jsnv vs. Socialism M. Slack Wort Kirvglcm THERE can be no Hope of progress or freedom for the people without the un- restricted and complete enjoyment of the right of free speech, free press and peaceful assembly. Gift.of IRA B. CROSS GIFT OF 6 Millionism vs. Socialism OR Timocracy vs. Democracy BY H. SLACK WORTHINGTON THE SHAKESPEARE PRESS 114-116 EAST 28TH STREET NEW YORK 1912 ni -7 "W73 COPYRIGHT, 1912, BY H. SLACK WORTHINGTON. PREFACE The time is rapidly approaching, if, indeed, it has not already arrived, when there should be a political party in the United States of America that aggres- sively and courageously espouses and promulgates principles in favor of A QUALIFIED BALLOT or EQUITABLE EELATIVITY in the exercise of suffrage, and which defends property rights and in- dividual ownership and management, as against the SOCIALISTIC and GOVERNMENTAL tendencies of both the existing great organizations. SELF preservation is the FIKST law of nature; the preservation of the offspring is the second, and the preservation of the race or society is the third. Socialism implies that the preservation of Society is the first law, which reverses Nature. It follows therefore that individual ownership should not only be permitted but encouraged, till both self and off- spring are adequately protected, plus a sufficient accumulation for the preservation of society. But private ownership does not signfy PRIVATE MO- NOPOLY MILLIONISM IS NOT BILLIONISM. Unless private monopoly is prevented SOCIALISM which is PUBLIC MONOPOLY, will likely be adopted. Timocracy suggests a plan by which pri- vate monopoly can be prevented, and yet private ownership can be encouraged and protected to the fullest extent necessary for individual excellence and civilized progress. That plan is, The "Mil- 3 447927 4 PEEFACE lionth per cent. Anti-Monopoly Tax." See chapter first hereof. Private ownership is right in principle or it is wrong in principle. A compromise position is un- tenable. If it is right, the owners of property should assert and defend that right, and the attitude of government or society toward millions (but not to- ward monopoly) should be the same as its attitude toward any subdivision of those magnitudes. If it is wrong it should be abolished. If private ownership is right, then private con- trollership and management is also right, because no thing or system can exist without carrying with it the necessary corollaries and concomitants of that existence. Private ownership with socialistic con- trol (which all governmental control is) constitutes a condition as unreasonable as would exist under so- cialistic ownership with private control. Control in either case renders nugatory and void the under- lying principles of ownership, because controller- ship is a necessary concomitant of possession or ownership. Regulation is but a form of control and its ten- dency is toward industrial strangulation rather than toward industrial stimulation, because of the un- certainties that would beset the operation and man- agement of enterprises in which private capital is invested. Politics and business do not work well together, and SOCIALISM is but the natural result of exist- ing tendencies toward PUBLIC REGULATION AND CONTROL, AND of existing tendencies to- ward PRIVATE MONOPOLY. The former should be called GOVERNMENTAL FETICHISM and its advocates "FETICHISTS." Many Socialists at PREFACE 5 heart are as yet only Fetichists by profession. The ABUSE OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP, WHICH IS MONOPOLY, should be prevented, as suggested in the following pages, but private owners should CONTROL what they own and MANAGE THEIR OWN BUSINESS. Democratic Republicanism, which is the correct name for the principles advocated by both of the leading political parties in the United States of America, is founded on the idea of EQUAL and UNIVERSAL suffrage, and that citizens are i 'equal shareholders in a common property " and should exercise equal voting power. Tim- ocratic Republicanism, as proposed in the fol- lowing pages, is founded on the idea of REL- ATIVE and QUALIFIED suffrage, and that citi- zens are not "equal" but that they are " RELA- TIVE " shareholders in a common property, and should exercise "Relative" voting power. Essen- tially, therefore, the issue is between so-called equal- ity, which is found nowhere in nature, and which, in social organizations, necessarily becomes a political or "boss" oligarchy; and EQUITABLE RELA- TIVITY, which is found everywhere in nature, and which is the only practical guarantee against a po- litical or "boss" oligarchy. The spirit of generic Democratic Republicanism is hostile to all educa- tional, rent, or tax-paying qualifications for citizen- ship and suffrage. "Mass Rule" implies no qualifi- cation except that of being one of the "mass." The spirit of Timocratic Republicanism is favorable to the aforesaid qualifications, relatively exercised, and proposes a plan by which relativity can be se- cured. It holds that equality in suffrage, which controls 6 PEEFACE social organizations, is inconsistent with IN- EQUALITY in the ownership of those organiza- tions, and that relative excellence in personality is more equitably shown or indicated by ownership and usership of property than by any other method. There exists to-day throughout the entire world a strong sentiment in favor of Socialism or public ownership of all property, and of the means of pro- duction and distribution. There exists, also a stronger sentiment in favor of public ownership of so-called "PUBLIC UTILITIES. " Both of these have become sufficiently crystalized and pronounced to be seriously reckoned with and considered, and, during some future commercial depression may be- come a serious political issue. It is held herein that the adoption of either to any considerable extent would cause social demoralization, and, if persisted in, social decay. The following letter from one of the world 's greatest thinkers was published in the Brooklyn Eagle on October the 14th, 1902. It is very suggestive and ominous, and, unless present tendencies change, it will surely prove truly prophetic. Timocracy seeks a way to counteract these ten- dencies, and to curtail instead of expand all public or governmental ownership and operation. Herbert Spencer's letter to James Skilton, pub- lished in Brooklyn Eagle October 14, 1902. FAIKFIELD PENSEY WILTS, May 28th, 1894. DEAK ME. SKILTON : I believe I wished you good speed in your enter- prise, but I believe your enterprise is futile. In the United States as here and elsewhere, the movement PEEFACE toward dissolution of existing social forms and re- organization on a socialistic basis I believe to be irresistable. We have bad times before us and you have still more dreadful times before you civil war, immense bloodshed and eventually military despot- ism of the severest type. Truly yours, HEBEKT SPENCEB. THE GIST OF IT. The writer of the following pages appreciates in all its force the desire upon the part of men and women of action to get at THE GIST OF IT, or the ESSENCE boiled-down-in-a-nut-shell of all proposi- tions. The "'Gist" or essence of this work is anti- monopoly and anti-Democracy (generically con- sidered) but that wealth cannot be segregated be- yond the limit herein named without diminishing accumulation which would be injurious to Society. 1st, Under the "Millionth per cent. Anti-Monopoly Tax" (Chapter first) after one generation, no one person could begin life worth more than 25 million dollars, but could accumulate till death, and no company, on a ten per cent, earning basis, could pay over 5 per cent, on 60 million dollars. Monopoly would be impossible, but private ownership encouraged. 2nd, Since all property, except that yielded up in taxation, is controlled in the ratio of INTER- ESTS, it also should be thus controlled, hence that a RELATIVE QUALIFICATION for suf- frage is the only equitable basis for GOVERN- MENTAL OPERATION. 3rd, It is claimed that private ownership and con- trollership is a natural right, and that the inter- ests of the public will be subserved better by private than by public ownership and control- lership of all enterprises, that, in the nature of things, offer a reward for human activity. 8 THE GIST OF IT 4th, It is claimed that wealth must accumulate faster than population increases if living standards are to be improved, and that accumulation can be more certainly guaranteed by private THRIFT than by PUBLIC WASTE. 5th, That a rich man, though he be worth many mil- lions, is only a CUSTODIAN or TEUSTEE of his superabundant wealth; and, that, if he PROPERLY INVESTS and does not PRI- VATELY APPROPRIATE too large a part of his TRUST ESTATE, he is a better and safer CUSTODIAN than any or all public agents could possibly be, but that Monopoly should not be permitted, even by the "survival of the fit- test, " or by Socialism. 6th, That WOMEN should vote in the ratio of their interests the same as men, but that it is inex- pedient for them to hold public office the same as men. AT DETROIT, MICH., SEPTEMBER 18, 1911, PRESIDENT WM. H. TAFT SAID: "We did get along with com- petition ; we can get along with it. We did get along without monopoly ; we can get along without it, and business men of the country must square themselves to that necessity. Either that or we must proceed to State Socialism, and vest the Government with power to run every business. " INTRODUCTORY ESSAYS 1st The Substructure of Sociology. 2nd Individual Ownership a Natural Right. 3rd Monopoly Public or Private Not Right. 4th Publico-Private Monopoly Government Reg- ulation of Prices not Practical. 10 THE GIST OF IT 5th Justification for Anti-Monopoly Taxation. 6th Magnitude, Monopoly and Monstrosity. 7th The Governmental Idea Fetichism. 8th The Government and the Opposition. 9th Patriotism. 10th State Governments vs. Social Progress, llth Erroneous Conception of Universal Suffrage. 12th Actual Democratic Eule an Iridescent Dream. 13th Eelativity vs. Equality Individualism vs. Socialism. 14th " The People be Damned " or Blessed Which? 15th The Power of the Press. MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM INTEODUCTOEY ESSAYS. THE SUB-STRUCTURE OF SOCIOLOGY. EQUITABLE RELATIVITY AND THE COSBIPSYSO. The Universe exists and moves in accordance with natural law and inexorable conditions or it does not. If it does not, there can be no exact science in any- thing. If it does, Sociology is as exact a science as Cosmology. The four great divisions of the Universe are : the COSMOS, the BIOS, the Psychos and the Socios the "COS BIPSY SO." Many analogies are apparent, and, if each classi- fication was thoroughly understood, analogy would be self-evident throughout. In each the normal state is EQUITABLE EELA- TIVITY. On no other basis can equilibrium exist. From an aggregation of nebulae to an aggregation of human beings the same general laws prevail. A Solar System and a social system differ fundament- ally only in the multiplication of effects. In a solar system we see EQUITABLE EELATIVITY, com- petition, rivalry and strife. The larger body causes the smaller to revolve in the cold of space around a center of gravity often within its own sphere, and ultimately absorbs the smaller within 11 12 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM its own mass. We see the same rivalry and strife in Biology, the stronger exist by the destruction of the weaker. We see it also in Psychology, and none can be oblivious of the fact of its existence from the dawn of the clan or tribe to the Empire of to-day. We see also great waste manifest in the Cosmos. We see it likewise in the Bios, the Psychos and the Socios. We see in the Cosmos inexorable law or state or condition. If we could as thoroughly scru- tinize and understand the Kinetics of the microcosm as we can of macrocosm, which knowledge we may some time acquire, we would see that all activities in the Bios, Psychos and Socios are equally inexorable as to law, state or condition. If not, where does said inexorableness cease? Without strife, i. e., an- tagonism between centrifugal and centripetal forces, a solar system would collapse. Without strife subsistence of the strong by the destruction of the weak a Biological system would collapse, and the same is true of a psychical system or a social sys- tem. All states of being are resultant and conse- quential. There is no spontaneity. It is safe to predict that a co-operative SOCIOS, that will en- dure, will never come from a competitive Cosmos, Bios and Psychos. If socialism as to all human activities ever comes, it will not long endure until men are evolved out of what they now are into be- ings among whom nothing but socialism could ex- ist, ex necessitate rei. If it could be instituted now it would result in retrogression and final collapse just as the cessation of strife in a Solar System would result in collapse. From this it follows that all PARTIALLY socialis- tic systems must tend toward partial deterioration or collapse, and if this is true Socialism, is against TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 13 the Constitution of things, and, save for the protec- tion of individual action and ownership and for non- compensating activities, must, in the outcome, be for the worst and not for the best interests of society at large. A great Capitalist has very wisely remarked: "The error of Socialism is that you can create by formal enactment what must be a natural develop- ment, and carry on through the agency of men se- lected by some political method, what must be car- ried on by men selected by nature." "That is ab- surd, " said he. "It is not business." JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER. INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP A NATURAL RIGHT. What is a natural right? The word "right" has several meanings. Ordinarily it is used either in the sense of PRIVILEGE or FREEDOM or in the sense of justice or equity. First, man has the right to do this or that: Second, it is right that man should do this or that. Primarily it must be considered in the sense of PRIVILEGE or FREEDOM, and, in this sense, what has man a right to do? Human conclusions are usually facilitated by re- ducing complexity to simplicity. Assume, there- fore, an inhabitable earth in all respects as now save that it was inhabited by one man only. If we eliminate the idea that a superior being or power has handed down laws which define or pre- scribe that one man's privilege or freedom, we must conclude that he would possess these attributes to the extent of doing whatsoever he willed or desired 14 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM to do, and that his accomplishments would be limited only by his own power or might. If he would have the privilege to do whatsoever he willed, he would have the privilege to enjoy the usufruct of that do- ing, hence he would have the privilege to own what- soever he willed. Suppose at this juncture another man should be introduced. Of him the same must be admitted. As long as each could do as he willed without conflict with the other, harmony would pre- vail, but whenever one trespassed upon the privilege of the other, discord would begin which could only be settled by compromise or force. If settled by compromise, then the use of the word i i right ' ' in the sense of justice or equity, would arise, and any vio- lation of the agreement would constitute a wrong. Whatever is true of one man or of two men is true of one or two billion men. On this fundamental ba- sis conclusions must be reached. If men have the privilege to DO, they have the privilege to enjoy the product of that doing, hence they have the privilege to OWN own anything that they can or all things if they can. When men become grouped in clans, villages, states or nations they still possess this privilege, but, likewise, other men have the privilege to define or pre- scribe what may be done or owned by any of their number. The social question, therefore, is not one of privilege, but one of ABRIDGEMENT. To what extent, therefore, shall each individual's natural privilege or freedom to do or to own be abridged? Fundamentally Timocracy holds that it should be abridged only to the extent of protecting each against monopoly and vs. the viciousness, unre- straint and worthlessness of others. It holds that monopolistic private ownership is a type of vicious- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 15 ness and that it should be prevented. Any property that is exclusively owned might, if too vast in its proportions, be confiscated by violence or force, be- cause, just as a man has the privilege of owning, so others have the privilege of depriving him of own- ing, and they would likely exercise that privilege if too seriously oppressed. Prevention of monopo- listic ownership, therefore, is a form of protection to individual ownership. Those who believe in So- cialism, or Fetichism, must conclude that man has not the natural privilege of doing or of owning whatsoever he will. If this idea be correct, what would have been the status of the one man in the original illustration? Why do not all men possess the same natural privilege that one man possesses ? It is not the exercise but the abridgement of these natural privileges that is wrong, hence that wrong should be confined to the least possible sphere of human activity that will insure protection and order. Individual liberty for the exercise of fac- ulty is abridged if individual ownership is denied or impeded within proper limitations. If it be assumed as the fundamental basis that men have NOT the natural privilege of doing (which also means owning) whatsoever they will, then abridgement to any extent, even to the absorp- tion of individual effort and of its products by the state, as is contemplated by Socialism, would be in order. As heretofore stated : Socialism is a Public monopoly which will come if Private monopoly is not prevented. Conclusions must be based on one or the other of these original positions. It is difficult to conceive how the natural privileges of men can or could be abridged, save by some outside agency or by men 16 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM themselves when they organize in societies. Abridgement by outside agency is an idea long since obsolete, and untenable. Governmental Fetichism now threatens freedom of individual activity and initiative, and to the extent that it is adopted will contravene the natural privilege of men and ulti- mately result in the retardation of progress, that is to say, it will cause less crude material to be con- verted into utilizable forms, less accumulation of wealth, hence lower standards of living than we now enjoy. \ MONOPOLY PEIVATE OE PUBLIC NOT EIGHT. It is contrary to the rights of man that MONOP- OLY, either PUBLIC OE PEIVATE, should be permitted to exist, which means that there should be no combination, partnership or co-operation be- tween private monopolists and public commission- ers. In their desire to stifle competition, and to perpetuate monopoly, some monopolists have actu- ally proposed that the Government name the price at which the products of monopolies can be sold. That this is misleading and perhaps disingenuous is obvious to any fair-minded and sensible man, be- cause the public officials would, of necessity, have to reach their conclusions from the representations of a private Bureaucracy. Said officials might be sympathetic with or they might be misled by the private monopolist and thus be induced to name or to sanction prices that would be far in excess of justice or of the needs of the enterprise. It would result in simply shifting the responsibility for mo- nopolistic extortion from the heads of private offi- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 17 cials on to the heads of the public commissioners. The private monopoly could say, i i Has not the gov- ernment sanctioned these prices ?" The funda- mental idea that PEIVATE MONOPOLY should be allowed to grow until it is necessary that a public commission should have anything to do with prices except to limit the maximum of companies to which special franchises are given, is repugnant to both reason and justice. Prices should be the result of COMPETITION of supply and demand and not the result of the dictum or decree of a private mo- nopoly, even if it be nominally under the control of commissioners. Much has been said about "ruin- ous competition. " If competition is " RUINOUS, " then SOCIALISM is the remedy. Society cannot progress half socialistic and half individualistic, more than it could exist "HALF SLAVE AND HALF FREE" as the great emancipator so wisely asserted. SOCIALISM constitutes a PUBLIC mo- nopoly under which private citizens would be prac- tically SLAVES to public OVER LORDS. The "COMING SLAVERY" prophesied by Mr. Spencer, would in fact be realized. Monopoly of any or either kind necessarily empowers one class of men (and that a small class) to exact TRIBUTE OR TAX from another class of men (and that a large class) which constitutes an ABUSE of ownership, if exercised by a private monopoly, and TYRANNY if exercised by a socialistic or public monopoly. Self-respecting men will not tolerate TRIBUTE OR TAX except that which they VOLUNTARILY impose on themselves by their government for the sole and only purpose of performing certain duties which they, as individuals, cannot do, or which offer no reward for individual effort. No man or com- 18 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM pany has a right to patronage that he or it does not merit by EXCELLENCE OK ENTERPRISE, and the offense of monopoly is in no wise mitigated be- cause its prices may have been named by a commis- sion which may have been dominated or in some way influenced by the monopolists themselves. The course to pursue is TO PERMIT NO PRIVATE MONOPOLY that requires the agent of a PUBLIC monopoly to regulate it. Monopoly is not necessary for the preservation of SELF, OFFSPRING and SOCIETY. CUMULATIVE TAXATION will pre- vent it and yet leave ample reward for all EXCEL- LENCE. Next to monopoly the OSTENTATIOUS EX- ENDITURE OF WEALTH is harmful to society. This cannot be prevented, but should be discour- aged. PUBLICO-PRIVATE MONOPOLY: GOVERN- MENT REGULATION OF PRICES NOT PRACTICAL. The proposition that the Government should reg- ulate prices, or name prices at which the products of private monopoly should be sold, is impracticable and more unreasonable than out and out Socialism, because it is, in fact, disguised socialism (Publico- Private Monopoly) which is designed to perpetuate private monopoly. The price at which a commodity sells is the SU- PER-STRUCTURE of all business; the SUB- STRUCTURE is all the rest relating to business. No super-structure can be strong if the sub-struc- ture is weak. The former, therefore, must be con- structed or regulated with reference to the latter. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 19 If therefore the Government names prices it must GUARANTEE PROFITS, which means that it must regulate the cost of raw material, the price of labor, the facilities for production and a multitude of incidental and necessary conditions and concomi- tants of enterprise. If the Government does NOT regulate these essential features of production, it cannot regulate the price, but must, of necessity, name a price that depends upon what the private owners may say or do in their regulation of the sub- structure or of the necessary incidental features of production. We have then the absurd and impracticable con- dition of the Government Monopoly regulating the price, and the Private Monopoly regulating every- thing that must in practice determine that price. It is absurd to hold that the Government could regulate the PRICE and NOT guarantee PROF- ITS; and if it did guarantee profits it must also regulate all the necessary agencies by which profits are made possible. No power on earth can wisely regulate the Super-Structure of anything or system, and NOT regulate the Sub-Structure of that thing or system. Government so-called regulation of prices, there- fore, must be only a perfunctory service depending on private monopoly for its real and genuine serv- ice, because to regulate otherwise must mean that it shall regulate the Sub-Structure as well, or, in other words, that it shall practically run the busi- ness, which is Socialism pure and simple, made worse than Socialism as proposed by its votaries, because the benefits of the Publico-Private Monop- oly would go to the private monopolists only. There is no compromise position: property must 20 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM be PEIVATELY owned and operated or it must be PUBLICLY (SOCIALISTICALLY) owned and operated. The Government should fix the MAXI- MUM PRICE for all Companies to which special franchises are given ; it should prevent MONOPOLY not enter into partnership with monopoly. To conceive Government, which is the agency of all the people, entering into business arrangements with private monopoly, which is the agency of only a few of the people, is an absurdity in thought. Government can PROTECT the people against monopoly by CUMULATIVE TAXATION : the peo- ple require no other protection, and should consent to no other until they adopt SOCIALISM, which is a monopoly in which all the people can participate, through OVER LORDS of their creation. THE JUSTIFICATION FOR ANTI-MONOPOLY TAXATION. From the first syllable of recorded time until a comparatively recent date, inter-transportation has been very difficult and world- wide transportation has been impossible. During all of this period com- munication has been no easier or quicker than trans- portation. During the last few years transportation has been facilitated and quickened until the impossi- ble has become the commonplace and months have almost been reduced to moments. Communication has been so vastly improved and quickened that IT has become almost instantaneous. Under the old regime it was physically impossi- ble for one generation to amass fabulous wealth because the difficulties of both communication and transportation rendered it impossible to deal with TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 21 large constituencies, hence large production in one locality was useless. Facilities for production have also grown fully apace with all other facilities. The wage slave could be employed only to produce a com- paratively small output, hence the profit that is justly derivable from his labor was so small that MULTI-MILLIONS were unknown. With increased facilities for production, instantaneous .communica- tion and rapid transportation, a large output is easy and large constituencies can be reached, hence multi- millions can be accumulated, until world-wide Mo- nopoly is as easy to-day as the accumulation of a competency was under the old order of things. Mo- nopoly under the old order was just as objectionable as it is under the new, but it could not then be ac- complished except by PRIVILEGE, SPOLIATION OR CONQUEST. Monopoly by these methods has been almost de- stroyed, and its destruction and prevention when re- sulting from existing methods and facilities is just as necessary and reasonable. During the time when condition have been devel- oping by which monopoly has been made possible, restrictive measures have not developed pari passu therewith. If, however, restrictive measures (CUM- ULATIVE TAXATION) had developed pari passu therewith, private monopoly, as it now exists, could not have developed at all, and, if destroyed, cannot again develop. A new adjustment therefore is imperative. The people should assert and maintain the following position: We will permit individual and corporate wealth to accumlate until a sufficiency has been ac- quired for self, offspring and the race (society), but beyond that all shall go to the commonwealth. Is 22 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM this position a reasonable one! If not, why not! Colossal private accumulations, which tempt lavish expenditure, are not necessary for the well being of the individual, and his offspring, and if their seques- tration or prevention does not diminish wealth ac- cumulation, they are necessary for the well being of society. It is not reasonable to maintain that in- creased facility for production, transportation and communication (by which alone fabulous fortunes are made possible) should be permitted to create a small coterie of monopolists and the balance "all slaves. " It can and ought to be prevented by Timocracy or some similar system ; if not, it will and ought to be prevented by Socialism. If monopoly is to exist at all, all should share in it. Give us Timocracy or give us Socialism, is the shibboleth and it is almost tantamount to saying: ' ' Give us liberty or give us death. ' ' There is a homespun maxim that "we cannot make omelets without breaking eggs"; so likewise we cannot create "EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION" without BEEAKING MONOPOLY. Unbroken MONOPOLY is as useless as unbroken EGGS. If those who concur in these opinions have no better plan, they should support Timocracy and make it better as soon as they can. MAGNITUDE, MONOPOLY AND MONSTROSITY. Many sincere opponents of monopoly have stated that MAGNITUDE is not objectionable. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 23 To this it may be replied that it is only by and through magnitude that monopoly is possible. If therefore monopoly is objectionable, magnitude, by and through which alone monopoly is possible, must also be objectionable. Monopoly, from the Greek "Monos," one, and "poleo," to sell, means, essentially, exclusive pos- session, or the Sole power of dealing in any com- modity or of handling any utilizable forms of wealth. Technically considered therefore, as long as the smallest fraction of ownership is held by one person or company other than the monopolist, monopoly does not exist. It is well known in practice, however, that if only one moiety of any industry is owned by one man or company, he or it can, in great degree if not en- tirely, exercise a monopolistic influence over that industry. To premit monopolistic magnitude is to permit at least the power to exercise monopoly, which power cannot exist without such magnitude. To permit this power to exercise monopoly to exist, means that it may be exercised unless curbed by the Govern- ment or by society. We have then the absurd condition of permitting one monstrosity (a monop- oly) to exist in order that we may (in fact must) create another monstrosity (a political commission) to curb and control its probable or possible extor- tions. Thus two wrongs are created to make one right, which of itself is a monstrosity in thought. The statement that "big business " must grow to monstrous, hence to monopolistic proportions, is not defensible. As well might it be said that the rains must deluge the earth in order to make possible the growth of vegetation. 24 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM Bains must only be sufficient to produce the great- est facility in growth and cheapness in harvest. Superfluity is as damaging as insufficiency. The same is true in industry. It must be encouraged (as the rains are prayed for) to that magnitude which assures the greatest facility in operation and cheap- ness in production, but, beyond that, like the rains, it is damaging. The "rule of reason" must apply here as in all human affairs. If the "millionth per cent." is too drastic it must be made less so, and experience alone can absolutely demonstrate this. No industry that can pay 5 per cent, on 60 to 100 million dollars can reasonably complain of oppres- sive or circumscriptive conditions. If any industry can reasonably so complain, then the limit can be enlarged, but not till then should it be enlarged. THE GOVEBNMENTAL IDEA. FETICHISM ! The Governmental idea, is, to a great extent a per- nicious superstition or Fetichism. For its mainten- ance and support more blood and treasure have been expended than mob violence has ever destroyed. Why does this institution exist? What is it good for f Why will human beings murder each other for the establishment of a Dynasty! Why will they yield up millions of labor product to support a monarch on a throne in idleness and luxury? Why do men take pride in saying "I am the subject of King or Emperor Edward or William or Nicholas or George? Why will they kill or imprison a fellow man if he trails in the dust or tramples under foot a piece of bunting called a flag! Why will they bow in obsequious genuflection before a being like them- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 25 selves? Why, even in so-called democracies, does this sentiment exist in a very great degree? The answer is because men are as yet unreasoning be- ings in a very great degree. There is need for an institution to protect personal and property rights against viciousness and unrestraint because these characteristics yet exist and will continue to exist until human beings are differently constituted. There is also a need for an institution to do things that must be done, which, in their nature, offer no reward for private or individual activity or per- formance. This institution must be supported by taxation and it must possess power to inforce its prerogatives if necessary. The unwisdom that is associated with it is its exaltation or deification. If it was considered a "Servicemen}" the idea of the Divine right of kings, and the useless expansion of its duties and responsibilities, as in the idea of Socialism would cease. The socialist opposes mon- archy, yet salvery to a socialistic boss would doubt- less be far more oppressive and galling than sub- jectship to a king. It is better and wiser to acknowl- edge the need for government or servicement lim- ited to its proper sphere, and grant to it absolute power within that sphere, leaving freedom to the in- dividual in all things else than to recognize sub- ject ship to monarchy or slavery to socialism, both of which are in conflict with the natural rights of men. Government of any kind signifies restraint, which is abhorent to free men, but to a certain ex- tent men must be restrained by what we call law until they sufficient restrain themselves, when law will become useless. Socialism implies not only re- straint but circumscription. Circumscription im- plies a diminution of incentive and this implies cur- 26 MILLIONISM 'VS. SOCIALISM tailment of producton which assures retrogression. All steps toward Governmentalization, either in ownership or controllership, are steps toward so- cialization. THE GOVEENMENT AND THE OPPOSITION. It is often believed and asserted by statesmen and savants that a "VIGOROUS OPPOSITION" is the most wholesome condition for any governing politi- cal party. This statement implies either that the " Government " (the party in power) is corrupt and should be held in check, or that its policies are un- statesmanlike or vicious and should not be adopted at all, or, if adopted, only after the most vigorous opposition. Under existing political conditions a strong opposition is no doubt better than the un- checked reign of any dominant party. Since we must deal with things as they are and not with them as they should be, we must rely on opposition to temper the recklessness and to check the rapacity of all par- ties long in control of public affairs. But why this need for opposition at all ? In a Board of Directors of a great commercial organization there is not con- stantly an organized opposition to the management of the business. Why not ?' Because business meth- ods are established and crystalized into some defi- nite and coherent form or system. Political affairs or methods should be likewise so, but they are not. Why are they not 1 Because the science of govern- ment is not yet as well known as is the science of business. The former is yet in a more crude and embryonic state, and is, in most countries, partici- pated in or controlled by hereditary rulers or by in- experienced men chosen by irresponsible and incom- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 27 petent voters. In government as in all other human activities there can be but one course, plan or policy that is right. Others, therefore, must be wrong. The dominant party is as likely to be wrong as the oppo- sition, hence BOTH are usually wrong. Opposition that is wrong to a dominant policy that is right is an injury, hence if our political methods were as near right as our business meth- ods (and they should be equally so) a vigorous op- posing party would be an absurdity, hence not a con- dition to be desired. It is the very fact that political methods and affairs are in such a crude and embry- onic state as to need " vigorous opposition " that makes more obvious than ever the necessity for cur- tailing governmental functions to within their small- est possible sphere. Why delegate to an institution that is so crude, incompetent or corrupt as to re- quire almost constant opposition, any duty or power whatsoever that can be performed or exercised by business institutions which do not need continuous organized opposition constantly opposing their policies. If the only real need of the opposition is to get the plums of patronage, as seems often to be the case, then yet greater is the need for curtailing gov- ernmental functions to within their smallest possible sphere. There would be little need for organized opposition if political affairs were conducted as sys- tematically as business affairs are conducted. PATRIOTISM. "My country may she always be right, but right or wrong, my country, " is a sentiment to which ninety-nine out of every hundred men will subscribe 28 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM and the one who will not subscribe to it is liable to be denounced both as a traitor and a fool. It is well to consider this a little: The words "my country " are presumed to apply to its institutions and not to its climate topography or soil. These in- stitutions may or may not be right in fact there is no country upon the face of the earth wherein they are not radically wrong, at the present time at least. Why support a wrong thing or institution? What does any individual want in a country where the climate and topographical conditions suit him, except the best and safest guarantee of his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ! Should he then support institutions where this safest guar- antee is not vouchsafed, other things equal ? If not then it is possible for unlimited patriotism to be- come a mockery and a sham. "My Country " may mean a nation, a state, a county or a city. In ancient times the city constituted practically an empire. To- day patriotism applies almost wholly to the nation and in support of it millions upon millions have been and now are sacrificed and squandered. For it vast armies and navies are maintained at great cost. Forts and arsenals are being constructed and garrisoned in fact, more of the valuable labor pro- duct of the world has been and is expended subserv- iently to the patriotic sentiment than for all the scientific and eleemosynary institutions in the world combined. If by reason of patriotism these atrocious institutions are perpetuated, then, if it were aban- doned, they would fall. The whole world is every man's country. Men were evolved from the EAETH not from part of it, but from all of it. The land which men occupy would be useless without the sea which they cannot occupy and thus an interdepen- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 29 dence exists that causes each to be interested in the conditions of all. If by fiat or force any one nation could monopolize the oceans and control the rain, the lands of all other nations would be worthless. This mutual interdependence so manifest in biology is intensified in sociology. NO great change can occur in society anywhere unless its effect is noticed everywhere. But, there are very few people to-day who see anything but the highest exemplification of manhood and intelligence in national patriotism, yet to it is attributable much of the distress that now curses the earth. STATE GOVEENMENTS VS. SOCIAL PEOGEESS. In America we are afflicted with "STATEEIO- TISM" as well as with PATEIOTISM. Those who believe that the United States of America are a "confederation of sovereign stars than which none more glorious are shown in the galaxy of nations " will not, at least for some time in the future, even inci- dentally consider the suggestion that STATE GOV- EENMENTS be curtailed much less abolished. Conditions change, and men must change with them. The time will come when state governments will be transformed into something akin to National Ju- dicial Districts. Inter-communication, Inter-trans- portation and commercial inter-change will render some such alteration necessary. