Till Chevreul’s classical researches on fatty bodies (1811- 23) it was believed that soap consisted simply of a binary compound of fat and alkali. Claude J. Geoffroy in 1741 pointed out that the fat or oil recovered from a soap solution by neutralization with a mineral acid differs from the original fatty substance by dissolving readily in alcohol, which is not the case with ordinary fats and oils. The significance of this observation was overlooked; and equally unheeded was a not less important discovery by Scheele in 1783. In preparing lead plaster by boiling olive oil with oxide of lead and a little water—a process palpably analogous to that of the soap-boiler—he obtained a sweet substance which, called by himself “Oelsüss” (“principium dulce oleorum”), is now known as “glycerin.” These discoveries of Geoffroy and Scheele formed the basis of Chevreul’s researches by which he laid bare the constitution of oils and the true nature of soap. (See Oils, vol. xvii. p. 740, and Glycerin, vol. x. p. 697.) In those articles it is pointed out that all fatty oils and fats are mixtures of glycerides, that is, of bodies related to the alcohol glycerin C 3 H 5 (OH) 3 , and some fatty acid such as palmitic acid (C 16 H 31 O 9 )H. Under suitable conditions C 3 H 5 (OH) 3 +3(C 16 H 31 O 2 )H give C 3 H 5 (C 16 H 31 O 2 ) 3 + 3H 2 O Glycerin. Palmitic Acid. Palmitin. Water.

The corresponding decomposition of palmitin into palmitic acid and glycerin takes place when the glyceride is distilled in superheated steam, and similarly it can be realized by boiling in water mixed with a suitable proportion of caustic potash or soda. But in this case the fatty acid unites with the alkali into its potash or soda salt, forming a soap—

C 3 H 5 (C 16 H 31 O 2 ) 3 + 3NaOH = 3NaC 16 H 31 O 2 + C 3 H 5 (OH) 3 Palmitin. Soda Hydrate. Soap. Glycerin.

Of the natural fats or glycerides contained in oils the most important in addition to palmitin are stearin and olein, and these it may be sufficient to regard as the principal fatty bodies concerned in soap-making.

The general characters of a soap are a certain greasiness to the touch, ready solubility in water, with formation of viscid solutions which on agitation yield a tenacious froth or “lather,” an indisposition to crystallize, readiness to amalgamate with small proportions of hot water into homogeneous slimes, which on cooling set into jellies or more or less consistent pastes. Soaps give an alkaline reaction and have a decided acrid taste; in a pure condition—a state never reached in practice—they have neither smell nor colour. Almost without exception potash soaps even if made from the solid fatty acids are “soft,” and soda soaps, although made with fluid olein, are “hard”; but there are considerable variations according to the prevailing fatty acid in the compound. Almost all soda soaps are precipitated from their watery solutions by the addition of a sufficiency of common salt. Potash soap with the same reagent undergoes double decomposition—a proportion being changed into a soda soap with the formation of chloride of potassium. Soap when dissolved in a large amount of water suffers hydrolysis, with formation of a precipitate of alkaliferous fatty acid and a solution containing free alkali. Its cleansing power is ordinarily explained by this reaction; but it is difficult to see why a solution which has just thrown off most of its fatty acids should be disposed to take up even a glyceride. It is more likely that the cleansing power of soap is due to the inherent property of its solution to emulsionize fats.

Resin soaps are compounds of soda or potash with the complex acids (chiefly abietic) of which coniferous resins consist. Their formation is not due to a true process of saponification; but they occupy an important place in compound soaps.

