that the main racial stocks should remain apart, on their several continents, in that mutual respect and brotherhood that the superficial repugnances of too close contact tend to destroy. The plan suggested at the close of the preceding paragraph would sufficiently avert these undesirable racial migrations.

IV. The woman-movement? The demand of women for a larger life and a recognition from men of their full equality has found expression in recent years, not only in the hysterical acts of the British suffragettes, but in many soberer revolts against the traditional assignment of duties and privileges. We may agree at once in deploring the exclusion of women from any rights and opportunities which are not inconsistent with a wise division of labor, and that patronizing air of superiority shown toward them by so many men a condescension not incompatible with tenderness and chivalry. Theirs has been the repressed and petted sex. Yet there are no adequate grounds for supposing that men are, on an average, really abler or saner or more reasonable naturally than women; that they are, indeed, in any essential sense different, except for the results of their different education and life, and such divergences as the differentiation of sex itself involves including an average greater physical strength. Men and women are naturally equals; with equally good training they can contribute almost equally to the world's work; they have an equal right to edu cation, a useful vocation, and the free pursuit of happiness. But equal rights do not necessarily imply identical duties; there is a certain division of labor laid down by nature. Women alone can bear children, mothers alone can properly rear them; no incubators and institutions can supply this fundamental need. If women, in their eagerness to compete with men in other occupations, neglect in any great numbers 1 But cf. Münsterberg, Psychology and Social Sanity, p. 195 ff.

this most difficult and honorable of all vocations, there will be a dangerous decline in the numbers and the nurture of coming generations. Moreover, if homes are not to be supplanted by boarding-houses and hotels, the great majority of women must stay at home and do the work which makes a home possible. Home-making and child-rearing are the duties that always have been and always will be the lot of most women; and they are duties too exacting to permit of being conjoined with any other vocation.

On the other hand, the woman who has servants and rears no children should be pushed by public opinion into some outside occupation; women have no more right to idle than men. All unmarried women, when past the years that may properly be devoted to education, should certainly enter upon some useful vocation; and there is no reason why (with a few obvious exceptions) any occupation save the more physically arduous should be closed to such. Every girl should be prepared for some remunerative work, in case she does not marry or her husband dies leaving her childless. Such economic independence would, further, have the inestimable value that she would be under no pressure to marry in order to be supported and have an honorable place in the world; if she is trained to earn her living she will be free to marry only for love. If she does marry, and gives up her prior vocation to be housekeeper and child-rearer, she should be legally entitled to half her husband's earnings. The grave difficulty is that a woman needs to prepare herself both for her probable duties as housekeeper and mother, and also for her possible need of earning a living otherwise. Education in the former duties, that must fall to the great majority of women, cannot safely be neglected, as it is so largely to-day; the only general solution will be for unmarried women to adopt, as a class, the vocations for which less careful preparation is necessary.

The question of the ballot has never been politically of great importance. It has been rather a matter of justice, of self-respect for women and proper respect for women on the part of men. So far as running the machinery of government goes, the decision in political affairs might well be left to half the population - when that half cuts so completely through all classes and sections—if the saving in expense or trouble seemed to make it expedient. The interests of women are identical with those of men. Women were, in most parts of this country, as well off before the law as men; they did not need the ballot to remedy any unjust discriminations. Moreover, the ballot will mean the necessity of sharing the burden of political responsibility. The women who look upon the right to vote as a plum to be grasped for, a something which they want because men have it, with no conception of the training necessary to exercise that right responsibly, are not fit to be trusted with itno fitter than most men. It often seems that it were better to restrict our trustful and generous right of suffrage to those who can show evidence of intelligence and responsibility whether men or women.

However, there is considerable reason to suppose that women, through their greater interest in certain goods, will materially accelerate some reforms-as, the sanitation of cities, the improvement of education, child-welfare legislation, the warfare against commercialized prostitution. The actual results already attained by women's votes are, on the whole, important enough to justify the extension of the right, as a matter of social expediency. Moreover, the very increase in the number of voters makes the securing of power through bribery more difficult; and the entrance of women into politics will probably hasten their purification in many places. At any rate, the necessity of voting is tending to develop a larger interest among women in public

affairs, fitting them better for the education of their children, and doing away with the lingering sense of the inferiority of

women.

