Economic and Vocational Civics

Raymond Osgood Hughes

[Excerpted sections from the book, Economic and Vocational Civics,
published by Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA, 1921]

The following excerpts from this interesting book, written for use in high schools, are writen from the interdisciplinary perspective of the political economist. The author, Raymond O. Hughes was at the time either an instructor or in some other capacity on the staff of Peabody High School in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Biographical information on R.O. Hughes is very sketchy, although he authored nearly a dozen books during his life. He may have graduated from Yale University. In 1936 he was a professor in the Department of Curriculum Studies at the University of Pittsburgh. The text that follows indicates Hughes was a serious student of classical political economy and was knowledgeable of the system of political economy as developed by Henry George, although this book makes no reference to Henry George or any other political economist. Interestingly, in the last portion of this book, in which he briefly responds to "radical ideas" for solving the problems of the inequitable distribution of wealth, he makes no mention of George's proposals to collect the rent of land in lieu of taxation labor and capital.

For every millionaire there may be a thousand paupers. Now why do these people get too little? Why is their share of things so much smaller than we have said one has a right to expect?

(1) Sometimes physical weakness of some kind is responsible. The blind man who stands on the corner trying to get a little money by playing a cheap mouth organ is an example of this. Sickness often keeps one from earning his regular wages, and if it is long continued may unfit him for doing any work that is difficult. Such a weakness is not in all cases a handicap. Often men and women have accomplished wonders in spite of it. But such people certainly deserve a great deal of credit, for usually they live and work under a great disadvantage.

(2) By contrast we may notice the man who is noted for laziness and lack of ambition. He possesses no desire to do his work well or to make a success of it, but prefers an aimless life of idleness. And so he gets small returns and perhaps does not deserve even these.

(3) Another reason why many people get too little is their lack of ability. A man may be a hard worker and desire to get ahead, but because he lacks talent or education or experience, he does not succeed. For this reason many a person is forced to accept too little to live on decently.

(4) Some people through their own extravagance do not have enough. They may have the ability to earn but they seem to be unable to save. What money they get they spend lavishly for expensive food, clothing, and luxuries, or throw it away in some foolish investment by means of which they hope to get wealthy. Then they must almost starve for a while. Small wonder it is that most of the time they have too little.

(5) Another reason to-day why people do not have enough is greed and unfairness. People are actually robbed. Some one takes more than he has a right to have, and what he gets must be at the expense of some one else. The people who are getting less than they deserve are often not able to exert sufficient power to obtain their dues.

The burglar, who takes a person's money and jewels, however, is not the only thief. Some men show no conscience in dealing with their fellow men. They do not hesitate to take advantage of another's needs and compel him to pay them, for their foods or services, prices far beyond what they are worth. Profiteers, we call such people. But if men are to live they must pay the prices charged for the things by which they must live. That is where some of the people's money goes which ought to enable every honest, hard-working man to have a comfortable living. That is why some people get too little -- because others get more than their share.

6. Why some People Get Too Much

First of all, what do we mean by "too much"? Surely it is not simply a condition of having more than some one else, for perhaps the one who has the larger amount worked hard while another man loafed. Perhaps we can agree that a person has too much if in order to get it he must force some other person to suffer, or if the possession of it causes him to fall into habits of laziness, wastefullness, or some other undesirable manner of living.

(1) A person may owe his wealth entirely to luck -- if it is proper to use that word at all. He may have been born in a wealthy family. Or perhaps some rich uncle may have presented him with some valuable gift or may have died and left him a fortune. Such occasions are not very common, it is true, but they do occur. In all these cases the individual is not responsible for his wealth, and is under a great temptation to live in lazy enjoyment, simply as one of the rich, who do no good to the world.

(2) Some men to-day have obtained their wealth largely :dishonesty. Besides the robber who makes a practice of taking the goods of others, there are men who, although they appear to be good, really become rich by depriving others of their share. The rich mill owner, who works his men like slaves and gives them low wages; the speculator, who sells worthless stock to persons who have saved up a little money, and the profiteer who charges enormous prices for the necessities of life, knowing that the people pay or do without, all belong in this class.

(3) Then there is the man who through influence of some kind gets "paid for work, which he does not do. Especially do we see this in public offices. Too often a person with political influence backing him is the one who gains recognition and good pay, while another man, perhaps much better equipped for the office, but unknown, is denied the opportunity to attain the honor or the reward of service.

(4) Other persons through greed and selfishness amass fortunes. The money they earn is carefully hoarded and they make sure that none of it is used for the benefit or pleasure of any except themselves. Such people naturally have more than is necessary for their use.

(5) Still another reason why some men get more than they earn is the extravagance and folly of others. Many people will pay too much for something that they absolutely do not need, rather than not have it. They do not have the brains, or if they have them do not use them, to distinguish between a wise and a foolish way to spend or invest. The saloon keeper often argued, "If these fellows are going to throw away their money, why shouldn't I get it as well as anybody else ? " The promoter of prize fights, the fashionable hairdresser, the clairvoyant and, fortuneteller, are all willing to take the coin from those who "spend money for that which is not bread." If these people get more titan they deserve, the blame rests partly on those who let them get it.

7. How the Needs of All Can Be Met

From what we have just observed about people who have too little and people who have too much, it is evident that no one cause can be blamed for the uneven division of the good things and pleasures of life. Yet it is clear that if every one understood as much as every other person about the principles that underlie the success or failure of people, there would be less want and waste and abuse of others' rights.

We may naturally ask, then, whether it is possible to find some laws or principles about the dealings of men with one another and about their use of the great gifts of Nature. If such laws can be worked out, and people can all know them, surely we can accomplish very much and make the world a better place to live in. Just here we will try to lay down a few great principles which are, beyond question, of the first importance.

(1) The surest and safest way to secure the things we need is by honest, faithful work. Things acquired by this means may seem to come slowly. But they usually come, and for most of us there is no other way to get them. Besides, there is much real satisfaction in the thought that we have earned the things that we possess.

(2) No one has the right to take for himself anything which belongs to another, or to supply his own needs or wishes by making another suffer. Much of the unhappiness and injustice in the world would completely disappear if every one obeyed this law.

The Golden Rule is not only good morals but good business. Care for the other fellow's interest is really care for our own, as our welfare can be secured only with the aid of our fellow man. For this reason common sense, as well as fairness and honesty, demands that we purchase the good-will of others by right dealing. Only with the assistance and cooperation of our fellows can we accomplish anything of real consequence. If individuals will not respect the rights of others, the people as a whole have the right and duty to protect those who may not be able to protect themselves from suffering and oppression and to prevent those who are strong and selfish from using their strength unfairly. "Might makes right" is a doctrine that never was true and that no man or nation should ever be allowed to practice.

(4) The right use of the gifts of Nature and obedience to her physical laws are all-important. We can not long violate these without either suffering ourselves or causing others to suffer. To make it possible to meet the needs of all, there are some conditions which must prevail. A few of these we will consider briefly.

