Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 2.djvu/484

 47 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

of the extension of that very system of credit which they invented to satisfy their needs. Although the volume of credit is gigantic, the basis upon which it rests is so narrow that it may be manipulated by a handful of men. That basis is gold. In gold debts must be paid ; therefore when gold is withdrawn the debtor is helpless, and becomes the servant of his master" (p. 292).

On page 289 the " crime of '73 " appears in a somewhat new light :

" These bankers conceived a policy unrivaled in brilliancy which made them masters of all commerce, industry, and trade. They engrossed the gold of the world, and then, by legislation, made it the sole measure of values. What Samuel Lloyd and his followers did to England in 1847 became possible for his successors to do to all the gold-standard nations in 1873. When the mints had been closed to silver, the currency being inelastic, the value of money could be man- ipulated like that of any article limited in quantity, and thus the human race became the subjects of the new aristocracy which represented the stored energy of mankind."

Mr. Adams does not follow his doctrine through to its application. He need not. The application lies on the surface. If we are at the culmination of an epoch of hoarding, and to the stringencies and dis- tresses of the period there is to be no relief, save as we enter the period when those who have not take by violence from those who have the results of their spoliation, then it follows as a matter of duty, if the word might be allowed in Mr. Adams' system, we must hasten the era of redistribution, or, in other words, the new era of plunder. W T e must preach the Gospel of Plunder as the application of what Mr. Carlyle would call the "Gospel of Dirt."

These gloomy doctrines the author professes to draw from history, and if we once admit his method we may admit his results. He treats history as a sort of conjurer's hat, the capacity of which in producing startling effects is limited only by the fancy of the prestidigitator. There is, however, this interesting difference between the ordinary conjurer and Mr. Adams. The conjurer knows his hat. Mr. Adams does not. In the chapter on "Modern Centralization," in which the author recounts the succession of recent economic movements, how- ever we may take issue with his deductions, in the statement of fact he is generally accurate. But in treating the Middle Ages the author's knowledge of facts appears not only superficial but limited. So long as he adheres to Mommsen, Fustel de Coulanges, or Luchaire he is safe