CHAPTER XXXVII.

THE TRANSITION PERIOD.

"It is pretty late," I said, "but I want very much to ask you just a few

more questions about the Revolution. All that I have learned leaves me

quite as puzzled as ever to imagine any set of practical measures by

which the substitution of public for private capitalism could have been

effected without a prodigious shock. We had in our day engineers clever

enough to move great buildings from one site to another, keeping them

meanwhile so steady and upright as not to interfere with the dwellers in

them, or to cause an interruption of the domestic operations. A problem

something like this, but a millionfold greater and more complex, must

have been raised when it came to changing the entire basis of production

and distribution and revolutionizing the conditions of everybody's

employment and maintenance, and doing it, moreover, without meanwhile

seriously interrupting the ongoing of the various parts of the economic

machinery on which the livelihood of the people from day to day depended.

I should be greatly interested to have you tell me something about how

this was done."

"Your question," replied the doctor, "reflects a feeling which had no

little influence during the revolutionary period to prolong the

toleration extended by the people to private capitalism despite the

mounting indignation against its enormities. A complete change of

economic systems seemed to them, as it does to you, such a colossal and

complicated undertaking that even many who ardently desired the new order

and fully believed in its feasibility when once established, shrank back

from what they apprehended would be the vast confusion and difficulty of

the transition process. Of course, the capitalists, and champions of

things as they were, made the most of this feeling, and apparently

bothered the reformers not a little by calling on them to name the

specific measures by which they would, if they had the power, proceed to

substitute for the existing system a nationalized plan of industry

managed in the equal interest of all.

"One school of revolutionists declined to formulate or suggest any

definite programme whatever for the consummating or constructive stage of

the Revolution. They said that the crisis would suggest the method for

dealing with it, and it would be foolish and fanciful to discuss the

emergency before it arose. But a good general makes plans which provide

in advance for all the main eventualities of his campaign. His plans are,

of course, subject to radical modifications or complete abandonment,

according to circumstances, but a provisional plan he ought to have. The

reply of this school of revolutionists was not, therefore, satisfactory,

and, so long as no better one could be made, a timid and conservative

community inclined to look askance at the revolutionary programme.

"Realizing the need of something more positive as a plan of campaign,

various schools of reformers suggested more or less definite schemes. One

there was which argued that the trades unions might develop strength

enough to control the great trades, and put their own elected officers in

place of the capitalists, thus organizing a sort of federation of trades

unions. This, if practicable, would have brought in a system of group

capitalism as divisive and antisocial, in the large sense, as private

capitalism itself, and far more dangerous to civil order. This idea was

later heard little of, as it became evident that the possible growth and

functions of trade unionism were very limited.

"There was another school which held that the solution was to be found by

the establishment of great numbers of voluntary colonies, organized on

co-operative principles, which by their success would lead to the

formation of more and yet more, and that, finally, when most of the

population had joined such groups they would simply coalesce and form

one. Many noble and enthusiastic souls devoted themselves to this line of

effort, and the numerous colonies that were organized in the United

States during the revolutionary period were a striking indication of the

general turning of men's hearts toward a better social order. Otherwise

such experiments led, and could lead, to nothing. Economically weak, held

together by a sentimental motive, generally composed of eccentric though

worthy persons, and surrounded by a hostile environment which had the

whole use and advantage of the social and economic machinery, it was

scarcely possible that such enterprises should come to anything practical

unless under exceptional leadership or circumstances.

"There was another school still which held that the better order was to

evolve gradually out of the old as the result of an indefinite series of

humane legislation, consisting of factory acts, short-hour laws, pensions

for the old, improved tenement houses, abolition of slums, and I don't

know how many other poultices for particular evils resultant from the

system of private capitalism. These good people argued that when at some

indefinitely remote time all the evil consequences of capitalism had been

abolished, it would be time enough and then comparatively easy to abolish

capitalism itself--that is to say, after all the rotten fruit of the evil

tree had been picked by hand, one at a time, off the branches, it would

be time enough to cut down the tree. Of course, an obvious objection to

this plan was that, so long as the tree remained standing, the evil fruit

would be likely to grow as fast as it was plucked. The various reform

measures, and many others urged by these reformers, were wholly humane

and excellent, and only to be criticised when put forward as a sufficient

method of overthrowing capitalism. They did not even tend toward such a

result, but were quite as likely to help capitalism to obtain a longer

lease of life by making it a little less abhorrent. There was really a

time after the revolutionary movement had gained considerable headway

when judicious leaders felt considerable apprehension lest it might be

diverted from its real aim, and its force wasted in this programme of

piecemeal reforms.

"But you have asked me what was the plan of operation by which the

revolutionists, when they finally came into power, actually overthrew

private capitalism. It was really as pretty an illustration of the

military manoeuvre that used to be called flanking as the history of war

contains. Now, a flanking operation is one by which an army, instead of

attacking its antagonist directly in front, moves round one of his flanks

in such a way that without striking a blow it forces the enemy to leave

his position. That is just the strategy the revolutionists used in the

final issue with capitalism.

"The capitalists had taken for granted that they were to be directly

assaulted by wholesale forcible seizure and confiscation of their

properties. Not a bit of it. Although in the end, of course, collective

ownership was wholly substituted for the private ownership of capital,

yet that was not done until after the whole system of private capitalism

had broken down and fallen to pieces, and not as a means of throwing it

down. To recur to the military illustration, the revolutionary army did

not directly attack the fortress of capitalism at all, but so manoeuvred

as to make it untenable, and to compel its evacuation.

"Of course, you will understand that this policy was not suggested by any

consideration for the rights of the capitalists. Long before this time

the people had been educated to see in private capitalism the source and

sum of all villainies, convicting mankind of deadly sin every day that it

was tolerated. The policy of indirect attack pursued by the

revolutionists was wholly dictated by the interest of the people at

large, which demanded that serious derangements of the economic system

should be, so far as possible, avoided during the transition from the old

order to the new.

"And now, dropping figures of speech, let me tell you plainly what was

done--that is, so far as I remember the story. I have made no special

study of the period since my college days, and very likely when you come

to read the histories you will find that I have made many mistakes as to

the details of the process. I am just trying to give you a general idea

of the main course of events, to the best of my remembrance. I have

already explained that the first step in the programme of political

action adopted by the opponents of private capitalism had been to induce

the people to municipalize and nationalize various quasi-public services,

such as waterworks, lighting plants, ferries, local railroads, the

telegraph and telephone systems, the general railroad system, the coal

mines and petroleum production, and the traffic in intoxicating liquors.

