Butapeoplewhohaveonceadoptedthelargesystemofproduction，eitherinmanufacturesorinagriculture，arenotlikelytorecedefromit;andwhenpopulationiskeptindueproportiontothemeansofsupport，itisnotdesirablethattheyshould。Labourisunquestionablymoreproductiveonthesystemoflargeindustrialenterprises;theproduce，ifnotgreaterabsolutely，isgreaterinproportiontothelabouremployed:thesamenumberofpersonscanbesupportedequallywellwithlesstoilandgreaterleisure;whichwillbewhollyanadvantage，assoonascivilizationandimprovementhavesofaradvanced，thatwhatisabenefittothewholeshallbeabenefittoeachindividualcomposingit。Andinthemoralaspectofthequestion，whichisstillmoreimportantthantheeconomical，somethingbettershouldbeaimedatasthegoalofindustrialimprovement，thantodispersemankindovertheearthinsinglefamilies，eachruledinternally，asfamiliesnoware，byapatriarchaldespot，andhavingscarcelyanycommunityofinterest，ornecessarymentalcommunion，withotherhumanbeings。Thedominationoftheheadofthefamilyovertheothermembers，inthisstateofthings，isabsolute;whiletheeffectonhisownmindtendstowardsconcentrationofallinterestsinthefamily，consideredasanexpansionofself，andabsorptionofallpassionsinthatofexclusivepossession，ofallcaresinthoseofpreservationandacquisition。Asastepoutofthemerelyanimalstateintothehuman，outofrecklessabandonmenttobruteinstinctsintoprudentialforesightandself—government，thismoralconditionmaybeseenwithoutdispleasure。Butifpublicspirit，generoussentiments，ortruejusticeandequalityaredesired，association，notisolation，ofinterests，istheschoolinwhichtheseexcellencesarenurtured。Theaimofimprovementshouldbenotsolelytoplacehumanbeingsinaconditioninwhichtheywillbeabletodowithoutoneanother，buttoenablethemtoworkwithorforoneanotherinrelationsnotinvolvingdependence。Hithertotherehasbeennoalternativeforthosewholivedbytheirlabour，butthatoflabouringeithereachforhimselfalone，orforamaster。Butthecivilizingandimprovinginfluencesofassociation，andtheefficiencyandeconomyofproductiononalargescale，maybeobtainedwithoutdividingtheproducersintotwopartieswithhostileinterestsandfeelings，themanywhodotheworkbeingmereservantsunderthecommandoftheonewhosuppliesthefunds，andhavingnointerestoftheirownintheenterpriseexcepttoearntheirwageswithaslittlelabouraspossible。Thespeculationsanddiscussionsofthelastfiftyyears，andtheeventsofthelastthirty，areabundantlyconclusiveonthispoint。Iftheimprovementwhicheventriumphantmilitarydespotismhasonlyretarded，notstopped，shallcontinueitscourse，therecanbelittledoubtthatthestatusofhiredlabourerswillgraduallytendtoconfineitselftothedescriptionofwork—peoplewhoselowmoralqualitiesrenderthemunfitforanythingmoreindependent:andthattherelationofmastersandwork—peoplewillbegraduallysupersededbypartnership，inoneoftwoforms:insomecases，associationofthelabourerswiththecapitalist;inothers，andperhapsfinallyinall，associationoflabourersamongthemselves。
5。Thefirstoftheseformsofassociationhaslongbeenpractised，notindeedasarule，butasanexception。Inseveraldepartmentsofindustrytherearealreadycasesinwhicheveryonewhocontributestothework，eitherbylabourorbypecuniaryresources，hasapartner’sinterestinit，proportionaltothevalueofhiscontribution。Itisalreadyacommonpracticetoremuneratethoseinwhompeculiartrustisreposed，bymeansofapercentageontheprofits:andcasesexistinwhichtheprincipleis，withexcellentsuccess，carrieddowntotheclassofmeremanuallabourers。IntheAmericanshipstradingtoChina，ithaslongbeenthecustomforeverysailortohaveaninterestintheprofitsofthevoyage;andtothishasbeenascribedthegeneralgoodconductofthoseseamen，andtheextremerarityofanycollisionbetweenthemandthegovernmentorpeopleofthecountry。AninstanceinEngland，notsowellknownasitdeservestobe，isthatoftheCornishminers。’InCornwalltheminesareworkedstrictlyonthesystemofjointadventure;gangsofminerscontractingwiththeagent，whorepresentstheownerofthemine，toexecuteacertainportionofaveinandfittheoreformarket，atthepriceofsomuchinthepoundofthesumforwhichtheoreissold。Thesecontractsareputupatcertainregularperiods，generallyeverytwomonths，andtakenbyavoluntarypartnershipofmenaccustomedtothemine。Thissystemhasitsdisadvantages，inconsequenceoftheuncertaintyandirregularityoftheearnings，andconsequentnecessityoflivingforlongperiodsoncredit;butithasadvantageswhichmorethancounterbalancethesedrawbacks。Itproducesadegreeofintelligence，independence，andmoralelevation，whichraisetheconditionandcharacteroftheCornishminerfarabovethatofthegeneralityofthelabouringclass。WearetoldbyDrCarham，that\"theyarenotonly，asaclass，intelligentforlabourers，butmenofconsiderableknowledge\"。Also，that\"theyhaveacharacterofindependence，some。thingAmerican，thesystembywhichthecontractsareletgivingthetakersentirefreedomtomakearrangementsamongthemselves;sothateachmanfeels，asapartnerinhislittlefirm，thathemeetshisemployersonnearlyequalterms\"……Withthisbasisofintelligenceandindependenceintheircharacter，wearenotsurprisedwhenwehearthat\"averygreatnumberofminersarenowlocatedonpossessionsoftheirown，leasedforthreelivesorninety—nineyears，onwhichtheyhavebuilthouses\";orthat\"281，541l。aredepositedinsavingbanksinCornwall，ofwhichtwo—thirdsareestimatedtobelongtominers\"。’（1*）
