ground rent in that country there is a commensurate increase of emigration to America. The Irishman, replaced by grazing cattle, settles down beyond the ocean as a Fenian. Thus over against the ancient sea-queen rises the new giant republic, assuming a more and more threatening attitude. 'Acerba fata Romanos agunt, There are those who think and say, with regard to such gloomy representations which ignore the brighter side of modern capitalism, with Hildebrand in answer to Engel's description of the "position of the English labouring classes: " "the facts mentioned are true for the most part, and therefore the description of special cases most striking and deceptive. What is untrue is rather the manner of combining the facts, and accounting for the causes to which they are attributed. The details are true enough, but the description, taken as a whole, is delusive. It only shows the dark sides of British industry and the condition of the labouring classes, and is as unfounded as would be a view of the state of the morality of mankind drawn from the biography of criminals, or like statistics referring to human health gathered chiefly from observations made in hospitals and similar institutions." We must confess, however, that this is by no means a complete refutation. Distress and wretchedness in hospitals and criminal institutions even ought to be exposed first, and then removed. So too it is the duty of social reform to remove the excrescences of speculating production, and its consequent evils in the dregs of society. The remedies for the above-mentioned evils are not to be brought about by a state communism, as socialists erroneously conclude; they only demand state intervention for RATIO OF RICH AND POOR FORMERLY. 219 the improvement of dwelling-houses, and the passing of sanitary measures. To this we shall presently return. It is the fashion with socialists to paint in roseate hues social conditions in olden times, as compared with the dark picture drawn of the present conditions of society. We would therefore, in concluding this chapter, point out a few of the dark spots in those systems, not however with the intention of denying the necessity of those social reforms which we have shown the nature of the case urgently demands. In the ancient Asiatic countries, where despotism prevailed, the ruler of the country was the sole landed proprietor. In Greece about three-fourths of the population were without civil rights, and were regarded like property, bought and sold like cattle. In Rome Gibbon calculates the number of slaves as comprising half of the population. Rome itself, during the transition period from republican to imperial institutions contained, besides 50,000 strangers, almost a million of slaves. The free plebs urbana of 1,250,000 heads had sunk so low in poverty that from Cæsar's time half of them were beggars living on public largesses. All the wealth of the country was absorbed by the 10,000 belonging to the rank of either senator or knight. Among these were the large landed proprietors, the great officeholders of the state, tax farmers, and moneychangers. Thus 40 per cent. of the population were slaves, 29 per cent. were beggars, and only per cent. of the whole number of inhabitants did actually belong to the possessed class. Later, under the emperors, Pliny was justified in saying: "Latifundia perdidere Italiam." During the middle ages landed property, which was almost the only kind of wealth, was divided among a few hereditary families. The rest of the people were some half free, some not much better than slaves, ground down by tithes, burdens, villainage, and prescriptions. Accord ing to Doomsday-book the landed proprietors made up only 3.3 per cent. of the population, 7.6 per cent. were halffree peasants, and 225,000 serfs and slaves, out of 300,000 fathers of families: so that three-fourths of the population were without liberty and without property. Similar conditions prevailed in other parts of Europe. These points ought not to be overlooked when the age we live in is painted in such dismal colours. Men like Proudhon, Marx, and Lassalle, do not quite overlook these facts, nor do they deny the gradual historical development of the forms of society. Their mistake consists rather in wishing to introduce prematurely their own new-fangled plans for the reconstruction of society, some of which may be left to develop themselves in the course of time. Then again they are over eager to destroy radically and abruptly existing forms of industry generally. They appear not to be able to regard calmly and without prejudice successive historical phases of society, and those transition states. from one form to another which are necessary. They do not see that a continuance of private and collective forms of property and existing modes of industry may be equally necessary, along with the new forms to be introduced now or hereafter. On the other hand their opponents err in a similarly one-sided manner in considering the capitalistic modes of industry as the only legitimate ones, and among such chiefly those carried on under the leadership of private capital, and in their defence of property laying stress on the claims of private property exclusively. This leads to the important investigation of the relative claims of the different forms of industry and property, in the next two chapters. CHAPTER II. Forms of Society, founded on the Principles of Capitalism, Communism, and Christian Love compared.-General Laws of Development in the Formation of Society (Morphology).— Federal Forms of Society the Latest Development.-Liberality and Self-devotion in Patriarchal, Christian, and Humanitarian Socialism.-Natural Community of Goods in the Family.— Its relation to Capitalism and public Community of Interests. -"Female Rights."-Communistic or public Forms of Society, their peculiar Conditions and Limits.-Five Cases enumerated where these are Applicable.-They are not Applicable to the Processes of Commerce and Banking.-Lassalle's Public Credit Scheme refuted.-Historically Communistic Principles are chiefly adapted for Primitive States of Society, and gradually give way to others in the Process of Civilization.-Their Relation to Capitalism considered.—Aristotle. As we have seen all along, there are three systems advocated by theorists for the salvation and perfection of society: (1) that of public forms of industry, carried on by the state and the commune, which has a retrogressive tendency; (2) that of a federative or co-operative improved capitalism, which has a progressive tendency; and (3) that of a Christian, humanitarian socialism, which in the free and devoted spirit of Christian love gives up all for the common weal. If applied exclusively, every one of these will prove false alike. But each one of them separately contains something of the truth, and so far corresponds to a remarkable degree with the actual facts of every-day experience. If applied within legitimate bounds, and in proportion to their respective expediency, all may be of service so long as they do not exclude the partial adaptation of the other systems where that seems required. With In order to show the truth of this statement, we must first make a few remarks on the various forms in which human beings are apt to combine for social purposes, and with a special view to the leading principles of political economy, i.e. the proper production, consumption, and distribution of wealth. These forms, with reference to the will of the various members of society, may be either compulsory (as in the community, the state, etc.); or voluntary (as joining a partnership, an association, or the like); or they may be binding after a contract freely entered upon (as matrimony). With regard to authority, they may be illiberal or the contrary. regard to the object they may aim at universality (state, community, family, etc.), or speciality (the interest of individuals only). With regard to their duration, they may be of a permanent or evanescent nature; with regard to extension, they may be local and particular, territorial, or cosmopolitan, and personally either wide or narrow. With regard to the motive for association, that may be speculating, dictated by self interest (in private undertakings), or communistic, sacrificing personal interest to the common weal; or these two motives may be mixed, as in the case of mutual assurance societies, coalitions, or other social associations by means of corporate bonds, whereby all are benefited. And finally with regard to the relation of various social forms of combination among themselves, they may either be simple and automatic, or combined and interdependent. Now bearing in mind these distinctions, we shall now be able to see how, historically and logically, the different distinctive forms of society above mentioned are gradually developed in a natural morphology and evolution, as civilization advances. As a matter of fact these distinctive forms follow each other in due succession, or they may as |