These being a class of enterprises partly or wholly non-competitive and

monopolistic in character, the assumption of public control over them did

not directly attack the system of production and distribution in general,

and even the timid and conservative viewed the step with little

apprehension. This whole class of natural or legal monopolies might

indeed have been taken under public management without logically

involving an assault on the system of private capitalism as a whole. Not

only was this so, but even if this entire class of businesses was made

public and run at cost, the cheapening in the cost of living to the

community thus effected would presently be swallowed up by reductions of

wages and prices, resulting from the remorseless operation of the

competitive profit system.

"It was therefore chiefly as a means to an ulterior end that the opponent

of capitalism favored the public operation of these businesses. One part

of that ulterior end was to prove to the people the superior simplicity,

efficiency, and humanity of public over private management of economic

undertakings. But the principal use which this partial process of

nationalization served was to prepare a body of public employees

sufficiently large to furnish a nucleus of consumers when the Government

should undertake the establishment of a general system of production and

distribution on a non-profit basis. The employees of the nationalized

railroads alone numbered nearly a million, and with their dependent women

and children represented some 4,000,000 people. The employees in the coal

mines, iron mines, and other businesses taken charge of by the Government

as subsidiary to the railroads, together with the telegraph and telephone

workers, also in the public service, made some hundreds of thousands more

persons with their dependents. Previous to these additions there had been

in the regular civil service of the Government nearly 250,000 persons,

and the army and navy made some 50,000 more. These groups with their

dependents amounted probably to a million more persons, who, added to the

railroad, mining, telegraph, and other employees, made an aggregate of

something like 5,000,000 persons dependent on the national employment.

Besides these were the various bodies of State and municipal employees in

all grades, from the Governors of States down to the street-cleaners.

THE PUBLIC-SERVICE STORES.

"The first step of the revolutionary party when it came to power, with

the mandate of a popular majority to bring in the new order, was to

establish in all important centers public-service stores, where public

employees could procure at cost all provisions of necessity or luxury

previously bought at private stores. The idea was the less startling for

not being wholly new. It had been the custom of various governments to

provide for certain of the needs of their soldiers and sailors by

establishing service stores at which everything was of absolutely

guaranteed quality and sold strictly at cost. The articles thus furnished

were proverbial for their cheapness and quality compared with anything

that could be bought elsewhere, and the soldier's privilege of obtaining

such goods was envied by the civilian, left to the tender mercies of the

adulterating and profit-gorging retailer. The public stores now set up by

the Government were, however, on a scale of completeness quite beyond any

previous undertakings, intended as they were to supply all the

consumption of a population large enough for a small-sized nation.

"At first the goods in these stores were of necessity bought by the

Government of the private capitalists, producers, or importers. On these

the public employee saved all the middlemen's and retailers' profits,

getting them at perhaps half or two thirds of what they must have paid at

private stores, with the guarantee, moreover, of a careful Government

inspection as to quality. But these substantial advantages were but a

foretaste of the prosperity he enjoyed when the Government added the

function of production to that of distribution, and proceeded as rapidly

as possible to manufacture products, instead of buying them of

capitalists.

"To this end great food and cotton farms were established in all sections

of the country and innumerable shops and factories started, so that

presently the Government had in public employ not only the original

5,000,000, but as many more--farmers, artisans, and laborers of all

sorts. These, of course, also had the right to be provided for at the

public stores, and the system had to be extended correspondingly. The

buyers in the public stores now saved not only the profits of the

middleman and the retailer, but those as well of the manufacturer, the

producer, and the importer.

"Still further, not only did the public stores furnish the public

employees with every kind of goods for consumption, but the Government

likewise organized all sorts of needful services, such as cooking,

laundry work, housework agencies, etc., for the exclusive benefit of

public employees--all, of course, conducted absolutely at cost. The

result was that the public employee was able to be supplied at home or in

restaurants with food prepared by the best skill out of the best material

and in the greatest possible variety, and more cheaply than he had ever

been able to provide himself with even the coarsest provisions."

"How did the Government acquire the lands and manufacturing plants it

needed?" I inquired. "Did it buy them of the owners, or as to the plants

did it build them?"

"It co

erected them without affecting the success of the programme, but that was

generally needless. As to land, the farmers by millions were only too

glad to turn over their farms to the Government and accept employment on

them, with the security of livelihood which that implied for them and

theirs. The Government, moreover, took for cultivation all unoccupied

lands that were convenient for the purpose, remitting the taxes for

compensation.

"It was much the same with the factories and shops which the national

system called for. They were standing idle by thousands in all parts of

the country, in the midst of starving populations of the unemployed. When

these plants were suited to the Government requirements they were taken

possession of, put in operation, and the former workers provided with

employment. In most instances former superintendents and foremen as well

as the main body of operatives were glad to keep their old places, with

the nation as employer. The owners of such plants, if I remember rightly,

received some allowance, equal to a very low rate of interest, for the

use of their property until such time as the complete establishment of

the new order should make the equal maintenance of all citizens the

subject of a national guarantee. That this was to be the speedy and

certain outcome of the course of events was now no longer doubted, and

pending that result the owners of idle plants were only too glad to get

anything at all for their use.

"The manufacturing plants were not the only form of idle capital which

the Government on similar terms made use of. Considerable quantities of

foreign imports were required to supply the public stores; and to avoid

the payment of profits to capitalists on these, the Government took

possession of idle shipping, building what it further needed, and went

into foreign trade, exporting products of the public industries, and

bringing home in exchange the needed foreign goods. Fishing fleets flying

the national flag also brought home the harvest of the seas. These peace

fleets soon far outnumbered the war ships which up to that time

exclusively had borne the national commission. On these fleets the sailor

was no more a slave.

HOW MONEY LOST ITS VALUE.

"And now consider the effect of another feature of the public-store

system, namely, the disuse of money in its operations. Ordinary money was

not received in the public stores, but a sort of scrip canceled on use

and good for a limited time only. The public employee had the right of

exchanging the money he received for wages, at par, into this scrip.

While the Government issued it only to public employees, it was accepted

at the public stores from any who presented it, the Government being only

careful that the total amount did not exceed the wages exchanged into

such scrip by the public employees. It thus became a currency which

commanded three, four, and five hundred per cent premium over money which

would only buy the high-priced and adulterated goods for sale in the

remaining stores of the capitalists. The gain of the premium went, of

course, to the public employees. Gold, which had been worshiped by the

capitalists as the supreme and eternal type of money, was no more

receivable than silver, copper, or paper currency at the public stores,

and people who desired the best goods were fortunate to find a public

employee foolish enough to accept three or four dollars in gold for one

in scrip.

