Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 4.djvu/113

 REVIEWS 97

workman dresses well, enjoys good food, and has many amusements. His standard of life is highest of all workmen. There are very great differences of income, but the workmen have had a good share of all gains, and the improvements in transportation, schools, lighting, streets, and other public wealth are shared by them. This progress is due to science, invention, management, and labor, and each has reaped a benefit.

In order to meet the power of employers on better terms, the workmen have formed trade unions, and, in order to provide for emer- gencies, they have associated themselves in mutual-benefit societies. There are advantages and disadvantages in unions, but they cannot be repressed ; they must be recognized, and they should be made legally responsible for their use of power. The outlook for schemes of arbi- tration and conciliation is not altogether hopeful, but they are worthy of consideration.

The "protective system" of tariffs is not regarded by the author as helpful to wage-earners. Charity and public relief are treated as pal- liatives, not as remedies. Patronage is not congenial to the American spirit. Profit-sharing has not been very successful. Cooperation has been carried forward chiefly in building and loan associations, while in societies for consumers or producers comparatively little progress has been made.

Socialism is defined and condemned. The author believes that the teachings by which it is propagated in America are dangerous and should be met by argument. The rapid rise of great fortunes, and the isolation of industrial classes in two hostile camps, tend to endanger social order. The problem of state intervention is pressing and diffi- cult. Socialists urge extension of state functions as a stage in the way to final absorption of all business by government. The degree of intervention must be determined by convenience, not by general theory. Factory legislation is needed to protect the health of work- men, but it should not interfere with the liberty of capitalist managers. The hours of labor should not be fixed by law, but by free agreements, and trade unions may help to secure shorter hours. It is entirely legitimate to regulate the housing of the people by law.

Professor Levasseur criticises Professor Ely for confusing morals with political economy. They are separate sciences, but do not con- flict. "It is an error, propagated in America as in Europe by reform- ers, that political economy is a science without compassion, because it studies economic facts and laws, and does not construct seductive