CHAPTER XIII

MONEY

I do not think that I can better introduce the few pages which I propose

to write on the relations of money to happiness and to character than by

a pregnant passage from one of the essays[67] of Sir Henry Taylor. 'So

manifold are the bearings of money upon the lives and characters of

mankind, that an insight which should search out the life of a man in

his pecuniary relations would penetrate into almost every cranny of his

nature. He who knows like St. Paul both how to spare and how to abound

has a great knowledge; for if we take account of all the virtues with

which money is mixed up--honesty, justice, generosity, charity,

frugality, forethought, self-sacrifice, and of their correlative vices,

it is a knowledge which goes near to cover the length and breadth of

humanity, and a right measure in getting, saving, spending, giving,

taking, lending, borrowing and bequeathing would almost argue a perfect

man.'

There are few subjects on which the contrast between the professed and

the real beliefs of men is greater than in the estimate of money. More

than any other single thing it is the object and usually the lifelong

object of human effort, and any accession of wealth is hailed by the

immense majority of mankind as an unquestionable blessing. Yet if we

were to take literally much of the teaching we have all heard we should

conclude that money, beyond what is required for the necessaries of

life, is far more a danger than a good; that it is the pre-eminent

source of evil and temptation; that one of the first duties of man is to

emancipate himself from the love of it, which can only mean from any

strong desire for its increase.

In this, as in so many other things, the question is largely one of

degree. No one who knows what is meant by the abject poverty to which a

great proportion of the human race is condemned will doubt that at least

such an amount of money as raises them from this condition is one of the

greatest of human blessings. Extreme poverty means a lifelong struggle

for the bare means of living; it means a life spent in wretched hovels,

with insufficient food, clothes and firing, in enforced and absolute

ignorance; an existence almost purely animal, with nearly all the higher

faculties of man undeveloped. There is a far greater real difference in

the material elements of happiness between the condition of such men and

that of a moderately prosperous artizan in a civilised country than

there is between the latter and the millionaire.

Money, again, at least to such an amount as enables men to be in some

considerable degree masters of their own course in life, is also on the

whole a great good. In this second degree it has less influence on

happiness than health, and probably than character and domestic

relations, but its influence is at least very great. Money is a good

thing because it can be transformed into many other things. It gives

the power of education which in itself does much to regulate the

character and opens out countless tastes and spheres of enjoyment. It

saves its possessor from the fear of a destitute old age and of the

destitution of those he may leave behind, which is the harrowing care of

multitudes who cannot be reckoned among the very poor. It enables him to

intermit labour in times of sickness and sorrow and old age, and in

those extremes of heat and cold during which active labour is little

less than physical pain. It gives him and it gives those he loves

increased chances of life and increased hope of recovery in sickness.

Few of the pains of penury are more acute than those of a poor man who

sees his wife or children withering away through disease, and who knows

or believes that better food or medical attendance, or a surgical

operation, or a change of climate, might have saved them. Money, too,

even when it does not dispense with work, at least gives a choice of

work and longer intervals of leisure. For the very poor this choice

hardly exists, or exists only within very narrow limits, and from want

of culture or want of leisure some of their most marked natural

aptitudes are never called into exercise. With the comparatively rich

this is not the case. Money enables them to select the course of life

which is congenial to their tastes and most suited to their natural

talents, or, if their strongest taste cannot become their work, money at

least gives them some leisure to cultivate it. The command of leisure,

when it is fruitful leisure spent in congenial work, is to many,

perhaps, the greatest boon it can bestow. 'Riches,' said Charles Lamb,

'are chiefly good because they give us Time.' 'All one's time to

oneself! for which alone I rankle with envy at the rich. Books are good

and pictures are good, and money to buy them is therefore good--but to

buy time--in other words, life!'

To some men money is chiefly valuable because it makes it possible for

them not to think of money. Except in the daily regulation of ordinary

life, it enables them to put aside cares which are to them both

harassing and distasteful, and to concentrate their thoughts and

energies on other objects. An assured competence also, however moderate,

gives men the priceless blessing of independence. There are walks of

life, there are fields of ambition, there are classes of employments in

which between inadequate remuneration and the pressure of want on the

one side, and the facilities and temptations to illicit gain on the

other, it is extremely difficult for a poor man to walk straight.

Illicit gain does not merely mean gain that brings a man within the

range of the criminal law. Many of its forms escape legal and perhaps

social censure, and may be even sanctioned by custom. A competence,

whether small or large, is no sure preservative against that appetite

for gain which becomes one of the most powerful and insatiable of

passions. But it at least diminishes temptation. It takes away the

pressure of want under which so many natures that were once

substantially honest have broken down.