8. Security

Providing we have acquired the things we need, what then is of most importance? Security, to be sure. By security we mean protection for ourselves and our property from all kinds of injury. If every morning a man went to work thinking that perhaps he would come home to find his family murdered, his valuables stolen, or his house burned to the ground, how much do you think he would be able to accomplish? Fear would be uppermost in his mind. There would be no thought of business. And why should he work, if, after all his effort, all might be destroyed at any time? He could make no progress in anything.

Fortunately, such conditions do not exist today, A person may go out at any time and have no reason to expect injury in any way. He may work hard to gain those things which he needs and feel sure that they will be safe. But what gives him this feeling of security? It is the fact that the government itself, which acts for all the people, gives its protection, without which people would be far from contented and happy.

19. Getting the Things We Want

In discussing how people come into the possession of things we often use the word "wealth." Perhaps it would be well to understand what is meant by that term. Wealth is the sum total of the material possessions of a person or of a community. By "material possessions" we mean those things which can be estimated by a value in money.

Wealth, then, may be of two kinds, private property and public property. We shall not pay very much attention to public property in our study, because the conditions and laws affecting it are considerably different from those which concern our private possessions. All the possessions of the community as a whole to be used by the public, such as our parks, schools, and the other institutions which all may use, are considered as public property.

Private property consists of the possessions of an individual, or family or company for their own use. All that we ourselves possess, our books, pets, and clothes, are our own private property. Houses, office buildings, and the like are usually some one's private property, though they do not always belong to the persons who actually use them most.

Is it better for us that our desires to have private property should be many or few? Some say that with a few there is a better chance of having them fulfilled -- that we can direct all our efforts toward satisfying them and then search for more, since all our desires can never be satisfied. Others say that it is best to have many desires - that without many, the world would not have progressed and man would still be in a primitive state.

Every one has to admit, though, that it is well both for an individual and for a community to have a great variety of interests. Not all our active desires need be developed at the same time, but the very fact that we have them makes us ambitious. Ambitious people are progressive people.

The history of nations shows that agricultural people have usually been the least progressive. This has been due largely to the monotony of their life. Their interests off the farm have been few and naturally they have been very slow to advance. Many American fanners are exceptions to this rule, for they are as enterprising people as can be found anywhere and always keep in touch with what is going on all over the world.

Here is another question of importance. Does it make any difference what work we do? Should we do what we like, or should we work at something in which we have no natural talent or interest, just because it offers a little more money or happens to be the handiest job to get?

A man who is engaged in the work he likes best is likely to make a better success of it and approach perfection sooner than would otherwise be possible. Nothing in this life is more deplorable than the misfits. Suppose a boy studies to become a minister because his mother desires him to do so, while all the time he longs to be an architect. Consequently the ministry gains little, while architecture is deprived of one who might have done much service in that field. And so not only the individual himself is harmed, but society as a whole is affected.

The same thing holds good for communities. If the people of Pittsburgh had not long ago taken advantage of their great industrial facilities for making steel, think what the world would lack to-day. This great principle is known as the law of least social cost. We may express it in this way: both individuals and communities get more done and do their work better if they are engaged in that work for which they are best suited.

But the fact that doing the things we like leads to greater accomplishment does not mean that we should never do anything which we dislike. Every one meets dome unpleasant things which he must do. By doing them his character is strengthened and the next difficulties which he encounters are not so hard to overcome. So then, while each one of us may plan to do the thing he likes, let him not expect even this to be accomplished without effort and trouble. Let him not shirk a task or neglect a duty just because there is something hard or unpleasant in it.

Formerly people made the mistake of thinking that work all the time was absolutely desirable. No time was planned for rest or recreation. A worker's duty began with sunrise and closed when the sun set. At first this seemed a great advantage to the employer. But now the mistake is clear. Tired men soon lose their enthusiasm, their work becomes inefficient, and they grow worn and exhausted.

To-day we all know that a variety of interests leads to better work. Eight hours is now the average working day for most people. This leaves considerable time to the workman for his own personal use. While we do not believe that he should spend this time in loafing, we do feel that both the individual and the community will benefit by using this extra time for the right kind of rest and recreation. Whether the worker gets simply a change of work like gardening or has a reasonable amount of real play, such as taking part in his children's ball game, or sometimes just takes a complete rest or reads a good book, he comes back to his regular task feeling refreshed and goes at it with new energy.

20. Property That Is Our Own

We need not deny that contentment is desirable. Without it the world would indeed be a very unpleasant place to live in. There are many factors which help to make one contented.

Perhaps the first thing we think of is having the things we really need. When the poor, who can not even satisfy their needs, to say nothing of obtaining any of the luxuries of life, see the rich man ride by in his great machine, driven by a well-paid chauffeur, and obtained perhaps partly through their labor, they may become discouraged and think," What's the use?"

But this is not all; to get some of these luxuries they may be tempted to commit crime. Or they may be ready to listen gladly to the schemes of those who wish to overthrow the present organization of society or government. When a large number of people are deprived of the needs of this life, there is indeed a great and fertile field to receive the seeds of wild and radical ideas. People in such a state of mind think they could not be any worse off, no matter what might happen. All society and government is consequently endangered.

The experience of all civilized people shows that it is beneficial for individuals to be able to acquire private property which shall be their very own. If a man knows that some day he may own his own home, he will work hard to gain it; and when it is his, he will try to make it a more attractive place to live in.

The ownership of private property is also a force for order. If a person owns his own home and has spent his money improving it, naturally he wants it to be protected by law. He demands good sound government and becomes an advocate of law and order. Besides, he acquires more respect for the property of others and actually takes an interest in his neighbor, who is working for the same things that he is. Abraham Lincoln said to the Workman's Association in 1864, "Property is the fruit of labor; property is desirable; is a positive good in the world. …Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built." Surely, if the ownership of private property can do so much good for an individual, it must be beneficial to his community and to the entire nation.

Can you imagine a community where all property is owned in common? Many people have tried it, but with very little success. It was tried long ago in the Virginia colony and in the Plymouth colony. Some of the men willingly did their part, but others became lazy when they knew that whether they worked or not they would receive the same. Such arrangements could not lust long. Even high-minded men like Emerson were interested in such experiments, and even they were unsuccessful. So, while we have to admit that having everything in common might be an ideal state of affairs if everybody were good and wise and unselfish, still we must all realize how utterly impracticable such a plan would be, just now at least.

21. Liberty

Just as there are certain conditions that must be maintained in order to enable us to obtain the things we must have, so there am certain other conditions necessary in order to make us happy. Once security seemed to be the " one thing needful." But gradually, as security began to be assured, people realized that security was not all, but that liberty was also an essential. Security is no less important now than it ever was; but we have taken it as a matter of course and have ceased to think so much about it. We are not satisfied simply to have other people look out for us; we want to be free to do things for ourselves.