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which is archaic in many particulars, inter-relation- ships of all kinds were meager and difficult. Uni- formity of law and process was not then as neces- say as it now is. In those days there was some 30 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM reason why the state of Massachusetts or Ehode Island might require some difference in fundamen- tal law from the state of South Carolina or Georgia. Neither their people nor their products came into al- most daily contact. Aside from the regulation of the race question, it is difficult to conceive of any- thing that any government should do, to-day, that would not as well apply to one as to the other. As the race question is regulated at present in the South, so it might be in all the states. The ques- tion, of course, is would it be so regulated? If the principle of EQUITABLE EELATIVITY pre- vailed throughout the entire Nation, there would be but little need of any other regulation regarding race questions of personal differences. The state is neither sufficiently National or suffi- ciently local to meet the requirements of to-day. Enactments of state Legislatures are very fre- quently adverse to the requirements of cities within their own domain, which now contain a vastly greater percentage of the wealth and population than they did when the Constitution was adopted. By increasing the power of cities in those respects wherein the state is now officious and unable ade- quately to control, and acknowledging to the Nation unquestioned suzerainty in those respects wherein the state is now acknowledged to be palpably defi- cient, would not cause centralization, but simply a better diversification which would tend toward greater convenience in administrative function which would greatly facilitate human activities, and diminish cumbersomeness of process. We have too much governmental machinery. State pride should not thwart social progress. State autonomy divided between the City and Nation would increase both TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 31 localization and nationalization. Both should be in- creased and the state decreased till it is finally ob- literated. Details are impossible here; but when there comes the will there will come the waif. THE EEEONEOUS CONCEPTION OF UNIVERSAL SUFFEAGE. It is the current belief that to deprive the masses of equal suffrage would be a wrong almost as griev- ous as to deprive them of life. It is probably no exaggeration to state that the only satisfaction de- rived by perhaps half the votes in any large city for the franchise privilege, is the receipt of the small recompense either in money or stimulating beverages for which their votes are saleable. The receipt of money is corrupting to their morals and cheap spiritus fermenti is usually injurious to their constitutions ; hence, if the only items of satisfaction are injurious, the privilege of exercising the fran- chise cannot be beneficial. To cherish chagrin, mor- tification, or a spirit of revenge for the deprivation of a thing implies the possession of ability for the appreciation of that thing. The slaves of the South- ern States did not clamor for freedom nor for fran- chise with half the unanimity and zeal that was manifested by their northern sympathizers why? Because most of them could not appreciate it. Oft- times sympathy is misplaced or is more intense than it should be. It is doubtless true that the writhings and contortions of a dying man are often less excru- ciating to him than they appear to be to his sympa- thetic bystanders. In fact, as stated by the immor- tal bard, even, "the sense of death itself may be most in apprehension and the poor beetle that we 32 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM tread upon in corporal sufferance may find a pang as great as when a giant dies," because in the ap- proach of dissolution, the sensibilities are numbed and even consciousness itself is ofttimes obliterated. The same is in great measure true regarding depri- vation, pain, agony, and many of the ills and woes that flesh is heir to, that is, they do not annoy the unfortunate victim as much as his sympathizers think they do. The professional politicians or bosses are the men who would protest against equitable suffrage and who would "rail out like the thunder when the clouds in autumn crack" why? Not be- cause of any genuine sympathy for the ignorant voter who would scarcely know that a change was contemplated, but because, by a change, their own occupation would be gone. More good would result to the masses by the better conditions that qualified, or, rather equitable suffrage would establish than many times the paltry consideration that is paid for their votes. Eeformers who think that their only protection against the encroachments of capital lies in univer- sal suffrage, fail to understand that many of the millions now owned by the rich are directly conse- quent upon universal suffrage and their power to purchase the boss who controls that suffrage. ACTUAL DEMOCRATIC EULE AN IRIDESCENT DREAM. As reasonably might it be asserted that weather vanes control the courses of the winds, or that drift- ing logs produce the movements of the tides, as that genuine Democratic Republicanism ever did, or, as men are now constituted, that it ever will actually rule any municipality or state. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 33 Referring to ancient so called democracies we find that they were not genuine democracies at all. Of the palmy days of Athens it is said that the cul- ture of her citizens was much superior to that of the average English, German or Latin speaking man or woman of to-day. It is also claimed that this culture was largely if not wholly attributable, not to ethnological, meteorological or topographical con- ditions, but to sociological conditions to her Demo- cracy. Excellent it undoubtedly was; attributable to social conditions it might, to a great extent, have been ; but those social conditions were not truly dem- ocratic. The Athenian citizens of that day constituted an Athenian aristocracy, but the Greek Slave hewed the wood and carried the water in fact, performed most all of the necessary labor. Lands and mines were largely owned by the public, and, by the labor of slaves, who had practically no political recogni- tion or rights, crude media, necessary for the sup- port of the state, was converted into utilizable forms. To this the captives brought home to Greece (and afterwards to Rome) " whose ransoms did the gen- eral coffers fill," added a very considerable sum. The city, thus supported, devoted, almost gratui- tously, much of its revenue toward the advance ment of art, literature, sculpture, the Drama and the like. The Greek citizen, famous in history, often had little or no concern about the ' l needful ' ' where- withal to support the requirements of life, because the Greek slave produced it for the state and the state practically supported its men of letters, art and philosophy. At times, even bankers were slaves and not socially recognized by citizens of genius and culture. Was such a social organization a true dem- 34 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM ocracy? Democratic enough, perhaps, within the ranks of the citizen lords, but far from being such among the whole people including the wealth-pro- ducing slaves. Even among the fudal Barons democracy doubt- less existed among the truly select; but, not only the productions but the lives of the slaves were subject to the merciless caprice of the lords of creation. In the slave holding states of the American Re- public, democracy existed among the masters with their peers. Once properly introduced, even to a stranger their house was his castle and their slaves were his servants. It cannot be shown however, that Dixie ever was truly democratic. In those days, and as the result of those conditions, Dixie pro- duced great men. The so-called democracy that pro- duced this excellence, which for many years prac- tically dominated the American nation, was much the same as that of Ancient Athens, i. e., No democ- racy at all. As in Athens so in the slave states of America, that social system could not endure. Neither were democratic, and, until the masses are more capable than they now are, actual democracy is an absurdity. Men of brains, as in Athens and in the South, must rule as an ancient aristocracy, or the business politicians must rule as a boss oligar- chy, because the masses (Democracy) are not com- petent to wield their own weapons. RELATIVITY VS. EQUALITY. "Equality is good only among EQUALS, " wrote Aristotle. All bodies in the Cosmos seek equilibrium on bases of Relativity, which, in that domain of na- ture, depends wholly on Mass and Motion. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 35 Biology and Psychology are closely associated the latter manifesting itself in highly organized forms only. Without entering into an inquiry or discussion as to the nature of either, it is safe to state that the same fundamental law underlies both that is found to exist in Cosmology. If this is true as to these three divisions of the Universe, it is most likely to be true in the fourth, namely, in Sociology. "Equality, therefore, in Sociology, is good only among EQUALS. It follows that whenever in hu- man society we find INEQUALITY, the application of the principle of EQUALITY is erroneous and ab- normal. As we find inequality everywhere, equality is normal nowhere. The greatest error that was made by our revolutionary sires was the assertion of the principle of EQUALITY. Effort is made by all admirers of the great work of those men to recon- cile their assertion with the facts as they exist, but the effect is more in the nature of an apology than of a demonstration. People are EQUAL or they are not equal they cannot be both at the same time. If they are equal, then, given time, their accomplishments and posi- tions would be equal, which we find that they are not. If their accomplishments and positions are un- equal (as we find them to be) then it is safe to state that they are unequal. If unequal, the only basis for true or normal rela- tionships between them is a EELATIVE basis. The assumption of equality is the reason why so many regulations are found to be necessary in our social organizations. Of course "Relativity" must be as "Equitable" as possible, and it is difficult to find a basis for its establishment. EXCELLENCE or 36 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM FITNESS is the true basis, and it is the claim of Timocracy that, for the purposes of government, the most practical basis of determining excellence (though, of course, discriminating in some cases) is ownership and usership of property. At any rate this IS A BASIS that would work practical justice, and any basis that is just is better than no basis at all. INDIVIDUALISM VS. SOCIALISM. Individuals must exist and be preseved (which means that their offspring must be preserved) be- fore Society can exist at all. It follows, therefore, that the preservation and perfection of society must come by and through the prior preservation and perfection of the individual. The created cannot come before the Creator, and the excellence of the whole must depend upon the excellence of the parts. Individualism but not monopoly is the shebbolith of true progress and true reform. THE PEOPLE BE DAMNED OR BLESSED -WHICH? When a certain multi-millionaire said, "0, the people be dam'd" he did not, in all probability, in- tend to consign them to HELL, but only to state, that, in his opinion, they really do not know what is best for themselves. If the people are not capable of properly using weapons then they are not blessed by an opportunity to use, be those weapons BAL- LOTS or BROADSWORDS. On the contrary, in- capacity to properly use will cause damage to them- selves and consequently harm to the social organiza- tion of which they are a part. TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCEACY 37 Most public men seek popularity by lauding the people. Such expressions as "government of, by and for the people " have been universally praised, and have caused their supposed author to be almost worshiped. It is by no means certain that a gov- ernment OF, and BY the people is or ever will be a government that is best FOB the people. No sin- cere man can object to a government FOE the people, because if not FOE the people it must be FOE Kings, Princes, Presidents and Pensioners. Surely no one desires a government solely for these, except they themselves. However, by reason of the incompetency of the people, governments are at this day, largely FOE these indiviluals only, and not FOE the people at all. If it is not by reason of the incompetency of the people, why is one-third of their labor product permitted to be taken to support these terrestrial GODS in regal splendor instead of being used to secure and maintain homes, food and com- forts for themselves? Taxes must be paid to sup- port kings before bread can be had to prevent star- vation. A government "OF and BY" the people is not this day a government FOE the people, nor will it ever be until the people are wiser. He, therefore, who opposes government OF and BY the people may be doing more to secure a true government for the people than he is doing who favors it. The people will be, at least in a measure, dam'd by any government OF and BY themselves till they can use their weapons more wisely. As long as the people can be used by men of su- perior intelligence to their own, their government OF and BY themselves will not be FOE themselves but FOE their BOSSES and FOE the minions whom MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM they select to do their bidding instead of serving the interests of the people. A child would be bene- fited by taking a razor out of its hands, and likewise the people might be benefited by taking the ballot out of their hands. Since, however, it cannot be practically deter- mined who can best use the ballot, it is proposed that a relative use of it is better than an EQUAL use or exercise of it. The better elements of society to-day would not persecute and abuse their inferiors as they did in the days of fudalism, but would try to assist and uplift them. The fetters, manacles, and shackels of serfdom have been removed not by the serfs themselves, but by their superiors and because these superiors have themselves been uplifted. In like manner the social bonds that now oppress the people would be loos- ened if their superiors were to exercise their proper ratio in the use of the ballot. The people in ages gone by were dam'd by their lords and masters, but to-day they are dam'd almost entirely by them- selves. THE POWEE OF THE PEESS. It is not asserted by Timocracy that a united press could "dim the noontide Sun or call forth the mutinous and tempestuous winds " but it is prob- able that it could "between the green sea and the azured vault set roaring war, or smiling peace if war was roaring." The PEESS not only MOULDS public opinion, but CEEATES it. There is scarcely a public man or measure about whom or which the public does not get its impression or form its opin- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 39 ion upon what the press says, or by what some influ- ential friend, who no doubt got his impressions from the press, has said or thought concerning any man or measure. When the press is divided, as it usually is, people are likewise divided. A UNITED PEESS could establish Timocracy or any other system in a comparatively short time. There are certain funda- mental things on which the press is united, and cer- tain other fundamental things on which it should be united. The opinion of the press is not divided as to the truth of the Heliocentric System, nor as to the ellipticity of celestial orbits, nor as to gravity, chem- ical affinity, nor as to the fundamental scientific facts in Biology or Psychology. The fact that equilibrium in each of these domains of nature is uniformly reached on bases of Eelativity is not dissented from by any enlightened contributor to the press. That Equilibrium in Sociology must likewise exist or be reached on bases of i ' Eelativity " is equally obvious, but it is not as yet as universally admitted: Until in Sociology relativity is acknowledged and estab- lished, equilibrium will not exist permanently in so- ciety. Eelativity cannot be established with abso- lute perfection by any ONE plan or system, but it can be APPEOACHED and an approach is better than no plan at all. If a UNITED PEESS should assert that relativ- ity should be adopted as to SUFFEAGE and that all monopoly should be abolished and, that, until some better plan is suggested, it should be ap- proached by the Timocratic plan of equitable suff- rage, based on the ratio of residential rent and tax, and by the Timocratic scale of CUMULATIVE tax- ation for the abolition of monopoly, it would not be long before that basis would be adopted, and, if 40 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM adopted, a very large per centum of the corruption, fraud, venality, dishonesty, poverty and misery with which society is now cursed, would be ended. If the press would simply admit the axiomatic aphorism that Eelativity among unequal things is just, and that equality among relative, or unequal things is unjust, that truth would soon be admitted. There is vast room for differences of opinion as to what should be done, or as to what political policy should be pursued after the plan or basis of doing it is relatively established. If the Timocratic plan is not a good one, the UNITED PEESS should suggest a better one. CHAPTER I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF TIMOCRACY. Millionism Better Than Socialism: Worth And Wealth Should Wield The World : Aristocracy And Plutocracy: Inadequacy Of Democracy: Boss Oli- garchy: Governments Are Business Corporations: Renter Is The Tax Payer : Error Of Plutocracy As To Voting: Error Of Democracy As To Voting: Equitable Relativity: World-Wide Nationalism: Definition Of Timocracy: Proposed Principles: The Millionth Per Cent. Anti-Monopoly Tax: Busi- ness Of Life: Collectiveism VS. Individualism: Forms Of Collectiveism : Fetichism, Geocracy And Semi-Socialism : Individualism : Wage Slaves And Chattle Slaves: No Uninterrupted Access To Na- tural Opportunity : Should Be Equitable Access To Natural Opportunity: Favoritism Under Public Ownership : GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF TIMOCRACY. Millionism is better than Socialism Accumula- tion is better than dissipation. Worth and Wealth should wield the world. The words Aristocratic and Plutocratic meaning substantially and respectively, "the rule of the best and the rule of wealth " are usually regarded with opprobrium. The word Dem- ocratic, signifying the rule of the masses or univer- 41 42 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM sal suffrage, is usually regarded with praise. The United States of America ostensibly constitute not only a republic but a Democratic Republic. When the Government was founded these States numbered only thirteen ; their population was only about three millions ; their territorial area was only about one- tenth what is now is; their cities were small and their population conservative; their aggregated wealth was but little more than that which a few individuals now own, and they were scarcely recog- nized as a nation of the earth. In those days and under those conditions the putative Democratic Ee- public was organized, though, even then, not without vigorous opposition upon the part of some of the wisest statesmen of that day. We were then prac- tically a community of agriculturists. We are to- day a great industrial nation competing for supre- macy in the commercial world. Such a revolution in internal and external conditions calls for some change in our governmental form. With our world- wide commercial policy there must also go a world- wide governmental policy. The greatest industrial nation in the world needs the best business talent and wisest statesmanship at the head of its affairs. The miscellaneous character of our population brought about by free immigration renders univer- sal suffrage dangerous to a stable business and gov- ernmental policy. Is a Democratic Eepublic suit- able to cope with and handle the complicated ques- tions resulting from these world-wide commercial and governmental conditions, both of which must expand? Is a Democratic Eepublic suitable even for the proper protection of the personal and pro- perty rights of 100,000,000 people of various na- tionalities widely diversified and miscellaneously TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 43 grouped? Ere long there must come in America a new arrangement of political parties and policies. Would it not be wiser to change the putative Dem- ocratic Republic into a Republic based on worth and responsibility rather than to continue a Govern- ment cursed by the incapacity and irresponsibility of universal suffrage, or by Socialism in any of its forms f The Republic of Democracy, practically begun over one century ago with the inauguration of Thomas Jefferson as President, has, after a test of one hundred years, resulted, not in Democratic Gov- ernment, but in boss oligarchism. In the days of Jefferson it was probably not imagined that one man in most of the large centres of population in America could ever practically name Councilmen, Mayors, Assemblymen, and Congressmen or that a few such in the larger States could even partially control the election of Governors and even of Presi- dents. In wresting power from a Monarch it is not] wise to vest it in a mob, nor in an irresponsible boss who controls that mob. Sociologically speaking, a Republic of Democracy means a boss oligarchy or a ' * political plutocracy. ' ' Either bosses distribute the offices or rich men buy them. This state of affairs is a necessary and unavoid- able result of a so-called democratic system. Ignor- ant and incompetent voters must have a leader or boss just as wards and children must have a guard- ian or nurse. When one boss is overthrown another equally corrupt is soon installed. The statement ofttimes made that, whenever bossism becomes too arrogant or corrupt, the people rise in their majesty and turn the rascals out is not wholly true. Such revolutions occur but seldom and not until bossism 44 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM becomes practically unendurable. The reign of re- form is usually brief; control soon lapses back to the original boss or his successor, because bossism is the normal, natural and necessary result of Dem- ocratic-Eepublicanism. More than half the voters, especially in the cities of America, are controlled by bosses ; and, as long as ignorance and irresponsi- bility mobilized by designing politicians can wield even the balance of power, bossism must continue. Men of sense know this and men of candor admit it. "A government actually ruled by a democracy would be like a household ruled by its nursery/' said one of the brainiest statesmen of Europe. A govern- ment may be truly a republic and yet may not be a democratic republic. The word republic means a public thing Re-publica. So that in opposing dem- ocratic republicanism, universal suffrage and boss- oligarchism, a citizen is not opposing a republican form of government. BUSINESS CORPORATIONS. A municipality, a commonwealth or a nation is an organization created to perform certain duties which citizens in their private capacities cannot so well perform or cannot perform at all. Each should be considered and dealt with as A BUSINESS CORPORATION. Its resources are, not the pri- vate property of the citizens ; but that percentage of it only that is yielded up in taxation. The tax re- ceipts, therefore, are the stock certificates of own- ership, and on these and not on the total ownership of private property votes should be apportioned. It is true that the owner primarily pays the taxes, but the amounts so paid are added to the rent of the TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 45 property, hence the owner is reimbursed by the ten- ant or user, who, in turn, is often reimbursed by a sub-tenant or sub-user, so that the tax receipt voting certificates rightfully belong (except as to the owner 's privately used properties) to and should be exercised by the said tenant or user. This is the justification for the voting system proposed herein as will be more fully discussed in a subse- quent chapter. The fundamental error of Plutocracy is that it assumes that citizens own the governmental cor- poration in the same ratio as they own private prop- erty and claims recognition and voting power on that basis, which is not right nor just, because all their private property is not contributed to said corporation. The fundamental error of Democracy is that it assumes that all men equally own the gov- ernmental corporation (which they do not because they have not equally contributed to the resources of that corporation) hence that all men should equally vote which is likewise not right nor just. An Aristocracy holds to the idea that only the best should vote. There being no practical method of determining who are "the best," an aristocracy is not a practical form of government and would also be an unjust form. Timocracy signifies a govern- ment in which votes are apportioned on the basis of a "renting or rating of property," and one in which honor, prudence and justice should be the ruling principles. Throughout all nature inequality and not equality is universally prevalent, hence in- equality and not equality should be recognized and provided for which can only be done by the adoption of the principle of Equitable Relativity. This there- fore and not equality is the true basis for all institu- 46 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM tions. For "Equality is good only among equals, " said Aristotle, and since equals do not exist, equality should not. For the support of Municipal and State Corporations the largest part of the value is now collected from FIXED property, so that votes ap- portioned on the tax and rental basis would corre- spond substantially to the true ownership of these governments, hence Equitable Eelativity would be guaranteed and the ends of justice subserved. In National Governments supported mainly by in- direct taxation this true ownership cannot be traced out nor rightfully guaranteed its just voting status. The time may come when the prejudice against DI- EECT taxation and the erroneous belief that it is more burdensome than INDIRECT systems will be removed, and then Equitable Eelativity can be es- tablished. If ever the dream of WOELD WIDE NATION- ALIZATION is realized, it must be on some basis of Equitable Eelativity. If said dream could be real- ized the first generation that succeeded it would do more toward making the Earth a paradise for men rather than a foot stool for Monarchs than the thou- sands of generations that have preceded it. Long residence in certain comparatively isolated regions has endeared the inhabitants thereof to the climate, the soil and topographical conditions. From this has developed the sentiment of PATEIOTISM, which does more to retard world wide progress than all other influences combined, because it consumes so large a part of the productive energy of the people in wars and in preparation for wars, and in the support of pensioners who have won or tried to win the " bauble reputation even in the cannon's mouth. ' ' TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 47 There yet lingers in the minds of many people the idea that there is some kind of a "DIVINITY that doth hedge a KING." Naturally Monarchs and their immediate retain- ers and beneficiaries encourage and foster this idea. Others who are more philosophical acknowledge its irrationality, but acquiesce in its continuance for the reason that nothing which can be called a de- cided improvement thereon has yet been proposed. The DEMOCRACY of America must be admitted to be .nothing but a BOSS OLIGARCHY under the practical operation of which corruption is as great, if not greater than under any progressive monarchi- cal system. This therefore offers little, if any, actual improvement certainly not enough to war- rant the disestablishment of any of the aforesaid PROGRESSIVE Monarchies. What is needed to warrant a change is a system that actually will be an improvement. Timocracy is suggested as an approach toward a better system than either Dem- ocracy or Monarchy. In writing about the Timo- cracy of Athens, which was founded by Solon, Thirl- wald, Grote and Von Ranke state, in substance, that "the distinguishing feature was, THE SUBSTITU- TION OF RATES ON PROPERTY FOR RIGHTS OF BIRTH AS A title to a honors and offices of state." Since the polity of Ancient Greece is not applicable in its entirety to modern America details are unnecessary. The name is chosen to designate those principles which prefer EQUITABLE RELA- TIVITY to INEQUITABLE EQUALITY, and PRIVATE OWNERSHIP to any form of MONO- POLY. It is submitted that DEMOCRACY on the one hand, which means a BOSS OLIGARCHY; and 48 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM MONOPOLY on the other, which means SOCIAL- ISM or a BUEEAUCEACY, is not suitable for the future of the American EEPUBLIC, necessarily ex- pansive, both politically and commercially. GENEEAL PEINCIPLES. The following general principles subject, of course, to such modifications as time, place and cir- cumstance may require, are submitted for the con- sideration of those who really believe in political reformation on lines of ANTI-MONOPOLY and ANTI-BOSS OLIGAECHY which latter is the nec- essary outgrowth of generical DEMOCEACY. There are many citizens in all countries who do thus believe, and, had they the courage to organize and act, great good would result to society at large. 1st. That "Capitalists are the CUSTODIANS of the world's wealth and that their accumulations should be encouraged, but not MONOPOLIZED. 2nd. That ALL TAXATION should, as soon as possible, be DIEECT and be collected from EEAL ESTATE AND OTHEE FIXED PEO- PEETY AND FEANCHISES ONLY. (It could now be applied for State and Municipal purposes and not appreciably alter existing methods.) That in order to extirpate existing and to prevent future MONOPOLY, the following CUMULATIVE EATES be imposed in addi- tion to the regular, and to be applied NATION- ALLY. I. On PEIVATE EESIDENCES, PAEKS, PEESEEVES, EESOETS (all property not offered for commercial use) over 100,000 dol- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 49 lars in value, a per centum on the assessed value equal to the ONE MILLIONTH of said assessed value. (This to prevent RESIDEN- TIAL MONOPOLY.) Rents capitalized at 10 per cent. II. To prevent MONOPOLY OF NATURAL OPPORTUNITY: On ALL UNUSED PRO- PERTY, such as LANDS, MINES, FORESTS, WATER POWER SITES, VACANT CITY LOTS, IDLE COMMERCIAL PLANTS and the like, over $100,000 in value, the same rate as on the foregoing; but said rate is not to be imposed on these properties unless an offer for development and use that a COURT deems rea- sonable is refused, and shall cease whenever such offer is accepted. III. To prevent the MONOPOLY OF REAL ESTATE IN GENERAL: On all REAL ESTATE owned by ONE INDIVIDUAL OR BY ONE COMPANY over ONE MILLION IN VALUE, a per centum on the gross MONTHLY RENTAL thereof equal to ONE MILLIONTH of the aggregate tax valuation of said aggre- gated property. IV. To PREVENT THE MONOPOLY OF INDUSTRY: On ALL BUSINESS ENTER- PRISES with a gross MONTHLY output or business of ONE MILLION or over, a per cen- tum on said output or business equal to the ONE-MILLIONTH thereof. The same to ap- ply to all enterprises owned by a single individ- ual or company. From this it is suggested that BANKS and CREDIT INSTITUTIONS be exempted to the extent of ONE HALF. 50 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM V. To PREVENT THE MONOPOLY OF WEALTH IN GENERAL : ON ALL INHER- ITANCES OF ONE MILLION and upward, to be paid at the date of the inheritance, by any single individual, a per centum equal to the ONE MILLIONTH of said aggregate INHER- ITANCE. The "Millionth Per Cent. Anti-Monopoly Tax." These rates are not complicated and could be easily applied. They could be designated "THE MILLIONTH PER CENT. ANTI- MONOPOLY TAX." If the rates should prove so drastic as to reduce per capita wealth accum- ulation or to thwart private enterprise it is pro- posed that they be reduced, as MONOPOLY is preferable to LOCAL, NATIONAL OR WORLD WIDE POVERTY. Commercial pro- perties carry only ONE TENTH the ANTI- MONOPOLY TAX that is imposed on PRI- VATELY USED OR UNUSED PROPERTY. If people really desire to tax WEALTH (not poverty) JUSTLY BUT NOT INJURIOUSLY, the above is. a GOOD plan. PROPOSED PRINCIPLES CONTINUED. 3rd. That there should be a qualification for citizen- ship and SUFFRAGE based on proper educa- tion and on ultimate TAXATION or the equiva- lent of the latter as represented by RESIDEN- TIAL RENT AND IN PROPORTION to said TAXATION and RENT. 4th. That the qualified popular electors or voters should elect or choose only the lower or popular branch of all legislative assemblages; that the TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 51 higher, or advisory branch, should be chosen by and from the members of the lower; and that the EXECUTIVE should be chosen by and from the members of the higher, all for stated terms and fixed tenures. That all JUDICIAL OFFICIALS should be appointed by EXECUTIVES and confirmed by LEGISLATURES, and serve for life or during good behavior ; and that in case of death, retire- ment or removal, the SENIOR in service in a lower court should be promoted to the higher, as far as the same can be practicable and not prejudicial to the service. That all minor offi- cials should be chosen as far as possible by com- petitive examination and those not so chosen to be appointed, and, if necessary, confirmed. 5th. That nothing should be done by any GOVERN- MENTAL power which, in its nature, will yield a revenue; that governments should be sup- ported by TAXATION and do nothing that pri- vate corporations or individuals can do. 6th. That the STANDARD OF VALUE for the present should be GOLD COIN only, and the circulating medium should be paper bills re- deemable in GOLD COIN, and be issued by the GOVERNMENT under proper regulations. 