MrBabbage，whoalsogivesanaccountofthissystem，observesthatthepaymenttothecrewsofwhalingshipsisgovernedbyasimilarprinciple;andthat’theprofitsarisingfromfishingwithnetsonthesouthcoastofEnglandarethusdivided:one—halftheproducebelongstotheowneroftheboatandnet;theotherhalfisdividedinequalportionsbetweenthepersonsusingit，whoarealsoboundtoassistinrepairingthenetwhenrequired。’MrBabbagehasthegreatmeritofhavingpointedoutthepracticability，andtheadvantage，ofextendingtheprincipletomanufacturingindustrygenerally。（2*）
Someattentionhasbeenexcitedbyanexperimentofthisnature，commencedabovethirtyyearsagobyaParistradesman，ahouse—painter，M。Leclaire，（3*）anddescribedbyhiminapamphletpublishedintheyear1842。M。Leclaire，accordingtohisstatement，employsonanaveragetwohundredworkmen，whomhepaysintheusualmanner，byfixedwagesorsalaries。Heassignstohimself，besidesinterestforhiscapital，afixedallowanceforhislabourandresponsibilityasmanager。Attheendoftheyear，thesurplusprofitsaredividedamongthebody，himselfincluded，intheproportionoftheirsalaries。（4*）ThereasonsbywhichM。Leclairewasledtoadoptthissystemarehighlyinstructive。Findingtheconductofhisworkmenunsatisfactory，hefirsttriedtheeffectofgivinghigherwages，andbythishemanagedtoobtainabodyofexcellentworkmen，whowouldnotquithisserviceforanyother。’Havingthussucceeded’（IquotefromanabstractofthepamphletinChambers’Journal，（5*））’inproducingsomesortofstabilityinthearrangementofhisestablishment，M。Leclaireexpected，hesays，toenjoygreaterpeaceofmind。Inthis，however，hewasdisappointed。Solongashewasabletosuperintendeverythinghimself，fromthegeneralconcernsofhisbusinessdowntoitsminutestdetails，hedidenjoyacertainsatisfaction;butfromthemomentthat，owingtotheincreaseofhisbusiness，hefoundthathecouldbenothingmorethanthecentrefromwhichorderswereissued，andtowhichreportswerebroughtin，hisformeranxietyanddiscomfortreturneduponhim。’Hespeakslightlyoftheothersourcesofanxietytowhichatradesmanissubject，butdescribesasanincessantcauseofvexationthelossesarisingfromthemisconductofworkmen。Anemployer’willfindworkmenwhoseindifferencetohisinterestsissuchthattheydonotperformtwo—thirdsoftheamountofworkwhichtheyarecapableof;hencethecontinualfrettingofmasters，who，seeingtheirinterestsneglected，believethemselvesentitledtosupposethatworkmenareconstantlyconspiringtoruinthosefromwhomtheyderivetheirlivelihood。Ifthejourneymanweresureofconstantemployment，hispositionwouldinsomerespectsbemoreenviablethanthatofthemaster，becauseheisassuredofacertainamountofday’swages，whichhewillgetwhetherheworksmuchorlittle。Herunsnorisk，andhasnoothermotivetostimulatehimtodohisbestthanhisownsenseofduty。Themaster，ontheotherhand，dependsgreatlyonchanceforhisreturns:hispositionisoneofcontinualirritationandanxiety。Thiswouldnolongerbethecasetothesameextent，iftheinterestsofthemasterandthoseoftheworkmenwereboundupwitheachother，connectedbysomebondofmutualsecurity，suchasthatwhichwouldbeobtainedbytheplanofayearlydivisionofprofits。’
UntilthepassingoftheLimitedLiabilityAct，itwasheldthatanarrangementsimilartoM。Leclaire’swouldhavebeenimpossibleinEngland，astheworkmencouldnot，inthepreviousstateofthelaw，havebeenassociatedintheprofits，withoutbeingliableforlosses。Oneofthemanybenefitsofthatgreatlegislativeimprovementhasbeentorenderpartnershipsofthisdescriptionpossible，andwemaynowexpecttoseethemcarriedintopractice。MessrsBriggs，oftheWhitwoodandMethleycollieries，nearNormantoninYorkshire，havetakenthefirststep。Theynowworktheseminesbyacompany，two—thirdsofthecapitalofwhichtheythemselvescontinuetohold，butundertake，intheallotmentoftheremainingthird，togivethepreferencetothe’officialsandoperativesemployedintheconcern’;and，whatisofstillgreaterimportance，whenevertheannualprofitexceeds10percent，one—halftheexcessisdividedamongthework—peopleandemployes，whethershareholdersornot，inproportiontotheirearningsduringtheyear。Itishighlyhonourabletotheseimportantemployersoflabourtohaveinitiatedasystemsofullofbenefitbothtotheoperativesemployedandtothegeneralinterestofsocialimprovement:andtheyexpressnomorethanajustconfidenceintheprinciplewhentheysay，that’theadoptionofthemodeofappropriationthusrecommendedwould，itisbelieved，addsogreatanelementofsuccesstotheundertakingastoincreaseratherthandiminishthedividendtotheshareholders。’
6。Theformofassociation，however，whichifmankindcontinuetoimprove，mustbeexpectedintheendtopredominate，isnotthatwhichcanexistbetweenacapitalistaschief，andwork。peoplewithoutavoiceinthemanagement，buttheassociationofthelabourersthemselvesontermsofequality，collectivelyowningthecapitalwithwhichtheycarryontheiroperations，andworkingundermanagerselectedandremovablebythemselves。Solongasthisidearemainedinastateoftheory，inthewritingsofOwenorofLouisBlanc，itmayhaveappeared，tothecommonmodesofjudgment，incapableofbeingrealized，andnotlikelytobetriedunlessbyseizingontheexistingcapital，andconfiscatingitforthebenefitofthelabourers;whichisevennowimaginedbymanypersons，andpretendedbymore，bothinEnglandandontheContinent，tobethemeaningandpurposeofSocialism。Butthereisacapacityofexertionandself—denialinthemassesofmankind，whichisneverknownbutontherareoccasionsonwhichitisappealedtointhenameofsomegreatideaorelevatedsentiment。SuchanappealwasmadebytheFrenchRevolutionof1848。Forthefirsttimeitthenseemedtotheintelligentandgenerousoftheworkingclassesofagreatnation，thattheyhadobtainedagovernmentwhosincerelydesiredthefreedomanddignityofthemany，andwhodidnotlookuponitastheirnaturalandlegitimatestatetobeinstrumentsofproduction，workedforthebenefitofthepossessorsofcapital。