Liberty, as we understand it to-day, is the freedom of an individual to do as he pleases so long as he does not infringe on the rights of others. We, who live in a free country, can not understand fully how much our liberty means to us. We simply take it for granted that things should be so.

But there are many people who have not yet experienced the benefits of liberty. Most of the Russians were for centuries hardly more than slaves, and now when they are seeking freedom they have little idea of the meaning of real liberty. The change in their country has been too abrupt. Wherever liberty does, not exist, the people can hardly fail to be unprogressive, and they are often discontented. They neither care nor dare to undertake anything new for government must give them permission r things, and the officials are , and dishonest men. We can not have real contentment without liberty.

22. The Chance to Get Ahead

Every man, rich or poor, in order to be really contented must have a chance to get ahead in this world. But let us make no mistake about this. Getting ahead does not mean only shorter hours and more pay. It means not only financial progress, but a chance for intellectual advancement and the development of whatever ability one possesses.

CHAPTER VI
FOUNDATIONS OF OUR NATION'S LIFE

46. What Makes a Nation?

"What constitutes a state? " asked the poet, and answered his own question by saying, " Not high raised battlement and moated gate, but men."

Yet first of all there must be a place for the people to live in, and the area of the place must be great enough to take care of the people. A nation must have land. But size is only a small part of the requirements. The character of the place must also be taken into consideration. Climate, natural resources, rivers, seacoast, and other geographical features all play their part. Besides, every nation must have some form of government. And so we see, although the people themselves are the real foundation of a nation, material things also have much to do with its prosperity.

Nations are not all equal. Nature has not favored all of them alike. No great nation has ever appeared in the torrid zone. The people there lack enterprise. Neither can the frigid zones boast of ever producing a powerful nation. The people must spend all their time in getting the bare necessities of life. They have no time or ambition for progress.

Then, by contrast, there is China with her great population and enormous area and resources, but she is not a great nation. Her people seem not to realize their great possibilities. They built up a remarkable civilization centuries ago, but they stopped and did not advance with the rest of the world.

One feels inclined to-day to exclude big Russia from the class of great nations, because of the ignorance of her people and the uncertainty of the future of her government. And even little Switzerland with her enterprising people and democratic government can never attain the position of a first-rank power, for she is remote from the sea and held within limited boundaries.

A great nation, then, is one of considerable size and population, with favorable climatic and geographical features, and a good, sound government; a nation whose people are progressive not only commercially and industrially, but also intellectually and morally. All nations to be truly great must come up to this standard.

47. The Factors in Industry

Looking now at simply the material side of a nation's life, what agencies bring about the production of the things we want? Land, labor, and capital are names we usually apply to the three " factors " of which we commonly think.

Land, as we use the word here, means not merely the ground we build houses on, or the soil we cultivate, but any gift of Nature which is used in the production of goods. The trees of our forests, our mineral deposits, and the water power which runs many of our mighty mills, are all considered in the term land. Natural resources is another expression often applied to the gifts of Nature.

Labor is the activity or effort of human beings that enters into industry. This applies to mental and, physical effort alike. The manager who does nothing but form plans and give orders is just as truly, a laborer as the man who operates one of the big machines in the mill or handles a shovel in the ditch.

Capital is any product of past labor used in the production of more goods. Many people think that money atone is capital, but this is far from the truth. The machinery in the mills, the trains of the rail roads, and even the ditch-digger's shovel are capital. All those were once made by man and are now being used by their owners to produce something more.

48. Services of Land and Natural Resources

Land, Nature's gift to production, is absolutely essential. In the first instance, it furnishes man with standing room. In other words, it gives him a place where he may live and work. How many of you ever thought of land as doing that for you? We simply take such things for granted.

Then, too, land supplies man with raw materials, which he may develop for his own use. The great mineral resources of our country, our mighty forests and our varied plant and animal life, all have been given to us by a bountiful Creator. It only remains for man to make good use of them.

But Nature does even more by giving man the forces with which to utilize these raw materials. There is the horse, for example, which has always aided man in his agricultural work. It supplies what is known as animal force. It may seem strange to express it in this way, but in terms of economics the horse is a form of land, since animals are a gift of Nature. Then there is the power supplied by water which turns many of our New England mills. And even the wind had been harnessed to aid man in his efforts.

Some of these contributions of Nature can be taken and held by individuals with considerable ease. Others cannot be reduced to private ownership. In this country any individual may own land who has obtained it in some fair way. Products of the soil and domesticated animals may also be held by private persons.

Some persons or corporations have even gained control of rivers or lakes to use in carrying on their own private business. But such gifts of Nature as sunlight and air and the great seas, which belong to all people, can not be owned by private individuals or even by corporations. But always the tendency is more and more to bring under private ownership the forces and resources of Nature.

49. Effects of Natural Conditions upon Industry

Long the life of man depended entirely on the nature of his surroundings. If his home was hi the forests, he was sure to be a hunter, killing wild beasts so that he might live. If he was born by the side of the sea or a lake, he generally became a fisherman or braved the waters in his boat. If inland plains were his abode, he undoubtedly led a pastoral life, roaming far and wide with his flocks.

From the combination of these three, all civilized societies of to-day are derived. Our own country is a good example of how natural conditions affect industry. New England's soil was not especially fertile, but she had rapid streams, and she has developed in manufacturing and trade more than in agriculture. The southern states, however, possess fertile soil, and agriculture consequently is their chief industry. The partly arid stretches of western Texas and the Great Plains are best suited for cattle raising, while the Rocky Mountains regions, with their treasures under the ground, excel in mining.

But man is coming to modify and even change his environment. Desert lands may be made fruitful by irrigation. By drainage, marshy lands are made fit for use. To-day even huge mountains can be tunneled and railroads run through them. In fact, economic progress tends to free man more and more from the power of Nature.

60. Private Ownership of Land

This is a subject which is being discussed more and more, especially by people who are not satisfied with things as they exist to-day. If land is so necessary, so vital to industry, as we have seen that it is, should individuals have the right to hold it for their own personal use? The parks, the playgrounds, and our public buildings we may use along with other people without fear of being molested, if we abide by rules which every one must follow. But suppose we desire to play in our neighbor's yard. Immediately we discover that we have no right to do so without his consent, since it is his private property.

But what right has he to own that hind? No doubt he bought it and in return for the money paid received a deed to the land. A deed is a written document which describes the location of the ground, states that it was sold by John White to Thomas Browne, and has been signed before some justice or notary.

But where did John White get the land which he sold? Perhaps he too bought it and had received a deed. If we look back far enough we shall find that some one did not buy the land from an individual, but received it from the government as a grant.

Immediately the question comes, "Where did the United States or any other government got the right to give land away?" Why, the colonists long ago either bought the land or took it from the Indians who lived in this country. But what right did the Indians have to claim possession of the land? They certainly bought it from no one, nor was it given to them. You see from this standpoint it is pretty hard to justify the possession of land as private property.