"The effect to make money a drug in the market, of this sweeping

reduction in its purchasing utility, was greatly increased by its

practically complete disuse by the large and ever-enlarging proportion of

the people in the public service. The demand for money was still further

lessened by the fact that nobody wanted to borrow it now for use in

extending business, seeing that the field of enterprise open to private

capital was shrinking every hour, and evidently destined presently to

disappear. Neither did any one desire money to hoard it, for it was more

evident every day that it would soon become worthless. I have spoken of

the public-store scrip commanding several hundred per cent premium over

money, but that was in the earlier stages of the transition period.

Toward the last the premium mounted to ever-dizzier altitudes, until the

value of money quite disappeared, it being literally good for nothing as

money.

"If you would imagine the complete collapse of the entire monetary and

financial system with all its standards and influences upon human

relations and conditions, you have only to fancy what the effect would

have been upon the same interests and relations in your day if positive

and unquestioned information had become general that the world was to be

destroyed within a few weeks or months, or at longest within a year. In

this case indeed the world was not to be destroyed, but to be rejuvenated

and to enter on an incomparably higher and happier and more vigorous

phase of evolution; but the effect on the monetary system and all

dependent on it was quite the same as if the world were to come to an

end, for the new world would have no use for money, nor recognize any

human rights or relations as measured by it."

"It strikes me," said I, "that as money grew valueless the public taxes

must have failed to bring in anything to support the Government."

"Taxes," replied the doctor, "were an incident of private capitalism and

were to pass away with it. Their use had been to give the Government a

means of commanding labor under the money system. In proportion as the

nation collectively organized and directly applied the whole labor of the

people as the public welfare required it, had no need and could make no

use of taxes any more than of money in other respects. Taxation went to

pieces in the culminating stage of the Revolution, in measure as the

organization of the capital and labor of the people for public purposes

put an end to its functions."

HOW THE REST OF THE PEOPLE CAME IN.

"It seems to me that about this time, if not before, the mass of the

people outside of the public service must have begun to insist pretty

loudly upon being let in to share these good things."

"Of course they did," replied the doctor; "and of course that was just

what they were expected to do and what it had been arranged they should

do as soon as the nationalized system of production and distribution was

in full running order. The previously existing body of public employees

had merely been utilized as furnishing a convenient nucleus of consumers

to start with, which might be supplied without deranging meantime any

more than necessary the outside wage or commodity markets. As soon as the

system was in working order the Government undertook to receive into the

public service not merely selected bodies of workers, but all who

applied. From that time the industrial army received its recruits by tens

and fifties of thousands a day till within a brief time the people as a

whole were in the public service.

"Of course, everybody who had an occupation or trade was kept right on at

it at the place where he had formerly been employed, and the labor

exchanges, already in full use, managed the rest. Later on, when all was

going smoothly, would be time enough for the changings and shiftings

about that would seem desirable."

"Naturally," I said, "under the operation of the public employment

programme, the working people must have been those first brought into the

system, and the rich and well-to-do must probably have remained outside

longest, and come in, so to speak, all in a batch, when they did."

"Evidently so," replied the doctor. "Of course, the original nucleus of

public employees, for whom the public stores were first opened, were all

working people, and so were the bodies of people successively taken into

the public service, as farmers, artisans, and tradesmen of all sorts.

There was nothing to prevent a capitalist from joining the service, but

he could do so only as a worker on a par with the others. He could buy in

the public stores only to the extent of his pay as a worker. His other

money would not be good there. There were many men and women of the rich

who, in the humane enthusiasm of the closing days of the Revolution,

abandoned their lands and mills to the Government and volunteered in the

public service at anything that could be given them to do; but on the

whole, as might be expected, the idea of going to work for a living on an

economic equality with their former servants was not one that the rich

welcomed, and they did not come to it till they had to."

"And were they then, at last, enlisted by force?" I asked.

"By force!" exclaimed the doctor; "dear me! no. There was no sort of

constraint brought to bear upon them any more than upon anybody else,

save that created by the growing difficulty and final impossibility of

hiring persons for private employment, or obtaining the necessities of

life except from the public stores with the new scrip. Before the

Government entered on the policy of receiving into the public service

every one who applied, the unemployed had thronged upon the capitalists,

seeking to be hired. But immediately afterward the rich began to find it

impossible to obtain men and women to serve them in field, factory, or

kitchen. They could offer no inducements in the depreciated money which

alone they possessed that were enough to counterbalance the advantages of

the public service. Everybody knew also that there was no future for the

wealthy class, and nothing to be gained through their favor.

"Moreover, as you may imagine, there was already a strong popular feeling

of contempt for those who would abase themselves to serve others for hire

when they might serve the nation of which they were citizens; and, as you

may well imagine, this growing sentiment made the position of a private

servant or employee of any sort intolerable. And not only did the

unfortunate capitalists find it impossible to induce people to cook for

them, wash for them, to black their boots, to sweep their rooms, or drive

their coaches, but they were put to straits to obtain in the dwindling

private markets, where alone their money was good, the bare necessities

of life, and presently found even that impossible. For a while, it would

seem, they struggled against a relentless fate, sullenly supporting life

on crusts in the corners of their lonesome palaces; but at last, of

course, they all had to follow their former servants into the new nation,

for there was no way of living save by connection with the national

economic organization. Thus strikingly was illustrated, in the final exit

of the capitalists from the human stage, how absolute was and always had

been the dependence of capital upon the labor it despised and tyrannized

over."

"And do I understand that there was no compulsion upon anybody to join

the public service?"

"None but what was inherent in the circumstances I have named," replied

the doctor. "The new order had no need or use for unwilling recruits. In

fact, it needed no one, but every one needed it. If any one did not wish

to enter the public service and could live outside of it without stealing

or begging, he was quite welcome to. The books say that the woods were

full of self-exiled hermits for a while, but one by one they tired of it

and came into the new social house. Some isolated communities, however,

remained outside for years."

"The mill seems, indeed, to have been calculated to grind to an exceeding

fineness all opposition to the new order," I observed, "and yet it must

have had its own difficulties, too, in the natural refractoriness of the

materials it had to make grist of. Take, for example, my own class of the

idle rich, the men and women whose only business had been the pursuit of

pleasure. What useful work could have been got out of such people as we

were, however well disposed we might have become to render service? Where

could we have been fitted into any sort of industrial service without

being more hindrance than help?"

