be stumbled upon. A Utopia, even if it can be realized, cannot be juggled out of a hat by a social magician. We must through development gradually assume the social form we desire. Only knowledge is obtained; wisdom is attained. Even our socialists, who, only yesterday, were promising us "a new heaven and a new earth," have learned that there is a tomorrow.

And withal, in our radicalism, if you choose to call it such, we are becoming more conservative. If we have begun to ask impertinent questions about classes, property, and social arrangements generally, it is not because we are condemning, but only because we are socially inquisitive. We would prove all things in order that we may hold fast to that which is good. Yet more clearly than ever before we realize the vastness, complexity, and even the mysteriousness of our social system. We know that we understand how various institutions and agents work very imperfectly. We know that many that seem to us to be without responsibility are intimately associated with some very important functions. We are not quite sure that we could create agencies which would perform the same functions more efficiently or with less cost. These things incline us to caution, to take easy steps, to examine results carefully before proceeding, and to use very flexible programs. But, if our knowledge is small, and if the difficulties are great, the call is for a greater determination, a more farsighted vision, a more careful, comprehensive, and patient study, and greater deliberation about ways and

means.

In view of this particular crisis in our development we must consider our problems. We must recognize the part which the older society, the older institutional system, and the older individualistic thought have played and are still playing. We must as clearly recognize the newer tendencies, both in the institutional system and in the newer attitudes toward our economic arrangements. Many of these problems we shall find to be old. When the universe was contrived many antagonisms were left. The enigmas of rich and poor, of waste and poverty, of privilege and oppression, have been presented to us by the many ages which they have baffled. As likely as not we shall leave them as part of our heritage to succeeding generations. Some of them appeared with the machine-system, and have become more and more conspicuous as the newer technique conquered the continent. Of these are the problems connected with huge aggregates of wealth, such as railroads and capitalistic monopolies. Some come from incompatibilities between advancing and stationary aspects of social development. The legal problem involved in employer's liability is typical of this class. Some are

manifestations of a later stage of the machine-culture. Of this kind are the problems centering in institutional system which trade unionism threatens to create. Of some of these problems we have long been conscious. The change in our attitude toward our social system has brought others within our field of vision. Who knows but there are many others which are with us, but which we cannot see because of intellectual blindness? But, old or new, familiar or unfamiliar, evident or invisible, all of these problems are part and parcel of Modern Industrialism. They are all involved in the gigantic pecuniary system which knits together our social life. The oldest of them is with us a problem very different in form from its earlier prototype which confronted our ancestors. They are all aspects of the larger question, Can our society determine the direction of its own development?

To find an answer to such a question would involve a quest into all of life. Here we must modestly limit ourselves to a general survey of the current aspects of Modern Industrialism. Our procedure makes it imperative, first of all, clearly to realize that our system is developing and that in this development the various aspects of social life mutually influence each other. The Industrial Revolution, if broadly enough interpreted, can then be made to show us the peculiarities and problems of the stage in development which we have now reached. We can then quite definitely turn our attention to the problem of the control of the development of industrial society, by inquiring about our knowledge of the "forces" which cause development, the means of control we possess, and the theory of control of which we should make use. The partial control which we are to exercise over development is to come from our handling of particular problems. Accordingly we must next consider a number of somewhat different problems, always with a clear idea of their relations to each other and to the developing whole. The few which will be treated are typical of the many which confront us. These fall into two somewhat distinct groups, the first centering about the problem of the organization of industrial society, the second concerning themselves with the various industrial classes which make up the population.

The primary question in the first group is that of the mechanical perfection with which price organizes society. The problem is complicated by the rhythm of the business cycle. Associated with it is the more difficult question of whether such an organization, quite apart from its mechanical perfection, can be made to serve the ends we would have it serve. A parallel problem is that of the extent to which the economic entity should be made to correspond to the

political entity; this appears most clearly in the issues which center. in the tariff. Internal problems of organization, of tremendous social consequence, particularly in the tendencies implicit in their gradual solution, are found in the regulation of railroads and capitalistic monopolies.