Manufacture. —The varieties of soaps made are numerous; the purposes to which they are applied are varied; the materials employed embrace a considerable range of oils, fats, and other bodies; and the processes adopted undergo many modifications. As regards processes of manufacture soaps may be made by the direct combination of fatty acids, separated from oils, with alkaline solutions. In the manufacture of stearin for candles, &c., the fatty matter is decomposed, and the liquid olein, separated from the solid fatty acids, is employed as an ingredient in soap-making. A soap so made is not the result of saponification hut of a simple combination, as is the case also with resin soaps. All other soaps result from the combination of fatty oils and fats with potash or soda solutions under conditions which favour saponification. The soap solution which results from the combination forms soap-size and is a mixture of soap with water, the excess alkali, and the glycerin liberated from the oil. In such condition ordinary soft soaps and certain kinds of hard soap are brought to the market. In curd soaps, however, which form the basis of most household soap, the uncombined alkali and the glycerin are separated by “salting out,” and the soap in this condition contains about 30 per cent, of water. Soap may be framed and finished in this state, but almost invariably it receives a further treatment called “refining” or “fitting,” in which by remelting with water, with or without the subsequent addition of other agents to harden the finished product, the soap may be made to contain from 60 to 70 per cent. of water and yet present a firm hard texture.

Among the raw materials used by the soap-boiler the principal fatty bodies are tallow, lard, palm oil, palm-kernel oil, olive oil, cotton-seed oil, sesame oil, and cocoa-nut oil for hard soaps, and fish oils, linseed oil, marrow fat, and the lower qualities of other oils obtained by extraction, &c., for potash or soft soaps. Almond oil, spermaceti, cocoa-butter, ground-nut oil, and some others form the basis of certain toilet and medicinal soaps. Resin and colophony form essential ingredients in yellow soaps. The alkalis are used almost exclusively in the condition of caustic lyes,—solutions of their respective hydrates in water. Caustic soda is now obtained direct from the soda manufacturer, and one operation, causticizing the soda, is thus spared the soap-boiler. Potash lyes are, however, principally sharpened or causticized by the soap-boiler himself from potash carbonate, the process for which is described under Potassium Metals (vol. xix. p. 589).

The process of soap-boiling is carried out in large iron boilers called “soap pans” or “coppers,” some of which have capacity for a charge of 30 tons or more. The pan proper is surmounted by a great cone or hopper called a curb, to provide for the foaming up of the boiling mass and to prevent loss from overflowing. Formerly the pans were heated by open firing from below; but now the almost universal practice is to boil by steam injected from perforated pipes coiled within the pan, such injection favouring the uniform heating of the mass and causing an agitation favourable to the ultimate mixture and saponification of the materials. Direct firing is used for the second boiling of the soap mixture; but for this superheated steam may with advantage be substituted, either applied by a steam-jacket round the pan or by a closed coil of pipe within it. In large pans a mechanical stirring apparatus is provided, which in some cases, as in Morfit’s steam “twirl,” is formed of the steam-heating tubes geared to rotate. Closed cylinders in which the materials are boiled under pressure are also employed for certain soaps.

Curd Soap.— The oil mixture used differs in the several manufacturing countries, and the commercial name of the product is correspondingly varied. In Germany tallow is the principal fat; in France olive oil occupies the chief place and the product is known as Marseilles or Castile soap; and in England tallow and palm oil are largely used. But in all countries a mixture of several oils enters into the composition of curd soaps and the proportions used have no fixity. For each ton of soap to be made from 12 to 16 cwts. of oil is required. The soap pan is charged with the tallow or other fat, and open steam is turned on. So soon as the tallow is melted a quantity of weak lye is added, and the agitation of the injected steam causes the fat and lye to become intimately mixed and produces a milky emulsion. As the lye becomes absorbed, a condition indicated by the taste of the goods, additional quantities of lye of increasing strength are added. After some time, the contents of the pan begin to clear and become in the end very transparent. Lye still continues to be poured in till a sample tastes distinctly alkaline,—a test which indicates that the whole of the fatty acids have been taken up by and combined with the alkali. Then without further addition of alkali the boiling is continued for a few minutes, when the soap is ready for salting out or “graining.” Either common salt or strong brine in measured quantity is added to the charge, and, the soap being insoluble in such salt solution, a separation of constituents takes place: the soap collects on the surface in an open granular condition, and the spent lye sinks to the bottom after it has been left for a short time to settle. Supposing now that a pure soap without resin is to be made—a product little seen in the market—the spent lye is run off, steam is again turned on, pure water or very weak lye run in, and the contents boiled up till the whole is thin, close, and clear. The soap is from this again grained off or salted out, and the underlye so thrown down carries with it coloured impurities which may have been in the materials or which arise from contact with the boiler. Such washing process may have to be repeated several times when impure materials have been used. The spent lye of the washing being drained off, the soap now receives its strengthening boil. Steam is turned on, and, the mass being brought to a clear condition with weak lye or water, strong lye is added and the boiling continued with close steam till the lye attains such a state of concentration that the soap is no longer soluble in it, and it will separate from the caustic lye as from a common salt solution. The contents of the pan are once more allowed to cool and settle, and the soap as now formed constitutes a pure curd soap, carrying with it some proportion of uncombined alkali, but containing the minimum amount of water. It may be skimmed off the underlye and placed direct in the frames for solidification; but that is a practice scarcely at all followed, the addition of resin soap in the pan and the subsequent “crutching in” of silicate of soda and adulterant mixings being features common to the manufacture. The lye from the strengthening boil contains much alkali and is used in connexion with other boilings.