In the expenditure of money there is usually a great deal of the

conventional, the factitious, the purely ostentatious, but we are here

dealing with the most serious realities of life. There are few or no

elements of happiness and character more important than those I have

indicated, and a small competence conduces powerfully to them. Let no

man therefore despise it, for if wisely used it is one of the most real

blessings of life. It is of course only within the reach of a small

minority, but the number might easily be much larger than it is. Often

when it is inherited in early youth it is scattered in one or two years

of gambling and dissipation, followed by a lifetime of regret. In other

cases it crumbles away in a generation, for it is made an excuse for a

life of idleness, and when children multiply or misfortunes arrive, what

was once a competence becomes nothing more than bare necessity. In a

still larger number of cases many of its advantages are lost because men

at once adopt a scale of living fully equal to their income. A man who

with one house would be a wealthy man, finds life with two houses a

constant struggle. A set of habits is acquired, a scale or standard of

luxury is adopted, which at once sweeps away the margin of superfluity.

Riches or poverty depend not merely on the amount of our possessions,

but quite as much on the regulation of our desires, and the full

advantages of competence are only felt when men begin by settling their

scheme of life on a scale materially within their income. When the great

lines of expenditure are thus wisely and frugally established, they can

command a wide latitude and much ease in dealing with the smaller ones.

It is of course true that the power of a man thus to regulate his

expenditure is by no means absolute. The position in society in which a

man is born brings with it certain conventionalities and obligations

that cannot be discarded. A great nobleman who has inherited a vast

estate and a conspicuous social position will, through no fault of his

own, find himself involved in constant difficulties and struggles on an

income a tenth part of which would suffice to give a simple private

gentleman every reasonable enjoyment in life. A poor clergyman who is

obliged to keep up the position of a gentleman is in reality a much

poorer man than a prosperous artizan, even though his actual income may

be somewhat larger. But within the bounds which the conventionalities of

society imperatively prescribe many scales of expenditure are possible,

and the wise regulation of these is one of the chief forms of practical

wisdom.

It may be observed, however, that not only men but nations differ widely

in this respect, and the difference is not merely that between prudence

and folly, between forethought and passion, but is also in a large

degree a difference of tastes and ideals. In general it will be found

that in Continental nations a man of independent fortune will place his

expenditure more below his means than in England, and a man who has

pursued some lucrative employment will sooner be satisfied with the

competence he has acquired and will gladly exchange his work for a life

of leisure. The English character prefers a higher rate of expenditure

and work continued to the end.

It is probable that, so far as happiness depends on money, the happiest

lot--though it is certainly not that which is most envied--is that of a

man who possesses a realised fortune sufficient to save him from serious

money cares about the present and the future, but who at the same time

can only keep up the position in society he has chosen for himself, and

provide as he desires for his children, by adding to it a professional

income. Work is necessary both to happiness and to character, and

experience shows that it most frequently attains its full concentration

and continuity when it is professional, or, in other words,

money-making. Men work in traces as they will seldom work at liberty.

The compulsory character, the steady habits, the constant emulation of

professional life mould and strengthen the will, and probably the

happiest lot is when this kind of work exists, but without the anxiety

of those who depend solely on it.

It is also a good thing when wealth tends to increase with age. 'Old

age,' it has been said, 'is a very expensive thing.' If the taste for

pleasure diminishes, the necessity for comfort increases. Men become

more dependent and more fastidious, and hardships that are indifferent

to youth become acutely painful. Beside this, money cares are apt to

weigh with an especial heaviness upon the old. Avarice, as has been

often observed, is eminently an old-age vice, and in natures that are in

no degree avaricious it will be found that real money anxieties are more

felt and have a greater haunting power in age than in youth. There is

then the sense of impotence which makes men feel that their earning

power has gone. On the other hand youth, and especially early married

life spent under the pressure of narrow circumstances, will often be

looked back upon as both the happiest and the most fruitful period of

life. It is the best discipline of character. It is under such

circumstances that men acquire habits of hard and steady work,

frugality, order, forethought, punctuality, and simplicity of tastes.

They acquire sympathies and realisations they would never have known in

more prosperous circumstances. They learn to take keen pleasure in

little things, and to value rightly both money and time. If wealth and

luxury afterwards come in overflowing measure, these lessons will not be

wholly lost.

