268 MY LIFE 



lcr, a wealthy gentleman of Edinburgh, who had read my 

 book and had given a donation to our society, but who 

 wished to give or bequeath a large part of his fortune for the 

 benefit of the community at large. He was, however, much 

 disturbed by the conflicting views of writers on the subject, 

 and though he was much inclined to land-nationalization, he 

 found it to be so strongly opposed by all the recognized 

 authorities in political economy, as well as by most public 

 writers and politicians, that he could not make up his mind 

 what to do. In this uncertain frame of mind he was persuaded 

 by some of his friends that the best thing he could do would 

 be to have a conference of all the leading politicians and 

 advanced thinkers to discuss the question, " What are the 

 best means, consistent with justice and equity, for bringing 

 about a more equal division of the accumulated wealth of the 

 country, and a more equal division of the daily products of 

 industry between Capital and Labour, so that it may become 

 possible for all to enjoy a fair share of material comfort 

 and intellectual culture, possible for all to lead a dignified 

 life, and less difficult for all to lead a good life? " 



He proposed to devote £1000 for the expenses of the con- 

 ference, and the following gentlemen agreed to act as trustees : 

 Sir Thomas Brassey, Mr. John Burnett, Mr. Thomas Burt, 

 the Earl of Dalhousie, Professor Foxwell, Mr. Robert Giffen, 

 and Mr. Frederick Harrison. 



But these gentlemen did not adopt the very clear state- 

 ment of the problem Mr. Miller wished to be enlightened 

 upon, nor the highly humane and moral object he had in 

 view, as shown by his own words given above. Instead of 

 it they adopted a comparatively hard and colourless state- 

 ment in the following terms : — " Is the present system or 

 manner whereby the products of industry are distributed 

 betzveen the various persons and classes of the community 

 satisfactory? Or, if not, are there any means by which that 

 system could be improved?" And this was again rendered 

 still more bald and systematic by being stated under five 

 heads and ten subdivisions, in the approved manner of the 

 political economists, so as to limit the questions discussed to 