Underthisencouragement，theideassownbySocialistwriters，ofanemancipationoflabourtobeeffectedbymeansofassociation，throveandfructified;andmanyworkingpeoplecametotheresolution，notonlythattheywouldworkforoneanother，insteadofworkingforamastertradesmanormanufacturer，butthattheywouldalsofreethemselves，atwhatevercostoflabourorprivation，fromthenecessityofpaying，outoftheproduceoftheirindustry，aheavytributefortheuseofcapital;thattheywouldextinguishthistax，notbyrobbingthecapitalistsofwhattheyortheirpredecessorshadacquiredbylabourandpreservedbyeconomy，butbyhonestlyacquiringcapitalforthemselves。Ifonlyafewoperativeshadattemptedthisarduoustask，orif，whilemanyattemptedit，afewonlyhadsucceeded，theirsuccessmighthavebeendeemedtofurnishnoargumentfortheirsystemasapermanentmodeofindustrialorganization。But，excludingalltheinstancesoffailure，thereexist，orexistedashorttimeago，upwardsofahundredsuccessful，andmanyeminentlyprosperous，associationsofoperativesinParisalone，besidesaconsiderablenumberinthedepartments。
Thesameadmirablequalitiesbywhichtheassociationswerecarriedthroughtheirearlystruggles，maintainedthemintheirincreasingprosperity。Theirrulesofdiscipline，insteadofbeingmorelax，arestricterthanthoseofordinaryworkshops;
butbeingrulesself。imposed，forthemanifestgoodofthecommunity，andnotfortheconvenienceofanemployerregardedashavinganoppositeinterest，theyarefarmorescrupulouslyobeyed，andthevoluntaryobediencecarrieswithitasenseofpersonalworthanddignity。Withwonderfulrapiditytheassociatedworkpeoplehavelearnttocorrectthoseoftheideastheysetoutwith，whichareinoppositiontotheteachingofreasonandexperience。Almostalltheassociations，atfirst，excludedpiece—work，andgaveequalwageswhethertheworkdonewasmoreorless。Almostallhaveabandonedthissystem，andafterallowingtoeveryoneafixedminimum，sufficientforsubsistence，theyapportionallfurtherremunerationaccordingtotheworkdone:mostofthemevendividingtheprofitsattheendoftheyear，inthesameproportionastheearnings。
Itisthedeclaredprincipleofmostoftheseassociations，thattheydonotexistforthemereprivatebenefitoftheindividualmembers，butforthepromotionoftheco—operativecause。Witheveryextension，therefore，oftheirbusiness，theytakeinadditionalmembers，not（whentheyremainfaithfultotheiroriginalplan）toreceivewagesfromthemashiredlabourers，buttoenteratonceintothefullbenefitsoftheassociation，withoutbeingrequiredtobringanythingin，excepttheirlabour:theonlyconditionimposedisthatofreceivingduringafewyearsasmallershareintheannualdivisionofprofits，assomeequivalentforthesacrificesofthefounders。
Whenmembersquittheassociation，whichtheyarealwaysatlibertytodo，theycarrynoneofthecapitalwiththem:itremainsanindivisibleproperty，ofwhichthemembersforthetimebeinghavetheuse，butnotthearbitrarydisposal:bythestipulationsofmostofthecontracts，eveniftheassociationbreaksup，thecapitalcannotbedivided，butmustbedevotedentiretosomeworkofbeneficenceorofpublicutility。Afixed，andgenerallyaconsiderable，proportionoftheannualprofitsisnotsharedamongthemembers，butaddedtothecapitaloftheassociation，ordevotedtotherepaymentofadvancespreviouslymadetoit:anotherportionissetasidetoprovideforthesickanddisabled，andanothertoformafundforextendingthepracticeofassociation，oraidingotherassociationsintheirneed。Themanagersarepaid，likeothermembers，forthetimewhichisoccupiedinmanagement，usuallyattherateofthehighestpaidlabour:buttheruleisadheredto，thattheexerciseofpowershallneverbeanoccasionofprofit。
Oftheabilityoftheassociationstocompetesuccessfullywithindividualcapitalists，evenatanearlyperiodoftheirexistence，M。Feugueray（6*）said，’Lesassociationsquiontetefondeesdepuisdeuxannees，avaientbiendesobstaclesavaincre;
laplupartmanquaientpresqueabsolumentdecapital;toutesmarchaientdansunevoieencoreinexploree;ellesbravaientlesperilsquimenacenttoujourslesnovateursetlesdebutants。Etneanmoins，dansbeaucoupd’industriesouellessesontetablies，ellesconstituentdejapourlesanciennesmaisonsunerivaliteredoutable，quisuscitememedesplaintesnombreusesdansunepartiedelabourgeoisie，nonpasseulementchezlestraiteurs，leslimonadiersetlescoiffeurs，c’est—a—diredanslesindustriesoulanaturedesproduitspermetauxassociationsdecomptersurlaclienteledemocratique，maisdansd’autresindustriesouellesn’ontpaslesmemesavantages。Onn’aqu’aconsulterparexemplelesfabricantsdefauteuils，dechaises，delimes，etl’onsaurad’euxsilesetablissementslesplusimportantsenleursgenresdefabricationnesontpaslesetablissementsdesassocies。’Thevitalityoftheseassociationsmustindeedbegreat，tohaveenabledabouttwentyofthemtosurvivenotonlytheanti—socialistreaction，whichforthetimediscreditedallattemptstoenableworkpeopletobetheirownemployers——notonlythetracasseriesofthepolice，andthehostilepolicyofthegovernmentsincetheusurpation——butinadditiontotheseobstacles，allthedifficultiesarisingfromthetryingconditionoffinancialandcommercialaffairsfrom1854to1858。Oftheprosperityattainedbysomeofthemevenwhilepassingthroughthisdifficultperiod，Ihavegivenexampleswhichmustbeconclusivetoallmindsastothebrilliantfuturereservedfortheprincipleofcooperation。