7th. That universal PEACE should be the policy of all nations and that universal and unlimited ARBITRATION should be adopted by all with respect to all differences. In essentials, CONSTANCY; in non-essen- tials, CONCILIATION and in all things, REA- SON is the position for all citizens to assume. The essential features of the above proposi- tions are EQUITABLE RELATIVITY, or 52 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM opposition to UNIVEESAL SUFFRAGE, and ANTI-MONOPOLY in the ownership of wealth. That individuals should exercise power, i. e., vote, in the ratio of their ownership in govern- mental corporations, and said ownership is measured by their contribution thereto, and the USER, not the OWNER, is the real and true contributor. THE BUSINESS OF LIFE. The business of life is the transformation of crude media into utilizable forms, and the transpor- tation of those forms to places of utilization. Com- prehensively considered this definition of life 's busi- ness covers all the vocations that men pursue. In other words the business of life is not to CREATE, BUT TO MOVE THINGS. Molecules of matter are MOVED into masses, and masses are MOVED into useful forms, and these forms are MOVED to where they are needed for the use and benefit of the people. If therefore, the business of life is the transfor- mation of crude material into utilizable forms, then it is an unavoidable conclusion that the things thus transformed are desired, and, if desired, the greater they are in quantity and the more excellent they are in quality, the better is human desire subserved or gratified. The question first arises, how can this desidera- tum be best accomplished, and, second, how can the safest and best custodianship be guaranteed? There is but ONE method by which crude media can be transformed, and that is BY WORK, or rather, by the application of energy energy such as is devel- TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 53 oped in the body of a man or beast or from natural reservoirs of the same utilized by machines. Coming at once to the doings of men as they have evolved into the state or condition that we call civil- ized social organization or modern government, the question then arises under which form or plan of this social organization can the well-being of hu- manity be best subserved? WEALTH MUST BE OWNED, and ownership must be PUBLIC OE PRI- VATE. The terms best suited to designate each are COLLECTIVEISM AND INDIVIDUALISM. The first, SOCIALISM, may be subdivided into three classifications: The first, and at present the most prominent and objectionable of these said types of socialism is what may be properly called FETICHISM, which holds, that, though property may be privately owned, it should be PUBLICLY CONTROLLED by commissioners appointed by some centralized power. This either deprives pri- vate ownership of its rightful prerogative, or cre- ates a partnership between a private coterie of monopolists and the governmental power, which is quite as objectionable as out and out socialism, and is but the entering wedge by which socialism may become complete. This plan is favored by some monopolists who doubtless conclude that a powerful private bureau- cracy controlling all of some necessary commodity could bring such influence on the governmental offi- cials as to secure practically what they want, or to so shift the responsibility for monopolistic extortion as to perpetuate their own rapacity under the guise of government sanction. If MONOPOLY cannot exist, it cannot be rapac- / eous, and if commodities are produced and prices 54 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM determined by the laws of trade, by SUPPLY AND DEMAND, no governmental regulation will be needed to designate prices. The people do not want to elect their public servants on a platform that de- mands that they will or will not permit a private monopoly to charge this or that price for necessary commodities, but what they should want is TO ANNIHILATE the private MONOPOLY so that they can regulate said prices for themselves. MONOPOLY is rendered none the less ATEO- CIOUS and unbearable by a partnership with gov- ernment officials, but the very fact that some monopolists seem to favor that plan is of itself proof that the time is now at hand to extirpate and destroy monopoly or to complete the dissolution of existing social conditions, and reorganize them on an out and out SOCIALISTIC BASIS. President William H. Taft said in Pocatello, Idaho, Oct. 6, 1911: "We must go back to competi- tion as an element in this country. If it is impossi- ble, then let us go to Socialism, for there is no way between. / am an individualist and not a Socialist." Individualism (Private ownership) holds to the belief, that, as sentiency is with the individual, each man should exercise his energy, his wit and his powers for himself or for his immediate dependants ; that wealth should be individually owned and that the commonwealth should have the least possible power or function consistent with social order and domestic tranquility. Between the extremes of the systems there are those who hold that land or crude media only should be common property, or (which is practically the same) that land rent be absorbed by the government. Whether an individual pays to the government for the use of land, full rental value TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 55 in the shape of a tax or in the shape of rent alters not the result, but simply changes the administra- tive function. In either case the user yields to the government the rental value of the land he occupies. Tenure of occupancy would be as well guaranteed by the lease from the government at the price of rental value as by a tax to the amount of rental value. This proposition will therefore be considered as equivalent to public land ownership, because in practical effect it would be publicly owned. This class of reformers, for the purposes of this work will be called Geocrats because they seek what they call the God-given earth. There is a soul of truth in geocracy but to the extent that it proposes the absorption of all land rents it is neither right, ex- pedient nor practical and would in actual operation result in practically the same conditions as to land that socialism in the abstract would result in re- garding all things else. "Unearned Increment " in thriving localities is largely offset by unavoidable decrement in decaying localities. There are others who hold that only the things known as public utility should be owned by the com- monwealth such for example as railways, highways, canals, and water-ways, telegraphs, telephones, and means generally of inter-transportation and com- munication. Tendencies toward this system (Semi- Socialism) especially as applied to municipalities, are now rapidly on the increase. In all the affairs of life, "what plea, so tainted and corrupt, but, be- ing seasoned with a gracious voice obscures the show of evil." This proposition means Socialism as to leading industries just as land rent absorption does as to all crude media. Both are subject to the objections that apply to Socialism in the abstract, 56 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM i. e., Individual Slavery; Governmental Bossism; Mai- Administration; Diminished Accumulation and conservation. If Socialism as a whole is not wise, then, as to these important parts, it cannot be wise. Briefly classified, as against Individualism, we have four types of collectiveism : First, Socialism; Second, Fetichism; Third, Land Taxism, and, Fourth, Semi- Socialism. Since sentiency is with the individual, the ten- dency of higher social systems must be towards the liberty and not towards the slavery of the individu- al. But, say the Socialists, are not all wage workers wage slaves ? ' * Slavery will not be abolished, ' ' said Aristotle, "till the shuttle weaves of its own ac- cord. " The transformation of chattel slavery into wage slavery that has occurred since the days of Aristotle, alters not the principle asserted by him; hence, rightly considered, the statement attributed to Aristotle is true. "When the shuttle weaves of its own accord" means "when utilities are trans- formed from crude media by energy other than that generated in the body of a man." Assuming the earth to have been at one time part of the mass that now constitutes the sun, its (the earth's) own gravity is traceable to the sun. All other forms of energy are indirectly but certainly traceable to this central orb. The winds, the tides, the currents and the cataracts are all manifestations of sun energy. Fuel found locked in the bowels of the earth is but stored up sun energy. The life functions of all living things are, by a process, traceable to the sun. Until sun energy, direct, converts crude media into utilizable forms, i. e., into forms desired by men, TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 57 this conversion or transformation, must, if accom- plished at all, be accomplished by energy operating through the bodies of men or by machines made by men, and, as long as such processes are necessary the shuttle "will not weave of its own accord/' i. e., things or utilities must be transformed by men who continually utilize more of the sun's power; but as long as human energy is even in part required, there will likely be employer- and employee-slavery or something akin to it in the business of the world, and it may not, even then, be abolished. There is no need of uselessly adding to this slavery, slavery to an imperious Socialistic Boss, or to a Fetichistic political commission. The man who works for hire is not, however, essentially a slave, for he has choice, save as he may be dominated by need, to reject said wages. But he is dominated by need, say the Socialists, and hence he is a slave. He is not at all times or in all cases thus dominated, The savage who hunts for game must find it or die such is the decree of nature ' ' red in tooth and claw" hence the savage is a slave. The wage earned in civilized society is but a substitute for the game caught in a barbarous society. Both must get the game or some one else must give it to them or both must die. We will provide it for him, say the Socialists, so that no man may want. Then many will practice malignery who would otherwise work, hence the so- ciety becomes poor and ere long will possess little or nothing to give. But, says the Socialists, many a good man is will- ing to work but can get no job. This is a valid ob- jection because it is often true. 58 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM Just here come in the Geocrats and say "we will provide access to natural opportunity so that no man need be idle." "Man has a natural right to the use of the earth," says the Geocrats. The fish has access to the waters (his element of crude media) ; the bird to the air (his element of crude media) ; hence, say the Geocrats, men should have access to the soil, to the forests, to the mines, the winds, the tides and the cataracts in a word to all crude media which they call "land" or the "God given inheritance." There is no such thing in nature as "uninterrupted," but there should be Eneretic and Equitable access to natural opportunity. The fish has access to his media only at the behest, and sub- ject to the destruction of other fish and in no do- main of nature is "killing off" so ruthless or uni- versal. A species of fish to survive must spawn millions of eggs millions of minnows feed but one mammoth. The bird has access to the air only subject to peril from other birds of prey and numberless vicious enemies. The land flora and fauna have access to the soil only at the behest or subject to the crowding out process of stronger flora or fauna. The beast has access only at the behest of the primaeval man who with his bow and arrow kills the less powerful beast. The aboriginal man has access only at the behest of the civilized (?) man who amid the reverberating thunder of his victorious guns kills off the aborig- ines. So among civilized man, the strongest, the brainiest, the most energetic or the most frugal by methods of barter and exchange and by the utiliza- tion of the labor of those less endowed or less for- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 59 tunate, drives off the latter and thus appropriates (we call it owns) the natural media himself. He then transforms it into useful things by em- ploying other men and becomes rich by profiting off of their labor. The Geocrats propose to remedy this. The system of taxation which at the present time they propose is to bring about that access, which, were society to be begun anew, they would hold inviolable. If the principles of common own- ership in crude media is correct, if it would redound to the greater well being of society, then the Geo- crats are justified in trying to undo by taxation or in any other manner what, they claim, has been done by spoilation. If the commonwealth owned all natural media, access to it might be easier, but if equal and exact justice were done to all those who seek to use, then the price of that occupancy or use would tend to be about as high as it is under private ownership of said media, unless favoritism was practiced by the Autocrat in control. This feature (favoritism) to persons and to localities would be very objection- able to all Governmental ownership, control or operation. Of course some lands are held out of use Speculatively. To avoid this, general rights of con- demnation would be the logical remedy; but, such "rights" entail many wrongs as will be illustrated further on Chapter on Taxation. CHAPTER II. Rich Men Custodians of Wealth : Superior Acqui- sition Natural: Labor Fairly Recompensed: Rich Men's Accumulations Benefit All: Wealth Must Accumulate Faster Than Population: No Over Production of Wealth: Equitable Distribution De- fined: The Insufficiency Of Wealth: Useful VS. Useless Production: Commercial Trusts: Benefi- cial When Monopoly Is Prevented: Limitations To All Things : Cumulative Tax Applied To Industrial Monopoly: Danger of Diminishing Accumulation: Application To Banks Half: All Owners Should Be Voters: Publicity By Court Order: Labor Trusts (Unions) : Watering Stocks Not Harmful Unless Fraudulent : Rich Men In Society : Vanish- ing Point of Custodianship: Saving And Spend- ing : Plutocratic Ostentation And Hauteur : PROPOSITION FIRST. That "rich men are the custodians of the world's wealth" and that "their accumulations should be en- couraged." Shylockism is better than Socialism. The essential difference between a civilized so- ciety and a barbarous society is that in the former more crude media has been transformed into utiliz- able forms than in the latter. Growing out of this increased transformation but directly creditable to it are the superior mental, and, on the average, su- 60 TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 61 perior physical development of the human race. The civilized man knows more, and, on the average, lives longer than does the barbarian. These transforma- tions, as has been stated, result from the application of energy as developed in the body of a man or men or from reservoirs of energy stored up in nature and utilized by machines. Men differ in fitness, ex- cellence or quality. One man by reason of superior muscle or brain or both of these or by superior enterprise and acquisitiveness, not only transforms more media, but conserves or accumulates more than another man or men. As time goes on and as his faculties develop he begins to utilize the energies of nature to a greater extent than another man or men which means that he acquires and possesses greater facili- ties for said transformation than another man or men, hence he becomes richer than any other man or men. As against this superior skill and improved facilities the less endowed or less worthy man can- not successfully compete, hence is driven out of the race, unless he becomes an employee of the superior man or men. Off of the labor of the inferior man the superior makes a profit, hence the latter becomes rich and the former remains poor. Added to this is the increase in value of the property possessed by the superior man, and each step in the process is as natural and as unavoidable as are the ebbs and flows of the tides or as the gravitation of the spheres. To interfere with or alter this natural condition by any plan whatever except to prevent monopoly tends to diminish the stimulus to exertion possessed by the superior man or men without correspond- ingly increasing said stimulus in the inferior man 62 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM or men, which diminishes production and retards progress. To hand over for consumption and use by the inferior man or men more than he has pro- duced or accumulated either as an independent transformation or as an employee, lessens the sum total of wealth and the community becomes poorer. But, say those who favor Socialism, every man should receive the full value that his labor justly represents, and that conditions which admit of a profit to any are equivalent to robbery. It is highly probable that, in the vast majority of the processes by which crude material is transformed, the wage- earner receives a reasonable percentage of the value that his services, exclusive of appliances furnished by his employer, currently produce. It is, however, this small value that he does not receive that is the source from which comes almost all our accumulated wealth. Be the system called socialism, fetichism, land-taxism or any other ism, it is a self-evident proposition that, if under it, every man received the full value that he produced all the accumulation that society would own would be the small savings of these men. Many of them would save nothing, and the savings of the few frugal ones would be so small and so widely scattered and diffused that it would be practically unavailable for enterprises of " great " or even of moderate "pith and mo- ment. " If the system, by what name soever it be designated, required that each man should contrib- ute to the common fund in the ratio of his ability and each draw from said fund in the ratio of his needs, few men, however capable, would long con- tribute more than the weakest, and each would de- sire to consume as much as the greatest. The result would be diminished production and increased con- TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 63 sumption, hence no accumulation, but likely a very large deficiency. Either a percentage of what men produce would have to be exacted from them and be placed in the coffers of the state, there to be absorbed, dissipated and squandered by a multitude of public agents or officials, or the capitalistic wage-paying and wage- profiting system or something akin to it, must con- tinue or there would be no accumulation, and ac- cumlation is as essential as production if standards of living are to be materially improved. In almost all discussions on these questions the great and all-essential factor of INCREASED AC- CUMULATION is usually ignored or considered of no essential importance in social affairs. More and worse than this : the accumulator is oft- times reviled, anathematized and scorned as a miser, a skinflint, or a disreputable member of society. How much better it would be for all mankind if we had many more such disreputable members of so- ciety than we have! All accumulations are more valuable to society than any dissipations can be. It is not advocated herein that an accumulator should gather gold coin or currency and bury it in a vault ; but that he should do as all wise accumulators do, viz : invest it in some gainful enterprise, or loan it to some other man or company against good security, which wise accumulators always exact, who want to drain a swamp or irrigate a desert or do some other useful or beneficent thing. These are the conditions under which money (ac- cumulated wealth) makes the mare go with greatest speed and to best advantage for the entire world, rich and poor alike. If it is by these natural and beneficent processes 64 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM that some men become rich, why condemn their ac- cumulations if not monopolized, when, for the most part, they are reinvested for further gain to them- selves, which means further and greater and cheaper access to and use of wealth by the entire body poli- tic? Be it remembered always that, other things equal, the greater the wealth in any community per capita, the easier and cheaper does access to and the use of it become, unless it is absorbed by the accu- mulator in private castles, private parks, private preserves, and the like for his own use and enjoy- ment, or consumed in luxurious and ostentatious liv- ing, or viciously monopolized. Against this abuse of the use of wealth, society should assert ITS EIGHT to interpose its opposing voice, and should make that voice effectual. In the language of that great EMPIRE BUILDEE of the great Northwest, James J. Hill: "It is the cost of high living that makes the cost of all living high." The demand for useless and luxurious things stimu- lates producers to produce those things thereby con- suming capital and energy that would otherwise be devoted to the production of USEFUL things. But, say the socialists or collectiveists, would not the benefit be still greater if all became rich? Un- doubtedly, provided they do so by increased produc- tion and conservation, otherwise what some gain others must lose. If, however, all became rich faster than the shuttle weaves of its own accord there would be no "wage slaves" to perform menial occu- pations, hence production would be diminished and accumulation would stop. To the words "wage slave" and "menial occupation" there will be of course go out a look of derision and scorn by all who believe in the so-called brotherhood of men. Until TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 65 "the shuttle weaves of its own accord " it must be propelled by men or by machinery made by men. Until menial occupations perform themselves they must be performed by men or by machines made by men, and until these machines can reproduce them- selves they, too, must require some menial labor in their formation or construction. If all men were equally rich, all would be equally poor, for wealth and poverty are only relative \/ terms. As wealth is accumulated to-day the real differ- ence between a poor man and a rich one, so far as the use of wealth is concerned, is, in rich communi- ties, only about $5.00 per hundred per year, or, rather, for $5.00 per hundred per year, clear of taxes and repairs, a poor man gets the same use of a rich man's wealth (save the private properties heretofore named) that the rich man himself does, and the difference between this cost of use by each of them is daily becoming less as accumulation be- comes greater. The next best thing therefore to be- ing rich is to encourage others to become so. If publicly owned, this "price for use" could not be less, for, if so, accumulation would stop. If it is true that the transformation of crude media into utilizable forms is desirable and that it does re- dound to the good or to the well being of mankind, then the proposition is equally true no matter who owns it, provided access or use is vouchsafed at the current interest or rental rates. If it is true that some men called capitalists do conserve and accumulate said wealth and that they do hold most of it open for use, often by endowing beneficent institutions, otherwise non-existent, and always at current interest or rental rates, then it is 66 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM true that these capitalists are a benefit and not an injury to society, because the masses do not suf- ficiently accumulate, and accumulation is absolutely necessary. Vast enterprises cannot be undertaken, much less accomplished, without vast wealth. The increased facility that they insure usually more than compensates for the cost of their con- struction. WEALTH MUST ACCUMULATE, NOT ONLY AS FAST BUT FASTER THAN POPULATION INCREASES if living conditions are to be improved. If 1,000 barbarians are increased to 10,000, and no wealth is accumu- lated in either case, all are barbarians still. If there is $100 per capita in each case the latter 10,000 live no better than the former 1,000 ; but if in the latter 10,000 there is $200 per capita, access is cheaper and all live better. Wealth, when accumulated, must be taken care of or it will perish. If the capitalist is not a custodian of wealth, then what is his relation to that all essen- tial transformed or crude media for which labor has or is willing to exchange itself? A consumer of it he is not, save of what he and his dependents may actually use. If used by others, then others are the consumers. Use could not be granted for nothing else ere long there would be nothing to use ; but the price of use does tend to be less as wealth becomes greater and this is the all-important factor in social organization. Wealth, say some cooperators, is over-produced already ; that the price of the hire of the wage slave and his inability to get work is because of over- production. If things are over-produced, then the community is too rich, and, to remedy that evil, it must be made poorer. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 67 It is undoubtedly true that if all the machines in all civilized countries and all labors in the same were continuously occupied for ten hours per day, more of most any article would be produced in average years of commerce and business than could be dis- posed of to consumers. But over-production in any line cannot long exist, for the reason that overplus in quantity tends to- ward betterment in quality and to quality there can be no maximum limit. If as many houses exist as the community can rent the tendency of currently accumulating wealth is to tear down old houses and build up new and better houses. The same is true in all lines of in- dustry and even in agriculture. If more cotton is raised than can readily be sold the tendency is to raise better cotton and less of it, so that given time for adjustment, quality improves when quantity is not demanded which is alike beneficial to society be- cause the improved article will tend to rent or sell for the same price as did its poorer predecessor. A certain number of days ' labor will secure a much better abode to-day than 50 years ago. But if it is true that there is too much wealth, then less wealth is the remedy, that is, society must become poorer. No, say all reformers, what we want is not less wealth, but "AN EQUITABLE DISTEIBUTION" of existing and subsequently transformed wealth. What constitutes an "EQUITABLE DISTRIBU- TION"? Things to be followed must be defined. Timocracy maintains that a fair definition of "equit- able distribution " is an ABUNDANCE, but not a EEDUNDANCE, for the preservation of SELF, of OFFSPEING and of SOCIETY. This means that any man or woman shall be permitted to inherit, ac- 68 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM cumulate, own and control an amount of wealth suf- ficient for at least THEEE generations, or for one generation beyond, or after, self and offspring, which latter generation represents the race or so- ciety. To preserve the race each married couple must bring into the world about FOUR children. Under the Timocratic cumulative rate, a 25-million- dollar estate could be inherited. If this estate was simply preserved intact, i. e., not increased or decreased by outside gain or ex- penditure beyond income, each of 16 grandchildren could become possessed of something over one mil- lion each. As there are millions of couples who would leave nothing to their offspring, it is question- able whether or not this amount is sufficient to as- sure INCREASED ACCUMULATION. If not suf- ficient, the rate would have to be less drastic. Ex- perience alone could demonstrate sufficiency. Equitable distribution to a wage slave is a fair part of the value of the product that has been added by his labor, and likewise the employer is entitled to interest on his investment and to a fair profit for his own talent and for the risk he takes in providing the wage slave with an opportunity to labor. Of course socialists object to this profit, and to the idea that he should allow anything for oppor- tunity, holding that the State should make the profit if any is made, and that opportunity is his as a mat- ter of right. Whenever he can enforce this condi- tion it will be his and not before. The question is, is it best for society that he should enforce this condition, even if he could? Timocracy says not. In the complex condition of production that now exists, it is impossible to determine the exact part TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 69 of production that has been contributed by a wage slave. Until socialism is established, the aim must be, ' ' get all you can, ' ' i. e., all your individual excellence or labor organization can command, but proceed within the law as at present administered, or worse conditions will confront all wage slaves. When so- cialism is established, distribution will not be "more equitable," because individual excellence, upon which alone EQUITY in anything is based, is incom- patable with harmony in a socialistic organization. The result would likely be very disappointing to the slaves of the over lords which socialism must create and maintain. Nevertheless, tendencies toward socialistic sys- tems are on the increase and are likely to be accel- erated. The reasons why these tendencies are on the in- crease is because private ownership is tending to- ward private monopoly and because many people honestly think that they see gerat evil if not actual ruin in the colossal aggregations of individual wealth. Properly considered, these fears are groundless. If as wealth (by which is meant all utilizable forms and values) per capita increases, the price for consumption and use does not DE- CREASE, it is because the demand per capita caused by higher standarsd of living or for other causes has increased proportionately, or because said increased wealth is represented by useless pri- vate forms, or by useless governmentalism, or be- cause access to it is withheld by vicious monopoly of one form or another. Cumulative taxation would correct useless private forms and vicious monopoly, but useless governmentalism can only be corrected 70 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM by curtailing governmental functions. If said taxa- tion should be too drastic it would also prevent ac- cumulation, and the same result would be caused that it sought to remedy, viz., less wealth per capita, and consequently high prices for consumption and use. THE INSUFFICIENCY OF WEALTH. However unreasonable it may appear even to un- prejudiced men, it cannot be too often repeated that the true cause why the living standard of the masses is so low is that the WOELD'S WEALTH IS TOO LITTLE to make it much higher. In the United States of America in 1890 wealth per capita was about $1,000. In 1900 it was about $1,250. If it was $12,500 per capita instead of $1,250, there would be more multi-millionaires, but the price for the use of wealth would be very much less, which would mean that standards of living could and would be very much higher. The remedy therefore must be MOEE WEALTH. By production and conservation alone can more wealth exist, and when it does exist (even if privately owned and not privately absorbed) then and not till then will living standards for humanity be materially improved. We think wealth is very abundant because, in the hands of the few whom, it seems, nature decrees shall own it, it APPEAES to be abundant. In point of fact, it is not so, when we consider the millions who own nothing. Socialism will not cause the millions to own more, but will surely cause less production and less accumulation, hence LOWEK instead of HIGHEE standards of living for all. If consumption or the living standard of all citizens of the United States of America were TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 71 raised more than about ten cents per day, then, un- less production was increased, there would be a loss which, in time, would mean retrogression and bankruptcy. LIVING STANDARDS FOR ALL CANNOT BE MUCH HIGHER UNTIL WEALTH PER CAPITA IS MUCH GREATER. The reason why the living standard of the masses is so low is not because a few men are superabun- dantly rich, but because the whole people (the few rich included) are superabundantly poor. The statement that, if, during the ten years intervening between 1890 and 1900, the whole people had en- joyed a living standard of only 10 cents per day bet- ter than they experienced, society would have taken a step toward bankruptcy unless production had been greater than it was during that period, appears ridiculous ; but, if statistics are even measurably cor- rect, that statement is substantially true. If it is true that the per capita wealth of the United States of America in 1870 was about $780 and in 1890 it was about $1,000 and in 1900 about $1,250, then it is true that the gain during that period was less than $20 per capita per year. This appears very small, but when we look around us we are obliged to con- clude that the average family of five people is not $100 richer than it was the previous year. In fact, many are actually poorer. Tending to confirm this view, it is reported that the savings bank deposits in New York increased only 63 million per year for five years prior to 1904. There were reported to be 2,365,583 depositors, which represents only an aver- age per capita annual gain of about $26.60. If, there- fore, even these despositors (to say nothing of the millions who saved nothing) had lived at a standard of 10 cents per day of $36.50 per year higher than 72 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM they did, and produced no more than they did, there would have been a shortage (unless they possessed other savings) of about $10 per capita per year for this comparatively frugal class. If those who save nothing are included and given a living standard of 10 cents per day higher, we find that an annual de- ficiency of $16.50 per capita per year would have resulted unless production had been greater. The riches of the few are observed in the contrasts of liv- ing standards, but the magnitude of the numbers of the comparatively and lamentably poor appears to be overlooked. When the total wealth aggregates ten times as much per capita as it now does, which, at the present rate of gain will be many years in the future, then all the people could live, on that basis of production, at a standard of about $1 per day bet- ter than all now live without drifting backward to- ward inevitable bankruptcy. It is probable, how- ever, unless arrested by socialism or kindred sys- tems, that both production and accumulation will be rapidly accelerated so that in a less number of yars than now appear necessary, a standard of living for all, $1.00 per day or its equivalent better than all who now live can be attained; but, even then, pro- duction and accumulation will have to be maintained at that standard. Increased production and accumu- lation, therefore, is the only way to reach better liv- ing standards. Socialists claim that, if their plan was adopted everybody could live much better than they now do with working hours reduced to three or four per day by the simple method of making all idlers work. It does not appear probable that there are enough idlers to-day, who would then be forced to work to produce as much in three or four hours as we now produce in ten. The real truth is, that, TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 73 though very much better than it ever was before, this old earth of ours is as yet the hard earth to live upon. It is not yet sufficiently rich, taking as an en- tirety, for all its people to live at a standard that averages much higher than present conditions make manifest. Lamentable though it be, it must be na- ture 's decree that the poor always have been, are now, and always will be with us until the whole world becomes richer. Socialism might temporarily alleviate, but it would ultimately further prostrate, unless present indications are erroneously inter- preted. If, however, it ever will result in greater accumulation, many other arguments against it will vanish. The only respects in which rich men, who are not monopolists, fail to do good to society is in excessive private use of wealth, or in expanding their accumu- lations in luxurious or useless things. In former days and largely in the present day much of the wealth of the community was and is invested in cathedrals, in costly tombs, in mausoleums, and in handsome but useless towers and pyramids. But, say all cooperators, does not this give work to wage slaves f It does, but the same wealth utilized in mak- ing better abodes for the living, in draining swamps, irrigating deserts and making better conditions for life would give just as much work to wage slaves and, when the work had been done, USEFUL forms to which access would be cheaper would supplant USELESS forms to which there is no access at all ; that tends to ameliorate the pangs of the living. In a word, capitalists do society the most good when they invest in things out of which they can get GEEATEE wealth, i. e., from which they can be- come still richer, for a revenue implies USE of the 74 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM articles produced, and the more of USABLE arti- cles there are the cheaper does access to them be- come. Is it not wiser to DAM the Nile and irrigate the desert, causing golden grain to wave over glar- ing sands, than to DAM the people and perpetuate the desert by building tombs and pyramids to com- memorate kings I It is a very praiseworthy fact in society that some custodians of wealth who possess incomes of thou- sands upon thousands are content to use, consume or to live upon only a few thousands per year. The common belief is that such a man is an injury to society. He should SPEND his wealth, say the agitators and fools, circulate his money, say the superficial thinkers. The facts are that the so-called "skin- flint" is doing society far more good by conserving much and consuming little than he could possibly do by lavish expenditure for USELESS things that would soon be destroyed or otherwise consumed. Of course this tendency may beget penuriousness which is always unwise ; but excessive economy is al- ways better than excessive WASTE. the miser hoards his riches, and as soon as he gets a few thousand dollars he invests in bonds and seals them in a box, say the average self-imposed philosophers. All this is true of wise accumulators, but this very investment in bonds enables some en- terprising man or company to build a house, a rail- way, a bridge or a waterway to do something to- ward the transformation of crude media into utiliza- ble forms and the skinflint who has accumulated it should be considered a great benefactor to society. His economy in the consumption of things which in- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 75 creases his accumulations for reinvestment in pro- ductive enterprise is of incalculable advantage. Rich men are undoubtedly getting richer, but poor men are undoubtedly not getting poorer. On the contrary, the poor are also getting richer, if not in increased ownership of media crude or transformed, then in increased and cheaper access to and use of media that is increasing in the hands of conserva- tors of wealth which is practically the same thing as far as standards of living are concerned. The poor man is richer when, for ten days ' labor, he can rent a house containing a bath which pre- viously cost him 12 or 15 days ' labor. The tendency of increased accumulations (which imply increased production and conservation) is to better the quality and cheapen the price. When capitalists cannot build houses, railways, highways and waterways that pay 6 per cent. 