SCIENCE. 



[Vol. VUI., No. 178 



too large demands on' the available space of this 

 journal, I will conclude with one further general 

 consideration. 



Professor Newcomb closes his article with the 

 statement of an objection against state interven- 

 tion, based on the observation that our congress- 

 men, and I suppose our lailers in general, are not 

 a very wise body of men, and presumably do not 

 know better than others what is for our good. 

 This shows, it seems to me, a total misapprehen- 

 sion of the question involved. Nobody wants to 

 intrust certain things to the government because 

 the government is very wise and very good. No- 

 body desires paternal government. Even the ex- 

 treme socialist does not desire it. What he wishes, 

 and believes practicable, is a fraternal common- 

 wealth. The question involved is not, "Shall we 

 let wiser and better people than we attend to 

 our affairs for us ? " but "Shall certain functions 

 be performed by co-operative methods, or by in- 

 dividual methods ? " for the state is only a certain 

 kind of co-operative institution. Then, if we 

 decide on co-operative methods, shall we adopt 

 voluntary co-operation, possibly that of a corpora- 

 tion, or shall we adopt the compulsory co-opera- 

 tion of the state? 



Now, inquiry shows that certain functions are 

 adapted for individual effort, that certain others 

 will be best performed by voluntary co-operation, 

 while still others can be accomplished most ad- 

 vantageously by the compulsory co-operation of 

 the state or of some subdivision thereof. What 

 these are, space does not permit me to say in this 

 place. 



I have, however, laid down a few sim^jle rules 

 elsewhere ; ' Prof. Henry C. Adams has gone into 

 the subject far more at length in his paper, 

 " Principles that should control the interference 

 of the states in industries ; " - while valuable sug- 

 gestions may be found in the admirable mono- 

 graph of Dr. James, on the "Relation of the 

 modern municipality to the gas-supply," just pub- 

 lished by the American economic association. It 

 is enough, if in this series of articles the general 

 pomts of view of the new school can be impressed 

 upon the readers of Science. It may be remarked, 

 however, that 'interference' is not so good a 

 word as ' participation ' to denote the activity of 

 the state ; for it is not opposed to, but, if wise, in 

 the line of the desires of the people, and precisely 

 on that account it is not generally noticed how 

 large is its sphere. 



Finally, the case is not nearly so hopeless as one 



1 In my 'Introduction to the labor problem,' published 

 by Harper and Brothers, 1886. 



2 A lecture printed in pamphlet form by the Constitution 

 <club of New York. 



would gather from Professor Newcomb's observa- 

 tions. Experience, sooner or later, teaches the 

 people many wise things. It is the function of 

 the economist to help the people by more careful 

 observation, and thus to shorten the term of un- 

 fortunate experimentation, and to lessen the cost 

 of that dear teacher ' experience.' Take the case 

 of the post-of3ace. Experience and science have 

 decided that its functions should be performed by 

 public authorities, trial having been made of pri- 

 vate enterprise. That question is settled, and the 

 benefits of correct practice are inestimable. Take^ 

 the case of letter-carriers in cities. They are a 

 great saving and convenience. I suppose, in a 

 city like Baltimore, the time they save to citizens 

 must amount to hundreds of years in each year. 

 The benefits derived from letter-carriers are equal 

 to those of great inventions, but they have been 

 demonstrated, and are secure. I think the rail- 

 way problem, now prominent, will be settled in 

 the same way ; that is, by experience, aided large- 

 ly by science. 



It is not necessary that the majority, or even a 

 great many, — that is, compared with the entire 

 population, — should have special and profound 

 knowledge in economics in order to secure intelli- 

 gent economic action. The influence of two or 

 three men ' who know ' is enormous when ex- 

 erted at the right time and in the right place. I 

 suppose six men in congress who thoroughly un- 

 derstood public finance could, at the beginning of 

 our late civil war, have shaped the financial policy 

 of government for years to come. 



I wish again to call attention to the forcible 

 illustration to which allusion has already been 

 made. A few months since, the question was 

 raised whether the gas - works of Philadelphia 

 should be sold. Few understood the question ; 

 and it is said that a systematic agitation in favor 

 of private works was conducted by a vast corpora- 

 tion, which had its eyes fastened on them as a 

 mine of wealth. But there was one man in. 

 Philadelphia who did understand the question in 

 all its bearings, and that was Dr. James. He came 

 forward and set the matter in its true light, and I 

 have been told that his influence was decisive. 

 At any rate, it had weight, and the gas-works, 

 remain to-day the property of the municipality. 

 That decision was worth many millions of dollars, 

 to the city of Philadelphia, and is an illustration 

 of the value of the higher education. All that 

 the University of Pennsylvania ever cost the citi- 

 zens of Philadelphia, either in their private or pub- 

 lic capacity, is a small matter compared to the 

 value to that municipality of a single man wha 

 occupies a chair in that institution of learning. 



RiCHABD T. Ely. 