ItisnotinFrancealonethattheseassociationshavecommencedacareerofprosperity。TosaynothingatpresentofGermany，Piedmont，andSwitzerland（wheretheKonsum—VereinofZurichisoneofthemostprosperouscooperativeassociationsinEurope），EnglandcanproducecasesofsuccessrivallingeventhosewhichIhavecitedfromFrance。UndertheimpulsecommencedbyMrOwen，andmorerecentlypropagatedbythewritingsandpersonaleffortsofabandoffriends，chieflyclergymenandbarristers，towhosenobleexertionstoomuchpraisecanscarcelybegiven，thegoodseedwaswidelysown;thenecessaryalterationsintheEnglishlawofpartnershipwereobtainedfromParliament，onthebenevolentandpublic。spiritedinitiativeofMrSlaney;manyindustrialassociations，andastillgreaternumberofcooperativestoresforretailpurchases，werefounded。
Amongthesearealreadymanyinstancesofremarkableprosperity，themostsignalofwhicharetheLeedsFlourMill，andtheRochdaleSocietyofEquitablePioneers。Ofthislastassociation，themostsuccessfulofall，thehistoryhasbeenwritteninaveryinterestingmannerbyMrHolyoake;（7*）andthenotorietywhichbythisandothermeanshasbeengiventofactssoencouraging，iscausingarapidextensionofassociationswithsimilarobjectsinLancashire，Yorkshire，London，andelsewhere。
Itisnotnecessarytoenterintoanydetailsrespectingthesub。
sequenthistoryofEnglishCo—operation;thelessso，asitisnowoneoftherecognizedelementsintheprogressivemovementoftheage，and，assuch，haslatterlybeenthesubjectofelaboratearticlesinmostofourleadingperiodicals，oneofthemostrecentandbestofwhichwasintheEdinburghReviewforOctober1864:andtheprogressofCooperationfrommonthtomonthisregularlychronicledintheCo—operator。Imustnot，however，omittomentionthelastgreatstepinadvanceinreferencetotheCooperativeStores，theformationintheNorthofEngland（andanotherisincourseofformationinLondon）ofaWholesaleSociety，todispensewiththeservicesofthewholesalemerchantaswellasoftheretaildealer，andextendtotheSocietiestheadvantagewhicheachsocietygivestoitsownmembers，byanagencyforcooperativepurchases，offoreignaswellasdomesticcommodities，directfromtheproducers。
Itishardlypossibletotakeanybutahopefulviewoftheprospectsofmankind，when，intwoleadingcountriesoftheworld，theobscuredepthsofsocietycontainsimpleworkingmenwhoseintegrity，goodsense，self—command，andhonourableconfidenceinoneanother，haveenabledthemtocarrythesenobleexperimentstothetriumphantissuewhichthefactsrecordedintheprecedingpagesattest。Fromtheprogressiveadvanceoftheco—operativemovement，agreatincreasemaybelookedforevenintheaggregateproductivenessofindustry。Thesourcesoftheincreasearetwofold。Inthefirstplace，theclassofmeredistributors，whoarenotproducersbutauxiliariesofproduction，andwhoseinordinatenumbers，farmorethanthegainsofcapitalists，arethecausewhysogreataportionofthewealthproduceddoesnotreachtheproducers——willbereducedtomoremodestdimensions。Distributorsdifferfromproducersinthis，thatwhenproducersincrease，eventhoughinanygivendepartmentofindustrytheymaybetoonumerous，theyactuallyproducemore:butthemultiplicationofdistributorsdoesnotmakemoredistributiontobedone，morewealthtobedistributed;
itdoesbutdividethesameworkamongagreaternumberofpersons，seldomevencheapeningtheprocess。Bylimitingthedistributorstothenumberreallyrequiredformakingthecommoditiesaccessibletotheconsumerswhichisthedirecteffectofthecooperativesystem——avastnumberofhandswillbesetfreeforproduction，andthecapitalwhichfeedsandthegainswhichremuneratethemwillbeappliedtofeedandremunerateproducers。Thisgreateconomyoftheworld’sresourceswouldberealizedevenifco—operationstoppedatassociationsforpurchaseandconsumption，withoutextendingtoproduction。
Theothermodeinwhichcooperationtends，stillmoreefficaciously，toincreasetheproductivenessoflabour，consistsinthevaststimulusgiventoproductiveenergies，byplacingthelabourers，asamass，inarelationtotheirworkwhichwouldmakeittheirprincipleandtheirinterest——atpresentitisneither——todotheutmost，insteadoftheleastpossible，inexchangefortheirremuneration。Itisscarcelypossibletoratetoohighlythismaterialbenefit，whichyetisasnothingcomparedwiththemoralrevolutioninsocietythatwouldaccompanyit:thehealingofthestandingfeudbetweencapitalandlabour;thetransformationofhumanlife，fromaconflictofclassesstrugglingforoppositeinterests，toafriendlyrivalryinthepursuitofagoodcommontoall;theelevationofthedignityoflabour;anewsenseofsecurityandindependenceinthelabouringclass;andtheconversionofeachhumanbeing’sdailyoccupationintoaschoolofthesocialsympathiesandthepracticalintelligence。
