privilege -of reading his ancestor’s works, provided that we return the copy -uninjured at the end of a fortnight. But even for the years during -which copyright and patents now last, the system which allows an author -or inventor a monopoly in his ideas is a stupid and ineffective way -either of paying for his work or of satisfying the public wants. In -each case the author or inventor obtains a maximum nett return by -leaving unsatisfied the wants, certainly of many, probably of most of -those who desire to read his book or use his invention. We all know -that the public got a very good bargain when it paid the owners of -Waterloo Bridge more than they could possibly have made by any scheme -of tolls. In the same way it is certain that any government which aimed -at the greatest happiness of the greatest number could afford to pay a -capable artist or author possibly even more than he gets from the rich -men who are his present patrons, and certainly more than he could get -by himself selling or exhibiting his productions in a society where -few possessed wealth for which they had not worked. Although the State -could thus afford to pay an extravagantly large reward for certain -forms of intellectual labor, it does not therefore follow that it would -be obliged to do so in the absence of any other important bidder.</p> - -<p>There would always remain the sick, the infirm, and the school -children, whose wants could be satisfied from the general stock without -asking them to bear any part of the general burden. In particular, it -would be well to teach the children by actual experience the economy -and happiness which arise in the case of those who are fitly trained -from association applied to the direct satisfaction of wants, as well -as from association in the manufacture of material wealth. If we -wish to wean the children from the selfish isolation of the English -family, from the worse than savage habits produced by four generations -of capitalism, from that longing for excitement, and incapacity for -reasonable enjoyment, which are the natural results of workdays spent -in English factories, and English Sundays spent in English streets, -then we must give freely and generously to our schools. If this -generation were wise it would spend on education not only more than any -other generation has ever spent before, but more than any generation -would ever need to spend again. It would fill the school buildings -with the means not only of comfort, but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">[134]</span> even of the higher luxury; -it would serve the associated meals on tables spread with flowers, -in halls surrounded with beautiful pictures, or even, as John Milton -proposed, filled with the sounds of music; it would seriously propose -to itself the ideal of Ibsen, that every child should be brought up as -a nobleman. Unfortunately, this generation is not wise.</p> - -<p>In considering the degree in which common owning of property would be -possible among a people just at that stage of industrial and moral -development at which we now find ourselves, it is expedient to dwell, -as I have dwelt, rather upon the necessary difficulties and limitations -of Socialism, than upon its hopes of future development. But we must -always remember that the problems which Socialism attempts to solve, -deal with conditions which themselves are constantly changing. Just as -anything like what we call Socialism would be impossible in a nation -of individualist savages like the Australian blacks, and could not, -perhaps, be introduced except by external authority among a people like -the peasants of Brittany, for whom the prospect of absolute property -in any portion of land, however small, is at once their strongest -pleasure and their only sufficient incentive to industry; so among a -people further advanced, socially and industrially, than ourselves, a -social condition would be possible which we do not now dare to work -for or even try to realise. The tentative and limited Social-Democracy -which I have sketched is the necessary and certain step to that better -life which we hope for. The interests which each man has in common with -his fellows tend more and more to outweigh those which are peculiar -to himself. We see the process even now beginning. Already, as soon -as a public library is started, the workman finds how poor a means -for the production of happiness are the few books on his own shelf, -compared with the share he has in the public collection, though that -share may have cost even less to produce. In the same way the score or -two of pounds which a workman may possess are becoming daily of less -and less advantage in production; so that the man who a few years ago -would have worked by himself as a small capitalist, goes now to work -for wages in some great business, and treats his little savings as a -fund to provide for a few months of sickness or years of old age. He -will soon see how poor a means for the production of food is his own -fire when compared with the public kitchen; and he will perhaps at -last not only<span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">[135]</span> get his clothes from the public store, but the delight -of his eyes from the public galleries and theatres, the delight of his -ears from the public opera, and it may be, when our present anarchy -of opinion be overpast, the refreshment of his mind from the publicly -chosen teacher. Then at last such a life will be possible for all as -not even the richest and most powerful can live to-day. The system of -property holding which we call Socialism is not in itself such a life -any more than a good system of drainage is health, or the invention -of printing is knowledge. Nor indeed is Socialism the only condition -necessary to produce complete human happiness. Under the justest -possible social system we might still have to face all those vices and -diseases which are not the direct result of poverty and over-work; we -might still suffer all the mental anguish and bewilderment which are -caused, some say by religious belief, others by religious doubt; we -might still witness outbursts of national hatred and the degradation -and extinction of weaker peoples; we might still make earth a hell for -every species except our own. But in the households of the five men out -of six in England who live by weekly wage, Socialism would indeed be -a new birth of happiness. The long hours of work done as in a convict -prison, without interest and without hope; the dreary squalor of their -homes; above all that grievous uncertainty, that constant apprehension -of undeserved misfortune which is the peculiar result of capitalist -production: all this would be gone; and education, refinement, leisure, -the very thought of which now maddens them, would be part of their -daily life. Socialism hangs above them as the crown hung in Bunyan’s -story above the man raking the muck heap—ready for them if they will -but lift their eyes. And even to the few who seem to escape and even -profit by the misery of our century, Socialism offers a new and nobler -life, when full sympathy with those about them, springing from full -knowledge of their condition, shall be a source of happiness, and not, -as now, of constant sorrow—when it shall no longer seem either folly -or hypocrisy for a man to work openly for his highest ideal. To them -belongs the privilege that for each one of them the revolution may -begin as soon as he is ready to pay the price. They can live as simply -as the equal rights of their fellows require: they can justify their -lives by work in the noblest of all causes. For their reward, if they -desire any, they, like the rest, must wait.</p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_70" href="#FNanchor_70" class="label">[70]</a> Lectures on Jurisprudence. Lecture XLVIII.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_71" href="#FNanchor_71" class="label">[71]</a> Happily, the ordinary anxieties as to the fate of -children left without property, especially weaklings or women unlikely -to attract husbands, may be left out of account in speculations -concerning socialised communities.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_72" href="#FNanchor_72" class="label">[72]</a> “Principles of Political Economy,” <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 435.</p> - -</div> -</div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">[136]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="INDUSTRY_UNDER_SOCIALISM">INDUSTRY UNDER SOCIALISM.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY ANNIE BESANT.</p> - - -<p>There are two ways in which a scheme for a future organisation of -industry may be constructed. Of these, by far the easier and less -useful is the sketching of Utopia, an intellectual gymnastic in which -a power of coherent and vivid imagination is the one desideratum. The -Utopist needs no knowledge of facts; indeed such a knowledge is a -hindrance: for him the laws of social evolution do not exist. He is a -law unto himself; and his men and women are not the wayward, spasmodic, -irregular organisms of daily life, but automata, obeying the strings -he pulls. In a word, he creates, he does not construct: he makes alike -his materials and the laws within which they work, adapting them all -to an ideal end. In describing a new Jerusalem, the only limits to its -perfection are the limits of the writer’s imagination.</p> - -<p>The second way is less attractive, less easy, but more useful. Starting -from the present state of society, it seeks to discover the tendencies -underlying it; to trace those tendencies to their natural outworking -in institutions; and so to forecast, not the far-off future, but the -next social stage. It fixes its gaze on the vast changes wrought by -evolution, not the petty variations made by catastrophes; on the -Revolutions which transform society, not the transient riots which -merely upset thrones and behead kings. This second way I elect to -follow; and this paper on industry under Socialism therefore starts -from William Clarke’s exposition of the industrial evolution which -has been in progress during the last hundred and fifty years. In thus -building forward—in thus forecasting the transitions through which -society will probably pass, I shall scarcely touch on the ideal Social -State that will one day exist; and my sketch must lay itself open to -all the criticisms which may be levelled against<span class="pagenum" id="Page_137">[137]</span> a society not ideally -perfect. It is therefore necessary to bear in mind that I am only -trying to work out changes practicable among men and women as we know -them; always seeking to lay down, not what is ideally best, but what is -possible; always choosing among the possible changes that which is on -the line towards the ideal, and will render further approach easier. In -fact this paper is an attempt to answer the “How?” so often heard when -Socialism is discussed. Large numbers of people accept, wholly or in -part, the Socialist theory: they are intellectually convinced of its -soundness or emotionally attracted by its beauty; but they hesitate to -join in its propaganda, because they “don’t see where you are going to -begin,” or “don’t see where you are going to stop.” Both difficulties -are disposed of by the fact that we are not “going to begin.” There -will never be a point at which a society crosses from Individualism to -Socialism. The change is ever going forward; and our society is well on -the way to Socialism. All we can do is to consciously co-operate with -the forces at work, and thus render the transition more rapid than it -would otherwise be.</p> - -<p>The third Fabian essay shews us the success of capitalism bringing -about a position which is at once intolerable to majority, and easy of -capture by them. At this point the destruction of the small industries -has broken down most of the gradations which used to exist between the -large employer and the hired laborer, and has left in their place a -gulf across which a few capitalists and a huge and hungry proletariat -face each other. The denial of human sympathy by the employer in his -business relations with his “hands” has taught the “hands” to regard -the employer as outside the pale of their sympathy. The “respect of the -public conscience for the rights of property,” which was at bottom the -private interest of each in his own little property, has diminished -since the many lost their individual possessions, and saw property -accumulate in the hands of the few: it is now little more than a -tradition inherited from a former social state. The “public conscience” -will soon condone, nay, it will first approve, and then demand, -the expropriation of capital which is used antisocially instead of -socially, and which belongs to that impersonal abstraction, a company, -instead of to our next door neighbor. To the average person it is one -thing for the State to seize the little shop of James Smith who married -our sister,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">[138]</span> or the thriving business of our Sam who works early and -late for his living; and quite another when James and Sam, ruined by -a big Company made up of shareholders of whom nobody knows anything -but that they pay low wages and take high dividends, have been obliged -to become hired servants of the Company, instead of owning their own -shops and machinery. Whose interest will it be to protest against the -State taking over the capital, and transforming James and Sam from -wage-slaves at the mercy of a foreman, into shareholders and public -functionaries, with a voice in the management of the business in which -they are employed?</p> - -<p>Let us suppose, then, that the evolution of the capitalist system has -proceeded but a little further along the present lines, concentrating -the control of industry, and increasingly substituting labor-saving -machinery for human beings. It is being accompanied, and must continue -to be accompanied, by a growth of the numbers of the unemployed. These -numbers may ebb and flow, as some of the waves of a rising tide run -forward some feet and then a few touch a lower level; but as the tide -rises despite the fluctuations of the ripples, so the numbers of the -unemployed will increase despite transient mountings and fallings. With -these, probably, will begin the tentative organisation of industry by -the State; but this organisation will soon be followed by the taking -over by the community of some of the great Trusts.</p> - -<p>The division of the country into clearly defined areas, each with -its elected authority, is essential to any effective scheme of -organisation. It is one of the symptoms of the coming change, that, -in perfect unconsciousness of the nature of his act, <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Ritchie has -established the Commune. He has divided England into districts ruled -by County Councils, and has thus created the machinery without which -Socialism was impracticable. True, he has only made an outline which -needs to be filled in; but Socialists can fill in, whereas they had -no power to outline. It remains to give every adult a vote in the -election of Councillors; to shorten their term of office to a year; to -pay the Councillors, so that the public may have a right to the whole -of their working time; to give the Councils power to take and hold -land—a reform already asked for by the Liberal and Radical Union, a -body not consciously Socialist; and to remove all legal restrictions, -so as to leave them as free to act<span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">[139]</span> corporately as an individual is to -act individually. These measures accomplished, the rapidity with which -our institutions are socialised, depends on the growth of Socialism -among the people. It is essential to the stability of the changed -forms of industry that they shall be made by the people, not imposed -upon them; hence the value of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Ritchie’s gift of Local Government, -enabling each locality to move swiftly or slowly, to experiment on a -comparatively small scale, even to blunder without widespread disaster. -The <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">mot d’ordre</i> for Socialists now is “Convert the electors; -and capture the County Councils.” These Councils, administering local -affairs, with the national Executive, administering national affairs, -are all destined to be turned into effective industrial organisers; and -the unit of administration must depend on the nature of the industry. -The post, the telegraph, the railways, the canals, and the great -industries capable of being organised into Trusts, will, so far as we -can see now, be best administered each from a single centre for the -whole kingdom. Tramways, gasworks, water-works, and many of the smaller -productive industries, will be best managed locally. In marking the -lines of division, convenience and experience must be our guides. The -demarcations are of expediency, not of principle.</p> - -<p>The first great problem that will press on the County Council for -solution will be that of the unemployed. Wisely or unwisely, it will -have to deal with them: wisely, if it organises them for productive -industry; unwisely, if it opens “relief works,” and tries, like an -enlarged Bumble, to shirk the difficulty by enforcing barren and -oppressive toil upon outlawed wretches at the expense of the rest -of the community. Many of the unemployed are unskilled laborers: a -minority are skilled. They must first be registered as skilled and -unskilled, and the former enrolled under their several trades. Then -can begin the rural organisation of labor on county farms, held by the -County Councils. The Council will have its agricultural committee, -charged with the administrative details; and this committee will choose -well-trained, practical agriculturists, as directors of the farm -business. To the County Farm will be drafted from the unemployed in the -towns, the agricultural laborers who have wandered townwards in search -of work, and many of the unskilled laborers. On these farms every -advantage of machinery, and every discovery in agricultural science, -should be utilised<span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">[140]</span> to the utmost. The crops should be carefully chosen -with reference to soil and aspect—cereals, fruit, vegetables—and the -culture adapted to the crop, the one aim being to obtain the largest -amount of produce with the least expenditure of human labor. Whether -land is most profitably cultivated in large or small parcels depends on -the crop; and in the great area of the County Farm, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">la grande et la -petite culture</i> might each have its place. Economy would also gain -by the large number of laborers under the direction of the head farmer, -since they could be concentrated when required at any given spot, as -in harvest time, and dispersed to work at the more continuous kinds of -tillage when the seasonal task was over.</p> - -<p>To these farms must also be sent some skilled laborers from among the -unemployed, shoemakers, tailors, smiths, carpenters, etc.; so that the -County Farm may be self-supporting as far as it can be without waste -of productive power. All the small industries necessary in daily life -should be carried on in it, and an industrial commune thus built up. -The democracy might be trusted to ordain that an eight hours’ day, and -a comfortable home, should be part of the life-conditions on the County -Farm. Probably each large farm would soon have its central store, -with its adjacent railway station, in addition to the ordinary farm -buildings; its public hall in the centre of the farm village to be used -for lectures, concerts, and entertainments of all sorts; its public -schools, elementary and technical; and soon, possibly from the outset, -its public meal-room, saving time and trouble to housewives, and, while -economising fuel and food, giving a far greater choice and variety of -dishes. Large dwellings, with suites of rooms, might perhaps replace -old-fashioned cottages; for it is worth noting, as showing the tendency -already existing among ourselves to turn from isolated self-dependence -to the advantages of associated living, that many modern flats are -being built without servants’ rooms, the house-cleaning, etc., being -done by persons engaged for the whole block, and the important meals -being taken at restaurants, so as to avoid the trouble and expense of -private cooking. It will surely be well in initiating new organisations -of industry to start on the most advanced lines, and take advantage of -every modern tendency towards less isolated modes of living. Socialists -must work hard to make municipal dealings with the unemployed avenues -to the higher life, not grudging utilisation of pauper labor. And<span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">[141]</span> as -they know their aim, and the other political parties live but from -hand to mouth, they ought to be able to exercise a steady and uniform -pressure, which, just because it is steady and uniform, will impress -its direction on the general movement.</p> - -<p>The note of urban industrial organisation, as of all other, must be -that each person shall be employed to do what he can do best, not -what he does worst. It may be desirable for a man to have two trades; -but watch-making and stone-breaking are not convenient alternative -occupations. Where the skilled unemployed belong to trades carried on -everywhere, such as baking, shoemaking, tailoring, etc., they should be -employed at their own trades in municipal workshops, and their products -garnered in municipal stores. These workshops will be under the -direction of foremen, thoroughly skilled workmen, able to superintend -and direct as though in private employment. The working-day must be of -eight hours, and the wages, for the present, the Trades Union minimum. -Then, instead of tailors and shoemakers tramping the streets ragged -and barefoot, the tailors will be making clothes and the shoemakers -boots and shoes; and the shoemaker with the wages he earns will buy -the tailor’s products, and the tailor the shoemaker’s. Then, instead -of supporting the unemployed by rates levied on the employed they will -be set to work to supply their own necessities, and be producers of -the wealth they consume instead of consuming, in enforced idleness -or barren penal exercises in the stoneyard, the wealth produced by -others. Masons, bricklayers, plumbers, carpenters, etc., might be set -to work in building decent and pleasant dwellings—in the style of -the blocks of flats, not of the barracks called model dwellings—for -the housing of the municipal industrial army. I lay stress on the -pleasantness of the dwellings. These places are to be dwellings for -citizens, not prisons for paupers; and there is no possible reason why -they should not be made attractive. Under Socialism the workers are to -be the nation, and all that is best is for their service; for, be it -remembered, our faces are set towards Socialism, and our organisation -of labor is to be on Socialist lines.</p> - -<p>It is very likely that among the unemployed some will be found whose -trade can only be carried on by large numbers, and is not one of the -industries of the town into which their unlucky fate has drifted them. -These should be sent into municipal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">[142]</span> service in the towns where their -trade is the staple industry, there to be employed in the municipal -factory.</p> - -<p>Concurrently with this rural and urban organisation of non-centralised -industries will proceed the taking over of the great centralised -industries, centralised for us by capitalists, who thus unconsciously -pave the way for their own supersession. Everything which has been -organised into a Trust, and has been worked for a time in the Trust -fashion, is ripe for appropriation by the community. All minerals -would be most properly worked in this centralised way; and it will -probably be found most convenient to work all the big productive -industries—such as the textile—in similar fashion. It is idle to -say that it cannot be done by the State when it is being done by a -ring of capitalists: a Local Board, an Iron Board, a Tin Board, can -be as easily held responsible to the nation as to a casual crowd of -shareholders. There need be no dislocation of production in making the -transference: the active organisers and directors of a Trust do not -necessarily, or even usually, own the capital invested in it. If the -State finds it convenient to hire these organisers and directors, there -is nothing to prevent its doing so for as long or as short a period -as it chooses. The temporary arrangements made with them during the -transition period must be governed by expediency.</p> - -<p>Let us pause for a moment to estimate the position so far. The -unemployed have been transformed into communal workers—in the country -on great farms, improvements of the Bonanza farms in America—in the -towns in various trades. Public stores for agricultural and industrial -products are open in all convenient places, and filled with the goods -thus communally produced. The great industries, worked as Trusts, -are controlled by the State instead of by capitalist rings. The -private capitalist, however, will still be in business, producing -and distributing on his own account in competition with the communal -organisations, which at present will have occupied only part of the -industrial field. But apart from a pressure which will be recognised -when we come to deal with the remuneration of labor, these private -enterprises will be carried on under circumstances of ever-increasing -difficulty. In face of the orderly communal arrays, playing into -each other’s hands, with the credit of the country behind them, the -ventures of the private capitalist will be at as great a disadvantage -as the cottage industries of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">[143]</span> last century in face of the factory -industries of our own period. The Trusts have taught us how to drive -competing capitals out of the market by associated capitals. The -Central Boards or County Councils will be able to utilise this power -of association further than any private capitalists. Thus the economic -forces which replaced the workshop by the factory, will replace the -private shop by the municipal store and the private factory by the -municipal one. And the advantages of greater concentration of capital -and of the association of labor will not be the only ones enjoyed by -the communal workers. All waste will be checked, every labor-saving -appliance utilised to the utmost, where the object is the production -of general wealth and not the production of profit to be appropriated -by a class; for in the one case it is the interest of the producers to -produce—inasmuch as their enjoyment depends on the productivity of -their labor—whereas in the other it is their interest to sterilise -their labor as far as they dare in order to render more of it necessary -and so keep up its price. As the organisation of the public industry -extends, and supplants more and more the individualist producer, the -probable demand will be more easily estimated, and the supply regulated -to meet it. The Municipalities and Central Boards will take the place -of the competing small capitalists and the rings of large ones; and -production will become ordered and rational instead of anarchical and -reckless as it is to-day. After awhile the private producers will -disappear, not because there will be any law against individualist -production, but because it will not pay. No one will care to face the -worries, the harassments, the anxieties, of individual struggling for -livelihood, when ease, freedom, and security can be enjoyed in the -communal services.</p> - -<p>The best form of management during the transition period, and possibly -for a long time to come, will be through the Communal Councils, -which will appoint committees to superintend the various branches -of industry. These committees will engage the necessary manager and -foreman for each shop, factory, etc., and will hold the power of -dismissal as of appointment. I do not believe that the direct election -of the manager and foreman by the employees would be found to work -well in practice, or to be consistent with the discipline necessary -in carrying on any large business undertaking. It seems to me better -that the Commune should elect its Council—thus keeping under its own<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">[144]</span> -control the general authority—but should empower the Council to select -the officials, so that the power of selection and dismissal within the -various sub-divisions should lie with the nominees of the whole Commune -instead of with the particular group immediately concerned.</p> - -<p>There is no practical difficulty in the way of the management of -the ordinary productive industries, large or small. The Trusts and -Co-operation have, between them, solved, or put us in the way of -solving, all problems connected with these. But there are difficulties -in connexion with the industries concerned in the production of such -commodities as books and newspapers. During the transitional stage -these difficulties will not arise; but when all industries are carried -on by the Commune, or the Nation, how will books and newspapers be -produced? I only throw out the following suggestions. Printing, like -baking, tailoring, shoemaking, is a communal rather than a national -industry. Suppose we had printing offices controlled by the Communal -Council. The printing committee might be left free to accept any -publication it thought valuable, as a private firm to-day may take the -risk of publication, the arrangement with the author being purchase -outright, or royalty on copies sold, in each case so much to be put to -his credit at the Communal Bank. But there are many authors whose goods -are desired by no one: it would be absurd to force the community to -publish all minor poetry. Why not accept the principle that in every -case where the printing committee declines to print at the communal -risk, the author may have his work printed by transferring from his -credit at the Communal Bank to the account of the printing committee -sufficient to cover the cost of printing? The committee should have -no power to refuse to print, where the cost was covered. Thus liberty -of expression would be guarded as a constitutional right, while the -community would not be charged with the cost of printing every stupid -effusion that its fond composer might deem worthy of publicity.</p> - -<p>Newspapers might be issued on similar terms; and it would always be -open to individuals, or to groups of individuals, to publish anything -they pleased on covering the cost of publication. With the comparative -affluence which would be enjoyed by each member of the community, -anyone who really cared to reach the public ear would be able to do so -by diminishing his expenditure in other directions.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">[145]</span></p> - -<p>Another difficulty which will meet us although not immediately, is the -competition for employment in certain pleasanter branches of industry. -At present an unemployed person would catch eagerly at the chance of -any well-paid work he was able to perform. If he were able both to set -type and to stitch coats, he would not dream of grumbling if he were -by chance offered the job he liked the less of the two: he would be -only too glad to get either. But it is quite possible that as the vast -amelioration of life-conditions proceeds, Jeshurun will wax fat and -kick if, when he prefers to make microscopic lenses, he is desired to -make mirrors. Under these circumstances, Jeshurun will, I fear, have -to accommodate himself to the demand. If the number of people engaged -in making lenses suffices to meet the demand for lenses, Jeshurun must -consent to turn his talents for the time to mirror-making. After all, -his state will not be very pitiable, though Socialism will have failed, -it is true, to make 2 + 2 = 5.</p> - -<p>This, however, hardly solves the general question as to the -apportioning of laborers to the various forms of labor. But a solution -has been found by the ingenious author of “Looking Backward, from -<span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> 2000.” Leaving young men and women free to choose their -employments, he would equalise the rates of volunteering by equalising -the attractions of the trades. In many cases natural bent, left free to -develop itself during a lengthened educational term, will determine the -choice of avocation. Human beings are fortunately very varied in their -capacities and tastes; that which attracts one repels another. But -there are unpleasant and indispensable forms of labor which, one would -imagine, can attract none—mining, sewer-cleaning, &c. These might be -rendered attractive by making the hours of labor in them much shorter -than the normal working day of pleasanter occupations. Many a strong, -vigorous man would greatly prefer a short spell of disagreeable work -to a long one at a desk. As it is well to leave the greatest possible -freedom to the individual, this equalising of advantages in all trades -would be far better than any attempt to perform the impossible task of -choosing an employment for each. A person would be sure to hate any -work into which he was directly forced, even though it were the very -one he would have chosen had he been left to himself.