reasoned and conscientious demand for a thoughtless and irresponsible one. Some goods would be less in demand, others more; the great massthose which feed, clothe, and house the nationwould remain very much unchanged. Anyone may estimate for himself what would be the effect of rationalising his own consumption or might, perhaps, arrive at a more impartial conclusion by suggesting how he would rationalise the consumption of his friends. Anyhow, it would be nothing like the revolution of demand which began with the war, when the rapid accommodation of supply to the new needs confirmed me in the practicability of my proposals. Some vested interests would suffer, others would gain; that is all. And we may remember that, on every reform, some interests have suffered; but so long as the cry of those who were hurt was not politically powerful nobody paid any attention.

I suggest no departure from "economic conduct" unless the "economic" is conceived as the "automatic." It is true that Demand, as we generally know it, is almost automatic-men and, particularly, women demand what they think cheap. That this motive is very general, I should be the last to deny-an economist takes human nature as it is. But the general sympathy shown with Sweating Exhibitions shows that great multi

tudes at least would not buy goods if they knew that such goods were made by sweated labour.

"

It appeals to me because here is a sphere where every man who has more than what he considers a "living wage may find a field for the moral life. Realising, I hope, with me, that the prerequisite of better distribution is more production, and that the common-sense cure of poverty is more wealth or making wealth go further, he need not leave reform to those who are paid to be reformers, or to "capitalists" who are supposed to have money in their pockets sufficient to raise wages, or to the State, that impersonation of ourselves, which is fair game for robbery, and yet is considered to be the great source of healing, but may give an earnest of his zeal by setting his own house in order.

CHAPTER VI

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE EMPLOYER

If, however, we ask ourselves how far the Reconstruction of Demand, which would come by introducing the elements of conscience into consumption, would go to meet the evils which presented themselves in early chapters, we should have to confess to disappointment.

What it would do is to increase wealth and make it go further. By checking waste, it would vastly increase the amount available for human consumption, and, by demanding the right sort of wealth, much that is now consumed immediately and passes out of existence in the mere selfish satisfaction of the individual would be "socialised,” either in the way of spreading the use of it over circles and successors, or in the way of putting it back into the national capital, yielding no money income, but giving a real "income of benefit " to the community-such as is done when a private estate is left at death for a public park.

And the reflex influence on the consumers of carrying out a moral purpose in the common dayto-day life of spending their income, would, of course, be very great.

But, as regards the other part of every-day life, the making of that income, it would not make the occupations of men generally better worthy the energies of men-except, indeed, in so far as it prevented the discouragement and depression of feeling that they were spending their lives in making things that would better be left unmade.1

In short, the reconstruction of Demand is not enough. To complement it, and to meet the evils emphasised in my third chapter, there must be some reconstruction in the other "pillar in the arch of value," namely, Supply.

But here we cannot appeal to the whole body of producers as we did to the whole body of consumers, for the great majority only obey, and must obey orders, and have no voice in the matter. We can only appeal to their leaders, those who take up the challenge of Demand and organise labour and capital to meet it in larger or smaller units, the Employing Class. And here,

1 It was found in the old poor-law days that, when paupers were sent errands to deliver parcels, and found that they were being "employed " in carrying stones, they bitterly resented it as an insult to their humanity.

K

I am afraid, I have to ask more of those who control production than I did of those who guide consumption.

In all ages, educated persons have regarded their private wealth as a trust." However much birth, and its prejudices, and peculiar ideas about Providence have blinded them, they have not been conceited enough to suppose that the whole evolution of history took place for their peculiar benefit. If they held land, and particularly if they were honest enough to enquire into their title deeds and ask how the necessary source of all living came to pass into their exclusive" holding," they recognised that they had not "made" the land; that they were not absolute owners, but tenants at will, holding a lease for life from Almighty God, responsible, like their own farmers, for handing over their lands to the next life-tenant in as good a condition as they got them. If they had wealth generally, they recognised, it is to be hoped as clearly, that they had not "made" it, but acquired it, at least by the co-operation of others, and, as the very continuance in existence of that wealth depended on other men taking it over from them, and reproducing it by using it productively, they could not regard themselves as absolute owners, but, equally, tenants for life.