But private ownership of land must have some justifications, else it would not exist and have existed for so long. When the Indians roamed around over this country, private ownership of land was unknown. If a tribe desired a stretch of land and had the power to take it and keep it, the land was theirs. Might alone was right.

As the English colonists came and settled in towns, the right to hold property, even land, became established. It brought with it a higher form of civilization, for from it a respect for others and their rights grew among the people. Greater contentment existed, for it encouraged the people to work and to develop their resources, since they knew that for their labor they would receive a lasting reward. Since they developed it and made it serve mankind they felt that they could rightly claim a title to it.

The ownership of land by private individuals even enjoyed a government guarantee. When the people realized that they had land of their very own to be protected, they were more willing to support the government. And so the entire community seemed to be benefited by the private ownership of land.

But there is something else we must notice about private ownership of land. For some people it has been the means of creating extraordinary wealth, but for others the cause of poverty. There are three general ways in which land may bring wealth to the owner. He may sell it, he may rent it to others, or he may cultivate it. But sometimes he does not do anything with it when he first gets possession of it. While other people are developing the neighborhood, the owner may simply hold the land without its being improved, until it can be sold for a big price. Such speculation is sometimes very undesirable, for by it, without working at all, one man may gain wealth at the expense of many.

A disagreeable result is the ill-feeling which renters are beginning to have for the rich landowner. He refuses sell to them at a reasonable figure either the land or the building that may be on it, and they are forced to pay high" rents in order to have shelter. When such conditions exist to a great degree, private landholding is no longer beneficial.

51. Problems of Land Ownership

In the country, too, there are problems connected with landholding. Many farms are mortgaged. That is, some one else than the owner has a money interest in the property. Sometimes this comes about when a person is not able to pay the full price at the time he buys the property. He may borrow some money or not pay all the price down, and then give the person to whom he is indebted a claim on the property for the amount that is due. If he does not pay what he owes at the time he agrees to do so, his creditor may cause the property to be sold and get what is due him in that way.

To own and cultivate farms under these conditions is often very unsatisfactory. Renting them brings about frequently the same situation. Much of the money which the struggling farmer takes in has then to go toward paying rent or interest on the mortgage, and he may be getting deeper in debt all the time. It seems as if he is working simply to help somebody else get rich. He loses heart, fails to keep the property in good condition, and drops into the hopeless, unprogressive class of citizens who are of little use to themselves or to their community. Wherever a large proportion of the farms in a neighborhood are either rented or heavily mortgaged, you can be sure something is wrong.

The renter in a city or town sometimes is in the same class as the " tenant farmer," for he can not be expected to take the same interest in improving some one else's property that he would if it were his own. Yet in the city people often prefer to rent rather than own, in order to feel more free to change from one place to another than they would if they were tied down by owning a home. Some think that the land in the big cities should be taken over by the city for the benefit of all, since, they believe, private ownership of it has done all the good it can do for a densely populated community. When only one house and lot in ten in New York City is owned by the people who occupy it, it does not seem that private property in land is any longer a great blessing to most New Yorkers.

The question of assessing property, or putting the right valuation upon it, is sometimes difficult. Part of the encouragement to keep one's property looking well may be removed when the owner knows that if he paints his house the assessor may come along and add $200 or $300 to the assessment on it, and the owner will have to pay more taxes than before. That is not right, yet it has often happened.

Suppose, too, that in a fine residential district your next-door neighbor sells out to a man who turns the place into a garage or crowded tenement house. Your own house at once becomes less desirable as a place to live in. Whole sections of towns may sometimes " run down" because cheap stores or factories or other unattractive elements make their way into them. To prevent the unnecessary occurrence of this kind of thing, many communities either have passed or are considering "zoning laws," which will lay down limits within which garages, factories, and the like may not be built, and specify certain sections to be used for particular purposes. In residential districts, when a new piece of land is divided into home sites, the property is sometimes sold with "restrictions." Then the purchaser binds himself to put up a house worth at least a certain sum of money, or to set it a certain distance from the street, or in some other way to deal with the property so as to keep the neighborhood always up to an established standard.

The title to property is also sometimes a cause of trouble, especially if the property has changed hands several times. It is well for a purchaser to have a lawyer or other responsible party look into this question when buying real estate. One ought to be sure that all previous owners have disposed of all their claims, or if they have not, that he understands exactly what their claims are. There are some "title guarantee" companies that make a business of this kind of work. Then if any question is raised about the title after they have investigated it, they will assume the responsibility for any lawsuits that may be brought which would question their own findings in the case.

So that private individuals may not have to bear all the expense and work that is sometimes connected with such investigations of titles, some of our states have adopted a plan known as the Torrens land title system. Under this plan the state or county determines the title to all registered land within its borders. Then when the land changes hands, it is a simple matter, with little expense, for the change to be recorded, and the buyer is sure of the title to his property and is saved the expense of having the title searched.

53. The Waste of Natural Resources

When our forefathers first came to this country, they found a land gifted by Nature with extraordinary resources. Fertile soil, timber, minerals, water, and diversified animal life all were here.

But from that time up to to-day waste and wanton destruction of these gifts of Nature have taken place. Two-thirds of the great forests of our country have been cleared away. Trees were cut down ruthlessly to satisfy men's greed for profits. No thought was given to setting out more trees.

The water power of this great country has also been abused. The greater part of it already is in the hands of individuals and corporations, which use it for their own private gain. To let this enormous power go to waste is certainly not desirable, but to give the control of it to a few men who use it to make money out of the people is almost as bad.

Then there are our great desert lands and our swamps and marshes, which people have shunned as being worthless. But all the time they wore just waiting for labor to be applied to them. When this has been done, the results have been wonderful.

In the same manner that our forests have been destroyed, our mines also have been wasted. Private operators who thought only of the greatest possible gain secured control of many of them. In many cases only that part of the coal, iron, or whatever it might be, was taken out, which could be worked with very little cost or trouble. The rest of the vein was often entirely abandoned and could now be opened up only at great expense. Consequently the supply of minerals which ought to be available for us has decreased almost unbelievably fast.

Animal life, too, has not been spared. Many finely plumed birds have become almost extinct from being constantly hunted to gratify the vanity of thoughtless or selfish women. The passenger pigeon, which once traveled north and south each year in flocks of many thousands, has gone forever. The buffalo and other animals of use to many narrowly escaped the same fate.

What has been the cause of this waste and destruction? Greed and ignorance are largely responsible. The men who got possession of our natural resources cared only about getting rich quickly. They showed neither thoughtfulness nor care. The worst part of the matter was that the people, through their ignorance of the situation, allowed this plundering to go on. They believed that our natural resources were so great that they would last forever, while in reality year by year they were steadily decreasing. Some of the people even had a "don't care" spirit and believed that they had no right to interfere in such matters. It is not much wonder that conservation of our natural resources seemed for a time a notion of "cranks," and that it was not easy to wake up the people to what was really going on. But now we realize that the men who preached conservation spoke the truth, and we are making an effort to correct the abuses which have existed.