The value of money as an element of happiness diminishes rapidly in

proportion to its amount. In the case of the humbler fortunes, each

accession brings with it a large increase of pleasure and comfort, and

probably a very considerable addition to real happiness. In the case of

rich men this is not the case, and of colossal fortunes only a very

small fraction can be truly said to minister to the personal enjoyment

of the owner. The disproportion in the world between pleasure and cost

is indeed almost ludicrous. The two or three shillings that gave us our

first Shakespeare would go but a small way towards providing one of the

perhaps untasted dishes on the dessert table. The choicest masterpieces

of the human mind--the works of human genius that through the long

course of centuries have done most to ennoble, console, brighten, and

direct the lives of men, might all be purchased--I do not say by the

cost of a lady's necklace, but by that of one or two of the little

stones of which it is composed. Compare the relish with which the tired

pedestrian eats his bread and cheese with the appetites with which men

sit down to some stately banquet; compare the level of spirits at the

village dance with that of the great city ball whose lavish splendour

fills the society papers with admiration; compare the charm of

conversation in the college common room with the weary faces that may be

often seen around the millionaire's dinner table,--and we may gain a

good lesson of the vanity of riches. The transition from want to comfort

brings with it keen enjoyment and much lasting happiness. The transition

from mere comfort to luxury brings incomparably less and costs

incomparably more. Let a man of enormous wealth analyse his life from

day to day and try to estimate what are the things or hours that have

afforded him real and vivid pleasure. In many cases he will probably say

that he has found it in his work--in others in the hour spent with his

cigar, his newspaper, or his book, or in his game of cricket, or in the

excitement of the hunting-field, or in his conversation with an old

friend, or in hearing his daughters sing, or in welcoming his son on his

return from school. Let him look round the splendid adornments of his

home and ask how many of these things have ever given him a pleasure at

all proportionate to their cost. Probably in many cases, if he deals

honestly with himself, he would confess that his armchair and his

bookshelves are almost the only exceptions.

Steam, the printing press, the spread of education, and the great

multiplication of public libraries, museums, picture galleries and

exhibitions have brought the chief pleasures of life in a much larger

degree than in any previous age within the reach of what are called the

working classes, while in the conditions of modern life nearly all the

great sources of real enjoyment that money can give are open to a man

who possesses a competent but not extraordinary fortune and some

leisure. Intellectual tastes he may gratify to the full. Books, at all

events in the great centres of civilisation, are accessible far in

excess of his powers of reading. The pleasures of the theatre, the

pleasures of society, the pleasures of music in most of its forms, the

pleasures of travel with all its variety of interests, and many of the

pleasures of sport, are abundantly at his disposal. The possession of

the highest works of art has no doubt become more and more a monopoly of

the very rich, but picture galleries and exhibitions and the facilities

of travel have diffused the knowledge and enjoyment of art over a vastly

wider area than in the past. The power of reproducing works of art has

been immensely increased and cheapened, and in one form at least the

highest art has been brought within the reach of a man of very moderate

means. Photography can reproduce a drawing with such absolute perfection

that he may cover his walls with works of Michael Angelo and Leonardo da

Vinci that are indistinguishable from the originals. The standard of

comfort in mere material things is now so high in well-to-do households

that to a healthy nature the millionaire can add little to it. Perhaps

among the pleasures of wealth that which has the strongest influence is

a country place, especially when it brings with it old remembrances, and

associations that appeal powerfully to the affections and the

imagination. More than any other inanimate thing it throws its tendrils

round the human heart and becomes the object of a deep and lasting

affection. But even here it will be probably found that this pleasure is

more felt by the owner of one country place than by the great

proprietor whose life is spent alternately in several--by the owner of a

place of moderate dimensions than by the owner of those vast parks which

can only be managed at great expense and trouble and by much delegated

supervision, and which are usually thrown open with such liberality to

the public that they probably give more real pleasure to others than to

their owners.

Among the special pleasures of the enormously rich the collecting

passion is conspicuous, and of course a very rich man can carry it into

departments which men of moderate fortune can hardly touch. In the rare

case when the collector is a man of strong and genuine artistic taste

the possession of works of beauty is a thing of enduring pleasure, but

in general the mere love of collecting, though it often becomes a

passion almost amounting to a mania, bears very little proportion to

pecuniary value. The intelligent collector of fossils has as much

pleasure as the collector of gems--probably indeed more, as the former

pursuit brings with it a much greater variety of interest, and usually

depends much more on the personal exertions of the collector. It is

pleasant, in looking over a geological collection, to think that every

stone we see has given a pleasure. A collector of Caxtons, a collector

of large printed or illustrated editions, a collector of first editions

of famous books, a collector of those editions that are so much prized

because an author has made in them some blunder which he afterwards

corrected; a collector of those unique books which have survived as

rarities because no one thought it worth while to reprint them or

because they are distinguished by some obsolete absurdity, will

probably not derive more pleasure, though he will spend vastly more

money, than the mere literary man who, being interested in some

particular period or topic, loves to hunt up in old bookshops the

obscure and forgotten literature relating to it. Much the same thing may

be said of other tastes. The gratification of a strong taste or hobby

will always give pleasure, and it makes little difference whether it is

an expensive or an inexpensive one.

The pleasures of acquisition, the pleasures of possession, and the

pleasures of ostentation, are no doubt real things, though they act in

very different degrees on different natures, and some of them much more

on one sex than on the other. In general, however, they tend to grow

passive and inert. A state of luxury and splendour is little appreciated

by those who are born to it, though much if it follows a period of

struggle and penury. Yet even then the circumstances and surroundings of

life soon become a second nature. Men become so habituated to them that

they are accepted almost mechanically and cease to give positive

pleasure, though a deprivation of them gives positive pain. The love of

power, the love of society, and--what is not quite the same thing--the

love of social influence, are, however, much stronger and more enduring,

and great wealth is largely valued because it helps to give them, though

it does not give them invariably, and though there are other things that

give them in an equal or greater degree. To many very rich men some form

of field sports is probably the greatest pleasure that money affords. It

at least gives a genuine thrill of unmistakable enjoyment.