Of the second group of problems, perhaps the most comprehensive is that of the control of population, quantitatively and qualitatively, through immigration and through births. Its proper solution should do much to lessen the intensity of the other social problems. A second, somewhat less baffling, but still extremely difficult, is that of eliminating economic insecurity from the lot of the wage-worker. A third, perhaps most evident in the program of trade unionism, is concerned with the rise of group- and classconsciousness, the spirit of group solidarity implicit in so much of the recent social legislation, and the clash between the institutional systems of individualism and of collectivism. The progress implicit in a solution of these latter problems calls for an increase of state activity on behalf of the individual, and makes imperative the problem of finding new sources of revenue. And finally, whether ominous or prophetic, we need to note a rising spirit of protest which demands a radical reconstruction of our whole scheme of social life and values.

Such a quest promises no guaranteed solutions of perplexing problems. It will not yield magical formulas for disposing of the enigmas which have perplexed the generations. It will give no assurance that succeeding ages will have no baffling and bewildering questions to disturb their peaceful repose. It will furnish no open sesame to a social Utopia. On the contrary, quite likely it will show that the perfect society is far in the future. It may even convey the dismal lesson that our limited resources will ever prevent the emancipation of the sons of Adam from bondage to social economy. But the search should yield some positive results. It should put us in position to essay further quests into particular aspects of our industrial system. It should prevent our dissipating our energies in an attempt to realize the unattainable by impossible methods. It should save us from thraldom to social and economic alchemy. Even more important, it should show us that our problems are in process of gradual solution; that they have long-time aspects much more important than the immediate issues which we see; and that vision, as well as emotion, is called for in dealing with them. Here and there, too, we should pick up bits which together we can weave into a partial and tentative program. If our quest makes this beginning, it will have served its purpose.

I

THE ANTECEDENTS OF MODERN INDUSTRIALISM

The perplexing economic questions of the day, as we shall learn, are not simple little affairs which can be separated from the "prevailing system" and analyzed and "solved" in isolation. They are so closely related that a change in one affects many others. They are inseparable parts of that complex of institutions, traditions, conventions, and activities to which we attach the name Modern Industrialism, and they are intimately associated with the multifarious legal, political, economic, ethical, and social aspects of this larger system. It is, therefore, in view of this larger whole that our problems are what they are.

There is nothing singular in our possession of troublesome problems. They are the common heritage of the ages. When the universe was contrived enough of antagonism was left in it to keep some problems constantly before us. The sweep of change constantly adds new recruits to this array. It may be that somehow or other problems get "solved" it may be that they merely become obsolescent and, like old machinery, are "scrapped"; it may be that they are forced to surrender their places to newcomers; or it may be that they tend to lose their identity in that of other problems. Perhaps all of these things happen; but, however that may be, old problems tend to disappear. But, strangely or naturally enough, as you may choose to view it, we never have an end of problems. As old ones depart, new ones, without awaiting welcome, come forward. Some of these newcomers are old problems appearing in new forms; for, after all, there is much that is fundamental in life and institutions. The questions of efficiency, of poverty, of social classes, and of work and reward are as old as society. But some problems are new; and even the old ones are for us quite distinct from their predecessors-distinct in the economic status of the individuals affected, distinct in the scheme of values surrounding them, and distinct in the treatment for which they call.

All of these problems, old and new alike, are aspects of the development of society; they emerge or assume new forms as the social complex develops. They give evidence of a lack of compatibility somewhere between the many and various aspects of social life-between institution and institution, between activity and custom, between practice and ideal. Their conscious or unconscious-solution is nothing else than a restoration of harmony between antagonistic elements. Since, too, growth is not uniform, their passing leads usually to the rise of new problems. Their "solution" has the further effect of contributing to the development of society; the process is advanced.

If, then, we are properly to understand current problems, we must first of all get some impression of our present "system." It is so much a part of our very lives and activities that we find it hard to think of it as "a" system, and are prone to view it as a part of the immutable universe itself. And, when active intellectual effort does point it out as only one of many systems, we often fail to see that it is in process of constant change. Clearly to understand-rather than to know-that it is only one among many possible systems and to see that it is persistently changing, even as we view it, let us try to catch a glimpse of it in process of development. In such a task we need neither general statements of the nature of its growth nor an intensive study of the "facts." Our concern is not with the past, but with the present; our interest is not in "events," but in the process. We want to see a system very unlike ours slowly giving way to the one with which we are familiar.