As to righteousness， in the sense of good intention， they probably do not， on the whole， differ much from the average.Some may be found of the highest character， some of gross unscrupulousness.The majority are doubtless without moral distinction and take the color of their associates The view sometimes set forth on behalf of men of wealth that riches go with virtue， and the view， more popular among non-possessors， that it comes by wickedness， are equally untrustworthy.The great mass of wealth is accumulated by solid qualities梕nergy， tenacity， shrewdness and the like梬hich may coexist with great moral refinement or with the opposite.
As a group， however， they are liable to moral deficiencies analogous to those of the conquerors and organizers of states just referred to.There is， especially， a certain moral irresponsibility which is natural to those who have broken away from customary limitations and restraints and are coursing almost at will over an unfenced territory I mean that business enterprise， like military enterprise， deals largely with relations as to which there are no settled rules of morality， no constraining law or public opinion Such conditions breed in the ordinary actor a Macchiavellian opportunism.Since it is hard to say what is just and honest in the vast and abstract operations of finance， human nature is apt to cease looking for a standard and to seize booty wherever and however it safely can.Hence the truly piratical character of many of our great transactions.And in smaller matters also， as in escaping taxation， it is often fatally easy for the rich to steal.
It must be allowed that such ascendancy as the capitalist class has rests， in part at least， upon service.That is to say， its members have had an important function to perform， and in performing that function have found themselves in a position to grasp wealth.The great work of the time has been， or has seemed to be， the extension and reconstruction of industry.
In this work leadership and organization have been needed on a great scale， and our captains of industry have nobly met this demand.That their somewhat autocratic control of production was called for by the situation seems to be shown by the rather general failure of cooperative enterprises intended to dispense with it.Why is it that America abounds in opportunity， and that every sort of industrial capacity is eagerly sought out and rewarded ？ Of course natural advantages play a great part， but much must also be ascribed to the energy and imaginative daring of our entrepreneurs， many of whom have spent great faculty and tireless zeal upon business， in a spirit of adventure and achievement rather than of gain.Where the general is aggressive the soldier will be kept busy.
I have no sympathy with the general abuse of commercialism， but hold with Montesquieu that "The spirit of commerce is naturally attended with that of frugality， economy， moderation， labor， prudence， tranquillity， order and rule.So long as this spirit subsists the riches it produces have no ill effect.The mischief is when excessive wealth destroys the spirit of commerce； then it is that the inconveniences of inequality begin to be felt."
The conception of keen adaptation of means to ends， of exact social workmanship， inculcated by "business" is of untold value to our civilization and capable of very general application.It is a very proper demand that government， education and philanthropy should， in this sense， be conducted on business principles.
At the same time it is plain that a large part of the accumulation of wealth梙ard unfortunately to distinguish from other parts梚s accomplished not by social service but， as just intimated， by something akin to piracy.
This IS not so much the peculiar wickedness of a predatory class as a tendency in all of us to abuse power when not under definite legal or moral control.
The vast transactions associated with modern industry have come very little under such control， and offer a field for freebooting such as the world has never seen.
Nor need we affirm that even the gains of the great organizers are in the highest sense right， only that they are natural and do not necessarily involve conscious wrong doing.
The question of the rather arbitrary control of industry by the capitalist-manager， which now prevails， and of the possibility of this control being diminished or modified in the future， calls for some analysis of underlying forces Evidently there is a conflict of principles here梩he demo cratic or popular and the autocratic.The latter， now ascendant， has the advantages of concentration， secrecy and promptness梩he same which give it superiority in war.On the other hand， the democratic principle should have the same merit in industry and commerce that it has in politics； namely that of enlisting the pride and ambition of the individual and so getting him to put himself into his work.Other things being equal， a free system is more vital and energetic organism than one in which the initiative and choice come from a central authority.