SuchisthenobleideawhichthepromotersofCo—operationshouldhavebeforethem。Buttoattain，inanydegree，theseobjects，itisindispensablethatall，andnotsomeonly，ofthosewhodotheworkshouldbeidentifiedininterestwiththeprosperityoftheundertaking。Associationswhich，whentheyhavebeensuccessful，renouncetheessentialprincipleofthesystem，andbecomejoint—stockcompaniesofalimitednumberofshareholders，whodifferfromthoseofothercompaniesonlyinbeingworkingmen;associationswhichemployhiredlabourerswithoutanyinterestintheprofits（andIgrievetosaythattheManufacturingSocietyevenofRochdalehasthusdegenerated）are，nodoubt，exercisingalawfulrightinhonestlyemployingtheexistingsystemofsocietytoimprovetheirpositionasindividuals，butitisnotfromthemthatanythingneedbeexpectedtowardsreplacingthatsystembyabetter。Neitherwillsuchsocieties，inthelongrun，succeedinkeepingtheirgroundagainstindividualcompetition。Individualmanagement，bytheonepersonprincipallyinterested，hasgreatadvantagesovereverydescriptionofcollectivemanagement。Co—operationhasbutonethingtoopposetothoseadvantages——thecommoninterestofalltheworkersinthework。Whenindividualcapitalists，astheywillcertainlydo，addthistotheirotherpointsofadvantage;
when，evenifonlytoincreasetheirgains，theytakeupthepracticewhichthesecooperativesocietieshavedropped，andconnectthepecuniaryinterestofeverypersonintheiremploymentwiththemostefficientandmosteconomicalmanagementoftheconcern;theyarelikelytogainaneasyvictoryoversocietieswhichretainthedefects，whiletheycannotpossessthefulladvantages，oftheoldsystem。
Underthemostfavourablesupposition，itwillbedesirable，andperhapsforaconsiderablelengthoftime，thatindividualcapitalists，associatingtheirwork—peopleintheprofits，shouldcoexistwitheventhosecooperativesocietieswhicharefaithfultothecooperativeprinciple。Unityofauthoritymakesmanythingspossible，whichcouldnotorwouldnotbeundertakensubjecttothechanceofdividedcouncilsorchangesinthemanagement。Aprivatecapitalist，exemptfromthecontrolofabody，ifheisapersonofcapacity，isconsiderablymorelikelythanalmostanyassociationtorunjudiciousrisks，andoriginatecostlyimprovements。Co—operativesocietiesmaybedependedonforadoptingimprovementsaftertheyhavebeentestedbysuccess，butindividualsaremorelikelytocommencethingspreviouslyuntried。Eveninordinarybusiness，thecompetitionofcapablepersonswhointheeventoffailurearetohavealltheloss，andinthecaseofsuccessthegreaterpartofthegain，willbeveryusefulinkeepingthemanagersofcooperativesocietiesuptotheduepitchofactivityandvigilance。
When，however，cooperativesocietiesshallhavesufficientlymultiplied，itisnotprobablethatanybuttheleastvaluablework—peoplewillanylongerconsenttoworkalltheirlivesforwagesmerely;bothprivatecapitalistsandassociationswillgraduallyfinditnecessarytomaketheentirebodyoflabourersparticipantsinprofits。Eventually，andinperhapsalessremotefuturethanmaybesupposed，wemay，throughthecooperativeprinciple，seeourwaytoachangeinsociety，whichwouldcombinethefreedomandindependenceoftheindividual，withthemoral，intellectual，andeconomicaladvantagesofaggregateproduction;andwhich，withoutviolenceorspoliation，orevenanysuddendisturbanceofexistinghabitsandexpectations，wouldrealize，atleastintheindustrialdepartment，thebestaspirationsofthedemocraticspirit，byputtinganendtothedivisionofsocietyintotheindustriousandtheidle，andeffacingallsocialdistinctionsbutthosefairlyearnedbypersonalservicesandexertions。Associationslikethosewhichwehavedescribed，bytheveryprocessoftheirsuccess，areacourseofeducationinthosemoralandactivequalitiesbywhichalonesuccesscanbeeitherdeservedorattained。Asassociationsmultiplied，theywouldtendmoreandmoretoabsorballwork—people，exceptthosewhohavetoolittleunderstanding，ortoolittlevirtue，tobecapableoflearningtoactonanyothersystemthanthatofnarrowselfishness。Asthischangeproceeded，ownersofcapitalwouldgraduallyfindittotheiradvantage，insteadofmaintainingthestruggleoftheoldsystemwithwork—peopleofonlytheworstdescription，tolendtheircapitaltotheassociations;todothisatadiminishingrateofinterest，andatlast，perhaps，eventoexchangetheircapitalforterminableannuities。Inthisorsomesuchmode，theexistingaccumulationsofcapitalmighthonestly，andbyakindofspontaneousprocess，becomeintheendthejointpropertyofallwhoparticipateintheirproductiveemployment:atransformationwhich，thuseffected，（andassumingofcoursethatbothsexesparticipateequallyintherightsandinthegovernmentoftheassociation）（8*）wouldbethenearestapproachtosocialjustice，andthemostbeneficialorderingofindustrialaffairsfortheuniversalgood，whichitispossibleatpresenttoforesee。
7。Iagree，thenwiththeSocialistwritersintheirconceptionoftheformwhichindustrialoperationstendtoassumeintheadvanceofimprovement;andIentirelysharetheiropinionthatthetimeisripeforcommencingthistransformation，andthatitshouldbyalljustandeffectualmeansbeaidedandencouraged。ButwhileIagreeandsympathizewithSocialistsinthispracticalportionoftheiraims，Iutterlydissentfromthemostconspicuousandvehementpartoftheirteaching，theirdeclamationsagainstcompetition。Withmoralconceptionsinmanyrespectsfaraheadoftheexistingarrangementsofsociety，theyhaveingeneralveryconfusedanderroneousnotionsofitsactualworking;andoneoftheirgreatesterrors，asIconceive，istochargeuponcompetitionalltheeconomicalevilswhichatpresentexist。Theyforgetthatwherevercompetitionisnot，monopolyis;
andthatmonopoly，inallitsforms，isthetaxationoftheindustriousforthesupportofindolence，ifnotofplunder。Theyforget，too，thatwiththeexceptionofcompetitionamonglabourers，allothercompetitionisforthebenefitofthelabourers，bycheapeningthearticlestheyconsume;thatcompetitioneveninthelabourmarketisasourcenotoflowbutofhighwages，whereverthecompetitionforlabourexceedsthecompetitionoflabour，asinAmerica，inthecolonies，andintheskilledtrades;andnevercouldbeacauseoflowwages，savebytheoverstockingofthelabourmarketthroughthetoogreatnumbersofthelabourers’families;while，ifthesupplyoflabourersisexcessive，notevenSocialismcanpreventtheirremunerationfrombeinglow。Besides，ifassociationwereuniversal，therewouldbenocompetitionbetweenlabourerandlabourer;andthatbetweenassociationandassociationwouldbeforthebenefitoftheconsumers，thatis，oftheassociations;