54. Conserving Nature's Gifts

The policy of our government in the past has been partly responsible for the careless of our natural resources. We seemed to have an unlimited amount of land which belonged to the people as a whole and hence was called public land. To let this lie uncultivated would have been folly, but to go out and settle on it as a pioneer was an undertaking surrounded with perils and difficulties.

To encourage people to take chances and undergo the trials of pioneer life our state and national governments were very generous in offering the public land at ridiculously low figures to those who would settle on it. These "Homestead Acts" brought about the occupation of many thousands of square miles of some of the richest soil in the world. The westward movement of settlers into the Mississippi Valley and beyond is one of the biggest features of American history.

But much land was given to railroads. Speculators who had no intention of actually settling upon it got possession of thousands of acres by evading the intent of the law. We were so very generous in virtually giving the land away that it is not strange that people got the impression that there was no need of being careful.

Now most of the public land which is of any value in its present state for agriculture has been taken up, though considerable remains that may be valuable for other purposes. Some of the western states contain marvelous scenery and wonderful natural features which can not be equaled anywhere in the world. But whether it be the geysers of the Yellowstone Park, the falls of the Yosemite Valley, or the giant redwoods of the California forests, greedy moneymakers would not care what happened to these marvels of nature if they could be converted into a source of wealth for men's private pocket books. Setting apart certain regions as National Parks is an effort to keep these wonderlands from being ruined by men who care for nothing but getting rich.

In order to save the forests of our country from complete destruction, millions of acres of land, largely in the western states, have been set apart as forest reserves under governmental control. Several thousand men are employed to take care of these reserves. Their duties are to protect the trees from destruction, to plant new ones and to prevent or put out the many forest fires for which careless campers or woodcutters may be responsible. Many states also have forest reserves of their own and employ a forest commissioner to promote conservation and to teach people the proper care and use of trees. The problem of water conservation is also of great importance. Much loss and suffering has resulted from floods which are thought by many to have been made worse by cutting down the forests. By the. construction of dams and reservoirs, flood water may be controlled, at least in part.

So that the people may keep control of what water power remains in their hands, a new plan has been proposed. The use of streams for power can be rented to individuals or corporations and the user be required to pay for the privilege. In this way private speculators can not get entire control and the people as a whole get some of the profit from their natural resources. A commission consisting of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of the Interior, und the Secretary of Agriculture, has been created to oversee the use of the water power on our national public lands.

A great deal has also been done both by private corporations and by the national government toward land conservation. Our great western deserts have become fertile farms after the water from distant rivers has reached them. Many wonderful irrigation enterprises have been undertaken. Great dams and canals have been constructed to aid in the work. Water is carried many miles mid then stored up for use. California has more irrigated farms than any other state, but all our states in the far West have benefited greatly by irrigation.

Then there is the conservation of our swamp lands, found near the mouth of the Mississippi River and along the Gulf and elsewhere. Drainage canals have been constructed which make this marshy land profitable for agriculture. This not only increases the value and importance of the land but also benefits the people as a whole, as swamp lands always breed disease.

The government also is taking a hand in conserving the minerals of our country. In Alaska, especially, where there is a great supply of coal, our government has refused to allow private companies to gain control. The policy has now been adopted of leasing these lands, charging a royalty on the products received and requiring thorough operation. The states also are assisting in this great work and are beginning to assume some control over their mineral deposits and to insist on proper methods of mining.

We have seen that animal life also has been wasted and destroyed, and so conservation applies to it as well as to land and water. All states have fish and game laws to prevent the extinction of these living things. Reserves have been set aside in the southern states to protect the birds and every effort is made to care for them in the right way. Besides, encouragement is given toward raising and preserving many animals of value to man, which have been almost totally destroyed by our lack of foresight.

This problem of conservation is not, as some may suppose, a problem for the government alone. Each one of us can help in the great work by refusing to waste or destroy any gift which Nature has given us.

56. Different Features of Industrial Life

We have seen that there are many things which we want. In making use of the three factors of production to satisfy our desires, we may distinguish four phases of industrial life.

The most fundamental of these is consumption. This means the use of goods for the purpose of gratifying some want. It was the motive which first impelled primitive man to engage in activity of any kind. And all through the years of growing civilization and progress it has continued to be the most important factor.

Consumption in one sense means destruction, for we can not consume without destroying. When we eat an apple, it is destroyed at once. With our books, clothes, and our homes, this sort of consumption takes place more slowly and is not so evident, though it does actually occur. But whether the destruction of goods takes place slowly or promptly, the desire to use goods to satisfy our wants is always present and always increasing -- and that is the main idea of consumption. It is really the foundation of our modern industrial life.

But we can not consume goods unless there are goods to consume. As man's desire to consume goods increased, he could not depend upon the things that Nature produced without any effort on his part. So he was forced to undertake to produce things by his own labor. This labor was very simple at first -- in fact it was done entirely by hand. Then rough stone tools were fashioned. Later bronze was used, and then iron and steel.

Some kinds of production continued to be very primitive until after the middle of the eighteenth century, when machinery began to play an important part in industry. Marvelous developments followed, until the complicated production of to-day resulted.

We have not yet stated just what production is. Man can not actually create goods. He can, however, create utilities, by which we mean the qualities that make the goods useful to him. He may take a tree from a forest and by various processes fashion the wood into a chair. While he is giving it this form utility, he is taking other utilities from it. The tree when cut down can no longer shelter the the birds or aid in preventing floods. Each step in the making of the chair tends to destroy the utilities which the tree once possessed.

But further creation of utilities is necessary before the chair is ready for consumption. It must be shipped by the manufacturer to the furniture dealer, who keeps it until a customer desires to buy. Thus the railroad gives the chair a place utility, while the dealer by keeping it until needed gives it a time utility, which it did not have before. All these people helped in producing the chair. And so we see that production is really the putting of utilities into material things.

If a primitive man produced many things, he would discover that he possessed more goods than he could use. So he would go to a neighbor who had goods of his own and try to make a trade. But this kind of trade was often found to have many difficulties and gradually, as we shall see later, the system developed which we have to-day. This uses gold and silver or some substitute for them as the means to bring about trades. The use of money or substitutes for it as a convenience in trading is known as exchange.It has come to be so important that we usually think of it as a distinct phase of our industrial life.

Then there is another phase of our economic interests which we call distribution. This does not moan the transportation or marketing of goods, as we might at first think. It has to do rather with the division of the returns that are earned by those who have helped in production. How much belongs to the landholder for what the land has done? How much to the worker who has contributed his toil?

How much to the holder of capital who has saved it from his past earnings and put it to use again?