Mottled Soap.— A pure curd soap always carries with it into the cooling frame a considerable amount of coloured impurity, such as iron sulphate, &c. When it is permitted to cool rapidly the colouring matter remains uniformly disseminated throughout the mass; but when means are taken to cause the soap to cool and solidify slowly a segregation takes place: the stearate and palmitate form a semi - crystalline solid, while the oleate, solidifying more slowly, comes by itself into translucent veins, in which the greater part of the coloured matter is drawn. In this way mottled or marbled soap is formed, and such mottled appearance was formerly highly valued as an indication of freedom from excess of water or other adulteration, because in fitted soaps the impurities are either washed out or fall to the bottom of the mass in cooling. Now, however, the most perfect mottle can be produced by working colouring matter into the soap in the frame, and mottling is very far from being a certificate of excellence of quality.

Yellow Soap consists of a mixture of any hard fatty soap with a variable proportion—up to 40 per cent. or more—of resin soap. That substance by itself has a tenacious gluey consistence, and its intermixture in excess renders the resulting compound soft and greasy. The ordinary method of adding resin consists in stirring it in small fragments into the fatty soap in the stage of clear-boiling; but a better result is obtained by separately preparing a fatty soap and the resin soap, and combining the two in the pan after the underlye has been salted out and removed from the fatty soap. The compound then receives its strengthening boil, after which it is fitted by boiling with added water or weak lye, continuing the boil till by examination of a sample the proper consistency has been reached. On settling a dark-coloured “nigger” or underlye separates out, which, because it contains some soap and alkali, is saved for future use.

Marine Soap.— Cocoa-nut oil behaves as regards saponification quite differently from all other oils and fats in relation to the caustic alkalis. It does not form an emulsion with weak alkalis; these even under prolonged boiling have no influence on the fat. With strong alkaline solutions, on the other hand, it saponifies with the utmost readiness even without heat, and forms without the separation of any underlye a soap of stiff firm consistence notwithstanding the presence of a very large percentage of water. Such soap is not insoluble in a strong solution of salt; hence it forms a lather and can be used for washing with sea-water, from which peculiarity it derives its name “marine soap.” Being thus soluble in salt water it cannot of course be salted out like common soaps; but if a very concentrated salt solution is used precipitation is effected, and a curd soap is separated so hard and refractory as to be practically useless. Cocoa-nut soap is usually prepared by the so-called cold method, in which the fat heated to 80° C. is treated with a calculated quantity of caustic soda solution of sp. gr. 1∙350, the two constituents being stirred together till the setting and hardening of the combination prevents further agitation. The property that cocoa-nut soap possesses of absorbing large proportions of water, and yet presenting the appearance of a hard solid body, makes the material a favourite basis for highly sophisticated compounds, in which water, sulphate of soda, and other alkaline solutions, soluble silicates, fuller’s earth, starch, &c., play an important and bulky part. Cocoa-nut soap is little prepared by itself; but it forms a principal ingredient in compound soaps meant to imitate curd and yellow soaps. Two principal methods of preparing such compound soaps are employed. In the first way the ordinary oil and the cocoa-nut oil are mixed and saponified together with such a measured quantity of alkaline solution as serves to produce a hard soap without any salting out or separation of underlye. According to the second plan, the ordinary oil is treated as for the preparation of a curd soap, and to this the cocoa-nut soap separately saponified is added in the pan and both are boiled together till they form a homogeneous soap.