Few of the special pleasures of the millionaire can be said to be

purely selfish, for few are concentrated altogether on himself. His

great park is usually open to the public. His pictures are lent for

exhibition or exhibited in his house. If he keeps a pack of hounds

others hunt with it. If he preserves game to an enormous extent he

invites many to shoot it, and at his great entertainments it will often

be found that no one derives less pleasure than the weary host.

At the same time no thinking man can fail to be struck with the great

waste of the means of enjoyment in a society in which such gigantic sums

are spent in mere conventional ostentation which gives little or no

pleasure; in which the best London houses are those which are the

longest untenanted; in which some of the most enchanting gardens and

parks are only seen by their owners for a few weeks in the year.

Hamerton, in his Essay on Bohemianism, has very truly shown that the

rationale of a great deal of this is simply the attempt of men to obtain

from social intercourse the largest amount of positive pleasure or

amusement it can give by discarding the forms, the costly

conventionalities, the social restrictions that encumber and limit it.

One of the worst tendencies of a very wealthy society is that by the

mere competition of ostentation the standard of conventional expense is

raised, and the intercourse of men limited by the introduction of a

number of new and costly luxuries which either give no pleasure or give

pleasure that bears no kind of proportion to their cost. Examples may

sometimes be seen of a very rich man who imagines that he can obtain

from life real enjoyment in proportion to his wealth and who uses it

for purely selfish purposes. We may find this in the almost insane

extravagance of vulgar ostentation by which the parvenu millionaire

tries to gratify his vanity and dazzle his neighbours; in the wild round

of prodigal dissipation and vice by which so many young men who have

inherited enormous fortunes have wrecked their constitutions and found a

speedy path to an unhonoured grave. They sought from money what money

cannot give, and learned too late that in pursuing shadows they missed

the substance that was within their reach.

To the intelligent millionaire, however, and especially to those who are

brought up to great possessions, wealth is looked on in a wholly

different light. It is a possession and a trust carrying with it many

duties as well as many interests and accompanied by a great burden of

responsibility. Mere pleasure-hunting plays but a small and wholly

subsidiary part in such lives, and they are usually filled with much

useful work. This man, for example, is a banker on a colossal scale.

Follow his life, and you will find that for four days in the week he is

engaged in his office as steadily, as unremittingly as any clerk in his

establishment. He has made himself master not only of the details of his

own gigantic business but of the whole great subject of finance in all

its international relations. He is a power in many lands. He is

consulted in every crisis of finance. He is an important influence in a

crowd of enterprises, most of them useful as well as lucrative, some of

them distinctively philanthropic. Saturday and Sunday he spends at his

country place, usually entertaining a number of guests. One other day

during the hunting season he regularly devotes to his favourite sport.

His holiday is the usual holiday of a professional man, with rather a

tendency to abridge than to lengthen it, as the natural bent of his

thoughts is so strongly to his work that time soon begins to hang

heavily when he is away from it.

Another man is an ardent philanthropist, and his philanthropy probably

blends with much religious fervour, and he becomes in consequence a

leader in the religious world. Such a life cannot fail to be abundantly

filled. Religious meetings, committees, the various interests of the

many institutions with which he is connected, the conflicting and

competing claims of different religious societies, fully occupy his time

and thoughts, sometimes to the great neglect of his private affairs.

Another man is of a different type. Shy, retiring, hating publicity, and

not much interested in politics, he is a gigantic landowner, and the

work of his life is concentrated on the development of his own estate.

He knows the circumstances of every village, almost of every farm. It is

his pride that no labourer on his estate is badly housed, that no part

of it is slovenly or mismanaged or poverty-stricken. He endows churches

and hospitals, he erects public buildings, encourages every local

industry, makes in times of distress much larger remissions of rent than

would be possible for a poorer man, superintends personally the many

interests on his property, knows accurately the balance of receipts and

expenditure, takes a great interest in sanitation, in new improvements

and experiments in agriculture, in all the multifarious matters that

affect the prosperity of his numerous tenantry. He subscribes liberally

to great national undertakings, as he considers it one of the duties of

his position, but his heart is not in such things, and the well-being of

his own vast estate and of those who live upon it is the aim and the

work of his life. For a few weeks of the year he exercises the splendid

and lavish hospitality which is expected from a man in his position, and

he is always very glad when those weeks are over. He has, however, his

own expensive hobby, which gives him real pleasure--his yacht, his

picture gallery, his museum, his collection of wild animals, his

hothouses or his racing establishment. One or more of these form the

real amusement of his active and useful life.

A more common type in England is that of the active politician. Great

wealth and especially great landed property bring men easily into

Parliament, and, if united with industry and some measure of ability,

into official life, and public life thus becomes a profession and in

many cases a very laborious one. There are few better examples of a

well-filled life and of the skilful management and economy of time than

are to be found in the lives of some great noblemen who take a leading

part in politics and preside over important Government departments

without suffering their gigantic estates to fall into mismanagement, or

neglecting the many social duties and local interests connected with

them. Most of their success is indeed due to the wise use of money in

economising time by trustworthy and efficient delegation. Yet the

superintending brain, the skilful choice, the personal control cannot

be dispensed with. In a life so fully occupied the few weeks of pleasure

which may be spent on a Scotch moor or in a Continental watering-place

will surely not be condemned.

The economy of time and the elasticity of brain and character such lives

develop are, however, probably exceeded by another class. Nothing is

more remarkable in the social life of the present generation than the

high pressure under which a large number of ladies in great positions

habitually live. It strikes every Continental observer, for there is

nothing approaching it in any other European country, and it certainly

far exceeds anything that existed in England in former generations.

Pleasure-seeking, combined, however, on a large scale with

pleasure-giving, holds a much more prominent place in these lives than

in those I have just described. With not a few women, indeed, of wealth

and position, it is the all-in-all of life, and in general it is

probable that women obtain more pleasure from most forms of society than

men, though it is also true that they bear a much larger share of its

burdens. There are, however, in this class, many who combine with

society a truly surprising number and variety of serious interests. Not

only the management of a great house, not only the superintendence of

schools and charities and local enterprises connected with a great

estate, but also a crowd of philanthropic, artistic, political, and

sometimes literary interests fill their lives. Few lives, indeed, in any

station are more full, more intense, more constantly and variously

occupied. Public life, which in most foreign countries is wholly outside

the sphere of women, is eagerly followed. Public speaking, which in the

memory of many now living was almost unknown among women of any station

in English society, has become the most ordinary accomplishment. Their

object is to put into life from youth to old age as much as life can

give, and they go far to attain their end. A wonderful nimbleness and

flexibility of intellect capable of turning swiftly from subject to

subject has been developed, and keeps them in touch with a very wide

range both of interests and pleasures.

There are no doubt grave drawbacks to all this. Many will say that this

external activity must be at the sacrifice of the duties of domestic

life, but on this subject there is, I think, at least much exaggeration.

Education has now assumed such forms and attained such a standard that

usually for many hours in the day the education of the young in a

wealthy family is in the hands of accomplished specialists, and I do not

think that the most occupied lives are those in which the cares of a

home are most neglected. How far, however, this intense and constant

strain is compatible with physical well-being is a graver question, and

many have feared that it must bequeath weakened constitutions to the

coming generation. Nor is a life of incessant excitement in other

respects beneficial. In both intellectual and moral hygiene the best

life is that which follows nature and alternates periods of great

activity with periods of rest. Retirement, quiet, steady reading, and

the silent thought which matures character and deepens impressions are

things that seem almost disappearing from many English lives. But lives

such as I have described are certainly not useless, undeveloped, or

wholly selfish, and they in a large degree fulfil that great law of

happiness, that it should be sought for rather in interests than in

pleasures.

I have already referred to the class who value money chiefly because it

enables them to dismiss money thoughts and cares from their minds. On

the whole, this end is probably more frequently attained by men of

moderate but competent fortunes than by the very rich. This is at least

the case when they are sufficiently rich to invest their money in

securities which are liable to no serious risk or fluctuation. A

gigantic fortune is seldom of such a nature that it does not bring with

it great cares of administration and require much thought and many

decisions. There is, however, one important exception. When there are

many children the task of providing for their future falls much more

lightly on the very rich than on those of medium fortune.

There is a class, however, who are the exact opposite of these and who

make the simple acquisition of money the chief interest and pleasure of

their lives. Money-making in some form is the main occupation of the

great majority of men, but it is usually as a means to an end. It is to

acquire the means of livelihood, or the means of maintaining or

improving a social position, or the means of providing as they think fit

for the children who are to succeed them. Sometimes, however, with the

very rich and without any ulterior object, money-making for its own sake

becomes the absorbing interest. They can pursue it with great advantage;

for, as has been often said, nothing makes money like money, and the

possession of an immense capital gives innumerable facilities for

increasing it. The collecting passion takes this form. They come to care

more for money than for anything money can purchase, though less for

money than for the interest and the excitement of getting it.

Speculative enterprise, with its fluctuations, uncertainties and

surprises, becomes their strongest interest and their greatest

amusement.

When it is honestly conducted there is no real reason why it should be

condemned. On these conditions a life so spent is, I think, usually

useful to the world, for it generally encourages works that are of real

value. All that can be truly said is that it brings with it grave

temptations and is very apt to lower a man's moral being. Speculation

easily becomes a form of gambling so fierce in its excitement that, when

carried on incessantly and on a great scale, it kills all capacity for

higher and tranquil pleasures, strengthens incalculably the temptations

to unscrupulous gain, disturbs the whole balance of character, and often

even shortens life. With others the love of accumulation has a strange

power of materialising, narrowing and hardening. Habits of

meanness--sometimes taking curious and inconsistent forms, and applying

only to particular things or departments of life--steal insensibly over

them, and the love of money assumes something of the character of mania.

