the way of tariffs on goods imported and consumed by workers and part
by direct taxation on the products of labor and even on the means and
appliances—tools shops and factories—by which wealth was produced.
This mode of taxation they said was, as far as it went, a ban placed
upon industry and a penalty upon the creation of wealth. They proposed
therefore to take all the taxes off from the products of labor and seize
the rents of land or so much of them as might be required for the support
of the government, in that way getting the interest on the increase in
the value of the land that had taken place since it passed into private
hands and which they denominated “unearned increment.” This agitation
began in your day—you must remember it.”

The expression “in your day” had at first a singular effect on me. I
had quite unconsciously but thoroughly entered into the spirit of the
Professor’s method and had gone forward with him to the year 2,000
and followed closely his discussion of things that happened 100 years
ago—from that standpoint. The sudden realization that my day had gone by,
was startling—“Yes,” I said to myself, “that is so, ‘my day’ has gone
by, my existence has been continued over a space during which I have not
lived. Memory has nothing to say of it. It is as if I had slept it away.
Well if one is asleep, one day to him, is as 1,000 years—aye, eternity!

“What can hurt him who is asleep? Nothing, unless it wakes him up.”

All this flashed through my brain in an instant and then my attention
suddenly returned to what the Professor had been saying. “Remember it?
Yes I remember it well. In my day there was a society in Minneapolis
called, I think the Single Tax League, devoted to this agitation. Their
ideas were those of Henry George, as set forth by him in his able book
called: ‘Progress and Poverty.’”

“Yes, well, to the labors of this persistent and aggressive society
are to be attributed in a great measure, the radical change in ideas
of political economy that soon came about. After much discussion,
petitioning of the legislature, agitation in the newspapers, the
organisation of auxiliary societies, the presentation of the subject in
labor associations etc., the working classes in the cities and even the
landless laborers on farms were persuaded that their interests lay in
the abolition of all taxes, except those on land. It was not long before
these classes constituted a majority by reason of the rapid growth of
the cities. As soon as they found themselves in power, they proceeded
to get the constitution of the state amended to enable the legislature
to release all classes from taxation except those who possessed land.
In your day, about half the taxes had been raised from land and the
other half from the buildings and improvements on the land and from
personal property. It was estimated that relieving the latter half, would
simply double the tax on land and so make it about four per cent on its
valuation. It was argued that the farmer would experience no change at
all, because the additional tax put upon his land would no more than
equal that taken off his houses, barns, stock and tools. The only persons
who would lose by the single tax would be the speculators, who held
unimproved land and were waiting for the labor and improvements of their
neighbors to raise its value, so they could sell out and get an increase
in value which they had done nothing to earn. As these people were looked
upon as a sort of parasites, they were not regarded as having any rights
in the matter that need to be respected. All that was necessary in
their case was simply to out-vote them. The benefits of the new system
it was expected would fall upon the industrial classes especially and
directly, but would be shared by all. Manufacturing industries relieved
of the repression of taxation, would bound forward like a spring suddenly
released. Nothing would any longer artificially limit the production of
wealth and the great stimulation it would receive would result in making
even articles of luxury so common as to place them within the reach of
everyone.

“The land speculating class, while admitting that the rest of the people
would be benefitted by the single tax, claimed that it would be done at
their expense and unjustly. They had bought the land and paid for it and
the state had got the money. With this money, and the interest on it, the
state had built the university, the state capitol, the penitentiary, the
charitable institutions and innumerable school houses. In other words,
they had given the state the interest on their money and taken in lieu
of it the anticipated increase in the value of the land. Moreover, they
had paid taxes on the land as they would have done on the money, if
they had retained it. And so they maintained that the increment in the
value of the land was not unearned. It was simply the interest on their
money which would have brought a like profit if it had been invested in
mining manufacturing, banking or steamboating. They admitted that in some
cases this profit had been greater than that derived from other sorts
of investments, but in many cases it was far less. They said the single
tax meant a confiscation of the land and the resumption of it by the
state that had once sold it; because it would very soon, if not from the
first, take the entire amount of the rent which would make the fee of the
land worthless to the owner. It would no longer be possible to mortgage
it or to sell it and the owner would lose his investment and be reduced
to a mere tenant, who could hold it only as long as he paid the rent to
the state the same as any other tenant, and if it were unimproved, the
owner would have no inducement to pay the rent and would simply abandon
it. In view of that, they said, that the state should at least pay back
the purchase money it had received with interest at the rates prevalent
during the time that she had possessed it, or failing that, she should
postpone so radical a change or make it gradual by annually increasing
the assessment upon land and diminishing it upon other property, and thus
consume at least thirty years in making the transfer complete.

“The impatience of the tax reformers would not allow any such
postponement as this. They said they did not propose to wait a whole
generation to have this wrong made right.

“They said the state never had any right to sell the land in the first
place. The people’s ownership therein was inalienable and any pretended
sale was void the same as the sale of the property of a minor for taxes,
or the sale of a stolen horse. The real owner had a right to take his
property wherever he could find it, without compensation to the pretended
owner who happened to be in possession as a party to a fraudulent sale.
So they held that the people could take possession of their land if they
saw fit, but they agreed that it would be better policy, to leave the
claimants in possession and merely take all the rents except a small
percentage to be left in the hands of the claimants as compensation to
them for collecting and paying over said rents to the state. These rents
moreover were to be called taxes instead of rents.

“The majority having without serious effort brought about a
reconciliation between their logic and their interests, proceeded to
put their conclusions into operation. The constitution of Minnesota was
amended in due course and the new plan put into execution with much
growling and protest on the part of the land owners, but without violence
or serious trouble, all the rest of the country looking on with great
curiosity.

“The effects very soon began to show themselves. Nearly the whole tax
being removed from shops and factories, profits and manufacturing
became at once very considerably enhanced. This induced numbers of
manufacturers to emigrate from other states and from Europe to Minnesota,
and so the population and wealth of the cities increased with unexampled
rapidity. By the year 1925, the population of Minneapolis had reached
1,780,000 and that of St. Paul, was over half as great.”

“Then,” said I, “the cities must have grown solidly together and formed a
continuous town.”

“Not at all,” he replied, “University and Como avenues, became continuous
streets, with good residences. But both cities became compactly built up
with tall and substantial buildings for offices, dwellings and factories.
Nearly everybody that paid rent lived in flats. These buildings were ten
to 16 stories high, fire proof, furnished with elevators, electric heat
and light. In connection with many of them, were cook shops, in which
the tenants could get their provisions cooked at cheaper rates than they
could do it themselves, and save their own time for other employment. A
great many women who in your day, would have been kept at home all day
to cook the meals for a small family were enabled to seek profitable
employment in various kinds of shops factories and offices, or had their
time for recreation or leisure.

“Cooking became a regular profession and people no longer cooked
for themselves to any greater extent than they doctored themselves.
Kindergartens were likewise attached to these great co-operative
dwellings, in which those too young to go to school, were looked after in
the absence of their parents.

“As mechanics and people of moderate incomes could live not only
cheaper, but far better in these buildings, than in separate homes at
long distances from the business and industrial centers, as well as
enjoying far better opportunities for society amusement etc., they soon
came to adopt that sort of life exclusively and separate residences
continued to be maintained only by the rich. The growth of the cities
continued for many years to be confined to the large spaces that in your
day were left vacant far within the corporate limits. People owning
such property, were anxious to get it improved so as to get their taxes
back in the rents of buildings. Those owing suburban lands and lots
soon found that it would be useless to improve them as people would not
occupy them till all the more central lots were occupied. Much dispute
arose as to the way in which such property should be taxed. At first the
assessments of valuation on the lands were as high, as they had been
before the adoption of the single tax plan. But it was soon found that
the land no longer possessed such value. The value had been prospective
or speculative, and people had paid as tax far more than the land would
rent for, and held it and paid taxes on it for what it was expected to
bring in the future. But now so much of the speculative value was taken
out of this suburban land that the owners refused to pay the taxes in
many cases, and nobody would buy it at the tax sales because the tax was
more than the rent for agricultural purposes, and to buy for the future
was like leasing property and paying rent on it for some years before
occupying it.”

“But,” I interposed, “the single tax people in Minneapolis disclaimed the
intention of taking a full rental of the land in the way of taxes, but
only enough to support the government, and thought that four per cent of
its value would do that. As money was then worth 6 per cent and rents
would average about the same the owner would clear 2 per cent. This they
said would be sufficient to make the owner retain his interest in the
property.”

“Yes,” he answered, “that was their notion, but the events turned out
very differently.

“When the tax was two per cent and the rents, six per cent, the owner
got clear the equivalent of six per cent on two thirds of the value of
the property. But when the tax was increased to 4 per cent, he got the
equivalent of six per cent on only one third of it. Thus his net income
being reduced to one-half of what it was, the selling and buying value of
the land was likewise reduced one-half. This made no difference to the
tenant paying rent, he still had to pay the same, but, two-thirds instead
of one-third now went to the state. But within the corporate limits
of Minneapolis, St. Paul and other cities, there was a great amount
of unused land, that produced no rent. This unused land constituted
about three-fourths of the total areas of those cities and represented
one-third of their total land valuation. The very first assessment of
the new tax was the signal for the reduction in the value of all this
property, fifty per cent or more at once, and every acre was immediately
thrown upon the market. By the time of the next assessment the assessors
were obliged to recognize this depreciation, and so all this land was
returned at half or less than half of what it had been. The loss of
tax money thus sustained had to be made up by a higher rate, and the
second levy was placed at 5 per cent instead of 4 per cent. This worked
a further reduction in the values of unoccupied lots and by the time of
the third assessment these lots were estimated as having only the value
of farm or garden lands; and so it became necessary to still further
increase the rate of taxation, which was now established at six per cent.

“In the meantime it began to be discovered that the owners of improved
lots had lost all the money they had invested in them. A certain person
who had bought a lot on Nicollet ave., for $40,000 and erected a building
on it at a cost of $40,000 more, did not for two or three years discover
any great difference in his tax, because although it was transferred
from the building to the lot the whole amount was nearly the same. But
after the tax assessment reached six per cent, the building was burned
down just after the expiration of the insurance policy. The gentleman
thought he had lost half of his property by neglecting the insurance,
but in reality, he had lost it about all. He could not mortgage the lot
for enough to build a house, nor even for enough to pay one year’s tax.
Nor could he sell it for one-tenth of what he gave. It was his only on
condition that he continued to pay a full rent for it and this he could
not do unless he could rebuild. Even if he rebuilt, his net income would
be only the interest on the cost of the building, he would get no return
for the lot, or at best, but little. Thus the owner found himself no
better off than a lease holder. He simply had the first right to pay
the rent for his lot in the way of tax. And so it came about that if an
owner could not immediately build something on his lot that he could
rent to advantage, he simply defaulted on his taxes. The selling of
vacant property for taxes became impossible except those lots wanted for
immediate improvement, and not even those if several years’ taxes were in
arrears. So the collection of back taxes became impossible on all vacant
property.

“The effect of the single tax on farming land was much the same. Not
over seven-tenths of the arable land in the state was under actual
cultivation. Large tracts were held by nonresident speculators. When
the increased tax came to be levied, these lands were all thrown on the
market. The depreciation in prices of these lands at first brought a
considerable access of population, but this soon became checked, because
the farmers found that on account of the loss of taxes on these lands,
the rates had to be increased and the additional burden fell on the
resident farmers. These in almost all cases owned considerable land they
did not cultivate, but were saving for speculation or for their children.
Often a farmer owing 160 acres, cultivated, but 40. As the burdens fell
heavier on this class, they commenced throwing up the uncultivated parts
of their farms, so that from these various causes in a few years almost
three-fourths of the arable land was without claimants, and of course
yielded no taxes. The farmers, then found themselves greatly reduced in
wealth, the lands they had counted on as belonging to them, now being
thrown out as commons; and even for the acres they cultivated they paid
more in the way of taxes than would have been considered a fair rent
in Wisconsin or Iowa. Their net wealth was in fact reduced to their
buildings, live stock, and tools.

