SOCIALISM AND PRECEDING ARGUMENTS 265 



advanced on his behalf to which, on practical grounds, Book in 

 any socialist could object. We have not assumed 

 that out of all the wealth he produces he shall take a been made for 

 larger, or even so large a share, as the least efficient to which 

 of his workmen. On the contrary, we have assumed JSJSf 8 neec 

 that his contributions to the national wealth find their 

 way into the pockets of those around him, and that for 

 him nothing is left but the bare means of subsistence. 

 It has indeed been shown that he must necessarily 

 have the control of capital, and be free to use it in the 

 way that he thinks best ; but this is only because the 

 control of capital affords the sole means by which, 

 amongst free men, industrial discipline can be en- 

 forced and the productive genius of the few be 

 communicated to the muscles of the many. For all 

 that has been said thus far to the contrary, the great 

 man himself may derive from his control of it no 

 advantage whatsoever. We have assumed only that for we have 

 by his use of it he shall concentrate his exceptional h^keeps mme 

 faculties on the practical business of wealth-produc- JJoJjjJ ^3h 

 tion with as much intensity and devotion as he ^ e ma ; kes ' for 



* himself, 



would do if the whole of what he produced were to 

 go into his own coffers. We have, in fact, been 

 regarding the great man as being socially the servant 

 of the ordinary men, though in technical matters he 

 is their master. 



So far, then, as our argument has up to this point 

 proceeded, we have merely in our theory assigned 

 to the great man functions which are implicitly 

 assigned to him in the reasonings of the more recent 

 socialists themselves, whilst in practice we have 



