PROVISION OF BORROWING FACILITIES. 357 



should be the ease in the great republic, and shows a curious 

 divergence between the views of business and of politics. It is right 

 to add that a limitation in the number of shares to be held and votes 

 to be given by each share-holder is recommended, also that another 

 American writer of great experience in Building societies (E. WRIGLEY) 

 considers that the stock vote (as many votes as shares) is bad in 

 principle, as "it gives the preference to capital over brains and 

 experience ; it gives the richer members power over the poorer ones ; 

 it tends to destroy confidence, and often leads to fraud and oppression ; 

 it is a great aid to dishonest management and the bane of large 

 corporations of the present day." In certain important groups of 

 mofassil Nidhis, it is customary to allow one vote for every share up 

 to ten, and thereafter one for every five ; this gives a preponderance 

 of power to wealthy shareholders, who moreover are generally those 

 who mostly attend general meetings ; these use the Funds as investments 

 and are often directors. Hence there is a tendency to run these 

 Funds as joint stock companies for the benefit of investors and 

 towards the development of dividends, and this is much complained 

 of by many members. The complaint is precisely that the Fund, 

 under this principle, falls into the hands of a few people who manage 

 everything with a view to their own interests. Experience seems to 

 tend towards the adoption of a modified democratic method ; some 

 Nidhis and many experienced members state distinctly that the 

 "one-man, one- vote" principle is folly, in that the ignorant, unbusiness- 

 like and improvident have the same voting power as the intelligent 

 and prudent business man, with a large stake in the society. To 

 which, however, there is the reply that the poor man is very often as 

 prudent as the rich ; that his solitary share may be his all ; that he 

 is more likely therefore, to insist on prudent management free from all 

 speculative bias, and above all that he is more likely to insist on 

 cheap credit rather than aim at high profits. The experience of 

 Europe is in favour of the democratic principle in these societies ; 

 even poor members thus learn to take a lively interest in a society 

 where their vote is so important, and it is considered that so long as 

 men do not grow wise in proportion as they grow rich, a Mutual 

 association should adhere to this principle, as more consistent with 

 the co-operative formula that a society is an association of men rather 

 than of shares. It is possible that, as in some Nidhis already, a 

 middle way may be found, e.g., in one Fund one vote is given for 



