7 22 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



mum of profits, are too common to admit of mention. In high-class 

 periodicals, too, like " The Century," we find plentiful manifestations 

 of the same spirit. Sometimes, as in the article " Danger ahead," 

 published in a late number of that magazine, the fear of violent revo- 

 lution shows itself in the feverish manner of the argument, and may 

 fairly be counted as the chief source of the opinions expressed ; but, 

 again, as in the recent papers of Washington Gladden, we find a 

 calm discussion of socialism and conclusions favorable to it arrived 

 at with no obvious bias. And in the pages of the most orthodox 

 political economists we observe a kindred tendency. In Mill's " Po- 

 litical Economy " there is no exhaustive examination of the unequal 

 distribution of wealth ; but the tone of the whole work is, I think, 

 expressive of regret that inequalities should be so great as they are. 

 While considering inheritance he commends laws enforcing the di- 

 vision of accumulated wealth at death.* Elsewhere he denies that 

 the proportioning of remuneration to work done is really just, ex- 

 cept so far as the amount of work is a matter of choice ; it is only 

 " highly expedient." f This shows his feeling toward the existing 

 system, and nearly all political economists exhibit a like feeling. 

 And even in Mr. Fiske's " American Political Ideas," despite the 

 magnificent paean on our "manifest destiny," which is in effect a 

 eulogy of our comparatively free economic system, we read with sym- 

 pathetic regret of the progress of a typical Massachusetts village 

 from a state of comparatively equal prosperity and intelligence to that 

 of a manufacturing town, where the distance between the highest 

 and lowest becomes in nearly all ways so great. Our affections in- 

 cline toward this primitive homogeneity ; our ideas have been largely 

 molded by it and by the great struggle against slavery, with which 

 we naturally, though erroneously, associate definite class divisions, to 

 which we are obviously tending. Our feeling for the past, or rather 

 our adaptation to it, joins with apprehension of the future to make us 

 fear any further departure from homogeneity, and we are impelled 

 along rather by the action of blind economic forces than by any one's 

 wish. A perception of our economic tendencies voices itself roughly 

 in the very inaccurate saying that " the rich are getting richer and the 

 poor poorer," which is the burden of the works of Henry George and 

 most of the socialistic writers ; and the united action of society is in- 

 voked to remedy the unfair operation of economic laws. 



Such being the ideas more or less vaguely prevalent, it may be in- 

 teresting to examine 1. What has made possible the acquirement of 

 the great fortunes of the present generation ? 2. Will the favoring 

 circumstances continue ? 3. How should we regard the holding of 

 millions by a single man and its inheritance by his family perchance 

 by a single son who could never have gained such wealth for himself ? 



* Mill's " Political Economy," vol. i, p. 289, American edition. 



f Ibid., vol. i, p. 272. I can not reconcile this doctrine with the utilitarian philosophy. 