"The problem might have been serious if the idle rich of whom you speak

had been a very large proportion of the population, but, of course,

though very much in evidence, they were in numbers insignificant compared

with the mass of useful workers. So far as they were educated

persons--and quite generally they had some smattering of knowledge--there

was an ample demand for their services as teachers. Of course, they were

not trained teachers, or capable of good pedagogical work; but directly

after the Revolution, when the children and youth of the former poor were

turned back by millions from the field and factories to the schools, and

when the adults also of the working classes passionately demanded some

degree of education to correspond with the improved conditions of life

they had entered on, there was unlimited call for the services as

instructors of everybody who was able to teach anything, even one of the

primary branches, spelling, writing, geography, or arithmetic in the

rudiments. The women of the former wealthy class, being mostly well

educated, found in this task of teaching the children of the masses, the

new heirs of the world, an employment in which I fancy they must have

tasted more real happiness in the feeling of being useful to their kind

than all their former frivolous existences could have given them. Few,

indeed, were there of any class who did not prove to have some physical

or mental quality by which they might with pleasure to themselves be

serviceable to their kind."

WHAT WAS DONE WITH THE VICIOUS AND CRIMINAL.

"There was another class of my contemporaries," I said, "which I fancy

must have given the new order more trouble to make anything out of than

the rich, and those were the vicious and criminal idle. The rich were at

least intelligent and fairly well behaved, and knew enough to adapt

themselves to a new state of things and make the best of the inevitable,

but these others must have been harder to deal with. There was a great

floating population of vagabond criminals, loafers, and vicious of every

class, male and female, in my day, as doubtless you well know. Admit that

our vicious form of society was responsible for them; nevertheless, there

they were, for the new society to deal with. To all intents and purposes

they were dehumanized, and as dangerous as wild beasts. They were barely

kept in some sort of restraint by an army of police and the weapons of

criminal law, and constituted a permanent menace to law and order. At

times of unusual agitation, and especially at all revolutionary crises,

they were wont to muster in alarming force and become aggressive. At the

crisis you are describing they must doubtless have made themselves

extremely turbulent. What did the new order do with them? Its just and

humane propositions would scarcely appeal to the members of the criminal

class. They were not reasonable beings; they preferred to live by lawless

violence, rather than by orderly industry, on terms however just. Surely

the new nation must have found this class of citizens a very tough morsel

for its digestion."

"Not nearly so tough," replied the doctor, "as the former society had

found it. In the first place, the former society, being itself based on

injustice, was wholly without moral prestige or ethical authority in

dealing with the criminal and lawless classes. Society itself stood

condemned in their presence for the injustice which had been the

provocation and excuse of their revolt. This was a fact which made the

whole machinery of so-called criminal justice in your day a mockery.

Every intelligent man knew in his heart that the criminal and vicious

were, for the most part, what they were on account of neglect and

injustice, and an environment of depraving influences for which a

defective social order was responsible, and that if righteousness were

done, society, instead of judging them, ought to stand with them in the

dock before a higher justice, and take upon itself the heavier

condemnation. This the criminals themselves felt in the bottom of their

hearts, and that feeling forbade them to respect the law they feared.

They felt that the society which bade them reform was itself in yet

greater need of reformation. The new order, on the other hand, held forth

to the outcasts hands purged of guilt toward them. Admitting the wrong

that they had suffered in the past, it invited them to a new life under

new conditions, offering them, on just and equal terms, their share in

the social heritage. Do you suppose that there ever was a human heart so

base that it did not at least know the difference between justice and

injustice, and to some extent respond to it?

"A surprising number of the cases you speak of, who had been given up as

failures by your civilization, while in fact they had been proofs of its

failure, responded with alacrity to the first fair opportunity to be

decent men and women which had ever come to them. There was, of course, a

large residuum too hopelessly perverted, too congenitally deformed, to

have the power of leading a good life, however assisted. Toward these the

new society, strong in the perfect justice of its attitude, proceeded

with merciful firmness. The new society was not to tolerate, as the old

had done, a criminal class in its midst any more than a destitute class.

The old society never had any moral right to forbid stealing or to punish

robbers, for the whole economic system was based on the appropriation, by

force or fraud on the part of a few, of the earth and its resources and

the fruit of the toil of the poor. Still less had it any right to forbid

beggary or to punish violence, seeing that the economic system which it

maintained and defended necessarily operated to make beggars and to

provoke violence. But the new order, guaranteeing an equality of plenty

to all, left no plea for the thief and robber, no excuse for the beggar,

no provocation for the violent. By preferring their evil courses to the

fair and honorable life offered them, such persons would henceforth

pronounce sentence on themselves as unfit for human intercourse. With a

good conscience, therefore, the new society proceeded to deal with all

vicious and criminal persons as morally insane, and to segregate them in

places of confinement, there to spend their lives--not, indeed, under

punishment, or enduring hardships of any sort beyond enough labor for

self-support, but wholly secluded from the world--and absolutely

prevented from continuing their kind. By this means the race, in the

first generation after the Revolution, was able to leave behind itself

forever a load of inherited depravity and base congenital instincts, and

so ever since it has gone on from generation to generation, purging

itself of its uncleanness."

THE COLORED RACE AND THE NEW ORDER.

"In my day," I said, "a peculiar complication of the social problem in

America was the existence in the Southern States of many millions of

recently freed negro slaves, but partially as yet equal to the

responsibility of freedom. I should be interested to know just how the

new order adapted itself to the condition of the colored race in the

South."

"It proved," replied the doctor, "the prompt solution of a problem which

otherwise might have continued indefinitely to plague the American

people. The population of recent slaves was in need of some sort of

industrial regimen, at once firm and benevolent, administered under

conditions which should meanwhile tend to educate, refine, and elevate

its members. These conditions the new order met with ideal perfection.

The centralized discipline of the national industrial army, depending for

its enforcement not so much on force as on the inability of any one to

subsist outside of the system of which it was a part, furnished just the

sort of a control--gentle yet resistless--which was needed by the

recently emancipated bondsman. On the other hand, the universal education

and the refinements and amenities of life which came with the economic

welfare presently brought to all alike by the new order, meant for the

colored race even more as a civilizing agent than it did to the white

population which relatively had been further advanced."

"There would have been in some parts," I remarked, "a strong prejudice on

the part of the white population against any system which compelled a

closer commingling of the races."

"So we read, but there was absolutely nothing in the new system to offend

that prejudice. It related entirely to economic organization, and had

nothing more to do then than it has now with social relations. Even for

industrial purposes the new system involved no more commingling of races

than the old had done. It was perfectly consistent with any degree of

race separation in industry which the most bigoted local prejudices might

demand."

