Regarding money-value we may say， in general， that it is one expression of the conventional or institutional phase of society， and exhibits all that mixture of grandeur and confusion with which nature usually presents herself to our understanding. I mean that its appraisal of men and things is partly expressive of great principles， and partly， so far as we can see， unjust， trivial or accidental. Some gains are vital or organic， springing from the very ~ nature of life and justified as we come to understand that ，~life； some are fanciful， springing from the tastes or whims (266) of the rich， like the value of diamonds or first editions， an some parasitical， like those of the legally-protect swindler. In general the values of the market are tho of the habitual world in all its grossness；spiritual values except those that have become conventional， being little felt in it. These appeal to the future. The detailed working of market value has no ascertainable connection with moral worth， and we must not expect it to have. If a man's work is moral， in the higher sense， it is in its nature an attack upon the habitual world which the latter is more likely to resent than reward. One can only take up that useful work that seems best suited to him， trying to be content if its value is small， and， if large， to feel that the power over money it gives him is rightly his only in so far as he uses it for the general good.
The more tangible kind of social power梥o far as intrinsic to the man and not adventitious like inherited wealth梔epends chiefly upon organizing capacity， which may be described as the ability to build and operate human machinery. It has its roots in tact and skill in dealing with men， in tenacity， and in a certain instinct for construction. One who possesses it sees a new person as social material， and is likely to know what can be made of him better than he knows himself. [4]
(267)
Of all kinds of leadership this has the readiest recognition and the highest market value； and naturally so， since it is essential to every sort of cooperative achievement. Its possessors understand the immediate control of the world， which they will exercise no matter what thc apparent forms of organization may be. In all ages they have gained and held the grosser forms of power， whenever these were at all open to competition.
Thus， during the early Middle Age， men of energy and management， more or less favored by situation， built up for themselves local authority and estate， or perhaps exploited the opportunities for still wider organization， like the founders of Burgundy and Brittany and the early kings of France；very much in the same manner as men of our own day build up commercial and industrial systems and become senators and railway presidents.
Indeed， this type of ability was never in such demand as it now is， for the conduct of the vast and diverse social structures rising about us梚ndustrial enterprises， political parties， labor unions， newspapers， universities and philanthropies.
It has its high money value partly because of its rarity and partly because there is a regular market for it； the need being so urgent and obvious as to create a steady and intelligent demand. In this latter respect it contrasts with services， like moral leadership， which people need but will seldom pay for. A third reason is that its possessors are almost always clever enough to know their own value and secure its recognition.
In discussing the power of the capitalist class there is o question of the finer and higher forms of power. We (268) shall rarely find among the rich any pregnant spiritual leadership， theirs being a pedestrian kind of authority which has a great deal to do with the every-day comfort of their contemporaries but does not attempt to sway the profounder destinies of the race. Nor does the world often accord them enduring fame： lacking spiritual significance their names are writ in water. Even in industry the creative thought， the inventions which are the germs of a new era， seldom come from money-winners， since they require a different kind of insight.
The capitalist represents power over those social values that are tangible and obvious enough to have a definite standing in the market. His money and prestige will command food， houses， clothes， tools and all conventional and standard sorts of personal service， from lawn-mowing to the administration of a railroad， not genius or love or anything of that nature. That wealth means social power of this coarser sort is apparent in a general way， and yet merits a somewhat closer examination.
We have， first， its immediate power over goods and services： the master of riches goes attended by an invisible army of potential servitors， ready to do for him anything that the law allows， and often more. He is in this way， as in so many others， the successor of the nobleman of mediaeval and early modern history， who went about with a band of visible retainers eager to work his will upon all opposers. He is the ruler of a social system wherever he may be.