Formerly production was looked upon as the chief factor, and most of man's interest in economic discussion was centered upon it. All this is changed. Now distribution is being emphasized more and more. People are beginning to question whether all those who take part in production are being justly rewarded, -- whether the laborer receives enough of the returns for his effort or whether the employer is getting too much profit at the expense of his workmen. Because we usually can not repay the workers by giving them a part of the goods they help to produce, the problem becomes still more complicated. Most of the social unrest of the day arises from the problem of distribution. We can easily see, therefore, the importance of this last feature of industrial life.

CHAPTER XIV
MAKING GQVERNMENT AND SOCIETY BETTER

131. How Much Is Wrong?

To speak of making some-tiling better is to assert that something is not what it should be. But how much? There is a fable which tells how a mocking bird was caroling gayly in a treetop, and when asked why he sang so loudly, replied: "How can I do anything else when the sky is so blue and the sun is so bright?" "Nothing in that," said a mole on the ground below, who had come up to the surface for a minute, "I have lived too long not to know that there is nothing in the world except grass roots and fish-worms."

Now each of these saw only a part of the things that existed. We need not be like the mole who saw nothing but unpleasant things. Neither should we shut our eyes or look away from the unpleasant things that do exist. There are things in the world that are wrong and that need to be corrected.

There is unfair distribution of wealth. We do not mean that everybody ought to have the same amount of wealth. If it were evenly divided once, it would be far from evenly divided the next morning. Some people never can keep a dollar. But some are born in surroundings of the lowest and most unattractive type. They have, to struggle for mere existence against a most unfavorable environment, while others are born to a life of ease, surrounded by luxury and pleasure.

There are those who have piled up wealth which could be fairly compared to blood money taken from the very lives of their workers. Others have taken advantage of the needs of the people to charge them outrageous prices for the necessities of life, or imposed unjust burdens as landlords upon tenants who must pay or sleep in a vacant lot. There are children working for a few cents a day whose lives are being dwarfed and scarred by the hardness of their toil and the ugliness of their surroundings.

There are political wrongs. There is less personal dishonesty than there used to be, but the "grafters" have not all gone. People vote too often by habit or for some selfish reason rather than because they believe that the candidate for whom they vote is the one whose election would be for the best interests of the country. The power of political organizations sometimes denies honor to men who think for themselves and refuse to "take orders." Men in office sometimes vote for party rather than for right.

There is abuse of wealth and opportunity. Reckless extravagance we see on every hand. Those who have little try to imitate the rich in vain display. Children get the notion that the object of life is to see how little one can do that is hard. When they have to look out for themselves they do as they have seen their elders do, and conclude, as one has put it, to wait for a situation with the emphasis on the "sit." Then there are others who are engaged at labor that is worth while but who deliberately limit their and work and insist on doing much less than they could easily do.

There is ill will between classes. The native American calls the foreigner a "wop" or a "dago" and refuses to help him become anything else. The rich man sometimes looks with scorn on the fellow who works with his hands. A great mass of the manual laborers have learned to call themselves the "proletariat." They hate the rich with a violent hatred and have begun to talk of " the class conflict " as if one class was meant to rule the other instead of living in harmony with it. Between the rich and the "proletariat" comes the middle class -- somewhat like the "bourgeois" of Europe. They are the small business men, the professional men, the clerks, the fanners, a vitally important element in a nation. Yet, looked down upon by the greedy rich man, despised by the discontented, ill-advised poor man, they sometimes wonder what they are coming to.

Yes, there are surely some things that are wrong. We have not nearly attained to the ideals for which we know we ought to strive.

132. The Contented and the Discontented

If some things are wrong to the extent that we have pointed out, it would be very strange if there were not a good many dissatisfied people in the world. In fact we can divide all mankind into two classes -- the contented and the discontented -- though the reason why we put a person in either group will vary greatly in the case of different individuals.

In the group of the contented we shall find such people as these:

(1) Those who know that conditions are not perfect, but who are afraid that a change would upset the good things which they do have -- "It is better to be safe than to be sorry," they argue;

(2) Those who have everything they want and naturally have no fault to find with things as they are;

(3) Those who take too little interest in the world's progress to care whether conditions can be made better or not.

All these belong to the group which either wants no change or will do nothing to bring one about. Such people often speak of themselves as conservatives. Those who dislike them often call them "stand-patters."

On the other side -- the discontented -- we find a variety of people:

(1) Those who have little or nothing, who think they could be no worse off by reason of any change, and who hope that somehow they would be lucky if a change took place, no matter what kind it might be;

(2) Those who are simply destructive or vengeful and who wish to "take it out" on the successful, not caring whether it is right to do so or not;

(3) Those who know that things may be made better and want to do whatever is necessary to make them so.

Is it desirable that we should have discontented people in the world? To some extent, yes. If there were no dissatisfied folks the world would never make any progress. The world owes a great deal to people who have had the courage to break tradition and suffer persecution in order to give a new idea to it. The more there are in our third class of discontented people, the less likely shall we be to suffer wrong in silence or permit others to be wronged without protest. Such people are the real "salt of the earth." With the very conservative on one side to offset the very dissatisfied on the other, those who are not extreme in either direction, but are progressive in a sane, sensible fashion, can lead us to a standard of happiness such as we have never yet enjoyed.

133. Some Radical Ideas

Before discussing this topic, we had better be sore that we know how we are using the word "radical." We have come to think of this term as signifying an idea or a person that is so far out of sympathy with existing conditions as to welcome extreme measures to bring about a change. Because in many countries a red flag has been used as the standard of such people, the most extreme among them have been nicknamed the "Reds."

One class of radicals are the communists of to-day. They want to do away with private property entirely. "What's mine is yours, and what's yours is mine," they say, though they often forget the first part of the theory. All property is to be owned in common, and the wealth that has been saved up by individuals is to be divided again. There is not much likeness between these people and men like. Robert Owen and the other unselfish dreamers of the first half of the nineteenth century, whose idea was to give everybody an equal chance and to make it possible for everybody to be happy.

In the United States the "I. W. W.," the so-called Industrial Workers of the World, are the most numerous examples of extreme radicals. What they advocate may be judged from a quotation or two from the preamble of their constitution:

"The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. …Between these two a struggle must go on until the workers of the world take possession of the earth and the machinery of production and abolish the wage system."

Such people have a great deal to say about "class consciousness." There is no thought among them of cooperation -- it is simply one class ruling the rest. To get power into their own hands they are willing to do anything whatever. They speak of "direct action," by which they mean destruction of property, threatening or taking of life, or any other means that will scare or force people to let them have their way. When they do not dare to go so far as this openly, they may indulge in "sabotage." By this term is meant any underhanded means of harming an employer, either by damaging machinery, causing imperfections in the product, or doing anything of that nature which will hurt his business.

It is hard to see how a right-thinking American can possibly indulge in such performances or hold such theories. A decent man finds it difficult to sympathize with even oppressed people who use any such means to have their grievances corrected.

184. Bolshevism

The Great War gave an opportunity one of the radical schemes for reorganizing government society to be tried out. After the government of the had been overthrown in Russia, the people, being utterly tired of war, were ready to submit to almost anybody who had a definite program to propose that was different from what they had been having. Two able and unscrupulous leaders, Lenin and Trotsky, took advantage of the opportunity. The scheme of things which they put into practice is usually called Bolshevism, from the name of the radical party in Russian affairs at the time -- the Bolsheviki.

The underlying idea of their system is that the state is all-powerful and that all the essential forms of industry shall be controlled and regulated by it. Mines, waterways, banks, railroads, and everything of similar character shall be administered by the state. The government is declared to be in the hands of those whom they call the " workers " -- and that means chiefly the manual laborers in the towns, who, except for the peasants, are in the majority in Russia. People who employ others or who live by means of income which they do not earn have no part in the government.

Authority in this system is exercised through Soviets. A soviet is a group of persons who are chosen by the various popular classes in a district to represent them, such as workmen, soldiers, or peasants. Representatives of local Soviets are supposed to constitute the governing body for the nation.

The Bolsheviki put themselves in power by a rule of blood and iron, following the theory that thorough social revolution is accomplished only by bloodshed. What success they have had has been through the ability of their leaders, who have a well-defined plan which they are carrying out at all costs. People who claim to represent their principles in this country lack both the purpose and the ability of the Russian leaders. Their endeavor is to stir tip disorder and disloyalty, without submitting any new plan. For these reasons and others we have come to connect with their name almost every bad idea in government and society.

In fairness, however, we must admit that we really do not know a great deal about what has happened in Russia since the Bosheviki came into power. They in turn have either not cared or pretended not to care what anybody else thought of them. It is hard to imagine that their system could have been utterly bad or else it would not have been able to keep itself in power in Russia as long as it has. And it is a mistake to call everything Bolshevik that we do not like.

Undoubtedly it is a sound principle that any one who receives any privileges from the state shall do something to earn them. We can hardly disagree with their theory that "he shall not eat who does not work." Quite possibly we may have to come sometime to the idea that the government shall regulate industry far more than it does now. But some things about Bolshevism make difficult the belief that it can ever be made suitable to Americans. For one thing it is apparently the rule of the people by one class, and it is not democratic for any class to rule. Besides, it assumes such a subjection of the individual to the authority of the state as would be hard for an American to tolerate. It is difficult for even humble Americans to give up the hopes and aspirations which are the goal under our present competitive system. Bolshevism may serve an ignorant and illiterate people. Let Russia try it if she wants to. We would rather not.

136. What the Socialist Believes

There is another theory of the way things ought to be, which is often confused with Bolshevism. This is Socialism. True, it has some features in common with Bolshevism, but at its best it is a much loftier and more attractive principle. Its ideal is the brotherhood and equality of all men, not the rule of the rest by one class. Its followers have come from all ranks of people, though naturally most of them from those whose opportunities and prosperity have been slight.

The Socialist believes that the present system of industry is wrong. Capital controls all production and should therefore be possessed by the state, says he. Every industry on which the mass of the people depend for their well-being should be operated by the state, which should see to it that everybody has a fair opportunity to work and to get a fair return for his labor. Then there would be no tyranny or injustice in the world of industry. The interests of one would be the interests of all. There would be no classes, since all productive toil would be considered worthy.

The theory sounds very pleasing when presented by a winning speaker or to an audience that is "sore " at the present state of society. When we think it over, however, the question comes to us, Who has the brains and unselfishness to make the system work? Surely a tremendous responsibility would rest upon those who were in charge of affairs under a socialistic system. Would not any system work if the men in positions of influence possessed the intelligence and broadmindedness sufficient to make Socialism succeed?

Of course we must admit that it is easier to do good under some circumstances than others. If Socialism would make it easier to do justice to all men, we ought to consider the idea seriously. It is but fair, too, to judge the principles of Socialism by its thoughtful, high-minded advocates as well as by the selfish, ignorant people who so often preach it.

Many Socialists in the United States were disloyal during the Great War, and naturally many people assumed that Socialist principles in other respects must be bad. Many Socialists, too, have been opposed to the Christian church, but there is no reason whatever why Socialism and religion should oppose each other. To some, indeed, the true Socialism seems to be simply putting into practice the lofty teachings of Christ.

It is undoubtedly best that whatever good there is in Socialism should be introduced gradually, rather than to upset everything by establishing the whole system at once. Let us not assume that everything new is undesirable, or that because we do not like some people we should refuse to listen to what they have to say. They may have an idea worth while.

136. Can We Correct the Wrongs?

We have admitted at some things are seriously wrong in the world as we know We have said a little about some of the extreme theories aging the condition of the world. Now what are we to think about it? Is the task of making the world a first-class place to live in a hopeless one?

To admit it would be going contrary to the history of mankind. The world is better than it used to be. Despite setbacks now and then, it has on the whole moved steadily With all the strikes and high prices and discontent are worried us these last few years, there never was a time when the mass of the people in the United States had so many comforts and pleasures as they do now. There is no reason why we should think that progress has stopped and that we can never do any better.

To correct the wrongs which we have mentioned there are two conditions necessary: (1) People in general must be educated to realize that wrongs exist and to know the facts about men and things so that they can think and act intelligently in correcting the wrongs. (2) People who know what is wrong and how it may be remedied must be willing _to do actively the work required to make the improvement.

Improvements in industry or society or government will never be accomplished by letting the other fellow do the work. Every single change in an any of these lines is going to affect us somehow sooner or later. Perhaps we should all do more ourselves if we realized that fact. Democracy, which we believe is the right principle of government, depends upon the idea that in the long run people will be right oftener than they are wrong, and that good citizens will all do their part to see that things are settled right as often as possible.

To correct wrongs, too, we must be willing to change our minds. Of course when one is convinced that he is right, he should stand by his convictions with all the power that he has. But he should be sure that what he calls "convictions " are not merely stubbornness or force of habit, and he should always be open to receive new ideas or to listen to sincere arguments from those who think differently from him.

Especially is this true in politics, for in a democracy many important industrial and social questing are settled by political action. Political organizations have been very useful in getting things done, but the people should use the organizations, and not let the organizations rule the people. We should form our own opinions on public questions and not let politicians tell us what to believe. And if every voter takes an active part in electing party committees and nominating party candidates, we shall have little need to complain.

137. How Changes Come About

We could classify changes under many different heads. There are changes in methods of doing things and changes in ideas. There are industrial changes, social changes, and political changes. And of course it would be impossible to separate them, entirely from one another.

The genius of inventors and men of science is responsible for the bringing out of new machinery and new processes, which in turn may have very great results socially or politically. Eli Whitney's cotton gin made slavery important in the South and forced an issue into politics, the effects of which can still be seen. There is almost no escaping the influences of material changes such as this.