'on the outlay, they will build them that pay 4 or 3 per cent, on the outlay, which means the same house for a lower price or a better house for the same price. The only hope for the betterment of the living con- dition of humanity is this increasing production, either in quantity or quality and in increased con- servation by accumulating men. The rich man is a blessing and his accumulations should be encour- aged, but not monopolized. It should be borne in mind that, not only should his accumulations be en- couraged, but he should also be encouraged to invest said accumulations in useful things, not in pyramids, statues, costly cathedrals, tombstones, mausoleums, conservatories, and the like, but in houses, bridges, railways, highways, waterways, and the like. If for the last two thousand years, or since the period of fairly well-authenticated history, all the wealth that 76 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM has been invested in the former list of compara- tively USELESS things, had been invested in the latter list of actually USEFUL things, the poorest man in the community would to-day be living in houses at least as comfortable and good as the mid- dle class occupy, and would secure them for the same or less outlay than they now expend for hovels. All classes would be elevated. If to this sum could be added all the wealth expended in implements and munitions of war, such as forts, arsenals, battleships and musketry, the whole world would now blossom like a rose and all waste places would be like the gardens of the Hesperides. Statistics show that the more numerous the mil- lionaires the higher the standard of living for the MASSES. In Eussia there are few millionaires and standards are lower than in Germany and France. In these countries there are fewer millionaires than in the British Empire, and living standards are lower. In the latter Empire millionaires are fewer than in America, where the highest living standards prevail. The reason for this is obvious, viz.: The greater the wealth the easier the access, and the easier the access the higher the standards of living. COMMERCIAL TRUSTS. Much opposition has of late years developed to a certain method of aggregating capital for the benefit of humanity (and such aggregations are always beneficial where monopoly is prevented) called TRUSTS. TRUSTS, so called, are ofttimes a great benefit to the public and whenever beneficial their organization should be encouraged. It would, of course, be folly to advocate the or- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 77 ganization of a TRUST under conditions that are not favorable, for under such conditions it could not long continue, hence its benefits to humanity would be only temporary and brief. When, in any line of business, concentration will tend to increase facility and to diminish cost, concentration in that line should be encouraged. Aye, more than this, when by concentration greater excellence can be as- sured at no greater labor cost so that greater profits can be earned on the capital invested so as to aid in the conservation of more wealth, concentration should likewise be encouraged. By reason of in- creased facility, which reduces cost, the prices of commodities subject to the uniformity and efficiency of trust organizations have in many cases grown less and not greater than when under the multi- formity and inefficiency of numerous little shops. Of course a condition might be imagined under which one man or company might own all x>r a large part of some necessary commodity, and under the right of private ownership might refuse to sell any thereof, or place thereon a prohibitory price. In such event the people should FORCE entry and use. The remedy against this VICIOUSNESS IS CUM- ULATIVE TAXATION, and TRUSTS, if organ- ized, would exist subject to said taxation, which would be much better than anti-trust enactments be- cause there would be a WARNING against trans- gression that would be definite and fixed. Some remedy against VICIOUS ABUSE AND MONOPOLY must exist, but vioding these, TRUSTS must exist if great enterprises are to be undertaken and accomplished. Among other beneficent results, TRUSTS pre- 78 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM vent protracted periods of depression followed by wild speculative activity. They are, as it were, the TEADE WINDS of busi- ness, not the DOLDEUMS and the CYCLONES. The "feast and famine " is largely supplanted by a healthful sufficiency at all times. Whilst private ownership is acknowledged (which it must be till it is publicly monopolized or Social- ized) no anti-trust legislation can cause confiscation, no matter by whom owned, either in whole or part ; but can only enforce SEGREGATION of a previous consolidation with proportionate ownership yet re- maining in the constituent companies. At the end of one generation, however, these ownerships would also be SEGEEGATED by the CUMULATIVE IN- HEEITANCE TAX as proposed herein, provided this tax is not so drastic as to diminish per capita wealth accumulation. If too drastic it must be made less so, but it cannot be abolished entirely if the abolition of private monopoly is in fact desired by society. The rate proposed would permit a single heir to inherit 25 million dollars, which, though it seems large to most people is, in fact, not excessive as has been indicated herein. In organizing a trust or in consolidating indus- tries, whenever a bona fide purchase and sale is made, no anti-trust enactment can invalidate that trust transaction, for, if so, the common law is a farce and private property a pretence. Whether the sellers take money or shares in the consolidated company is a matter of no conse- quence, because, if they take the former, they may soon seek to buy the latter as a safe investment for their capital. In a word, TEUSTS, or aggregations of capital TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 79 where fraud is not practiced, or MONOPOLY crea- ted, are, on the whole, a benefit to humanity, and their organization should be encouraged. The accumulation of wealth, no matter who owns it, is beneficial or it is not beneficial to society. If it is beneficial, then opposition to systematized meth- ods of accumulation is illogical. If it is not beneficial, then rebarberization is logical. But there are limitations to all things and pro- cesses that human intelligence comprehends. There are limits to our grand and lofty mountains and also to our broad and multitudinous seas. Only space, matter and motion are unlimited. Even the great globe itself and all which it inherits is limited and i ' shall dissolve, ' ' etc. It is not there- fore unreasonable to conclude with the great law- giver, Solon, " NOTHING IN EXCESS/' and that there are proper limitations to the possession of individ- ual wealth. Private fortunes should grow to that magnitude which preserves SELF, OFFSPEING and EACE and which assures the greatest accumu- lation of wealth; but they should be as popularly owned as is consistent with said greatest accumula- tion. Business enterprises of all kinds should be per- mitted to expand to that magnitude which will as- sure the greatest facility in operation and the great- est economy in production. Beyond this limit there is no need for the expansion of estates or corpora- tions. The question is, WHAT IS THE PEOPEE LIMIT ? No limit can be absolutely determined, but one large enough to remove all doubt can be de- 80 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM termined, and this will not be so monopolistic as to be at all objectionable if properly regulated by cumulative taxation. In dealing with all business, society should look to GEOSS OUTPUT and not to CAPITALIZA- TION OE TO NET PEOFIT, as both of the latter are indefinite and subject to manipulation, malver- sation, secretiveness and evasion. If the tax rate hereinbefore named, to wit, THE ONE-MILLIONTH PEE CENT, was applied to the MONTHLY (not yearly) output or business of all commercial enterprises, except BANKS, then when a monthly business of FIVE MILLION dollars was done, a tax rate of FIVE PEE CENT, would have to be paid. Assuming the average profit of large concerns to be 10 per cent, on sales or business (and statistics show that they average fully that) then one-half of said profit would go to the people, or to the Government, when that maximum was reached. This would automatically force the segregation of corporations when a business of, say, 60 million per year was done. Of course, proportionate holdings would be unaltered, but, be it remembered, that, at the end of one generation the CUMULATIVE IN- HEEITANCE TAX would segregate these hold- ings, and that is as soon as they should be segre- gated. It is not at all presumable or probable that a larger concern than one of this magnitude would add anything to facility for operation or to cheap- ness of production, and if not no larger single en- terprise is to be recommended. The tendency would not likely be to curtail ac- cumulation because smaller concerns, against which TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 81 the tax would be less, could sell at the same price and make a greater net profit. No concern doing a business of less than, say, one million per month should be subject to said cumula- tive tax rate, because, be it remembered, that the tax is NOT AIMED AT BUSINESS OE PEOP- EETY, BUT AT MONOPOLY. It is better to es- tablish some regular and definite SYSTEM or plan like the millionth per cent, with respect to which all enterprises could organize and to which they could adjust themselves, than to subject all concerns to the uncertainty and caprice of doubtful legislation or litigation. UNCEETAINTY is the greatest of all barriers against business enterprise. It does not matter so much what the conditions are, provided they are just and practicable, if only they are DEFINITE and not altered after they are once in- stituted. If the "millionth per cent." is too dras- tic or not enough so, it could be changed to fit the conditions. Eeformers must take great care lest, in seeking to steer clear of the Scylla of inequitable distribution, that they do not wreck society in the Charybdis of diminished accumulation. With such an automatic balance wheel on enter- prises, prices would need no regulation by Govern- ment commissions, and no abuses could be prac- ticed that would be damaging to society. Under it, TEUSTS could yet be organized, as they should be when not monopolistic, and they would need no pestiferous intermediation of the Governmental Fetich, even as to discrimination in rates which is not necessarily an abuse of private ownership, but at times is the very thing to be done to meet certain conditions. Large and uniform transactions in all 82 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM lines of industry always have and always should command cheaper rates than small and multiform transactions. But for this fact EETAIL trade would be impossible because unprofitable, and if re- tail trade is not possible there can be no systematic and business-like distribution of merchandise. It would be as reasonable to prevent a large fac- tory from selling a million dollar order to a large jobber or retailer at a cut rate as to prevent a rail- road company from transporting a million-dollar shipment at a cut rate. Both might be very bene- ficial to society. The large order might keep a fac- tory in operation throughout a dull season, hence give employment to thousands of operatives who might otherwise be idle for a long period, and the cut rate on freights might cause the opening of a mine or quarry that would otherwise remain idle or unproductive. Even the consuming masses might be benefited by cheaper prices for a long time. All things considered, society is benefited more by permitting business conditions (when not monopo- lized) to be met by the owners of establishments than by any interference of Government commis- sioners, who cannot know the requirements of a business situation as well as owners can know them. BANKS AND CUMULATIVE TAXATION As credits are LOANED, not SOLD, and as prof- its are only from 4 to 6 per cent., it is proposed that the rate on Banks be HALF that on other business enterprises. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 83 COEPOEATE ORGANIZATIONS. ALL OWNEES SHOULD BE VOTEES. Ownership should carry with it the privileges, powers and conditions of ownership, which means CONTEOLLEESHIP. Most of the corporations of the country (especially railroad companies) are not controlled by their owners. In most cases the common stock only, which often has no intrinsic value and earns no dividends, con- trols the corporation. It is attributable largely if not wholly to this fact that corrupt, unscrupulous, and designing men can and do carry into effect many unjust, unbu sine ss -like and often iniquitous policies. A bondholder is usually more an owner than a preferred stockholder, and the latter usually more than a common stockholder, yet usually neither of these owners can vote. Actual ownership in the large corporations of the country is to-day quite " popular, " i. e., owners in fact are quite numerous, but CONTEOLLEES in fact are very few. Every security, be it a bond, preferred stock or common stock, should cast one vote in the election of man- aging directors of a company, for every one dollar per year on the hundred that it receives in interest or dividends. Policy holders in insurance companies should likewise vote in all companies (as they do in many) on an equitable basis. If there be no inter- est or dividends paid, then the prior evidences of ownership alone should vote. Though it would en- tail some additional complication, bonds could be issued and registered the same as stock, and be similarly transferable. 84 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM With all classes of ownership thus recognized, vot- ing control could not so easily become autocratic, and it would be the fault of a majority in VALUE if corrupt combinations were made. Why should one class of ownership, and that the lowest class, be the actual CONTROLLER? If they who actually own, actually control, there would not only be no need for the paternal guardianship of the GOVERNMENTAL FETICH, but such guardian- ship would be tantamount to impertinent intermed- dling of disinterested intruders. There should be ONE NATIONAL CORPORA- TION LAW, with which, as to fundamental powers and restrictions, the state laws should be in con- formity. The fewer the restrictions the more invit- ing the investment. Many so-called " great states- men " entirely overlook the reactionary damage that results from actionary intermeddling. Most " great statesmen " are too small to successfully handle mat- ters of as much importance as the industry of any country. In many cases the common stock, which does the voting, represents no investment whatso- ever. In this respect there is a similarity between Private and Governmental corporations. In both, the owners should vote in the ratio of their owner- ship. ORGANIZED LABOR TRUSTS Working men have the same right to organize Labor Trusts that Capitalists have to organize Com- mercial Trusts. No trust organization can be more beneficial or praiseworthy than a Labor Trust (which all union organizations are) provided its operations are law- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 85 ful ; that it is voluntarily entered into by its mem- bers; and provided, furthermore, that it is made RESPONSIBLE PECUNIARILY as well as per- sonally considered. A Labor Trust that does not possess financial or pecuniary responsibility should be treated as a MOB, and dealt with by the strong arm of the law whenever its actions interfere with any business. Its members should be obliged to contribute to its treasury a certain sum per capita so as to provide said pecuniary responsibility; and this fund should be invested in Government Bonds or deposited with some responsible institution to be held by it as a guarantee that agreements when made with the Labor Trust or Union can be legally enforced. This fund would draw interest so as to avoid loss to the Labor Trust, but it should be subject to process, the same as Real Estate or any other value by whom- soever owned. The trust should be empowered to sue and be sued as are all Commercial Trusts. Labor trusts can become the most obnoxious of all possible monopolies ; they can, if so disposed, tie up the food supply of a city, a district or a state, and cause untold damage, even starvation and death to people and destruction to property. If they were financially responsible, that damage could in some degree be repaired by the judgment of a Court, and liability to such judgment would tend to insure proper conduct and to prevent mob out- lawry. No law or statute that bears on Commercial Trusts should exempt Labor Trusts from its pen- alties. Commercial Trusts are financially responsible, hence justice requires that Labor Trusts should not 86 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM be execution proof or in any way protected from the operation of law. This responsibility would give to labor trusts dig- nity and character. Agreements could be enforced or damages obtained for non-compliance therewith by due process of law. Labor monopolies must be destroyed the same as ^Capital monopolies. Forcible interference with non-union endeavor or opportunity should be dealt with as mob violence is dealt with, and the BOYCOTT should be answerable to Court Injunction if necessary. AKBITKATION, but not necessarily binding on either party, should be enforced before a strike is declared operative so as to give time for adjust- ment in case no settlement is reached. PUBLICITY OF PEIVATE BUSINESS. Publicity of private business should not be en- forced except by Court order for special reasons. Public scrutiny into the same should be confined to confirmation, if questioned, of compliance with cor- porate rights and restrictions, and to the ascertain- ment of GEOSS OUTPUT or GROSS RENTALS. In other respects PRIVATE BUSINESS IS NOT PUBLIC BUSINESS. But, if several companies owned by the same men should combine and arbi- trarily advance prices or curtail production (which they could not do unless they owned a complete monopoly) then, in the discretion of a Court, the "millionth per cent, tax" could be made to apply to the aggregate output of all the companies instead of to the single output of one of the companies. We must use our Courts and Trust our Courts. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 8? COEPOEATE CAPITALIZATION OE "WATEE- ING STOCKS. " Much complaint is urged against what is termed "watering stocks " in private corporations. The stocks of corporations, as has been stated, are only certificates or evidences of ownership of the prop- erty of the corporation. To increase or decrease the number of certificates does not increase or de- crease the resources of the company. If the shares pay 10 per cent, on a certain issue, and 5 per cent, is the rate in the community at which investments thought to be good are maintained at par, the ten- dency of the stock on a 10 per cent, basis will be to sell at 200. If the issue is doubled the same would tend to sell at 100. Twice the stock at half the price is the same as half the stock at twice the price. There is no injustice in this. The buyer must be- ware. VOIDING FEAUD no inherent wrong exists in so-called "watering stocks. " Against FEAUD the courts provide a remedy ; but against the l ' gulli- bility of the public" there is no remedy unless it be a FOOL KILLEE or a WISDOM CEEATOE. People often buy stocks, knowing as well as any- thing can be known that they possess nothing but speculative value ; in fact, if they possessed any real value nine-tenths of a certain class of investors would not touch them. If the business of the Gov- ernment Fetichists is to eradicate the speculative in- stincts of mankind they had better begin by teach- ing the mothers to teach their children the folly of that habit rather than to try to control it by inter- meddling with the private business of corporations in that respect. No corporation can force any man 88 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM or woman to buy their stocks, and, VOIDING FBAUD, they have a just right to sell them. EICH MEN IN SOCIETY. Man and his true place in nature is not thoroughly understood by even the wisest of our philosophers and scarcely conceived at all by ordinary mortals. Most people think that men were created by the 1 < FIAT of OMNIPOTENCE to occupy the earth, and the earth created by the same FIAT to be occu- pied by men. This basic or fundamental belief leads to many misconceptions in all the affairs of life. It causes the masses to think that their natural and rightful inheritance has been taken away from them by the classes, or, rather, by the rich, when, in fact, the rich are Custodians and Benefactors until they be- come Monopolists, which under Timocracy is impos- sible. The expression that "Bich men are the tem- porary custodians of the world 's wealth" is taken from the writings and speeches of Mr. Andrew Car- negie. VANISHING POINT OF CUSTODIANSHIP? Will there ever come a time when men will cease to try to accumulate wealth beyond the possible needs of themselves and their dependants? It is sincerely to be hoped that such time will never come, because it will mean the diminution of accumulation. At the present time, in rich communities the reward of an accumulator for the valuable service of custo- dianship is only about $4.00 per hundred per year. It is evident that, if wealth should continue to ac- cumlate; that if population and the desires of the TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 89 people for a higher standard of living should not increase, the amount of wealth per capita would be- come so great that the reward for custodianship would be reduced to less than $4.00 per hundred per year, or possibly to such a low rate of compen- sation ($2.00, or even $1.00, per hundred per year) that custodians would have no inducement to con- tinue their valuable services to the community. In this event, accumulation would diminish and its con- sequent ill-effects would follow. It is probable, how- ever, or at least it is sincerely to be hoped, that con- tinuously increasing strife for higher standard of living will perpetuate a sufficiently high reward for the use of wealth, to stimulate accumulators to con- tinue their beneficent service, and their all-impor- tant custodianship of the wealth of the world. It is certainly true that, as wealth per capita increases, either the people at large will get the same standard of living at a lower price or a higher standard at the same price, which forces the conclusion that in- creased accumulation is the all-important desidera- tum even though privately owned, if not privately and ostentatiously used and absorbed. The conclu- sion is just as obvious that more accumulation will result from private thrift than from public waste, which again forces the conclusion that the means of production and distribution should be privately (and in one sense publicly) owned, operated and con- trolled. Voluntary benefactors from private custo- dians in 1909 were over 150 million, and in 10 or 12 years previous were about one billion, which is prob- ably more than will ever be saved to society by the Governmental Fetich, which destroys the assured blessings of Individualism and assures none of the supposed blessings of socialism. 90 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM SAVING AND SPENDING. In order to possess society must produce; in order to accumulate, it must save. Spending, as society is organized, is equivalent to consuming. It is really but an exchange, but the exchanged products are usually consumed. Again, for the purposes of clearer understanding, let complexity be reduced to simplicity. If but one man existed on the earth, he would be obliged to produce, that is, to convert into utilizable forms, the crude material that he pos- sessed. In social aggregations, division of labor and differentiation of function cause each man to pro- duce a few or perhaps only one thing or a part of a thing, and, by exchanging it for the products of others, provide for his current wants. It is cur- rently believed that men should spend, that is, con- sume, in order to create a demand for and supply work to their fellow men. If this idea is sound in social aggregations of men, it must likewise be so as to a single man, which is to say that a man must consume in order to provide an opportunity for himself to work. The wise course for one man to pursue is to produce what he can produce, consume as much or little as his desires and appetites sug- gest, and to accumulate or save as much as he can consistently with his appetites and desires, because there will come times in most earthly climates when he cannot produce at all, but as long as he lives there will never come a time when he cannot consume or spend. If this is true of one man, then it is true of all men. When we strike a balance between produc- tion and saving and consumption or spending, the advantageous resultant must be on the one side or 4 TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 91 the other it cannot be on both. Then aside from what men must produce and spend in order to live, their best conditions are subserved either by more saving or by more spending which? By saving, so- ciety accumulates and can surround its members with currently increasing comforts. By spending, it cannot accumulate, hence cannot insure additional comforts. Unless, therefore, it is a wise policy for one man to consume in order to give work to him- self, it is not a wise policy for him to spend in order to create demand for and give work to his fellow men. A man should spend with reference to his own production, and he is the wisest and he does society the most good who accumulates, for his own comfort primarily, and for the comfort of all men secondarily ; and he is least wise and he does society least good who spends in order to provide work for his fellows. If all men would accumulate, no man would need the unwise expenditures of other men in order that they might be provided with work. PLUTOCRATIC OSTENTATION AND HAUTEUR. The most stupid of all plutocratic performances is the superciliousness and ostentation exercised by "the pig parvenue," as he has often been called. "Three generations to breed a gentleman " is in most cases a truism. Ostentatious expenditure stimulates the production of useless and evanescent forms. It also tends to intensify the extreme of living conditions, and consequently provokes ani- mosity that Would not otherwise exist. The error that lavish expenditure by the rich bene- fits the poor by circulating money should be dissi- pated in the minds of the people. One dollar in- 92 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM vested in useful and durable things is worth, TO THE PEOPLE, many dollars invested in useless and perishable things. Just as the expenditure of wealth taken by governments in taxation, for battle- ships, forts, arsenals and the like ; and just as ex- penditures for costly cathedrals, towers, pyramids and the like, are wasteful, so ostentatious expendi- tures by plutocratic parvenues are wasteful. A plu- tocrat is but a CUSTODIAN of wealth that has been produced by the people. When a custodian is ex- travagant and wasteful, his occupation should termi- nate. ' * It is my money, ' ' says the parvenue, ' i and I will do with it as I please." Not if the people exercise their power, as they will some day do, will you "do with it as you please. " The argument that wealth production is a low and groveling aspiration, is, however, an error also, and it is yet a greater error to anathematize the wealth accumulator who invests his accumulations produc- tively. Civilization cannot advance unless crude ma- terial is converted into utilizable forms, from which it follows that these forms must be accumulated and conserved. The justification for private ownership over public ownership (millionism over socialism) lies in the belief, which is practically a demonstra- tion, that accumulation will be greater, hence that the living of all will be higher and better. When people cease to worship the Governmental Fetich it will be deemed far more honorable to be president of an industrial establishment that produces and ac- cumulates millions of dollars per year than to be President of the United States governmental estab- lishment that consumes or wastes millions of dollars per year. CHAPTER III. Taxation Its Function : Levied On Property Di- rect: Reasons Therefor: Equitable Relativity In Assessments: Taxation For Protection: Cumula- tive Tax On Private Estates And Monopoly: The Geocratic Position: Its Objectionable Features: General Rights Of Condemnation: Difficulty Of Changes: Inheritance vs. Income Taxes: Tolls vs. Taxes : Pauperizing Taxes : Church Property And Taxation: Valuation For Taxation: Taxation Breeds Revolution: Death And Taxes: Taxation One-Third Of Labor Product: Cumulative Tax Briefly Outlined. I PROPOSITION SECOND. That all taxation should be for revenue only, and be collected from Real Estate and other fixed prop- erty and franchises only, with an additional cumula- tive levy on private parks, private castles, private residences, private preserves and the like, above cer- tain valuation, occupied, rented, or held exclusively for private enjoyment, occupancy and use. Under a well-adjusted social status taxation has but one justifiable function, viz. : the procurement of wealth with which to support institutions which are required by society and which cannot be practically self-supporting. Under the same social status there 93 94 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM is but one justifiable source from which said wealth should be derived, viz.: from fixed property equit- ably and relatively assessed. Under formative or developing social conditions, owing to the multitu- dinous agencies that prompt human action, there are times when it appears reasonable to attempt by taxation the business of regulation. There is -but one such regulation that is not ipso facto, discrimi- nating and unjust, viz. : that of preventing the per- nicious abuse of private ownership, which is monop- oly. As applied to anything but fixed property, revenue, source and regulation must always be mat- ters of doubt and discrimination. The basis of all government is property, therefore property should support government. There is no property but utili- ties. Evidence of ownership in utilities (stocks, bonds and the like) are not property. Taxation, therefore, should be levied on property and not on evidences of ownership in property. Most prop- erty is fixed property, movables represent only a small percentage thereof. Most of the value of a railway is in its roadbed, bridges, station houses, depots, and franchises. All of these are fixed prop- erty. Most of the value of a factory is in its land, buildings, machinery, and their incidental belong- ings. The reason, therefore, for taxing only fixed property are the following: 1st. Most property is fixed property. 2d. All fixed property is ascertainable and can- not be secreted or moved. 3d. It avoids double taxation which is always un- just, and since there is no practical way of justly taxing so-called personal property the burden falls unjustly on that which is taxed, and, being an injus- tice it should not be imposed. If all personalty TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 95 could be taxed, interest rates would average higher, and the borrower (who is vastly in the majority) would lose more than the community would gain. If personalty is not taxed it seeks investment which reduces interest rates and the borrower gains more than the community would lose. These facts, to- gether with the absolute impossibility of assessing it justly, more than compensate for its total ex- emption. 4th. By taxation on fixed property alone can a citizen's exact contribution to, hence his rightful ownership in a government corporation be ascer- tained. 5th. The exact rate and burden would always be known, which would constantly tend toward economy in expenditure. Much extravagance is made possible by the INSIDIOUS operation of all INDIEECT systems, which are none the less oppressive because of being temporarily shifted. To secure revenue by evasive methods is almost the same as THEFT. "By Heaven ! I had rather COIN my heart, and drop my blood for drachmas, than to wring vile trash by any INDIEECTION." 6th. Fixed Property can be valued for taxation with reasonable accuracy at all times and in all places. 7th. Taxes would be levied and collected in the locality to which the revenue is to be applied, and no tax that is too oppressive for FIXED property to comfortably bear should ever be imposed in any lo- cality. Neither of these reasons applies to movable prop- erty, and since movables represent in the main tran- sient and perishable effects, and since they can be and always will be secreted or greatly undervalued, 96 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM for convenience and justice to those who tell the truth, all of this class (movables) should be exempt from taxation. Stocks and Bonds are simply evidence of owner- ship in property, most of which is fixed. The Corporation issuing these evidences of own- ership, as such, in its individual capacity, should pay the tax. Its valuation should be that of its total evidences of ownership, excluding such mov- ables as are rightfully exempt. A street car plant in a city is usually worth more than the value of its tracks, buildings, machinery, barns, and movables. All value therefore, in excess of these totals repre- sents its FEANCHISE VALUE. By taxing its evi- dences of ownership, or rather the VALUE of these, less its movables, justice will have been done. The value of any property depends largely on the efficiency of its management. There is, however, no reason why the valuation for taxation should not be that for which the total of its stocks and bonds cur- rently sell less whatever is exempted to all owners. All that is desired is EQUITABLE EELATIVITY. It matters not whether the basis is one half, one third or total, provided all pay the same and at fair relative valuations. The greatest injustice with which society is cursed is the favoritism shown by assessors in listing the property of large corporations. Not one in ten pay anything like what they should pay, which is a crime almost as infamous as theft. In the city of CIN- CINNATI OHIO in 1907 the Gas and Electric Com- pany was assessed at only $4,473,610 dollars (about one tenth of its value. Its securities readily sold on a basis of 56 million. It is the same elsewhere. If TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 97 these properties were fairly assessed then, be the rates what they may, the contribution will be equit- able. Taxation on fixed property alone is justifiable for the reason that on it alone can equitable relativ- ity be assured. PROTECTIVE TARIFFS. Tariffs for protection with incidental revenue should never be imposed. This appears to be a dog- matic assertion, but it is not such. In the develop- ing condition of a nation, for the purpose of secur- ing diversification of industry and so called national independence sooner than they would otherwise be secured, the government might be justified is using a part of the revenue that it derived from fixed pro- perty to encourage for a time certain kinds of do- mestic production. This could only be justified, however, when the conditions are very extraordin- ary and the urgency very great, which is of course indefinite. When such encouragement is given it should be by the payment of direct bounties and not by taxing importations. To tax the importation of the products of foreign labor for the purpose of pro- tecting domestic labor and at the same time encour- age the importation of the foreign labor itself is like quarantining against pestilence and inviting the germs. Neither bounties nor the so-called pro- tective system is justifiable in the United States of America at the present time when the products of our infant industries are sold to foreign consumers cheaper than to domestic consumers. Revenue by imposts will doubt- less for some time be necessary for the reason that it will require time for the people to under- 98 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM stand that direct taxes are less oppressive than in- direct taxes, because, their payment being directly felt, tends toward economy in expenditure, hence to the need for less taxation. No, say some reformers, we must spend all that we possibly can so as to make business good and times lively ; and we must secure the means by the most indirect, insidious and sur- reptitious methods that we can possibly devise, so that the tax payers will not so keenly feel the bur- den, hence will not so quickly protest against the folly and injustice. The government through its financial department and in connection with local authorities, should at certain intervals assess the value of fixed property on an absolutely equitable and relative basis, and keep said assessments always open to public scru- tiny. Then, on this value the rate should be im- posed, to apply first to the city, where it is now thor- oughly practical, and in time to the state and nation. All other taxes should be abolished as soon as it is practicable. THE CUMULATIVE ANTI-MONOPOLY TAX. The cumulative tax rates proposed herein are the only radical features of this work. They are not aimed at the ownership of private property, but at the ownership of private MONOPOLY. When no man or woman owning less than 25 mil- lion dollars can be affected otherwise than benefi- cially (that is relieved of taxation) the plan cannot be called AGRARIAN or an attack on property rights. The PARTICULAE KATES named are no essential feature of the proposition, and are chosen only because they are regarded as a FAIR approach TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 99 toward that desideratum which will extirpate pres- ent and prevent future monopoly, and at the same time prevent the diminution of accumulating wealth. If not drastic enough for the former they must be increased, and if too drastic for the latter they must be reduced. The establishment of the correctness of the principle is all that is now desired by Timocracy, leaving the AEITHMETIC of the proposition to be determined later on. The principles are as follows: 1st. That all monopoly is in conflict with the rights of men because it empowers a few to exact TEIBUTE OE TAX from the many. 2nd. That free men cannot tolerate TEIBUTE ( OE TAX except that which they VOLUNTAEILY impose on themselves. 