</p> - -<p>Further, much of the most disagreeable and laborious work<span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">[146]</span> might be -done by machinery, as it would be now if it were not cheaper to exploit -a helot class. When it became illegal to send small boys up chimneys, -chimneys did not cease to be swept: a machine was invented for sweeping -them. Coal-cutting might now be done by machinery, instead of by a man -lying on his back, picking away over his head at the imminent risk of -his own life; but the machine is much dearer than men, so the miners -continue to have their chests crushed in by the falling coal. Under -Socialism men’s lives and limbs will be more valuable than machinery; -and science will be tasked to substitute the one for the other.</p> - -<p>In truth the extension of machinery is very likely to solve many of -the problems connected with differential advantages in employment; -and it seems certain that, in the very near future, the skilled -worker will not be the man who is able to perform a particular set of -operations, but the man who has been trained in the use of machinery. -The difference of trade will be in the machine rather than in the man: -whether the produce is nails or screws, boots or coats, cloth or silk, -paper-folding or type-setting, will depend on the internal arrangements -of the mechanism and not on the method of applying the force. What we -shall probably do will be to instruct all our youth in the principles -of mechanics and in the handling of machines; the machines will be -constructed so as to turn the force into the various channels required -to produce the various articles; and the skilled workman will be the -skilled <em>mechanic</em>, not the skilled printer or bootmaker. At the -present time a few hours’ or a few days’ study will make the trained -mechanician master of any machine you can place before him. The line -of progress is to substitute machines for men in every department of -production: let the brain plan, guide, control; but let iron and steel, -steam and electricity, that do not tire and cannot be brutalised, do -the whole of the heavy toil that exhausts human frames to-day. There -is not the slightest reason to suppose that we are at the end of an -inventive era. Rather are we only just beginning to grope after the -uses of electricity: and machinery has before it possibilities almost -undreamed of now, the men produced by our system being too rough-handed -for the manipulation of delicate and complicated contrivances. I -suggest this only as a probable simplification of balancing the supply -and demand in various forms of labor in the future: our immediate<span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">[147]</span> -method of regulation must be the equalising of advantages in them.</p> - -<p>One may guess that in each nation all the Boards and communal -authorities will ultimately be represented in some central Executive, -or Industrial Ministry; that the Minister of Agriculture, of Mineral -Industries, of Textile Industries, and so on, will have relations with -similar officers in other lands; and that thus, internationally as well -as nationally, co-operation will replace competition. But that end is -not yet.</p> - -<p>We now approach a yet more thorny subject than the organisation of the -workers. What should be the remuneration of labor—what the share of -the product taken respectively by the individual, the municipality, and -the State?</p> - -<p>The answer depends on the answer to a previous question. Is the -organisation of the unemployed to be undertaken in order to transform -them into self-supporting, self-respecting citizens; or is it to be -carried on as a form of exploitation, utilising pauper labor for the -production of profit for non-paupers? The whole matter turns on this -point; and unless we know our own minds, and fight for the right method -and against the wrong from the very beginning, the organisation of the -unemployed will be a buttress for the present system instead of a step -towards a better. Already there is talk of establishing labor colonies -in connexion with workhouses; and there is no time to be lost if we are -to take advantage of the good in the proposal and exclude the bad. The -County Councils also will lead to an increase of municipal employment; -and the method of that employment is vital.</p> - -<p>The ordinary vestryman, driven by the force of circumstances into -organising the unemployed, will try to extract a profit to the -ratepayers from pauper farms by paying the lowest rates of wages. He -would find this way of proceeding very congenial, and would soon, -if permitted, simply municipalise slave-driving. In this way the -municipal and rural organisation of labor, even when its necessity and -its advantages are realised, can do nothing but change the form of -exploitation of labor if the workers in public employ are to be paid a -wage fixed by the competition of the market, and the profits of their -labor used only for the relief of the rates. Under such circumstances -we should have the whole of the rates paid by the communal workers, -while the private employers would go free. This<span class="pagenum" id="Page_148">[148]</span> would not be a -transition to Socialism, but only a new way of creating a class of -municipal serfs, which would make our towns burlesques of the ancient -Greek slaveholding “democracies.” We shall find surer ground by -recalling and applying the principle of Socialism that the laborers -shall enjoy the full product of their toil. It seems to me that this -might be worked out somewhat in the following way:</p> - -<p>Out of the value of the communal produce must come rent of land -payable to the local authority, rent of plant needed for working -the industries, wages advanced and fixed in the usual way, taxes, -reserve fund, accumulation fund, and the other charges necessary for -the carrying on of the communal business. All these deducted, the -remaining value should be divided among the communal workers as a -“bonus.” It would be obviously inconvenient, if not impossible, for -the district authority to sub-divide this value and allot so much to -each of its separate undertakings—so much left over from gas works -for the men employed there, so much from the tramways for the men -employed on them, and so on. It would be far simpler and easier for the -municipal employees to be regarded as a single body, in the service of -a single employer, the local authority; and that the surplus from the -whole of the businesses carried on by the Communal Council should be -divided without distinction among the whole of the communal employees. -Controversy will probably arise as to the division: shall all the -shares be equal; or shall the workers receive in proportion to the -supposed dignity or indignity of their work? Inequality, however, would -be odious; and I have already suggested (<abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 145) a means of adjusting -different kinds of labor to a system of equal division of net product. -This meets the difficulty of the varying degrees of irksomeness -without invidiously setting up any kind of socially useful labor as -more honorable than any other—a distinction essentially unsocial -and pernicious. But since in public affairs ethics are apt to go to -the wall, and appeals to social justice too often fall on deaf ears, -it is lucky that in this case ethics and convenience coincide. The -impossibility of estimating the separate value of each man’s labor with -any really valid result, the friction which would arise, the jealousies -which would be provoked, the inevitable discontent, favoritism and -jobbery that would prevail: all these things will drive the Communal -Council into the right path, equal remuneration of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">[149]</span> all workers. That -path once entered on, the principle of simplification will spread; and -presently it will probably be found convenient that all the Communal -Councils shall send in their reports to a Central Board, stating the -number of their employees, the amount of the values produced, the -deductions for rent and other charges, and their available surplus. -All these surpluses added together would then be divided by the total -number of communal employees, and the sum thus reached would be the -share of each worker. The national trusts would at first be worked -separately on lines analogous to those sketched for the Communes; -but later these would be lumped in with the rest, and still further -equalise the reward of labor. As private enterprises dwindle, more -and more of the workers will pass into communal employ, until at last -the Socialist ideal is touched of a nation in which all adults are -workers, and all share the national product. But be it noted that all -this grows out of the first organisation of industry by Municipalities -and County Councils, and will evolve just as fast or just as slowly -as the community and its sections choose. The values dealt with, and -the numbers employed at first, would not imply as much complexity of -detail as is involved in many of the great businesses now carried on by -individuals and by companies. The same brains will be available for the -work as are now hired by individuals; and it is rather the novelty of -the idea than the difficulty of its realisation which will stand in the -way of its acceptance.</p> - -<p>It is probable, however, that for some time to come, the captains -of industry will be more highly paid than the rank and file of the -industrial army, not because it is just that they should receive higher -remuneration, but because they, having still the alternative of private -enterprise, will be able to demand their ordinary terms, at which -it will pay the community better to engage them than to do without -them—which would be indeed impossible. But their remuneration will -fall as education spreads: their present value is a scarcity value, -largely dependent on their monopoly of the higher education; and as the -wider training is thrown open to all, an ever-increasing number will -become qualified to act as organisers and directors.</p> - -<p>The form in which the worker’s share is paid to him is not a matter of -primary importance. It would probably be convenient to have Communal -Banks, issuing cheques like those of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">[150]</span> Cheque Bank; and these banks -could open credits to the workers to the amount of their remuneration. -The way in which each worker expended his wealth would of course be his -own business.</p> - -<p>The above method of dealing with the surplus remaining from communal -labor after rent and other charges had been paid to the Municipality, -would prove the most potent factor in the supersession of private -enterprises. The amounts produced by the communal organisations would -exceed those produced under individualist control; but even if this -were not so, yet the shares of the communal workers, as they would -include the produce now consumed by idlers, would be higher than any -wage which could be paid by the private employer. Hence competition to -enter the communal service, and a constant pressure on the Communal -Councils to enlarge their undertakings.</p> - -<p>It should be added that children and workers incapacitated by age or -sickness should receive an equal share with the communal employees. As -all have been children, are at times sick, and hope to live to old age, -all in turn would share the advantage; and it is only just that those -who have labored honestly in health and through maturity should enjoy -the reward of labor in sickness and through old age.</p> - -<p>The shares of individuals and of Municipalities being thus -apportioned, there remains only a word to say as to the Central -National Council—the “State” <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">par excellence</i>. This would -derive the revenues necessary for the discharge of its functions, -from contributions levied on the Communal Councils. It is evident -that in the adjustment of these contributions could be effected the -“nationalisation” of any special natural resources, such as mines, -harbors, &c., enjoyed by exceptionally well situated Communes. The levy -would be, in fact, of the nature of an income tax.</p> - -<p>Such a plan of Distribution—especially that part of it which equalises -the shares in the product—is likely to provoke the question: “What -will be the stimulus to labor under the proposed system? Will not -the idle evade their fair share of labor, and live in clover on the -industry of their neighbors?”</p> - -<p>The general stimulus to labor will be, in the first place, then -as now, the starvation which would follow the cessation of labor. -Until we discover the country in which jam-rolls grow on bushes, and -roasted sucking-pigs run about crying “Come<span class="pagenum" id="Page_151">[151]</span> eat me!” we are under an -imperious necessity to produce. We shall work because, on the whole, -we prefer work to starvation. In the transition to Socialism, when the -organisation of labor by the Communal Councils begins, the performance -of work will be the condition of employment; and as non-employment will -mean starvation—for when work is offered, no relief of any kind need -be given to the healthy adult who refuses to perform it—the strongest -possible stimulus will force men to work. In fact, “work or starve” -will be the alternative set before each communal employee; and as men -now prefer long-continued and ill-paid work to starvation, they will -certainly, unless human nature be entirely changed, prefer short and -well-paid work to starvation. The individual shirker will be dealt with -much as he is to-day: he will be warned, and, if he prove incorrigibly -idle, discharged from the communal employ. The vast majority of men -now seek to retain their employment by a reasonable discharge of their -duty: why should they not do the same when the employment is on easier -conditions? At first, discharge would mean being flung back into the -whirlpool of competition, a fate not lightly to be challenged. Later, -as the private enterprises succumbed to the competition of the Commune, -it would mean almost hopelessness of obtaining a livelihood. When -social reorganisation is complete, it would mean absolute starvation. -And as the starvation would be deliberately incurred and voluntarily -undergone, it would meet with no sympathy and no relief.</p> - -<p>The next stimulus would be the appetite of the worker for the result -of the communal toil, and the determination of his fellow-workers to -make him take his fair share of the work of producing it. It is found -at the present time that a very small share of the profits arising -from associated labor acts as a tremendous stimulus to each individual -producer. Firms which allot a part of their profits for division among -their employees, find the plan profitable to themselves. The men work -eagerly to increase the common product, knowing that each will have a -larger bonus as the common product is larger: they become vigilant as -to waste in production; they take care of the machinery; they save gas, -etc. In a word, they lessen the cost as much as they can, because each -saving means gain to them. We see from the experiments of Leclaire and -Godin that inventiveness also is stimulated by a share in the common -produce.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">[152]</span> The workers in these businesses are ever trying to discover -better methods to improve their machinery, in a word to progress, -since each step forward brings improvement of their lot. Inventions -come from a desire to save trouble, as well as from the impulse of -inventive genius, the joy in accomplishing an intellectual triumph, -and the delight of serving the race. Small inventions are continually -being made by clever workmen to facilitate their operations, even -when they are not themselves personally gainers by them; and there -is no reason to fear that this spontaneous exercise of inventiveness -will cease when the added productivity of labor lightens the task or -increases the harvest of the laborer. Is it to be argued that men will -be industrious, careful, and inventive when they get only a fraction -of the result of their associated labor, but will plunge into sloth, -recklessness and stagnation when they get the whole? that a little gain -stimulates, but any gain short of complete satisfaction would paralyse? -If there is one vice more certain than another to be unpopular in a -Socialistic community, it is laziness. The man who shirked would find -his mates making his position intolerable, even before he suffered the -doom of expulsion.</p> - -<p>But while these compelling motives will be potent in their action -on man as he now is, there are others, already acting on some men, -which will one day act on all men. Human beings are not the simple -and onesided organisms they appear to the superficial glance of the -Individualist—moved only by a single motive, the desire for pecuniary -gain—by one longing, the longing for wealth. Under our present social -system, the struggle for riches assumes an abnormal and artificial -development: riches mean nearly all that makes life worth having, -security against starvation, gratification of taste, enjoyment of -pleasant and cultured society, superiority to many temptations, -self-respect, consideration, comfort, knowledge, freedom, as far as -these things are attainable under existing conditions. In a society -where poverty means social discredit, where misfortune is treated as a -crime, where the prison of the workhouse is a guerdon of failure, and -the bitter carking harassment of daily wants unmet by daily supply is -ever hanging over the head of each worker, what wonder that money seems -the one thing needful, and that every other thought is lost in the -frensied rush to escape all that is summed up in the one word Poverty?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">[153]</span></p> - -<p>But this abnormal development of the gold-hunger would disappear upon -the certainty for each of the means of subsistence. Let each individual -feel absolutely secure of subsistence, let every anxiety as to the -material wants of his future be swept away; and the longing for wealth -will lose its leverage. The daily bread being certain, the tyranny of -pecuniary gain will be broken; and life will begin to be used in living -and not in struggling for the chance to live. Then will come to the -front all those multifarious motives which are at work in the complex -human organism even now, and which will assume their proper importance -when the basis of physical life is assured. The desire to excel, the -joy in creative work, the longing to improve, the eagerness to win -social approval, the instinct of benevolence; all these will start -into full life, and will serve at once as the stimulus to labor and -the reward of excellence. It is instructive to notice that these very -forces may already be seen at work in every case in which subsistence -is secured, and they alone supply the stimulus to action. The soldier’s -subsistence is certain, and does not depend on his exertions. At once -he becomes susceptible to appeals to his patriotism, to his <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">esprit -de corps</i>, to the honor of his flag; he will dare anything for -glory, and value a bit of bronze, which is the “reward of valor,” far -more than a hundred times its weight in gold. Yet many of the private -soldiers come from the worst of the population; and military glory -and success in murder are but poor objects to aim at. If so much can -be done under circumstances so unpromising, what may we not hope from -nobler aspirations? Or take the eagerness, self-denial, and strenuous -effort, thrown by young men into their mere games! The desire to be -captain of the Oxford eleven, stroke of the Cambridge boat, victor -in the foot-race or the leaping, in a word, the desire to excel, is -strong enough to impel to exertions which often ruin physical health. -Everywhere we see the multiform desires of humanity assert themselves -when once livelihood is secure. It is on the devotion of these to the -service of Society, as the development of the social instincts teaches -men to identify their interests with those of the community, that -Socialism must ultimately rely for progress; but in saying this we are -only saying that Socialism relies for progress on human nature as a -whole, instead of on that mere fragment of it known as the desire for -gain. If human nature should break down, then<span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">[154]</span> Socialism will break -down; but at least we have a hundred strings to our Socialist bow, -while the Individualist has only one.</p> - -<p>But Humanity will not break down. The faith which is built on it is -faith founded on a rock. Under healthier and happier conditions, -Humanity will rise to heights undreamed of now; and the most exquisite -Utopias, as sung by the poet and idealist, shall, to our children, seem -but dim and broken lights compared with their perfect day. All that we -need are courage, prudence, and faith. Faith, above all, which dares to -believe that justice and love are not impossible; and that more than -the best that man can dream of shall one day be realised by men.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">[155]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">[157]</span></p> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="THE_TRANSITION_TO_SOCIAL_DEMOCRACY">THE TRANSITION TO SOCIAL DEMOCRACY.</h2> -</div> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h3 class="nobreak" id="TRANSITION73">TRANSITION.<a id="FNanchor_73" href="#Footnote_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a></h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY G. BERNARD SHAW.</p> - - -<p>When the British Association honored me by an invitation to take part -in its proceedings, I proposed to do so by reading a paper entitled -“<i>Finishing</i> the Transition to Social Democracy.” The word -“finishing” has been, on consideration, dropped. In modern use it has -gathered a certain sudden and sinister sense which I desire carefully -to dissociate from the process to be described. I suggested it in the -first instance only to convey in the shortest way that we are in the -middle of the transition instead of shrinking from the beginning of -it; and that I propose to deal with the part of it that lies before us -rather than that which we have already accomplished. Therefore, though -I shall begin at the beginning, I shall make no apology for traversing -centuries by leaps and bounds at the risk of sacrificing the dignity of -history to the necessity for coming to the point as soon as possible.</p> - -<p>Briefly, then, let us commence by glancing at the Middle Ages. There -you find, theoretically, a much more orderly England than the England -of to-day. Agriculture is organised on an intelligible and consistent -system in the feudal manor or commune; handicraft is ordered by the -guilds of the towns. Every man has his class, and every class its -duties. Payments and privileges are fixed by law and custom, sanctioned -by the moral sense of the community, and revised by the light of that -moral sense whenever the operation of supply and demand disturbs -their adjustment. Liberty and Equality are unheard of; but so is Free -Competition. The law does not suffer a laborer’s wife to wear a silver -girdle; neither does it force her to work sixteen hours a day for -the value of a modern shilling. Nobody<span class="pagenum" id="Page_158">[158]</span> entertains the idea that the -individual has any right to trade as he pleases without reference to -the rest. When the townsfolk, for instance, form a market, they quite -understand that they have not taken that trouble in order to enable -speculators to make money. If they catch a man buying goods solely in -order to sell them a few hours later at a higher price, they treat that -man as a rascal; and he never, as far as I have been able to ascertain, -ventures to plead that it is socially beneficent, and indeed a pious -duty, to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest. If he did, -they would probably burn him alive, not altogether inexcusably. As to -Protection, it comes naturally to them.</p> - -<p>This Social Order, relics of which are still to be found in all -directions, did not collapse because it was unjust or absurd. It -was burst by the growth of the social organism. Its machinery was -too primitive, and its administration too naïve, too personal, -too meddlesome to cope with anything more complex than a group of -industrially independent communes, centralised very loosely, if at -all, for purely political purposes. Industrial relation with other -countries were beyond its comprehension. Its grasp of the obligations -of interparochial morality was none of the surest: of international -morality it had no notion. A Frenchman or a Scotchman was a natural -enemy: a Muscovite was a foreign devil: the relationship of a negro -to the human race was far more distant than that of a gorilla is -now admitted to be. Thus, when the discovery of the New World began -that economic revolution which changed every manufacturing town into -a mere booth in the world’s fair, and quite altered the immediate -objects and views of producers, English adventurers took to the sea -in a frame of mind peculiarly favorable to commercial success. They -were unaffectedly pious, and had the force of character which is only -possible to men who are founded on convictions. At the same time, they -regarded piracy as a brave and patriotic pursuit, and the slave trade -as a perfectly honest branch of commerce, adventurous enough to be -consistent with the honor of a gentleman, and lucrative enough to make -it well worth the risk. When they stole the cargo of a foreign ship, or -made a heavy profit on a batch of slaves, they regarded their success -as a direct proof of divine protection. The owners of accumulated -wealth hastened to “venture” their capital with these men. Persons of -all the richer degrees, from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_159">[159]</span> Queen Elizabeth downward, took shares -in the voyages of the merchant adventurers. The returns justified -their boldness; and the foundation of the industrial greatness and -the industrial shame of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was -laid; modern Capitalism thus arising in enterprises for which men are -now, by civilised nations, hung or shot as human vermin. And it is -curious to see still, in the commercial adventurers of our own time, -the same incongruous combination of piety and rectitude with the most -unscrupulous and revolting villainy. We all know the merchant princes -whose enterprise, whose steady perseverance, whose high personal honor, -blameless family relations, large charities, and liberal endowment -of public institutions mark them out as very pillars of society; and -who are nevertheless grinding their wealth out of the labor of women -and children with such murderous rapacity that they have to hand over -the poorest of their victims to sweaters whose sole special function -is the evasion of the Factory Acts. They have, in fact, no more sense -of social solidarity with the wage-workers than Drake had with the -Spaniards or negroes.</p> - -<p>With the rise of foreign trade and Capitalism, industry so far outgrew -the control, not merely of the individual, but of the village, the -guild, the municipality, and even the central government, that it -seemed as if all attempt at regulation must be abandoned. Every law -made for the better ordering of business either did not work at all, or -worked only as a monopoly enforced by exasperating official meddling, -directly injuring the general interest, and reacting disastrously on -the particular interest it was intended to protect. The laws, too, -had ceased to be even honestly intended, owing to the seizure of -political power by the capitalist classes, which had been prodigiously -enriched by the operation of economic laws which were not then -understood.<a id="FNanchor_74" href="#Footnote_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> Matters reached a position in which legislation and -regulation were so mischievous and corrupt, that anarchy became the -ideal of all progressive thinkers and practical men. The intellectual -revolt formally inaugurated by the Reformation was reinforced in the -eighteenth century by the great industrial revolution which began with -the utilisation of steam and the invention of the spinning jenny.<a id="FNanchor_75" href="#Footnote_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> -Then came chaos. The feudal system became an absurdity when its basis -of communism with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">[160]</span> inequality of condition had changed into private -property with free contract and competition rents. The guild system had -no machinery for dealing with division of labor, the factory system, or -international trade: it recognized in competitive individualism only -something to be repressed as diabolical. But competitive individualism -simply took possession of the guilds, and turned them into refectories -for aldermen, and notable additions to the grievances and laughing -stocks of posterity.</p> - -<p>The desperate effort of the human intellect to unravel this tangle of -industrial anarchy brought modern political economy into existence. -It took shape in France, where the confusion was thrice confounded; -and proved itself a more practical department of philosophy than the -metaphysics of the schoolmen, the Utopian socialism of More, or the -sociology of Hobbes. It could trace its ancestry to Aristotle; but -just then the human intellect was rather tired of Aristotle, whose -economics, besides, were those of slave holding republics. Political -economy soon declared for industrial anarchy; for private property; for -individual recklessness of everything except individual accumulation -of riches; and for the abolition of all the functions of the State -except those of putting down violent conduct and invasions of private -property. It might have echoed Jack Cade’s exclamation, “But then are -we in order, when we are most out of order.”</p> - -<p>Although this was what political economy decreed, it must not be -inferred that the greater economists were any more advocates of mere -license than Prince Kropotkin, or <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Herbert Spencer, or <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Benjamin -Tucker of Boston, or any other modern Anarchist. They did not admit -that the alternative to State regulation was anarchy; they held that -Nature had provided an all-powerful automatic regulator in Competition; -and that by its operation self-interest would evolve order out of chaos -if only it were allowed its own way. They loved to believe that a right -and just social order was not an artificial and painfully maintained -legal edifice, but a spontaneous outcome of the free play of the forces -of Nature. They were reactionaries against feudal domineering and -medieval meddling and ecclesiastical intolerance; and they were able -to shew how all three had ended in disgraceful failure, corruption -and self-stultification. Indignant at the spectacle of the peasant -struggling against the denial of those rights of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">[161]</span> private property -which his feudal lord had successfully usurped, they strenuously -affirmed the right of private property for all. And whilst they were -dazzled by the prodigious impulse given to production by the industrial -revolution under competitive private enterprise, they were at the -same time, for want of statistics, so optimistically ignorant of the -condition of the masses, that we find David Hume, in 1766, writing to -Turgot that “no man is so industrious but he may add some hours more in -the week to his labor; and scarce anyone is so poor but he can retrench -something of his expense.” No student ever gathers from a study of the -individualist economists that the English proletariat was seething -in horror and degradation whilst the riches of the proprietors were -increasing by leaps and bounds.