Changes in ideas are often harder to bring about. It was much more difficult to convince the South that slavery was an evil and a harm to the Southern people than it was to get them to use the cotton gin after it was invented. To establish a new principle we must first make the majority of public sentiment favor it. Gradually we may hope to induce people to change their views and customs to agree with a new idea if we can show them that it is sound. When we get the majority of people thinking and doing as we do, then it may be safe to make a law commanding the rest of them to do the thing in the same way. To get the law by tome means made first and then try to force obedience to it before the people in general are convinced of its soundness is usually far less satisfactory than the oilier way.

This docs not mean, of course, that those in authority should never undertake or propose anything new on their own responsibility. Our officials ought to lead us as well as to obey us. But their task will be much easier if they can convince people that their program is sound than if they try to force it upon a people who misunderstand it.

Changes brought about in this way -- by convincing people of the merit of a new thing or a new idea, and then getting them to adopt it by custom or by law -- we may call changes by evolution. Sometimes, however, people will not accept the new idea. They may be stubborn or ignorant or may conscientiously believe that the old is better. If those who adhere to the old idea are in power politically, it may be that nothing short of violent action will overthrow them. Changes which come that way we may call changes by revolution.

England is the great example of a country where most changes come about by the slow but certain process of evolution. When her people make a change, it is usually because the majority of them have become convinced that it is desirable. And when they have changed, the change lasts.

France is a country which had one great Revolution. There seemed to be no other way to overthrow the wrongs of centuries. The change was sudden and extreme.

The United States came into existence by what we call the American Revolution. After all, however, this Revolution did not change customs or life very much. It simply was a breaking off of a part of the British Empire which had become strong and self-confident enough to go its own way. Much more revolutionary in some ways was our Civil War, which suddenly put an end to slavery and settled a long dispute about the political nature of the Union. But most of the changes in this country have been like those of England -- evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

138. Which Way Is Best?

That great good has sometimes come about through revolution and war, one must not deny. England and America both realize that it was best for the United States to gain their independence. One can not see how the German military madness for mastery of the world could have been checked until it had met with defeat hi war.

Yet often great and sudden changes go too far at one stride. No doubt it would have been far better if the ignorant negroes had not been given the vote so soon after they were set free, and before they had any opportunity to become educated. The Revolution in France in 1789 and the recent overturn in Russia were accompanied by excesses which cast discredit and suspicion on both movements.

Besides, when changes are made under the stress of fervent and quickly aroused emotion, they are sometimes followed by a reaction which may undo part of what has already been accomplished. France, after overthrowing her absolute monarchy, went back for a time to absolutism again. Our Civil War, though it was won by a fervor for freedom and unity, was followed by an era of political quarreling and corruption that was almost disgraceful. The great struggle through which we have recently passed, in which a mighty spirit for the defense of liberty and justice and democracy possessed so many nations, was succeeded by a period in which the meanest sort of selfishness seemed to have seized a great part of mankind.

If changes come gradually, they are less likely to be followed by reaction. If a new thing is not introduced too abruptly, people are more likely to be ready for it and to accept it when it is established. There may be a right way and a wrong way to do a good thing.

A revolution either destroys in order to build things new or else destroys simply for the sake of destroying. Evolution brings on the new without changing the old suddenly or unnecessarily. Surely the latter way is better.

We are a democracy. We have the means -- universal suffrage -- to make our government what we will. All we need to do is to get enough people to vote a certain way and we can have any social or economic change that even the most radical may desire. That is the reason why there should be no excuse for revolutionary methods when radicals wish to get a change.

Radicals are entitled to try to get a change by persuading enough people to vote for their program. To accomplish this they are entitled to free speech. Any suppression of free speech gives them an excuse for advocating revolutionary measures, because then they can claim that their only peaceful way of securing a change -- the ballot -- is closed to them.

There is no reason for any one to fear free speech. It has been said that the surest way to show up a fool is to let him hire a hall and address the public. But there may be some good ideas in radical arguments. Anyway, no honest man who is capable of thinking ought to fear free speech.

Radicalism thrives on suppression and abuse. If given a chance to talk itself out, it would be far less harmful than if silenced until it breaks out in violence. Every time anybody with political or economic power abuses that power by doing anything unfair, he promotes Bolshevism or radicalism. Every time the government acts illegally in putting down Bolshevism, it makes more Bolshevists.

Those who are politically and economically powerful have a wonderful chance to combat radicalism if they wish, by avoiding harsh and arbitrary political or judicial acts as well as inexcusable profiteering. Every time a manufacturer doubles his price to take care of a twenty per cent increase in wages he foments strikes and encourages Bolshevism. If he would be content with reasonable profits, instead of piling up more wealth than he can ever hope to use, he would take most of the wind out of the sails of agitators.

The best arguments of radicals are the illustrations of abuses which, they say, our present system can not hope to correct. These abuses come invariably from men of great political or economic power. Sometimes they are able to influence even the courts. So long as they insist on owning and running the country for their own selfish "interests," they will give a big opportunity to the agitators. It will be easy then to convince the fellow who thinks he is not getting a square deal that it is useless to try to do anything by constitutional means and that by contrast a revolutionary would be very simple and effective.

Let us then strive to learn our country's needs and the needs of the world. When some one proposes what he thinks is a better way of doing some thing, let us give it whatever fair consideration it deserves. And lei no consideration of selfishness or apparent personal advantage keep us from helping to bring about the change if it will make the mass of the people better and happier.

139. Making People Think

People who never think can not be expected to know what is best for them. One of the greatest of our needs, then, is to become a thinking people. How can this be done?

For one thing, people must know the facts upon which their opinions are to be based. Magazines, newspapers, moving pictures, and public addresses are some of the means which present these facts to us. Sometimes, unfortunately, we get not facts but misstatements from these sources. We must therefore have some training in judgment and morals which will help us to discriminate between sound and un sound reasoning, between honest and perverted statements of fact.

For these purposes we have the church and the school. Some people think that the church has not done all that it could hi helping its members to live well "the life that now is." But since people of so many different views are often members of the same church organization, and since some church people believe that the church should be almost wholly a place for worship, it is not always easy to make a church a source of truth and power for right in improving social" and industrial conditions.

We have still the school. A public school can not properly teach the doctrines of any one political party or religious denomination. But it can make known the facts and principles on which their views are based. It can teach high ideals of life and conduct that will help employer and employed, laborer and capitalist, fanner and manufacturer to understand each other's needs better and work with each other instead of fighting each other.

No improvement or change can be made to last unless the people as a whole are in favor of it. In the long run a people who think will come out right, even though they make mistakes. To deal rightly with the great economic and social questions which we must try to settle, we must grasp the meaning and importance of the subjects with which we have been getting acquainted in this study of ours.