58 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



We do not vote away our own money in every case, nor the 

 money of this man or that man ; we vote away a certain part 

 of all the ])roj)erty in the town or State for the public uses. 

 In our State, the man without a penny may have as potent a 

 voice in taking that money, and in determining its use, as the 

 man who claims a million. We say, in any town, " We want 

 fifty thousand dollars this year to keep good roads for all, 

 good schools for all, and to give food and raiment and shelter 

 to those who cannot obtain them for themselves." We send 

 out a man — the tax-collector — to take so much property wher- 

 ever he can find it. Up to this point every good citizen is a 

 communist. And it is a fact, that the more civilized a society, 

 the farther does this principle of communism prevail. Witness 

 the advance of public schools, the provision made for the poor 

 and unfortunate. Although the operation of this principle, 

 up to a certain point, is good, — even essential to society in 

 its best forms, — there are only a few in the world who claim 

 that it is possible or desirable for this principle to prevail 

 universally. 



But there is also much voluntary cooperation that has in it 

 the element of the communistic principle. In most of our 

 churches the expense is voluntarily borne by comparatively a 

 few. In almost every Christian church the hearer is wel- 

 comed, whether able to pay or not. In our colleges, the 

 money given is for the perpetual use of young men or women. 

 Those who pay most, pay but a mere fraction of what is spent 

 for them. 



In other cases the benefit, or possible benefit, is as the 

 amount contributed, — as in mutual insurance companies, — a 

 most beneficial form of cooperation. 



The growth of all these is understood, and their principles 

 are recognized as wholly beneficial. 



As we have remarked, cooperation, under the communistic 

 system, can prevail icJtolly only in limited communities ; that 

 is, where some form of intense religious life, or abnormal 

 philanthropic views, are more powerful than the instinct of 

 separate ownership in property. This state of things can 

 never, we believe, control any community, except it be a 

 community drawn together by taking here and there one from 

 the great mass. But from such communities we can learn 