</p> - -<p>The historical ignorance of the economists did not, however, disable -them for the abstract work of scientific political economy. All their -most cherished institutions and doctrines succumbed one by one to -their analysis of the laws of production and exchange. With one law -alone—the law of rent—they destroyed the whole series of assumptions -upon which private property is based. The apriorist notion that among -free competitors wealth must go to the industrious, and poverty be -the just and natural punishment of the lazy and improvident, proved -as illusory as the apparent flatness of the earth. Here was a vast -mass of wealth called economic rent, increasing with the population, -and consisting of the difference between the product of the national -industry as it actually was and as it would have been if every acre of -land in the country had been no more fertile or favorably situated than -the very worst acre from which a bare living could be extracted: all -quite incapable of being assigned to this or that individual or class -as the return to his or its separate exertions: all purely social or -common wealth, for the private appropriation of which no permanently -valid and intellectually honest excuse could be made. Ricardo was quite -as explicit and far more thorough on the subject than <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Henry George. -He pointed out—I quote his own words—that “the whole surplus produce -of the soil, after deducting from it only such moderate profits as -are sufficient to encourage accumulation, must finally rest with the -landlord.”<a id="FNanchor_76" href="#Footnote_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">[162]</span></p> - -<p>It was only by adopting a preposterous theory of value that Ricardo was -able to maintain that the laborer, selling himself for wages to the -proprietor, would always command his cost of production, <i>i.e.</i>, -his daily subsistence. Even that slender consolation vanished later -on before the renewed investigation of value made by Jevons,<a id="FNanchor_77" href="#Footnote_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> -who demonstrated that the value of a commodity is a function of the -quantity available, and may fall to zero when the supply outruns the -demand so far as to make the final increment of the supply useless.<a id="FNanchor_78" href="#Footnote_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> -A fact which the unemployed had discovered, without the aid of the -differential calculus, before Jevons was born. Private property, in -fact, left no room for new comers. Malthus pointed this out, and -urged that there should be no newcomers, that the population should -remain stationary. But the population took exactly as much notice of -this modest demand for stagnation, as the incoming tide took of King -Canute’s ankles. Indeed the demand was the less reasonable since the -power of production per head was increasing faster than the population -(as it still is), the increase of poverty being produced simply by the -increase and private appropriation of rent. After Ricardo had completed -the individualist synthesis of production and exchange, a dialectical -war broke out. Proudhon had only to skim through a Ricardian treatise -to understand just enough of it to be able to shew that political -economy was a <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">reductio ad absurdum</i> of private property instead -of a justification of it. Ferdinand Lassalle, with Ricardo in one hand -and Hegel in the other, turned all the heavy guns of the philosophers -and economists on private property with such effect, that no one dared -to challenge his characteristic boasts of the irresistible equipment of -Social Democracy in point of culture. Karl Marx, without even giving up -the Ricardian value theory, seized on the blue books which contained -the true history of the leaps and bounds of England’s prosperity, -and convicted private property of wholesale spoliation, murder and -compulsory prostitution; of plague, pestilence, and famine; battle, -murder, and sudden death. This was hardly what had been expected from -an institution so highly spoken of. Many critics said that the attack -was not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">[163]</span> fair: no one ventured to pretend that the charges were not -true. The facts were not only admitted; they had been legislated -upon. Social Democracy was working itself out practically as well as -academically. Before I recite the steps of the transition, I will, as -a matter of form, explain what Social Democracy is, though doubtless -nearly all my hearers are already conversant with it.</p> - -<p>What the achievement of Socialism involves economically, is the -transfer of rent from the class which now appropriates it to the whole -people. Rent being that part of the produce which is individually -unearned, this is the only equitable method of disposing of it. There -is no means of getting rid of economic rent. So long as the fertility -of land varies from acre to acre, and the number of persons passing by -a shop window per hour varies from street to street, with the result -that two farmers or two shopkeepers of exactly equal intelligence and -industry will reap unequal returns from their year’s work, so long -will it be equitable to take from the richer farmer or shopkeeper the -excess over his fellow’s gain which he owes to the bounty of Nature -or the advantage of situation, and divide that excess of rent equally -between the two. If the pair of farms or shops be left in the hands of -a private landlord, he will take the excess, and, instead of dividing -it between his two tenants, live on it himself idly at their expense. -The economic object of Socialism is not, of course, to equalise farmers -and shopkeepers in couples, but to carry out the principle over the -whole community by collecting all rents and throwing them into the -national treasury. As the private proprietor has no reason for clinging -to his property except the legal power to take the rent and spend it -on himself—this legal power being in fact what really constitutes -him a proprietor—its abrogation would mean his expropriation. The -socialisation of rent would mean the socialisation of the sources of -production by the expropriation of the present private proprietors, and -the transfer of their property to the entire nation. This transfer, -then, is the subject matter of the transition to Socialism, which began -some forty-five years ago, as far as any phase of social evolution can -be said to begin at all.</p> - -<p>It will be at once seen that the valid objections to Socialism consist -wholly of practical difficulties. On the ground of abstract justice, -Socialism is not only unobjectionable, but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">[164]</span> sacredly imperative. I -am afraid that in the ordinary middle-class opinion Socialism is -flagrantly dishonest, but could be established off-hand to-morrow with -the help of a guillotine, if there were no police, and the people were -wicked enough. In truth, it is as honest as it is inevitable; but all -the mobs and guillotines in the world can no more establish it than -police coercion can avert it. The first practical difficulty is raised -by the idea of the entire people collectively owning land, capital, or -anything else. Here is the rent arising out of the people’s industry: -here are the pockets of the private proprietors. The problem is to -drop that rent, not into those private pockets, but into the people’s -pocket. Yes; but where is the people’s pocket? Who is the people? -what is the people? Tom we know, and Dick: also Harry; but solely and -separately as individuals: as a trinity they have no existence. Who is -their trustee, their guardian, their man of business, their manager, -their secretary, even their stakeholder? The Socialist is stopped -dead at the threshold of practical action by this difficulty until he -bethinks himself of the State as the representative and trustee of the -people. Now if you will just form a hasty picture of the governments -which called themselves States in Ricardo’s day, consisting of rich -proprietors legislating either by divine right or by the exclusive -suffrage of the poorer proprietors, and filling the executives with the -creatures of their patronage and favoritism; if you look beneath their -oratorical parliamentary discussions, conducted with all the splendor -and decorum of an expensive sham fight; if you consider their class -interests, their shameless corruption, and the waste and mismanagement -which disgraced all their bungling attempts at practical business -of any kind, you will understand why Ricardo, clearly as he saw the -economic consequences of private appropriation of rent, never dreamt of -State appropriation as a possible alternative. The Socialist of that -time did not greatly care: he was only a benevolent Utopian who planned -model communities, and occasionally carried them out, with negatively -instructive and positively disastrous results. When his successors -learned economies from Ricardo, they saw the difficulty quite as -plainly as Ricardo’s vulgarisers, the Whig doctrinaires who accepted -the incompetence and corruption of States as permanent inherent State -qualities, like the acidity of lemons. Not that the Socialists were not -doctrinaires<span class="pagenum" id="Page_165">[165]</span> too; but outside economics they were pupils of Hegel, -whilst the Whigs were pupils of Bentham and Austin. Bentham’s was not -the school in which men learned to solve problems to which history -alone could give the key, or to form conceptions which belonged to -the evolutional order. Hegel, on the other hand, expressly taught the -conception of the perfect State; and his pupils saw that nothing in -the nature of things made it impossible, or even specially difficult, -to make the existing State, if not absolutely perfect, at least -practically trustworthy. They contemplated the insolent and inefficient -government official of their day without rushing to the conclusion that -the State uniform had a magic property of extinguishing all business -capacity, integrity, and common civility in the wearer. When State -officials obtained their posts by favoritism and patronage, efficiency -on their part was an accident, and politeness a condescension. When -they retained their posts without any effective responsibility to the -public, they naturally defrauded the public by making their posts -sinecures, and insulted the public when, by personal inquiry, it made -itself troublesome. But every successfully conducted private business -establishment in the kingdom was an example of the ease with which -public ones could be reformed as soon as there was the effective will -to find out the way. Make the passing of a sufficient examination -an indispensable preliminary to entering the executive; make the -executive responsible to the government and the government responsible -to the people; and State departments will be provided with all the -guarantees for integrity and efficiency that private money-hunting -pretends to. Thus the old bugbear of State imbecility did not terrify -the Socialist: it only made him a Democrat. But to call himself so -simply, would have had the effect of classing him with the ordinary -destructive politician who is a Democrat without ulterior views for -the sake of formal Democracy—one whose notion of Radicalism is the -pulling up of aristocratic institutions by the roots—who is, briefly, -a sort of Universal Abolitionist. Consequently, we have the distinctive -term Social Democrat, indicating the man or woman who desires through -Democracy to gather the whole people into the State, so that the State -may be trusted with the rent of the country, and finally with the land, -the capital, and the organisation of the national industry—with all -the sources of production, in short, which are now abandoned to the -cupidity of irresponsible private individuals.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_166">[166]</span></p> - -<p>The benefits of such a change as this are so obvious to all except -the existing private proprietors and their parasites, that it is very -necessary to insist on the impossibility of effecting it suddenly. The -young Socialist is apt to be catastrophic in his views—to plan the -revolutionary programme as an affair of twenty-four lively hours, with -Individualism in full swing on Monday morning, a tidal wave of the -insurgent proletariat on Monday afternoon, and Socialism in complete -working order on Tuesday. A man who believes that such a happy despatch -is possible, will naturally think it absurd and even inhuman to stick -at bloodshed in bringing it about. He can prove that the continuance -of the present system for a year costs more suffering than could be -crammed into any Monday afternoon, however sanguinary. This is the -phase of conviction in which are delivered those Socialist speeches -which make what the newspapers call “good copy,” and which are the only -ones they as yet report. Such speeches are encouraged by the hasty -opposition they evoke from thoughtless persons, who begin by tacitly -admitting that a sudden change is feasible, and go on to protest that -it would be wicked. The experienced Social Democrat converts his too -ardent follower by first admitting that if the change could be made -catastrophically it would be well worth making, and then proceeding -to point out that as it would involve a readjustment of productive -industry to meet the demand created by an entirely new distribution -of purchasing power, it would also involve, in the application of -labor and industrial machinery, alterations which no afternoon’s work -could effect. You cannot convince any man that it is impossible to -tear down a government in a day; but everybody is convinced already -that you cannot convert first and third class carriages into second -class; rookeries and palaces into comfortable dwellings; and jewellers -and dressmakers into bakers and builders, by merely singing the -“Marseillaise.” No judicious person, however deeply persuaded that the -work of the court dressmaker has no true social utility, would greatly -care to quarter her idly on the genuinely productive workers pending -the preparation of a place for her in their ranks. For though she is -to all intents and purposes quartered on them at present, yet she at -least escapes the demoralisation of idleness. Until her new place is -ready, it is better that her patrons should find dressmaking for her -hands to do, than that Satan should find<span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">[167]</span> mischief. Demolishing a -Bastille with seven prisoners in it is one thing: demolishing one with -fourteen million prisoners is quite another. I need not enlarge on the -point: the necessity for cautious and gradual change must be obvious -to everyone here, and could be made obvious to everyone elsewhere if -only the catastrophists were courageously and sensibly dealt with in -discussion.</p> - -<p>What then does a gradual transition to Social Democracy mean -specifically? It means the gradual extension of the franchise; and the -transfer of rent and interest to the State, not in one lump sum, but -by instalments. Looked at in this way, it will at once be seen that -we are already far on the road, and are being urged further by many -politicians who do not dream that they are touched with Socialism—nay, -who would earnestly repudiate the touch as a taint. Let us see how far -we have gone. In 1832 the political power passed into the hands of -the middle class; and in 1838 Lord John Russell announced finality. -Meanwhile, in 1834, the middle class had swept away the last economic -refuge of the workers, the old Poor Law, and delivered them naked to -the furies of competition.<a id="FNanchor_79" href="#Footnote_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> Ten years turmoil and active emigration -followed; and then the thin end of the wedge went in. The Income -Tax was established; and the Factory Acts were made effective. The -Income Tax (1842), which is on individualist principles an intolerable -spoliative anomaly, is simply a forcible transfer of rent, interest, -and even rent of ability, from private holders to the State without -compensation. It excused itself to the Whigs on the ground that those -who had most property for the State to protect should pay <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ad -valorem</i> for its protection. The Factory Acts swept the anarchic -theory of the irresponsibility of private enterprise out of practical -politics; made employers accountable to the State for the well-being -of their employees; and transferred a further instalment of profits -directly to the worker by raising wages. Then came the gold discoveries -in California (1847) and Australia (1851), and the period of leaps and -bounds, supported by the economic rent of England’s mineral fertility, -which kindled <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Gladstone’s retrogressive instincts to a vain hope of -abolishing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">[168]</span> the Income Tax. These events relieved the pressure set up -by the New Poor Law. The workers rapidly organized themselves in Trades -Unions, which were denounced then for their tendency to sap the manly -independence which had formerly characterized the British workman,<a id="FNanchor_80" href="#Footnote_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a> -and which are to-day held up to him as the self-helpful perfection of -that manly independence. Howbeit, self-help flourished, especially at -Manchester and Sheffield; State help was voted grandmotherly; wages -went up; and the Unions, like the fly on the wheel, thought that they -had raised them. They were mistaken; but the value of Trade Unionism -in awakening the social conscience of the skilled workers was immense, -though to this there was a heavy set-off in its tendency to destroy -their artistic conscience by making them aware that it was their duty -to one another to discourage rapid and efficient workmanship by every -means in their power. An extension of the franchise, which was really -an instalment of Democracy, and not, like the 1832 Reform Bill, only an -advance towards it, was gained in 1867; and immediately afterwards came -another instalment of Socialism in the shape of a further transfer of -rent and interest from private holders to the State for the purpose of -educating the people. In the meantime, the extraordinary success of the -post-office, which, according to the teaching of the Manchester school, -should have been a nest of incompetence and jobbery, had not only shewn -the perfect efficiency of State enterprise when the officials are made -responsible to the class interested in its success, but had also proved -the enormous convenience and cheapness of socialistic or collectivist -charges over those of private enterprise. For example, the Postmaster -General charges a penny for sending a letter weighing an ounce from -Kensington to Bayswater. Private enterprise would send half a pound the -same distance for a farthing, and make a handsome profit on it. But the -Postmaster General also sends an ounce letter from Land’s End to John -o’ Groat’s House for a penny. Private enterprise would probably demand -at least a shilling, if not five, for such a service; and there are -many places in which private enterprise could not on any terms maintain -a post-office. Therefore a citizen with ten letters to post saves -considerably by the uniform socialistic charge, and quite recognises -the necessity for rigidly protecting the Postmaster’s monopoly.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_169">[169]</span></p> - -<p>After 1875,<a id="FNanchor_81" href="#Footnote_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> leaping and bounding prosperity, after a final spurt -during which the Income Tax fell to twopence, got out of breath, and -has not yet recovered it. Russia and America, among other competitors, -began to raise the margin of cultivation at a surprising rate. -Education began to intensify the sense of suffering, and to throw light -upon its causes in dark places. The capital needed to keep English -industry abreast of the growing population began to be attracted -by the leaping and bounding of foreign loans and investments,<a id="FNanchor_82" href="#Footnote_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a> -and to bring to England, in payment of interest, imports that were -not paid for by exports—a phenomenon inexpressibly disconcerting -to the Cobden Club. The old pressure of the eighteen-thirties came -back again; and presently, as if Chartism and Fergus O’Connor had -risen from the dead, the Democratic Federation and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> H. M. Hyndman -appeared in the field, highly significant as signs of the times, and -looming hideously magnified in the guilty eye of property, if not -of great account as direct factors in the course of events. Numbers -of young men, pupils of Mill, Spencer, Comte, and Darwin, roused by -<abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Henry George’s “Progress and Poverty,” left aside evolution and -freethought; took to insurrectionary economics; studied Karl Marx; and -were so convinced that Socialism had only to be put clearly before -the working-classes to concentrate the power of their immense numbers -in one irresistible organization, that the Revolution was fixed for -1889—the anniversary of the French Revolution—at latest. I remember -being asked satirically and publicly at that time how long I thought -it would take to get Socialism into working order if I had my way. I -replied, with a spirited modesty, that a fortnight would be ample for -the purpose. When I add that I was frequently complimented on being one -of the more reasonable Socialists, you will be able to appreciate the -fervor of our conviction, and the extravagant levity of our practical -ideas. The opposition we got was uninstructive: it was mainly founded -on the assumption that our projects were theoretically unsound but -immediately possible, whereas our weak point lay in the case being -exactly the reverse.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_170">[170]</span> However, the ensuing years sifted and sobered -us. “The Socialists,” as they were called, have fallen into line as -a Social Democratic party, no more insurrectionary in its policy -than any other party. But I shall not present the remainder of the -transition to Social Democracy as the work of fully conscious Social -Democrats. I prefer to ignore them altogether—to suppose, if you will, -that the Government will shortly follow the advice of the <i>Saturday -Review</i>, and, for the sake of peace and quietness, hang them.</p> - -<p>First, then, as to the consummation of Democracy. Since 1885 every man -who pays four shillings a week rent can only be hindered from voting -by anomalous conditions of registration which are likely to be swept -away very shortly. This is all but manhood suffrage; and it will soon -complete itself as adult suffrage. However, I may leave adult suffrage -out of the question, because the outlawry of women, monstrous as it -is, is not a question of class privilege, but of sex privilege. To -complete the foundation of the democratic State, then, we need manhood -suffrage, abolition of all poverty disqualifications, abolition of -the House of Lords, public payment of candidature expenses, public -payment of representatives, and annual elections. These changes are now -inevitable, however unacceptable they may appear to those of us who -are Conservatives. They have been for half a century the commonplaces -of Radicalism. We have next to consider that the State is not merely -an abstraction: it is a machine to do certain work; and if that work -be increased and altered in its character, the machinery must be -multiplied and altered too. Now, the extension of the franchise does -increase and alter the work very considerably; but it has no direct -effect on the machinery. At present the State machine has practically -broken down under the strain of spreading democracy, the work being -mainly local, and the machinery mainly central. Without efficient local -machinery the replacing of private enterprise by State enterprise is -out of the question; and we shall presently see that such replacement -is one of the inevitable consequences of Democracy. A democratic State -cannot become a <em>Social</em>-Democratic State unless it has in every -centre of population a local governing body as thoroughly democratic -in its constitution as the central Parliament. This matter is also -well in train. In 1888 a Government avowedly reactionary passed a -Local Government Bill which effected a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">[171]</span> distinct advance towards the -democratic municipality.<a id="FNanchor_83" href="#Footnote_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> It was furthermore a Bill with no single -aspect of finality anywhere about it. Local Self-Government remains -prominent within the sphere of practical politics. When it is achieved, -the democratic State will have the machinery for Socialism.</p> - -<p>And now, how is the raw material of Socialism—otherwise the -Proletarian man—to be brought to the Democratic State machinery? Here -again the path is easily found. Politicians who have no suspicion -that they are Socialists, are advocating further instalments of -Socialism with a recklessness of indirect results which scandalizes the -conscious Social Democrat. The phenomenon of economic rent has assumed -prodigious proportions in our great cities. The injustice of its -private appropriation is glaring, flagrant, almost ridiculous. In the -long suburban roads about London, where rows of exactly similar houses -stretch for miles countrywards, the rent changes at every few thousand -yards by exactly the amount saved or incurred annually in travelling -to and from the householder’s place of business. The seeker after -lodgings, hesitating between Bloomsbury and Tottenham, finds every -advantage of situation skimmed off by the landlord with scientific -precision. As lease after lease falls in, houses, shops, goodwills of -businesses which are the fruits of the labor of lifetimes, fall into -the maw of the ground landlord. Confiscation of capital, spoliation -of households, annihilation of incentive, everything that the most -ignorant and credulous fundholder ever charged against the Socialist, -rages openly in London, which begins to ask itself whether it exists -and toils only for the typical duke and his celebrated jockey and his -famous racehorse. Lord Hobhouse and his unimpeachably respectable -committee for the taxation of ground values are already in the field -claiming the value of the site of London for London collectively; and -their agitation receives additional momentum from every lease that -falls in. Their case is unassailable; and the evil they attack is one -that presses on the ratepaying and leaseholding classes as well as upon -humbler sufferers. This economic pressure is reinforced formidably by -political opinion in the workmen’s associations. Here the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">[172]</span> moderate -members are content to demand a progressive Income Tax, which is -virtually Lord Hobhouse’s proposal; and the extremists are all for Land -Nationalisation, which is again Lord Hobhouse’s principle. The cry for -such taxation cannot permanently be resisted. And it is very worthy -of remark that there is a new note in the cry. Formerly taxes were -proposed with a specific object—as to pay for a war, for education, -or the like. Now the proposal is to tax the landlords in order to -get some of <em>our</em> money back from them—take it from them first -and find a use for it afterwards. Ever since <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Henry George’s book -reached the English Radicals, there has been a growing disposition to -impose a tax of twenty shillings in the pound on obviously unearned -incomes; that is, to dump four hundred and fifty millions<a id="FNanchor_84" href="#Footnote_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> a year -down on the Exchequer counter; and then retire with three cheers for -the restoration of the land to the people.</p> - -<p>The results of such a proceeding, if it actually came off, would -considerably take its advocates aback. The streets would presently -be filled with starving workers of all grades, domestic servants, -coach-builders, decorators, jewellers, lace-makers, fashionable -professional men, and numberless others whose livelihood is at present -gained by ministering to the wants of these and of the proprietary -class. “This,” they would cry, “is what your theories have brought -us to! Back with the good old times, when we received our wages, -which were at least better than nothing.” Evidently the Chancellor -of the Exchequer would have three courses open to him. (1) He would -give the money back again to the landlords and capitalists with an -apology. (2) He could attempt to start State industries with it for -the employment of the people. (3) Or he could simply distribute it -among the unemployed. The last is not to be thought of: anything is -better than <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">panem et circenses</i>. The second (starting State -industries) would be far too vast an undertaking to get on foot soon -enough to meet the urgent difficulty. The first (the return with an -apology) would be a <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">reductio ad absurdum</i> of the whole affair—a -confession that the private proprietor, for all his idleness and his -voracity, is indeed performing an indispensable economic function—the -function of capitalising, however wastefully<span class="pagenum" id="Page_173">[173]</span> and viciously, the wealth -which surpasses his necessarily limited power of immediate personal -consumption. And here we have checkmate to mere Henry Georgism, or -State appropriation of rent without Socialism. It is easy to shew that -the State is entitled to the whole income of the Duke of Westminster, -and to argue therefrom that he should straightway be taxed twenty -shillings in the pound. But in practical earnest the State has no -right to take five farthings of capital from the Duke or anybody -else until it is ready to invest them in productive enterprise. The -consequences of withdrawing capital from private hands merely to lock -it up unproductively in the treasury would be so swift and ruinous, -that no statesman, however fortified with the destructive resources of -abstract economics, could persist in it. It will be found in the future -as in the past that governments will raise money only because they want -it for specific purposes, and not on <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">a priori</i> demonstrations -that they have a right to it. But it must be added that when they -<em>do</em> want it for a specific purpose, then, also in the future as -in the past, they will raise it without the slightest regard to <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">a -priori</i> demonstrations that they have no right to it.</p> - -<p>Here then we have got to a dead lock. In spite of democrats and land -nationalisers, rent cannot be touched unless some pressure from -quite another quarter forces productive enterprise on the State. -Such pressure is already forthcoming. The quick starvation of the -unemployed, the slow starvation of the employed who have no relatively -scarce special skill, the unbearable anxiety or dangerous recklessness -of those who are employed to-day and unemployed to-morrow, the rise in -urban rents, the screwing down of wages by pauper immigration and home -multiplication, the hand-in-hand advance of education and discontent, -are all working up to explosion point. It is useless to prove by -statistics that most of the people are better off than before, true as -that probably is, thanks to instalments of Social Democracy. Yet even -that is questionable; for it is idle to claim authority for statistics -of things that have never been recorded. Chaos has no statistics: it -has only statisticians; and the ablest of them prefaces his remarks -on the increased consumption of rice by the admission that “no one -can contemplate the present condition of the masses without desiring -something like a revolution for the better.”<a id="FNanchor_85" href="#Footnote_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a> The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">[174]</span> masses themselves -are being converted so rapidly to that view of the situation, that we -have Pan-Anglican Synods, bewildered by a revival of Christianity, -pleading that though Socialism is eminently Christian, yet “the Church -must act safely as well as sublimely.”<a id="FNanchor_86" href="#Footnote_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> During the agitation made -by the unemployed last winter (1887-8), the Chief Commissioner of -Police in London started at his own shadow, and mistook <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Burns -for the French Revolution, to the great delight of that genial and -courageous champion of his class.