Silicate Soaps.— A further means of enabling a soap to contain large proportions of water and yet present a firm consistence is found in the use of silicate of soda. The silicate in the form of a concentrated solution is crutched or stirred into the soap in a mechanical mixing machine after the completion of the saponification, and it appears to enter into a distinct chemical combination with the soap. While silicate soaps bear heavy watering, the soluble silicate itself is a powerful detergent, and it possesses certain advantages when used with hard waters, so that, taking its cheapness into account, the question whether its introduction into soap is a fraud may be fairly discussed and much said in its defence.

Framing.— The frames into which hard soaps are ladled for cooling and solidification consist of rectangular boxes made of iron plates and bound and clamped together in a way that allows the sides to be removed when required. The solidification is a very gradual process, depending, of course, for its completion on the size of the block; but before cutting into bars it is essential that the whole should be set and hardened through and through, else the cut bars would not hold together. Many ingenious devices for forming bars have been produced; but generally a strong frame is used, across which steel wires are stretched at distances equal to the size of the bars to be made, the blocks being first cut into slabs and then into bars.

Soft Soap.— As already said, soft soaps are made with potash lyes, although in practice a small quantity of soda is also used to give the soap some consistence. There is no separation of underlyes in potash soap, consequently the product contains the whole constituents of the oils used, as the operation of salting out is quite impracticable owing to the double decomposition which results from the action of salt, producing thereby a hard principally soda soap with formation of chloride of potassium. Owing to this circumstance it is impossible to “fit” or in any way purify soft soap, and all impurities which go into the pan of necessity enter into the finished product. The making of soft soap, although thus a much less complex process than hard soap making, is one that demands much skill and experience for its success. From the conditions of the manufacture care must be taken to regulate the amount and strength of the alkali in proportion to the oil used, and the degree of concentration to which the boiling ought to be continued has to be determined with close observation.

Toilet Soaps, &c.—Soaps used in personal ablution in no way differ from the soaps previously alluded to, and may consist of any of the varieties. It is of consequence that they should, as far as possible, be free from excess of alkali and all other salts and foreign ingredients which may have an injurious effect on the skin. The manufacturer of toilet soap generally takes care to present his wares in convenient form and of agreeable appearance and smell; the more weighty duty of having them free from uncombined alkali is in many cases entirely overlooked. Transparent soaps are prepared by dissolving ordinary soap in strong alcohol and distilling off the greater portion of the alcohol till the residue comes to the condition of a thick transparent jelly. This, when cast into forms and allowed to harden and dry slowly, comes out as transparent soap. A class of transparent soap may also be made by the cold process, with the use of cocoa-nut oil, castor oil, and sugar. It generally contains a large amount of uncombined alkali, and that, with its unpleasant odour of cocoa-nut oil, makes it a most undesirable soap for personal use. Toilet soaps of common quality are perfumed by simple melting and stirring into the mass some cheap odorous body that is not affected by alkalis under the influence of heat. The finer soaps are perfumed by the cold method; the soap is shaved down to thin slices, and the essential oil kneaded into and mixed with it by special machinery, after which it is formed into cakes by pressure in suitable moulds.

Glycerin soap ordinarily consists of about equal parts of pure hard soap and glycerin...