oftheindustriousclassesgenerally。
Idonotpretendthattherearenoinconveniencesincompetition，orthatthemoralobjectionsurgedagainstitbySocialistwriters，asasourceofjealousyandhostilityamongthoseengagedinthesameoccupation，arealtogethergroundless。
Butifcompetitionhasitsevils，itpreventsgreaterevils。AsM。Feugueraywellsays，’Laracinelaplusprofondedesmauxetdesiniquitesquicouvrentlemondeindustriel，n’estpaslaconcurrence，maisbienl’exploitationduetravailparlecapital，etlapartenormequelespossesseursdesinstrumentsdetravailpreleventsurlesproduits……Silaconcurrenceabeaucoupdepuissancepourlemal，ellen’apasmoinsdefeconditepourlebien，surtoutencequiconcerneledeveloppementdesfacultesindividuelles，etlesuccesdesinnovations。’ItisthecommonerrorofSocialiststooverlookthenaturalindolenceofmankind;
theirtendencytobepassive，tobetheslavesofhabit，topersistindefinitelyinacourseoncechosen。Letthemonceattainanystateofexistencewhichtheyconsidertolerable，andthedangertobeapprehendedisthattheywillthenceforthstagnate;willnotexertthemselvestoimprove，andbylettingtheirfacultiesrust，willloseeventheenergyrequiredtopreservethemfromdeterioration。Competitionmaynotbethebestconceivablestimulus，butitisatpresentanecessaryone，andnoonecanforeseethetimewhenitwillnotbeindispensabletoprogress。Evenconfiningourselvestotheindustrialdepartment，inwhich，morethaninanyother，themajoritymaybesupposedtobecompetentjudgesofimprovements;itwouldbedifficulttoinducethegeneralassemblyofanassociationtosubmittothetroubleandinconvenienceofalteringtheirhabitsbyadoptingsomenewandpromisinginvention，unlesstheirknowledgeoftheexistenceofrivalassociationsmadethemapprehendthatwhattheywouldnotconsenttodo，otherswould，andthattheywouldbeleftbehindintherace。
Insteadoflookinguponcompetitionasthebanefulandanti—socialprinciplewhichitisheldtobebythegeneralityofSocialists，Iconceivethat，eveninthepresentstateofsocietyandindustry，everyrestrictionofitisanevil，andeveryextensionofit，evenifforthetimeinjuriouslyaffectingsomeclassoflabourers，isalwaysanultimategood。Tobeprotectedagainstcompetitionistobeprotectedinidleness，inmentaldulness;tobesavedthenecessityofbeingasactiveandasintelligentasotherpeople;andifitisalsotobeprotectedagainstbeingunderbidforemploymentbyalesshighlypaidclassoflabourers，thisisonlywhereoldcustom，orlocalandpartialmonopoly，hasplacedsomeparticularclassofartisansinaprivilegedpositionascomparedwiththerest;andthetimehascomewhentheinterestofuniversalimprovementisnolongerpromotedbyprolongingtheprivilegesofafew。Iftheslopsellersandothersoftheirclasshaveloweredthewagesoftailors，andsomeotherartisans，bymakingthemanaffairofcompetitioninsteadofcustom，somuchthebetterintheend。
Whatisnowrequiredisnottobolsterupoldcustoms，wherebylimitedclassesoflabouringpeopleobtainpartialgainswhichinteresttheminkeepingupthepresentorganizationofsociety，buttointroducenewgeneralpracticesbeneficialtoall;andthereisreasontorejoiceatwhatevermakestheprivilegedclassesofskilledartisansfeelthattheyhavethesameinterests，anddependfortheirremunerationonthesamegeneralcauses，andmustresortfortheimprovementoftheirconditiontothesameremedies，asthelessfortunatelycircumstancedandcomparativelyhelplessmultitude。
NOTES:
1。ThispassageisfromthePrizeEssayontheCausesandRemediesofNationalDistress，byMrSamuelLaing。TheextractswhichitincludesarefromtheAppendixtotheReportoftheChildren’sEmploymentCommission。
2。EconomyofMachineryandManufactures，3rdedition，Ch。26。
3。Hisestablishmentis11，RueSaintGeorges。
4。Itappears，however，thattheworkmenwhomM。Leclairehadadmittedtothisparticipationofprofits，wereonlyaportion（ratherlessthanhalf）ofthewholenumberwhomheemployed。
Thisisexplainedbyanotherpartofhissystem。M。Leclairepaysthefullmarketrateofwagestoallhisworkmen。Theshareofprofitassignedtothemis，therefore，aclearadditiontotheordinarygainsoftheirclass，whichheverylaudablyusesasaninstrumentofimprovement，bymakingittherewardofdesert，ortherecompenseforpeculiartrust。
5。For27September，1845。
6。L’AssociationOuvriereIndustrielleetAgricole，pp。37—8。
7。’Self—helpbythePeople——HistoryofCo—operationinRochdale。’Aninstructiveaccountofthisandotherco—operativeassociationshasalsobeenwritteninthe’CompaniontotheAlmanack’for1862，byMrJohnPlummer，ofKettering;himselfoneofthemostinspiringexamplesofmentalcultivationandhighprincipleinaself—instructedworkingman。
8。InthisrespectalsotheRochdaleSocietyhasgivenanexampleofreasonandjustice，worthyofthegoodsenseandgoodfeelingmanifestedintheirgeneralproceedings。’TheRochdaleStory。’
saysMrHolyoake，’rendersincidentalbutvaluableaidtowardsrealizingthecivilindependenceofwomen。WomenmaybemembersofthisStore，andvoteinitsproceedings。Singleandmarriedwomenjoin。Manymarriedwomenbecomemembersbecausetheirhusbandswillnottakethetrouble，andothersjoininitinself—defence，topreventthehusbandfromspendingtheirmoneyindrink。ThehusbandcannotwithdrawthesavingsattheStorestandinginthewife’sname，unlessshesignstheorder。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book5:OnTheInfluenceofGovernment