3rd. That PEIVATE monopoly is "TAXA- TION WITHOUT EEPEESENTATION, and hence violates the principles for which our ancestors fought. 4th. That prices should be regulated by the laws of trade and not by MONOPOLY supported by BU- EEAUCEACY. 5th. That MONOPOLY is not necessary to pro- vide adequate reward for individual excellence or to prompt individual enterprise. 6th. That competition can never be "EUIN- OUS" to the BEST, and, that, if the worst are to be " protected" COOPEEATION or SOCIALISM is the remedy. 7th. That SOCIALISM, because it proposes pro- tection to the WOEST, will result in retrogression and finally in barbarism. Industrial enterprises can be monopolized by TEUST CONSOLIDATIONS that are permitted to 100 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM expand beyond the limit which assures the greatest facility in operation and greatest economy in pro- duction, but, that, to said limit (for which Timocracy suggests an automatic regulator) TEUSTS should not only be permitted, but ENCOUEAGED. Eeal Estate or free hold property can be monopo- lized by permitting too great a value thereof to be held or owned by any one individual or corporation. To prevent this Timocracy suggests the same auto- matic regulator as in the case of industries. A more objectionable form of EEAL ESTATE monopoly than the ownership of business properties is the holding for private use, occupancy and pleas- ure of costly PEIVATE EESIDENCES, PAEKS, PEESEEVES and the like. Against this Tim- ocracy suggests a more DEASTIC cumulative rate. Just here come in the GEOCEATS and propose practical confiscation for UNUSED NATUEAL OPPOETUNITY, or rather that it be taxed to rental value. There are not many NATUEAL SITES or CITY LOTS held by capitalists where they would not gladly, under proper conditions, open them out for use to any suitable occupant, or for sale at com- mercial rates. Few capitalists enjoy paying taxes and getting no revenue, and where a vacant lot, for- est or mine is, for any length of time, held vacant, idle, and unproductive it is usually because of rea- sons which at the time would not in their opinion justify improvement or operation, or because of conditions unknown to the outsider which render the same impracticable from a business standpoint. But there are occasional exceptions to this general disposition, and just here lies the "soul of truth " in geogracy. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMCt! : X^i^ ! A GENEEAL EIGHTS OF CONDEMNATION. There are cases where valuable city building sites are held vacant because the owner is not wise enough to improve, or to sell to those who are wise enough, at a reasonable price. The same is sometimes, though not often, true as to mines, meadows and forests. Of course these cases work harm to the owner by causing him to pay taxes without deriving any revenue, and also to the community by prevent- ing it from receiving the benefit of improvements that another owner, if the site could be procured at a fair price, would construct, or of the products of a mine, meadow or forests that a more progres- sive owner might develop and operate. This sug- gests the idea of general ' ' rights of condemnation. ' ' It is deemed to be for the general good that certain corporations be granted rights of condemnation so that, by unreasonableness or caprice upon the part of an individual owner, the progress of enterprise may not be thwarted. Should this apply to citizens generally? On the one hand it would tend to pre- vent speculative holdings out of use, and on the other, it would interfere with individual right. The surface of the earth is limited. There are no more Americas to be discovered. The Arctic and Ant- arctic zones are now and perhaps ever will, for prac- tical purposes, be "locked in thrilling regions of thick-ribbed ice." On the whole about three-fourths of the earth 's surface water and about three-fourths the remaining fourth is practically uninhabitable, leaving only about one sixteenth fairly open to hu- man activity on a good life sustaining basis. It is not difficult to imagine that a few generations hence VS. SOCIALISM the question of access to the use of the earth may be a very important one. Be this even so, neverthe- less, justice demands that, when property is con- demned, a fair price shall be paid. Usually a high price is paid, because of the sympathy of courts and jurors with the people and versus the corpora- tions. If rights of condemnation were universal the sympathy might be on the other side. If our courts were what they ought to be (which will never be the case under democratic-republican so-called elec- tion, but really boss oligarchic actual selection) many issues would voluntarily be committed to their determination that cannot now be safely so commit- ted. Even under the most perfect human system in justice would occasionally be inflicted. However, if the rights of general condemnation could be pro- perly safeguarded, it might be safe to establish it, on condition that if an owner refuse to accept the price named by a competent jury, and persisted in refusing access to or the use of his property, said property thereafter be subjected to the cumulative rate. But, as things now are, many abuses would creep in, and, in the nature of things, many ques- tions would arise. Poor improvements on good pro- perty called for betterments more than no improve- ments on poor property, so that when a man or set of men wish to buy any property, a pretext for con- demnation could be found. This would make the conditions of ownership doubtful and tend to dis- courage investment. The preponderance of good or ill in this is difficult to determine, but be it as the future may demonstrate to be wisest, nevertheless, certain it is that the Geocratic position, modified to the extent of the cumulative rate instead of "taxa- tion to rental value, ' ' and to the extent of its impo- TIMOCRACY VS. sit ion only by order of Court after an offer that is deemed reasonable for purchase or lease for im- provement and use has been refused, would not be unjust nor confiscatory to owners, yet would result in great good to the community at large. These properties, however, could not justly be UNCONDI- TIONALLY subjected to the said rate, as private residential holdings can justly be, for the reason that improvement and use is not always practicable from a business standpoint, and to force improve- ment ahead of time would result in disuse or un- profitable use of said improved property, and thus entail loss. The proposition of Geocrats that to tax improved fixed property is to place an incubus upon and to deter the transformation of crude media into it, is likewise untenable. To exempt the improvements because, forsooth, the owner might not build them if taxed is to lose sight of EQUITABLE ADJUST- MENT. All men paying tax on what they own (fixed property) works no injury on any man in particular, because compensation for use (rents and the price of products) are adjusted to that basis. THE DIFFICULTY OF CHANGES. The greatest difficulty in bringing about any change or social reformation results from aversion to innovation and to the fact that it often works injustice to some people. Some people now own personalty, some now own realty. Both personalty and realty are now subject to taxation, but the for- mer usually escapes assessment, as it always will and always should. However, the change from the present so-called system of taxing personalty and 104 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM incomes to a system of taxing only fixed property and Inheritances would work no injustice of conse- quence if due compensation is made. Compensation can be made and even-handed jus- tice can be vouchsafed, but the doing thereof in- volves some time and adjustment, but no injustice. Incomes and personalty have evaded taxation so long and so universally that an adjustment has been made to that evasion ; hence to exempt them entirely would not appreciably increase the burden on fixed property, and to the small extent that it might do so, the INHEEITANCE TAX proposed herein, which could not be seriously evaded, would be ample recompense. INHERITANCE VS. INCOME TAXES. The compensation that is suggested for the re- moval of all taxation from personalty and incomes is a National INHEEITANCE TAX. THE Abolition of DUTIES is a remote desidera- tum, but none the less to be recommended. The in- heritance tax should be made CUMULATIVE the same as is proposed to be levied on Industries or on Rents and on all property that is privately used and non-productively invested. On general principles, however, no property that is productively invested and not monopolized should be cumulatively taxed, because such taxation tends to diminish accumula- tion more rapidly than specific levies do. Much wealth is absolutely squandered by super- abundantly rich people in various forms of useless, foolish and luxurious living which also tends to re- duce accumulation. Other than on the fixed proper- ties hereinbefore named this extravagance and lux- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 105 uriousness cannot be checked. A graduated inheri- tance tax would appropriate to the government a fund such as would tend largely to check this extrav- agance, and to relieve from taxation people who are more frugal. It could, of course, be evaded by the distribution of estates during the lives of their pos- sessors unless some restrictive measures were in- troduced ; but such distribution would not often nor seriously occur. It could also be to a certain ex- tent evaded by secretiveness and under-valuation, but less so than an INCOME TAX, as inheritance taxes would be paid but once in a generation and Executors and Administrators could be closely scru- tinized. With an inheritance tax in force an income tax would be useless as all estates are the result of income, hence an inheritance tax is an income tax. The revenue to the government would be about as constant as from incomes because owners would die from year to year, and a fixed rate on inheri- tances paid but once would be the same as a corre- sponding rate on incomes collected annually. The inheritance tax rate might be ON EACH ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS INHERITED THE ONE MILLIONTH PART OF THE TOTAL IN- HERITANCE. If this would be so drastic as to reduce accumulation notwithstanding the saving that would be realized by the abolition of annual taxes on personalty and from the tendency to dis- courage luxurious and ostentatious living, it could be reduced as the conditions might warrant, with due reference to maintaining intact INCREASED ACCUMULATION, which must go on faster than population increases if the living condition of the people is to be currently improved. In these days of machinery and combinations, both of which must 106 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM increase, it is possible that individual estates may become so colossal as to be unwieldly and to offset the benefits resulting from private custodianship and accumulation. An inheritance tax need not apply to values less than one Million. TOLLS VS. TAXES or PAUPERIZING TAXATION. But few people appreciate the fact that practic- ally all taxes primarily paid by the rich, or property holders, are shifted on to the poor, or the users or consumers. This is not an injustice but is so from the very nature of things, viz., that the user and consumer must be the ultimate contributor. But few people appreciate the fact that whenever they abolish tolls they create taxes, and that the taxes so created are usually much greater than the tolls they abolish. But few people appreciate the fact that the so-called FEEE highways, FREE bridges, FEEE schools, etc., that they think they enjoy, are, in fact very high TOLL highways, TOLL bridges, TOLL schools, etc. Because, however, the TOLL is a tax and often indirect they think they are avoiding it altogether or that it is being paid by the rich. The budget for New York City for the year 1909 was about $160,000,000 and has since increased. The population that year was, in round numbers, four million, so that every man, woman, and child paid about $42 for the pleasure and privilege of BEING GOVERNED by the municipal and State oligarchy alone. The average family of 5 or 6 therefore, paid about $225 dollars for this privilege. All of this came from the products of labor. To TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 107 this must be added the cost of the NATIONAL OLI- GARCHY, amounting to almost one billion dollars more. The total per year, therefore, was about $75 more, or, in all about 300 dollars per year. The average earning capacity of a city family is scarcely $900 dollars per year, hence about one third of all labor product was absorbed in taxation, and thus taken away from the living standard of the people. It is the same as though one pair of shoes out of every three, or one house out of every three was burned as soon as created because such expenditure leaves practically no inventoriable assets to repre- sent it. Does not this create a demand for more shoes, and for more houses, thus creating a demand for more labor? say our average philosopher. Yes, and if we should burn all the shoes and all the houses we create, that would create a still greater de- mand, and hence we would soon all be rich. These enormous tax property destroying agencies are among the chief causes of low living standards or, rather, of our poverty. The principal difference be- tween private and public ownership is that of Tolls against Taxes. Tolls are cheaper than taxes; they are voluntary, whilst taxes are compulsory; they are always indiscriminating whilst taxes are usually discriminating against those least able to pay them. The toll system enables a frugal man to economize and prosper ; the tax system is a Socialistic distri- bution of wealth. The best way to avoid them is to curtail the functions that the wealth destroying agencies perform. To talk ECONOMY is but to repeat the platitudes of every demagogue that ever ran for public office. To the extent that taxation encroaches upon in- come or increment, Socialism is approached. When- 108 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM ever it equals these, Socialism is, in effect, estab- lished. CHUECH PEOPEETY AND TAXATION. Far be it from the purpose of TIMOCEACY to enter upon the field of religious thought or contro- versy. Origin and Destiny are themes regarding which no one can offer conclusive proofs or irrefut- able arguments. Nevertheless, is so far as religious institutions have an economic bearing, we must hue to the line, let the chips fall where they may. Much of the labor product of the world has been and still is absorbed in the contruction of Cathedrals, Churches and their incidental belongings. In past times vast areas of the surface of the earth were held by ecclesiastical institutions. Church edifices represent to-day in some localities, more labor pro- duct than the homes of all the people who worship at their shrines. They are occupied and used only about one-seventh of the days and only about one- seventh of the hours in each of these days, or, in all, only about one-fiftieth of the time. They are usually exempted from all taxation on the ground that the moral precepts taught therein and promul- gated therefrom are of such value to the community as to justify said exemption. If exemption from taxation was the only loss it might be admitted that moral precepts were a sufficient recompense. The greatest loss, however, is the absorption of labor product in amounts vastly greater than that for which there is any possible justification, wisdom or need. Does not the erection of a 20 million dollar cathedral give employment to labor, say our aver- age philosophers? Yes, but if said 20 million was TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 109 invested in improving old and in building new homes, as much labor would be employed, and, when done, the poor people would have access to these homes 7 days in each week and for 24 hours in each of these days. Is it not better to have access to God for one hour than to homes for 50 hours? Access to God can be had from the closet or from an old- fashioned quaker meeting house as well as from a cathedral whose spires pierce the Heavens, but pro- tection from the churlish chiding of the winter's wind cannot be had as well from a rookery as from a comfortable dwelling. Moreover, these buildings should be so constructed as to be used for more pur- poses such as edifying concerts, scientific lectures, etc., etc., thus utilizing the labor product to much better advantage and in no wise detracting from their usefulness for worship. If people will persist in these unwise and wasteful expenditures, and if they will continue to withhold access from elevating and edifying uses, then even-handed justice suggests CUMULATIVE TAXATION. It may not be better to insure temporal comfort than spiritual solace, but it certainly seems wiser to do so than to encourage spiritual extravagance, and pauperizing waste. VALUATION OF PROPERTY FOR TAXATION. Great injustice is inflicted by inequitable and dis- criminating VALUATIONS ON PROPERTY. It amounts, in some cases, to practical exemption or practical confiscation. This wrong is attributable almost wholly to incompetent or dishonest assessors. Influence is usually more potent than justice. Large corporations usually pay on about one-tenth of just 110 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM value, and small homes on about double just value. This wrong has been so universal and widespread that the oppressed small owner almost despairs of remedial action. It is one of the greatest preventives in the way of the purchase of small homes. The only remedy is the adoption of a plan by which VALUE can be correctly ascertained and enforced. This process would necessarily be somewhat cum- bersome, but it is not at all impracticable. Some cumbersomeness can be endured rather than that in- justice and oft times robbery should be inflicted. What is VALUE? How is it ascertained? The best basis of value, and the one that should be adopted for purposes of taxation is EXCHANGE value. A thing is worth that amount for which it will EXCHANGE. Either owner or assessor, if they disagree, should have power to call for a public sale. The owner could "buy in" if he desired so as to protect his property rights, and the selling price should be the valuation for taxation. Universally applied this would work no injustice, and, ere long, an adjustment would be made. Knowing that this expedient could be resorted to, neither the assessor nor the owner could work an injustice, and an agree- ment would usually be reached before the remedy was applied. In case of a corporation, where the greatest in- justice is practised, the valuation for taxation should be the aggregate worth of its BONDS AND STOCKS, less its movables. This would include its franchise if it owned one. Similarly, sales might here apply, if disagreement could not be reconciled. If the Company had no "treasury" stock or bonds to be offered at public vendue, a percentage thereof TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 111 might, by law, be exacted or turned in to the treas- ury by the stock and bond holders and these offered, the proceeds, of course, to go into the Company's treasury and the price at which they sold to be the basis for aggregating the value for assessment, less movables. The Company should pay this tax and the stock and bond holders pay no tax on their evi- dences of ownership. Whenever citizens representing a certain number in personality or a certain aggregate in amount of property, deemed the basis agreed upon between the assessor and the owner of property of any consider- able magnitude to be wrong or unjust, they should be able to inforce said TEST sale by petition to a court or otherwise. The fact that this power was exercisable by said citizens would tend always to prevent discriminating valuations, and, if discrim- inating valuations were prevented, the tax rate in almost all communities could be reduced fully ONE HALF. TAXATION BREEDS REVOLUTION. The French Revolution was, at bottom, the result of oppressive and discriminating taxation. The no- bility and the church paid practically nothing. The peasants paid practically all and the burden became so great that about two-thirds of the product of an acre of ground or of the output of a factory were taken in one form or another by taxation. Of the remaining third the landlord took about one-half, leaving the peasant or worker only about one-sixth of the value of his toil. The nobility consumed everything by living in idleness and luxury, whilst the poor working slave could scarcely get bread. Revolution should have come long before it did, but 112 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM the power of the king sustained by his minions and mermydons was so great and the stupidity and sub- missiveness of the starving masses was so universal that a general uprising was prevented until a less powerful monarch ascended the throne. When, howf- ever, the oppressed populace had an opportunity to get a fair start, then the crowned heads tumbled into the guillotine 's maw, men almost drank boiling blood, "hell itself breathed contagion on the world and speer tailed devils ran upon the violent tongues of fire," doing such business as the blackest night would quake to look upon. With taxation almost equal in most parts of the United States of America to one-third of the pro- duct of an acre or an industry, it is not surprising that we hear distant rumblings of an approaching storm. The difference between one-third and two-thirds is all that protects us. With increased popular in- dependence, more education and a keener apprecia- tion of the contrasts that confront us and a more popular disbelief in the divinity of kings and in the sacredness of stupid and oppressive governmental conditions, it will not require a tax burden equal to the other or remaining third to cause the flame of fury to burst forth vengefully and the torch and ax to complete the work of bloodshed and ruin. We must therefore cease to destroy or as it were to burn up the product of our labor by contributing it in taxation for governmental consumption for which we get no inventoriable return that alleviates our suffering. There is but one remedy and that is to curtail governmental operation to smaller limita- tions and to substitute tolls which are voluntary for taxes that are enforced. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 113 The amount of labor product that is consumed in useless and wasteful governmental establishments and operation would, if economically applied, cause wealth to accumulate almost twice as fast as it does, which would correspondingly reduce the price of access to wealth and make the living of all easier and cheaper. People do not appreciate the enormity of the drain upon their resources caused by useless govern- ment, but they think that the expenditures made by it are a blessing. Let the burden become much greater than it now it and they will not only feel its oppression but will rebel against its imposition. Useless governmentalism is but a phase of the persistence of ancient superstitution and must be discontinued if humanity intends to better its con- dition. If not discontinued taxes will not only be as sure, but as fatal as DEATH. DEATH AND TAXATION. The old proverb that " there is nothing sure but death and taxes ' ' is familiar to all people. Death, we know to be a necessary end and that it will come when it will come. But why should TAXES be a necessary end, and, why should they come at all ? The answer is, to support Government. Why do we need government and why do we sup- port it! Why do we contribute our labor product to it with the same certainty that we pay the last debt of nature? The admission that we need to be governed is an acknowledgment that we cannot gov- ern ourselves. The entire idea is repugnant to the conception of independence. If ten thousand people were suddenly placed on a fertile island about the 114 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM first thing they would do would be to institute some sort of government. Eeally what they should do would be to adopt and agree upon rules of associa- tion so as to avoid conflict with each other in their actions and operations. These rules would have to be enforcible, when necessary for the preservation of order, by some power or might. If all sufficiently regulated themselves there would be no need of gov- ernment. Even under self regulation there would be some things that would have to be done by a public agent or official. This official would have to be sup- ported by a contribution from all. As these contri- butions would not always be voluntarily paid, their collection would, at times, have to be enforced. Ob- viously the least coercion would leave the greatest independence, and the least contribution would leave the greatest individual wealth. Under no circum- stances would it be necessary to create or appoint an agent who would be looked upon as a being in any way superior to the rest. But this would likely be the status of some individual thus created or ap- pointed. The people would create a GOD and then fall down and worship him. Instead of being considered a SERVANT he would soon be deemed a LOED. He would be maintained in pomp and splendor though he would produce not one dollar's worth of wealth. He and his associates would impose and collect taxes which the people would pay and then bow in obsequious genuflection before him and say "LONG LIVE THE KING." As long as the peo- ple are "built that way" so long will taxes be as certain and as unavoidable as Death. TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 115 GOVERNMENT EXPENSES ONE-THIRD OF LABOR PRODUCT. The statement that we are consuming about one- third of our labor product in taxation for govern- ment support may appear unreasonable and erro- neous. In the first place we have no labor product at the end of any year till we deduct the cost of liv- ing for that year. In 1908 it was reported that our productions were about as follows: From Farms, 7 billion; Mines 2y 2 billion; Fisheries and Forests, 1 billion ; Factory products, 18 billion, or a total of 28y 2 billion. Most of the product of the farms and mines that was not at once consumed became the raw material for the factory, hence our product for that year was only 18 billion instead of 28y% billion. The average product of 16 million families is not $1,800 per year, but more nearly $500 or $600 per year. The cost of converting this raw material into finished or factory product must have been at least two-thirds of the value of the same, or about 12 billion. This would leave a NET product of about 6 billion. We pay for all forms of Government fully 2 billion, which is one-third or 33^% thereof. There is therefore left an actual product of only about 4 billion per year. This appears to be sustained by the facts as pre- sented during the last 10 years, as follows : In 1900 with a population of about 74 million we had about 80 billion of wealth, and in 1910 with 90 million population we estimate 120 billion of wealth, or an average increase of only 4 billion per year which makes an annual average per capita gain of about $25.00 which seems to conform to the facts as pre- 116 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM sented for the last 40 years. It has cost over 22 billion to run the United States Government since 1875. If therefore we had not expended for Government support one-third of our production we would have had a per capita gain of 50 per cent, more than we did. More wealth would now exist, hence access to and the use of it would be cheaper and easier. However, much enthusiastic PATEIOTS may de- precate or ridicule the statement that Government is entirely too costly, it is nevertheless true. Since government agents are not and never will be frugal, and since the masses are not wise enough to be fru- gal, the functions of Government must be curtailed, and the accumulations of the millionaires must be encouraged, but not monopolized, else, ere long, poverty and destitution will be more widespread than we find it to-day. Taxes, be they direct or indirect ; be they specific or cumulative must be curtailed. This is a world- wide necessity. The hollow bauble PATRIOTISM must vanish ; kings must become TIMONEERS ; sol- diers and sailors must become industrial producers ; battleships must become commercial carriers; forts must become factories; taxes must become tolls so that their payment can be voluntary; the Govern- ment Fetich must be abandoned and its world-wide WASTE prevented. In the year 1911 there were 384,088 Federal Office holders and 946,194 pensioners both aggregating 1,330,282 about one voter in ten in New York City was on the payroll and approximately the same was true in other cities. Add to this the State and County employees and the result is astounding. The Government Fetich, if not checked, will enforce So- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 117 cialism. Most of our Taxes go to pay the salaries of our Government Fetich mongers. THE CUMULATIVE TAX BEIEFLY OUTLINED. In order to destroy monopoly without interfering with EEASONABLE reward for individual excel- lence, and without diminishing the accumulation of wealth, Timocracy proposes FIVE forms of CUMU- LATIVE TAXATION, neither of which is at all complicated or impracticable. 1st. AGAINST RESIDENTIAL MONOPOLY: Under this a residential owner or occupier of a private House, Park or Preserve would pay a PENALTY TAX of 100 dollars per year for a 100,000 dollar property, and 10,000 dollars per year for a million dollar property. 2nd. AGAINST MONOPOLY OF NATUEAL OP- POETUNITY: Under this, an owner holding natural sites out of use would pay the same penalty as on residences if an offer for use was refused that a Court should deem reasonable. 3rd. AGAINST MONOPOLY OF EEAL ESTATE IN GENEEAL: Under this any SINGLE holder of EEAL ESTATE would pay 1,000 dol- lars penalty tax on a rent roll of 100,000 dollars per year, and 100,000 on one of a million dol- lars per year. These rates would tend to prevent monopo- listic holdings in all forms of FEEE HOLD ESTATES. 