532 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



become equally evident that capital can not develop the industrial sur- 

 plus source without labor. Indeed, one has not to examine the situa- 

 tion very closely to become convinced that the once disfranchised wage- 

 earners are rapidly regaining as organized unions what they lost as 

 individuals, viz., a claim — and a valid claim at that — to some share in 

 the control of the industrial surplus source. To the extent that such 

 claim can be established through association, to just such extent, there- 

 fore, can coercion be mitigated. On this account it does not appear 

 to me at all unlikely that capitalists will tire in time of trying to enforce 

 coercive measures, if for no other reason, because they will find coercion 

 in the end too costly. That is to say, with diminishing returns staring 

 them in the face because of the antagonism of trade unionism, I can 

 readily see how capitalists may find it to their advantage to forego 

 exclusive control of their surplus sources and admit their laborers into 

 their monopolies by giving them shares in their companies. And if 

 this movement — which is already well advanced — toward profit-sharing 

 proceeds, ultimately the existing coercive relation between employer 

 and employee will be replaced by the cooperative system, and the old 

 guild organization will be reestablished on a very much larger scale. 

 But supposing the coercive system between capitalists and laborers 

 to be succeeded in this way by the cooperative system among producers, 

 there is still another class to be considered, namely, the consumers. 

 The new guilds, if established, would difi'er from the old guilds in this, 

 that they would actually control the headwaters of the industrial sur- 

 plus, while their predecessors only controlled a few incipient streams. 

 If they chose — and as their profits would be increased thereby they 

 might very well so choose — they could coerce consumers by demanding 

 monopoly prices for their products. Under the existing regime we 

 have had a taste of this sort of coercion as applied by the capitalists 

 alone, we can well imagine, therefore, what it would mean when applied 

 by capitalists and laborers combined. But here again, in spite of pres- 

 ent appearances, coercion must in the long run prove unprofitable. The 

 consumers do not represent a particular class, as do the laborers and the 

 capitalists, nor are their interests divided, as are those of the producers. 

 On the contrary, the consumers represent the entire community, and 

 public opinion is always united for fair prices and efficient service. 

 Monopoly prices and poor service touch the public's pocket, as we say, 

 and arouse resistance at once. When things go well enough the con- 

 sumers are satisfied, but let pressure be exerted on any side by pro- 

 ducers, it is remarkable how vigorously they resist. Agitation quickly 

 leads to association, and when combined consumers can readily bring 

 recalcitrant producers to terms, either by boycotting their products, or, 

 if this is not enough, by assuming control of the surplus source them- 

 selves. This latter plan has been adopted to a considerable extent in 



