But the guards were making a systematic search, each one following a cane row to the end of the field. The hunted man saw a guard approaching and rolled between the cane stalks into the next row. It was his only chance and he glanced hurriedly up and down the row. There was no guard in sight. He lay still until the footsteps had all passed and then began again his kangaroo-like leaping toward the bayou. He was not afraid to try the water, manacled as he was. There was no diver to match him, even on the Illyria where all were swimmers.

Before long he heard the footsteps of the returning guards and

dropped to the earth, motionless, save for his hunted eyes. When he saw that there was a guard in his cane row he tried his former trick of creeping between the stalks. There was no time to reconnoitre. He rolled through hurriedly and looked up to find himself at the very feet of a stalwart six-footer with a loaded rifle in hand.

He was at bay but unafraid. Death was better than captivity and

his lips drew back in a soundless snarl as he struggled to a sitting. posture and raised clenched fists.

The guard's clear gray eyes looked into his steadily and the clenched hands dropped beside him. He even began a confused apology, though he could not have told why until he saw that the guard had taken a key from his pocket as he stooped over the manacled feet.

At that moment stealthy footsteps approached on the other side of a leafy cane row. Both men held their breath till the danger was well passed. Then the key clicked in the lock.

"Tote 'em to the bayou, brother," said the guard. "They mustn't be found here-unlocked."

He frowned with Anglo-Saxon dread of a scene as the Frenchman grasped the hand that held the rifle in both his own and covered it with kisses.

From the point of view of a higher economic
form of society, the private ownership of the
globe on the part of some individuals will ap-
pear quite as absurd as the private ownership
of one man by another. Even a whole society,
a nation, or even all societies together, are not
the Owners of the globe. They are only its
Possessors, its users, and they have to hand it
down to the coming generations in an im-
proved condition, like good fathers of fami-
lies.
Capital.

-Karl Marx, in Volume III of

BY JOSEPH E. COHEN

VII. SOCIALIST SOCIOLOGY

OCIOLOGY treats of human society. It studies man at his everyday affairs, aiming to tell how present social relations came to be and what direction they are taking. It is the youngest of the sciences, the most complex and, consequently, the least exact, so that its conclusions must be accepted only very tentatively. But, while still fumbling about in its swaddling clothes, it has come to be the most favored of the family of sciences, and is developing rapidly.

One thing, however, we may say at the outset. Sociology, to be worth anything, must be sociology-a survey that takes into consideration the play of social activities together. The study of some particularly curious or interesting phenomenon in society, by itself, is not sociology, any more so than is the study of one's finger nails anatomy. Many so-called sociologists do not hold this opinion. They believe they can handle one question, such as child-labor, at a time, independently of the whole social question. Such sociology is of the stamp that imagines that our vagrancy problem can be solved by compelling tramps to "move on"-as if there were an edge of the earth somewhere, over which they can be shoved.

Objection must also be made to the theory that society is merely a collection of individuals, and that if we know the "human nature" of one individual and multiply it by the number of individuals, we can thereby tell what society is. For every one is aware that we do things in our relations with our fellowmen that we would not dream of doing if we lived alone on some desert isle. Governments, for instance, are the consequence of certain social conditions, and are very little influenced by the fact that here or there some individual thinks they deprive him of his personal liberty. In turn, what may be to the individual's welfare or detriment, as an individual, is not necessarily to the welfare or detriment of society at large. Thus, an individual's extravagance often stimulates industrial activity; an individual's thrift is often a menace to the general welfare. What counts, therefore, is the sum total of our activities as members of society.

Then what is society? Spencer called it an organism. It has many of the attributes of an organism. Yet it has not developed out of another organism, having been "artificially" created and may be so destroyed. It is not a true organism. Again, it has been called an organization. This is less satisfactory. The hold society has upon us is more binding, more deeply seated, than that of an association. It is part of our very makeup. Even hermits like to be within calling distance of their fellow-men, and hermits are very rare at that. Society is more of an organism than an organization.

Human society differs from all other organisms because of the influence of the mind of man. By the exercise of this faculty, man has scaled heights of achievement far beyond anything attained in the animal kingdom, and has acquired the pursuit of happiness as an end in itself. It is the use of mechanical tools and the desire for pleasure, either independent of or in conjunction with the will to live, that, according to Lester F. Ward, distinguishes man from the other animals and raises human society above animal gregariousness. It may be observed that Ward, probably unconsciously, borrows the thought of "pursuit of happiness" from the Declaration of Independence, a document that the invention of superior mechanical tools was. not a little responsible for. Ward takes up the influence of mind especially in his "Psychic Factors of Civilization." "The environment transforms the animal, while man transforms the environment," he says. "The fundamental principle of biology is natural selection, that of sociology is artificial selection." And of the human struggle for existence, he declares: "In no proper sense is it true that the fittest survive." In his "Applied Sociology" he goes even further. Here he declares: "The intellectual factor completely reverses the biologic law. The whole effort of intelligence has been to do away with the struggle for existence. .. The law of nature has been neutralized in the physical world and civilization is the result. It is still in force in the social and especially in the economic world, but this is because the method of mind has not been applied to these departments of nature." The mind is such a great factor that modern sociology flows out of psychology, which, in turn, rests upon biology. For this reason, too, we speak of the social environment as "artificial" (for want of a better word), to distinguish it from the purely organic or physical environment.

How did society come to be? For information on this point we turn to Lewis Morgan, whose great work, "Ancient Society," is a storehouse of data as to what has gone before. Just as the human embryo, in its development, epitomizes organic evolution, so Morgan

found, largely through his experiences among the Iriquois nation of American Indians, in learning their institutions, customs and traditions, that civilized man is a resumé of social evolution.

Morgan divides savagery and barbarism into three periods each. Supposing man, as such, to have existed now a hundred thousand years upon earth, Morgan thinks it fair to say that sixty thousand years were spent in savagery, twenty thousand in older barbarism, fifteen thousand in its two newer periods, leaving about five thousand for civilization. If anything, Morgan underestimates the time society has existed. In making these divisions, Morgan says: "It is probable that the successive arts of subsistence which arose at long intervals will ultimately, from the great influence they must have exercised upon the condition of mankind, afford the most satisfactory bases for these divisions."

The earliest form of social arrangement known is that of communism, when the land and almost everything else was held in com

And it is speaking of this time that Morgan says: "The principal institutions of mankind originated in savagery, were developed in barbarism, and are maturing in civilization." The author mentions among these institutions, "the rudiments of language, of government, of the family, of religion, of house architecture and of property, together with the principal germs of the arts of life."

The first division of labor was between man and woman. While man was the hunter and warrior, woman both delved and spun, despite the old saying. The many accomplishments of prehistoric woman, O. T. Mason has recounted for us in his "Woman's Share in Primitive Culture." Particularly should be noted the making of pottery, which brought about village life and marked the transition from savagery to barbarism; also the domestication of animals, the last step but one before civilization.

The first organization of society was upon the basis of sex. Husband and wife belonged to different gentes. Morgan defines a gens as "descended from the same common ancestor, distinguished by a gentile name, and bound together by affinities of blood." From the same root we derive the words "generate" and "generation." Several gentes made a tribe through the medium of phratries, and several tribes made a nation, each fulfilling certain purposes and exercising certain administrative rights, of a dfferent nature from those of our present political government.

Political government founded upon property and division of territory, with its economic classes, tax gatherers and police powers, was an innovation that disrupted tribal society. It is not yet two and a