LITERARY NOTICES. 



109 



seeks to comprehend facts, and their rela- 

 tions to ethical truths. 



The author of this work, profoundly im- 

 pressed with the importance of the ques- 

 tions he discusses, has devoted himself to 

 that consideration of his subject which in- 

 cludes a careful examination of existing 

 conditions, with an inquiry into possible 

 changes in the direction of a more complete 

 justice between capitalists and laborers. 

 It is a piece of good fortune that the task 

 has been taken up in this case by a writer 

 free from the eccentricities or narrowness- 

 es which too often beset those who discuss 

 social questions. The literature on the 

 subject of capital and labor is rapidly in- 

 creasing, and much of it is open to a com- 

 mon criticism. The range of view is either 

 too narrow, the formula? of political econ- 

 omy being accepted as final and complete ; 

 or we find ourselves at the mercy of a 

 being, utterly unscientific in his methods, 

 who proposes to set things right by means 

 little better than magic. Into neither mis- 

 take has Mr. Larned fallen ; for, on the one 

 hand, he has a correct appreciation of the 

 limits to the laws which the economists 

 have formulated, and, on the other hand, 

 his faith rests on means of attaining ends 

 which the most rigid scientific investigators 

 of society must commend. As conditions 

 change, economic science takes note and 

 sets about the explanation of the new facts. 

 The science is a growing one, and to take 

 its statements to-day as an approval of 

 existing forms of industrial life is to mis- 

 conceive its nature. As Prof. Cairnes has 

 clearly stated the point : 



" It (economic science) belongs to the class 

 of sciences whose work can never be com- 

 pleted, never, at least, so long as human beings 

 continue to progress: for the most important 

 portion of the data from which it reasons is 

 human character and institutions, and every- 

 thing consequently which affects that character 

 or those institutions must create new problems 

 for economic science." 



The perception of this fact leads to an 

 appreciation of our author's fundamental 

 views. He disputes no generally-accepted 

 economic conclusions, but gives due weight 

 to factors, at present excluded, which, 

 slowly gathering force, will raise new prob- 

 lems. He steps out into the broad field of 

 social inquiry, and seeks to bring into clear 



view agencies which must in time affect hu- 

 man character, and modify the institutions 

 of the present. In addition to this, the 

 nature of those modifications is foreshad- 

 owed. 



To show how clear and strong our au- 

 thor's position is in respect to social re- 

 forms, it is only necessary to glance for a 

 moment at his conception of the evolution 

 of justice in the department of human so- 

 ciety with which he is concerned. After 

 analyzing the function of capital, and de- 

 fining it with rare precision as being 

 "everything derived and accumulated from 

 past labor which enables present labor to 

 be employed in any such way that the ben- 

 eficial results from it have to be waited 

 for," two other facts of startling import are 

 brought into juxtaposition. They are, first, 

 that every kind of labor which does not 

 immediately produce for the man who 

 performs it the immediate satisfaction of 

 an immediate want is absolutely dependent 

 upon capital ; and, second, that this com- 

 plex social state which ive call civilization 

 has left no labor to be done by any man 

 that is not of that dependent kind. Here is 

 the dependence of labor upon capital 

 brought home to us by a mere statement 

 of facts. Pushing further the analysis of 

 the conditions upon which capital and labor 

 bargain together, and the reality of this de- 

 pendence is intensified. We are invited to 

 look at the man of capital and the man of 

 work in the concrete, in order to realize 

 the motives and necessities which to a large 

 extent determine their relations to each 

 other. The capitalist becomes an employer 

 mainly to increase his means ; the desire 

 of gain is the most powerful motive shaping 

 his conduct. As a bargainer, he therefore 

 occupies a position of comparative inde- 

 pendence. The empty-handed laborer is 

 very differently situated. He must live ; 

 the physical wants of himself and family 

 must be supplied ; he bargains with inex- 

 orable needs at his back. Given these con- 

 ditions, and human nature not apt to rise 

 to high motives, and it is palpable that 

 there is no limit to the possible oppres- 

 sion. No one claims that capital exercises 

 to-day all the advantages of its superior 

 position. The reasons that it does not are 

 found in prevailing moral ideas which have 