“The lands themselves, they could neither sell nor mortgage. It was
not practicable under these conditions to compete with the farmers in
adjoining states, and so in a few years, the markets of Minneapolis and
St. Paul came to be supplied chiefly from adjoining states. Many of the
farmers ruined and disgusted, gathered up what they could and left the
state. Others moved into the cities, which were booming, and went into
other business.

“There now began to come into the rural districts of the state, two
classes of settlers or rather occupants of a different character. The
first of these were drovers with herds of cattle from adjoining states.
They drove their cattle about from place to place, over the abandoned
lands, but never settled anywhere and as cattle were not taxable, and
they claimed no land, they paid no taxes. They also escaped taxes at
their legitimate homes in other states, because their cattle were
conveniently away at assessing time.

“The other class of new occupants that came in, were poor squatters.
These brought little or no capital, and no enterprise or ambition beyond
enough to supply the essentials of existence. A family of this kind
would alight on an unoccupied spot, construct a cabin or a dug-out,
cultivate four or five acres of grain and potatoes, and eke out the
rest of a living with a few cows and pigs. Little or no tax could be
collected from them, and of course little or no public improvements, such
as schools, bridges, roads etc., were accomplished where they squatted
in any considerable force. In short, it gradually came about that the
inhabitants of the rural districts did but little more than sustain
themselves. And the state ceased almost entirely to be an exporter of
agricultural products. The cities however suffered nothing on this
account. They got their supplies largely from the neighboring states,
and they became large producers and exporters of manufactured articles,
competing in that respect with some of the famous manufacturing towns of
Europe; and they became enormously wealthy.

“The question of taxation was however always a difficult one. The lands
near the centers of the towns of course were the most valuable. But lands
were never sold—only the buildings—and any given lot came to be valued
by the kind of building and the amount of business on it. So assessments
finally had to be fixed by an arbitrary rule—the rates decreasing at a
fixed ratio according to distance from the center of greatest business
activity. The rule had a tendency to verify itself by compelling the
most valuable business to be done in the places subject to the highest
rates, since the less valuable could not afford it. By this rule the
rates in the suburbs were low, and since the buildings paid no tax, it
often happened that a millionaire living in a $100,000 house paid little,
if any more than a laborer living in a $300 shanty. But in the course
of time it came to pass that notwithstanding the general prosperity,
there were many who were wretchedly poor, made so by bad management,
extravagance, indolence, ill health, dissipated habits, disappointment
and ill luck. These became squatters in the vacant lands around the
outskirts of the cities. They paid no rent and no taxes. It was found
that it was useless to evict them as nobody could be found with money
who could gain anything by paying their taxes, as long as there was
plenty of unoccupied land. There also came to be a positive sentiment
against eviction of the poor and so this non tax-paying class constantly
increased and finally included many who were able to pay, but who shirked
out, satisfying their consciences by the plea that the government had
no right to discriminate, and exempt some and not others. These ideas
expanded and finally crystallized into a political creed to the effect
that a poor man ought not to be taxed for a spot on which to exist and
bring up his family. Thus it came about that neither the very poor; nor
the very rich whose property was chiefly in fine buildings, stocks, bonds
and other personal effects, paid any considerable amount of the taxes.

“The taxes were paid by such of the farmers as had still too valuable
improvements to justify their abandonment, and by the mechanics and
merchants whose business and whose residences were packed in tall
buildings on small areas of ground in the cities.

“The great stimulation of the growth of the Minnesota cities, and their
apparently great prosperity, attracted the attention of the whole world
and aroused the spirit of emulation in the cities of the United States
and of the northern states in particular. In most of the northern states,
the city populations controlled the politics of the states, and there
developed a violent mania for following the example of Minnesota. There
was much opposition from the conservative classes, and the people were
warned that a policy that might benefit a small section of the nation,
was not necessarily good for all. But it was held by many to be simply a
measure of self defense for cities to compel their states to adopt the
single tax, since those where this was done, not merely flourished, but
flourished at the expense of those who remained under the old method. For
they attracted from them, their manufacturing establishments and this was
naturally followed by their wholesale trade. The result was that in a few
years, all the northern states and several of the southern states adopted
the single tax. The effect was not so marked in those that came into the
plan among the last; but the first experienced much the same stimulation
and rapid growth that distinguished the Minnesota towns, so that in a
few years the majority of the population had crowded into the cities.
This effect was brought about by the action of two causes. The first
cause was the superior attractions of the cities as places for profitable
employment and as places for the enjoyment of life. The cities rapidly
became socialistic in their policy, and constantly extended the scope
of the functions of the government. The municipality soon acquired the
ownership of the lighting plants, the water works and street car lines.
These were run at first as speculative enterprises, the cities selling
light and water to private individuals, but the people soon demanded that
these things should be free as the public libraries, schools, university
and parks, were in your day. And this was gradually brought about, the
cities furnishing at first so much water and so much light and so many
street car rides free to each person, and at last taking off all limits,
only making the citizen responsible for unreasonable waste. Then the
populace demanded free amusements and entertainments and these were
provided in the form of the concert, lecture, theater, circus etc. All
these things cost money and the tax rates kept getting higher and higher.
These were paid in the form of rents on the land, the buildings stood on
and of course at once transferred to the rents paid by tenants for rooms,
flats, shops, stores etc. Rents soon became higher than they had ever
been known before the adoption of the single tax. To lighten these rents
in the cities, it was now proposed to increase the rents of lands in the
country.”

CHAPTER VI.

Confiscation of Lands.

“The former owners of these lands had now been practically dispossessed.
Many of them had gone to the cities and engaged in more profitable
business than farming. Many who were mortgaged had been sold out,
bankrupted and ruined, and had settled down into the condition of
peasants. The lands were now regarded as the property of the state.
This process of the transfer of the lands to the state went further in
Minnesota than the other states, because she was the first to adopt the
new plan of taxation. After the other states adopted it, the advantage
their farmers had over those of Minnesota was lost. Rents under the name
of taxes were levied, farming rendered unprofitable and the uncultivated
portions of the land abandoned by their owners. The few southern states
that did not go into this new plan could not reap much advantage from
their position, because their products were different from those of
the northern states and could not replace those whose cultivation was
repressed.

“Agricultural products fell off to such an extent, that in a few years
the United States ceased to be an exporter of them. The cities having
gained control of the states, it came to be a political theory that
each state was a community, and that the lands abandoned or forfeited
for taxes belonged to the Community and therefore came indirectly under
the control of the cities. From this position it was an easy step to the
idea that the taxes—or rents as they were designated—of the “people’s
lands” might be spent where most beneficial to the majority, that is, in
the cities. It was attempted to be pointed out by the more conservative
that this was class legislation. But the radical progressives replied
that it was in line with the theory of the single tax which was class
legislation if anything could be. And they asserted that the adoption of
the single tax carried with it an endorsement of the principle of class
legislation when demanded by the interests of the majority. Whether their
reasoning was sound or not they carried the day, and a great stride was
taken toward the centralization of power and population. It now happened
that when more money was wanted it was raised, not by increasing the
rents of city lots, but those of farming lands, and after a time the
principle revenues came to be derived from them. Although the exportation
of grain, flour, beef etc., had practically ceased, still the people
had to eat and their food had to be raised on the land. The business of
farming gradually took on entirely new features. Large operators took
large tracts on lease from the state at prices determined periodically
by appraisement fixed in proportion to the needs of the state. Lands
taken on these terms were guaranteed to be kept free from the competition
of squatters, so that the lands remaining vacant were cleared of
squatters, or else the latter were restricted to a mere garden patch.
Thus the country was no longer occupied by farmers residing on the lands
with their families as in former times. The agricultural districts were
inhabited only by a poor and thriftless class of peasants and during the
summers by the employes of the large contract farmers who made their
headquarters and resided with their families in the cities. In the
winter, only such hands as were required to care for the stock remained
in the country, the rest all flocking to the towns.

“One result of the increased rentals charged for the agricultural lands
appears not to have been anticipated. That was the great rise in the cost
of food. Of course the rents of the lands were simply added to the cost
of the production of grain and other foods, and finally were paid by the
consumer. It came to be seen after a time that the public revenues raised
out of the agricultural lands were finally paid by all the people in
proportion—not to their wealth or ability, but to their appetites and the
amount they consumed—so that a laboring man with a vigorous appetite paid
more to support the state than a dyspeptic millionaire. And a poor man’s
family of six or eight ravenous offspring contributed many times as much
as the scanty and sickly progeny of the exclusive aristocrat. It speedily
became a cause of great dissatisfaction and disappointment when the poor
and the working classes found out that the fine promises of the single
tax had so far failed that instead of lightening their burdens it had
increased them. And that the confiscation of the lands of the farmers
instead of adding to the prosperity of the common people had increased
the already plethoric wealth of the rich. A school of politicians now
arose who declared that the taxation of land was the taxation of the
poor man’s bread and butter and was all wrong. Instead of farming land
paying the bulk of the taxes they said it ought not to pay any. Every
facility and encouragement ought to be given for the production of cheap
food. People ought not to be taxed on what they consume, but on what
they save. Neither labor nor the laborer should be taxed, they should be
made as free and unhampered as possible for the production of wealth.
But when wealth was once produced then it should be taxed wherever found
and a necessary portion of it taken as the revenue of the state. The
laboring classes were in a mood to listen to this logic whether sound or
not. The lands having passed out of private hands, however, there was
no disposition to allow them to pass back to them again. And the new
party advocated state superintendence of the lands and free occupancy by
private individuals of such amounts as each could actually cultivate to
advantage. As the population and demand for land increased, the amounts
allotted to individuals was to be cut down proportionally, and a grade
or standard of cultivation and quantity of production was to be exacted,
and the state was to fix the prices at which the products were to be
sold. Eventually it was proposed that the state should be the purchaser
and distributor of these products so that speculation in them should be
prevented. The advantage possessed by some on account of their nearness
to market would be equalized by the state paying a less rate for their
products than for those further away.

“Taxes for revenue were then to be levied upon every piece of personal
property that could be found of every sort whatever including buildings.
In the cities a graded rent for lots was to be assessed according to
locality, beginning at zero in the vacant suburbs and increasing toward
the center of greatest activity and demand. A thoroughness in assessment
and the employment of methods that were called by their critics,
“odiously inquisitorial,” were to be adopted, but the fact was the mass
of the people were drifting rapidly toward socialism in their ideas, and
they asserted that the “inquisitorial methods” were alright. They said,
it was high time to know how much wealth people had and how they came
by it, and that reluctance to tell on the part of the possessors of it
indicated that either they had acquired it by questionable methods, or
wished to avoid the fair responsibility, that its ownership entailed.
They went further and declared it was high time that more scientific
processes were discovered and put into practice for the equitable
distribution of wealth. A thousand men contribute to the production
of $1,000,000 of wealth, all of which is gobbled up in a few weeks or
months by the scheming of a single “financier.” The board of directors
of a railroad, a mining company or a manufacturing company, may issue to
themselves certificates of watered stock for which they pay not a cent,
and which represent wealth having no existence, but which they are in a
position to compel the public to make good. A gang of speculators may get
up a corner on wheat or cotton or stocks of some sort and artificially
raise the price while they unload at the advanced rate thereby securing
wealth they never earned. Combinations and trusts in oil or sugar,
screws, nails, coal, whisky, gas-pipes or binding twine, arbitrarily
advance the price of the articles whenever they want more money, and thus
take as many thousands or millions from that patient ass, the public, as
they see fit without a pretense of returning an equivalent. All these
things the politicians of the new school declared must be stopped. They
said people should not be allowed to secure wealth without in some way
earning it, and if they had managed to secure it without rendering an
equivalent for it, it would be no more than right to confiscate it for
the benefit of the public at whose expense it must have been acquired.
The party advocating these ideas rapidly came into power and proceeded
to put their views into practice. It was found after much discussion and
some experimenting that people would not work and do their best unless
they were paid better for their best than for their worst. The experiment
of making the state the buyer and wholesale seller of all articles that
could be made the subjects of combines and trusts was found to work well.
The state did not at first undertake to manufacture or produce anything,
but monopolized its transfer from producer to consumer. For example the
producers of anthracite coal were required to sell their product to
the government, and it was unlawful for them to sell to anyone else.
The price of mining, handling and transportation and the selling rate
were each fixed by a board of arbitration and remained fixed till the
conditions changed. There was no such thing as striking among the hands,
for if they were dissatisfied all they could do was to leave and allow
others to take their places. If no others were willing to do the work it
was an indication that the rate was too low and the board of arbitration
raised it. It had been settled before this that the mine owner had no
royalty rights. These were regarded as the property of the state. So if
the mine owners attempted to combine to raise the price to the state or
from perverseness refused to furnish the amount required their properties
were placed by the state in the hands of receivers to be worked till such
time as the matters in dispute were regulated.

