the various forms which it assumes in the writings of people who allow their sympathies developed exclusively in one direction to override their judgment. General denunciations of "the profit-making instinct” would seem to be equally unwise. On the whole, considering the universality of this instinct, and the benefits which in countless instances it has conferred on the community, it would perhaps be better to prevent its over-development or to turn it into a useful public servant. The Co-operative Movement has not eliminated the instinct, though, as Miss Potter has pointed out, co-operators have made impossible the pursuit of gain apart from the interests of the association. Miss Potter appears to regard the financial advantages of dividends on purchases as a mere advertisement for the democratic control which is associated with, though it does not necessarily follow from, that principle. This is excusable in a study of Co-operation as one form of democratic association. But in the discussion of the Christian Socialist position, the idea of self-government is subordinated to the treatment of the profits of the factory or the workshop. Thus, by eliminating "the profitmaking instinct" in the one case, and bringing it into prominence in the other, the advantages of the present form of Co-operation over that advocated by the Christian Socialists and those who agreed with them, become very apparent. But the merest acquaintance with the average co-operator reveals the keen interest which he takes in the quarterly dividend. Whatever may be the advantages of democratic controland I should be the last to underrate them-it is evident that it is the financial advantages of Co-operation which make it "go." The store has provided for working men the best outlet for that very "profitmaking instinct" which Miss Potter so eloquently condemns. If it could not satisfy that propensity, if it failed to attach the interests, no less than to enlist the sympathies of co-operators, there is no reason for thinking that democratic control would save Co-operation. The dominance of this motive justly excites apprehension as to its future influence on the Co-operative Movement. An association, no less than an individual, may be degraded by a low moral ideal, and may become the source of grave abuses in the community as a whole. The Cooperative Movement is associated with great confidence in the working classes. As long as "divi.-hunting" is so predominant, co-operators may indeed have all credit for sound business management, but the movement cannot arouse those feelings which have been its strength in stormy times. Co-operation exists and draws its life-breath from the competitive system with which it is surrounded. Miss Potter has shown that in all probability it will continue to be so surrounded. Its appeal to the working classes is based on the pecuniary advantages

which will accrue to them by becoming their own shopkeepers, and by keeping in their pockets the saving which can be made by cash payments and the economical management of a large retail trade. But what is there to prevent these advantages from becoming a vanishing quantity? If the present process of consolidation, which may be observed in retail trade, should become more rapid and extensive, it is conceivable that the co-operative margin might be indefinitely diminished, and without assuming any great expansion of productive enterprise on the part of the Wholesale, the pressure brought to bear by an uninstructed profit-making constituency of working men might lead to the oppression of great bodies of workers. At the present time, apart from a mere sentiment, there is nothing to prevent the Wholesale from pandering to their constituents by beating down the wages of their employés, buying in the cheapest market, and selling adulterated goods or shoddy imitations of good wares. Co-operators are by no means so well pleased with the results of the present system as their prosperity might lead one to think. They are alive to the necessity of educating the rank and file, and they have distinguished themselves by their efforts in this direction. But the rank and file do not care for educational schemes. Mr. Holyoake points out that the educational clause is rarely to be found when it has not been included in the original constitution of the Store. It is noteworthy that a society distinguished for its zeal in education is amongst those questionable forms of Co-operation which have provoked Miss Potter's censure. She explains the divergence between congress intentions and co-operative practice by the dominance of the Christian Socialist element in the Co-operative Union, or by imputing a sentimental insincerity to the delegates. Is it not conceivable that the delegates may find it impossible to get their genuine wishes carried into effect by their constituents?

The influence in the Co-operative Movement, of the ideal of selfgoverning factories or workshops, is not to be measured by its practical and apparent results. It has served to commit co-operators to a high standard in the treatment of their employés, and it has helped to nourish in the movement just those qualities which would not be likely to survive the ravages of the "profit-making instinct." This is, perhaps, not much to say in face of the numerous failures which have attended efforts to give effect to the principle. Miss Potter traces these failures in detail, and finds on examination that "the ideal of the Christian Socialists. . . vanishes into an indescribable industrial phantom, which, unlike the texture of real existence, becomes more and more imperceptible with the application of the magnifying-glass." The forms