The name was thus first applied in England to Owen’s theory of social reconstruction, and in France to those also of Saint-Simon and Fourier. The best usage has always connected it with the views of these men and the cognate opinions which have since appeared. The word, however, is used with a great variety of meaning not only in popular speech and by politicians but even by economists and learned critics of socialism. The general tendency is to regard as socialistic any interference with property undertaken by society on behalf of the poor, the limitation of the principle of laissez-faire in favour of the suffering classes, radical social reform which disturbs the present system of private property as regulated by free competition. It is probable enough that the word will be permanently used to express the tendency indicated in these phrases, as a general name for the strong reaction that has now set in against the overstrained individualism and one-sided freedom which date from the latter half of the 18th century. The application is neither precise nor accurate; but it is use and wont that determine the meaning of words, and this seems to be the tendency of use and wont.

Even economic writers differ greatly in the meaning they attach to the word. The great German economist Roscher defines it as including “those tendencies which demand a greater regard for the common weal than consists with human nature.” Adolf Held says that “we may define as socialistic every tendency which demands the subordination of the individual will to the community.” Janet more precisely defines it as follows :—“We call socialism every doctrine which teaches that the state has a right to correct the inequality of wealth which exists among men and to legally establish the balance by taking from those who have too much in order to give to those who have not enough, and that in a permanent manner, and not in such and such a particular case,—a famine, for instance, a public calamity, &c.” Laveleye explains it thus: “In the first place every socialistic doctrine aims at introducing greater equality in social conditions, and in the second place at realizing those reforms by the law or the state.” Von Scheel simply defines it as the “economic philosophy of the suffering classes.” Of all these definitions it can only be said that they more or less faithfully reflect current opinion as to the nature of socialism. They are either too vague economic anarchy, to the degradation of the working man and his family, to the growth of vice and idleness among the wealthy classes and their dependants, to bad and inartistic workmanship, and to adulteration in all its forms; and that it is tending more and more to separate society into two classes,—wealthy millionaires confronted with an enormous mass of proletarians,—the issue out of which must either be socialism or social ruin. To avoid all these evils and to secure a more equitable distribution of the means and appliances of happiness, the socialists propose that land and capital, which are the requisites of labour and the sources of all wealth and culture, should become the property of society, and be managed by it for the general good. In thus maintaining that society should assume the management of industry and secure an equitable distribution of its fruits socialists are agreed, but in the most important points of detail they differ very greatly.

They differ as to the form society will take in carrying out the socialist programme, as to the relation of local bodies to the central government, and whether there is to be any central government, or any government at all in the ordinary sense of the word, as to the influence of the national idea in the society of the future, &c. They differ also as to what should be regarded as an “equitable” system of distribution. The school of Saint-Simon advocated a social hierarchy in which every man should be placed according to his capacity and rewarded according to his works. In the communities of Fourier the minimum of subsistence was to be guaranteed to each out of the common gain, the remainder to be divided between labour, capital, and talent,—five-twelfths going to the first, four-twelfths to the second, and three-twelfths to the third. At the revolution of 1848 Louis Blanc proposed that remuneration should be equal for all members of his social workshops. In the programme drawn up by the united social democrats of Germany (Gotha, 1875) it is provided that all shall enjoy the results of labour “according to their reasonable wants,” all of course being bound to work. It is needless to say also that the theories of socialism have been held in connexion with the most varying opinions in philosophy and religion. A great deal of the historic socialism has been regarded as a necessary implicate of idealism. Most of the prevailing socialism of the day is based on the frankest and most outspoken revolutionary materialism. On the other hand, many socialists hold that their system is a necessary outcome of Christianity, that socialism and Christianity are essential the one to the other; and it should be said that the ethics of socialism are closely akin to the ethics of Christianity, if not identical with them.