Temptations connected with money are indeed among the most insidious and

among the most powerful to which we are exposed. They have probably a

wider empire than drink, and, unlike the temptations that spring from

animal passion, they strengthen rather than diminish with age. In no

respect is it more necessary for a man to keep watch over his own

character, taking care that the unselfish element does not diminish, and

correcting the love of acquisition by generosity of expenditure.

It is probable that the highest form of charity, involving real and

serious self-denial, is much more common among the poor, and even the

very poor, than among the rich. I think most persons who have had much

practical acquaintance with the dealings of the poor with one another

will confirm this. It is certainly far less common among those who are

at the opposite pole of fortune. They have not had the same discipline,

or indeed the same possibility of self-sacrifice, or the same means of

realising the pains of poverty, and there is another reason which tends

not unnaturally to check their benevolence. A man with the reputation of

great wealth soon finds himself beleaguered by countless forms of

mendicancy and imposture. He comes to feel that there is a general

conspiracy to plunder him, and he is naturally thrown into an attitude

of suspicion and self-defence. Often, though he may give largely and

generously, he will do so under the veil of strict anonymity, in order

to avoid a reputation for generosity which will bring down upon him

perpetual solicitations. If he is an intellectual man he will probably

generalise from his own experience. He will be deeply impressed with the

enormous evils that have sprung from ill-judged charity, and with the

superiority even from a philanthropic point of view of a productive

expenditure of money.

And in truth it is difficult to overrate the evil effects of injudicious

charities in discouraging thrift, industry, foresight and self-respect.

They take many forms; some of them extremely obvious, while others can

only be rightly judged by a careful consideration of remote

consequences. There are the idle tourists who break down, in a once

unsophisticated district, that sense of self-respect which is one of the

most valuable lessons that early education can give, by flinging pence

to be scrambled for among the children, or who teach the poor the fatal

lesson that mendicancy or something hardly distinguishable from

mendicancy will bring greater gain than honest and continuous work.

There is the impulsive, uninquiring charity that makes the trade of the

skilful begging-letter writer a lucrative profession, and makes men and

women who are rich, benevolent and weak, the habitual prey of greedy

impostors. There is the old-established charity for ministering to

simple poverty which draws to its centre all the pauperism of the

neighbouring districts, depresses wages, and impoverishes the very

district or class it was intended to benefit. There are charities which

not only largely diminish the sufferings that are the natural

consequence and punishment of vice; but even make the lot of the

criminal and the vicious a better one than that of the hard-working

poor. There are overlapping charities dealing with the same department,

but kept up with lavish waste through the rivalry of different religious

denominations, or in the interests of the officials connected with them;

belated or superannuated charities formed to deal with circumstances or

sufferings that have in a large degree passed away--useless, or almost

useless, charities established to carry out some silly fad or to gratify

some silly vanity; sectarian charities intended to further ends which,

in the eyes of all but the members of one sect, are not only useless but

mischievous; charities that encourage thriftless marriages, or make it

easy for men to neglect obvious duties, or keep a semi-pauper population

stationary in employments and on a soil where they can never prosper, or

in other ways handicap, impede or divert the natural and healthy course

of industry. Illustrations of all these evils will occur to every

careful student of the subject. Unintelligent, thoughtless, purely

impulsive charity, and charity which is inspired by some other motive

than a real desire to relieve suffering, will constantly go wrong, but

every intelligent man can find without difficulty vast fields on which

the largest generosity may be expended with abundant fruit.

Hospitals and kindred institutions for alleviating great unavoidable

calamities, and giving the sick poor something of the same chances of

recovery as the rich, for the most part fall under this head. Money will

seldom be wasted which is spent in promoting kinds of knowledge,

enterprise or research that bring no certain remuneration proportioned

to their value; in assisting poor young men of ability and industry to

develop their special talents; in encouraging in their many different

forms thrift, self-help and co-operation; in alleviating the inevitable

suffering that follows some great catastrophe on land or sea, or great

transitions of industry, or great fluctuations and depressions in class

prosperity; in giving the means of healthy recreation or ennobling

pleasures to the denizens of a crowded town. The vast sphere of

education opens endless fields for generous expenditure, and every

religious man will find objects which, in the opinion not only of men of

his own persuasion, but also of many others, are transcendently

important. Nor is it a right principle that charity should be denied to

all calamities which are in some degree due to the fault of the

sufferer, or which might have been averted by exceptional forethought or

self-denial. Some economists write as if a far higher standard of will

and morals should be expected among the poor and the uneducated than can

be found among the rich. Good sense and right feeling will here easily

draw the line, abstaining from charities that have a real influence in

encouraging improvidence or vice, yet making due allowance for the

normal weaknesses of our nature.