General: F. W. Taussig, Principles of Economics, chap. 54. W. E. Weyl, The New Democracy, bk. 1. Adams and Sumner, Labor Problems, chap. XIII. C. B. Spahr, The Present Distribution of Wealth in the United States. Dewey and Tufts, Ethics, chap. xxv, secs. 6, 7. Atlantic Monthly, vol. 112, pp. 480, 679.

The single tax: Henry George, Progress and Poverty; Social Problems. R. C. Fillebrown, The A.B.C. of Taxation. Outlook, vol. 94, p. 311. Shearman, Natural Taxation. Atlantic Monthly, vol. 112, p. 737; vol. 113, pp. 27, 545. H. R. Seager, Introduction to Economics, chap. XXVI, secs. 283-88. F. W. Taussig, op. cit., chap. 42, sec. 7. Arena, vol. 34, p. 500; vol. 35, p. 366. New World, vol. 7, p. 87.

Free trade: North American Review, vol. 189, p. 194. Quarterly Review, vol. 202, p. 250. H. Fawcett, Free Trade and Protection. W. J. Ashley, The Tariff Problem. H. R. Seager, op. cit., chap. xx, secs. 211-17. F. W. Taussig, op. cit., chaps. 36, 37.

Immigration: Jenks and Lauck, The Immigration Problem. H. P. Fairchild, Immigration. Adams and Sumner, Labor Problems, chap. ш. F. J. Warne, The Immigrant Invasion. A. Shaw, Political Problems, pp. 62-86. North American Review, vol. 199, p. 866. Nineteenth Century, vol. 57, p. 294. Educational Review, vol. 29, p. 245. Forum, vol. 42, p. 552. Charities, vol. 12, p. 129 ff. Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 16, pp. 1, 141.

The woman question: J. S. Mill, The Subjection of Women. C. P. Gilman, Women and Economics. O. Schreiner, Woman and Labor. K. Schirmacher, The Modern Woman's Rights Movement. Jane Addams, Newer Ideals of Peace, chap. VII. F. Kelley, Some Ethical Gains through Legislation, chap. v. Outlook, vol. 82, p. 167; vol. 91, pp. 780, 784, 836; vol. 95, p. 117; vol. 101, pp. 754, 767. Atlantic Monthly, vol. 112, pp. 48, 191, 721. Century, vol. 87, pp. 1, 663. National Municipal Review, vol. 1, p. 620. H. M. Swanwick, The Future of the Women's Movement. Ellen Key, The Woman Movement. J. Martin, Feminism. E. S. Martin, The Unrest of Women. B. I. Bell, Right and Wrong after the War, chap. III. International Journal of Ethics, vol. 19, p. 443; vol. 26, pp. 207, 223, 462.

CHAPTER XXX

THE FUTURE OF THE RACE

IN proportion as fair means are found and utilized for remedying the gross inequalities in the present distribution of wealth, and big fortunes disappear, it will become necessary for the State to undertake more and more generally the functions that have, during the last few generations, been largely dependent upon private philanthropy. This will be an advantage not merely in putting this welfare work upon a securer basis, but in enlisting the loyalty of the masses to the Government. Much of the energy and devotion which are now given to the labor-unions, because in them alone the workers see hope of help, might be given to the State if it should take upon itself more adequately to minister to the people's needs. The rich can get health and beauty for themselves; but the poor are largely dependent upon public provision for a wholesome and cheerful existence. Laissez-faire individualism has provided them with saloons; in the new age the State must provide them with something better than saloons. "Flowers and sunshine for all," in Richard Jefferies' wistful phrase; the State should make a determined and thoroughgoing effort, not merely to repress, to punish, to palliate conditions, but in every positive way that expert thought can devise and the people will vote to support, to add to the worth of human life. We may consider these paternal functions of government under three heads: the improvement of human environment, to make it more beautiful and convenient; the development, through educational agencies, of the mental and moral life of the