“Other mining industries, and the production of coal-oil, sugar and
other articles capable of control by trusts, were regulated and handled
in similar manner by the state. As to railroad, telegraph and express
properties, they all passed into direct government ownership before the
middle of the twentieth century.”

The Professor pausing here for a moment to shift his profile, I ventured
to say that I had in my day anticipated this move on the part of the
government, but many people had been unable to see how it could be
carried into effect without simple confiscation, because they said it
would bankrupt the country to buy the roads etc., and pay their value
for them.

“There was no difficulty at all in the matter,” the Professor continued,
“the owners of the roads received for them all they were worth, and yet
they did not cost the country a dollar. First the government had the
roads appraised on a capitalized basis, in which account was taken of the
actual value in cash of the property as it stood regardless of the amount
of stock and bonds outstanding against it. Next, account was taken of its
power to earn money.

“The government now provided for the issue of consolidated railway bonds
guaranteed by the government. These all bore the same rate of interest,
three per cent payable annually. They were in five series, due in 20, 40,
60, 80 and 100 years respectively, an equal amount of each. They were in
denominations of $20.00, $50.00, $100.00, and $1,000, with coupons for
the interest attached, the lower denominations payable at the earlier
dates.

“These bonds were issued in exchange for the railway securities on the
following terms. Bonds at their face value were allotted to each road to
the amount of its estimated cash value, plus its net earnings for that
one year next preceding the passage of the act of purchase. Many roads
earned only enough to pay their running expenses, and these received
only the amount of their appraised valuation. For the purpose of the
distribution of the allotment of the purchase bonds to the holders of
the railway securities in any given case, account was taken of the
market quotations of the several sorts of stocks and bonds at a date
one year previous to the act of purchase, and the value of each person’s
holding thus ascertained. Then the purchase bonds were distributed to the
individuals pro rata to these values. When seven-tenths in interest of
the proprietors of any road accepted the terms of the government purchase
the other three-tenths were obliged to accede or lose their interests.

“A few roads held out for a short time, but after the ice was broken
they all at once became eager to transfer their properties to the
government. The railway consols at once became popular and were rated
above par, the government guaranty making them in reality national
bonds. A new cabinet office—secretary of transportation—was created. All
the employes on the roads from the superintendents of transportation
down, held their places under civil service rules, and this branch
of the administration never came under political conditions, but was
managed upon strictly business principles like the post office. The
income from the roads, from the very first year not only paid the
interest on the railroad consols, but yielded a handsome surplus that
was annually laid aside in safe investments to serve as a sinking fund
for the redemption and cancellation of the bonds as they should mature.
Before the end of the twentieth century one-half of these bonds had been
retired and great reductions had been made in passenger and freight
rates and the service had vastly improved over what it was in your day.
Strikes, freight and passenger rate wars with their terrific waste and
demoralization of business were things of the long past. Many other leaks
of railway earnings were stopped when the roads became the property of
the government. Many small pieces of road became consolidated under
one superintendence; hordes of directors, presidents, vice presidents,
general managers, general agents, solicitors of business and other
officials were dispensed with; many of whom under the former regime,
not only drew salaries for supposed services, but absorbed besides in
various mysterious ways, vast wealth that of right should have gone to
the stockholders.

  The total mileage of the railroads of the U. S. in 1893 was    173,370

  Total capital stock                                     $5,021,576,551

  Total bonds                                              5,510,225,528

  Total actual cost $45,000 per mile                       7,801,650,000

  Total earnings, one year                                 1,208,641,498

  Total net earnings                                         358,648,918

  Amount of the railroad consols to be issued in payment
    of the R. R.                                           8,160,300,000

  Annual interest on same at three per cent                  244,809,000

  Surplus of railway income after paying interest on
    railroad consols to be applied to sinking fund           113,839,918

  Amount of sinking fund after twenty years to be used
    in the extinction of one-fifth of the consols          1,632,060,000

  Net income of roads increased to                           400,000,000

  Surplus to be used in betterments                           41,351,082

(The above figures I have worked out to accord with the Professor’s
suggestions—as he did not give details. I have put the average value of
the roads at $45,000 per mile which is much more than it would cost to
replace them.)

“I suppose,” said I, “that these bonds, especially those of the lower
denominations would circulate to some extent as currency.”

“They did, and those of the $1,000 denomination were used as the basis
of paper currency. But now at the close of the twentieth century over
half of these bonds have been retired and the currency based upon them
withdrawn. The railroad, telegraph, transportation, express, and car
companies have all disappeared and the entire business is conducted by
the general government. All of the roads will soon have been entirely
paid for and the rates for the transportation of passengers, goods and
messages are reduced almost to actual cost of the service including wear
and tear. You would doubtless be surprised by the schedule of prices. For
example, passenger rates for ten miles or under three cents, 20 miles
five cents, 50 miles ten cents, 100 miles fifteen cents, 200 miles 25
cents, 500 miles 50 cents and greater distances at the same rate provided
it is a continuous ride in the same train.”

“In my time,” said I, “electricity was being introduced as the motive
power on railways. Did it prove successful?”

“It did, eminently so, and entirely superseded steam locomotion, although
steam stationary engines were used principally, throughout the century.
But when we come to look forward into the twenty-first century, we shall
find some remarkable changes. But we have not reached that yet.”

“I am curious to know how the currency question was settled. After the
retirement of the railway consols, I suppose they fell back on gold or
paper based on it, did they?”

“The use of gold and silver money was never discontinued entirely, and
both were coined. Near the close of last century, the free coinage of
silver was strongly demanded by the people and strongly opposed by the
financiers. Finally they compromised. The government gave up the task of
maintaining the parity of the metals at any ratio, but coined both.

“The silver “dollar” with its fractions, half quarter and dime was coined
in quantities to accommodate the business. Silver was made a legal tender
for limited amounts. This gave silver the character of “fiat money,” or
money that is legal and current at inflated values. They made gold the
standard of value. In this they were right. There could logically be only
one unit of value. But the debtor class strenuously opposed the plan.
They said it worked great injustice to them, because their debts were
contracted at times when money bore inflated values; when for example
silver was intrinsically worth only half as much as gold. These debts
were therefore now payable in money twice as valuable and twice as hard
to get as that for which they had gone into debt. In other words they
paid back twice as much as they fairly owed and the creditor received
twice as much as he fairly loaned. There can be no doubt this is true
of debts of long standing. But most debts were not affected materially
by the rise in the value of gold, because they were not contracted at
its bottom value, but at various grades of value while it was on the
ascending movement. However as long as it was rising the creditor class
was reaping an unjust advantage over the debtors. The government issued
bank notes; some based on silver and some on gold; each kind redeemable
in the metal on which it was based. The quantity of this paper money was
regulated by the national legislature so as to insure a circulation in
proportion to the volume of business. The extended use of bank checks
has furnished a substitute for or supplement to the currency. When the
currency question was finally felt to be settled, the conditions were
practically accepted and the producing class was set to work, and in
an incredibly short time, replaced the wealth that had been abstracted
from them and more. Then came an era of speculation and the scattering
of wealth. Obligations rashly incurred in flush times, had to be met
when times became tight. This led to panics and the whole routine
had to be repeated about so often. But panics could not be entirely
eliminated by doctoring the currency, because currency is not the only
factor. No matter how much currency a man has, he is not likely to buy
articles he does not want. If mechanics have spent their time in the
production of something the public do not require or a surplus of what
they do ordinarily require, there will be difficulty in disposing of
the product. If two classes of mechanics each make things with the
expectation of selling them to the other class, and they turn out to
be such things as are not wanted in either case, there is sure to be
stagnation of exchange and consequent suffering. Where all are working
in ignorance of the requirements of others there are sure to be produced
many things for which there will be no demand. This had been partially
recognized by the government in your day and commissioners were appointed
to collect statistics and make estimates in regard to the production of
and probable demand for certain farm products. As the government became
more intimately the servant of the people its services in this direction
were greatly extended and inquiries covered many other departments
beside that of farming. The government itself became a large consumer
in operating its railroads, telegraphs, etc. Additional mileage had to
be constructed to meet the growing business besides the renewals on
account of wear and tear. By the publication in advance of the probable
demands on the various sorts of industry it became possible to estimate
approximately what amount of and what kind of product could be disposed
of. A still more fruitful source of financial trouble was to be found in
the spirit of recklessness and extravagance with which people spent their
money when times were prosperous or booming. It seemed so easy then to
get money and to pay debts that many thought it hardly worth while to
do it, if there appeared a chance for a profitable speculation, and so
instead of paying old debts they were very likely to incur fresh ones.
But as the state became more and more involved in business affairs,
it was able to advise what products would be in demand, when it was
advisable to use caution and economy and when activity would be rewarded.
The functions of the state as a medium of exchange between the producer
and the consumer became rapidly extended, and before the close of the
century it became the chief and in many things the only buyer and seller
of the products in most common use, as well as the sole factor in all
monopolies and in banking, insurance, and public amusements. It had not
yet gone into manufacturing or farming except to the extent necessary to
prevent combinations and private monopolies.”

“I think I can see the advantage of this,” said I, “they probably held to
the principle that competition is necessary to keep men up to their best
in exertion and industry.”

“That is correct,” he replied, “until work becomes an instinct it is
necessary to stimulate exertion by the better rewards that extra industry
can procure. The socialists in your day proposed no plan that calculated
sufficiently upon the selfishness of the individual. They expected that
everybody would accept the position assigned to him and work faithfully
for the good of all. But it was too soon to expect this. Your race is
very young. It is not so long since your ancestors ceased to depend
on the spontaneous productions of the earth for their sustenance, and
began to supplement them by their own exertions. With some of your
races work is beginning to be instinctive, but there are yet enough
in every nation, who, by their hereditary aversion to exertion are
ready to shirk out of labor and make the burden of the instinctively
industrious intolerable. Your race is too young yet, here at the close
of the twentieth century, to take on the purely instinctive socialistic
conditions as we Lunarians have them.”

“You think then that socialism to be successful must be instinctive as it
is with the bees?”

“To be permanently successful it must be founded upon such an instinct
for industry, that makes it more agreeable for a person to work, than
to be idle, or to be merely amused. That is, the individual must love
work for the sake of the work rather than for the reward that is to come
after it. It is indeed true that only the stimulation of the reward at
the end could ever have created or kept up the habit of work until it
became instinctive, and it is true that if this reward at the end should
habitually cease to be realized to at least some degree, the instinct
for the work would in course of time become undone—unwound as we might
say. The expectation of the reward if it is as constant as the work,
would naturally become a part of the instinct. But there are often
disappointments as to the reward, while the work itself remains constant,
so that this part of the instinct learns to be satisfied with smaller and
smaller results until finally the necessaries of painless existence in
which the working apparatus is kept in proper operating order are all the
reward that the instinct requires.”