HOW THE TRANSITION MIGHT HAVE BEEN HASTENED.

"There is just one point about the transition stage that I want to go

back to," I said. "In the actual case, as you have stated it, it seems

that the capitalists held on to their capital and continued to conduct

business as long as they could induce anybody to work for them or buy of

them. I suppose that was human nature--capitalist human nature anyway;

but it was also convenient for the Revolution, for this course gave time

to get the new economic system perfected as a framework before the strain

of providing for the whole people was thrown on it. But it was just

possible, I suppose, that the capitalists might have taken a different

course. For example, suppose, from the moment the popular majority gave

control of the national Government to the revolutionists the capitalists

had with one accord abandoned their functions and refused to do business

of any kind. This, mind you, would have been before the Government had

any time to organize even the beginnings of the new system. That would

have made a more difficult problem to deal with, would it not?"

"I do not think that the problem would have been more difficult," replied

the doctor, "though it would have called for more prompt and summary

action. The Government would have had two things to do and to do at once:

on the one hand, to take up and carry on the machinery of productive

industry abandoned by the capitalists, and simultaneously to provide

maintenance for the people pending the time when the new product should

become available. I suppose that as to the matter of providing for the

maintenance of the people the action taken would be like that usually

followed by a government when by flood, famine, siege, or other sudden

emergency the livelihood of a whole community has been endangered. No

doubt the first step would have been to requisition, for public use all

stores of grain, clothing, shoes, and commodities in general throughout

the country, excepting of course reasonable stocks in strictly private

use. There was always in any civilized country a supply ahead of these

necessities sufficient for several months or a year which would be many

times more than would be needful to bridge over the gap between the

stoppage of the wheels of production under private management and their

getting into full motion under public administration. Orders on the

public stores for food and clothing would have been issued to all

citizens making application and enrolling themselves in the public

industrial service. Meanwhile the Government would have immediately

resumed the operation of the various productive enterprises abandoned by

the capitalists. Everybody previously employed in them would simply have

kept on, and employment would have been as rapidly as possible provided

for those who had formerly been without it. The new product, as fast as

made, would be turned into the public stores and the process would, in

fact, have been just the same as that I have described, save that it

would have gone through in much quicker time. If it did not go quite so

smoothly on account of the necessary haste, on the other hand it would

have been done with sooner, and at most we can hardly imagine that the

inconvenience and hardship to the people would have been greater than

resulted from even a mild specimen of the business crises which your

contemporaries thought necessary every seven years, and toward the last

of the old order became perpetual.

HOW CAPITALIST COERCION OF EMPLOYEES WAS MET.

"Your question, however," continued the doctor, "reminds me of another

point which I had forgotten to mention--namely, the provisional methods

of furnishing employment for the unemployed before the organization of

the complete national system of industry. What your contemporaries were

pleased to call 'the problem of the unemployed'--namely, the necessary

effect of the profit system to create and perpetuate an unemployed

class--had been increasing in magnitude from the beginning of the

revolutionary period, and toward the close of the century the involuntary

idlers were numbered by millions. While this state of things on the one

hand furnished a powerful argument for the revolutionary propaganda by

the object lesson it furnished of the incompetence of private capitalism

to solve the problem of national maintenance, on the other hand, in

proportion as employment became hard to get, the hold of the employers

over the actual and would-be employees became strengthened. Those who had

employment and feared to lose it, and those who had it not but hoped to

get it, became, through fear and hope, very puppets in the hands of the

employing class and cast their votes at their bidding. Election after

election was carried in this way by the capitalists through their power

to compel the workingman to vote the capitalist ticket against his own

convictions, from the fear of losing or hope of obtaining an opportunity

to work.

"This was the situation which made it necessary previous to the conquest

of the General Government by the revolutionary party, in order that the

workingmen should be made free to vote for their own deliverance, that at

least a provisional system of employment should be established whereby

the wage-earner might be insured a livelihood when unable to find a

private employer.

"In different States of the Union, as the revolutionary party came into

power, slightly different methods were adopted for meeting this

emergency. The crude and wasteful makeshift of indiscriminate employment

on public works, which had been previously adopted by governments in

dealing with similar emergencies, would not stand the criticism of the

new economic science. A more intelligent method was necessary and easily

found. The usual plan, though varied in different localities, was for the

State to guarantee to every citizen who applied therefor the means of

maintenance, to be paid for in his or her labor, and to be taken in the

form of commodities and lodgings, these commodities and lodgings being

themselves produced and maintained by the sum of the labor of those, past

and present, who shared them. The necessary imported commodities or raw

materials were obtained by the sale of the excess of product at market

rates, a special market being also found in the consumption of the State

prisons, asylums, etc. This system, whereby the State enabled the

otherwise unemployed mutually to maintain themselves by merely furnishing

the machinery and superintendence, came very largely into use to meet the

emergencies of the transition period, and played an important part in

preparing the people for the new order, of which it was in an imperfect

way a sort of anticipation. In some of these State establishments for the

unemployed the circle of industries was remarkably complete, and the

whole product of their labor above expenses being shared among the

workers, they enjoyed far better fare than when in private employment,

together with a sense of security then impossible. The employer's power

to control his workmen by the threat of discharge was broken from the

time these co-operative systems began to be established, and when, later,

the national industrial organization was ready to absorb them, they

merely melted into it."

HOW ABOUT THE WOMEN?

"How about the women?" I said. "Do I understand that, from the first

organization of the industrial public service on a complete scale, the

women were expected, like the men, if physically able, to take their

places in the ranks?"

"Where women were sufficiently employed already in housework in their own

families," replied the doctor, "they were recognized as rendering public

service until the new co-operative housekeeping was sufficiently

systematized to do away with the necessity of separate kitchens and other

elaborate domestic machinery for each family. Otherwise, except as

occasions for exemption existed, women took their place from the

beginning of the new order as units in the industrial state on the same

basis with men.

"If the Revolution had come a hundred years before, when as yet women had

no other vocation but housework, the change in customs might have been a

striking one, but already at that time women had made themselves a place

in the industrial and business world, and by the time the Revolution came

it was rather exceptional when unmarried women not of the rich and idle

class did not have some regular occupation outside the home. In

recognizing women as equally eligible and liable to public service with

men, the new order simply confirmed to the women workers the independence

they had already won."

"But how about the married women?"