Chapter1
OftheFunctionsofGovernmentinGeneral
1。Oneofthemostdisputedquestionsbothinpolitical
scienceandinpracticalstatesmanshipatthisparticularperiod，
relatestotheproperlimitsofthefunctionsandagencyof
governments。Atothertimesithasbeenasubjectofcontroversy
howgovernmentsshouldbeconstituted，andaccordingtowhat
principlesandrulestheyshouldexercisetheirauthority;butit
isnowalmostequallyaquestion，towhatdepartmentsofhuman
affairsthatauthorityshouldextend。Andwhenthetidesetsso
stronglytowardschangesingovernmentandlegislation，asa
meansofimprovingtheconditionofmankind，thisdiscussionis
morelikelytoincreasethantodiminishininterest。Ontheone
hand，impatientreformers，thinkingiteasierandshortertoget
possessionofthegovernmentthanoftheintellectsand
dispositionsofthepublic，areunderaconstanttemptationto
stretchtheprovinceofgovernmentbeyondduebounds:while，on
theother，mankindhavebeensomuchaccustomedbytheirrulers
tointerferenceforpurposesotherthanthepublicgood，orunder
anerroneousconceptionofwhatthatgoodrequires，andsomany
rashproposalsaremadebysincereloversofimprovement，for
attempting，bycompulsoryregulation，theattainmentofobjects
whichcanonlybeeffectuallyoronlyusefullycompassedby
opinionanddiscussion，thattherehasgrownupaspiritof
resistanceinliminetotheinterferenceofgovernment，merelyas
such，andadispositiontorestrictitssphereofactionwithin
thenarrowestbounds。Fromdifferencesinthehistorical
developmentofdifferentnations，notnecessarytobeheredwelt
upon，theformerexcess，thatofexaggeratingtheprovinceof
government，prevailsmost，bothintheoryandinpractice，among
theContinentalnations，whileinEnglandthecontraryspirithas
hithertobeenpredominant。
Thegeneralprinciplesofthequestion，insofarasitisa
questionofprinciple，Ishallmakeanattempttodetermineina
laterchapterofthisBook:afterfirstconsideringtheeffects
producedbytheconductofgovernmentintheexerciseofthe
functionsuniversallyacknowledgedtobelongtoit。Forthis
purpose，theremustbeaspecificationofthefunctionswhichare
eitherinseparablefromtheideaofagovernment，orare
exercisedhabituallyandwithoutobjectionbyallgovernments;as
distinguishedfromthoserespectingwhichithasbeenconsidered
questionablewhethergovernmentsshouldexercisethemornot。The
formermaybetermedthenecessary，thelattertheoptional，
functionsofgovernment。Bythetermoptionalitisnotmeantto
imply，thatitcaneverbeamatterofindifference，orof
arbitrarychoice，whetherthegovernmentshouldorshouldnot
takeuponitselfthefunctionsinquestion;butonlythatthe
expediencyofitsexercisingthemdoesnotamounttonecessity，
andisasubjectonwhichdiversityofopiniondoesormayexist。
2。Inattemptingtoenumeratethenecessaryfunctionsof
government，wefindthemtobeconsiderablymoremultifarious
thanmostpeopleareatfirstawareof，andnotcapableofbeing
circumscribedbythoseverydefinitelinesofdemarcation，which，
intheinconsideratenessofpopulardiscussion，itisoften
attemptedtodrawroundthem。Wesometimes，forexample，hearit
saidthatgovernmentsoughttoconfinethemselvestoaffording
protectionagainstforceandfraud:that，thesetwothingsapart，
peopleshouldbefreeagents，abletotakecareofthemselves，
andthatsolongasapersonpractisesnoviolenceordeception，
totheinjuryofothersinpersonorproperty，legislaturesand
governmentsareinnowaycalledontoconcernthemselvesabout
him。Butwhyshouldpeoplebeprotectedbytheirgovernment，that
is，bytheirowncollectivestrength，againstviolenceandfraud，
andnotagainstotherevils，exceptthattheexpediencyismore
obvious？Ifnothing，butwhatpeoplecannotpossiblydofor
themselves，canbefittobedoneforthembygovernment，people
mightberequiredtoprotectthemselvesbytheirskilland
courageevenagainstforce，ortobegorbuyprotectionagainst
it，astheyactuallydowherethegovernmentisnotcapableof
protectingthem:andagainstfraudeveryonehastheprotection
ofhisownwits。Butwithoutfurtheranticipatingthediscussion
ofprinciples，itissufficientonthepresentoccasionto
considerfacts。
Underwhichoftheseheads，therepressionofforceorof
fraud，arewetoplacetheoperation，forexample，ofthelawsof
inheritance？Somesuchlawsmustexistinallsocieties。Itmay
besaid，perhaps，thatinthismattergovernmenthasmerelyto
giveeffecttothedispositionwhichanindividualmakesofhis
ownpropertybywill。This，however，isatleastextremely
disputable;thereisprobablynocountrybywhoselawsthepower
oftestamentarydispositionisperfectlyabsolute。Andsuppose
theverycommoncaseoftherebeingnowill:doesnotthelaw，
thatis，thegovernment，decideonprinciplesofgeneral
expediency，whoshalltakethesuccession？andincasethe
successorisinanymannerincompetent，doesitnotappoint
persons，frequentlyofficersofitsown，tocollecttheproperty
andapplyittohisbenefit？Therearemanyothercasesinwhich
thegovernmentundertakestheadministrationofproperty，because
thepublicinterest，orperhapsonlythatoftheparticular
personsconcerned，isthoughttorequireit。Thisisoftendone
incaseoflitigatedproperty;andincasesofjudicially
declaredinsolvency。Ithasneverbeencontendedthatindoing
thesethings，agovernmentexceedsitsprovince。