subsequently assumed by attempts to realize the ideal certainly present some difficulty of classification. She has reduced them to something like systematic form in the useful table which she has constructed. But the ideal is not so indefinite. The idea of associations of producers in industry and commerce was not new when Mr. Ludlow picked up in France a modern application of it. There are some centuries in which we find it in various forms. It is indeed much more in harmony with English traditions and "constitutional" practice than the present. form of Co-operation, if that could be any argument in its favour. We find it in the gilds and in the trading companies, some of which have survived to our own day in a mutilated form-from the small local association to the great Dutch East India Company, where the capital was administered by a court of sixty-five directors, chosen by the different towns of the Republic, each of which elected a number proportionate to its shares in the stock of the association, the amount being determined by that of their respective contributions to the taxes of the State. The gild system came very near that municipal control of industry which Miss Potter recommends as the best solution of the problems of to-day. But with gild and trading association the story is the same. It was neither the self-government nor the "profitmaking instinct" which turned them into oppressive oligarchies, but the existence of these qualities in associations which enjoyed a trade monopoly. Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds originated in revolt. against the municipal control which the working men of those towns must now perchance discover to be the panacea for all their evils. The monopoly of the old associations must be revived, without their beneficial features. Modern adaptations of a mischievous principle would bring the old evils in their train on a grander scale. State or municipal monopoly in the staple industries of the country would mean the renewal of those inter-municipal and international rivalries, which it is to be hoped belong to the past; it would lead to the revival of protection in its worst forms; it would make wholesale corruption the approved method of Parliamentary government; and it would inevitably bring with it the oppression of individuals and the entire check to free enterprise in the interests of the wire-pullers of the municipality or the State. Yet this is the proposed extension of democratic control, the alternative to the Christian Socialist ideal,-proposed, too, after a very effective comparison between the English and the American civil service.

To the Christian Socialist the two theories of Co-operation are not mutually exclusive, but complementary; and he would desire to see experiments in both forms on a larger scale. The present form is

impossible where the consumers are not easily accessible and capable of being organized for purposes of government, and there are narrow limits to productive enterprise on the part of the Wholesale. The present form of Co-operation has only brushed the fringe of the evils of the modern industrial system. Miss Potter has pointed out the need of the trade union to render Co-operation effectual. On the other hand, self-governing, self-employment schemes are impossible in the crude form they have generally assumed, and it remains to be seen in what manner the principle can be applied on a larger scale. It is a problem in factory organization which cannot be solved on the lines of a single movement, or on any one system. There are many forces in industry helping to give back to the workers direct interest and control in the affairs which concern them in their function as producers. These have to be combined and subordinated to the end in view. Rival interests have to be conciliated and harmonized, not irritated into more bitter opposition. We believe now that the gloom which for so long overshadowed the prospects of working men will be finally dispelled; but an industrial democracy, of the kind indicated by Miss. Potter, would be, not the consummation, but the final ruin and overthrow of the hopes we entertain. Under such a system we should miss the qualities which, kept in due subordination, are of the highest importance in the progress of society. The routine of a civil service system is not the final goal of economical development, nor can we have a strong and vigorous democracy where the workers are mere screws or levers in a big machine. For the Christian Socialist, indeed, it is impossible to acquiesce in an ideal which disfranchises the workers, and disqualifies them for direct control in the factory or workshop. An infinitesimal share in an industrial democracy would be poor compensation for the loss of interest in the immediate business of life. It will be found upon analysis that the ideal of the Christian Socialists was not the mere second-hand suggestion of a French writer, but was based on the fundamental principles of the faith which they professed. W. A. S. HEWINS.

NOTES AND MEMORANDA.

PROFESSOR MARSHALL'S "PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS." 1 - The universal chorus of commendation which greeted the first appearance of Professor Marshall's most important and valuable contribution to economic science, has forestalled any expression of surprise that a second edition should be so soon demanded. The present volume bears every evidence of conscientious and painstaking revision. It is true that the actual changes that have been made in the original text consist only in points of detail and in a fresh arrangement of certain sections, and do not represent any substantial variation from the conclusions of the first edition. Here and there a master-hand has been at work to bring out more firmly and explicitly the solution of some puzzling problem, or to guard against the danger of misunderstanding, in however slight a degree, the true proportion and symmetry of the perplexing science to which Professor Marshall has devoted his remarkable genius with such ungrudging labour.

"The most important alteration," as we learn from the new preface, "is the fusion of the old Books V. and VI., together with some additional matter, into the present Book V.; the chief purpose of the change being to throw further light on the position held by the element of Time in economics, and to show more clearly how Time modifies the reciprocal influences of the earnings of workers and the prices of goods made by them." And, following out this same subject, some chapters of the old Book VII. (now become Book VI.) have been rearranged and partly rewritten. These modifications "aim at emphasizing and defining more fully the distinguishing characteristics of the broad problem of Distribution as contrasted with questions relating to the values of particular things; and at showing more clearly how, though the causes that govern demand and those that govern supply can be studied separately, in the case of any single commodity, yet this cannot be done for the agents of production as a whole." Again, in Book III. an important new chapter has been added, which has in view "the

1 Principles of Economics. By Alfred Marshall, Professor of Political Economy in the University of Cambridge. Vol. i. Second edition. [xvi., 770 pp. 8vo. 12s. 6d. net. Macmillan. London, 1891.]