4th. TO PEEVENT MONOPOLY OF INDUS- TEY: Under this any man or company doing a gross business of one million per month would 118 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM pay 10,000 dollars penalty, and on a gross busi- ness of ten millions per month would pay a million dollars penalty. Banks, one half. 5th. TO PREVENT MONOPOLY BY INHERI- TANCE : Under this no single individual could inherit more than 25 million dollars from one testator. Residence should be held to go with the pro- perty, and in case of mortgage bonds, the In- heritor should be obliged to record or list same before they became binding against the mort- gagor, and for fraud or evasion as to this, a double tax rate should be imposed. It is clear from the above that Timocracy wages no war against ownership, but only against the MONOPOLY of ownership. Monopoly is either desirable and beneficial or it is not. If it is, then SOCIALISM, which is the per- fection of monopoly, should be established. If it is NOT desirable and beneficial, then support for any system that will eradicate it, and at the same time NOT diminish wealth accumulation is certainly ad- visable. When population increases 2% per year, and wealth increases 2y 2 % per year, society is on safe ground, and living conditions will gradually improve. Of course the greater the increase of per capita wealth over population, the faster will living condi- tions become better. Whenever wealth increases LESS than population, living conditions will gradu- ally become worse still, ultimately, rebarbarization will result. It is not proposed that any SURPLUS wealth be paid into the coffers of the Government, but that if ever the cumulative rates herein proposed yield TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 119 enough for Timocratic Government, no other taxes are to be paid, and if they ever yield more than enough for Timocratic Government they shall be horizontally reduced. All accumulation must re- main in the custody of the individual, who, by his energy, created it and, by his frugality, saves it. To the objection that the system would drive wealth out of the country it may be replied, that, where it drives a single 100 millionaire out, it will likely invite 100 single millionaires in, which would be a desirable exchange. A system that is as liberal to wealth as Timocracy will not injuriously affect the owners of that wealth. Some time, some similar system must become world wide. CHAPTER IV. Eight To Vote : Should Vote In Katio Of Contri- bution : Contribution Represents Ownership : Renter Pays Tax Not Owner : Residential Tax And Rent Proper Basis: Amounts Entitling Each To Vote: Votes Not Allowed For Cumulative Residential Tax : Votes Wherever Residential Tax And Rent Is Paid : Tax Paying Women And Rent Paying Women Should Vote: Women Not Less Capable: Women Should Not Hold Elective Office: Not Expedient: Universal Suffrage Works No Good To Masses: No Proper Person Deprived Of Votes : Would Des- troy Boss Oligarchism: Its Probable Result: Com- missioners For City Government: Political Cam- paign Funds: PROPOSITION THIRD. That there should be a qualification for citizen- ship and suffrage based on proper education and on ultimate taxation and the equivalent of the latter as represented by residential rent and in propor- tion to said payments. When human beings evolve into that state or con- dition of fixed habitation which constitutes hamlets, villages, towns, cities, states and nations there arises a necessity for the adoption among them of cus- toms or rules of conduct. These finally become crys- talized into what we call laws. 120 TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 121 Since, in these assemblages, certain duties must be performed which the residents, in their individual capacities cannot well perform or cannot perform at all, and, since some of these duties, from the in- herent nature of things, can yield no revenue with which to compensate private endeavor, the neces- sity arises to create or to constitute what we call a government to do or perform these said duties. The proper status of this so-called government is not a ruling power, or agency, but simply a duty per- forming agency to subserve the aforesaid ends. Since these organizations are not or should not be, in any sense, industrial, their only means of sup- port are or should be from contribution, or, rather, from rates or taxes derived from the residents of said communities or assemblages. The simplest method of obtaining this revenue would be to tax each adult citizen a certain fixed sum, and, in this case each adult should have one vote or voice in the choice of the agents or employ- ees who conduct or perform said duties: and thi& is the only plan under which each adult should have one (or an equal number) of votes or voices. This per capita plan of raising revenue is found to be impracticable because, from a vast majority of adults, it cannot be collected. The only practicable plan seems to be, to collect it from what these adults own or from what they use, either directly or indi- rectly. The direct method is the best, and the most direct or ascertainable or available thing is the best source from which to collect it. This source is fixed property, such as lands, houses, railroads, factories, etc., etc. The tax receipts for funds thus collected represent the stock certificates of ownership in the property of the community, state or nation, and, on 122 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM these certificates votes should be cast. Since they are not held equally, we are not EQUAL share- holders in a common property as all political parties now in America strenuously maintain, hence we should not have equal voice in the control of said property. The tax is paid primarily by the owner but he, in turn, is reimbursed by his lessee, and the lessee is, in turn, often reimbursed by a sub lessee in fact, in the ultimate, the user pays the tax. In order to establish a system on this, the only equit- able basis, it is necessary to agree upon some fixed ratio between taxation and rental compensation. When property rents for ten per cent, of its value, and when taxation is 2%, this ratio is one-fifth. If Government functions were curtailed within their proper limitations, and if these functions were eco- nomically, honestly and wisely administered, a tax rate of one-tenth rental compensation would be am- ple for all governmental establishments. This would vary in different places and at different times, but it will do for illustration, and, if established, could be modified whenever it was found to be inequit- able. Therefore, whenever a residential tenant paid, say, $100 per year rent for an unfurnished house or rooms (rated at two-thirds the furnished price) and as often as he paid full multiples of $100, he or she would be entitled to receive from the owner one or more voting or tax paid certificates. The owner would receive from the tax collector one certificate for every one-tenth of this sum, or for $10, that he paid in taxation. Owners or lessees of stores, factories, farms, transportation or other COMMEECIAL plants or properties, would be reimbursed by their pat- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 123 rons, hence, rightfully, the PATRONS should vote; but these reimbursements are in such small amounts and paid so indirectly, that the certificates could not be practically transferred from said owners or lessees to these patrons, hence these (commercial) properties should not carry voting privilege. This is just, and, more than this, in the case of residential tenants or sub-tenants, it is en- tirely practicable and constitutes a substantially equitable system. Now, whenever voting time arrived, the holder of these certificates could and should vote them in the district where issued, for the candidates there pre- sented. Residential tax or rent anywhere would carry voting privilege, but other tax or rent would carry it nowhere. Transient Hotels should be rated as commercial property, but to permanent residents therein owners or lessees would supply voting cer- tificates on the basis herein proposed. Combined Commercial and Residential properties would carry votes for the residential part only. To each certi- ficate would be attached a supplemental coupon, to be used for primary elections, and votes would be cast for candidates direct, thus abolishing the use- less, corrupt, unrepresentative and BOSS-controlled conventions. Furthermore, the trouble and expense of registration would be unnecessary. Unless party lines were closely drawn, even primary elections would be unnecessary. Most candidates are now elected by pluralities, hence the only evil resulting from the abolition of neglected primaries and BOSS- controlled conventions would be that these plurali- ties would be less than now on account of the prob- ability of several unnominated and un-BOSS-con- trolled candidates, which might be a great improve- 124 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM ment. In addition to these betterments the ten- dency of the proposed system would be to cause tax- ation and rental compensation to be and remain in the ratio of 10 to 100 or such other ratio as might be equitable. Allowing for just compensation, for invested capital and for incidentals, depreciation, etc., etc., the above appears to be about right. If $100 for a renter and $10 for an owner was deemed too low, the basis might be $200 and $20 or $400 and $40. If residential rent temporarily ex- ceeded ten times tax, an owner or tenant might, for a bona fide tenant or sub-tenant, secure additional certificates by paying $10, $20, or $40 therefor to the tax office in his district. On either basis, or on any basis, equitable relativ- ity would be maintained, and this is the only just and fair relation between men as regards anything in nature. There could be established in each con- gressional district, or county, or city, as might be deemed necessary a permanent and fixed office or department, of as much dignity as an Internal Reve- nue Office or a Post-Office, the occupant of which, or thereof to be an official appointed and confirmed as are Post Masters and Revenue Collectors. This de- partment could be designated and known as the "Tax and Voting" department. Its officials would fairly assess all fixed property in its territory and, to it, all taxes could be paid so much for City, State and Nation. County seats should comprise all county property, not specifically a part of any other municipal corporation: so that there would be only three corporations Municipal, State and Nation. The State Government might, ere long, be abolished, thus assuring greater simplicity and uniformity. This department would collect all taxes and remit TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 125 to each its proper share. To each tax-payer would issue one voting certificate, good for that year, for every $10, $20 or $40 that he paid in residential taxation, and said tax-payer would, as above set forth, transfer one to any residential tenant for every $100, $200 or $400 said tenant paid to him as his tenant or lessee, and this tenant to a residential sub-tenant. When voting time came, the owner or holder of these certificates could present them in person or send them by post, to the aforesaid de- partment, duly filled out and signed, to be, by said department officials, acknowledged, if need be, and recorded, as set forth, on their face. The certifi- cates would, in form and shape, appear something like the following: VOTING CEETIFICATE, 19. STATE OF NEW YOEK, DISTEICT or COUNTY Good for one (or any number) of votes. FOE CONGEESSMAN FOE STATE ASSEMBLY FOE CITY COUNCILMAN. . The Primary Election certificate would be of simi- lar form and shape. SIGNED (voter's name and residence) . ... ... ... .,. .,.,. There is no complication to this system that is in any way serious, and any adult who is too incom- petent to perform these simple requirements is not fit to vote. The idea is, not to bring the conditions of suffrage DOWN to the quality of the voter (as all parties now try to do] but to bring the quality of the vote UP to the conditions of suffrage, as all parties should try to do. 126 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM The tax paying period could be May or June and the voting time in November or December, so that each year, when election time arrived the certifi- cates would be rightfully distributed. It is true, that against this system, objections can be urged, but none that are serious, and none that time and prac- tice would not thoroughly overcome. If it is true that so-called governmental corporations do eman- ate from the people, and that they do derive their powers from the people, and, if it is true that these corporations are supported by contributions from the people, then it is true that the people own these corporations in the ratio of their contributions ; and, if they do own in this ratio and if it is the best prac- ticable plan of ascertaining relative excellence, then they should vote in this ratio. The certificate is handed down or transferred from owner to tenant and to sub-tenant as fairly and justly as is practic- able; and, since all adults are owners, tenants or sub-tenants, if they have any fixed habitation at all, (and if they have no fixed habitation they should not vote) practically speaking, every adult would have at least one vote. Farmers would vote on the valuation of their domicile and its fixed belongings, as, on their culti- vatable land, they are reimbursed by the users of their products. Vacant city lots should be deemed commercial properties, hence carry no voting privil- ege, until residentially occupied or used. Any adult could vote in any district of which he or she held a voting certificate which would be just, because its possession would be prima-facie evidence that he, she or some other person, had paid residential tax and is to that extent an owner in that district. Of course, certificates might be counterfeited, lost or TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 127 forged, but we do not abolish our currency because of this liability. By a system of numbering all pos- sibility of this could be prevented, and, the details could be easily worked out and applied. The plan is simple and inexpensive, and, above all, it is just. Under it fraud would be practically impossible. SHOULD WOMEN VOTE AND HOLD ELECT- IVE OFFICES! Unquestionably a residential tax-paying or a rent- paying, or, a sub-rent-paying woman, or a woman, who, by any lawful mean's, became possessed of one or more certificates, could and should vote just the same as a man. Husband and wife could divide equally their residential voting certificates. But, should women be eligible to hold these elec- tive offices? There is no reasonable objection to this except that of INEXPEDIENCY, but this objection is weighty and is deemed sufficient to exclude them. On the average there is little, if any, intellectual su- periority in men over women. In men, however, there is a greater range of mental endowment or capacity. Individual males rise higher above and sink further below the average than individual fe- males do. This, doubtless, accounts for the greater individual male accomplishments in life. Has woman a different sphere in life from man? In the process of conception, gestation, parturition and sustentation of the progeny of the human race her sphere is not only different but exclusive. If it ceases to be different where does it cease? When she becomes a wage earner, it is said. The fact of 128 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM woman being a wage earner does not cause her sphere, in the abstract, to be the same as that of man any more than the fact of a man ceasing to be a wage earner, would cause his sphere to be the same as that of woman. Aside from the natural, and, in the childhood of the human race, the exclu- sive adaptability of woman for the performance of certain functions, they become specialized for those functions by environment and heredity. To inflict upon women the duty of holding office, which means also the duty of serving in any public or official capacity, would largely detract from their time and opportunity to perform those duties for which they are exclusively adapted. This would mean that these duties would be less well done than they would be otherwise done. To introduce woman into man's sphere might work well, but to introduce man into woman 's sphere would not work well. If women held elective office to any great extent, such a transposition would have to be made, or duties would go undone. There is nothing inherent in women that enable them to per- form the duties of office holding better than men can do them, but there is much inherent in her that en- ables her to do things belonging to her sphere better than men could do them. Certain it is that her pri- vate duties would be conflicted with to some extent, which would cause a loss, unless more was gained to the Eostrum, the Forum, the public Hall, the Leg- islative Assembly, the Congress and even to the Army and Navy than was lost to the domestic sphere, for to the domestic sphere there would surely be a loss. There is, however, nothing inher- ently wrong in office-holding for women, but, pro- positions to be worthy of support, must be not only TIMOCKACY VS. DEMOCRACY 129 right but expedient and practicable. Female office holding is INEXPEDIENT. It is true that, in any community, many women are more capable than many men, but, all women are not more capable than all men, and the female tax or rent payer, would suffer no wrong by being obliged to cast her vote for men only. A City Council, a State Legislature, or a National Congress made up of both men and women would be no improvement on one composed of men only. To hold that women would not be fairly represented because obliged to vote for men only would be to say that she would not be fairly protected or defended unless by a female policeman or soldier. Men could, with equal reason, say that they would not be fairly represented in the care of their homes and tutelage of their babies in acknowl- edging that vastly superior function to women. If women were eligible to elective office the sentiment of love and hate would become a factor of no small moment, and ofttimes determine choice instead of considerations of fitness and capacity. Men are such unreasoning creatures that beauty and grace, gen- tleness and sweetness would often win their votes as against the grandest female intellect who possessed less or none of these qualities. It is no discrimina- tion against, but a relief to women to exempt them from serving as policemen, soldiers, or civil officials, but they should perform the duty of voting in the ratio of their interests. Under universal suffrage the ballot would do the mass of women no good as it does the mass of men no good; but the increased cumbersomeness and in- efficiency of an unqualified ballot might hasten the adoption of a qualified ballot for both men and women. Suffragettes should add to their demand 130 MILLIONISM 'VS. SOCIALISM the condition of a qualified ballot for both men and women. Not only is the holding of public office by women unnecessary to their own well being or to that of society, but it is useless and inefficacious in its prac- tical result. Many women do not want it, and those . who do are usually husbandless misanthropists or childless wives. For appointive positions under these boards, competent women should not be ex- cluded on account of sex only, but, even this should not be encouraged. It is true that no honorable op- portunity of securing the means of subsistence should be withheld from women, but it is a fair ques- tion whether or not, on the whole, it would not be better for women to compete less with men in the outer field of endeavor, and rule more supremely in the empire of the home. The extension of the right to vote to tax or rent paying women, is right, expedient and practicable. Eligibility to member- ship in public boards of control, strictly speaking, may be right enough and practicable enough, but it is fatally inexpedient. Whilst this system extends to all tax and rent paying men and women, the right to vote on a fair basis, and, whilst it is almost equivalent to Univer- sal suffrage, in its comprehensiveness and scope, yet it would be very different in its results, because it is not INEQUITABLE EQUALITY, but EQUIT- ABLE INEQUALITY, or rather, EQUITABLE EELATIVITY. Let it be said almost in defiance of successful contradiction, that equal and universal suffrage never has and never can accomplish anything of consequence even for the universal-suffragist, for TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 131 the reason that he is not fit for nor capable of using it. In the United States of America, where every man (unfortunately) has had one vote, the contrasts between wealth and poverty are as great or greater than in the most autocratic governments of any part of Europe. And why is this so? Because men of talent, fit- ness and brains, use the votes of the unfit and un- worthy for their own advantage and gain. Equal and Universal suffrage simply creates voting au- tomita by which corruption is fostered and proper reforms prevented. Democracy is as yet and per- haps ever will be incapable of wielding its own wea- pons. As has been stated, under the system herein pro- posed no man or woman worthy to be called such would be deprived of at least one vote. If $100 rent per year is too high, the minimum might be fifty dollars which would not disturb equitable rela- tivity. The result would be the practical elimination of Boss Oligarchism (the necessary concomitant of generical Democracy) and the establishment of business methods in public affairs. The better class of citizens would then vote and not neglect that duty as many now do, because excellence would be recog- nized. Furthermore, fewer men (only representa- tives in lower bodies) would be voted for and since with these would rest responsibility and power, bet- ter men would accept public office. The judiciary would be independent and undefiled which would be as priceless a blessing as a dependent judiciary is now a blighting curse. The tendency would be con- stantly upward and no natural rights of mankind would be in any way oppressed, curtailed or in- fringed. Eeformation in society when needed would 132 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM be sooner accomplished because the power that would make these changes would be more intelligent, hence more capable of passing on issues of reform. Even Socialists or Geocrats would have a better chance under the plan proposed, because if there be aught that is good in their propositions they would have a wiser constituency to appeal to and if this class saw merit they would soon control the masses. The time might come in the future when these systems would be worthy of consideration and adoption, but as men now are and are likely for some time to be they are neither right, expedient nor practical. If Universal Suffrage had not been cur- rent in America the cry would be "give us all a vote," then we will regulate. We have had it for a hundred years. What has it accomplished? Boss Oli- garchism and Corruption. A man to become a car- penter or a cobbler, must have some education and qualification for that vocation; but, to become a voter or a law-maker, ignorance, imbecility and irre- sponsibility appear to be most highly prized because easiest used for corrupt administration. Private property is controlled and managed by individuals in the ratio of their ownership; why, therefore, should not the small part which they yield up to government be likewise controlled, since they own in the ratio that they contribute? WHY SHOULD EQUALITY IN VOTES, WHICH CONTEOL SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS, BE RECOGNIZED WHEN EQUALITY IN PER- SONALITY AND PROPERTY IS NOT? A RENTER, however, is, for the purposes of taxation, practically the owner of that which he uses, for, on that, he and not the owner pays ultimate taxation. TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCEACY 133 For the amount paid by the owners and occupants of Private Residences, Parks, Preserves and the like in CUMULATIVE TAXATION as proposed herein they SHOULD NOT vote, because this taxation rep- resents a PENALTY for residential monopoly, hence should not be treated as representing owner- ship in the governmental corporation. Monopoly should carry with it no privileges. The most logical in fact the only real objec- tion that can be reasonably urged against voting on the basis of excellence and interests instead of per capita, is the difficulty of establishing an equitable basis. To give to owners ALL the voting rights, when their tenants are really the tax-payers, is clearly wrong, and, to give to small tax-payers (owners or renters) the same privileges as to large ones is equally wrong. The plan proposed, with but little complication, overcomes this objection, and, in fact, all other reasonable objections, and gives to practic- ally every man and woman at least ONE VOTE. Fair minded people do not object to EQUITABLE RELATIVITY in all things and processes, and, however opprobious the idea may be, it is neverthe- less true that excellence and ownership are oftener found together than excellence and indigence. HOW IT WOULD WORK. We will assume that in a congressional district there exists residential valuation of, say, $200,000,- 000 dollars in fixed property and that the rate is 2%. The tax collected would be $4,000,000. On the basis of $10 for a tax-payer (which means $100 dollars for a rent payer) there would be issued 134 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM ' certificates which would entitle some persons (who- ever held them) to 400,000 votes. If there were an average of 50,000 men and women in each district, there would be about 8 votes per capita. Of course some men or women would cast 10 or perhaps 100 votes, but they would be fairly entitled to do so because each vote would rep- resent a tax payment of $10 or a rent payment of $100. There would be very few who would get no vote at all, because almost every man or woman certainly all who are fit to vote would pay at least $100 per year or $8.33 per month in residential rent. COMMISSIONEES FOE CITY GOVERNMENT. This plan has proven satisfactory in several cit- ies. It simplifies process and individualizes respon- sibility. The prevention of WARD representation is not a serious objection. Commissioners, timocratically elected, would doubtless provide good City-County government; but if controlled by BOSS OLIGAR- CHIES, as is inevitable under universal suffrage, the result would be little, if any, improvement on the present bi-cameral systems. If people really de- sire to purify the ballot and to improve Government, whether by Commissioners or otherwise, Timocracy offers a good plan which should be adopted till they get a better plan. On the other hand it is argued: Have we not under boss oligarchism, even acknowledging all its attendant mal-administration and corruption, thriven more and grown richer than any nation on earth? To this the answer is: Had we not been cursed with boss oligarchism and curruption, there- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 135 by being able to save what has so ruthlessly been squandered, would we not have thriven yet more and grown yet richer? It is not problematical but cer- tain that if more had been saved and conserved and if less had been scattered and squandered, we would now possess yet more wealth and consequently greater civilized development and higher standards of living. The fact is that by reason of boundless resources and limitless opportunities, we have in the past thriven in spite of this corruption and have protected individual and property rights in spite of its demoralization; but it by no means follows that, in the future, with a largely increased popula- tion and largely decreased opportunities, we will continue so to thrive, and so to protect property rights, especially when at our very door we are con- fronted with growing tendencies towards Socialism and Fetichism which, are but necessary and kindred concomitants of popular irresponsibility and boss oligarchism. Especially is the system herein pro- posed desirable for Municipal Suffrage, and, if never extended to the State or Nation, the reform would be very beneficial. Suppose that in business cor- porations voting was done per capita or by the masses, rather than per stocks, can any reasonable man doubt that the management would be less effi- cient? No municipal Corporation or State or Nation that is based on the votes of its citizens (who are its owners in the ratio that they contribute to its main- tenance) can be rightly goverried on the per capita basis, nor can a fair, honest and just expression of qualified voters be secured by the present ward- boss nominating conventions, nor by the temporarily improvised booth, bar-room, ballot box system. Most 136 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM all primary elections and nominating conventions from which issue most all our candidates, are too absurd to warrant more than two words in denun- ciation and these are Farcical and Damnable. POLITICAL CAMPAIGN FUNDS. Whenever a corporation contributes money to a campaign fund, it is guilty of a misdemeanor under existing laws, which are largely the product of phar- iseeism and hypocricy. Under existing so-called Democratic-Republican, but really only Boss-Oli- garchic government, many men are elected to office for the express and avowed purpose of "bleeding the corporations. " Many bills are presented in Al- dermanic boards and Legislative Assemblages for the express purpose of receiving bribes for suppres- sion. Most of these bills are iniquitous and would, under a proper political system, damn to perdition the man who offered them. Corporations have con- sequently been forced, not for the enrichment but for the protection of their stockholders, to make political issues and elections a part of their neces- sary business. It is by no means for the sole and only purpose of obtaining valuable grants and fran- chises that corporations go into politics, but it is, in a majority of cases, for protection against vicious- ness and political blackmail. More than this : When some great issue takes hold of the mass of unthink- ing voters, like the proposition in 1896, to repudiate half the existing fixed obligations by the unlimited coinage of debased silver dollars, what is more rea- sonable, or, for that matter, more dutiful, than that the corporation holding these obligations should seek to defeat the unwise and unjust proposition? TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 137 Why should not the management of any Company contribute one dollar or any sum toward the defeat of a proposition, which, if established, would cost the stockholders ten or perhaps a thousand dollars? The solution for all such temptation is the elevation and purification of the ballot. If people voted in the ratio of their interests instead of in the ratio of their incapacity, the occupation of the bribe giver and bribe taker would, in great measure, be gone. But no human establishment can be perfect while human beings are imperfect, nevertheless, steps in the direction of perfection are certain to accomplish considerable good. To legally attempt to prevent campaign contributions is usually abortive and quite as often wrong as right. Right action and good con- duct cannot be manufactured by legislatures or by boss-dominated conventions. When Governments seek to control business corporations, what is more reasonable or proper than that business corpora- tions should (and under Boss Oligarchism they will) seek to control government by electing officials fa- vorable to their cause. CHAPTER V. How And For What We Should Vote: Govern- ments Run On Business Principles ; Capability And Responsibility Required: Independent Judiciary: Not Possible Under Democracy: Promotion For Fitness: Office-Holding Class Not Objectionable: Democracy Fatal Weakness In Judiciary : Elective Judiciary A Farce: The Reason Why: Frequent Changes Not Necessary : Laws And Litigation : Initiative And Referendum Not Feasible: Social Evils Not Regulated By Government: Superabun- dance Of Legislation : Harm To All Business : How The System Might Be Adopted: How It Would Work: The United States Senate Illogical: The Electoral College: Enlarged Constituencies: PROPOSITION FOURTH. That the qualified voters or electors should elect only the lower or popular branch of all legislative assemblages; that the higher or advisory branch should be chosen by and from the lower; and that the executive should be chosen by and from the higher: all for stated terms and fixed tenures. That all Judicial officials should be appointed by state or national executives, confirmed by state or national legislators and serve for life or during good behavior; and that in case of death or removal, the senior in service in a lower court should be pro- 138 TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 139 moted to the higher; that all minor or lower officials should be chosen as far as practicable by competi- tive examination as tests of fitness, and those not so chosen to be appointed and confirmed as in the case of the Judiciary. How little wisdom rules the world. How often Kings are but animated things. The exercise of the voting duty should be confined more to Interests and Excellence than to men and manipulation; more to principles than to personali- ties. Public office should in fact be a "public trust " and not a private prerequisite or personal "snap." Unfortunately under Boss Oligarchism the latter and not the former conception o v f public service is almost the Universal conception. This, however, is the necessary result of the so-called Democratic (1) system. As far as measures and principles are concerned not half of the men chosen to public office by popular suffrage represent either, and scarce half of this half know anything about measures or principles. Government corporations should be run on business principles or bases because they deal with powers and values, the same as do business corporations. The stockholders of a corporation in the ratio of their interests elect the directors from their own number. The directors elect their officials usually from their own number, choose their advis- ory committees, appoint their employees, and gener- ally conduct the business of the company. Not al- ways are the largest stockholders elected as direc- tors, nor as President or leading officials of the com- pany as a whole, but usually effort is made to select the most fit or capable for all of these positions. 140 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM When old officials die, usually the next in seniority of service or in supposed capability are chosen in their stead. The same should be the case with gov- ernments. The qualified voters should chose only the lower bodies or boards of control in municipalities, in states and in nations. These bodies or boards should in bi-cameral systems (which are best) select from their own number the higher or advisory board, and the last named board should select from its own number the executive or President, who should not be younger than 50 nor older than 70 years. Vacancies could be filled by alternates, sub- sequent elections or otherwise. There is no more reason why the qualified electors (who stand to the municipality, the state or the nation as do the stock- holders to a corporation) should elect or appoint all officials or minor employees than there is why the same function should be exercised by the stock- holders of a company, but there are reasons why they should not. 1st. The stockholders cannot as well judge or pass upon fitness or capacity as can the directors or executive. 2nd. They cannot as well determine their worthi- ness for retention. These and other reasons apply to the qualified elector or voter. The lower body or board would usually select as members of the higher those in longest service and of known capability, just as members and chairmen of important committees are now chosen or selected to perform these important duties. The higher body would usually chose or select as executive a man similarly qualified, so that the tendency would be to increase the capability as they increased the re- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 141 sponsibility. Neither the Executive nor the Advis- ory branch of the Legislative Department of a Gov- ernment should be chosen directly by the voters, be- cause a temptation (often irresistible) exists, caus- ing aspirants for these offices to do acts and things that are often wrong, and which would not other- wise be done, calculated to popularize themselves for election or succession. Popular opinion can se- cure responsive expression quickly enough through the popular Assembly. An experienced member of the lower body usually makes a better member of the higher or advisory body than does an inexperienced one, and an exper- ienced man who has been a member of both of these bodies makes a better executive than a man who has served in neither or even one of these bodies. In other words a man vrsed in affairs and practical workings of a governmental corporation, or, rather, a politician, (however opprobious that term may be in the opinion of many) is, if honest and competent, far better than any non-politician can be, other things equal, for continuance in and promotion under any political system. Whilst business meth- ods should be used in all governmental corporations, it does not follow that a successful merchant would make a better mayor of a great city than an honest and capable politician; because the former can not be as familiar as the latter with the details and minutia of that corporation. A successful manu- facturer would not necessarily make as good a rail- road president as an employee or director of that corporation, who had achieved less business success in the ordinary sense of that term, but who was familiar with the detail operation of said company. Neither does it often happen that a Cincinnatus 142 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM taken from the plow would make as good a gover- nor, other things equal, as a state assembly man who has also passed through the experience of a state senator. Neither is a naval or military hero who has recently "won the bubble reputation even in the cannon's mouth " would likely to make as good a president as a man schooled in statescraft by con- tact and experience with men and measures in both the lower and higher legislative bodies. More than this, the system herein proposed not only tends to- ward increased ability apace with increased respon- sibility but it distinctly individualizes governmental corporations and prevents selection and promotion by popular caprice. Often a brilliant congressman is nominated for governor of his state when he may have served so long in the national assembly as to be wholly out of touch with the affairs of said state. Often state officials are chosen wholly on national issues, and a successful candidate for Governor is often nominated for President. Men achieving no- toriety in matters wholly foreign to statescraft, are elected to positions requiring practice and exper- ience in governmental affairs. But perhaps one of the greatest benefits that would be accomplished by the promotion system would be its tendency to pre- vent legislative log-rolling. Members of the higher bodies would not be distinctly localized. According to present methods a member from one ward of a city, county of a state, or congressman from a dis- trict, can say to his fellow member from some other ward, county or district, "you favor my appropria- tion and I will favor yours/' The alderman, the state or United States senator will favor his own locality or state hence many iniquitous measures are thus log-rolled through, the only check on same TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 143 being the veto of the executive. Under the proposed plan not only the executive but the higher body also would be free, in most cases, from any local bias, and local measures would pass on merit only, or, at least, that would be the tendency. Local initiative and representation is not neces- sary in the "Advisory" branch of a legislative body nor in the executive; but, on the contrary, the "Ad- visory" characteristics and functions of the higher body are rendered less efficient by local recognition therein. The best plan is to elect the lower body by votes qualified as proposed and then promote from that body to the higher and from it to the executive. A government thus constituted would be con- ducted not only on business principles, but on evolu- tionary principles. Excellence in all things is a growth, not a manufacture. If there is any differ- ence between a so-called politician who is often an- athematized and often deservedly so, and a so-called statesman who is often apotheosized but never de- servedly so, it is a matter of experience and growth, other things equal. Men schooled in affairs of business corporations are the best men to select and to promote in those corpora- tions, and the same is true of governmental corpora- tions. If the idea so universally prevalent in the human mind, as it is at present evolved (and which has been handed down from antiquity as a relic of divinely appointed kings) that there is anything particularly honorable in serving in a governmental position, could be eliminated these servants (for such alone they are) would be more efficient and ser- viceable. The idea that the incumbent is a ruler 144 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM should vanish. Often the most exalted is only a figure head, an incarnation of the idea of sovereignty an animated flag around which enthusiastic supporters of they know not what, rally, fight, bleed and die. The incumbent should be, not the figure head, but the directing head for the time being, of the business of the governmental corporation the Helmsman as it were or "THE TIMONEER" (whether he be a TIMOCRAT, or an autocrat or a democrat) and the sooner that Timocratic or some means and methods other than monarchical succes- sion or Democratic-Republican Boss-Oligarchic so- called election are adopted to place and keep good and capable TIMONEERS at the helm, the sooner will those functions called "Governmental" be per- formed in keeping with those evolutionary agencies which alone bring about the best adjustment in all things from the Cosmos to the Socios, and which alone institute and perpetuate Equitable Relativity instead of Monarchy or Inequitable Equality. One of the greatest, if not the greatest, troubles with which the whole world is cursed to-day is too much government. People do not realize how little of it they actually need and how much of it they could dispense with. When we reflect and consider how very few of us who are quiet and orderly