“Then,” said I, “in this supreme ideal of socialistic instinct, I
understand you, that the individual lays aside all expectation of
personal enjoyment, or the possession of anything in the way of luxuries
or superfluities. It seems to me such an existence must be a very narrow
one.”

“The possession of superfluities,” said he, “does not contribute at all
to enjoyment of life. That is why they are superfluities. A luxury,
however, is something that gives or is supposed to give unaccustomed
pleasure, and it presupposes conditions or times in the ordinary life
of the individual in which he fails to get perfect returns of happiness
or satisfaction. But suppose there are no such times or conditions, and
that he has no possible desire that his habitual work does not satisfy.
Then his work is his luxury and no diversion to any unaccustomed function
would procure so great a luxury. As to such existence being narrow, it
all depends on the breadth of the work. If the work is circumscribed, the
life is narrow. If the work is wide, diversified and complicated, then
so is the life, whether it be accompanied by the elements of contingency
and uncertainty of mind as with you or the assurance of settled and
triumphant success as with us.

“All the same however true socialistic conditions are not realized to a
nearly perfect degree up to this close of the twentieth century, although
the advance toward them has been what the conservatives of your day
would have regarded as alarming. In all cases where honest competition
in the production of anything can be maintained, it is the policy of
government to refrain from interference; but if the articles produced
are necessary to consumers or are required as materials in the production
of other goods that are, and the manufacturers of such things form trusts
or combinations for the purpose of increasing the price, the government
appoints receivers for such business and has it operated long enough to
ascertain the cost of producing the article. The price is then fixed by
the government.”

“But what if the parties decline to sell at the prices fixed by the
state?”

“They do not decline unless they want to go out of business,” he replied,
“because when the state interferes in such cases it amounts to notice to
the parties that the state is ready, as an alternative, to undertake the
business itself, when it speedily destroys extortion by furnishing the
required product at a fair price.”

“It would seem then,” said I, “that the state has become a large factor
in the business of the country, and there has been a great centralization
of power.”

“That is true,” he answered, “there has been a remarkable evolution
and yet a perfectly natural and logical one. The very first principle
on which a state is organized is the defense and protection of all—the
weaker as well as the stronger members—against a common external foe.
The second principle which is easily derivable from the first is the
protection of the members of the society from each other. Under this
principle the weaker will be protected from the stronger, first in his
person, second in his property. It was the theory of many in all former
times that the functions of the state ought to end there. Some said,
that to go any further would contravene the wholesome natural law of
selection, and interfere against the survival of the fittest. Nature left
to herself, would put down and finally exterminate the weakest of the
race mentally and physically, leaving always the strongest and best to
survive, and so constantly improve the race. But if that consideration
were to prevail there should never have been any protective organization
of tribes and states in the first place. If when a community were
attacked each individual ran away or hid as best he could, the enemy
would catch and destroy the less swift and strong and the less shrewd and
wary, and so select the best for survival. But under the organization,
they stand together, and if the enemy is beaten off, the weak and
inferior members are saved with the best. The only consideration on which
this is right must be that the weaker members of the society are worth
more to the state than they cost, and therefore to the extent that they
are protected by the organization they are selected by nature in this
roundabout way for survival, for the benefit of the state.

“The further defense of the weak against the strong within the social
organization, must be on the same principle. And this principle having
been admitted there is no logical end to it short of protection against
every advantage the strong or the superior or the more wary can possibly
take or attempt. In a civilized society the oppression of the weak is no
longer so much from personal violence or robbery, but it takes the more
subtle form of absorbing their wealth under forms of law and business
formulas, so that in such a society the weak and unwary are valuable to
produce wealth, but are robbed of it, practically by a few.

“If the state would get the benefit of the exertions of its members, it
must protect them from these depredations, whether they are perpetrated
under the forms of highway robbery or of the laws of trade. In short the
protection of the individual by the state cannot logically terminate
till it prevents everyone from acquiring property he has not earned and
rendered a fair equivalent for.”

“Then ought it not also to protect society against the extortions of
anyone who would compel it to pay too much for something he alone could
produce?”

“Of course that is included in the first.”

“Well then, does not that imply also that the state shall insure a fair
return for the work of every individual to himself?”

“No,” said he, “that does not follow, unless the individual performs such
work as the community wants. If a man is free to do as he likes, and he
must be, he may sometimes choose to do something of no use to anyone
else. Then of course no one else should be obliged to take the useless
thing and pay for it. But if a man has nothing to do, the state should
upon his application furnish him employment and pay him for his work when
done under instructions.”

CHAPTER VII.

Women’s Rights.

“I suppose there has been a change in the position of women since my day?”

“In politics and in business, there is now no distinction on account of
sex. A woman may be president or governor of a state, a senator or judge.
Women are to be found in every department of business, and are fully as
successful as the men. This materially disturbed the organization of
the family, as it was before your time. The man was then the legal and
often the actual head of the family, and both the wife and the children
were supposed to be under his authority within certain limits. But as
the sphere of woman extended and she became better educated, she soon
passed the condition in which she was content to be subordinate to the
man. She insisted upon and of course secured a position of equality
as to legal rights and equal authority in the family. In your day the
principal occupation of women was in domestic life, keeping the house and
rearing the children. As women became interested in wider activities,
many of them began to seek ways of avoiding family cares. Co-operative
house-keeping was tried in many cases, kindergartens taking charge of the
children.

“The state had for a long time asserted an interest in the education
of children, first providing the means of education, then making it
compulsory. Finding that some were kept from school from the inability
of parents to provide books, the state provided books to those who
needed them. Then because the pride of those who accepted this bounty,
was wounded by this advertisement of their poverty, it became necessary
for the state to furnish books to all children, both of the rich and the
poor. Next it was found that want of suitable clothes kept some from
school that ought to attend, and so the state commenced to supply school
clothes to them and by a similar process of evolution finally came to
supply a school uniform to all children. It was also perceived that the
interest of the state in the individual did not end when it had taught
him the three R’s and the two G’s; in fact it had only fairly begun. It
was all important to the state to know whether the child she had educated
was going to employ his talents for good or for ill. It was expected he
would carve his way and make his living, but if he were not given an
opportunity to learn an honest vocation, was it certain that he would not
drift into a dishonest one? It was seen to be the duty of the state to
see that every youth of both sexes were given such opportunity to learn
some trade or occupation. This became the more necessary on account of
the trades unions and combinations amongst working men who naturally were
anxious to prevent their ranks from being crowded and jealously threw
obstacles in the way of apprentices, so the state found it necessary to
care for the individual until he had attained the equipment essential for
his self support.

“At first the state schools of trades were simply free to all; later
they became compulsory, following the experience of the common schools.
Scholars in the common school were educated with reference to the trade
they fancied, and when they entered the trade school they were on trial
for a limited period and were sorted according to their ascertained
aptitudes. It became a necessary branch of the supervision of the state
to ascertain the proper proportion of workmen required for each branch
of business and when this proportion was being seriously disturbed by
unequal selection by the scholars themselves, it was restored by state
selection on examination according to aptitude.

“So much of the care and education of the youth having thus been assumed
by the state, the way was opened for more. It was said that half the
people who had children did not know how to bring them up properly; and
teachers often complained that the example in bad manners, deportment,
language etc., that the children got at home to a great extent
neutralized the good lessons in these things they received at school.

“The kindergartens became by almost insensible degrees enlarged in the
scope of their functions. At first, as in your day, they were merely
stopping places for the children during the day, they going back to
their parents to spend the night. As the mothers came to be more and
more engrossed in affairs away from home, the kindergartens extended
their care over the children, furnishing them their meals, then their
lodging, then medical attendance as well as education and amusement,
finally assuming all the care and expense of maintaining and rearing
them. At first the expense was paid by the parents, but was gradually
assumed by the state by degrees till it finally became responsible for
all. The advantage of these public nurseries was at first of course most
marked in favor of the poorer classes. But as their functions and scope
developed, the care and training of the children became more scientific,
their powers, tastes and aptitudes were more thoroughly brought out.
The wealthier classes at first objected to having their children reared
in association with the plebians. But the children of plebians were no
longer plebian when removed permanently from the influences of their
parent’s homes; and they turned out a larger percentage of successful
men and women than those of more comfortable position. In physical and
mental ability they were superior, and in morality at least equal to the
others. It was seen that these kindergartens were better adapted for the
care of children than even the better equipped homes, and they received
the patronage of a constantly increasing proportion of the people. At
first there was nothing compulsory in this patronage. Parents left their
children when it suited them, and took them away when they chose. But
after a time this was outgrown. It came gradually to be understood that
the state—that is the whole community—was really as much concerned in
the destiny of the growing generation as the parents; and it was said
that it was better that the children should have the constant care and
attention of those intelligently qualified and perfectly equipped, than
that their development should be interrupted when the caprice of parents
craved them only for pets and playthings. So the selfishness of parents
in this respect was gradually outgrown in favor of the more important
welfare of the children. But economy as well as sentiment supported this
evolution. The cost of caring for the children by the state was vastly
less than under the old system, and it no longer fell with such crushing
weight on those least able to bear it; for it was notorious that the poor
were the most prolific. With the better care they received the mortality
amongst the children was greatly reduced and a far greater proportion
reached maturity. Another important consideration in the state nursery
system was the cultivation of the democratic sentiment amongst the
children, and the destruction of exclusiveness and aristocratic ideas and
feelings.”

“From what you say,” said I, “it appears that the state has undertaken to
take care of the race during their age of helplessness, from infancy to
manhood.”

“That is correct,” he answered, “the state takes the child as soon as
it is weaned, sometimes before, and keeps and provides for it every day
till it is prepared to be selfsupporting. Every one is taught a trade or
a profession according to its bent and the demand for services in the
several callings, it being the policy of the state to so regulate these
things that the value of services is about the same in all callings.”

“Then can a mechanic make as much as a doctor?”

“About the same. As soon as any difference is observed, more are
encouraged to enter the calling that tends to the higher pay, and so made
to preserve the uniformity.”

“Well, if the state begins when the child is weaned, to take care of
it, why should it not begin before—a long time before in fact? For
ante-natal influences are often of the most powerful kind; and when they
are mischievous, no amount of subsequent education is able to neutralize
or rectify them. That was all thought out in my day by the more advanced
thinkers.”

“O they have “maternity hospitals” and “Homes for Ladies” and all that
sort of things—of course—but what you mean; not yet. That is still in the
future—but we shall find it by and by in a way that will surprise you.”

“Well it seems to me, to get even where they are they must have met and
solved some rather difficult riddles,” said I. “For example in my day
there was a desperate struggle between Protestants and Catholics in
regard to the religious education of the children. The Catholics hated
the public schools, because they were “godless.” They insisted on having
their children brought up in their own faith. They wanted a share of
the public money so they could have schools of their own and mix their
catechism with the rules of grammar and the rule of three. How did they
ever settle this difficulty—or did they settle it?”