In all these ways the very rich can find ample opportunities for useful

benevolence. It is the prerogative of great wealth that it can often

cure what others can only palliate, and can establish permanent sources

of good which will continue long after the donors have passed away. In

dealing with individual cases of distress, rich men who have neither the

time nor the inclination to investigate the special circumstances will

do well to rely largely on the recommendation of others. If they choose

trustworthy, competent and sensible advisers with as much judgment as

they commonly show in the management of their private affairs, they are

not likely to go astray. There never was a period when a larger amount

of intelligent and disinterested labour was employed in careful and

detailed examination of the circumstances and needs of the poor. The

parish clergyman, the district visitor, the agents of the Charity

Organization Society which annually selects its special cases of

well-ascertained need, will abundantly furnish them with the knowledge

they require.

The advantage or disadvantage of the presence in a country of a large

class of men possessing fortunes far exceeding anything that can really

administer to their enjoyment is a question which has greatly divided

both political economists and moralists. The former were long accustomed

to maintain somewhat exclusively that laws and institutions should be

established with the object of furthering the greatest possible

accumulation of wealth, and that a system of unrestricted competition,

coupled with equal laws, giving each man the most complete security in

the possession and disposal of his property, was the best means of

attaining this end. They urged with great truth that, although under

such a system the inequalities of fortune will be enormous, most of the

wealth of the very rich will inevitably be distributed in the form of

wages, purchases, and industrial enterprises through the community at

large, and that, other things being equal, the richest country will on

the whole be the happiest. They clearly saw the complete delusion of the

common assertions that the more millionaires there are in a country the

more paupers will multiply, and that society is dividing between the

enormously rich and the abjectly poor. The great industrial communities,

in which there are the largest number of very wealthy men, are also the

centres in which we find the most prosperous middle class, and the

highest and most progressive rates of wages and standards of comfort

among the poor. Great corruption in many forms no doubt exists in them,

but it can scarcely be maintained with confidence that the standard of

integrity is on the whole lower in these than in other countries, and

they at least escape what in many poor countries is one of the most

fruitful causes of corruption in all branches of administration--the

inadequate pay of the servants of the Crown. The path of liberty in the

eyes of economists of this school is the path of wisdom, and they were

profoundly distrustful of all legislative attempts to restrict or

interfere with the course of industrial progress.

In our own generation a somewhat different tendency has manifestly

strengthened. It has been said that past political economists paid too

much attention to the accumulation and too little to the distribution of

wealth. Men have become more sensible to the high level of happiness and

moral well-being that has been attained in some of the smaller and

somewhat stagnant countries of Europe, where wealth is more generally

attained by thrift and steady industry than by great industrial or

commercial enterprise, in which there are few large fortunes but little

acute poverty, a low standard of luxury, but a high standard of real

comfort. The enormous evils that have grown up in wealthy countries, in

the form of company-mongering, excessive competition, extravagant and

often vicious luxury, and dishonest administration of public funds, are

more and more felt, and it is only too true that in these countries

there are large and influential circles of society in which all

considerations of character, intellect, or manners seem lost in an

intense thirst for wealth and for the things that it can give.

Sometimes we find vast fortunes in countries where there is but little

enterprise and a very low standard of comfort among the people, and

where this is the case it is usually due to unequal laws or corrupt

administration. In the free, democratic, and industrial communities

great fluctuations and disparities of wealth are inevitable, and some of

the most colossal fortunes have, no doubt, been made by the evil methods

I have described. They are, however, only a minority, and not a very

large one. Like all the great successes of life, abnormal accumulation

of wealth is usually due to the combination in different proportions of

ability, character, and chance, and is not tainted with dishonesty. On

the whole, the question that should be asked is not what a man has, but

how he obtained it and how he uses it. When wealth is honestly acquired

and wisely and generously used, the more rich men there are in a country

the better.

There has probably never been a period in the history of the world when

the conditions of industry, assisted by the great gold discoveries in

several parts of the globe, were so favourable to the formation of

enormous fortunes as at present, and when the race of millionaires was

so large. The majority belong to the English-speaking race; probably

most of their gigantic fortunes have been rapidly accumulated, and bring

with them none of the necessary, hereditary, and clearly defined

obligations of a great landowner, while a considerable proportion of

them have fallen to the lot of men who, through their education or early

habits, have not many cultivated or naturally expensive tastes. In

England many of the new millionaires become great landowners and set up

great establishments. In America, where country tastes are less marked

and where the difficulties of domestic service are very great, this is

less common. In both countries the number of men with immense fortunes,

absolutely at their own disposal, has enormously increased, and the

character of their expenditure has become a matter of real national

importance.

Much of it, no doubt, goes in simple luxury and ostentation, or in mere

speculation, or in restoring old and dilapidated fortunes through the

marriages of rank with money which are so characteristic of our time;

but much also is devoted to charitable or philanthropic purposes. In

this, as in most things, motives are often very blended. To men of such

fortunes, such expenditure, even on a large scale, means no real

self-sacrifice, and the inducements to it are not always of the highest

kind. To some men it is a matter of ambition--a legitimate and useful

ambition--to obtain the enduring and honourable fame which attaches to

the founder of a great philanthropic or educational establishment.

