AN OBJECT LESSON IN SOCIAL REFORM. 311 



But in place of this mass of politics, inseparable from the state 

 conduct of business, there was the natural selection of the most 

 reputable and fit men to take charge of the work. One of them 

 was an engineer of long experience in municipal works. Another 

 was a contractor of more than usual character and ability. Still 

 another was a banker, who was made treasurer, and who person- 

 ally inspected the work before it was paid for. Still another was 

 a man of wealth and leisure, who was glad to devote himself thus 

 to the welfare of his fellows. All the other gentlemen that had 

 anything to do with the work were likewise men of standing in 

 the community. All served without pay. 



The result of the selection of such men was the construction of 

 the largest possible number of miles of path with the smallest 

 possible expenditure. They exercised care in the purchase and 

 use of material. They knew that they had but a limited sum of 

 money to spend, and they aimed to make it go as far as they could 

 and to build as good paths as they could. They avoided expen- 

 sive experiments. They made sure, before going ahead, that the 

 plan they had adopted was the best. How well they succeeded is 

 shown by the fact that no fault has been found with their work. 

 As the various paths were completed, the bicyclists of the city 

 were invited to join in what was called an " opening." From five 

 hundred to two thousand would meet at the entrance of the path 

 and ride over it. In every instance they expressed satisfaction 

 with what had been done. It had been estimated, while the tax 

 bill was under discussion, that the paths would cost ten cents a 

 running foot. By the plan thought to be so chimerical the cost 

 was reduced to from two to four cents a running foot. 



III. 



What was done in this instance, where it was believed indis- 

 pensable to summon the aid of the state, can be done in all 

 instances. No practical problem of social reform has been or can 

 be suggested that can not be solved by voluntary effort. To 

 appeal to the state to solve it is to appeal to force, to resort to 

 feudal methods. It is, moreover, to assume that I know better 

 than my neighbors what will make them happy that I have the 

 right to compel them to make that use of their money that will 

 add to my pleasure rather than to theirs. By the pursuit of this 

 absurd policy, modern reformers, forgetting that they are follow- 

 ing in the footsteps of the old French despots, imagine that they 

 are hastening the millennium. What they are hastening is only 

 a revolt against their suppression of freedom. They are building 

 up a despotism of democracy certain to become just as hateful 

 and intolerable as the despotism of autocracy. 