“O yes,” he said, “they settled it, or rather it settled itself. At
first the Catholics and in some places the Lutherans and other sects of
Protestants insisted on maintaining their own schools, kindergartens
etc., but the state institutions were so far superior to what these
sectarians could furnish, that the laity broke away from the control of
their priests in this respect and followed their interests in putting
their children under the care of the state. As however the state
monopolized more and more of the pupils’ time, it was conceded that if
the whole population was not to become “godless,” it would be necessary
to allow religion to be taught in these public institutions in some form.
So they compromised. The different religious bodies were allowed to hold
Sunday schools and classes for religious instruction of the pupils in the
creeds professed by their parents. The children were also taken to church
according to the same rule. This was at first made compulsory if desired
by the parents, but after a time compulsory attendance upon religious
instruction was remitted at the age of 12 and the pupils were allowed
to choose their religion. This arrangement preserved the proportions of
the sects to each other fairly well, but in the meantime there arose
conditions that made this preservation of small moment. These were such
changes in the spirit and feeling of the members of different churches
toward each other, and such a liberalizing of creeds that all were
brought together and became not only tolerant, but even cordial toward
each other. The schools themselves did more than anything else to bring
about this result, for as the older scholars were given their freedom
of choice, it gradually became a fashion or fad amongst the pupils and
finally a part of the regular curriculum to attend each other’s meetings
and interchange ideas and arguments. As the ability grew amongst all,
both the young and old, to reason more justly and logically, all sides
became less tenacious of the dogmas they found themselves unable to
prove. When these were lopped off from the various conflicting creeds
their professors found themselves all standing on practically the same
platform of facts and plain human duties. The things they differed on
were mostly mere hypotheses. They still continued to differ, but no
longer regarded their differences of such vital consequence as formerly.
It came to be generally admitted as absurd that the future post mortem
condition of men should depend on their intellectual convictions
regarding unprovable metaphysical theories.”

“Doubtless the bringing together of the children of all creeds and
educating them in each others notions had much to do with this
liberalizing process; had it not?” I asked.

“It had of course, but the education of the children together, was itself
a result of a liberalized public opinion. The fact is the human mind
was constantly undergoing a process of expansion and growth. It could
no longer be satisfied with the crude and childish notions of former
generations, and was outgrowing them as children outgrow the fables of
the nursery. Until men got capacity, argument and logic were of no avail.
Education in the great facts and discoveries of science and philosophy
gave them capacity.”

“From what you say, I should suppose there has been a great modification
of creeds?”

“There has been. No church remains the same either in theory or practice
that it was in your day. Several of the minor protestant sects have
entirely disappeared.

“In several cases two or three have united to form one. The whole
number of sects is less than one-fourth of what it was. Creeds have
become extremely simplified and in many cases practically ignored. The
government among the protestant sects, is in most cases congregational
and democratic. They no longer engage in missionary work for the
conversion of the heathen, as there are no longer any heathen whose
conversion is desired; and no organized effort is necessary for
charitable work at home, because that is amply provided for by the state.
But the church is useful as a social organization, promoting personal
friendships and associations, providing intellectual and educational
entertainment for its members fostering and fortifying the moral virtues
and elevating and refining the manners. In many of these protestant
congregations, the worship of God by prayer and ceremony is entirely
discontinued, it being held that all worship is unworthy, and based
upon a false notion of the relationship between God and man. Man they
say cannot worship or serve God directly. God is not childish enough to
want it. All man can do is to help his fellow man and himself and that
constitutes his whole duty.”

“These,” said I, “would probably have been called free thinkers or
agnostics in my day. But what of the Catholics?”

“The Catholics,” he replied, “are far more numerous than the Protestants.
Forty years ago there was a great schism in the Catholic church, the
American branch of it separating completely from the European, and
setting up for itself as the “American Catholic Church.” At the same
time important changes were made in the interpretation of the doctrines
of the church and radical innovations in its government. The latter is
now largely republican in form and the laity have representation in
the councils of the church and a preponderating influence both in its
doctrine and its temporal policy. The tendency toward this development
showed itself strongly in the beginning of the twentieth century, and
originated from the general increase of intelligence and feeling of
personal assertion and responsibility among the laity and the example
of the freer people about them. The clergy instinctively resisted this
tendency, and called upon the Pope and the European church to help them
to stop it. The help they afforded only stimulated the movement. The
interference of the Europeans was resented as impertinent; the exercise
of the papal authority was looked on as a display of superannuated
tyranny. The Pope asserted that the American Church by its liberal
practices and tendencies was corrupting the church in other parts of the
world, and declared they were doing it more damage as members, than
they could do as open enemies outside of its pale, and he threatened to
excommunicate the whole American body. The immediate cause of the final
act of separation was first the persistence of the laity in having the
ownership of the church property in their own hands, represented by
trustees of their own selection. Second, their demand to share in the
government of the church, to which end they proposed a representative
legislature composed of two houses, one composed of laymen and the other
of clergy.

“Third they asserted the right of private judgment without prejudice to
their standing as Catholics, on all questions of mere faith, except the
cardinal principle of Christianity, requiring only the observance of the
sacraments and the practice of charitable works and a moral life.

“They repudiated auricular confession. These innovations were not all
consummated at once, but the controversy once begun, found no logical
settlement short of these demands and the rupture of the church.
Liberalized in this way in regard to creed and government, and freed from
the domination of the Italians, but retaining much of the ancient ritual
and the pomp of public worship, the American Church, became very popular,
and soon received large accessions of membership from the protestant
bodies. In fact the more conservative and spiritual protestants found
the new catholic church more congenial to them than the new protestant.
The former church advanced toward them as the latter drifted away into
rationalism.”

CHAPTER VIII.

Marriage and Divorce.

“You said that the occupations of women became varied and ceased to be
domestic in a majority of cases; what effect did that have on marriage
and divorce?” I enquired.

“Various causes tended to make marriage almost universal and celibacy
became the rare exception. The chief cause was the assumption by the
state of the care and education of the children. Another was the ability
of women to support themselves. Men did not feel it such a burden to
be married when they did not have to greatly exert themselves for the
support of either wife or children. Women did not feel it such a burden
when they were released from the care and responsibility of a household
of children and servants. Marriage moreover has become less of a lottery
than in your day, because men and women meet each other in business
relations in which they act their natural selves. Neither is obliged
to marry in order to live, and less art and deceit are used for the
purpose of entrapping a partner. The property of neither man nor woman is
affected by marriage, and neither acquires any rights over the property
of the other except, that each is bound to care and provide for the
other in case of sickness or disability. There are fewer conditions that
are liable to produce inharmony, because greater freedom is conceded
to the parties, and there are fewer points on which absolute unanimity
is essential. Marriage is on the whole much happier than formerly, and
although divorces are easily obtained they are much less frequent. These
conditions have had a marked effect on the increase of population as you
might suppose. There is no longer any temptation to avoid the natural
results of marriage, and those unnatural expedients women formerly
resorted to for that purpose, ruinous to health and morals, are now
almost unknown. The health and strength of women have vastly improved.
Women dress sensibly, and live natural hygienic lives, and the terrors
of childbearing have practically vanished. As Americans took upon
themselves the furnishing of native born citizens to people this country,
immigration from Europe fell off rapidly and practically ceased sixty
years ago. But notwithstanding this, the population has more than doubled
three times, and for the territory that formed the United States in your
day it is now over 600,000,000.”

“Six hundred millions!” I repeated. “What an enormous number! It takes my
breath to think of it. Is it possible so many people can be supported in
that territory? Nearly all the really valuable land seemed to be taken up
when the population was but 70,000,000.”

“Aye,” said he, “six hundred millions are easily supported, and supported
in greater comfort than when the population was but 70,000,000; and they
may even double several times more before the capacity of the country is
exhausted.”

“I am amazed at what you say,” said I, “but there must be a limit.
Let me see, if 600,000,000 are doubled three times it will amount to
4,800,000,000. Is it possible the land could produce food and clothing
for so many; and yet from what you say about the rate of increase that
enormous number of people will be in this country before the end of the
twenty-first century.”

“We will not cross that bridge till we come to it,” he answered, “we
will explain that when we come to look forward into the twenty-first
century. It is true we shall find a limit. The breeding instinct of any
race of animals, not excepting man, would if unchecked and unopposed in
the course of time absolutely fill up the earth till it could support
no more. Man has for many ages been the dominant animal of the earth.
Yet he has failed to stock the world to its capacity or anywhere near
it for reasons you can easily supply yourself. In the first place the
profession of arms or the art of keeping down the population by war has
always held the most honorable rank among human employments; second the
human race has been the absolutely helpless victim of pestilence and
plague. Hundreds of different kinds of microbes, vibrios, bacteria and
zymases have from age to age apparently whenever they saw fit, or thought
men were getting too numerous, unseen and unsuspected, planted their
colonies in their vital organs, and swarmed in their blood, living at
their expense and sweeping them to death by myriads and millions. Next,
men were at the mercy of the elements both on sea and land. Whenever a
crop failed from drought or flood there followed a famine, and millions
were periodically swept away by gaunt starvation, because there was no
way of conveying to a needy district, the superabundance that might
exist in another. But even where all nature was favorable, and nations
happened to be at peace there was always the native and hereditary
stupidity of the individual that blinded him to all rational ways of
taking care of himself or his dependents and made it impossible for him
to rear to maturity more than one out of five of his children. Thus many
causes conspired to kill people off almost as fast as they were born and
sometimes faster, and many times to prevent them from being born when
they ought to have been. These inimical causes have all practically been
eliminated. The destructive agencies supplied by nature for limiting the
increase of the population having been set at defiance by art, it is
evident that art must likewise find a way for limiting the increase of
population, or else sometime in the future that increase will by its very
success put a stop to itself, and the brutal methods of untamed nature
again assert themselves. After all, art is only a subdivision of nature.
It may modify the action of nature as to details, but cannot set aside
the principles that govern it.”

“You spoke a little while ago of the territory of the United States, as
it was in my day. This would appear to intimate that the boundaries have
changed since then, is that so?”

“Well yes, you will think so, when you know that the United States of the
present day covers the entire Continent of North America, and embraces
besides, New Zealand, Australia, the English Colonies in South Africa,
Ireland, Cuba and most of the West India Islands, and numerous islands in
the Pacific ocean. I see this astonishes you and I will proceed to tell
you how it happened. If we begin at the beginning, it appears to have
been very largely due to the construction of railroads in Asia by the
Russians; that is it, would never have happened if these roads had not
been built. The great transcontinental Siberian road was completed from
St. Petersburg to Vladivostock on the Pacific ocean in 1904 and formally
opened with a great flourish by the Russian emperor. The Russians were
not entirely satisfied however with this road. It was essential as a
military road, and as a means of settling a vast extent of fertile
country in Siberia, but as a commercial line it did not meet their rather
sanguine expectations.

“Their ambition was to monopolize the trade between China and Europe. The
new road by going around the east side of Mantchooria instead of through
it to Pekin, imposed on that trade an unnecessary transportation of 1800
miles. They saw directly that they needed a line to Pekin and Teentsin,
from Irkutsk. They obtained a concession from the Chinese government
and built this line for commercial purposes. Then, later, they found it
desirable to build another line west of the first and reaching the ocean
at Shanghai. They also tapped the western part of the Chinese empire by a
line from Bokara.

“From these lines others soon grew, commanding the business of the
country and mostly owned by the Russians. In no long time jealousy
of the enterprising “foreign devils” on the part of some of the more
conservative and reactionary of the Chinese, led to outrages on their
part which furnished a good pretext for military occupation of the
country and finally to its conquest and annexation by the Russians.
These encroachments of the Russians had been bitterly, but ineffectually
opposed by the English. Their opposition provoked the Russians to place
England on the defensive with regard to her Indian possessions so
they pushed their railway line through Tartary to the very borders of
northwestern India and threatened it with a large army of invasion. The
Hindoos who had for years been waiting for such an opportunity to throw
off the British yoke now revolted. They had been taught the art of war by
their masters and now practiced it upon them, turning upon their teachers
the weapons they had put into their hands and taught them to use. The
very soldiers that were counted on to repel the Russians took their side
against the English. Between the Russians and the Indians the British
power in India was totally crushed, and several independent kingdoms were
set up under Russian protection. France also assisted Russia in this war,
especially on the ocean. British commerce was almost destroyed by Russian
and French cruisers. After the war was over these two nations almost
monopolized the Indian trade under discriminating commerce regulations,
the Russians by land carriage over their railway and the French by sea.
In the end the Russians became masters of almost the whole of Asia.
Turkey was dismembered, the city of Constantinople and all Asiatic Turkey
falling to the Russians.”

