among men as at present, but if the outside power gave shelter freely and food sparingly, the relative value of these two classes of goods w6iild be influenced by this fact just as at pres ent it is influenced by the relative cost of secur ing them.' No student of economics could entirely for get, even if he desired to do so, the social conditions in the midst of which he finds the economic laws to be in operation. It is natural to keep those actual conditions constantly in view, whether practical conclusions arc drawn and practical applications made or not. Eco nomic men constitute society. On the outer fringe of the society to be studied is the social dependent. He cannot be ignored. He is not to be explained by exactly the same principles as apply to society in general. The social debtor may be cast aside to perish, or tolerated as a persistent drain on the social income. Neither course is wise, though human society is con stantly alternating between them.
Leaving aside this problem of practical philan thropy, we return to our society of economic 1 See p. 85, Chapter V.
equals to consider what mental traits may be discovered which are as universal as the physi cal characteristics already pointed out. Fore most among these is the feeling of personal independence, of confidence in the ability to earn one's living, a sense of security on the part of the individual in the continued public apprecia tion of the services which he can render. Where this confidence is lacking, the man is riot con scious of full economic freedom. Where it is robust and universally shared, the economic ideal is realized. The possession of property no doubt strengthens this sense of security, but its real basis is personal, and it is to a large extent independent of any present possessions other than physical health, mental vigor, and a free opportunity to use one's powers to the best advantage.
Coupled with this feeling of personal indepen dence there is, in the normal economic man, an unwillingness to take for personal use any wealth which he has not earned. He would not steal even if the laws did not prohibit it. He will refuse to accept presents except as courtesies which will in some way be reciprocated. He will accept the highest possible reward for his own labor, because that is the law of his society, and he willingly sees others exact similar terms of exchange ; but if he were to find himself in position to pocket the wealth belonging to others, he would reject the opportunity, insisting upon such social rearrangements as would restore the wealth to its rightful owners. If the facts of actual life appear to be in conflict with this broad principle, it is partly because individuals are sometimes brought into possession of prop erty as the result of complicated legal and so cial relations which they do not fully understand, so that they do not appreciate to what extent they have really become dependents, or social debtors, and remain under the delusion that they have in some way earned and are entitled to all that they have; and partly because there are many persons who having such opportuni ties eagerly seize them from what is at bottom a criminal instinct. They thus belong in the criminal class of social debtors. The laws even of civilized countries are imperfect, and do not reach all wilful offenders ; but they are steadily improving, and in no direction at the present time more rapidly than in their extension to the class who, having large income, attempt to es cape a just accounting for its origin. The rea
son for this improvement is not a class feeling of envy or resentment, but the fact that the great body of citizens, rich and poor, deliber ately act upon principles of equity, and sternly insist that those who refuse to recognize those principles shall be put where they belong, be yond the pale of honest citizenship.
Another mental trait of the economic man is his readiness to accept the final judgment of the community as to the market value of the com modities and services which he wishes to buy or sell. He may use great ingenuity and skill in the attempt to make that judgment more favor able to himself and to those whose interests are identical with his own, but he accepts it never theless as the basis of his economic relations with his fellows. The line between the eco nomic man and the social debtor is nowhere more clearly drawn than here. The latter may be given an income determined by his human needs, or by the public safety, or by the gener osity of those who deal with him, or by the amount of the free surplus at the disposal of society. Any of these methods of distribution involves inquiry into the personal affairs of the recipients, such as would be resented by the normal economic man. Such inquiry would be humiliating to one who is not in need of assist ance. It may or may not be humiliating to a dependent according as the dependency is, or is not, caused by his own fault.
Economic society might conceivably adopt some other basis of wealth distribution such as that proposed by the socialists or the commun ists. But present opinion in all countries, and, as far as all history shows, the practically uni versal opinion of the past, has been in favor of a general market value for each class of goods, nicely adjusted to the total quantity of such goods available, and to the demand or general desire for them. Attention will be given in due time to the exact nature and laws of value. At present it is only necessary to point out the universal acquiescence in the fact of value as a characteristic of that part of the human family with which we are directly con cerned. Those who struggle for higher wages, no less than others who attempt to sell land or diamonds at the highest possible price ; advo cates of a single gold standard, no less than bimetalists who would like to see the price of silver increased ; scholars who prize books and instruments of research, and an opportunity for travel, and free time for meditation and study ; parents who weigh carefully the cost of pro posed courses of education for their children ; every one who has any kind of unsatisfied desire takes value into consideration.
The economic man has many other character istics less easily described, but these are funda mental, are easily recognized, and will remain as a part of our conception, however extensive may become our acquaintance with his less obvious traits. It has already become obvious that the economic man is not a mere abstraction and that he is not a rare exception. He is not only a human being. He is the normal human being of ordinary life. To an increasing extent we are all becoming economic men.