<a id="FNanchor_87" href="#Footnote_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a> The existence of the pressure -is further shewn by the number and variety of safety valves proposed -to relieve it—monetization of silver, import duties, “leaseholds -enfranchisement,” extension of joint-stock capitalism masquerading as -co-operation,<a id="FNanchor_88" href="#Footnote_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a> and other irrelevancies. My own sudden promotion from -the street corner to this platform is in its way a sign of the times. -But whilst we are pointing the moral and adorning the tale according -to our various opinions, an actual struggle is beginning between the -unemployed who demand work and the local authorities appointed to -deal with the poor. In the winter, the unemployed collect round red -flags, and listen to speeches for want of anything else to do. They -welcome Socialism, insurrectionism, currency craze—anything that -passes the time and seems to express the fact that they are hungry. -The local authorities, equally innocent of studied economic views, -deny that there is any misery; send leaders of deputations to the -Local Government Board, who promptly send them back to the guardians; -try bullying; try stoneyards; try bludgeoning; and finally sit down -helplessly and wish it were summer again or the unemployed at the -bottom of the sea. Meanwhile the charity fund, which is much less -elastic than the wages fund, overflows at the Mansion House only to -run dry at the permanent institutions. So unstable a state of things -cannot last. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_175">[175]</span> bludgeoning, and the shocking clamor for bloodshed -from the anti-popular newspapers, will create a revulsion among the -humane section of the middle class. The section which is blinded -by class prejudice to all sense of social responsibility, dreads -personal violence from the working class with a superstitious terror -that defies enlightenment or control.<a id="FNanchor_89" href="#Footnote_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a> Municipal employment must -be offered at last. This cannot be done in one place alone: the rush -from other parts of the country would swamp an isolated experiment. -Wherever the pressure is, the relief must be given on the spot. -And since public decency, as well as consideration for its higher -officials, will prevent the County Council from instituting a working -day of sixteen hours at a wage of a penny an hour or less, it will -soon have on its hands not only the unemployed, but also the white -slaves of the sweater, who will escape from their dens and appeal to -the municipality for work the moment they become aware that municipal -employment is better than private sweating. Nay, the sweater himself, -a mere slave driver paid “by the piece,” will in many instances be -as anxious as his victims to escape from his hideous trade. But the -municipal organisation of the industry of these people will require -capital. Where is the municipality to get it? Raising the rates is -out of the question: the ordinary tradesmen and householders are -already rated and rented to the limit of endurance: further burdens -would almost bring them into the street with a red flag. Dreadful -dilemma! in which the County Council, between the devil and the deep -sea, will hear Lord Hobhouse singing a song of deliverance, telling -a golden tale of ground values to be municipalised by taxation. The -land nationalisers will swell the chorus: the Radical progressive -income taxers singing together, and the ratepaying tenants shouting -for joy. The capital difficulty thus solved—for we need not seriously -anticipate that the landlords will actually fight, as our President<a id="FNanchor_90" href="#Footnote_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> -once threatened—the question of acquiring land will arise. The -nationalisers will declare for its annexation by the municipality -without compensation; but that will be rejected as spoliation, worthy -only of revolutionary Socialists. The no-compensation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">[176]</span> cry is indeed -a piece of unpractical catastrophic insurrectionism; for whilst -compensation would be unnecessary and absurd if every proprietor -were expropriated simultaneously, and the proprietary system at once -replaced by full blown Socialism, yet when it is necessary to proceed -by degrees, the denial of compensation would have the effect of -singling out individual proprietors for expropriation whilst the others -remained unmolested, and depriving them of their private means long -before there was suitable municipal employment ready for them. The -land, as it is required, will therefore be honestly purchased; and the -purchase money, or the interest thereon, will be procured, like the -capital, by taxing rent. Of course this will be at bottom an act of -expropriation just as much as the collection of Income Tax to-day is an -act of expropriation. As such, it will be denounced by the landlords -as merely a committing of the newest sin the oldest kind of way. In -effect, they will be compelled at each purchase to buy out one of their -body and present his land to the municipality, thereby distributing the -loss fairly over their whole class, instead of placing it on one man -who is no more responsible than the rest. But they will be compelled to -do this in a manner that will satisfy the moral sense of the ordinary -citizen as effectively as that of the skilled economist.</p> - -<p>We now foresee our municipality equipped with land and capital for -industrial purposes. At first they will naturally extend the industries -they already carry on, road making, gas works, tramways, building, and -the like. It is probable that they will for the most part regard their -action as a mere device to meet a passing emergency. The Manchester -School will urge its Protectionist theories as to the exemption of -private enterprise from the competition of public enterprise, in one -supreme effort to practise for the last time on popular ignorance of -the science which it has consistently striven to debase and stultify. -For a while the proprietary party will succeed in hampering and -restricting municipal enterprise;<a id="FNanchor_91" href="#Footnote_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a> in attaching the stigma of -pauperism to its service; in keeping the lot of its laborers as nearly -as possible down to private competition level in point of hard work -and low wages. But its power will be broken by the disappearance of -that general necessity for keeping down the rates which now hardens -local authority to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_177">[177]</span> humane appeals. The luxury of being generous at -someone else’s expense will be irresistible. The ground landlord will -be the municipal milch cow; and the ordinary ratepayers will feel the -advantage of sleeping in peace, relieved at once from the fear of -increased burdens and of having their windows broken and their premises -looted by hungry mobs, nuclei of all the socialism and scoundrelism of -the city. They will have just as much remorse in making the landlord -pay as the landlord has had in making them pay—just as much and -no more. And as the municipality becomes more democratic, it will -find landlordism losing power, not only relatively to democracy, but -absolutely.</p> - -<p>The ordinary ratepayer, however, will not remain unaffected for long. -At the very outset of the new extension of municipal industries, the -question of wage will arise. A minimum wage must be fixed; and though -at first, to avoid an overwhelming rush of applicants for employment, -it must be made too small to tempt any decently employed laborer to -forsake his place and run to the municipality, still, it will not be -the frankly infernal competition wage. It will be, like mediæval wages, -fixed with at least some reference to public opinion as to a becoming -standard of comfort. Over and above this, the municipality will -have to pay to its organisers, managers, and incidentally necessary -skilled workers the full market price of their ability, minus only -what the superior prestige and permanence of public employment may -induce them to accept. But whilst these high salaries will make no -more disturbance in the labor market than the establishment of a new -joint-stock company would, the minimum wage for laborers will affect -that market perceptibly. The worst sort of sweaters will find that if -they are to keep their “hands,” they must treat them at least as well -as the municipality. The consequent advance in wage will swallow up the -sweater’s narrow margin of profit. Hence the sweater must raise the -price per piece against the shops and wholesale houses for which he -sweats. This again will diminish the profits of the wholesale dealers -and shopkeepers, who will not be able to recover this loss by raising -the price of their wares against the public, since, had any such step -been possible, they would have taken it before. But fortunately for -them, the market value of their ability as men of business is fixed -by the same laws that govern the prices of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">[178]</span> commodities. Just as the -sweater is worth his profit, so they are worth their profit; and just -as the sweater will be able to exact from them his old remuneration in -spite of the advance in wages, so they will be able to exact their old -remuneration in spite of the advance in sweaters’ terms. But from whom, -it will be asked, if not from the public by raising the price of the -wares? Evidently from the landlord upon whose land they are organising -production. In other words, they will demand and obtain a reduction of -rent. Thus the organiser of industry, the employer pure and simple, -the <em>entrepreneur</em>, as he is often called in economic treatises -nowadays, will not suffer. In the division of the product his share -will remain constant; whilst the industrious wage-worker’s share will -be increased, and the idle proprietor’s share diminished. This will -not adjust itself without friction and clamor; but such friction is -constantly going on under the present system in the opposite direction, -<i>i.e.</i>, by the raising of the proprietor’s share at the expense of -the worker’s.</p> - -<p>The contraction of landlords’ incomes will necessarily diminish -the revenue from taxation on such incomes. Let us suppose that the -municipality, to maintain its revenue, puts on an additional penny -in the pound. The effect will be to burn the landlord’s candle at -both ends—obviously not a process that can be continued to infinity. -But long before taxation fails as a source of municipal capital, the -municipalities will have begun to save capital out of the product of -their own industries. In the market the competition of those industries -with the private concerns will be irresistible. Unsaddled with a single -idle person, and having, therefore, nothing to provide for after paying -their employees except extension of capital, they will be able to offer -wages that no business burdened with the unproductive consumption of -an idle landlord or shareholder could afford, unless it yielded a -heavy rent in consequence of some marked advantage of site. But even -rents, when they are town rents, are at the mercy of a municipality -in the long run. The masters of the streets and the traffic can nurse -one site and neglect another. The rent of a shop depends on the number -of persons passing its windows per hour. A skilfully timed series of -experiments in paving, a new bridge, a tramway service, a barracks, -or a small-pox hospital are only a few of the circumstances of which -city rents are the creatures.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_179">[179]</span> The power of the municipality to control -these circumstances is as obvious as the impotence of competing private -individuals. Again, competing private individuals are compelled to sell -their produce at a price equivalent to the full cost of production at -the margin of cultivation.<a id="FNanchor_92" href="#Footnote_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> The municipality could compete against -them by reducing prices to the average cost of production over the -whole area of municipal cultivation. The more favorably situated -private concerns could only meet this by ceasing to pay rent; the less -favorably situated would succumb without remedy. It would be either -stalemate or checkmate. Private property would either become barren, or -it would yield to the actual cultivator of average ability no better an -income than could be obtained more securely in municipal employment. -To the mere proprietor it would yield nothing. Eventually the land and -industry of the whole town would pass by the spontaneous action of -economic forces into the hands of the municipality; and, so far, the -problem of socialising industry would be solved.</p> - -<p>Private property, by cheapening the laborer to the utmost in order -to get the greater surplus out of him, lowers the margin of human -cultivation, and so raises the “rent of ability.” The most important -form of that rent is the profit of industrial management. The gains -of a great portrait painter or fashionable physician are much less -significant, since these depend entirely on the existence of a very -rich class of patrons subject to acute vanity and hypochondriasis. But -the industrial organiser is independent of patrons: instead of merely -attracting a larger share of the product of industry to himself, he -increases the product by his management. The market price of such -ability depends upon the relation of the supply to the demand: the -more there is of it the cheaper it is: the less, the dearer. Any cause -that increases the supply lowers the price. Now it is evident that -since a manager must be a man of education and address, it is useless -to look ordinarily to the laboring class for a supply of managerial -skill. Not one laborer in a million succeeds in raising himself on -the shoulders of his fellows by extraordinary gifts, or extraordinary -luck, or both. The managers must be drawn from the classes which -enjoy education and social culture; and their price, rapidly as it -is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">[180]</span> falling with the spread of education and the consequent growth of -the “intellectual proletariat,” is still high. It is true that a very -able and highly-trained manager can now be obtained for about £800 a -year, provided his post does not compel him to spend two-thirds of -his income on what is called “keeping up his position,” instead of on -his own gratification.<a id="FNanchor_93" href="#Footnote_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a> Still, when it is considered that laborers -receive less than £50 a year, and that the demand for laborers is -necessarily vast in proportion to the demand for able managers, nay, -that there is an inverse ratio between them, since the manager’s talent -is valuable in proportion to quantity of labor he can organise, it will -be admitted that £800 a year represents an immense rent of ability. -But if the education and culture which are a practically indispensable -part of the equipment of competitors for such posts were enjoyed by -millions instead of thousands, that rent would fall considerably. Now -the tendency of private property is to keep the masses mere beasts of -burden. The tendency of Social Democracy is to educate them, to make -men of them. Social Democracy would not long be saddled with the rents -of ability which have during the last century made our born captains of -industry our masters and tyrants instead of our servants and leaders. -It is even conceivable that rent of managerial ability might in course -of time become negative,<a id="FNanchor_94" href="#Footnote_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> astonishing as that may seem to the many -persons who are by this time so hopelessly confused amid existing -anomalies, that the proposition that “whosoever of you will be the -chiefest, shall be servant of all,” strikes them rather as a Utopian -paradox than as the most obvious and inevitable of social arrangements. -The fall in the rent of ability will, however, benefit not only the -municipality, but also its remaining private competitors. Nevertheless, -as the prestige of the municipality grows, and as men see more and -more clearly what the future is to it, able organisers will take lower -salaries for municipal than for private employment; whilst those who -can beat even the municipality at organising, or who, as professional -men, can deal personally with the public without the intervention of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">[181]</span> -industrial organisation, will pay the rent of their places of business -either directly to the municipality, or to the private landlord whose -income the municipality will absorb by taxation. Finally, when rents -of ability had reached their irreducible natural level, they could be -dealt with by a progressive Income Tax in the very improbable case of -their proving a serious social inconvenience.</p> - -<p>It is not necessary to go further into the economic detail of the -process of the extinction of private property. Much of that process -as sketched here may be anticipated by sections of the proprietary -class successively capitulating, as the net closes about their special -interests, on such terms as they may be able to stand out for before -their power is entirely broken.<a id="FNanchor_95" href="#Footnote_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a></p> - -<p>We may also safely neglect for the moment the question of the -development of the House of Commons into the central government which -will be the organ for federating the municipalities, and nationalising -inter-municipal rents by an adjustment of the municipal contributions -to imperial taxation: in short, for discharging national as distinct -from local business. One can see that the Local Government Board of -the future will be a tremendous affair; that foreign States will be -deeply affected by the reaction of English progress; that international -trade, always the really dominant factor in foreign policy, will have -to be reconsidered from a new point of view when profit comes to -be calculated in terms of net social welfare instead of individual -pecuniary gain; that our present system of imperial aggression,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">[182]</span> in -which, under pretext of exploration and colonisation, the flag follows -the filibuster and trade follows the flag, with the missionary bringing -up the rear, must collapse when the control of our military forces -passes from the capitalist class to the people; that the disappearance -of a variety of classes with a variety of what are now ridiculously -called “public opinions” will be accompanied by the welding of society -into one class with a public opinion of inconceivable weight; that this -public opinion will make it for the first time possible effectively -to control the population; that the economic independence of women, -and the supplanting of the head of the household by the individual as -the recognized unit of the State, will materially alter the status of -children and the utility of the institution of the family; and that the -inevitable reconstitution of the State Church on a democratic basis -may, for example, open up the possibility of the election of an avowed -Freethinker like <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Morley or <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Bradlaugh to the deanery of -Westminster. All these things are mentioned only for the sake of a -glimpse of the fertile fields of thought and action which await us when -the settlement of our bread and butter question leaves us free to use -and develop our higher faculties.</p> - -<p>This, then, is the humdrum programme of the practical Social Democrat -to-day. There is not one new item in it. All are applications of -principles already admitted, and extensions of practices already in -full activity. All have on them that stamp of the vestry which is so -congenial to the British mind. None of them compel the use of the words -Socialism or Revolution: at no point do they involve guillotining, -declaring the Rights of Man, swearing on the altar of the country, -or anything else that is supposed to be essentially un-English. And -they are all sure to come—landmarks on our course already visible to -farsighted politicians even of the party which dreads them.</p> - -<p>Let me, in conclusion, disavow all admiration for this inevitable, but -sordid, slow, reluctant, cowardly path to justice. I venture to claim -your respect for those enthusiasts who still refuse to believe that -millions of their fellow creatures must be left to sweat and suffer -in hopeless toil and degradation, whilst parliaments and vestries -grudgingly muddle and grope towards paltry instalments of betterment. -The right is so clear, the wrong so intolerable, the gospel so -convincing, that it seems to them that it <em>must</em> be possible to -enlist the whole body of workers—soldiers,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_183">[183]</span> policemen, and all—under -the banner of brotherhood and equality; and at one great stroke to -set Justice on her rightful throne. Unfortunately, such an army of -light is no more to be gathered from the human product of nineteenth -century civilisation than grapes are to be gathered from thistles. But -if we feel glad of that impossibility; if we feel relieved that the -change is to be slow enough to avert personal risk to ourselves; if we -feel anything less than acute disappointment and bitter humiliation -at the discovery that there is yet between us and the promised land a -wilderness in which many must perish miserably of want and despair: -then I submit to you that our institutions have corrupted us to the -most dastardly degree of selfishness. The Socialists need not be -ashamed of beginning as they did by proposing militant organisation -of the working classes and general insurrection. The proposal proved -impracticable; and it has now been abandoned—not without some -outspoken regrets—by English Socialists. But it still remains as the -only finally possible alternative to the Social Democratic programme -which I have sketched to-day.</p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_73" href="#FNanchor_73" class="label">[73]</a> An address delivered on the 7th September, 1888, to the -Economic Section of the British Association at Bath.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_74" href="#FNanchor_74" class="label">[74]</a> Explained in the first essay in this volume.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_75" href="#FNanchor_75" class="label">[75]</a> See page 57-61.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_76" href="#FNanchor_76" class="label">[76]</a> “Principles of Political Economy,” <abbr title="chapter">chap.</abbr> xxiv, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_77" href="#FNanchor_77" class="label">[77]</a> “Theory of Political Economy.” By W. Stanley Jevons -(London: Macmillan & Co.). See also “The Alphabet of Economic Science.” -Part by Philip H. Wicksteed. (Same publishers.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_78" href="#FNanchor_78" class="label">[78]</a> See <abbr title="pages">pp.</abbr> 7-9 <i>ante</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_79" href="#FNanchor_79" class="label">[79]</a> The general impression that the old Poor Law had become -an indefensible nuisance is a correct one. All attempts to mitigate -Individualism by philanthropy instead of replacing it by Socialism are -foredoomed to confusion.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_80" href="#FNanchor_80" class="label">[80]</a> See Final Report of Royal Commission on Trade Unions, -1869. <abbr title="volume">Vol.</abbr> i, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> xvii, <abbr title="section">sec.</abbr> 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_81" href="#FNanchor_81" class="label">[81]</a> See <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Robert Giffen’s address on “The Recent Rate of -Material Progress in England.” Proceedings of the British Association -at Manchester in 1887, page 806.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_82" href="#FNanchor_82" class="label">[82]</a> See <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Robert Giffen on Import and Export Statistics, -“Essays on Finance,” Second Series, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 194. (London: G. Bell & Sons. -1886.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_83" href="#FNanchor_83" class="label">[83]</a> This same Government, beginning to realise what it has -unintentionally done for Social Democracy, is already (1889) doing what -it can to render the new County Councils socialistically impotent by -urgently reminding them of the restrictions which hamper their action.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_84" href="#FNanchor_84" class="label">[84]</a> The authority for this figure will be found in Fabian -Tract, No. 5, “Facts for Socialists.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_85" href="#FNanchor_85" class="label">[85]</a> <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> R. Giffen, “Essays in Finance,” Second Series, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> -393.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_86" href="#FNanchor_86" class="label">[86]</a> Proceedings of the Pan-Anglican Synod: Lambeth, 1888. -Report of Committee on Socialism.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_87" href="#FNanchor_87" class="label">[87]</a> Finally, the Commissioner was superseded; and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Burns -was elected a member of the first London County Council by a large -majority.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_88" href="#FNanchor_88" class="label">[88]</a> It is due to the leaders of the Co-operative movement -to say here that they are no parties to the substitution of -dividend-hunting by petty capitalists for the pursuit of the ideal -of Robert Owen, the Socialist founder of Co-operation; and that they -are fully aware that Co-operation must be a political as well as a -commercial movement if it is to achieve a final solution of the labor -question.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_89" href="#FNanchor_89" class="label">[89]</a> Ample material for a study of West End mob panic may be -found in the London newspapers of February, 1886, and November, 1887.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_90" href="#FNanchor_90" class="label">[90]</a> Lord Bramwell, President of the Economic Section of the -British Association in 1888.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_91" href="#FNanchor_91" class="label">[91]</a> See note, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_92" href="#FNanchor_92" class="label">[92]</a> The meaning of these terms will be familiar to readers of -the first essay.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_93" href="#FNanchor_93" class="label">[93]</a> See note, <abbr title="page">p.</abbr> 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_94" href="#FNanchor_94" class="label">[94]</a> That is, the manager would receive less for his work than -the artisan. Cases in which the profits of the employer are smaller -than the wages of the employee are by no means uncommon in certain -grades of industry where small traders have occasion to employ skilled -workmen.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_95" href="#FNanchor_95" class="label">[95]</a> Such capitulations occur already when the Chancellor -of the Exchequer takes advantage of the fall in the current rate -of interest (explained on page 20) to reduce Consols. This he -does by simply threatening to pay off the stockholders with money -freshly borrowed at the current rate. They, knowing that they could -not reinvest the money on any better terms than the reduced ones -offered by the Chancellor, have to submit. There is no reason why -the municipalities should not secure the same advantages for their -constituents. For example, the inhabitants of London now pay the -shareholders of the gas companies a million and a half annually, or 11 -per cent on the £13,650,000 which the gas works cost. The London County -Council could raise that sum for about £400,000 a year. By threatening -to do this and start municipal gas works, it could obviously compel -the shareholders to hand over their works for £400,000 a year, and -sacrifice the extra 8 per cent now enjoyed by them. The saving to the -citizens of London would be £1,000,000 a year, sufficient to defray -the net cost of the London School Board. Metropolitan readers will -find a number of cognate instances in Fabian Tract No. 8, “Facts for -Londoners.”</p> - -</div> -</div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_184">[184]</span></p> - -<h3 class="nobreak" id="THE_OUTLOOK">THE OUTLOOK.</h3> -</div> - -<p class="center">BY HUBERT BLAND.</p> - - -<p><abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Webb’s historical review brought us from the “break up of the -old synthesis” (his own phrase), a social system founded on a basis -of religion, a common belief in a divine order, to the point where -perplexed politicians, recognising the futility of the principle of -Individualism to keep the industrial machine in working order, with -“freedom of contract” upon their lips spent their nights in passing -Factory Acts, and devoted their fiscal ingenuity to cutting slice after -slice off incomes derived from rent and interest. His paper was an -inductive demonstration of the failure of anarchy to meet the needs of -real concrete men and women—a proof from history that the world moves -from system, through disorder, back again to system.</p> - -<p><abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Clarke showed us, also by the historic method, that given a few -more years of economic progress on present lines, and we shall reach, -<i>via</i> the Ring and the Trust, that period of “well defined -confrontation of the rich and poor” upon which German thought has -settled as the brief stage of sociological evolution immediately -preceding organic change.</p> - -<p>The truth of this postulate of Teutonic philosophers and economists no -one who has given to it a moment’s serious thought is likely to call in -question. Nor does anyone who has followed the argument developed in -these lectures believe that the transition from mitigated individualism -to full collectivity can be made until the capitalist system has worked -itself out to its last logical expression. Till then, no political or -social upheaval, however violent, nay, even though the “physical force -revolutionists” should chase the Guards helter-skelter down Parliament -Street and the Executive Committee of the Fabian Society hold its -meetings in the Council Chamber of Windsor Castle, will be anything -more than one of those “transient riots,”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">[185]</span> spoken of by Mrs. Besant, -which “merely upset thrones and behead monarchs.”<a id="FNanchor_96" href="#Footnote_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a> All sociologists -I think, all Socialists I am sure, are agreed that until the economic -moment has arrived, although the hungry or the ignorant may kick up a -dust in Whitechapel and make a bloody puddle in Trafalgar Square, the -Social Revolution is impossible. But I, for my part, do not believe in -the even temporary rout of the Household Brigade, nor indeed in any -popular outbreak not easily suppressible by the Metropolitan police; -and I shall waste no time in discussing that solution of the social -problem of which more was heard in the salad days of the English -Socialist movement—in its pre-Fabian era—than now, <i>viz.</i>, -physical force employed by a vigorous few. The physical force man, like -the privileged Tory, has failed to take note of the flux of things, and -to recognise the change brought about by the ballot. Under a lodger -franchise the barricade is the last resort of a small and desperate -minority, a frank confession of despair, a reduction to absurdity -of the whole Socialist case. Revolutionary heroics, natural and -unblameable enough in exuberant puerility, are imbecile babblement in -muscular adolescence, and in manhood would be criminal folly.</p> - -<p>Let us assume then that the present economic progress will continue -on its present lines. That machinery will go on replacing hand labor; -that the joint-stock company will absorb the private firm, to be, -in its turn, swallowed up in the Ring and the Trust. That thus the -smaller producers and distributors will gradually, but at a constantly -increasing pace, be squeezed out and reduced to the condition of -employees of great industrial and trade corporations, managed by highly -skilled captains of industry, in the interests of idle shareholders.