“Professor, in my day there was a great war between Russia and Japan,
which you have not mentioned. Was it not a factor in the settlement of
the Asiatic questions?”

“No, it did not assist in making a settlement, for none was made, its
only effect was to postpone a settlement. The events I have narrated
were greatly to the advantage of the United States. The destruction of
England’s commerce largely involved her manufacturers also, and in like
degree made room for and stimulated those of the United States. Her
trade with all the British Colonies soon eclipsed that of the mother
country herself. As the tremendous natural resources of the United States
became more and more developed under the energy and skill of the most
enlightened methods, the contrast between America and England enforced
itself on the attention of all.

“Treaties looking to the abolition of war, and the settlement of all
international questions by arbitration had already been adopted between
the United States and Great Britain and her Colonies, and there had
been a strong feeling and agitation for a closer political union of all
the English speaking people. The aggressive foreign policy of England
stood in the way of this. But to her, this aggressive policy appeared
essential. She had held India, Birmah and large territories in Africa,
by conquest, and her trade to these countries depended on her continued
military control over them.

“After the war with Russia and France in which she lost India, her
commerce, and her prestige, England still felt her only chance for
retaining her importance as an influential factor in the politics of the
world, to be in cultivating her interests in Birmah and Africa. She could
colonize neither of these countries to any great extent. All she could do
was to conquer and rule them and compel them to trade with her on terms
that turned all their surplus wealth into her coffers—as she had done in
India. Her misfortunes had soured her temper and made her more truculent
and bulldozing than ever. Her manner towards her colonies changed. They
had been of little or no assistance to her in her struggle with Russia,
and had but little sympathy with her foreign policy and the truculent
and aggressive bearing towards weaker nations that had made her to be
thoroughly unpopular in some parts of the world. England now began to
resent the cold attitude of the colonies toward her, and to talk of the
duty of the daughters towards the mother. She began to be sorely pinched
for money. The war had doubled her already enormous debt, and halved her
resources. The number of her unemployed at home had greatly increased
by reason of the diminution of her trade and the foreign demand for her
manufacturers. Taxation enormously increased and the rich were reduced to
poverty in providing for the poor. Millions emigrated to America and to
the colonies, generally people of the thrifty and productive classes,
thereby reducing the resources of the country without diminishing her
liabilities. She now proposed to the colonies to tax themselves for her
benefit. This they were not inclined to do. They were all comparatively
poor. They needed all the money they could raise for public improvements
in their own settlements. Most of them were heavily in debt. Canada was
hopelessly so, practically bankrupt in fact. Finally the colonies all
declined to be taxed for the benefit of the mother country. The condition
of affairs in the British empire gave a great impulse to the idea of
confederation with the United States. The plan gained favor rapidly with
the colonies. No nation on earth was so prosperous then, or possessed of
such vast resources as the United States. The country was out of debt and
enormously wealthy.

“Her army was small, but she had a powerful navy. She was respected by
all the world and had great influence, as much from her fairness and
justice to other nations as from her known reserved power and ability
to enforce justice to herself. The British felt the need of an alliance
that would place them in the front rank of nations again, and all the
branches of the empire appeared anxious for the consolidation with the
United States. This country was desirous of obtaining Canada, and this
made it the more ready to adopt the union, because it was supposed it
must be with all or none. As this country was by far the most populous
number of the proposed union, it was conceded that Washington should be
the capital of the new empire. The constitution of the United States was
taken as the basis of the new government with certain modifications. The
President and Vice President were to be elected by direct vote of the
people, a plurality to elect. They were to serve six years only. They
could not both be from the same continent or state. The President was
not to have the veto power. The Representatives were to be 600 in number
apportioned among the states according to population. The senate was to
consist of 100 members elected by the people. The term of office for
both houses was to be two years. Each natural division as a continent or
island or group of islands was to be divided into senatorial districts
following state boundaries when practicable, but throwing together
small states or fractions of large ones when necessary to give the
proper quota of population. All bills were to originate in the House of
Representatives, but were also to pass the senate before becoming laws;
but that body could not alter or amend—only veto or approve, and the
House could pass any bill in spite of the senate by a two thirds vote.
The President was to appoint his cabinet with the approval of the senate,
but all or any one was to be required to resign upon a vote of “want of
confidence” by the House of Representatives. Both the President and Vice
President could be removed from office by a two-thirds vote of both House
and senate and a new election ordered to fill the unexpired term.

“There was to be free trade amongst all the states under this
constitution and also between these states and foreign nations
except that a tariff on importations might be imposed when ordered by
a three-fourths vote of the Congress. The general revenue was to be
collected by the County Commissioners and Treasurers of the counties of
the several states, such officers being for such purpose, officers of the
general government, and levying such rate of tax as ordered by the law
of Congress in addition to the taxes ordered by the state, county, city,
ward, or school district authorities.

“Suffrage was to be restricted to men and women who could read and
write the English language. Foreign immigrants were not to be permitted
to settle in colonies in any of the states or to maintain public
schools—except high schools—in which any other than the English language
is used.

“No state could engage in aggressive foreign war, but might repel
invasion. Only the general government could engage in war.

“This scheme of government was prepared by a joint commission appointed
for the purpose, and submitted to the people of the several countries
interested, the British Colonies, each separately, England, Ireland,
the United States and Scotland. All the colonies, the United States and
Ireland voted for the plan; England and Scotland voted against it. They
were dissatisfied with the provision prohibiting them from going to war.
They had always enjoyed this luxury and were loth to be deprived of
it. They had hoped the plan of union would allow them to pursue their
schemes of settlement and annexation as before with the right to call on
the confederation for succor in case they were hard pressed by foreign
enemies. They argued indeed that actual active assistance would never in
any probable event be required, because with the mere moral support of
such formidable backing they felt sure that almost any nation would put
up with any amount of insult and injury rather than resent it against
such odds.

“It was supposed by many that the failure of Great Britain to ratify the
general constitution would defeat the whole scheme. But the colonies
and Ireland had become very much in favor of it, and hated to be balked
by what they termed the selfish action of the mother country; and they
demanded her consent to the union, of as many as might choose to join
it without her. She was in no condition to resist their demands if they
should choose to enforce them. But it would have been folly to have come
to blows or even to words over such a question. The colonies had never
been a source of profit to England, but rather a bill of expense. She
traded with them, but did not possess a monopoly of their trade, and paid
their tariff dues the same as other people. The United States enjoyed a
larger trade with Canada than she, and had almost driven her out of the
trade with several of her own West India Islands. Whatever the position
might be that she held with reference to this commerce, it would not be
made worse by this proposed union, but rather better, for free trade
would take the place of tariffs. She would also enjoy free trade with
the United States, which alone was worth to her a dozen colonies. The
union of England with her colonies was chiefly one of sentiment. They
governed themselves according to their own ideas, and were practically
so many independent nations, which she was in sentiment bound to protect
when they got into trouble, but which had little or nothing to give her
in return for her maternal solicitude and worry. Their relationship to
her tended to make them impertinent and presumptuous in their intercourse
with other nations. Canada in particular by her bumptiousness had
more than once come very nearly involving her in ruinous war with the
United States, in which her loss would have been the destruction of her
commerce, and her only gain, the loss of her pert colony. All these
points were discussed by the English. It was urged that if Britain tried
to keep the Colonies against their will, the time would surely come
when she would have to give them up against hers. They recalled the
Controversy with the United States and reflected how much better it would
have been for England if she had permitted them to go off as friends
rather than enemies. And they averred that if she should give her cordial
approbation to the new union and send off the colonies with the maternal
blessing to join their big brother Jonathan, it would go far toward
curing the unfilial, but not entirely causeless feeling of bitterness he
had entertained for her since 1776 and 1812.

“As a result of all these reflections and many more of the same sort,
the conclusion was finally reached and the parliament gave its solemn
sanction to the new State, but with characteristic foresight exacted
one promise to which all the states acceded before the final act was
consummated, and that was, that the said new nation should forever
be the friend of Great Britain and in case her existence as a nation
were threatened it should be bound to interpose in her behalf, and if
necessary take up arms in her defense. The name proposed for the new
nation was the “Pan Anglic Union.” When England failed to ratify, “Pan”
was dropped, and the name became simply the “Anglic Union.” But it was
playfully nicknamed the “Lion’s Cubs,” the “Old Hen’s Chickens” etc.”

“When did these things happen?” I inquired.

“They were finished by the year 1950,” he replied.

“Did not the various states have to do considerable remodeling of their
forms and procedure to fit them for this consolidation?”

“Very little, their governments were all much like that of the United
States. Like this country, they had already turned over to the control
of the state all monopolies, such as railroads, and had reached the same
conclusions as to money, the suffrage, taxation and most other questions.
They had their legislatures and executive and judicial branches of
government, all about alike. Ireland had for a decade or more enjoyed
home rule. She came into the new Union as two states, Ulster and South
Ireland. These were soon afterward reconsolidated into one—Ireland—the
causes that led to their separation, viz, religious jealousy and the
teaching of religion in the schools having been eliminated by the
severance of all connection between church and state, which the new
constitution required.

“The new nation had hardly got settled down to business, before new
annexations and consolidations were proposed and after much hesitation
and reflection were agreed to. Mexico, Central America and Japan
proposed to come into the Union, and shortly after Chili and Argentine
made application for admission. The fact is that in forming the “Anglic
Union” the promoters were building far more than they realized. Time had
without their knowing it reached a new epoch, and was about to turn over
a new leaf. Men were becoming educated and mentally developed by strides
instead of inches, by moles instead of molecules. In forming the “Anglic
Union” they had given expression to a new feeling into which mankind was
just being born, a feeling of human brotherhood, a new instinct that
drew men together and acquainted them with the fact that they were all
the result of common natural causes and animated by common loves and
hopes and fears. It showed them they were not naturally and necessarily
enemies, but might and ought to be friends and mutually helpful to each
other. It was the beginning of the end of war, the epoch of peace and
good will.

“When they began to think of taking other than English speaking nations
into the “Anglic Union,” it was at once perceived that the name was
inadequate, and so was the constitution. The name was changed to “The
Great Union” and the constitution was amended in regard to the official
language so far as the non-English speaking nations were concerned.
English however was to be taught in these nations and it has gradually
superseded the other languages. Schools have everywhere been established,
and the church has been rigidly separated from the state. The state
protects the church, but contributes nothing to its support, nor does
it compel any unwilling citizen to contribute to its support by the
exemption of its property from its due proportion of taxation.”

“Have any other nations joined the Great Union up to the present time
besides those you have mentioned?”

“None others have been admitted into full membership as equal states,
but all the states of South America have been taken under the protection
of the “Great Union.” They are being settled and developed by northern
people and the native population gradually educated up to the required
standard. The equatorial climate is naturally unfavorable to enterprise,
and development proceeds slowly. The church has been a serious obstacle,
claiming time and attention of the natives that ought to be devoted
to business and education. The country is being covered with railways
by northern enterprise. The most important of these is the great
international road extending from the city of Mexico through Central
America and the isthmus of Darien and traversing the whole length of
South America, even into Patagonia. Branches from this trunk diverge
toward all important points and enormous progress has been made in
agriculture and mining. The resources of this continent furnish a vast
support to the teeming population of North America.”

Mention of these railways led me to inquire of the Professor concerning
the progress of transportation, and commerce and whether any radical
innovations had been introduced.