Others find that, in England at least, large philanthropic expenditure

is one of the easiest and shortest paths to social success, bringing men

and women of low extraction and bad manners into close and frequent

connection with the recognised leaders of society; while others again

have discovered that it is the quickest way of effacing the stigma which

still in some degree attaches to wealth which has been acquired by

dishonourable or dubious means. Fashion, social ambition, and social

rivalries are by no means unknown in the fields of charity. There are

many, however, in whose philanthropy the element of self has no place,

and whose sole desire is to expend their money in forms that can be of

most real and permanent benefit to others.

Such men have great power, and, if their philanthropic expenditure is

wisely guided, it may be of incalculable benefit. I have already

indicated many of the channels in which it may safely flow, but one or

two additional hints on the subject may not be useless. Perhaps as a

general rule these men will find that they can act most wisely by

strengthening and enlarging old charities which are really good, rather

than by founding new ones. Competition is the soul of industry, but

certainly not of charity, and there is in England a deplorable waste of

money and machinery through the excessive multiplication of institutions

intended for the same objects. The kind of ambition to which I have just

referred tends to make men prefer new charities which can be identified

with their names; the paid officials connected with charities have

become a large and powerful profession, and their influence is naturally

used in the same direction; the many different religious bodies in the

country often refuse to combine, and each desires to have its own

institutions; and there are fashions in charity which, while they

greatly stimulate generosity, have too often the effect of diverting it

from the older and more unobtrusive forms. On the other hand, one of the

most important facts in our present economical condition is that an

extraordinary and almost unparalleled development of industrial

prosperity has been accompanied by extreme and long-continued

agricultural depression and by a great fall in the rate of interest.

Wealth in many forms is accumulating with wonderful rapidity, and the

increased rate of wages is diffusing prosperity among the working

classes; but those who depend directly or indirectly on agricultural

rents or on interest of money invested in trust securities have been

suffering severely, and they comprise some of the most useful,

blameless, and meritorious classes in the community. The same causes

that have injured them have fallen with crushing severity on

old-established institutions which usually derive their income largely

or entirely from the rent of land or from money invested in the public

funds. The bitter cry of distress that is rising from the hospitals and

many other ancient charities, from the universities, from the clergy of

the Established Church, abundantly proves it.

The preference, however, to be given to old charities rather than to new

ones is subject to very many exceptions. It does not apply to new

countries or to the many cases in which changes and developments of

industry have planted vast agglomerations of population in districts

which were once but thinly populated, and therefore but little provided

with charitable or educational institutions. Nor does it apply to the

many cases in which the circumstances of modern life have called into

existence new forms of charity, new wants, new dangers and evils to be

combated, new departments of knowledge to be cultivated. One of the

greatest difficulties of the older universities is that of providing,

out of their shrinking endowments, for the teaching of branches of

science and knowledge which have only come into existence, or at least

into prominence, long after these universities were established, and

some of which require not only trained teachers but costly apparatus

and laboratories. Increasing international competition and enlarged

scientific knowledge have rendered necessary an amount of technical and

agricultural education never dreamed of by our ancestors; and the rise

of the great provincial towns and the greater intensity of provincial

life and provincial patriotism, as well as the changes that have passed

over the position both of the working and middle classes, have created a

genuine demand for educational establishments of a different type from

the older universities. The higher education of women is essentially a

nineteenth-century work, and it has been carried on without the

assistance of old endowments and with very little help from modern

Parliaments. In the distribution of public funds a class which is wholly

unrepresented in Parliament seldom gets its fair share; and higher

education, like most forms of science, like most of the higher forms of

literature, and like many valuable forms of research, never can be

self-supporting. There are great branches of knowledge which without

established endowments must remain uncultivated, or be cultivated only

by men of considerable private means. Some invaluable curative agencies,

such as convalescent homes in different countries and climates and for

different diseases, have grown up in our own generation, as well as some

of the most fruitful forms of medical research and some of the most

efficacious methods of giving healthy change and brightness to the lives

that are most monotonous and overstrained. Every great revolution in

industry, in population, and even in knowledge, brings with it new and

special wants, and there are cases in which assisted emigration is one

of the best forms of charity.

These are but a few illustrations of the directions in which the large

surplus funds which many of the very rich are prepared to expend on

philanthropic purposes may profitably go. There is a marked and

increasing tendency in our age to meet all the various exigencies of

Society, as they arise, by State aid resting on compulsory taxation. In

countries where the levels of fortune are such that few men have incomes

greatly in excess of their real or factitious wants, this method will

probably be necessary; but many of the wants I have described can be

better met by the old English method of intelligent private generosity,

and in a country in which the number of the very rich is so great and so

increasing, this generosity should not be wanting.

FOOTNOTE:

[67] _Notes on Life._

The Map of Life Conduct and Character · 第 13 / 17 章