</p> - -<p>In a parliamentarian State like ours, the economic cleavage, which -divides the proprietors from the propertyless, ever growing wider and -more clearly defined, must have its analogue in the world of politics. -The revolution of the last century, which ended in the installation -of the Grand Industry, was the last of the great unconscious world -changes. It was helped by legislation of course; but the help was -only of the negative and destructive sort. “Break our fetters and -let us alone,”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_186">[186]</span> was the cry of the revolutionists to Parliament. The -lawmakers, not knowing quite what they were doing, responded, and then -blythely contracted debts, and voted money for commercial wars. Such a -sight will never be seen again. The repeated extension of the suffrage -has done more than make the industrial masses articulate, it has given -them consciousness; and for the future the echo of the voices of those -who suffer from economic changes will be heard clamoring for relief -within the walls of <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Stephen’s and the urban guildhalls.</p> - -<p>Thus the coming struggle between “haves” and “have nots” will be a -conflict of parties, each perfectly conscious of what it is fighting -about and fully alive to the life and death importance of the issues at -stake.</p> - -<p>I say “will be”; for one has only to read a few speeches of political -leaders or attend a discussion at a workman’s club to be convinced that -at present it is only the keener and more alert minds on either side -which are more than semi-conscious of the true nature of the campaign -of which the first shots may even now be heard at every bye-election.</p> - -<p>But as nothing makes one so entirely aware of one’s own existence as -a sharp spasm of pain; so it is to the suffering—the hunger, the -despair of to-morrow’s dinner, the anxiety about the next new pair -of trousers—wrought by the increasing economic pressure upon the -enfranchised and educated proletariat that we must look to awaken that -free self-consciousness which will give the economic changes political -expression and enable the worker to make practical use of the political -weapons which are his.</p> - -<p>The outlook then from the point of view of this paper is a political -one—one in which we should expect to see the world political gradually -becoming a reflex of the world economic. That political should be -slow in coming into line with economic facts is only in accordance -with all that the past history of our country has to teach us. For -years and decades the squirearchy retained an influence in the House -of Commons out of all proportion to its potency as an economic force; -and even at this moment the “landed interest” bears a much larger -part in law-making than that to which its real importance entitles -it. Therefore we must be neither surprised nor dispirited if, in a -cold-blooded envisagement of the condition of English parties, the -truth is borne in upon us that the pace of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_187">[187]</span> political progress has -no proper relation to the rate at which we are travelling towards -Socialism in the spheres of thought and industry.</p> - -<p>This fact is probably—nay almost certainly—very much more patent -to the Socialist and the political student than to the man in the -street, or even to him of the first class railway carriage. The noisy -jubilation of the Radical press over the victory of a Home Ruler -at a bye-election, at a brief and vague reference to the “homes of -the people” in a two hours’ speech from a Liberal leader, or at the -insertion of a “social” plank in a new annual programme, is well and -cleverly calculated to beguile the ardent Democrat, and strike cold -terror to the heart of the timorous Tory. But a perfectly impartial -analysis of the present state of parties will convince the most -sanguine that the breath of the great economic changes dealt with in -<abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Clarke’s paper has as yet scarcely ruffled the surface of the House -of Commons.</p> - -<p>When the syllabus of this course of lectures was drawn up, those who -were responsible for it suggested as the first subheading of this -paper, the well worn phrase, “The disappearance of the Whig.” It is -a happy expression, and one from the contemplation of which much -comfort may be derived by an optimistic and unanalytical temperament. -Printed are at this disadvantage compared with spoken words, they fail -to convey the nicer <em>nuances</em> of meaning bestowed by tone and -emphasis; and thus the word “disappearance” meets the eye, carrying -with it no slightest suggestion of irony. Yet the phrase is pointless, -if not “meant surcarstic”; for so far is the Whig from “disappearing,” -that he is the greatest political fact of the day. To persons deafened -by the daily democratic shouting of the Radical newspapers this -assertion may require some confirmation and support. Let us look at -the facts then. The first thing which strikes us in connexion with -the present Parliament is that it no longer consists of two distinct -parties, <i>i.e.</i>, of two bodies of men differentiated from each -other by the holding of <em>fundamentally</em> different principles. Home -Rule left out,<a id="FNanchor_97" href="#Footnote_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a> there<span class="pagenum" id="Page_188">[188]</span> remains no reason whatever, except the quite -minor question of Disestablishment, why even the simulacrum of party -organisation should be maintained, or why the structural arrangements -of the House of Commons should not be so altered as to resemble those -of a town hall, in which all the seats face the chair.</p> - -<p>But fifty years ago the floor of the House was a frontier of genuine -significance; and the titles “Whig” and “Tory” were word-symbols of -real inward and spiritual facts. The Tory party was mostly made up of -men who were conscientiously opposed to popular representation, and -prepared to stand or fall by their opposition. They held, as a living -political creed, that the government of men was the eternal heritage of -the rich, and especially of those whose riches spelt rent. The Whigs, -on the other hand, believed, or said they believed, in the aphorism -“<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vox populi, vox Dei</i>”; and they, on the whole, consistently -advocated measures designed to give that voice a distincter and louder -utterance. Here, then, was one of those fundamental differences in the -absence of which party nomenclature is a sham. But there was another. -In the first half of this century the Tories, hidebound in historic -traditions and deaf to the knell of the old <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">régime</i> tolling in -the thud, thud, of the piston rods of the new steam engines, clung -pathetically to the old idea of the functions of the State and to -territorial rights. The Whigs went for <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i> and the -consequent supremacy of the business man. I am making a perfectly -provable proposition when I say that all the political disputes<a id="FNanchor_98" href="#Footnote_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> -which arose between the Revolution of 1688 and the enfranchisement -of the £10 householder by Disraeli had their common cause in one of -these two root differences. But the battle has long ago been lost and -won. The Whigs have triumphed all along the line. The Tories have not -only been beaten, they have been absorbed. A process has gone on like -that described by Macaulay as following on the Norman invasion, when -men gradually ceased to call themselves Saxon and Norman and proudly -boasted of being English. The difference in the case before us is that -while the Tories have accepted the whole of the Whig principles they -still abjure the Whig name.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">[189]</span></p> - -<p>No so-called Conservative to-day will venture on opposing an extension -of the franchise on the plain ground of principle. At most he will but -temporise and plead for delay. No blush of conscious inconsistency -suffused <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Ritchie’s swarthy features when introducing his “frankly -democratic” Local Government Bill. And rightly not; for he was doing no -violence to party principles.</p> - -<p>In the matter of the functions of the State, the absorption of the -Tory is not quite so obvious, because there never has been, and, as -long as society lasts, never can be, a <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">parti serieux</i> of logical -<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">laisser faire</i>. Even in the thick of the Industrial Revolution, -the difference between the two great parties was mainly one of -tendency—of attitude of mind. The Tory had a certain affection for -the State—a natural self-love: the Whig distrusted it. This distrust -is now the sentiment of the whole of our public men. They see, some of -them perhaps more clearly than others, that there is much the State -must do; but they all wish that much to be as little as possible. -Even when, driven by an irresistible force which they feel but do not -understand (which none but the Socialist does or can understand), they -bring forward measures for increasing the power of the whole over the -part, their arguments are always suffused in a sickly halo of apology: -their gestures are always those of timorous deprecation and fretful -diffidence. They are always nervously anxious to explain that the -proposal violates no principle of political economy, and with them -political economy means, not Professor Sidgwick, but Adam Smith.</p> - -<p>The reason why this unanimity of all prominent politicians on great -fundamental principles is not manifest to the mind of the average man -is that, although there is nothing left to get hot or even moderately -warm about, the political temperature is as high as ever. It is not in -the dust of the arena, but only in the repose of the auditorium that -one is able to realise that men will fight as fiercely and clapper-claw -each other as spitefully over a dry bone as over a living principle. -One has to stand aside awhile to see that politicians are like the -theological controversialists of whom Professor Seeley somewhere says -that they never get so angry with each other as when their differences -are almost imperceptible, except perhaps when they are quite so.</p> - -<p>Both the efficient and the final cause of this unanimity is a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">[190]</span> -sort of unconscious or semi-conscious recognition of the fact that -the word “State” has taken to itself new and diverse connotations, -that the State idea has changed its content. Whatever State control -may have meant fifty years ago it never meant hostility to private -property as such. Now, for us, and for as far ahead as we can see, -it means that and little else. So long as the State interfered with -the private property and powers of one set of proprietors with a view -only to increasing those of another, the existence of parties for -and against such interference was a necessity of the case. A duty on -foreign corn meant the keeping up of incomes drawn from rent:<a id="FNanchor_99" href="#Footnote_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> its -abolition meant a rise of manufacturers’ profits. “Free Trade” swelled -the purses of the new <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bourgeoisie</i>: the Factory Acts depleted -them, and gave a sweet revenge to the rent-docked squire. But of this -manipulation of the legislative machine for proprietors’ purposes we -are at, or at least in sight of, the end. The State has grown bigger -by an immense aggregation of units, who were once to all intents -and purposes separate from it; and now its action generally points -not to a readjustment of private property and privileges as between -class and class, but to their complete disappearance. So then the -instinct which is welding together the propertied politicians is truly -self-preservative.</p> - -<p>But, it may be asked by the bewildered Radical, by the tremulous -Conservative, by the optimistic Socialist, if the political leaders -are really opposed to State augmentation, how comes it that every new -measure of reform introduced into the House of Commons is more or less -colored with Socialism, and that no popular speaker will venture to -address a public meeting without making some reference of a socialistic -sort to the social problem? Why, for instance, does that extremely -well oiled and accurately poised political weathercock, Sir William -Harcourt, pointing to the dawn, crow out that “we are all Socialists -now”?</p> - -<p>To these questions (and I have not invented them) I answer: in the -first place because the opposition of the political leaders <em>is</em> -instinctive, and only, as yet, semi-conscious, even in the most -hypocritical; in the second place, that a good deal of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">[191]</span> legislative -Socialism appears more in words than in deeds; in the third place that -the famous flourish of Sir William Harcourt was a rhetorical falsehood; -and fourthly, because, fortunately for the progress of mankind, -self-preservative instincts are not peculiar to the propertied classes.</p> - -<p>For it is largely instinctive and wholly self preservative, this change -in the position of the working people towards the State, this change by -which, from fearing it as an actual enemy, they have come to look to -it as a potential savior. I know that this assertion will be violently -denied by many of my Socialist brethren. The fly on the wheel, not -unnaturally, feels wounded at being told that he is, after all, not the -motive power; and the igniferous orators of the Socialist party are -welcome, so far as I am concerned, to all the comfort they can get from -imagining that they, and not any great, blind, evolutionary forces are -the dynamic of the social revolution. Besides, the metaphor of the fly -really does not run on all fours (I forget, for the moment, how many -legs a fly has); for the Socialist does at least know in what direction -the car is going, even though he is not the driving force. Yet it seems -to me the part being, and to be, played by the Socialist, is notable -enough in all conscience; for it is he who is turning instinct into -self-conscious reason; voicing a dumb demand; and giving intelligent -direction to a thought wave of terrific potency.</p> - -<p>There is a true cleavage being slowly driven through the body politic; -but the wedge is still beneath the surface. The signs of its workings -are to be found in the reactionary measures of pseudo reform advocated -by many prominent politicians; in the really Socialist proposals of -some of the obscurer men; in the growing distaste of the political club -man for a purely political pabulum; and in the receptive attitude of a -certain portion of the cultivated middle class towards the outpourings -of the Fabian Society.</p> - -<p>This conscious recognition of the meaning of modern tendencies, this -defining of the new line of cleavage, while it is the well-spring of -most of the Socialist hopes, is no less the source of some lively fear. -At present it is only the acuter and more far seeing of the minds -amongst the propertied classes who are at all alive to the real nature -of the attack. One has but to listen to the chatter of the average -Liberal candidate,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_192">[192]</span> to note how hopelessly blind the man is to the fact -that the existence of private property in the means of production, -forms any factor at all in the social problem; and what is true of the -rank and file is true only in a less degree of the chiefs themselves. -Ignorance of economics and inability to shake their minds free of -eighteenth century political philosophy,<a id="FNanchor_100" href="#Footnote_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a> at present hinders the -leaders of the “party of progress” from taking up a definite position -either for or against the advance of the new ideas. The number of -English statesmen, who, like Prince Bismarck, see in Socialism a -swelling tide whose oceanic rush must be broken by timely legislative -breakwaters, is still only to be expressed by a minus quantity. But -this political myopia is not destined to endure. Every additional -vote cast for avowed Socialist candidates at municipal and other -elections, will help to bring home to the minds of the Liberals, that -the section of the new democracy which regards the ballot merely as a -war-engine with which to attack capitalism, is a growing one. At last -our Liberal will be face to face with a logical but irritating choice. -Either to throw over private capital or to frankly acknowledge that -it is a distinction without a difference which separates him from the -Conservatives, against whom he has for years been fulminating.</p> - -<p>At first sight it looks as though this political moment in the history -of the Liberal party would be one eminently auspicious for the -Socialist cause. But although I have a lively faith in the victory of -logic in the long run, I have an equally vivid knowledge that to assure -the triumph the run must be a very long one; and above all I have a -profound respect for the staying powers of politicians, and their -ability to play a waiting game. It is one thing to offer a statesman -the choice of one of two logical courses: it is another to prevent his -seeing a third, and an illogical one, and going for it. Such prevention -in the present case will be so difficult as to be well nigh impossible; -for the Liberal hand still holds a strong suit—the cards political.</p> - -<p>It is quite certain that the social programme of our party will -become a great fact long before all the purely political proposals<span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">[193]</span> -of the Liberals have received the Royal assent; and the game of the -politician will be to hinder the adoption of the former by noisily -hustling forward the latter. Unfortunately for us it will be an -easy enough game to play. The scent of the non-Socialist politician -for political red herrings is keen, and his appetite for political -Dead Sea fruit prodigious. The number of “blessed words,” the mere -sound of which carries content to his soul, would fill a whole page. -In an age of self-seeking his pathetic self-abnegation would be -refreshing were it not so desperately silly. The young artizan on -five-and-twenty shillings a week, who with his wife and children -occupies two rooms in “a model,” and who is about as likely to become -a Lama as a leaseholder, will shout himself hoarse over Leaseholds’ -Enfranchisement, and sweat great drops of indignation at the plunder -of rich West End tradesmen by rich West End landlords. The “out of -work,” whose last shirt is in pawn, will risk his skull’s integrity in -Trafalgar Square in defence of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> O’Brien’s claim to dress in gaol -like a gentleman.</p> - -<p>Of course all this is very touching: indeed, to be quite serious, it -indicates a nobility of character and breadth of human sympathy in -which lies our hope of social salvation. But its infinite potentiality -must not blind us to the fact that in its actuality the dodgy Liberal -will see his chance of the indefinite postponement of the socialising -of politics. Manhood suffrage, female suffrage, the woes of deceased -wives’ sisters, the social ambition of dissenting ministers, the legal -obstacles to the “free” acquirement of landed property, home rule -for “dear old Scotland” and “neglected little Wales,” extraordinary -tithes, reform of the House of Lords: all these and any number of other -obstacles may be successfully thrown in the way of the forward march -of the Socialist army. And the worst of it all is that in a great part -of his obstructive tactics the Liberal will have us on the hip; for -to out-and-out democratisation we are fully pledged, and must needs -back up any attack on hereditary or class privilege, come it from what -quarter it may.</p> - -<p>But, to get back to our metaphor of the card table (a metaphor much -more applicable to the games of political men), the political suit does -not exhaust the Liberal hand. There still remains a card to play—a -veritable trump. Sham Socialism is the name of it, and <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Morley -the man to plank it down.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">[194]</span></p> - -<p>I have said above that the trend of things to Socialism is best -shewn by the changed attitude of men towards State interference -and control; and this is true. Still it must not be forgotten that -although Socialism involves State control, State control does not imply -Socialism—at least in any modern meaning of the term. It is not so -much to the thing the State does, as to the end for which it does it -that we must look before we can decide whether it is a Socialist State -or not. Socialism is the common holding of the means of production -and exchange, and <em>the holding of them for the equal benefit of -all</em>. In view of the tone now being adopted by some of us<a id="FNanchor_101" href="#Footnote_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a> I -cannot too strongly insist upon the importance of this distinction; -for the losing sight of it by friends, and its intentional obscuration -by enemies, constitute a big and immediate danger. To bring forward -sixpenny telegrams as an instance of State Socialism may be a very -good method of scoring a point off an individualist opponent in a -debate before a middle-class audience; but from the standpoint of the -proletariat a piece of State management which spares the pockets only -of the commercial and leisured classes is no more Socialism than were -the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">droits de Seigneur</i> of the middle ages. Yet this is the sort -of sham Socialism which it is as certain as death will be doled out by -the popular party in the hope that mere State action will be mistaken -for really Socialist legislation. And the object of these givers of -Greek gifts will most infallibly be attained if those Socialists who -know what they want hesitate (from fear of losing popularity, or from -any more amiable weakness) to clamor their loudest against any and -every proposal whose adoption would prolong the life of private capital -a single hour.</p> - -<p>But leaving sham Socialism altogether out of account, there are -other planks in the Liberal “and Radical” programme which would make -stubborn barriers in the paths of the destroyers of private capital. -Should, for instance, Church disestablishment come upon us while the -<i>personnel</i> of the House of Commons is at all like what it is at -present, few things are more certain than that a good deal of what -is now essentially collective property will pass into private hands; -that the number of individuals interested in upholding ownership<span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">[195]</span> -will be increased; and that the only feelings gratified will be the -acquisitiveness of these persons and the envy of Little Bethel.</p> - -<p>Again, the general state of mind of the Radical on the land question -is hardly such as to make a Socialist hilarious. It is true your -“progressive” will cheer Henry George, and is sympathetically inclined -to nationalisation (itself a “blessed word”); but he is not at all sure -that nationalisation, free land, and peasant proprietorship, are not -three names for one and the same proposal. And, so far as the effective -members of the Liberal party are concerned, there is no question at -all that the second and third of these “solutions” find much more -favor than the first. In fact, in this matter of the land, the method -of dealing with which is of the very propædeutics of Socialism, the -Radical who goes for “free sale” or for peasant ownership, is a less -potent revolutionary force than the Tory himself; for this latter only -seeks to maintain in land the state of things which the Ring and Trust -maker is working to bring about in capital<a id="FNanchor_102" href="#Footnote_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a>—and on the part which -<em>he</em> is playing in economic evolution we are all agreed.</p> - -<p>From such dangers as these the progress of Democracy is, by itself, -powerless to save us; for although always and everywhere Democracy -holds Socialism in its womb, the birth may be indefinitely delayed by -stupidity on one side and acuteness on the other.</p> - -<p>I have gone at some length into an analysis of the possible artificial -hindrances to Socialism, because, owing to the amiability and -politeness shown us by the Radical left wing during the last twelve -months; to the successes which Radical votes have given to some of our -candidates at School Board and other elections; and to the friendly -patronage bestowed upon us by certain “advanced” journals, some of our -brightest, and otherwise most clear-sighted, spirits have begun to base -high hopes upon what they call “the permeation” of the Liberal party. -These of our brothers have a way of telling us that the transition to -Socialism will be so gradual as to be imperceptible, and that there -will never come a day when we shall be able to say<span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">[196]</span> “now we have a -Socialist State.” They are fond of likening the simpler among us who -disagree with them as to the extreme protraction of the process, to -children who having been told that when it rains a cloud falls, looks -disappointedly out of the window on a wet day, unconscious that the -cloud is falling before their eyes in the shape of drops of water. To -these cautious souls I reply that although there is much truth in their -contention that the process will be gradual, we shall be able to say -that we have a Socialist State on the day on which no man or group of -men holds, over the means of production, property rights by which the -labor of the producers can be subjected to exploitation; and that while -their picturesque metaphor is a happy as well as a poetic conceit, it -depends upon the political acumen of the present and next generation of -Socialist men whether the “cloud” shall fall in refreshing Socialist -showers or in a dreary drizzle of Radicalism, bringing with it more -smuts than water, fouling everything and cleansing nowhere.</p> - -<p>This permeation of the Radical Left, undoubted fact though it is of -present day politics, is worth a little further attention; for there -are two possible and tenable views as to its final outcome. One is -that it will end in the slow absorption of the Socialist in the -Liberal party, and that by the action of this sponge-like organism, -the whole of the Rent and Interest will pass into collective control, -without there ever having been a party definitely and openly pledged -to that end. According to this theory there will come a time, and that -shortly, when the avowed Socialists and the much socialised Radicals -will be strong enough to hold the balance in many constituencies, and -sufficiently powerful in all to drive the advanced candidate many -pegs further than his own inclination would take him. Then, either -by abstention or by actual support of the reactionary champion at -elections, they will be able to threaten the Liberals with certain -defeat. The Liberals, being traditionally squeezable folk (like all -absorbent bodies), will thus be forced to make concessions and to offer -compromises; and will either adopt a certain minimum number of the -Socialis<em>tic</em> proposals, or allow to Socialists a share in the -representation itself. Such concessions and compromises will grow in -number and importance with each successive appeal to the electorate, -until at last the game is won.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_197">[197]</span></p> - -<p>Now it seems to me that these hopefuls allow their desires to distort -their reason. The personal equation plays too large a part in the -prophecy. They are generally either not yet wholly socialised Radicals -or Socialists who have quite recently broken away from mere political -Radicalism, and are still largely under the influence of party ties -and traditions. They find it almost impossible to believe that the -party with which they acted so long, so conscientiously, and with -so much satisfaction to themselves, is, after all, not the party to -which belongs the future. They are in many cases on terms of intimate -private friendship with some of the lesser lights of Radicalism, and -occasionally bask in the patronizing radiance shed by the larger -luminaries. A certain portion of the “advanced” press is open to -them for the expression of their views political. Of course none of -these considerations are at all to their discredit, or reflect in -the very least upon their motives or sincerity; but they do color -their judgment and cause them to reckon without their host. They are -a little apt to forget that a good deal of the democratic programme -has yet (as I have said above) to be carried. Manhood suffrage, the -abolition of the Lords, disestablishment, the payment of members: -all these may be, and are, quite logically desired by men who cling -as pertinaciously to private capital as the doughtiest knight of the -Primrose League. Such men regard the vital articles of the Socialist -creed as lying altogether outside the concrete world—“the sphere of -practical politics.” Meanwhile the Socialist votes and voices are well -within that sphere; and it is every day becoming more evident that -without them the above-mentioned aspirations have a meagre chance of -realisation. Now, from the eminently business-like Liberal stand-point, -there is no reason whatever why concessions should not be made to the -Socialist at the polling booth so long as none are asked for in the -House of Commons. And even when they are demanded, what easier than to -make some burning political question play the part which Home Rule is -playing now? Thus an endless vista of office opens before the glowing -eyes of the practical politician, those short-sighted eyes which see so -little beyond the nose, and which, at that distance only, enable their -owner to hit the white.</p> - -<p>The Radical is right as usual in counting on the Socialist alliance -up to a certain point. For us the complete democratisation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">[198]</span> of -institutions is a political necessity. But long before that complete -democratisation has been brought about, we shall have lost our patience -and the Radicals their temper.</p> - -<p>For as <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Hyndman tells the world with damnable (but most veracious) -iteration, we are “a growing party.” We recruit by driblets; but we -do recruit; and those who come to us come, like all the new American -newspapers, “to stay.” Our <em>faith</em>, our reason, our knowledge, -tell us that the great evolutionary forces are with us; and every -addition to our ranks causes us, in geometrical proportion, to be -less and less tolerant of political prevarication. Directly we feel -ourselves strong enough to have the slightest chance of winning off our -own bat, we shall be compelled both by principle and inclination to -send an eleven to the wickets. They will have to face the opposition, -united or disunited, of both the orthodox parties, as did the defeated -Socialist candidates at the School Board election in November, 1888. -And whether our success be great or small, or even non-existent, -we shall be denounced by the Radical wire-pullers and the now so -complaisant and courteous Radical press. The alliance will be at an end.</p> - -<p>There is yet another way in which we may win the ill-will of our -temporary allies and, at present, very good friends. I have spoken -above of certain reactionary items of a possible Radical programme, -which, although they have a grotesque resemblance to Socialism, are -worlds away from being the thing itself. These proposals we not only -cannot support, but must and shall actively and fiercely oppose. At the -first signs of such opposition to whoever may be the Liberal shepherd -of the moment, the whole flock of party sheep will be in full cry upon -our track. The ferocity of the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">mouton enragé</i> is proverbial; and -we shall be treated to the same rancour, spleen, and bile which is now -so plenteously meted out to the Liberal Unionists.