"Of course," replied the doctor, "there would be considerable periods

during which married women and mothers would naturally be wholly exempt

from the performance of any public duty. But except at such times there

seems to be nothing in the nature of the sexual relation constituting a

reason why a married woman should lead a more secluded and useless life

than a man. In this matter of the place of women under the new order, you

must understand that it was the women themselves, rather than the men,

who insisted that they must share in full the duties as well as the

privileges of citizenship. The men would not have demanded it of them. In

this respect you must remember that during its whole course the

Revolution had been contemporary with a movement for the enlargement and

greater freedom of women's lives, and their equalization as to rights and

duties with men. The women, married as well as unmarried, had become

thoroughly tired of being effaced, and were in full revolt against the

headship of man. If the Revolution had not guaranteed the equality and

comradeship with him which she was fast conquering under the old order,

it could never have counted on her support."

"But how about the care of children, of the home, etc.?"

"Certainly the mothers could have been trusted to see that nothing

interfered with the welfare of their children, nor was there anything in

the public service expected of them that need do so. There is nothing in

the maternal function which establishes such a relation between mother

and child as need permanently interfere with her performance of social

and public duties, nor indeed does it appear that it was allowed to do so

in your day by women of sufficient economic means to command needed

assistance. The fact that women of the masses so often found it necessary

to abandon an independent existence, and cease to live any more for

themselves the moment they had children, was simply a mark of the

imperfection of your social arrangements, and not a natural or moral

necessity. So, too, as to what you call caring for a home. As soon as

co-operative methods were applied to housekeeping, and its various

departments were systematized as branches of the public service, the

former housewife had perforce to find another vocation in order to keep

herself busy."

THE LODGINGS QUESTION.

"Talking about housework," I said, "how did they manage about houses?

There were, of course, not enough good lodgings to go around, now that

all were economic equals. How was it settled who should have the good

houses and who the poor?"

"As I have said," replied the doctor, "the controlling idea of the

revolutionary policy at the climax of the Revolution was not to

complicate the general readjustment by making any changes at that time

not necessary to its main purpose. For the vast number of the badly

housed the building of better houses was one of the first and greatest

tasks of the nation. As to the habitable houses, they were all assessed

at a graduated rental according to size and desirability, which their

former occupants, if they desired to keep them, were expected to pay out

of their new incomes as citizens. For a modest house the rent was

nominal, but for a great house--one of the palaces of the millionaires,

for instance--the rent was so large that no individual could pay it, and

indeed no individual without a host of servants would be able to occupy

it, and these, of course, he had no means of employing. Such buildings

had to be used as hotels, apartment houses, or for public purposes. It

would appear that nobody changed dwellings except the very poor, whose

houses were unfit for habitation, and the very rich, who could make no

use of their former habitation under the changed condition of things."

WHEN ECONOMIC EQUALITY WAS FULLY REALIZED.

"There is one point not quite clear in my mind," I said, "and that is

just when the guarantee of equal maintenance for all citizens went into

effect."

"I suppose," replied the doctor, "that it must have been when, after the

final collapse of what was left of private capitalism, the nation assumed

the responsibility of providing for all the people. Until then the

organization of the public service had been on the wage basis, which

indeed was the only practicable way of initiating the plan of universal

public employment while yet the mass of business was conducted by the

capitalists, and the new and rising system had to be accommodated at so

many points to the existing order of things. The tremendous rate at which

the membership of the national industrial army was growing from week to

week during the transition period would have made it impossible to find

any basis of equal distribution that would hold good for a fortnight. The

policy of the Government had, however, been to prepare the workers for

equal sharing by establishing, as far as possible, a level wage for all

kinds of public employees. This it was possible to do, owing to the

cheapening of all sorts of commodities by the abolition of profits,

without reducing any one's income.

"For example, suppose one workman had received two dollars a day, and

another a dollar and a half. Owing to the cheapening of goods in the

public stores, these wages presently purchased twice as much as before.

But, instead of permitting the virtual increase of wages to operate by

multiplication, so as to double the original discrepancy between the pay

of the two, it was applied by equal additions to the account of each.

While both alike were better off than before, the disproportion in their

welfare was thus reduced. Nor could the one previously more highly paid

object to this as unfair, because the increased value of his wages was

not the result of his own efforts, but of the new public organization,

from which he could only ask an equal benefit with all others. Thus by

the time the nation was ready for equal sharing, a substantially level

wage, secured by leveling up, not leveling down, had already been

established. As to the high salaries of special employees, out of all

proportion to workmen's wages, which obtained under private capitalism,

they were ruthlessly cut down in the public service from the inception of

the revolutionary policy.

"But of course the most radical innovation in establishing universal

economic equality was not the establishment of a level wage as between

the workers, but the admission of the entire population, both of workers

and of those unable to work or past the working age, to an equal share in

the national product. During the transition period the Government had of

necessity proceeded like a capitalist in respect to recognizing and

dealing only with effective workers. It took no more cognizance of the

existence of the women, except when workers, or the children, or the old,

or the infirm, crippled, or sick, or other dependents on the workers than

the capitalists had been in the habit of doing. But when the nation

gathered into its hands the entire economic resources of the country it

proceeded to administer them on the principle--proclaimed, indeed, in the

great Declaration, but practically mocked by the former republic--that

all human beings have an equal right to liberty, life, and happiness, and

that governments rightfully exist only for the purpose of making good

that right--a principle of which the first practical consequence ought to

be the guarantee to all on equal terms of the economic basis. Thenceforth

all adult persons who could render any useful service to the nation were

required to do so if they desired to enjoy the benefits of the economic

system; but all who acknowledged the new order, whether they were able or

unable to render any economic service, received an equal share with all

others of the national product, and such provision was made for the needs

of children as should absolutely safeguard their interests from the

neglect or caprice of selfish parents.

"Of course, the immediate effect must have been that the active workers

received a less income than when they had been the only sharers; but if

they had been good men and distributed their wages as they ought among

those dependent on them, they still had for their personal use quite as

much as before. Only those wage-earners who had formerly had none

dependent on them or had neglected them suffered any curtailment of

income, and they deserved to. But indeed there was no question of

curtailment for more than a very short time for any; for, as soon as the

now completed economic organization was fairly in motion, everybody was

kept too busy devising ways to expend his or her own allowance to give

any thought to that of others. Of course, the equalizing of the economic

maintenance of all on the basis of citizenship put a final end to the

employment of private servants, even if the practice had lasted till

then, which is doubtful; for if any one desired a personal servant he

must henceforth pay him as much as he could receive in the public

service, which would be equivalent to the whole income of the would-be

employer, leaving him nothing for himself."

THE FINAL SETTLEMENT WITH THE CAPITALISTS.

"There is one point," I said, "on which I should like to be a little more

clearly informed. When the nation finally took possession absolutely in

perpetuity of all the lands, machinery, and capital after the final

collapse of private capitalism, there must have been doubtless some sort

of final settling and balancing of accounts between the people and the

capitalists whose former properties had been nationalized. How was that

managed? What was the basis of final settlement?"

"The people waived a settlement," replied the doctor. "The guillotine,

the gallows, and the firing platoon played no part in the consummation of

the great Revolution. During the previous phases of the revolutionary

agitation there had indeed been much bitter talk of the reckoning which

the people in the hour of their triumph would demand of the capitalists

for the cruel past; but when the hour of triumph came, the enthusiasm of

humanity which glorified it extinguished the fires of hate and took away

all desire of barren vengeance. No, there was no settlement demanded; the

people forgave the past."

"Doctor," I said, "you have sufficiently--in fact,

overwhelmingly--answered my question, and all the more so because you did

not catch my meaning. Remember that I represent the mental and moral

condition of the average American capitalist in 1887. What I meant was to

inquire what compensation the people made to the capitalists for

nationalizing what had been their property. Evidently, however, from the

twentieth-century point of view, if there were to be any final settlement

between the people and the capitalists it was the former who had the bill

to present."

"I rather pride myself," replied the doctor, "in keeping track of your

point of view and distinguishing it from ours, but I confess that time I

fairly missed the cue. You see, as we look back upon the Revolution, one

of its most impressive features seems to be the vast magnanimity of the

people at the moment of their complete triumph in according a free

quittance to their former oppressors.

"Do you not see that if private capitalism was right, then the Revolution

was wrong; but, on the other hand, if the Revolution was right, then

private capitalism was wrong, and the greatest wrong that ever existed;

and in that case it was the capitalists who owed reparation to the people

they had wronged, rather than the people who owed compensation to the

capitalists for taking from them the means of that wrong? For the people

to have consented on any terms to buy their freedom from their former

masters would have been to admit the justice of their former bondage.

When insurgent slaves triumph, they are not in the habit of paying their

former masters the price of the shackles and fetters they have broken;

the masters usually consider themselves fortunate if they do not have

their heads broken with them. Had the question of compensating the

capitalists been raised at the time we are speaking of, it would have

been an unfortunate issue for them. To their question, Who was to pay

them for what the people had taken from them? the response would have

been, Who was to pay the people for what the capitalist system had taken

from them and their ancestors, the light of life and liberty and

happiness which it had shut off from unnumbered generations? That was an

accounting which would have gone so deep and reached back so far that the

debtors might well be glad to waive it. In taking possession of the earth

and all the works of man that stood upon it, the people were but

reclaiming their own heritage and the work of their own hands, kept back

from them by fraud. When the rightful heirs come to their own, the unjust

stewards who kept them out of their inheritance may deem themselves

mercifully dealt with if the new masters are willing to let bygones be

bygones.

"But while the idea of compensating the capitalists for putting an end to

their oppression would have been ethically absurd, you will scarcely get

a full conception of the situation without considering that any such

compensation was in the nature of the case impossible. To have

compensated the capitalists in any practical way--that is, any way which

would have preserved to them under the new order any economic equivalent

for their former holdings--would have necessarily been to set up private

capitalism over again in the very act of destroying it, thus defeating

and stultifying the Revolution in the moment of its triumph.

"You see that this last and greatest of revolutions in the nature of the

case absolutely differed from all former ones in the finality and

completeness of its work. In all previous instances in which governments

had abolished or converted to public use forms of property in the hands

of citizens it had been possible to compensate them in some other kind of

property through which their former economic advantage should be

perpetuated under a different form. For example, in condemning lands it

was possible to pay for them in money, and in abolishing property in men

it was possible to pay for the slaves, so that the previous superiority

or privilege held by the property owner was not destroyed outright, but

merely translated, so to speak, into other terms. But the great

Revolution, aiming as it did at the final destruction of all forms of

advantage, dominion, or privilege among men, left no guise or mode

possible under which the capitalist could continue to exercise his former

superiority. All the modes under which in past time men had exercised

dominion over their fellows had been by one revolution after another

reduced to the single form of economic superiority, and now that this

last incarnation of the spirit of selfish dominion was to perish there

was no further refuge for it. The ultimate mask torn off, it was left to

wither in the face of the sun."

"Your explanation leaves me nothing further to ask as to the matter of a

final settling between the people and the capitalists," I said. "Still, I

have understood that in the first steps toward the substitution of public

business management for private capitalism, consisting in the

nationalizing or municipalizing of quasi-public services, such as gas

works, railroads, telegraphs, etc., some theory of compensation was

followed. Public opinion, at that stage not having accepted the whole

revolutionary programme, must probably have insisted upon this practice.

Just when was it discontinued?'

"You will readily perceive," replied the doctor, "that in measure as it

became generally recognized that economic equality was at hand, it began

to seem farcical to pay the capitalists for their possessions in forms of

wealth which must presently, as all knew, become valueless. So it was

that, as the Revolution approached its consummation, the idea of buying

the capitalists out gave place to plans for safeguarding them from

unnecessary hardships pending the transition period. All the businesses

of the class you speak of which were taken over by the people in the

early stages of the revolutionary agitation, were paid for in money or

bonds, and usually at prices most favorable to the capitalists. As to the

greater plants, which were taken over later, such as railroads and the

mines, a different course was followed. By the time public opinion was

ripe for these steps, it began to be recognized by the dullest that it

was possible, even if not probable, that the revolutionary programme

would go completely through, and all forms of monetary value or

obligation become waste paper. With this prospect the capitalists owning

the properties were naturally not particularly desirous of taking

national bonds for them which would have been the natural form of

compensation had they been bought outright. Even if the capitalists had

been willing to take the bonds, the people would never have consented to

increase the public debt by the five or six billions of bonds that would

have been necessary to carry out the purchase. Neither the railroads nor

the mines were therefore purchased at all. It was their management, not

their ownership, which had excited the public indignation and created the

demand for their nationalization. It was their management, therefore,

which was nationalized, their ownership remaining undisturbed.

"That is to say, the Government, on the high ground of public policy and

for the correction of grievances that had become intolerable, assumed the

exclusive and perpetual management and operation of the railroad lines.

An honest valuation of the plants having been made, the earnings, if any,

up to a reasonable percentage, were paid over to the security holders.

