of such a system, there would be a vast saving of productive forces which are now wasted; but there are likely also to be great losses from causes already alluded to, such as the lack of stimulus to extraordinary exertion, which now plays so important a part in the productive process.

5. The ideal society which it is claimed will be the result of the adoption of Socialism is a very delightful one. It is nothing less than the millennium in which so many Christians earnestly believe, and for which they ardently hope,

a state in which there will be no want and no poverty, no rich men lording it over the poor, no injustice nor oppression nor degradation of any portion of the community, no crime and no selfishness, but all men dwelling together in harmony, each doing as he would be done by. But this appears to me to be a condition precedent to the success of the Socialistic system, not one to be created by it. It is not a state into which we can vote ourselves. Society must cultivate towards it, and grow up to it. Here would seem to be the great fallacy of Socialism. It assumes a condition of human nature as universal, which is found as yet only in small minorities.

6. If anything is better settled than anything else respecting human character, it is that men will not work except under the stimulus of self-interest. Emerson says,

"Men are as lazy as they dare to be." This holds true almost universally. Under the present system the fear of want, the desire of possession, the power that wealth gives, and some other cognate motives, constitute this stimulus. In the Socialistic state none such will exist. Every man's wants will be provided for in any case. The desire for possession and the power conferred by wealth will be reduced to a minimum. No penal sanctions in the interest of honest labor adequate to the end proposed have

been set forth in any presentation yet made to the public. It is not a reasonable reply that in the Socialistic state men will be public-spirited, and all will be disposed to work. There is obviously nothing in the scheme of Socialism that implies such a radical revolution in human nature.

7. The advocates of Socialism also seem to take no adequate account of the natural selfishness of men, of the tendency to self-indulgence and the immediate gratification of any desire, impulse, or appetite which may characterize individuals, and out of which come the larger proportion of poverty and wretchedness in our communities. These are as likely to exist under the socialistic system as under the present. Let us take an instance. As before intimated, Socialists differ as to the principle of distribution of the products of industry, some claiming that all should share alike, others that the distribution should be in proportion to the productive power of individuals. Let us suppose the former. There is also a difference as to method. Perhaps the most plausible is that each person shall receive a card entitling him to a certain aggregate amount for a given time. He carries it to the government storehouses, and takes what he wants of any kind, and the amount and value is checked off on his card. He may take this from time to time, as he may need, and in any form, provisions, clothing, furniture, books, pictures, jewelry, silks, laces, tobacco, whiskey, etc. What is there to hinder a man who is so disposed from doing as so many do now, - take a disproportionate amount, or the whole, of his apportionment in articles of mere show and no use, or which minister to his appetites, and degrade and ruin his character, and bring distress upon his family? How are poverty and want to be prevented under such conditions?

8. Socialism, then, though not the raw-head and bloodybones spectre that it is sometimes pictured, is, in the present condition of humanity, impracticable. It may easily be said that the evils alluded to, and many others of which no mention is made, are not certain to exist under Socialism. Still, they are possible, and to enter upon a wholly artificial system, with no guarantee against them, would, even in a limited experiment, be imprudent, and on the universal scale proposed might be a crime. It is not unlikely that in the progress of civilization we may gradually come to a system embracing some of the prominent features of Socialism. Already we have a considerable number of instances in which the government has assumed the control of great business enterprises. Our great postal system is purely Socialistic. So is our lighthouse system. Many governments operate the telegraph system. The common roads are generally the property and care of the government, general or local. Other kinds of business are carried on by government to a greater or less extent. There are still others which, though not recognized as properly Socialistic, at least partake somewhat of that nature. Such are the water-supply of cities, public education, the gas and electric lighting systems. Government might perhaps safely extend its proprietorship to other kinds of industrial undertakings, but there is a point beyond which, in the present condition of human society, it would not be safe to go. What may be the case when society is more highly developed and improved, it is yet too early to determine.

CHAPTER XII.

TAXATION.

1. ONE of the indispensable conditions of a prosperous community is the maintenance of order and justice between the members of the body politic. There must be protection against criminally disposed persons, and against all sorts of fraud and violence. The weak and poor and ignorant must not be allowed to be put at a disadvantage in contests with the strong and rich and intelligent; and there must be some way to decide questions of law and equity. Now, order cannot be maintained by each man's undertaking to execute justice for himself. It must be done by society in its corporate capacity. But in order to this, on the principle of the division of labor, as well as on other grounds, the duty is delegated to an agency or set of agents appointed for this purpose. This agency is the Government, and consists of a number of men acting in a variety of capacities.

2. Now, if these functionaries are a condition of any considerable production, then, clearly, a share of the wealth created belongs to them under the law of distribution. This is to be contributed by all who share in the benefit of the agency. The aggregate constitutes what is called the revenue of the Government. Its apportionment among the members of the community is known under the general name of taxation.

The most equable method of levying the taxes is a subject upon which a vast variety of opinions exists; and, though great improvements have been made in the devices employed, they are still very imperfect, and public men are far from agreement in regard to them.

3. It is a question of some importance, whether a man should be taxed according to the amount of his accumulations, or of his revenues. A man may have a large estate in land or other property, which, owing to various circumstances, is bringing him in very little or even no revenue. Another has no property at all, but he has a large income from his profession or occupation. If these both pay according to property, the latter will contribute nothing, while the former will be heavily taxed. If they pay according to revenue, the latter will pay largely, and the former contribute nothing. Again, there are some so situated that they will have a perpetual moderate income; while others have a much larger income, which, however, depends upon the continuance of health, business prosperity, or some other contingency which is wholly uncertain. If the tax is simply according to revenue, and not property, here would be an instance of great inequality.

4. Another question arises here, which is not always squarely met by writers on this subject. Does genuine economy require a uniform system of taxation, according to either property or income? The theory of taxation, generally accepted, implies the affirmative of the above question. But it is doubtful if any civilized government ever really attempts to apply it. The economical instincts of men lead them to repudiate it in practice. Unquestionably, what men desire in respect to taxation is a system which will give the needed public revenue, at the least possible expense on the whole, and with a just distribution of the burden. But it