FALLACIES OF MODERN ECONOMISTS. 229 



the land, another to confine taxation to land, another to national- 

 ize all the instruments and means of production, another pre- 

 scribes a system of co-operation. One favors the enlargement of 

 the powers and scope of government, and another insists on the 

 annihilation of all governments. Small wonder, therefore, that 

 the reader, who has not time to penetrate far below the surface, 

 should lack faith in the teachings of a system whose doctors so 

 thoroughly disagree. 



An interesting and somewhat amusing book, entitled The Why 

 I Ams, published by the Twentieth Century Publication Com- 

 pany, comprises a collection of short essays by the representatives 

 of most of the modern economic societies, in which the writers 

 give their reasons for the faith that is within them. Each writer 

 is confident that the school to which he belongs possesses the true 

 solution to the riddle of the social sphinx, and regards his scheme 

 for social redemption as founded on " fundamental scientific prin- 

 ciples." Let us examine some of these " fundamental principles " 

 upon which these societies are founded. One of the " fundamental 

 principles " underlying Progress and Poverty is, that the fund out 

 of which wages are paid is created by the wage-earner. It follows 

 that, if this be so, the doctrine that wages are advanced by capital 

 falls to the ground. Mr. George proceeds to test his theory by in- 

 duction. The illustrations he gives are of two kinds. One class 

 applies to isolated settlements and the other to modern society. 

 The one class apparently favors his theory, the other, however, is 

 decidedly against him. For example, he instances conditions 

 where men are employed in picking berries, gathering eggs, catch- 

 ing whales, etc. In these cases he says it is customary to pay 

 those employed in such occupations by giving them a certain pro- 

 portion of the things they have brought. In certain gold-fields it 

 has been customary to pay the miner for his labor by giving him 

 a certain percentage of the gold he has mined. All this seems 

 clear enough, and, if the world's industries were confined to those 

 above cited, Mr. George's principle would undoubtedly be sus- 

 tained. But when he goes on to apply it to the modern factory, 

 ship-yard, and those industries which form the vast majority of 

 human occupations, the facts clearly disprove his assertions. 



Mr. George says: "Bring the question to the test of facts. 

 Take, for instance, an employing manufacturer who is engaged in 

 turning raw material into finished products — cotton into cloth, 

 iron into hardware, leather into boots, and so on — as may be, and 

 who pays his hands, as is generally the case, once a week. Make 

 an exact inventory of his capital on Monday morning before the 

 beginning of work, and it will consist of his buildings, machinery, 

 raw materials, money on hand, and finished products in stock. 

 Suppose, for the sake of simplicity, that he neither buys nor sells 