This arrangement answered the purpose of delivering the people and the

security holders alike from the extortions and mismanagement of the

former private operators, and at the same time brought a million railroad

employees into the public service and the enjoyment of all its benefits

quite as effectively as if the lines had been bought outright. A similar

plan was followed with the coal and other mines. This combination of

private ownership with public management continued until, the Revolution

having been consummated, all the capital of the country was nationalized

by comprehensive enactment.

"The general principle which governed the revolutionary policy in dealing

with property owners of all sorts was that while the distribution of

property was essentially unjust and existing property rights morally

invalid, and as soon as possible a wholly new system should be

established, yet that, until the new system of property could as a whole

replace the existing one, the legal rights of property owners ought to be

respected, and when overruled in the public interest proper provision

should be made to prevent hardship. The means of private maintenance

should not, that is to say, be taken away from any one until the

guarantee of maintenance from public sources could take its place. The

application of this principle by the revolutionists seems to have been

extremely logical, clean cut, and positive. The old law of property, bad

as it was, they did not aim to abolish in the name of license,

spoliation, and confusion, but in the name of a stricter and more logical

as well as more righteous law. In the most nourishing days of capitalism,

stealing, so called, was never repressed more sternly than up to the very

eve of the complete introduction of the new system.

"To sum up the case in a word," I suggested, "it seems that in passing

from the old order into the new it necessarily fared with the rich as it

did when they passed out of this world into the next. In one case, as in

the other, they just absolutely had to leave their money behind them."

"The illustration is really very apt," laughed the doctor, "except in one

important particular. It has been rumored that the change which Dives

made from this world to the next was an unhappy one for him; but within

half a dozen years after the new economic system had been in operation

there was not an ex-millionaire of the lot who was not ready to admit

that life had been made as much better worth living for him and his class

as for the rest of the community."

"Did the new order get into full running condition so quickly as that?" I

asked.

"Of course, it could not get into perfect order as you see it now for

many years. The _personnel_ of any community is the prime factor in

its economic efficiency, and not until the first generation born under

the new order had come to maturity--a generation of which every member

had received the highest intellectual and industrial training--did the

economic order fully show what it was capable of. But not ten nor two

years had elapsed from the time when the national Government took all the

people into employment on the basis of equal sharing in the product

before the system showed results which overwhelmed the world with

amazement. The partial system of public industries and public stores

which the Government had already undertaken had given the people some

intimation of the cheapening of products and improvement in their quality

which might follow from the abolition of profits even under a wage

system, but not until the entire economic system had been nationalized

and all co-operated for a common weal was it possible completely to pool

the product and share it equally. No previous experience had therefore

prepared the public for the prodigious efficiency of the new economic

enginery. The people had thought the reformers made rather large promises

as to what the new system would do in the way of wealth-making, but now

they charged them of keeping back the truth. And yet the result was one

that need not have surprised any one who had taken the trouble to

calculate the economic effect of the change in systems. The incalculable

increase of wealth which but for the profit system the great inventions

of the century would long before have brought the world, was being reaped

in a long-postponed but overwhelming harvest.

"The difficulty under the profit system had been to avoid producing too

much; the difficulty under the equal sharing system was how to produce

enough. The smallness of demand had before limited supply, but supply had

now set to it an unlimited task. Under private capitalism demand had been

a dwarf and lame at that, and yet this cripple had been pace-maker for

the giant production. National cooperation had put wings on the dwarf and

shod the cripple with Mercury's sandals. Henceforth the giant would need

all his strength, all his thews of steel and sinews of brass even, to

keep him in sight as he flitted on before.

"It would be difficult to give you an idea of the tremendous burst of

industrial energy with which the rejuvenated nation on the morrow of the

Revolution threw itself into the task of uplifting the welfare of all

classes to a level where the former rich man might find in sharing the

common lot nothing to regret. Nothing like the Titanic achievement by

which this result was effected had ever before been known in human

history, and nothing like it seems likely ever to occur again. In the

past there had not been work enough for the people. Millions, some rich,

some poor, some willingly, some unwillingly, had always been idle, and

not only that, but half the work that was done was wasted in competition

or in producing luxuries to gratify the secondary wants of the few, while

yet the primary wants of the mass remained unsatisfied. Idle machinery

equal to the power of other millions of men, idle land, idle capital of

every sort, mocked the need of the people. Now, all at once there were

not hands enough in the country, wheels enough in the machinery, power

enough in steam and electricity, hours enough in the day, days enough in

the week, for the vast task of preparing the basis of a comfortable

existence for all. For not until all were well-to-do, well housed, well

clothed, well fed, might any be so under the new order of things.

"It is said that in the first full year after the new order was

established the total product of the country was tripled, and in the

second the first year's product was doubled, and every bit of it

consumed.

"While, of course, the improvement in the material welfare of the nation

was the most notable feature in the first years after the Revolution,

simply because it was the place at which any improvement must begin, yet

the ennobling and softening of manners and the growth of geniality in

social intercourse are said to have been changes scarcely less notable.

While the class differences inherited from the former order in point of

habits, education, and culture must, of course, continue to mark and in a

measure separate the members of the generation then on the stage, yet the

certain knowledge that the basis of these differences had passed away

forever, and that the children of all would mingle not only upon terms of

economic equality, but of moral, intellectual, and social sympathy, and

entire community of interest, seems to have had a strong anticipatory

influence in bringing together in a sentiment of essential brotherhood

those who were too far on in life to expect to see the full promise of

the Revolution realized.

"One other matter is worth speaking of, and that is the effect almost at

once of the universal and abounding material prosperity which the nation

had entered on to make the people forget all about the importance they

had so lately attached to petty differences in pay and wages and salary.

In the old days of general poverty, when a sufficiency was so hard to

come by, a difference in wages of fifty cents or a dollar had seemed so

great to the artisan that it was hard for him to accept the idea of an

economic equality in which such important distinctions should disappear.

It was quite natural that it should be so. Men fight for crusts when they

are starving, but they do not quarrel over bread at a banquet table.

Somewhat so it befell when in the years after the Revolution material

abundance and all the comforts of life came to be a matter of course for

every one, and storing for the future was needless. Then it was that the

hunger motive died out of human nature and covetousness as to material

things, mocked to death by abundance, perished by atrophy, and the

motives of the modern worker, the love of honor, the joy of beneficence,

the delight of achievement, and the enthusiasm of humanity, became the

impulses of the economic world. Labor was glorified, and the cringing

wage-slave of the nineteenth century stood forth transfigured as the

knight of humanity."

Equality(#7303) · 第 37 / 38 章