“All the old methods of transportation,” said he, “have been greatly
improved upon, but none of them entirely superseded. Flying machines have
been brought to a reasonable degree of perfection at the expense of much
thought and many experiments, many fortunes and many broken necks. But
they cannot take the place of the freight car or the steamship. They are
more rapid, easily making 100 to 150 miles an hour, but they are as yet
of limited capacity carrying light letter mails, and a few passengers,
but at too great an expense to compete with the improved rail and water
carriage of the present. Besides most people would rather be near the
ground in case of accident. I mentioned to you the greatly reduced
cost of railway transportation in North America where all the lines
are operated by the state. In most of the South American states, the
roads are merely controlled—not owned—by the state and there is active
agitation in favor of the annexation of these states to the Great Union,
in anticipation in part of the advantage that will be obtained by the
state control of roads that will follow.

“The most beneficent service that the flying machine has rendered is
its potent contribution toward the abolition of war. Men have indeed
been rapidly educated out of the spirit and habit of war, but the
flying machine simply prohibited it. Without it, an age of peace would
undoubtedly have been reached in the future, with it, the age of peace is
here. International warfare is at an end and probably forever.”

“I don’t quite see how,” said I.

“It is very easy. One of these machines can carry enough dynamite, gun
cotton and other destructive explosives to devastate a city of 100,000
inhabitants. It can at will, fly over any place and drop its deadly stuff
precisely where it will do the most execution. It can select the palace
of the king, the houses of parliament or congress, the barracks, the
citadel, or the magazine, or the thickly peopled camp of a great army.
It can do this with little risk, deliberately, in broad daylight, poised
two or three miles above its victim out of reach of practical gunnery;
but in the night it can drop death upon defenseless and unsuspecting
sleepers without a moments warning. Battle ships are equally useless. A
charge of dynamite dropped from a flyer being able to reduce the greatest
ship to scrap iron and send it to the bottom in a moment. As personal
armor became a useless encumbrance, when gunpowder was introduced, so the
armoring of ships has entirely passed away in the presence of the flying
machine and naval warfare is no more practicable than war or land.”

“I should think,” said I, “that the “flyer” could be converted into
a dangerous instrument for criminal use. What’s the reason pirates
and robbers could not sail down upon a community small enough to be
overpowered by them, and then sail off again with their booty to some
inaccessible or solitary place?”

“That has been done,” he answered, “but it is no longer easy. Whenever a
fresh emergency arises in human affairs, a fresh remedy is found to meet
it. It often brings its own remedy. The flyer is as great an agent in the
hands of the police as it is in the hands of the criminal. As to solitary
places, there are very few left on earth that are habitable, and there
is not a spot that has not been seen by men, and that is not subject to
police surveillance.”

“Then,” said I, “they must have discovered the north pole.”

“Yes they have, and the south pole too,” he replied. “The first trip to
the north pole was made from Cape Prince of Wales in Alaska. The party
flew in a straight line from that point, in midsummer, north over the
pole and continuing in almost the same direction to the south, reached
Hammerfest in Norway a distance of 3,000 miles in forty hours without
stopping. Parties have gone from Minneapolis by way of the north pole in
an air line to the town of Tomsk in Siberia a distance of 5,500 miles,
stopping at the pole twelve hours, and finishing the journey within four
days. These trips have often been repeated and many similar ones made. It
is possible to make the circuit of the earth in twelve days by means of
relays at certain continental points and on some of the Pacific Islands;
but it can also be made by rail and water with only four changes, two to
rail and two to steamer in fifteen to seventeen days. Railroads run to
Alaska reaching Bering Sea and the Pacific at several points, and are met
by corresponding roads on the Russian side. The water carriage in summer
is only across Bering Strait, but in winter on account of ice the passage
is made further south and is longer.”

“Why don’t they tunnel Bering Strait,” I inquired, “or bridge it?”

“They will in the future tunnel it part way and build a dam or embankment
the rest of the way,” he replied, “and utilize the enormous power of the
current passing through there to drive the trains 1,000 miles on each
side of the strait, but the time has not yet arrived. A bridge would not
stay there, it would be swept away by the ice.”

“Isn’t there danger of collision between these flying machines?”

“Many fatal collisions took place when the flyers were first introduced.
It was found necessary to regulate them by government supervision. The
routes between all points have been carefully laid out and the going and
returning paths separated by a wide and safe space.

“You mentioned the abolition of war. I hardly see how it could be while
there were any uncivilized nations on earth,” I observed.

“I said international warfare was abolished.” he returned. “After Russia
had taken possession of Asia and settled its ownership, and Africa had
been divided up amongst the western European nations, the governments of
all nations were civilized. The regulation of such barbarous subjects
as they might be responsible for, was simply a question of policing, not
war. An insurrection by them could not succeed against the destructive
weapons held by the government. But as international affairs are now
settled, there is no excuse for any responsible body of men to resort
to force. The principle of arbitration first adopted between the United
States and Great Britain was subsequently extended to all civilized
nations. Later there was framed for the guidance of Arbitrators of
international questions, an international constitution or law of nations
agreed to by treaty between the principal nations and finally ratified by
all. This constitution described the boundaries of all nations, which it
was agreed were not to be disturbed except on consent of all the parties
concerned, thus doing away with wars for conquest.

“A criminal code was enacted, by which all crimes between subjects of
different nations were to be tried, and an international court was
established, composed of Judges from every nation. When a suit is brought
before this court, those judges appointed by the nations parties to the
suit, are excused from serving, and the case is tried by the others.
Questions of damages by one nation and its decrees when finally reached
are acquiesced in without hesitation, because it is keenly recognized
that any settlement even when not entirely satisfactory, is preferable
to war. In fact war is not recognized as a practical method of settling
anything.”

“If war is at an end, what have the European Nations done with their
great armies,” I inquired. “In my day most of the surplus wealth of
those nations went to support their vast armies, and the masses of the
industrial classes were kept in poverty, because their earnings were so
largely diverted to that purpose. And yet there appeared to be too many
workers, for their wages were very low. If the soldiers were set to work
at peaceful occupations and married and raised families, the population
must have increased and the wages gone still lower. How was that?”

“Well, not quite like that,” he replied. “The more workers the more
wealth, provided they have plenty of raw material to work on. The
abolition of war gave a great impetus to the production of wealth in
Europe. A great demand was created for raw materials, such as wool,
cotton, timber, iron and other metals and for food stuffs. A large
part of these supplies had to be furnished from other countries. The
United States furnished vast quantities. This increased commerce, and
as the population increased, emigration was stimulated. As the United
States filled up, the emigration was diverted from this country to South
America and to Africa. The products and exports of these countries
correspondingly increased. The equatorial regions are most prolific
in all the products of the soil. The temperate zones furnish the most
vigorous people for consuming these and turning them into wealth. The
relations between these two regions are reciprocal and complemental
rather than competitive. Free trade was first established in those
directions and it soon forced itself in others, until it became the
rule the world over. The history of western Europe during the twentieth
century, is bound up with the development and settlement of South America
and Africa, especially the latter. Modern Africa is as much a child of
Europe as America is, and the native races and tongues are being rapidly
displaced by the European. Population in Europe naturally increases in a
more rapid ratio than ever before, due to the suppression of the ravages
and waste of war, the more scientific treatment of disease, and control
of epidemics, the greater comfort and prosperity of the people. But
with their increased possibilities for comfort have come, an increased
standard and expectation of life, so that it cannot be said that the
people are any better satisfied with life than they were before. The
struggles are as intense and the disappointments as stinging as ever. The
incentives to emigration have not diminished while facilities inducements
and flattering prospects to the immigrant are vastly greater than ever.

“Europe is the great breeding ground for Africa, as it was formerly for
North America. And the human inundation that formerly poured itself into
the United States is diverted chiefly to Africa, but in four fold volume.”

“Surely,” said I, “the capacity of the earth for supporting the human
family must be almost exhausted. It is sickening to contemplate the
suffering that will be entailed in the struggle for existence that it
seems to me must inevitably come soon. Evidently from what you say,
Europe must be about as full as it will hold. I suppose the great
migration you speak of represents the surplus crop of folks that the
continent must get rid of in order to let those that remain live in
tolerable comfort. When Africa and South America get to be as full as
Europe and the United States, so that they can no longer receive this
tide of emigration, then what is to be done? For anything I can see
famine will have to sweep away some of the race in order that the rest
may exist, and after all is that any better than war?”

“At any rate,” said he, “we have not reached that yet. We have now
reached the beginning of the twenty-first century. The population of the
earth has reached the very considerable number of 4,000,000,000 or almost
three times what is was in your day. Yet we concede a three fold increase
of that figure before starvation or some other repressive agency will be
necessary to stop the increase of the population and that will only be
reached by the year 2070.”

He here pulled out a pencil of curious make and with his middle left
hand dashed off some strange looking characters on a blank space on the
profile. He was evidently figuring, for in a moment he went on to say
that he found that when the 40,000,000 square miles of habitable land on
the earth were divided equally between 12,000,000,000, of people they
would have about two acres each.

I ventured to say, I did not think two acres enough to furnish an
individual with food, taking his chances of bad seasons from droughts,
floods etc. Besides men could hardly live without timber and they could
have none if all the land were cultivated. Moreover, they must have
animals to furnish leather, wool etc., and land would be required for
their sustenance.

Land must be also devoted to cotton, flax hemp and so on for clothes
etc. When you allow for such things as these, I said, I thought the area
devoted to the production of food would not be much over one acre to the
individual by the year 2070, if he was right about the number of people
there would then be.

“You are only thinking of the crude methods people had in your day of
getting their food from the earth,” said he. “They were at the mercy of
the uncontrolled action of natural forces and accidents. The rain and
sunshine naturally falling on an acre of land enabled them to raise so
many bushels of wheat or beans or carrots or beets. But if the rain did
not fall or the sun failed to shine or there was too much rain or too
much sunshine or the weather was too cold or the wind too boisterous, the
farmer was at the mercy of the fickle elements and his crop a failure. In
a few places irrigation was practiced, men got a partial control of the
conditions, but these places were limited, and the control incomplete.

“If you will call to mind the information I have given you of the
artificial production of food and other necessaries of existence among
the Lunarians, you will readily see that the resources of the earth to
sustain its population do not depend altogether on the amount of land
surface that men can cultivate to beets and potatoes—the amount on which
the sun shines and the rain falls. Surface you must have of course for
people to live and to move on. But when you learn how to utilize it there
is material under every acre on an average, more than sufficient for the
sustenance of all the people that could stand on it. The soil in which
you plant your seeds is nothing but the disintegrated rock of a thin
layer of the surface of the earth. Below it are rocks of the same sort in
quantities enough to make millions of such soils. If you knew how, you
could make your food products out of the soil directly instead of waiting
for the growth of plants in it, and if the soil should give out you could
make them from the rocks below.”

“Yes,” said I, “but will mankind ever find out how to do this? Will you
wise and experienced Lunarians show us?”

“No, it is not necessary that we should. You will find it out fast enough
yourselves. Your chemists even in your day had begun to take lessons in
chemical synthesis, and as time went on, and the necessity increased,
their efforts were stimulated and constantly became more successful until
now they can produce a number of artificial foods from the original
elements without the necessity of raising vegetables or animals by the
action of natural growth. Looking over into the twenty-first century, we
see that they will easily be able to produce food from the elements as
fast as required. Their abilities and facilities will keep pace with the
population. This implies that the race will not have to be checked in its
expansion by lack of food. The feature of evolution and selection of the
fittest by means of a struggle for food will be entirely eliminated. The
matter will be entirely in the hands of the people themselves.”

“How about clothing,” I asked, “will they produce that too by the aid of
chemistry?”

“Yes they will. Sheep will not be required for their wool any more than
their flesh. A substitute will be found for leather as well as beef.
Better and more durable clothing will be made directly from minerals than
were produced in your time from vegetable and animal substances. Metals
and artificial mineral products began early in the twentieth century and
even before, to supplant wood in buildings and many other structures.
So at present the use of wood is greatly reduced and during the coming
century it will be almost discontinued; a great many things are now made
of Alumina that were formerly made of wood, and that metal has become
cheaper and more abundant than iron. Glass is also very much used, and
methods have been discovered of giving it any desired temper, so that it
is made flexible and tough like pewter or firm and elastic like steel.
It can also be made fibrous and soft as cotton and can be spun and woven
into textile fabrics.”