know that there is a government except when we pay taxes (about two thousand million of which go to support this unnecessary system) it is surprising that we tolerate it beyond those limitations which offer no revenue to prompt private endeavor, or for protection and arbitration policemen and courts. TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 145 THE JUDICIARY. If there are any public officials who are worthy of being called "Honorable" it should be extended to the JUDICIARY, and, with respect to this most im- portant function, our present political systems are most inadequate incongruous and absurd. More and worse than this : they are ofttimes infamous and debased. By far the greatest, in fact, the fatal ob- jection to so-called democracy (really only boss oli- garchism) is the prostitution of the Judiciary, and, next to this is the government of large cities. Judges are not the creators but the arbitrators of our causes and differences. They should be not only efficient but, as nearly as possible, absolutely inde- pendent and non-biased. In the absolute or to the extent of perfection, independence and non-bias are not possible, but as long as judicial positions are subject to popular caprice and BOSS OLIGARCH- ISM, a reasonable approach to these essential quali- fications is almost an absurdity in thought : Judicial positions in the United States of America do not carry adequate compensation. There are few great lawyers, who, from a pecuniary standpoint, can af- ford to accept a judgeship. True, great minds sel- dom covet riches, but they should not make sacri- fices. "To lapse in fullness" is not only "sorer" but less likely than "to lie for need," and indepen- dence is encouraged when the "needful" is assured. Complaints might be made that the appointing and confirming power as proposed herein might be prejudiced or biased by personal favoritism or otherwise. Once the judiciary was installed, the appointing power would be confined, as far as possi- 146 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM ble, to the lower judgeships only, the HIGHEE would hold position by PROMOTION from the lower, which would mean experience, which would usually mean fitness. This would prevent favorit- ism and give time for competency or incompetency to become manifest. To prevent a tendency toward superannuation the age of retirement could be made earlier and compulsory. Judges should be remov- able, not by popular recall, but just as legislative acts are repealable by the power that creates them. If the power that creates is not fit to remove, it was not fit to create. The created cannot be greater than the creator, and the very fact that the public is not deemed fit to recall or remove is conclusive proof that it should not be deemed fit to create or elect. To poise the even scales of justice requires the best processes of the human mind, because there are biases that are traceable even back into remote ancestry. In the ultimate, human baseness results from human incompetence in fact one of the wisest men in the world once said that l i a knave was only a fool by a circumbendibus." In other words a really wise man knows too much to be a knave. There is, of course, no OMNISCIENT man, but in our judges we want men, who, by being placed as far above bias as possible, and, who, by being as brainy as possible, and as independent and exper- ienced as possible, will give us the most equitable decisions that are possible. Nevertheless, it must be remembered that a judge is only a human being bone of the same bone and flesh of the same flesh with the balance of us. There is no Divinity that doth hedge him as there is none that doth hedge a king. Many of the musty forms and ceremonies that .are still retained in the pro- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 147 cesses of our courts and the obsequiousness that is indulged in (often insincerely and ridiculously) be- fore the wearer of a toga or a wig is but a relic of ancient ignorance and superstitution. The decisions of our highest courts are by no means infallible, and, when judges disagree (as they often do) all may be wrong, and, certainly, some of them are wrong. However, courts of so-called justice are the near- est approach to actual justice that our present civili- zation warrants. All we can do is to improve upon and make them better than they are. Power exer- cised by courts is often misused and abused, but, against this there is no better remedy than wisdom and non-bias, because some discretionary power must exist. Complication of process and technicality of proce- dure are but the results of that multiplication of ef- fects that is consequent upon all long continued movements or practices. At times it is necessary to sweep away this old multiformity and substitute for it a new uniformity as is done in nature throughout its rhythmical cycle. All uniformity tends toward instability, hence toward multiformity which is us- ually more stable, hence more difficult of dislodge- ment. Such has become the complication in process of our so-called courts of justice that that sacred word could almost as well be associated with a mon- tebank as a court. Instead of a recourse to be sought it is a peril to be shunned. Precedent usu- ally exercises more power than logic and influence more force than law. In many cases money is more potent than all other considerations. An elective judiciary, depending upon a boss oligarchy must al- ways be little, if anything more, than a mere sem- blance of justice. However, men are only men and 148 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM their institutions are usually the best that their im- perfect natures can devise. The best judicial sys- tem is that which tends toward the greatest wisdom and non-bias. Wrongdoing in all stations of life is largely the result of the imperfections of men which appear as often as inherent baseness or pre- meditated obliquity. Too often, however, there ex- ists on the bench or among the chosen twelve a thief or fool or two, who is guiltier than him they try, and the cost of administering so-called justice is often much greater than the value of the cause adjudi- cated. THE LAWS AND LITIGATION. Laws cannot be enforced nor justice administered with absolute impartiality under any human system because human beings are not perfect nor free from bias caused by one influence or another. If "Equitable Relativity" was the basis of our systems, as it some day must be, then the ends of justice would be subserved. If that class of our citizens called LAWYEES, who live largely from the worldly contentions of their fellow men, and who often aggravate rather than assuage those contentions, were all JUDI- CIALLY MINDED, then there would be much less litigation because no lawyer would then take any case, which, as a judge, he would decide against himself. Be it said, however, to the dishonor of the profession, that almost any practitioner at any bar will, for a sufficiently large cash retainer, take almost any case, be the same black or white, wrong or right, even in his own judgement. Under the present elective judicial system usually TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 149 the POOREST, NOT THE BEST, legal talent is chosen to the judiciary. Until recently* membership of the appointive United States Supreme Court has been almost wholly POLITICAL. Fortunately, wisdom in selec- tion, rather than political bias, has been to a greater extent the prompting motive of our recent execu- tives. Since, usually the weakest lawyers are, by the elective machinery, elevated to judgeships, naturally the strongest lawyers who practice before them have a greater influence upon their decisions than such lawyers would have on abler judges. As the mass of the people cannot employ the ablest attorneys, it follows that the masses do not get equitable rep- resentation, hence do not get "even-handed justice " in the administration of the law. This cannot be obviated except by ABLER AND UNBIASED JUDGES. In order to avoid the "law's delay 7 ' all lawyers might, when admitted to practice, be given limited judicial powers. Applicants for admission to the bar who are not fitted or qualified for these powers should be rejected. This would tend also to elevate the character and ability of practitioners. The practice should then be to immediately assemble ARBITRATION or, as it were, Oyer and Terminer Courts to try all cases, by calling in one or three other lawyers to be chosen by the litigants or by their attorneys. Their compensation could in some proper way be provided for, and all cases should be thus tried before they go to the regularly constituted courts at all. Thus the courts would adjudicate APPEAL CASES only. Many would never be ap- pealed, and small cases should not be appealable. 150 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM This system would immeasurably relieve the courts, and in many cases justice would be arrived at as well if not better and certainly more expedi- tiously than by the present congested system. In the very nature of things a limited number of judges' cannot try an UNLIMITED number of cases, and since judges are but men, they do not differ in ability and excellence from other men simply be- cause they have been, by some political boss, ele- vated to a judgeship that they should, in many cases never have heard of or seen. What blacker crime could be committed than an aspirant for judicial honors paying to the boss politician a money con- sideration (as has been done) or a pledge for favor as a price for nomination and election? The system suggested above, with an appointive and promotive judiciary, would materially aid both justice and expedition. THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM. If REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT is worthy of retention, then the INITIATIVE and REFERENDUM, which hampers and circumscribes it, is not worthy of consideration. It is probable that the percentage of ignorant and incompetent voters in any community is as great as in the Legis- latures which they elect. Unless, therefore, both the INITIATIVE and REFERENDUM were confined to the higher or better elements of said voters, the result would be INCREASED CUMBERSOME- NESS WITH NO INCREASED EFFICIENCY. To improve legislation we must improve legislators, which means that we must improve the ELECTOR- ATE that chooses legislators. TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 151 All efforts to improve the super-structure of so- ciety whilst yet the sub-structure is illogical and un- natural, will fail to accomplish any permanent good, and may entail serious harm. Equitable Relativity in place of inequitable equal- ity would be far more efficacious than INITIATIVE and REFERENDUM. People who are not fit to elect competent or honest Legislators are not fit to initiate, or act as referees on current legislation. REDUNDANT LEGISLATION. There is scarcely anything on earth of which there is so great and damaging a redundance as of legisla- tive enactments. Many are pernicious, inefficacious and supererogatory, and quite half of old laws are obsolete and useless, as is conclusively shown by the flood of measures to repeal other measures which are not now considered worthy of retention. As well had we seek to ' t strike flat the thick rotun- dity of the earth, to crush its rock-ribbed sides to- gether and rear mountains in the seas" as to at- tempt by legislation to regulate the grievances under which humanity groans. The people do not appreciate to the extent that they should the fact that ALL ACTION MUST BE FOLLOWED BY REACTION. To place onerous conditions on investment, results in NON-INVEST- MENT, and to encourage pestiferous interference with business affairs results in the curtailment of those affairs. When, by frugality, energy, enter- prise and perspicacity certain men have grown rich in the prosecution of certain enterprises, a clamor 152 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM goes out that these enterprises should be owned by the Government or regulated by legislative enact- ments in other words that the property of some men because they have handled it wisely and eco- nomically and reinvested their accumulations in useful things to which the people have access at currently lower rates, should be turned over to all men because of their incompetency, unfrugality, im- prudence and waste. Verily "the earth hath bubbles as the water hath and these are of them." To the popular elector is often presented a ticket, threshed out by the Boss Oligarchy of each politi- cal party, containing a number of candidates to be voted for to fill a number of minor positions not one of which may have been selected with reference to fitness nor competency but usually all selected with reference to subserviency to the autocratic Boss. If to the stockholders of a Eailway Company or any other association at its annual election there should be presented by the officials in control a ticket containing the names of candidates for switch- men, brakemen, stokers and the like, a look of sur- prise would be detected on the faces of the voters. Yet this is just what is done in municipal govern- ments especially, and, as a necessary and unavoid- able result, municipalities are the greatest subjects of mal-administration, corruption and robbery. There is no greater reason why all these minor offi- cials should be chosen by popular ballot than there is why all measures of legislation should be simi- larly adopted. In New York in 1910 the ballot was about four feet square and in Chicago it reached "from the eyes to the ground." The qualified voter should elect only the members TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 153 of the lower board of control. From this should issue all other officials. Responsibility and account- ability would then be definitely fixed and localized. The minor officials would be chosen with reference to fitness and capacity and insubordination would be punished by summary discharge. Voting thus confined to membership of these boards would be simplified and purified and corrupt combinations of Boss Oligarchies would be abso- lutely prevented. The business world would not be subject to political upheavals and damaging changes, and all public duties would be more wisely and hon- estly conducted. The system would not remove the governing power too far from the people, but, if properly arranged its accountability to the people would be more direct than now. Members of the lower body (with an alternate, if need be, to serve in case of promotion or death) could be chosen EVERY YEAR. From it, in bi-cameral govern- ments, the members of the higher body could be chosen one-third, one-quarter or one-sixth every year, and from the higher the executive could be chosen for 3, 4, or 6 years, all eligible to re-election and all removable at any time by the body that chose them, and removal should be exercised as freely as choice. If the lower body was elected an- nually there would be no need for recall by the peo- ple. The lower body, however, should meet within as short a time as possible after its election. One of the most absurd and, ofttimes, one of the most pernicious features of our present system is the lapse of thirteen months between the date of election and the time of assembling of the newly elected congress. This renders it possible for the repudiated party to enact legislation directly in con- 154 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM flict with the mandate of the people, and this power is often used to the great abuse and damage of the country. True, the executive can call an extra ses- sion, but when this official is in sympathy with the repudiated party, he is often in sympathy with the very measures that the people .have repudiated. There is scarcely a constitutional government on earth, except our own, where a repudiated party would dare to continue to impose its policies on the people. A repudiated party in most civilized coun- tries resigns at once. The fact that under our sys- tem it is possible for such a one to continue to legis- late is another evidence of the archaic condition of our constitution and fundamental law. Under the proposed system this abuse would be entirely remedied. A majority of both bodies and the executive could do anything, not unconstitu- tional ; two-thirds of the two, without the executive, could do the same, and five-sixths of the lower body might, with safety, be supreme. Eegardless of their tenures of office, officials not elected annually should be removable just as laws are repealable, because the object of government is TO EEPEESENT THE PEOPLE, and hostile officials are even more objec- tionable than hostile LAWS. The proposed system could be adopted as to the legislatures of states and as to city governments, and this is as far as it could go under our present constitution because of the clause that no State shall be deprived of two SENA- TOES, and because this clause cannot be altered or changed by amendment, which imposes on us a con- dition that is a travesty on representative govern- ment, and the pernicious effects thereof have already been seriously felt in legislation alike inimical to wealth and population. TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 155 As a NATIONAL system it would be quite as equitable and beneficial as for state and municipal governments, but at present less practicable of adop- tion. To be adopted NATIONALLY the constitu- tion would have to be abolished. States often adopt new constitutions ; why should the NATIONAL IN- STRUMENT be too sacred to be kept apace with the progress of civilization? THE UNEEPEESENTATIVENESS AND ILLOG- ICALITY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE. All things should be what they purport to be. If a government purports to be representative it should be representative, which of course implies that it should be proportionately so on some agreed bases, be that bases population or wealth or area or any other bases. The United States Senate is propor- tionately representative on no bases whatsoever. The fathers of the republic were jealous of each other; they feared encroachment on their local rights. They appeared to ignore the fact that the national government was intended to be in no sense a local affair, but that it was designed to deal with concerns wholly national in their bearing and suze- rainty. Clinging to their local prejudice and jeal- ousy they established the principle that the higher or advisory branch of the National Legislature should contain two members from each of certain por- tions or land area, whether the said portions be large or small or whether they contain many or few inhab- itants, or whether they were rich or poor, fertile or desert. They decreed that at this utterly capricious and illogical bases of so-called representation should 156 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM never be altered by amendment. With equal imagi- nary wisdom they also decreed that the African slave trade should not be abolished and that this provision also should never be altered by amend- ment. The conditions relating to the United States Senate are as obsolete to-day as are those relating to the African slave trade, and the continuation of State governments (which causes the absurdity) is about as obsolete as either. On the basis of area the State of Nevada would be entitled to two or three times as many Senators as the State of New York, but on the bases of population or wealth the City of New York alone would be entitled to thirty or forty times as many Senators as the State of Ne- vada. As the nation grows and as population be- comes crystalized these inequalities will cause great injustice and perhaps much antagonism. Already there have been demonstrations of the tendency of these partially populated and comparatively pauper- ized States to impose conditions upon the whole na - tion or to prevent conditions from being imposed that were very prejudicial or highly beneficial, as the case may be, to the interests of the vast majority. Silver purchase bills, railway land grants, unwise currency measures and discriminating systems of taxation are samples of these. As time goes on the effect of this inequality will become more glaring and galling. Upon no basis of reasoning is it right. The system proposed herein or something similar in corrective tendency must some day be adopted to alter this obvious wrong, or there may with great reason again be instituted efforts directed toward the dismemberment of the Union. According to the census of 1910 the total population was about 91,- 972,266. Of the forty-eight States sending ninety- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 157 six Senators, there were twenty-four States send- ing forty-eight Senators, or half of the entire body. These twenty-four States contained a population of only about 16,569,926, hence per capita their power is five times as great as the twenty-four large States. In accumulated wealth the disparity is even greater, and in both respects it appears to be becom- ing still greater. In many other features the con- stitution of the United States of America, suitable for conditions that existed over a century ago, is now obsolete. Since its alteration by amendment is very difficult impossible as to Senatorial repre- sentation it is scarcely possible that another gen- eration can pass without its complete extirpation and the substitution in its stead of an up-to-date instrument which must not only prevent such ab- surdities as now exist in the Senate, but it must remove all doubt as to the right to pursue a world- wide governmental policy which must go pari passu with a worldwide commercial policy, which latter must go pari passu with civilized progress. Unless retrogadation sets in, the whole of the North Ameri- can continent, with its contiguous islands at least, must become one nation, and one of the main ob- stacles to its consummation to-day is the inade- quacy of our constitution and fundamental law. It is better to change the laws to fit the times than to try to change the times to fit the laws. THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE. The electoral college is likewise illogical and about as glaringly so as is the United States Senate. It also is a result of obsolete State pride, and should be relegated to the tombs of antiquity. Its objection- 158 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM able features are more conspicuously manifest in the nomination of candidates than in their election. States that can supply no electoral votes often de- termine the nomination of candidates. States that are evenly balanced politically command candidates on account of supposed availability, to the exclusion of all other States, however suitable a resident of either of them may be to become the Timoneer or helmsman of the nation. This causes the local bosses of said States to become almost omnipotent, as in the case of New York, Ohio, and at times other large commonwealths. The whole nation is therefore often obliged to accept as a candidate to be voted for, the personal favorite of some local boss. Since the can- didate of one or the other of only two parties is usually elected, it is tantamount to the actual selec- tion of a President by one local boss, and yet ninety to one hundred millions of people think they are choosing the supreme official of the nation. The fact is that their choice is more a matter of their own imaginations than of any tangible reality. It is surprising how very little the whole people have to do in selecting any prominent official. This boss recognition in doubtful and determining States is practically unavoidable under our present electoral college system. As a remedy it has been proposed that the President be chosen by a popular vote. There is no more reason for electing governors and mayors by popular vote than for similarly electing a President; but, even were this plan adopted, the candidate would be the nominee of several bosses instead of the doubtful State boss only, which would be but a slight improvement. Under so-called dem- ocratic republicanism, the boss system is inevitable. One who believes in the luminosity of the sun had as TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 159 well oppose Ms life's sustaining rays, as to favor democratic republicanism and oppose the boss oli- garchies and political plutocracies which are its nec- essary concomitants. Not only under this system is the boss inevitable, but in no other practical man- ner could the machinery of politics be run, because the vast majority are incompetent. The Socialists and other reformers expound their theories to the masses as innocently and as enthusiastically as though the masses really ruled. They should con- vert the bosses, and, until they do, their propa- gandisms are like shooting howitzers at mosquitoes or trying to strike the stars with sticks. If, how- ever, as is by no means improbable, the boss oli- garchies ever do espouse the cause of Socialism out- right, the people who believe in private ownership and controllership of production and transportation will be buried under a cyclone unless they, too, or- ganize to convince the bosses that these theories are wrong. As yet that controlling class of politicians have not espoused the cause of Socialism, but they are almost a unit for Fetichism, which may cause civilized progress to vanish into air unless such a catastrophy is averted by timely organization. These statements now appear to be lugubrious and visionary, but the whole story of democratic repub- licanism cannot be foretold by its record up to date. CONSTITUENCIES SHOULD BE ENLARGED. If a century ago one delegate in Congress was rightfully apportioned to about 25,000 voters, then, at the present time, with increased facilities for communication and transportation, one delegate could as well represent 250,000 voters. With the 160 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM functions of government confined to rightful spheres and the characteristics of the people becoming more uniform, constituencies would not differ as radically as in the past, hence there is less need for so many representatives. A Congress of 300 to 400 delegates would be ample to properly represent the constitu- encies of the entire world in the popular branch of a world congress, and sixty to seventy in the higher branch would be ample for all functions such a body need perform. As surely as civilized progress con- tinues, there must and will come a worldwide na- tionalization. Its delegates could now go from the south to the Septentrion, and from the first to the one hundred and eightieth meridian in less time than formerly from Boston to Washington or from Edin- burgh to London. Large legislative bodies are un- wieldly, and for this reason are less representative than smaller ones, because business must, to a great extent, be done by committees and by autocratic pre- siding officers. Individual delegates lose their iden- tity and often merely echo the mandates of the few who control. When by the Sixtieth Congress sal- aries were increased one-half, measures should have been instituted to reduce membership one-half, or to double the size of constituencies. When States are abolished, about thirty-nine members should consti- tute the advisory body of the National Congress, and about thirteen aldermen would be ample for any city. CHAPTER VI. Monarchy Preferable to Mob : Equitable Relativ- ity the Golden Mean: Anarchy: Useless Homage to Officials: Condensed Principles: Science and Soci- ology: Governmental Inefficiency: Government Pos- tal Service Opposed: Public Schools vs. Private Schools: Discrimination Not Avoided by Govern- ment Control: Government and Railroad Owner- ship: Government and Telegraph Ownership: Gov- ernment Paternalism: Log Rolling Legislation: Public Franchises to Private Corporations: Terms for Franchises to Corporations. PROPOSITION FIFTH. That nothing should be done by any governmental power which, in its nature, will yield a revenue; that government should be supported by direct taxation and do nothing that private individuals or private corporations can do. The despotism of a monarch is quite as reasonable and endurable as the despotism of a mob. In fact, if he be a sufficiently wise and worthy monarch, his despotism might be better than any other govern- mental system. More than this, there is some war- rant for the despotism of a monarch because many people of fair intelligence and quality honestly be- lieve that he is the direct representative or vice- 161 162 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM gerent of God on earth, whereas no one believes that a mob is such representative or vice-gerent. Speak- ing only of what are known as civilized nations, the monarchy is limited either by paper constitutions or by the consensus of public opinion as reflected by his counsellors, so that tyrannical absolutism in these nations is practically unknown. On the other hand, in a democratic republic the mob or mass is the source from which power theoretically emanates, as set forth in the oft repeated phrases, "All just power comes from the consent of the governed," and ' i no man is good enough to govern another man without that other man's consent. " The first should be changed so as to read, "from the consent of the capable of the governed, " and the second, "to gov- ern another equally capable man without that man's consent." The consent of those who are not capable of knowing what it is to which they do consent is certainly no consent at all. An absolutely incom- petent and ignorant man stands in about the same relation to a thoroughly competent and educated man, as far as popular governing is concerned, as a child does to his father as far as domestic governing is concerned. If, therefore, the father is good enough to govern his child, domestically considered, a wise man is good enough to govern the fool, politically considered. Just as in monarchies a despot, abso- lute or limited, does not actually rule, so in demo- cratic republics the mob does not actually rule. In the former the ruling power is a ministry and in the latter a boss oligarchy. If the ministry chosen by the monarch in response to public sympathy is com- posed of wise and capable men, it is far preferable to a self-constituted boss oligarchy and their chosen agents or officials, who are usually corrupt and in- TIMOCBACY VS. DEMOCRACY 163 capable men. Between a monarchy which, in civil- ized nations, means a ministry, and a democratic republic, which means a boss oligarchy, the choice, except for the sentiment of liberty, would likely be the former. However, power does not emanate from the gods, or rather many people do not think that kings and emperors are divinely appointed, hence a government based on that idea is not suited to these people. Power should not emanate from the mob, hence boss oligarchies the necessary machinery of democratic republics are not suited to people who think the mob should not be sovereign. Between the ministry, which is the machinery of the monarch, and the boss oligarchy, which is the machinery of the mob, a mean must be adopted to suit human beings who believe in neither of the aforesaid extremes. * ' The golden mean is the path of wisdom, ' ' said Con- fucius. Such a medium is a government based on Equitable Relativity as nearly as that can be prac- tically created. As has been stated, this relativity cannot be established between men on bases of erudi- tion or intellectuality, but it can be on their contri- bution to government deriving its support from tax- ation on fixed property, and a ratio thus established is practically just and reasonable, representing, as it does, relative ownership in the governmental cor- poration. // under a government thus organized, a boss oligarchy would yet exist, it would be a wiser and better one than that emanating from the mob, ivhich is a sufficient justification if not a guarantee of absolute perfection. Together with the establish- ment of a proper system of government there is also a necessity of confining that government within its rightful sphere. The law-maker is often more harm- ful to society than the law-breaker. Anarchism 164 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM means "to be without government," and not to be in favor of murder, arson, and the like. Opposition to useless government is praiseworthy. But as long as people live together, which they will do as long as they are by nature gregarious, rules of conduct will at least be necessary. At times these rules would have to be enforced by power by might. Such only is the status of what we now call law. Complete anarchy is as illogical as would be the abolition of systematized industrial enterprise, be- cause there is a rightful sphere for government, which should be called "servicement," but there is no occasion for its exaltation or deification, and the "pageantry, pomp and circumstance of glorious war" that attend coronations, inaugurations and often the administration of the simplest of govern- mental or " servicemental" functions is but a foolish waste of public wealth. It is another evidence of popular misconception and incompetency and in- tensifies the idea set forth in the memorable words, "0 place, form, how often dost thou with thy case, thy habit, wrench awe from fools and tie the wiser souls to thy false seeming." If the army and navy features of governmental operation were eliminated, there is scarcely a nation on the face of the earth that would be of more "pith and moment" than are many of our industrial enterprises. The homage, therefore, that is paid to all governmental officials (to a greater or less degree) is sentimental, illogical, and often encourages that "insolence of office" and at times that "law's delay" with which humanity has been, is, and will be cursed until business meth- ods only are made applicable to all governmental affairs. A simple assemblyman is often called an honor- TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 165 able, and the "pregnant hinges of the knee' are crooked not only to emperors and kings, but to those who are elected or appointed to serve, not to com- mand, save as an industrial official must command within the limits of his necessary authority. The average intelligence of public men who are often called "great" is far less than that of scien- tists, philosophers, men of letters and captains of industry, and their rightful sphere of usefulness is by no means as important as it is usually thought to be. To call a man "great" for political or mili- tary achievement is but another evidence of present human weakness. GOVERNMENT POST OFFICE AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Assuming that governments should exercise pro- tective suzerainty over property and not business management of property, it necessarily follows that the maxim of Samuel J. Tilden is absolutely true, viz. : ' * That nothing should be done by the general government that the local authorities are competent to do, and nothing by any governmental power that INDIVIDUALS can do for themselves." There are two very important functions that the government now performs in the United States of America, viz.: the POST OFFICE and PUBLIC EDUCATION. There is no doubt that each of these functions offers reward for private endeavor, and that each could be performed by private enterprise. Why are they not performed by private enterprise? Simply because the Socialistic sentiment has pre- vailed to this extent. How comes it that Socialism 166 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM to this extent is preferable, if not so with respect to other necessary duties? If preferable with re- spect to other necessary duties, then the principles of Socialism should be adopted. There is no line of demarcation except that named by Mr. Tilden, in which Timocracy fully concurs, and supplements the idea by the more definite suggestion of confining governmental operation to non-compensating enter- prises. As an OEIGINAL PKOPOSITION, therefore, Timocracy would favor PRIVATE OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT of each of these aforesaid functions. It appears, however, that times, condi- tions, and the consensus of public opinion are not now ripe for these innovations, and, since to all con- ditions that have long existed there come ADJUST- MENTS, it is seldom wise to advocate changes until time has been given for READJUSTMENT. Again, all propositions, whether for the DISESTABLISH- MENT of existing or for the establishment of non- existing things should be subjected to at least THREE tests, viz.: ARE THEY RIGHT? ARE THEY PRACTICABLE (time, place and conditions considered) f and ARE THEY EXPEDIENT? If an affirmative answer cannot be given to ALL THREE, the existing status should remain un- changed. The science of the PRACTICABLE is the sub-structure of all action. It is probable, therefore, that each of these func- tions will continue to be Socialistically performed until the fact that Socialism is against the consti- tution of things is generally accepted. Detailed arguments against governmental per- formance of each would require volumes in and of themselves. TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 167 ON PRINCIPLE Timocracy opposes government operation of each, but does not deem a change ex- pedient under existing conditions. "Things by season, seasoned are to their right praise and true perfection." The first aim and ob- ject of Timocracy is to oppose the further extension of governmental operation, and to extirpate MON- OPOLY in private operation. With this accomplished, the abandonment of gov- ernmental operation in all fields now occupied by it that offer a reward for individual enterprise would be a natural and inevitable consequence. The operation by government of any function usually results in nothing