</p> - -<p>The immediate result of this inevitable split will be the formation -of a definitely Socialist party, <i>i.e.</i>, a party pledged to the -communalisation of all the means of production and exchange, and -prepared to subordinate every other consideration to that one end. Then -the House of Commons will begin dimly to reflect the real condition -of the nation outside; and in it we shall see as in a glass, darkly, -or smudgedly, something<span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">[199]</span> of that “well defined confrontation of rich -and poor,” of which all who attend Socialist lectures hear so much, -and to which <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ex hypothesi</i>, the world, day by day, draws nearer. -Then, also, will begin that process which, I submit, is more likely -than either the absorption of the Socialist or the prolonged permeation -of the Radical: namely, the absorption of the Radical himself into -the definitely pro-private capital party on the one side, and the -definitely anti-private capital party on the other.</p> - -<p>A really homogeneous Socialist party once formed, the world political -reflects the world economic, and there is no longer any room for the -Radical, as we know the wonder. Each fresh Socialist victory, each -outpost driven in, each entrenchment carried, will be followed by a -warren-like scuttle of alarmed and well-to-do Radicals across the floor -of the House of Commons, which will once more become a true frontier; -and, finally, the political battle array will consist of a small -opposition, fronting a great and powerful majority, made up of all -those whose real or fancied interests would suffer from expropriation.</p> - -<p>Thus far the outlook has been clear and focusable enough; and it has -needed no extra-human illumination to see the details. All that has -been wanted has been normal vision and a mind fairly free of the -idols of the cave. But here the prospect becomes dim and uncertain; -and little purpose would be served by trying to pierce the mist which -enshrouds the distant future.</p> - -<p>Much, very much, will depend upon the courage, the magnanimity, -the steadfastness, the tact, the foresight, and above all upon the -incorruptibility of those whose high mission it will be to frame the -policy and direct the strategy of the Socialist party in those early -days of its parliamentary life. It will have sore need of a leader as -able as, and more conscientious than, any of the great parliamentary -figures of the past. The eye expectant searches in vain for such a man -now among the younger broods of the new democracy. He is probably at -this moment in his cradle or equitably sharing out toys or lollipops -to his comrades of the nursery. And this is well; for he must be a man -quit of all recollections of these days of <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Sturm und Drang</i>, of -petty jealousies, constant errors, and failing faith. He must bring to -his task a record free from failure and without suspicion of stain.</p> - -<p>But whatever may be the difficulties in store for us who name the name -of Socialism, of one thing at least they who have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">[200]</span> followed this course -of lectures may make quite sure. That, however long and wearisome the -struggle, each day brings us nearer victory. Those who resist Socialism -fight against principalities and powers in economic places. Every new -industrial development will add point to our arguments and soldiers -to our ranks. The continuous perfecting of the organisation of labour -will hourly quicken in the worker the consciousness that his is a -collective, not an individual life. The proletariat is even now the -only real class: its units are the only human beings who have nothing -to hope for save from the levelling up of the aggregate of which they -form a part. The intensifying of the struggle for existence, while it -sets <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bourgeois</i> at the throat of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bourgeois</i>, is forcing -union and solidarity upon the workers. And the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bourgeois</i> ranks -themselves are dwindling. The keenness of competition, making it every -year more obviously impossible for those who are born without capital -ever to achieve it, will deprive the capitalist class of the support -it now receives from educated and cultivated but impecunious young -men whose material interest must finally triumph over their class -sympathies; and from that section of workmen whose sole aspiration is -to struggle out of the crowd. The rising generation of wage workers, -instead of as now being befogged and bedevilled by the dust and smoke -of mere faction fight, will be able at a glance to distinguish the -uniforms of friend and foe. Despair will take sides with Hope in doing -battle for the Socialist cause.</p> - -<p>These lectures have made it plain enough to those who have hearing -ears and understanding brains that mere material self-interest alone -will furnish a motive strong enough to shatter monopoly; and after -monopoly comes Socialism or—chaos. But the interest of the smaller -self is not the only force which aids us in the present, or will guide -us in the future. The angels are on our side. The constant presence -of a vast mass of human misery is generating in the educated classes -a deep discontent, a spiritual unrest, which drives the lower types -to pessimism, the higher to enquiry. Pessimism paralyses the arms and -unnerves the hearts of those who would be against us. Enquiry proves -that Socialism is founded upon a triple rock, historical, ethical, and -economic. It gives, to those who make it, a great hope—a hope which, -once it finds entrance into the heart of man, stays to soften life -and sweeten death. By the light of the Socialist<span class="pagenum" id="Page_201">[201]</span> Ideal he sees the -evil—yet sees it pass. Then and now he begins to live in the cleaner, -braver, holier life of the future; and he marches forward, steeled and -stimulated, with resolute step, with steadfast eye, with equal pulse.</p> - -<p>It is just when the storm winds blow and the clouds lour and the -horizon is at its blackest that the ideal of the Socialist shines with -divinest radiance, bidding him trust the inspiration of the poet rather -than heed the mutterings of the perplexed politician, bidding him -believe that</p> - -<p class="poetry"> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">“For a’ that, for a’ that,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Its coming yet for a’ that,</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">That man to man the world o’er</span><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Shall brothers be for a’ that.”</span><br /></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_202">[202]</span></p> - - -<div class="footnotes"><h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_96" href="#FNanchor_96" class="label">[96]</a> It is to the half-conscious recognition of this -generalisation that the disappearance of militant Republicanism among -the English working classes is owing.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_97" href="#FNanchor_97" class="label">[97]</a> The difference of principle here is more apparent than -real. The Gladstonians repudiate any desire for separation, and affirm -their intention of maintaining the absolute veto of the imperial -Parliament; while the Unionists avow their ultimate intention of giving -to Ireland the same powers of self-government now enjoyed, or to be -enjoyed by England and Scotland.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_98" href="#FNanchor_98" class="label">[98]</a> The battles for Catholic Emancipation and the removal -of the religious disabilities were fought on sectarian rather than on -political grounds.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_99" href="#FNanchor_99" class="label">[99]</a> This is perhaps not, historically, quite true; but -the landlords believed that their own prosperity depended upon the -exclusion of foreign corn, and that is sufficient for the purpose of my -argument.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_100" href="#FNanchor_100" class="label">[100]</a> <i>Cf.</i> The speeches of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> John Morley on the eight -hours’ proposal and the taxation of ground rents. Also the recent -writings of <abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Bradlaugh, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">passim</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_101" href="#FNanchor_101" class="label">[101]</a> One of the most indefatigable and prolific members -of the Socialist party, in a widely circulated tract, has actually -adduced the existence of <em>hawkers’ licenses</em> as an instance of the -“Progress of Socialism”!</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_102" href="#FNanchor_102" class="label">[102]</a> It is worth noting that those organs of the press -which are devoted more particularly to the landed interest have been -the first to hint at the probable desirability of dealing with great -<em>industrial</em> monopolies by means of legislation.</p> - -</div> -</div> -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">[203]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="INDEX">INDEX.</h2> -</div> - - -<ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Absentee Proprietors, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Abstinence, Reward of, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Abstract method in Economics, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Administrative Errors, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Administrative Nihilism”, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Adulteration Acts, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Aged, Treatment of the, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Agriculture and Machinery, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Aladdin’s uncle outdone, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Aliens, Necessity under Socialism for a law of, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Althorp, Lord, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">America (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#usa">United States</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">American Independence, Declaration of, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Anarchists, Modern, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Anarchy preferred to corrupt State regulation by progressive thinkers, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Andrews, E. Benjamin, on Trusts, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Angels, Constitution and status of, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Angels, condition of their imitation on earth, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Argyle, Duke of, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Aristotle, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Arkwright’s inventions, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Aristocratic employments, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ashley, Lord (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#shaft">Lord Shaftesbury</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Associated Capitals, Competitive force of, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Associations, Legal position under Socialism of voluntary, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Austin, John, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Autobiography of John Stuart Mill, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Aveling, <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> F. W., <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Balfour, Right Hon. A. J., <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Barbarous Countries, Exploitation of, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bastille, Fall of the, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bebel, August, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bedford, Duke of, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bellamy, E. (author of “Looking Backward”), <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Benefit Association, Sheep and Lamb Butcher’s Mutual, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Benevolence and Omnipotence, The dilemma between, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bentham, Jeremy, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bequest, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Berkeley, Bishop, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Besant, Annie, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">    ”     Walter: His belated chivalry, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bimetalism suggested as a solution of the social problem, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Birmingham, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">    ”     compared with Warwick, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bismarck, Socialism and Prince, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Blanc, Louis, His Definition of Communism, <a href="#Page_131">131</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">[204]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bland, Hubert, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bloodshed: How to argue with its advocates, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>-<a href="#Page_167">7</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bonanza farms, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bourgeoisie, The Factory Acts and the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Free Trade and the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bradford, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bradlaugh, Charles, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bramwell, Lord, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bright, John, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Brittany, Standard of comfort in, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Peasants of, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">British Association, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">    ”     Mind, The Vestry stamp upon the, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bryce, James, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Brook Farm, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Browning, Robert, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Burns, John, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Bunyan, John, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Cade, Jack, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cairnes, J. E., on the idle rich, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Canada, Conquest of, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Canals, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cant: Its Source, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Capital: Is not machinery, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Is the result of saving, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Is spare subsistence, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Cannot be safely taken by the State except for immediate employment as capital, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Source of municipal capital, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Provision for municipal accumulation, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Capital” (Karl Marx’s work), <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Capital and Land” (Fabian Tract), <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Capitals, Competitive force of associated, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Capitalism, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Unscrupulousness of, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its idea self-destructive, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Morals of, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Characteristic effects of, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its origin in piracy and slave-trading, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Capitalist: Separation of his function from that of the <i>entrepreneur</i>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Regulation of the, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Type of the, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Capitalist combinations and State action, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Capitulations by proprietary classes, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Career open to the talented, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Carlyle, Thomas, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cartwright, <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> Edmund, Inventions of, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Caste (see <span class="smcap"><a href="#class">Class</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Castlereagh, Viscount, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Catastrophic Socialism, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Catechism, Misquotation of the Church, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Catholic Church, Socialism of the, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Catholic Emancipation, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Centralization of State industries, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Chalmers, <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> Thomas, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Charity, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Charter, The People’s”, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Chartism, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cheque Bank: Suggestion as to Communal currency, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Children: In Communes, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of Socialism on the status of, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Christian Socialism”, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Church Catechism, The, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Church, The Catholic, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Church of England: A mere appanage of the landed gentry, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Church of England: Effect of property holding on the, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Democratization of the, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Church Reformer, The”, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Churches, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Church-going, Hypocrisies of, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Church, Declaration of the Pan-Anglican Synod concerning Socialism and the, <a href="#Page_174">174</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_205">[205]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Civilizations and Societies, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Civil Servants: Their reputation for unconscientiousness, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Claims of Labor, The”, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Clanricarde, Lord, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Clarke, William, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="class">Class Feeling and Morality, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>-<a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Classes, Separation of, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cleavage, Economic, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Clive, Robert, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Coal mining, Application of machinery to, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Coal monopoly in the Unite States, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cobden Club disconcerted by the appearance of Imports not paid for by Exports, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cobden, Richard, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Colonization, Modern, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Coleridge, S. T., <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Combination, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Benefits of, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Commercial policy of England under Capitalism, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Commodities: Exchange of, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Process by which their value is reduced to the cost of production of the most costly unit of the supply, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Common Sense, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Commune: Its establishment in England already accomplished, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Communes, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Communism defined, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Communities, Savings of, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Debts of, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Compensation for expropriated proprietors, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Competition: Theory of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Decline of, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect on wages, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Comte, Auguste, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Comte de Paris, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Condition of the Working Classes” (F. Engels’ work), <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Conduct and Principle, Incompatibility set up by Private Property between, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Conscience, Social, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Conservatives, Present attitude of, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Consols:</li> -<li class="isuba">Nature of the operation called “reducing”, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Consumption, Associated, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Contracts restricted in England, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Contradictions apparently besetting the investigation of value, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Conventions as to Morality, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cooking, Public and private, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Co-operative Movement, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialist origin of the, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Aims of the leaders, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Co-operative Experiments, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Co-ordination, Social, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Copyright, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Copper, The “corner” in, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Corners, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cost of Production: What it means, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Reduction of value to, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isuba">On inferior soils, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cotton Manufacture, Progress of the, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cotton-seed Oil Trust, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="council">County Councils, The new, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">County Council, The London, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">County Family, Origin of the, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">County Farms, Organization of, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">County Government Act (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#council">County Councils</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Covert Garden Market and the Duke of Bedford, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Crime: Its relativity, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Criminal Class: Its formation, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cromptom, Samuel, Inventions of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cultivation of the Earth, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its beginning, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its “margin”, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_206">[206]</span></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of exploration on the progress of, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cultivation of the Earth:</li> -<li class="isuba">Discrepancies between its actual progress and that deduced from abstract economics, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Culture:</li> -<li class="isuba">Effect on profits of industrial management of the spread of, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Currency, Suggestion as to communal, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cynicism of our time, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">    ”     Routed by Socialism, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Dante, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Darwin, Charles, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Darwinism and Politics”, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Darwinian theory appealed to by monopolists, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> -<li class="isuba">By Socialists, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Day, The working, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Debt, The National, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Debts, Law as to, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Of Communities, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Decentralization, Necessity for, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Definitions of economic rent, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Demand, Effective, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Supply and, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Democracy: Import of, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Instability of, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Postulated by Socialism, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Further steps necessary to consummate, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Democrat, Distinction between the Ordinary and the Social, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Democratic Federation (See <a href="#sdf">S. D. F.</a>)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">De Quincey, Thomas, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Desire as a social motor, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Detailed suggestions for social organization of unemployed labor, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">De Tocqueville. A. C. H. C., <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Devil worship, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Diocesan Councils, Central Conference of, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Dirty Work, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Discipline in socialized industries, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Discovery of new countries, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Disestablishment of the Church, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Dishonesty a product of Capitalism, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Disingenuousness of Class Economics, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Dismal Science now the Hopeful, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Dismissal, Power of, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Dissolution of the Old Synthesis, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Division of labor, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Drainage Acts, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Drinking Fountains, Communism exemplified in, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Drone and Worker, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Earnings distinguished from the revenue of Private Property, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ecclesiastical intolerance, Reaction against mediæval, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Economics (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#polecon">Political Economy</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Economists (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#polecon">Political Economists</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Education: Reform of, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Moral, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> -<li class="isuba">A necessity for morality, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialist ideal of, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect on profits of industrial management, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Tendency of Social Democracy to encourage, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Eight Hours, Working day of, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Electors, Number of, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Elizabethan merchant adventurers, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Emigration, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="empl">Employer: Differentiated from Capitalist, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> -<li class="isuba">And laborer, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Not harmed by Socialism, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Engels, F., <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">England: Her social policy to-day, <a href="#Page_19">19</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">[207]</span></li> -<li class="isuba">In 1750, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Her foreign policy dictated by Capitalism, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Her mineral fertility, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“English Factory Legislation.” (See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#legis">Factory Legislation</a></span>), <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst"><i>Entrepreneur</i> (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#empl">Employer</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Episcopal Conference, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Equality of remuneration, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Errors (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#mistake">Mistakes</a></span> exposed by Socialism).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ethics: Metaphysic of, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Positive science of, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Evolution, Effect of Hypothesis of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Exchange of Commodities, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Mechanism of, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Exchange Value (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#value">Value</a></span>), <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Exploitation, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Factories before the Factory Act, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="legis">Factory Legislation, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Factory System, Introduction of the, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Facts for Londoners”, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Fair Trade”, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Family: Effect of Socialism on the, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Origin of the County, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Isolation of the, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Farms: Organization of County, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Bonanza, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Fawcett, Henry, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Federation of Municipalities, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Feudalism: Survival of, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Reaction against its domineering, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Feudal dues, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Fielden, John, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Filibuster, The Colonizing, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="final">Final Utility, Theory of, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Flag, Trade following the, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Flats, Living in, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Fly-Shuttle, Invention of the, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Foreign Investments, Interest on, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Foreign Markets, The fight for, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Foreign Policy: Effect of Capitalism upon, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of Socialism upon, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Foreign Trade following the Flag, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Forestalling, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Fourier, F. C. M., <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Fox, Charles James, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Foxwell, Professor H. S., <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Free Ferry, The London, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Free Land” and the Radical party, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Free Trade Movement, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Foreign investments left out of account by the, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The bourgeoisie and the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Freethinker, Possible Election to the Deanery of Westminster of an avowed, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">French Revolution, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Friction caused by introduction of Municipal Socialism, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Furse, Canon, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Gambling, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gasworks, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">George III, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">George, Henry, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Georgism, Checkmate to, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Giffen, Robert, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gladstone, Right Hon. W. E., <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Retrogressive instincts of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Glasgow, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Growth of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Godin and Leclaire, Experiments of, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Godwin, William, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gold: As money, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of Discoveries in California and Australia, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Goschen, Right Hon. G. J., <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gould, Jay, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Government: In 1750, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Industries carried on by, <a href="#Page_42">42</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_208">[208]</span></li> -<li class="isuba">“Government Organization of Labor”, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gradual Socialization, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Compensation a condition of, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Greek Republics, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Greenock, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Gronlund, Laurence, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Grote, George, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ground values, Municipilization of, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Growth of Towns, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Guild of <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Matthew, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Guillotining, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Habits: Moral, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Automatic, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Harbors, Nationalization of, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. V., <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isuba">On the teetotal stump, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“We are all Socialists now”, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hargreaves, James, The Inventions of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Harrison, Frederic, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hastings, Warren, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Haves and Have-nots, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Head Rents, Relative Insignificance of, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hegel, G. W. F., <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">High Church Party, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Historical: Method in Economics, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Development of Private Property, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Basis of Socialism, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Historical Basis of Socialism” (Hyndman’s work), <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“History”: “Of Agriculture and Prices”, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Of the 18th Century”, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Of Private Bill Legislation”, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Of the Reform Bill”, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hobbes, Thomas, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hobhouse, Lord, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hobhouse, Sir John Cam, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Homestead Law, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hospital, The, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">House of Commons, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">House of Lords, Abolition of, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Household Suffrage, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Huddersfield, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Human Life, Disregard of Capital for, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hume, David, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Huxley, Professor, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hyndman, H. M., <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hypocrisy, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Ibsen, Henrik, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Icaria, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Idleness, Association of prosperity with, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Idlers: their fate under Socialism, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Illth, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Illusions, Economic, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Immigration, Pauper, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Improvement in Production, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of unforeseen, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Incentive to Labor: Under Socialism, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Under Leasehold system, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Income Tax, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> -<li class="isuba">An instrument of expropriation, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Rent of ability” recoverable by, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Independent Weaver, Transformation of the, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">India, Conquest of, under Clive and Warren Hastings, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Indifference, Law of, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Individualism: Outbreak of, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Abandonment of, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The change to Socialism from, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Confusedly opposed to Socialism, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its moralization, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Anti-Social manifestation, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Protestant form of, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Abolished in production, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Industrial Organization, Centralization of, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Industrial Remuneration Conference, <a href="#Page_54">54</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">[209]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="rev">Industrial Revolution, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>-<a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Attitude of parties during, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Industrialism, Evil effects of, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Industry: Under Socialism, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Nationalization of, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isuba">As virtue or vice, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Disgraceful for women, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> -<li class="isuba"><i>La grande industrie</i>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Inequality, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Mischief of, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Sense of it lost in contemplation of equality before God, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Inferior soils, Resort to, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ingram, J. K., <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Injustices produced by private appropriation of land, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Insanity, Definition of, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Inspection of Industry, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Institutions, History of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Insurance: National, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Municipal, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Insurrectionism, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Intellectual Revolt, The, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Interest, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Fall in the current rate often mistaken for a tendency in Interest to disappear, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> -<li class="isuba"><abbr title="mister">Mr.</abbr> Goschen’s operation for securing to the community the advantage of the fall in the current rate, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> -<li class="isuba">A tribute, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Interest, Class, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">International Morality in the Middle Ages, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">International Trade the dominant factor in foreign policy, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Invention, Consequences of, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Inventor, The first, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Iron Industry, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Jevons, W. Stanley, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Joint Stock Companies: Development of, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Not objects of public sympathy, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Joseph the Second, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Kaye of Bury, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Kingsley, Charles, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Kitchens: Separate, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Public, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Kropotkin, Peter, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Labor: Mouth honor to, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="isuba">In the market as a commodity, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Displaced by machinery, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Fruits of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Municipal organization of, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Labor colonies, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Beginning of State organization of, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Laborer and Employer, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#prol">Proletarian</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst"><i>Laisser-faire</i>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lancashire, Old, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Expansion of, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Weavers’ grievances, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Land, Rent of, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>-<a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Point at which it becomes a close monopoly, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Powers of the County Councils to hold, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Nationalization of, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Landlord, What he costs, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Landed Interest, Its policy, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lassalle, Ferdinand, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Law of Indifference, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“     “      Rent (See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#rent">Rent</a></span>), <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Leaseholds Enfranchisement”, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Leaseholds: Origin of, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Confiscation at expiry of, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lecky, W. J., <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Leclaire and Godin, Experiments of, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Leed, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Legislation: Breakdown of mediæval, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#legis">Factory Legislation</a></span>.)<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">[210]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Leveling-down action of Private Property, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Levi, Leone, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Liberal and Radical Union in favor of County Councils holding land, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Libraries, Public, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Liberal Party, Its policy on Socialism, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>-<a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Liberty and Equality, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Liberty and Property Defence League, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lincoln, Abraham: The moral of his assassination, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Liverpool, Growth of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lloyd, Henry D., on “Lords of Industry”, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Local: Improvement Acts, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Self-Government, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Government Boards dealings with the unemployed, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Government Board of the future, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lodging Houses, Municipal, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">London: Facts concerning, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The County Council, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Extraordinary proportions reached by Economic Rent in, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Liberal and Radical Union, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> -<li class="isuba">London and Southwestern Railway shareholders, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Looking Backward”, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Louis XVI, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lying, As vice or virtue, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Machinery: Shoemaking by, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Agriculture by, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Displacement of hand labor by, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Progress of, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Substitution for hand labor in disagreeable employments, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Chimney Sweeping by, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Maine, Sir Henry, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Malthus, <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> T. R., <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Man as producer and exchanger, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Man <i>versus</i> the State”, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Management, Profits of industrial, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Managers, Qualifications and present value of industrial, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>-<a href="#Page_180">80</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Manchester, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Manchester School, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its advocacy of Protection, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Manners, Lady Janette on “Are Rich Landowners Idle?”, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Manorial Rights, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Mills, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Manors, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Marginal Utility (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#final">Final Utility</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Margin of Cultivation, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Obligation of private competitors to charge the full cost of production at, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>-<a href="#Page_179">9</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Markets: Effect on rent of proximity to, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The fight for foreign, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Marriage, Contract of, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Marshall, Alfred, and Mary Paley—Definition of rent, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Marx, Karl, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Matthew, Guild of <abbr title="saint">St.</abbr>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Maurice, F. Denison, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Meliorism, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Men, Traffic in, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Mercantile System, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Method of Criticism on Moral Basis, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Metœci in Athens, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Middle Ages: Social Organization in the, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Middle Class: Its callousness, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its moral ideas, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>-<a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its misunderstandings of Socialism, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its dread of mob violence, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Militant organization of the working class for forcible revolution, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Militarism and immigration, <a href="#Page_125">125</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_211">[211]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Military Service, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Empires of the Continent, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Mill, James, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Mill, John Stuart, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Milk Exchange of New York, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Milton, John, Proposal as to schools, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Mines: Their horrors before the legislation initiated by Lord Ashley, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Nationalization of, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Mines Regulation Acts, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Minor poetry, Socialist provision for the publication of, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Mirabeau, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Missionaries, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="mistake">Mistakes exposed by Socialism:</li> -<li class="isuba">That Society is no more than the sum of its units, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That Private Property encourages industry, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That Private Property establishes healthy incentive, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That Private Property distributes wealth according to exertion, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That Rent does not enter into price, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That Exchange Value is a measure of true wealth, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That “the poor ye shall have always with you”, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -<li class="isuba">That riots, regicide and bloodshed make Revolutions, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Mob Violence, Middle-class dread of, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Molesworth, W. N., <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Money, Function of, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Monopolies, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isuba">And Democracy, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Necessity for protecting the Postmaster’s, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Moral Basis of Socialism, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Habits and their origin, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Education of the Individual, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> -<li class="isuba">And of Society, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Moralists, Foolish, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Morality, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Relativity of, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Recognizable only in Society, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Conventional, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Natural, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Practical, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Class, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Elementary conditions of, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Developed conditions of, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialistic, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Medieval, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Elizabethan, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Morals and Health Act” (1802), <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">More, Sir Thomas, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Morley, Right Hon. John, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Motors, Influence of new, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Municipal: Corporations Act, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Action, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialism, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Debt, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Development, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Prestige of Municipal Employment, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Municipalities, Growth of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#council">County Councils</a></span>.)</li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Nabob, The appearance in English social life of the, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Napoleon: “The career is open to the talented”, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“A nation of shopkeepers”, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Nasmyth, James, invents the steam-hammer, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">National Insurance, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">National Liberal Federation, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“National Review, The”, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Nationalization of Rent, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">[212]</span></li> -<li class="isuba">It results if unaccompanied by Socialistic organization of labor, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Inter-municipal rent, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rent of ability, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>-<a href="#Page_180">80</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#prog">Progress and Poverty</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Nature: Caprices of, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Red in tooth and claw”, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Unmorality of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The cause of Society, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Newspapers under Socialism, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">New Hampshire, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">New Motors, Influence of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">New River Company, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">New York Legislature—Committee on Trusts, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Newcommen, Thomas, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Nexus, The social, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Oastler, Richard, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">O’Connor, Fergus, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Oldest Families—Tradition of their superiority, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Oldham, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Olivier, Sydney, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Omnipotence and Benevolence, The Dilemma of, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Optimism: rebuked by Science, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The individual economists and their, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Organism, The Social, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Outlook, The political, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="overpop">Over-population, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Owen, Robert, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Painters, Gains of fashionable, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Paley, <abbr title="reverend">Rev.</abbr> William, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Palmerston, Chinese policy of Lord, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst"><i>Panem et Circenses</i>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Parasitism, Economic, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Parliaments, Annual, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Parks, Public, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>-<a href="#Page_188">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Parties, State and fundamental differences of, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Patent rights, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Patronage in the public service, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of appointments by, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Pauper Labor, How to deal with, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Payment of representatives, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Peasant Proprietorship, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Period of Anarchy, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Perpetual pension, Privately appropriated Rent is of the nature of a, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Pessimism, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Peterloo, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Philanthropy, Futility of, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Philosophic Radicalism,” <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="force">Physical force, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Advocated by Lord Bramwell, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Physicians, Gains of fashionable, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Piracy and the Slave Trade in the 16th century, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Pitt, William: His motives, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Piener, E. von, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Plebeians in ancient Rome, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Plato, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Police: Conduct of Socialists charged upon by the, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Recent action of the ex-Chief Commissioner of, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Political: Tendencies, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Reform, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Political Science Quarterly,” <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Economy (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#polecon">Political Economy</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="polecon">Political Economy, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Basis of Socialism in, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Definition of Rent in treatises, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Theory apparently contradicted by history, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Untrustworthiness of abstract, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its guns turned against Private Property, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Old school and new, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -<li class="isuba">John Stuart Mill, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Ricardo, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Jevons, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rise of modern, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_213">[213]</span></li> -<li class="isuba">Perceived to be a <i>reductio ad absurdum</i> of Private Property, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Present political parties and, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Poor Law: A Socialistic institution degraded, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Reform, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The old and the new, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Post Office: A Socialistic institution, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialization of the postal system, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Economy of collectivist charges exemplified by, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Population: Increase and its effects, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its control by public opinion, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#overpop">Overpopulation</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Press: Its liberty after the socialization of printing, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Clamor for bloodshed from the newspapers of the proprietary class, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Preston, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its public debt, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Prices cannot be raised to compensate diminished profits, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Printing, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="priv">Private Property: Beginning of, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its levelling-down action, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Injustice of, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Not now practicable in its integrity, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its abrogation conceived as an attempt to empower