Noristhefunctionofthelawindefiningpropertyitself，
sosimpleathingasmaybesupposed。Itmaybeimagined，
perhaps，thatthelawhasonlytodeclareandprotecttheright
ofeveryonetowhathehashimselfproduced，oracquiredbythe
voluntaryconsent，fairlyobtained，ofthosewhoproducedit。But
istherenothingrecognizedaspropertyexceptwhathasbeen
produced？Istherenottheearthitself，itsforestsandwaters，
andallothernaturalriches，aboveandbelowthesurface？These
aretheinheritanceofthehumanrace，andtheremustbe
regulationsforthecommonenjoymentofit。Whatrights，and
underwhatconditions，apersonshallbeallowedtoexerciseover
anyportionofthiscommoninheritance，cannotbeleftundecided。
Nofunctionofgovernmentislessoptionalthantheregulationof
thesethings，ormorecompletelyinvolvedintheideaof
civilizedsociety。
Again，thelegitimacyisconcededofrepressingviolenceor
treachery;butunderwhichoftheseheadsarewetoplacethe
obligationimposedonpeopletoperformtheircontracts？
Nonperformancedoesnotnecessarilyimplyfraud;thepersonwho
enteredintothecontractmayhavesincerelyintendedtofulfil
it:andthetermfraud，whichcanscarcelyadmitofbeing
extendedeventothecaseofvoluntarybreachofcontractwhenno
deceptionwaspractised，iscertainlynotapplicablewhenthe
omissiontoperformisacaseofnegligence。Isitnopartofthe
dutyofgovernmentstoenforcecontracts？Herethedoctrineof
non—interferencewouldnodoubtbestretchedalittle，andit
wouldbesaid，thatenforcingcontractsisnotregulatingthe
affairsofindividualsatthepleasureofgovernment，butgiving
effecttotheirownexpresseddesire。Letusacquiesceinthis
enlargementoftherestrictivetheory，andtakeitforwhatitis
worth。Butgovernmentsdonotlimittheirconcernwithcontracts
toasimpleenforcement。Theytakeuponthemselvestodetermine
whatcontractsarefittobeenforced。Itisnotenoughthatone
person，notbeingeithercheatedorcompelled，makesapromiseto
another。Therearepromisesbywhichitisnotforthepublic
goodthatpersonsshouldhavethepowerofbindingthemselves。To
saynothingofengagementstodosomethingcontrarytolaw，there
areengagementswhichthelawrefusestoenforce，forreasons
connectedwiththeinterestofthepromiser，orwiththegeneral
policyofthestate。Acontractbywhichapersonsellshimself
toanotherasaslave，wouldbedeclaredvoidbythetribunalsof
thisandofmostotherEuropeancountries。Therearefewnations
whoselawsenforceacontractforwhatislookeduponas
prostitution，oranymatrimonialengagementofwhichthe
conditionsvaryinanyrespectfromthosewhichthelawhas
thoughtfittoprescribe。Butwhenonceitisadmittedthatthere
areanyengagementswhichforreasonsofexpediencythelawought
nottoenforce，thesamequestionisnecessarilyopenedwith
respecttoallengagements。Whether，forexample，thelawshould
enforceacontracttolabour，whenthewagesaretooloworthe
hoursofworktoosevere:whetheritshouldenforceacontractby
whichapersonbindshimselftoremain，formorethanavery
limitedperiod，intheserviceofagivenindividual:whethera
contractofmarriage，enteredintoforlife，shouldcontinueto
beenforcedagainstthedeliberatewillofthepersons，orof
eitherofthepersons，whoenteredintoit。Everyquestionwhich
canpossiblyariseastothepolicyofcontracts，andofthe
relationswhichtheyestablishamonghumanbeings，isaquestion
forthelegislator;andonewhichhecannotescapefrom
considering，andinsomewayorotherdeciding。
Again，thepreventionandsuppressionofforceandfraud
affordappropriateemploymentforsoldiers，policemen，and
criminaljudges;buttherearealsociviltribunals。The
punishmentofwrongisonebusinessofanadministrationof
justice，butthedecisionofdisputesisanother。innumerable
disputesarisebetweenpersons，withoutmalafidesoneither
side，throughmisconceptionoftheirlegalrights，orfromnot
beingagreedaboutthefacts，ontheproofofwhichthoserights
arelegallydependent。Isitnotforthegeneralinterestthat
theStateshouldappointpersonstoclearuptheseuncertainties
andterminatethesedisputes？Itcannotbesaidtobeacaseof
absolutenecessity。Peoplemightappointanarbitrator，and
engagetosubmittohisdecision;andtheydosowherethereare
nocourtsofjustice，orwherethecourtsarenottrusted，or
wheretheirdelaysandexpenses，ortheirrationalityoftheir
rulesofevidence，deterpeoplefromresortingtothem。Still，it
isuniversallythoughtrightthattheStateshouldestablish
civiltribunals;andiftheirdefectsoftendrivepeopletohave
recoursetosubstitutes，eventhenthepowerheldinreserveof
carryingthecasebeforealegallyconstitutedcourt，givesto
thesubstitutestheirprincipalefficacy。
NotonlydoestheStateundertaketodecidedisputes，it
takesprecautionsbeforehandthatdisputesmaynotarise。The
lawsofmostcountrieslaydownrulesfordeterminingmany
things，notbecauseitisofmuchconsequenceinwhatwaythey
aredetermined，butinorderthattheymaybedeterminedsomehow，
andtheremaybenoquestiononthesubject。Thelawprescribes
formsofwordsformanykindsofcontract，inorderthatno
disputeormisunderstandingmayariseabouttheirmeaning:it
makesprovisionthatifadisputedoesarise，evidenceshallbe
procurablefordecidingit，byrequiringthatthedocumentbe
attestedbywitnessesandexecutedwithcertainformalities。The
lawpreservesauthenticevidenceoffactstowhichlegal
consequencesareattached，bykeepingaregistryofsuchfacts;
asofbirths，deaths，andmarriages，ofwillsandcontracts，and
ofjudicialproceedings。Indoingthesethings，ithasneverbeen
allegedthatgovernmentoverstepstheproperlimitsofits
functions。