other than the substitu- tion of TAXES WHICH ARE ENFORCED FOR TOLLS WHICH ARE VOLUNTARY, hence noth- ing should be undertaken by governments excepting duties for the performance of which TOLLS are impracticable. GOVERNMENT AND RAILWAY OWNERSHIP. The accumulated capital represented by more than 230,000 miles of railway in the United States of America amounts to between one-sixth and one-sev- enth of the entire wealth of the country. The number of people employed in railway service amounts to between one-twelfth and one-fourteenth of the en- tire voting population. The gross revenues of the various systems amount to nearly 2500 million dol- lare annually, or about twice the total revenue of the entire national government. The proposition that these vast enterprises be owned and operated by the government is too stupendous for ordinary comprehension. How shall they be secured by the 168 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM government? Shall they be confiscated? Certainly no fair-minded citizen would advocate such a propo- sition. Shall they be bought? This would involve an expenditure of from twelve to fourteen thousand million dollars, and an interest charge of five to seven hundred million dollars per year, or an amount about equal to the annual expenditure by the govern- ment for all other purposes. The railway depart- ment would transcend all the other branches of the public service combined. If the business should be conducted with the same improvidence, extrava- gance and waste that characterizes all other branches of the public service, that which now rep- resents accumulated wealth in the hands of frugal private owners, would become an engulfing ocean of bankruptcy and ruin. So loose, unbusiness-like and reckless are the methods and management of the government that there are no two departments to- day which will agree as to the exact amount that is annually expended for the functions that it now performs. What would this be if to it were added all the details of the management of 14,000 million dollars more, with a million additional office holders and public employees appointed and retained by the cohesive power of public plunder? Governmental railways are not wholly an untried proposition. Many years ago they were experimented with in Pennsylvania, Michigan and South Carolina, and were abandoned because of glaring, galling and dis- graceful inefficiency in the management. If the com- plaint of discrimination in rates to favored shippers is now justifiably urged as against private manage- ment, it would be many times worse under public control. The energy and sagacity of every Con- gressman and Senator would be directed towards TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 169 securing favored rates for the products of his sec- tion, as, on a much smaller scale, we now see sec- tional strife before the Ways and Means Committee of each succeeding Congress. When the government takes over the railways, then let Socialism become complete, so that the retroactive result will come sooner and more decisively. GOVEENMENT TELEGEAPH AND PUBLIC UTILITIES OWNEESHIP AND CONTEOL. Eegarding telegraphs, telephones, express com- panies and, in fact, all other so-called public utilities, the same objection to government ownership and controllership applies as to railroads. The only honest object the government could have in owning or controlling any of these properties would be to prevent private monopoly or the "per- nicious abuse of private ownership, " or to so reduce the operating price to the people as to absorb or diminish private wealth accumulation. This could be accomplished only by equally efficient and eco- nomic management (which is by no means to be ex- pected, much less guaranteed) ; but if guaranteed, it would result in a saving of only a small sum per year to each of eighty to one hundred million people, which would be scarcely appreciable, and would not be accumulated as three-fourths or more of it now is by the private owners of said systems. Thus by these acts of public intrusion into private business, even assuming the management to be equally frugal and efficient, there would be a loss to the country of an accumulation of many million dollars annually and an almost certain deficiency of many millions more. 170 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM There is as much reason for public ownership or controllership of many other enterprises as there is for these so-called public utilities, the only certain result if all were taken over being to dimmish ac- cumulation and with it to correspondingly diminish efficient management, and to increase corruption and fraud. It must be admitted that accumulation is necessary. If not, then the status quo is neces- sary or diminution is necessary. If public operation or even cumulative taxation tends to curtail accumu- lation, then both are injurious. The annual income of the richest man in America is not over, say, $25,000,000, and this under Tim- ocracy would be divided after the first generation. The incomes of all would be but little for all, and the most that government promises by its control is to save this amount to the people, thus taking it away from those who would conserve it and give it to officials or to those by whom it would be dissi- pated and squandered. Enterprises must be run at a profit, else civilization will turn backward. This profit can never be excessive IF MONOPOLY IS PEEVENTED. CAMPAIGNING AND "LOG ROLLING" LEGIS- LATION AS CONNECTED WITH PUBLIC OWNERSHIP. The telegraph system in England was govern- mentalized that is, attached to the post office sys- tem in 1870, and has since then been publicly op- erated. During the first two years the receipts paid interest on the investment. Since then there has been a deficiency. In 1872, said deficiency was about 120,000, or nearly $600,000. It has been annually TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 171 increasing. In 1892 it was over 950,000, or about $5,000,000. In 1906, with the largest business ever known, $29,578,880, the loss was over $5,000,000. The reason for this is inefficient and uneconomic op- eration. The political parties and partisans respec- tively bid for the vote of public employees by prom- ising to increase the wage rates, or to lessen the working hours. Candidates promised to the voters certain postal and telegraphic favors, conditioned on their election, and many other abuses have crept in. In a country, vast in domain like America, and one in which suffrage is universal, these abuses would be intensified. Post office buildings are now constructed where not needed because of "log roll- ing" legislation to satisfy Congressional constitu- encies. If the railways and telegraphs were publicly owned, ambitious men would promise an appropria- tion to build one thousand miles of additional track or pole lines in every county, in their districts. Rail- roads of different descriptions would be promised from every valley to every mountain top ; and, more than promises, many of these would become actuali- ties. Would not all of this give employment to workmen! say the advocates of public ownership. Yes, and at exorbitant wage rates. The business would, of necessity, where improvements were not made in response to business demand, be operated at a great loss, entailing ruinous taxation for deficien- cies as well as for original construction. The national indebtedness of America would soon be as great per capita as it now is in Australia or New Zealand, and be represented by comparatively worthless properties which were prematurely, un- wisely, and, in many cases, corruptedly and fraudu- lently conceived and constructed. Enterprise, to be 172 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM beneficial, must be carried out on business principles, that is, on the basis of "will it pay?" Private capi- tal often builds in advance of the "will it pay now?" period, but not with reference to placating or re- warding a Congressional constituency for electing some man to office. The ' ' will it pay ? ' ' with private capital is with foresight and good judgment from the standpoint of an investor, and this is the only proper standpoint. GOVEENMENTAL PATERNALISM. The government of the United States of America may, with a tendency toward facetiousness, be deemed an Avuncular one; but, under no pretext whatsoever should it be deemed a paternal one. The interesting old gentleman who stands for our sov- ereignty may be considered our Uncle Sam, but never our Father Sam. When it was believed that God created kings, the paternal idea was consistent, however ridiculous and ill conceived. When the peo- ple create not a king, but a servant, the paternal idea is inconsistent as well as ridiculous. Paternalism is but a mild name for Socialism. PUBLIC FRANCHISES TO PRIVATE COR- PORATIONS. It is by no means conclusive that a governmental corporation having privileges, franchises or prop- erty at its disposal should not dispose of them at all, but that it should retain, use or operate, as the case may suggest, all of such valuable opportunities itself. The power to grant or to confer is one thing, and the expediency of retaining and operating is TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 173 another. Governmental corporations, even when honest and capable, are in no sense specialized for or adapted to the performance of business functions. It is better therefore that they should grant or sub- let these privileges and opportunities to corpora- tions that are specialized and adapted, provided al- ways that the price and terms are fair, equitable and reasonable, and the best that can be secured at the time. The objection should not be to the act of granting, but to the unfairness of the terms, and to the fact that the consideration paid goes to bosses and spoilsmen rather than to the treasury of the governmental corporation. The private specialized corporation usually gets by far the better end of the deal. And why is this so? The reply is solely and only by reason of the relative incompetency, short-sightedness, indifference or dishonesty of the governmental corporation 's directors. We have seen in Vienna, Budapest, and other European cities that make no pretension to democratic government, that contracting private companies ofttimes get by far the worse end of the deal, and that they are often unable to comply with the rigorous conditions that the astute governmental directors, who are not the products of boss oligarchies, often impose. We do not often hear of ' i grabs " or of stolen franchises in these cities. In some cases public operation is found to be reasonably safe in such cities solely because of the efficiency of their governments. Still, be the municipal control ever so capable, it is better to pursue the plan of specialization of function. It is difficult to understand why well-meaning social reformers who acknowledge the danger and dishon- esty of public grants of public property, yet favor the public retention and operation of that property, 174 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM when they well understand that inefficient and dis- honest operation may entail far greater and more complicated dishonesty and wrong than an out and out sale or even a donation might do. The explana- tion probably lies in the glaring lump sum fraud in the one case and the obscure, but none the less atrocious, fraud in the other. The remedy is to elect better, wiser, and more honest goyernmental direc- tors. But boss oligarchism is not likely ever to ap- ply this needful remedy. Again, we say, it is useless to expect "golden actions from leaden instincts." As from nothing, nothing conies, so from inefficiency and corruption nothing else can come, whether as regards public grants or public operations. Practical business men, whose "money makes the mare go" (not theoretical social reformers, whose ideas would make the money go), know full well that private capital would ask no better investment to- day than to take, at a fair valuation, every publicly operated commercial plant or property in the entire world, and, at the same price for service, receive for its profit only the savings of more efficient private management. There is scarcely an isolated instance where the public plant is now self-sustaining, that private capital would not eagerly grasp. In many cases more would be paid than a fair valuation, and less would be charged than existing prices for serv- ice, and still the private corporation would accumu- late wealth. TEEMS FOE FEANCHISES TO PEIVATE COMPANIES. Almost every municipality has certain enterprises called PUBLIC utilities, viz. : water and sewerage, TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 175 transportation, lighting and telephone service. Water and sewerage is usually under municipal con- trol, and the tendency now is to municipalize all the others. All should be PEIVATE enterprises, because in their nature they are revenue producing. The longer the term for which a franchise is granted the greater is the inducement for private investment, and, usually, the better is the equipment and the more efficient the management because it pays to install the best facilities. As an original proposition and not as subsequent confiscation, the municipality might exact from such companies ONE charge only and subject them to no taxation, except the cumulative. This charge should be a certain percentage of their gross earnings, say, for example, one-tenth to one-seventh thereof. The proposition to private investors should then be : "At what price will you do this business for, say, fifty years, with the further condition that, whenever gross earnings bear a greater ratio to track and car mileage (if a transportation company) or to pipe line mileage (if a water or sewerage company), or to pole line mileage (if a lighting or a telephone com- pany), than before, then the percentage of said earn- ings to be paid to the city shall be proportionately increased!" If ever said gross earnings bear a less ratio than before, then said percentage shall be cor- respondingly decreased. If the ratio is substantially maintained, then the percentage is to be unaltered. The tendency of this would be to stimulate and in- crease both construction and operation pari passu with increased population and business, and to an extent fully equal to the progress and growth of the municipality. Often, though earnings are largely in- 176 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM creased, track and car mileage is not increased, and the same is true as to pipe and pole line mileage. Often also a certain per car charge is exacted, thus tempting the company to cripple its service and in- convenience its passengers or patrons, all of which is ill advised and unnecessary. In a well-regulated city this income alone might be sufficient to pay all municipal expenses, thus ren- dering all other taxation unnecessary, or reducing it to a minimum so inconsiderable as to be of no ap- preciable burden. The same plan might be applied to overland railways, telegraphs and telephone com- panies, the revenue in this case to go to the national government, as such companies should operate only under national charters. From this source a well- equipped and properly confined national government might derive a large part if not all the revenue it required. It is probable that some day State gov- ernments will be abolished and that the powers that they now exercise, or such of them as should be continued, will be divided between the CITY and the NATION, thus insuring greater localization and greater nationalization, as a result of which many improvements, not now practicable because of use- less State interference, could be adopted. CHAPTER VII Money a Measure of Value: A Medium of Ex- change: Its Qualities of Fitness: No Absolutely Non- Variable Standard: Gold the Best at Present: Paper Currency Preferable : Means of Supplying It : Currency and Credit: Central Bank Undesirable: Elasticity: " Emergency " Money: Plan for Issue by Clearing Houses: Postal Savings Banks: No Currency Issuing Monopoly. CHAPTER VII. PROPOSITION SIXTH. Money a Standard of Value and Facilitator of Exchange; Gold Only; Currency Payable in Gold and Issued ~by Government Only; Banking and Cur- rency. In the discussion of a sociological question allu- sion to money is seldom necessary and is often con- fusing. In such discussions WEALTH, PROP- ERTY and actual utilities for which labor will ex- change itself are the subjects to be considered. Es- sentially money is a standard of value and facili- tator of exchange. It usually represents so small a part of the value that commands labor that allusion to it is seldom necessary except when discussing questions relating exclusively to Standards of value and Exchanges. The Standard of Value should be some one (never 177 178 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM more than one) commodity put in convenient form or shape for which labor will exchange itself. Its qualities of excellence or fitness are, convenience in handling and non-fluctuation in value as measured by the average of other commodities. No absolutely non-variable standard has as yet been devised. The best that is now known is the metal GOLD. Intrin- sic value as applied to gold is, to a great extent, a fancy; but, by ages of persistence it has become a fact sufficiently enduring to warrant its adoption as the "STANDARD" of value for some time in the future. This metal has therefore been adopted by the leading civilizations of the earth, and thus it should remain till something better can be substi- tuted. A practically non-variable standard of weight and measure can be secured, as gravity and distance do not vary or fluctuate. Value, however, depends on many conditions such as quantity, qual- ity and facility for production and utilization, either changing as to any commodity (gold included) changes its value relative to other commodities ; and, since, change in these respects is the invariable course of nature, no standard of value good for all time can likely be secured, but some standard must be agreed upon even though time and changing con- ditions may require its abandonment and the sub- stitution of some other. As has been stated, GOLD at present is the best. If all exchanges into which the standard of value enters were concluded at once, the fluctuating char- acter of any standard would be of little consequence ; but when in any transaction the element of TIME enters, the variableness of the standard may injure or benefit the debtor or creditor according as the same may increase or decrease. If one man loans TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCRACY 179 25.8 grains of gold to another man for a term of ten years, justice demands that value equal to 25.8 grains of gold when loaned should be returned when paid. It therefore follows that the standard, whatever it may be, should be made by agreement or law, the subject of REVALUATION and readjustment at stated intervals of time. Variation now applies to gold less than to any other equally suitable com- modity, hence, for the present, gold should be the standard, but as a circulating medium, paper cur- rency, redeemable in gold, is preferable. CURRENCY AND CREDIT. We have available FOUR plans of obtaining cur- rency, as follows: 1st, An independent bank issue, which is unde- sirable. 2nd, A combination of all banks to secure each bank's issue. 3rd, A specially chartered Central or Association Bank. 4th, A Government issue independent of all banks. An ENFORCED association of all banks to pro- vide a fund with which to redeem the currency of any bank is kindred in kind to a similar EN- FORCED association to make good the deposits of any bank, and is not to be recommended, except as to emergency currency as is hereinafter suggested. A CENTRAL BANK OR CURRENCY ISSUING MONOPOLY. A great Central Bank or any institution (call it what we may) chartered by the Government and by 180 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM it granted the MONOPOLY of issuing currency is a surrender by the Government of its important con- stitutional prerogative to COMMERCIAL INTER- ESTS. "To COIN money and regulate its value" is, by implication, supplemented by Court decisions, a right to "COIN" (print and issue) any substitute for coin. Such an institution would necessarily be owned by large capitalists or by banks exclusively. If banks subscribed to its stock in proportion to their own capitalization a few of the largest banks would con- trol a majority thereof. As these large Banks are themselves controlled (and in some cases owned) by a very few men, these few men would, by the asso- ciation's monopoly, control the currency issuing power of the entire United States. The Government should provide and maintain a uniform and stable CIRCULATING MEDIUM to the extent of such an amount per capita as is by experience deemed adequate and sufficient, but it cannot well provide for ELASTICITY or EMER- GENCY conditions. This, therefore, should be left to the banks, as it is only a temporary expedient to bridge over, as it were, a period when, by commercial stringency, the normal amount of currency is insufficient. Lack of currency does not indicate bank insol- vency. It follows, therefore, that banks that are sound should have some means of securing tempo- rary relief. This could be accomplished through CLEARING HOUSE ASSOCIATIONS. The mem- bers of any clearing house could deposit such of their securities or commercial Paper as was accept- able to the officers or governors thereof and receive therefor in certificates or emergency currency an TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 181 agreed percentage of the face value thereof. These should be an obligation of all the clearing house banks. The Government could then afford to give them sanction and validity, provided the joint guar- antee was unquestioned, and provision for the speedy return and cancellation of said notes or their equivalent was made by a cumulative interest charge on the time basis. Thus the JOINT BANK GUAR- ANTEE plan would apply to EMERGENCY CUR- RENCY because the Government could not well nor expeditiously handle that business. It could not well pass on the character of commercial paper and banks would have to use this in most cases, as their funds are not invested in high class bonds if their business has been to accommodate the commercial borrower. To a limited extent this system has been tried and works well. If perfected in details it should be adequate for all needs and would be sim- pler than a Central Bank. Country Banks could get currency from their CITY correspondents. This is preferable to a MONOPOLISTIC BANK OR AS- SOCIATION. To avoid panics, it is better to avoid the condi- tions that cause them, viz., the over extension of credit, than to provide conditions for relieving them, by creating a currency issuing monopoly. If a regular Government issue of, say, $30 per capita should be deemed too large or too small, it could be regulated either way in connection with the Government's BOND issuing or TAXING power. When banks desired it the Government might reduce any currency plethora by exchanging bonds therefor. It is not necessary to provide for the reduction of a currency plethora with the same 182 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM expedition that it may be necessary to supply a cur- rency deficiency. In order to meet this exigency any reasonable ex- pedient should be resorted to before the Government relinquishes one of its most important prerogatives and transfers it to what must inevitably be CON- TEOL by a small coterie of currency issuing monop- olists, if delegated to a CENTRAL BANK, who might use their power far more ABUSIVELY and discriminately than any monopoly that it is now try- ing to suppress. Why should the Government seek to suppress monopolies, which, when they exist at all, do so by the survival of the fittest, and then cre- ate a monopoly that could not possibly exist unless by Government creation! The segregation of Com- mercial Monopolies undoubtedly causes some incon- venience; but that inconvenience is deemed prefer- able to the perpetuation of monopoly. Normal currency represents checks payable to bearer. When issued by the Government it is EVERYBODIES' check backed by everybodies' tax contribution, hence nobody can discredit it who has faith in the Government. Of course Governments are not always stable, but when they are not, all pri- vate property is in danger. In countries where cen- tral banks through branch banks virtually control the banking business, conditions are different from those in America where small independent banks are often a great convenience to the people. POSTAL SAVINGS BANKS. Corresponding to Shakespeare's simile as to ad- versity, this system "is like unto a toad, ugly, but not very venomous.' 7 It wears TWO jewels TIMOCKACY VS. DEMOCRACY 183 (neither very precious) in its head. Its ugliness consists in the fact that it is not the proper business of a Government ; but, since interest rates are so low as not to become seriously competitive with private banking institutions, it is not very venomous. The two jewels are : It discourages the HOARDING and EXPORTATION of currency. As long as we have a Governmental Post Office, which is maintained by the same social status that needs governmental sav- ings banks, it may be well to continue the latter as an adjunct to the former. Far be it from the purpose of Timocracy to advo- cate the performance of any function by Govern- ment that can be performed by private agencies, but it is acknowledged to be the proper function of Gov- ernment to "coin" gold and "regulate its value," from which the issuance of currency seems to be a logical sequence, provided a plan is at hand for sup- plying EMERGENCY issues, and also for securing GOLD for the settlement of foreign balances. Currency and Credit have no essential bearing on the fundamentals of Timocracy except that it op- poses a private monopoly in the issuance of cur- rency as it does all other private monopoly. It advocates a PUBLIC MONOPOLY in the per- formance of this duty, the same as in all other func- tions that offer no reward for private endeavor, as the issuance of the CIRCULATING medium should not. The Government should be its own banker; it should collect no revenue in excess of its own needs, hence should have no funds to deposit in the coffers of favored banks. CHAPTEE VIII Universal Peace: Three Leading Nations Could Establish It: Sentiment of Patriotism Delays It: To Whom Timocracy Should Appeal : The Practica- bility of Timocracy : A Glimpse Into the Future. CHAPTEE VIII PEOPOSITION SEVENTH. That Universal Peace, Industrialism and Produc- tion should be the Universal Policy of All Nations and People. To the above proposition there is scarce an indi- vidual who will dissent. In the language of Benja- min Franklin, " there never was a good war nor a bad peace." This statement is almost absolutely true. "War is a game that kings could not play if men were not fools. " In 1909 more than 70 per cent, of the revenue of the United States of America was spent for past and future wars. It is about as useless to expect universal peace whilst human na- ture is as it now is, as it would be to expect water to flow up hill whilst gravity operates as it now does. If no man would enlist and if none would enforce conscription there could be no armies or navies. The "meek may inherit the earth," but it will not be till all are meek. If war tended more largely than it does to kill off the weaklings or worthless specimens of the human race, its ravages would not 184 TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 185 be so baneful, but the reverse of this is usually the tendency. If three of the leading nations of the earth could agree as to arbitration they could prob- ably enforce all others to arbitrate, and all ques- tions, even those of honor, are arbitrable. But as long as THEEE cannot agree it is useless to expect all to agree. If only the English speaking people of the earth could unite under one govern- ment (as they could do on the basis of Timocratic Equitable Eelativity) they could almost command world- wide peace. The statement that ' ' to preserve peace we must be prepared for war" is unfortu- nately to a great extent true as long as any nation is prepared for war. How, therefore, can any na- tion be prevented from being prepared for war? Either by the voluntary act of its citizens or by the COEECION of other nations. As long as the sentiment of PATEIOTISM trans- cends most all other sentiments no nation's own citizens will prevent it from being in a state of pre- paredness for war to the extent that it is capable of being so prepared. Education along the lines of voluntary AEBITEATION may in time accomplish the much desired end, and certain it is that effort in that direction is most praise-worthy, but the sen- timent of PATEIOTISM is so deep-seated that war and useless GOVEENMENTALISM will for some time consume the life blood of the producer. TO WHOM TIMOCEACY SHOULD APPEAL. Timocracy should appeal to all millionaires who are not monopolists; to merchants and manufac- turers; to farmers and stock raisers; to lawyers, doctors, preachers and professors in fact to all 186 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM citizens who oppose monopoly on the one hand and the mob on the other. Suffragettes could vastly strengthen their cause by proposing equitable in- stead of universal suffrage for both men and women. THE PEACTICABILITY OF TIMOCEACY. The practicability of ever being able to adopt measures akin to those in the foregoing pages is of course a very important matter. People, it is said (neither the masses nor monopolists), will never voluntarily curtail their own power. This is not wholly true. There are hundreds of thousands of voters in the United States who for a few dollars per head would vote for an empire or almost for their own extermination, and multi-millionaires who oppose monopoly. Eightly understood, however, there would be no unjust curtailment of power. Every man and woman would vote who paid $100 per year in residential rent, a part of which repre- sents his or her contribution to governmental sup- port. Those who pay more residential rent or who own their residences would cast more votes, and multi-millionaires, but not monopolists, could and should exist. No just man or woman could reason- ably object to this. Conservatism and prudence are yet in the ascendency in America. There are nearly six million farm owners in the entire country (ex- act numbers census 1900, 5,738,468). There are at least two million large and small owners of town and city property. In New York State, 33% per cent, of the people, in 1900, owned their own homes ; in Massachusetts, 35 per cent.; in Connecticut and Ehode Island, 28.2 per cent.; in the Southern and Western States, 45% per cent, in Texas; 47.7 per TIMOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY 187 cent, in Arkansas ; 59.1 per cent in Kansas, and 71.8 per cent, in Oklahoma represent the average. All these would be benefited by wielding a larger pro- portion of power than they now do. Add to this the fair-minded citizen, who opposes monopoly as he does a prostituted ballot (whether property owning or not, he is a rent payer and consequently would be a voter), at and at least half of the voting popula- tion of the country is fairly comprehended. But whether it be an easy task or not it will never be easier or more practicable. The writer believes it is practicable by organized effort, and this effort should be speedily and energetically put forth first in large cities and then throughout the country at large. If not taken in hand the tendency towards public ownership or socialism will grow and if ever, even partially, established it will cause diminution of production and social degeneration. It will work its own ruin, but it may be temporarily supplanted by a monarchy or an empire. Neither are desirable, but government in the relation of man's contribu- tion to it and of relative excellence is desirable, and would be of practicable application anywhere on earth. If the worth and wealth of the country were resolutely and earnestly organized for the estab- lishment of Timocratic Republicanism or some kin- dred system, Democratic Republicanism would van- ish and would never again be attempted in the civil- ized world until all men are equal in all things that pertain to manhood, which will never occur until this "too, too, solid flesh shall melt, thaw and resolve itself to a dew"; and, since men are unequal, this inequality must be recognized as nearly as possible or the ends of justice will not be subserved or the principle of right be recognized. Not Equality but 188 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM Equitable Relativity is the climax of justice in all things. If Timocratic or kindred organizations were per- fected and placed on practical working bases in all communities, then, if they never accomplished any- thing more, their use as a BALANCE OF POWER would often command respect and recognition and, at times, dictate measures and policies. Tentanda via est The way should be tried. A GLIMPSE INTO THE FUTUEE. Since no human intellect can take into considera- tion all of the multitudinous agencies that prompt human actions, all prophets as far as exact predic- tions are concerned, should be " without honor " everywhere and at all times as they are conceded to be within their own country. However, he who ac- curately considers most of these agencies is most liable to be right. Since the great philosopher (Mr. Herbert Spencer) has predicted that "the tendency toward the dissolution of existing social conditions and a re-organization upon a socialistic basis is irre- sistible" and that this will result in Military Des- potism (which predictions, judging from the tenden- cies since the date of its utterance, appears to be approaching verification) ; and, since Military Des- potism cannot endure, it is interesting to ask in what will the Military Despotism result? Certainly not in the re-establishment of Democratic Republican- ism or so-called equality or Boss Oligarchism, be- cause it will have been demonstrated to result in Socialism and Despotism. Certainly not in Mon- archy which is but a modification of Despotism and which would be disestablished to-day but for the ob- TIMOCEACY VS. DEMOCEACY 189 duracy of habit and aversion to innovation. In what, then, will said Despotism likely result I Equal- ity, the extreme on the one side and Monarchy, the extreme on the other, are both strained and abnor- mal conditions. Relativity is the equilibrium to- wards which nature always tends. Nature does not decree that the Sun and Earth, the Earth and Moon, or any other bodies in the universe that are related to each other, shall revolve around their mutual cen- ters of gravity in equal orbits, but in orbits relative to the mass of each. If this is true of Celestial or Cosmological movements, it must likewise be true of terrestrial or Sociological movements, else, between the cosmos and the socios, a change has been made in nature's operations. If a change, when, where and for what reason has said change taken place? The probabilities are that said tendency toward equilibrium on bases of relativity continues through- out the whole universe, and throughout all times. In social affairs, as has been stated, equitable rela- tivity cannot be practically established on bases of personality, that is, not on qualities of size, strength, education, intellectuality, race, color or previous condition of servitude. In other words it cannot be equitably nor practically determined by what human beings are, hence it must be determined by what they do or by what they own, or by what they use, as the most practicable test of excellence. This, therefore, appears to be the normal resultant or equilibrium between the strained and abnormal con- ditions of so-called equality or Democracy on the one hand and Monarchy on the other. If this be so, why not institute efforts and energy calculated to avert the intermediary stages of socialism and Des- potism. Eeforms are usually the result of revolu- 190 MILLIONISM VS. SOCIALISM tions. The reason for this is the fact that correct- ive measures are not instituted in time. Strained conditions intensify and grow until restraint is im- possible and the social organism becomes ruined. From this chaos, system usually results on bases less strained than those from which revolution re- sulted. No man can prophesy with absolute accu- racy, but such is liable to be the result of existing social tendencies. Timely correctives would likely delay, probably mitigate and possibly prevent such future experiences, but they are liable to be post- poned until the strain becomes too great. Reforms appear to be the children of revolutions, because human beings are yet the children, not the adults of nature. Solar systems evolve slowly, but dissolve quickly. It will be so with social systems until men are wise enough to avert it. THE LIFE OE DEATH OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. Timocracy prophesies that Private Ownership will not live after it has reached monopolistic mag- nitude such as requires Socialistic (or Govern- mental) control of the sub-structure of its business. Monopoly prevents the exercise of Individualism, hence hastens the adoption of Socialism. Timocracy prophesies also, that the Life or Death of Popular Government will depend on the estab- lishment of Equitable Relativity, instead of In- equitable Equality for citizenship and suffrage. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY /This book is DUE on the last date stamped^below. OCT 21 1947 MAY 10 1955 LU 'V. INTER-LIBRARY LOAN APR 131967 LD 21-100m-12,'46(A2012sl6)4120 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY