146 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES. 



clear that there are only three out of twelve possible alternatives which 

 can yield the required result, although there are five possible cases in which 

 A may be actually no worse ofi and five in which he may/eeZ worse off. 



Here I may pass to question 13. 



To what extent does a feeliry of social injustice operate to affect a 

 man's motives to make him work harder, or less hard, or work less regu- 

 larly, and thus in itself become, psychologically, an economic factor 

 affecting the aggregate production ? It is only in certain special circum- 

 stances that the feeling will lead to harder work. It would do so where 

 an effort to escape the inferior position is great, but this is hardly distin- 

 guishable from the incentive which is afforded by the prospect of wealth, 

 and of distinction itself, which must be examined later. It is probable 

 that with many temperaments the feeling operates to exasperate, not, 

 indeed, all the time, but at occasional periods when the difference is brought 

 home by some marked external incident. It is probable, therefore, that 

 it contributes to an underlying feeling of unrest, and a complete unwilling- 

 ness to do more for the wages obtained than the minimum that will pass 

 muster. There must be many thousands, even millions, who continue to 

 accept inequality, not so much of wealth, as of wealth due to inheritance, 

 as part of the scheme of things against which they have little grievance. 

 They are believers in ' luck,' and coming into wealth from a forgotten uncle 

 in Australia may move to envy, but it does not lead into malice or resent- 

 ment. These vast numbers are sufficiently untouched in their economic 

 activity by a sense of social injustice in everyday life not to work less 

 faithfully or less hard. There are, however, numbers who, in times of dis- 

 tress and unemployment or labour trouble, can be brought to considerable 

 moral reaction against any display of luxury on the part of the ' classes ' 

 who do not work for a living. We have heard of the resentment against 

 mining royalties, which as a peculiarly provocative form of inherited 

 wealth are contributory in a marked degree to that lack of good feeling in 

 the mining industry which has a marked economic significance in output. 

 In my judgment the feeling of resentment against wide differences of 

 fortune due to inherited wealth is seldom distinguished in popular feeling 

 from differences due to the right of accumulation as distinct from inherit- 

 ance. It is the inequality of reward and the multiplying power of 

 accumulated wealth which excites animosity, not so much that particular 

 part of it which may be due to the inheritance system. I- find it difficult 

 to believe that a sense of social injustice addressed simply to the existence 

 of a system of inheritance is, in itself, an important economic factor. The 

 average man is unaware that inheritance is not a ' natural right ' existent 

 at all times and in all places. If he has any sense of injustice it is against 

 inequality in general, and not to inequality as brought about by this 

 system. 



I have made many inquiries in America of workmen and of those who 

 are in touch with them and know their psychology, and I am assured that 

 grievances about inheritance as such have no adverse effect whatever on 

 production. Indeed, I was assured that inequality of wealth, to which 

 this is contributory, stirs men to effort, to emulation, to ambition, and 