“But what are they going to do for power and fuel?” I asked. “If there
is to be such an increase of population, an enormous consumption of fuel
and power will follow. Of course they will use the coal while it lasts,
but the supply of that limited, and if that is the only dependence, all
industries will sooner or later be brought to an end.”

“The coal,” said he, “was an excellent makeshift for temporary use until
a more enduring supply of power was discovered to supersede it. But even
now it could if necessary be almost entirely dispensed with and yet there
are still vast deposits of it untouched. In the long distant future the
time will come when the coal will be regarded as a deposit of food for
your race as it is now with ours, but it will not be consumed for its
heat or its power except in that way.”

“Have our people then learned how to get power as you do from the use of
the principle of the repulsion of gravitation?”

“Indeed they have not,” he answered, “and they are very unlikely ever to
find out how to do it unless instructed by us; and that will never be
till the Lunarians become lunatics. The new power that has been developed
and already brought into considerable use and which will soon become a
substitute for all others and endure as long as the earth is habitable
is simply sunlight; and the discovery that is to prove by far the most
valuable ever made by your race is the direct conversion of its force
into electricity, which can as you know be conveyed hundreds of miles and
applied to any sort of machinery required. When coal is used to produce
electricity, the process is after all an indirect way of utilizing the
force of the sun’s rays. Ages ago these rays created the vegetation that
afterwards became coal, and in burning the coal now, the force of the
sun’s rays consumed in its production is again brought into action in
heating the water, that expands into steam that drives the engine, that
turns the dynamo, that creates the electric current. It was seen long ago
that if some process could be devised by which the force of the sunlight
could be consumed in the creation of electricity directly, the suns rays
of to-day could be utilized in the production of power instead of using
up the coal that was produced by them in former ages. It was discovered
in your day that sunlight falling upon the metal selenium is turned in
part into electricity. Acting on this hint your scientists experimented
with that metal and others, and tried hundreds of combinations and
alloys. They have discovered many compounds that possess this property,
which is found to depend on the sizes and shapes of the spaces between
the molecules of the metal. The impact of the undulations of the ether
that give rise to light, striking into the ether confined in these
peculiarly shaped spaces impart to it the sort of motion these shapes
make it competent to take, which is the new form of motion, electricity.
They were largely assisted and guided in their investigations by spectrum
analysis. The apparatus for the production of electricity in this way is
necessarily of large dimensions presenting large surface to the sun, and
as yet is rather expensive, but once made, it lasts forever and produces
electricity whenever the sun shines. Improvements are constantly being
made that reduce the cost and increase the efficiency. These machines are
arranged to turn automatically, a certain face to the sun, revolving on
a horizontal plane diurnally and changing their declination vertically
to follow the north and south movement of the sun through the seasons.
The electricity is transmitted to storage batteries and a surplus thus
accumulated during sunshine to be used at night and in cloudy weather
or carried off to be used elsewhere. These machines yield especially
good results in tropical latitudes and in localities where clear weather
predominates, such as southern California, Arizona, northern Mexico, the
Sahara desert, Egypt, Arabia, Tartary, Central Australia, etc. In all
such countries railroads are operated at nominal expense.

“Stations at intervals transmit the power several hundred miles on
either side. As there is practically no limit to this power it has come
to be used for the accomplishment of undertakings that were hardly
dreamed of before. The irrigation and development of deserts by means of
artesian wells and by streams brought from a distance, followed by the
construction of roads, settlement and cultivation are being vigorously
prosecuted in all parts where the climate is not too cold. Large tracts
notably in the Sahara and Gobi deserts and in Arabia and Tartary, have
already been made productive and populous. This power can be conveyed to
great distances from the point where it is developed, and made to do work
in places practically inaccessible to any other form of power. Excavation
of canals, railway cuts, tunnels and mines with the transportation
of materials for embankments is prosecuted with tremendous energy.
Innumerable mines are being pushed far into the bowels of the earth and
the interior explored and honeycombed in many directions. This work is
however destined to be of vastly more importance in the distant future
than at the present. But I think you can now see that with practically
unlimited power and unlimited raw materials for the construction of the
human race placed in the hands of the race itself your fears that the
increase of population will ever press uncomfortably on the means of
subsistence are not well founded.”

“Yes I do begin to see that,” said I. “It is all very wonderful. What a
career the race has before it! Why it has hardly got out of its cradle
yet. What a misfortune that I was not reserved to be born two or three
centuries later so I could see some of these future glories!”

“Nay, nay,” he replied, “that is a vain wish. You may be as happy in your
own time as you could be in the future. In all the ages of the past,
people have been found expressing a poor opinion of their own times,
extolling the golden age that was past or the millennium that was to
come; and it will be so in the future. If you were to live two centuries
hence you would see as many defects and shortcomings, and anticipate as
many still future improvements and achievements as you did in your day.”

“Well, I suppose, that must be so; and yet with such an apparently
absolute control over the earth it would seem that mankind might make
themselves comfortable and contented.”

CHAPTER IX.

The Problem of Over Population.

“Notwithstanding all that has been and will be accomplished by your
enterprising race,” said he, “there are some things about the earth
that they will never be able to control or improve. There are two in
particular of essential importance. One is the area of the earth’s
surface, which your race can never increase no matter what its
necessities may be; the other is the slow but very certain refrigeration
of the earth’s climate by which we may be sure that a time will be
reached in the long distant future when the habitable surface shall
gradually be reduced till at last no part of the earth’s surface will be
tolerable to any living creature. So in effect while the demand of the
race will be for more room it will constantly be required to put up with
less.”

“But,” said I, “isn’t that a good ways off? The extreme refrigeration
of the earth is a process involving millions of years according to our
scientists.”

“Yes, it will be a long time before any important reduction of area can
take place, but not long before the present room will become very much
cramped. Only a few moments ago we reckoned that by the year 2070 there
would be about two acres to each of the 12,000,000,000 of inhabitants,
on which to live and move and produce the means of subsistence. If the
race should then be doubling every thirty years, in 2100 there will be
but one acre for each; and if they keep on increasing in 2130 a half
acre; in 2160 a quarter; in 2190 an eighth, in 2220 a sixteenth; in
2250 a lot thirty-three by forty-one and one-fourth feet, which in 2280
is reduced to thirty-three by twenty feet 8 inches and this in 2292
four hundred years after the centennial of the discovery of America by
Columbus that was celebrated in your day at Chicago, will be reduced
to thirty-three by sixteen and one-half, or two rods by one. If the
population should get to be as numerous as that the entire earth would
be a city inhabited twelve times as densely as the city of Minneapolis
was in your day. This of course is the average. Some places are more
desirable than others and these would be more densely packed. Already at
the close of the twentieth century many of the pleasanter parts of the
earth have become uncomfortably populous, not from want of the means of
subsistence, but from want of room to carry on the business and pleasures
of life. And yet the growth of population may be said to be just fairly
commenced. It is obvious from what can already be seen that it will very
soon be necessary to place some artificial restriction on the increase
of population or else there will be such suffering among men as will of
itself operate to keep down the number of people by killing them off
faster and shortening the average duration of life. These questions are
already being seriously considered by the philosophers and wise men, and
many plans are being discussed.

“There are some pessimists who declare there is no remedy. They say it
was an egregious blunder on the part of society to attempt the banishment
of suffering. It was suffering that had in all ages kept down the
population, so that the world remained roomy enough to live in with some
comfort. They hold that suffering is a necessary concomitant of comfort
and we are bound to have it both before it, as a necessary antecedent
and after it, as a necessary consequent. It is the law of nature and it
is vain to try to evade it. By banishing war and want and disease, and
reducing the problem of life to an easy pleasant certainty, society, they
say, has caused herself to be invaded by fresh innumerable hordes of
human beings that step into the arena of life from the secret caves of
non-existence as if attracted by the feast of good things that she has
provided for herself. When the repressive hand of suffering is lifted a
little the human species breed and grow like rabbits until they feel its
hard pressure again.

“Nature, they affirm, is no sentimentalist. Her ways are all direct,
hard, cruel and brutal. She is extravagant and wasteful of effort and
parsimonious of results. She creates a thousand seeds of grain or grass
or tree, only one of which will become a grown plant and reproduce its
kind. She is even more prodigal with the spawn of fishes destroying
millions for one she brings to maturity. There is nothing to show that
she cares any more for the human race than for fishes. When men get too
numerous she destroys them as ruthlessly as if they were so many herring
or clams. They assert it is impossible to evade or even to improve upon
the methods of nature. They point to the teeming multitudes that have
swarmed upon the earth during the last century in such comparative
security and comfort as to invite a still greater inundation during the
century to come; and they declare it to be one of the characteristic
stratagems of nature, only restraining her grim and malicious humor in
order to make it the more tragic and appalling when she does give it
play. And they aver that it would be better even now to drop a large
part if not all of the artificial stimulations to the expansion of the
population that have by insensible degrees been grafted upon state
policy during the last century. Let every tub stand on its own bottom,
say they, let natural selection secure the survival of the fittest, and
let the unfit be quietly eliminated by whichever of the numerous methods
nature finds most applicable. In opposition to these are the optimists
who hold that the human race is nature’s pet. If she could be said to
plan anything or to have any preferences in favor of anything, it was
the human family. After making trial in succession of the Trilobite, the
Orthoceras, the Shark, the Megalosaurus, the Pterodactyl, the Mastodon
and others, she put them all down and brought forward man and placed
him over them all, and made him master of the earth. He was a frail
insignificant helpless creature without weight, power or dignity. Other
animals could beat him swimming, diving, flying, running, fighting.
There was only one thing he could do tolerably well and that was to
climb a tree. That was his capital, his stock in trade as one might
say, for it developed his hands and quickened his senses. Nature took
this unprepossessing, unpromising creature, educated and developed him
in her stern school and by her untender methods, put brains into him,
civilized him and fitted him to control the world and finally to govern
himself. This last lesson he has not yet perfectly mastered, but he is
learning more of it every day. Progress, say they, never takes a back
track. The pessimistic theory that nature’s plan is to let every fellow
look out for himself and the devil take the hindmost, is no longer true.
The race has passed that place and the new ideal is; every fellow for
all the rest, and no one left behind. Until this is practically realized
they say the race will not have fulfilled its destiny, and retreat is
impossible. Moreover it is not necessary; for the new departure is after
all as natural as the old way, and is in fact only a continuation of it;
a turn in the road as it were; and it may quite as well be depended upon
to rectify all the difficulties of its own creation. If the principle of
mutual succor, sympathy and assistance leads to over population, the same
principle must furnish the remedy. The optimists admit the contention
of the pessimists that this trouble is looming up, and the philosophers
of all schools are beginning to feel serious. They are discussing such
figures as we had before us a few moments ago and endeavoring to fix the
date at which a halt will have to be called, and the means devised by
which it is to be accomplished. Some say the population is dense enough
now. Others point out that with the increased means of subsistence there
need not be anything uncomfortable in a population of 12,000,000,000
which they estimate will not be reached till 2070, or 70 years from the
present (A. D. 2000.) And they are hopeful enough to believe that by that
time, human wit will have discovered some way of controlling population
without violence to human happiness. All agree that if society is to be
maintained on the present scale it is high time to settle the manner in
which the great question of population is to be met and handled. It is
the most difficult question that has ever demanded human attention.

“In your day there was already beginning to be some discussion in regard
to stirpiculture and the scientific regulation of the family and rearing
of children. But it did not at that time reach a practical stage. No
scientific conclusions on the subject of marriage have yet been able to
displace sentiment and instinct. But soon, as I have already told you,
the rearing of the children was undertaken by the state and removed from