everyone to rob everyone else, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its revenue distinguished from earnings, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Composition of incomes derived from, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Institution of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Conditions of its possibility, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect on sex relations, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Idea of, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rights of, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Cheapens the laborer, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Tends to make the majority mere beasts of burden, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Process of extinction of, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The State and, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#prop">Property</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Private Enterprise compared with Public, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Produce: Unjust division resulting from private appropriation of land, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Production: Improvements in, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of unforeseen improvements in, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Conditions of production and exchange, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Associated, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Profit, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Sweater’s, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Most important form of “Rent of Ability,” <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of calculating it in net social welfare instead of individual pecuniary gain, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Profit Sharing”, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Programme of Social Democracy, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Progress: Conditions of, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rate of in politics, industry and thought, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="prog">“Progress and Poverty,” <a href="#Page_23">23</a>-<a href="#Page_25">5</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Progress of Socialism,” <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="prol">Proletarian: The first, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Predicament of landless, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> -<li class="isuba">End of his absorption by the land as tenant, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Sold into bondage, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Operation of the law of value on his position as a vendor of labor, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="isuba">How the Democratic State will deal with him, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#prol2">Proletariat</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="prol2">Proletariat: Origin of the, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Exploitation of, <a href="#Page_17">17</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">[214]</span></li> -<li class="isuba">Physical degradation of, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Type of, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Morals of, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>-<a href="#Page_113">13</a></li> -<li class="isuba">So-called “intellectual,” <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#prol">Proletarian</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="prop">Property: Under Socialism, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Definition and economic analysis of, <a href="#Page_120">120</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#priv">Private Property</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Prosperity, Association of idleness with, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Prostitutes, their making, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Protection: Decay of, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="isuba">In the Middle Ages, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Advocated by the Manchester School, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Proudhon, P. J., <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Public Health Acts, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Public Opinion, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Purchasing Power—Pernicious effect of its unequal distribution, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Quit Rents, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Radicalism: Philosophic, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The modern Radical Programme, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Ordinary destructive variety, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Permeation of by Socialism, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Absorption of, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The land question and, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Railways: Requisites for making them under Capitalism, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Development of, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialization of, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Raphael’s pictures, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ratepayer, How Socialism will first affect the, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rates, Growth of, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Reactionary Legislation, Danger of, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Reform Bills, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Regicide: Its victims, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its futility, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Registration, Anomalous condition of voters’, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Regulation of Industry: Medieval, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>-<a href="#Page_158">8</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Modern (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#legis">Factory Legislation</a></span>).</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="rent">Rent: Recognized and paid by worker to drone, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Definitions of economic rent by standard economists, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Point at which rent ceases to be strictly “economic rent,” <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Enters into price of all commodities except those produced at margin of cultivation, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Relation to cost of production, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Nationalization of, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Is common wealth, not individually earned, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Moral Aspect of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Case of Birmingham and Warwick, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Law of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Illustration of economic rent, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Urban, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of municipal Socialism on, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="isuba">How County Councils can manipulate, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Nationalizing inter-municipal, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect of Free Trade on agricultural, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rent of ability, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="isubb">Industrial profit the most important form of, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="isubb">Raised by Private Property, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="isubb">May become negative, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Republicanism: Disappearance of militant Republicanism in England, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Residuum: Genesis of the, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its appreciation of public hospitality, <a href="#Page_114">114</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">[215]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Respectability, Falsehood of current, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Reward of Abstinence, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">    ”    of effort in the cause of Socialism, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Revolt, The Intellectual, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Revolution: Middle class notions of, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialistic attempt to organize militant, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#rev">Industrial Revolution</a></span> and <span class="smcap"><a href="#force">Physical Force</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ricardo, David, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Riches are not Wealth, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rights of Man, Declaring the, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rings, Growth of capitalist, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ritchie, Right Hon. C. T., <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ritchie, D. G., <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rochdale Pioneers, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Roebuck, J. A., <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rogers, Professor Thorold E., <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rousseau, J. J., <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rural economy in 1750, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Russell, Lord John, announces finality, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ruskin, John, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Russia’s industrial competition in the world market, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rutland, Duchess of, on the hard work of country gentlemen, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ryot, Suppression of Indian, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst" id="sdf">S. D. F. (Social Democratic Federation), <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sadler, Michael Thomas, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Salisbury, Rt. Hon., the Marquess of, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Satan: His moral activity, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rehabilitation of, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Saul”: Optimism as expressed in Robert Browning’s poem, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Saving: Capital the result of, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Savings of communities and of individuals, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Schools as they should be, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Scott, Sir Walter, Political types in “Rob Roy”, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Secretan, Eugène, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Seeley, J. R., <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Self, Extension of, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Self-defence, Origin of the Noble Art, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Self-help”, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Seligman, E. R. A., <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Servants, Domestic, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Servantgalism an Effect of Capitalism, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Services, Property in, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Settlement, Law of, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Seven Years’ War, The, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sewer Cleaning under Socialism, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="shaft">Shaftesbury, Lord, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Shaftesbury Avenue, Land near, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Shakspere, Suggested Duke of, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Shaw, G. Bernard, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Shelley, P. B., <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Shoemaking by hand, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> -<li class="isuba">By machinery, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Shopkeeping, Joint-Stock, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sidgwick, Henry, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sidmouth, Lord, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Six Acts, The, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Six Centuries of Work and Wages,” <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Slave Trade, The, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Slavery, The White, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Slaves Released when not worth keeping, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Smiles, Samuel, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Smith, Adam, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="soc2">Societies: Failure of previous attempts to establish true, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Societies and Civilizations, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#soc">Society</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="soc">Society: Hypothesis that it is no more than the sum of its Units, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The Matrix of Morality, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Evolution of Primitive, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Industrial, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Parasitic, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>-<a href="#Page_107">7</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Fashionable, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#soc2">Societies</a></span>.)<span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">[216]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Soils, Resort to Inferior, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Somers, Robert, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Social: Utility Divorced from Exchange Value, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Character of Social Changes, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Evolution, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Social Statics,” <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Health, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Organization, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Instinct, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Social Democratic Federation, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Social Democracy and Social Democrat. (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#socialism">Socialism</a></span> and <span class="smcap"><a href="#socialist">Socialist</a></span>.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="socialism">Socialism, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>-<a href="#Page_195">95</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Economic basis of, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Bearing of Economic Analysis of Individualism on, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Substitutes Meliorism for Pessimism, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Historic Aspect, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Socialism in England,” <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Change in, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Early or Utopian, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Industrial Aspect, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The Capitalist and, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Moral Aspect, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Its Genesis, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isuba">New Conception of, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Property under, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Definition of pure, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Industry under, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Change from Individualism to, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Local machinery of, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Dirty Work under, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Transition to, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Practical difficulties of, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Honesty of, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Must be introduced gradually, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Solution of the Compensation difficulty, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Effect on Rent, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Friction caused by introduction of, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Outlook toward, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Prince Bismarck’s view of, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The Liberal Party and, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isuba">True and False, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>-<a href="#Page_194">4</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Two views of the future of, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Practical politicians and, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> -<li class="isuba">(See also the Index Generally.)</li> - -<li class="ifrst">Socialist Politics, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Programme, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Formation of party, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="socialist">Socialists and the police, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Early (See <span class="smcap"><a href="#utopia">Utopian Socialism</a></span>).</li> -<li class="isuba">The <i>mot d’ordre</i> for, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Social Democrats fall into line as a political party, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The Radical Press and, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Parliament and, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Future leader for, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Spencer, Herbert, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst"><abbr title="saint">St.</abbr> Matthew, Guild of, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Standard Oil Trust, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Star, The,” <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">State: Social Democratic, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Functions under Socialism, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Corruption of the, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Whig conception of the, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Conception of the perfect, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Decentralization in the Social Democratic, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Private Property and the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Attitude of parties towards the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Idea and content of the, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The working-class and the, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Statistics and Statisticians, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Steam applied to cotton spinning, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Stuart, Professor James, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Subletting of Tenant Right, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Subsistence Wages, <i>Rationale</i> of, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sunday: Hypocrisies of church going, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The English, <a href="#Page_133">133</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">[217]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sunderland, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Supply and Demand: Action of, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Value decreases with Supply, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Final effect on wage-labor, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sweating, How to defeat, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Sweeping Chimneys: Replacement of boy labor by machinery in, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Syndicate of Copper Cornerers, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Synthesis: The old, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The new, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Talent, Career open to, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Taxation: Reform, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Of ground values, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Novel character of recent demands for, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Telegraphs, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ten Hours’ Bill, The, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tenant Rights: Perpetual, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Replaced by finite leases, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tennyson, Alfred, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Test and Corporation Acts repealed, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Theatres, Communal, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tocqueville, A. C. H. C. de, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tory of fifty years ago, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>-<a href="#Page_189">9</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Absorption of the party, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tonquin, French policy in, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“Total Utility,” <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Toynbee, Arnold, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Trade: Secrets of, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Discredit and rehabilitation of as a pursuit for the nobility and gentry, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Trade Unions, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Wages in, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Royal Commission (1869), <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Trafalgar Square: The police in, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The Fountains in, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Traffic in Men, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tramways, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Transition to Social Democracy, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Truck Acts, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Trusts, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Tucker, Benjamin R., <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Turgot, A. R. J., <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Two-man power more than double One-man power, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Unemployed: Their existence a proof that the labor they could replace has no exchange value, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Social pressure created by the, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="usa">United States: Results of Individualism plus political liberty in the, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Declaration of Independence, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Growth of Monopoly in the, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Extent to which monopoly has gone in the, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Unskilled Labor, Fate of, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Unsocialism, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Utilitarian questioning and scientific answering, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Utilitarians, The, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Utility: Its relation to Value, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Total Utility,” “Marginal,” or “Final Utility,” <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Divorce from Exchange Value, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="utopia">Utopian Socialism, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Valjean, Jean, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst" id="value">Value in Exchange, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Not explained by the money mechanism, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Man’s control over it consists in his power of regulating supply, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Divorced from social utility, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Theory of, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Voluntary Associations: Their legal position under Socialism, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Von Plener, E., <a href="#Page_36">36</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">[218]</span></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Vestrydom congenial to British mind, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Villiers, C. P., <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Virtues conditioned by social evolution, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>-<a href="#Page_106">6</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Wages, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Subsistence level, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Adjustment, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Rise after 1840, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Apparently raised by Trade Unions, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Competition wages, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Socialistic wages, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>-<a href="#Page_178">8</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Walford’s Insurance Cyclopædia, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Walker, F. A., <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Wallas, Graham, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Walpole, Sir Robert, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Warren, Sir Charles, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Wars for foreign markets, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Warwick compared with Birmingham, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Watt, James, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Watts, Isaac, on the cotton manufacture, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Waterloo Bridge, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Waterworks, Socialization of, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Wealth: Divorced from Exchange Value, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Wealth: Distinguished from “Illth,” <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> -<li class="isuba">“Wealth of Nations,” <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Weaver, Extirpation of the hand-loom, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Webb, Sidney, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Westminster, Duke of, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Whig Philosophy, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Economics, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Disappearance of the, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The Whig of fifty years ago, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>-<a href="#Page_189">9</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">White Slavery, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">“White Terror, The,” <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Whitman, Walt, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Wicksteed, P. H., <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">William the Silent, Assassination of, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Women: Effect of Property System on, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>-<a href="#Page_110">10</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Outlawry of, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Economic independence of, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Worker and Drone, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Working class: Militant organization of, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="isuba">The State and the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isuba">Political superstitions of the, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -</ul><ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst">Zeitgeist, Effect of the, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> -</ul> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter transnote"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Transcribers_Notes">Transcriber’s Notes</h2> - - -<p>Errors and omissions in punctuation were corrected.</p> - -<p>The page reference in the Table of Contents to the start of William Clarke’s article on the Fabian Society and its work has been corrected.</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_xiii">xiii</a>: “or <i>Debats</i>” changed to “or <i>Débats</i>”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_xxxiii">xxxiii</a>: “ignorant and presumptous” changed to “ignorant and -presumptuous”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_14">14</a>: “being disengenuous” changed to “being disingenuous”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_30">30</a>: “wider concensus” changed to “wider consensus”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_33">33</a>: “of these man” changed to “of these men”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_38">38</a>: “French contempories” changed to “French contemporaries”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_40">40</a>: “nett result” changed to “net result”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_52">52</a>: “not neccessarily” changed to “not necessarily”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_71">71</a>: “conquest or Canada” changed to “conquest of Canada”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_79">79</a>: “conceited, hyprocritical” changed to “conceited, hypocritical”</p> - -<p>Page <a href="#Page_162">162</a>: “dialectrical war” changed to “dialectical war”</p> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FABIAN ESSAYS IN SOCIALISM ***</div> -<div style='text-align:left'> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will -be renamed. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. -</div> - -<div style='margin-top:1em; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person -or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the -Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when -you share it without charge with others. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work -on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the -phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: -</div> - -<blockquote> - <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most - other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions - whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms - of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online - at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this eBook. - </div> -</blockquote> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg™ License. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format -other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain -Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -provided that: -</div> - -<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'> - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation.” - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ - works. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. - </div> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right -of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread -public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state -visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. -</div> - -</div> -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/69088-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/69088-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7ce82f6..0000000 --- a/old/69088-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null |