Still it should be insisted that the basis of socialism is economic, involving a fundamental change in the relation of labour to land and capital,—a change which will largely affect production, but will entirely revolutionize the existing system of distribution. But, while its basis is economic, socialism implies and carries with it a change in the political, ethical, technical, and artistic arrangements and institutions of society which would constitute a revolution greater probably than has ever taken place in human history, greater than the transition from the ancient to the mediaeval world, or from the latter to the existing order of society. In the first place, such a change generally assumes as its political complement the most thoroughly democratic organization of society. The early socialism of Owen and Saint-Simon was marked by not a little of the autocratic spirit; but the tendency of the present socialism is more and more to ally itself with the most advanced democracy. Socialism, in fact, claims to be the economic complement of democracy, maintaining that without a fundamental economic change political privilege has neither meaning nor value. In the second place, socialism naturally goes with an unselfish or altruistic system of ethics. The most characteristic feature of the old societies was the exploitation of the weak by the strong under the systems of slavery, serfdom, and wage-labour. Under the socialistic régime it is the privilege and duty of the strong and talented to use their superior force and richer endowments in the service of their fellow-men without distinction of class or nation or creed. In the third place, socialists maintain that under their system and no other can the highest excellence and beauty be realized in industrial production and in art, whereas under the present system beauty and thoroughness are alike sacrificed to cheapness, which is a necessity of successful competition. Lastly, the socialists refuse to admit that individual happiness or freedom or character would be sacrificed under the social arrangements they propose. They believe that under the present system a free and harmonious development of individual capacity and happiness is possible only for the privileged minority, and that socialism alone can open up a fair opportunity for all. They believe, in short, that there is no opposition whatever between socialism and individuality rightly understood, that these two are complements the one of the other, that in socialism alone may every individual have hope of free development and a full realization of himself.

Having seen, then, how wide a social revolution is implied in the socialistic scheme of reconstruction, let us repeat (1) that the essence of the theory consists in this —associated production with a collective capital with the view to an equitable distribution. In the words of Schaffte, “the Alpha and Omega of socialism is the transformation of private competing capitals into a united collective capital” {Quintessenz des Socialismus). A. Wagner’s more elaborate definition of it (in his Grundlegung') is entirely in agreement with that of Schäffle. This is the principle on which all the schools of socialism, however opposed otherwise, are at one. Such a system, while insisting on collective capital (including land), is quite consistent with private property in other forms, and with perfect freedom in the use of one’s own share in the equitable distribution of the produce of the associated labour. A thoroughgoing socialism demands that this principle should be applied to the capital and production of the whole world; only then can it attain to supreme and perfect realization. But a sober-minded socialism will admit that the various intermediate stages in which the principle finds a partial application are so far a true and real development of the socialistic idea. (2) Socialism is both a theory of social evolution and a working force in the history of the 19th century. Some of the most eminent socialists, such as Rodbertus, regard their theory as a prophecy concerning the social development of the future rather than as a subject of agitation. In their view socialism is the next stage in the evolution of society, destined after many generations to supersede capitalism, as capitalism displaced feudalism and feudalism succeeded to slavery. Even the majority of the most active socialists consider the question as still in the stage of agitation and propaganda, their present task being that of enlightening the masses until the consummation of the present social development, and the declared bankruptcy of the present social order, shall have delivered the world into their hands. Socialism, therefore, is for the most part a theory affecting the future, more or less remote, and has only to a limited degree gained a real and practical footing in the life of our time. Yet it should not be forgotten that its theories have most powerfully affected all the ablest recent economic writers of Germany, and have even considerably modified German legislation. Its influence is rapidly growing among the lower and also among the most advanced classes in almost every country dominated by European culture, following as a destroying negation the development of capitalism. (3) In its doctrinal aspects socialism is most interesting as a criticism of the present economic order, of what socialists call the capitalistic system, with which the existing land system is connected. Under the present economic order land and capital (the material and instruments without which industry is impossible) are the property of a class, employing a class of wage-labourers handicapped by their exclusion from land and capital. Competition is the general rule by which the share of the members of those classes in the fruits of production is determined. Against this system critical socialism is a reasoned protest; and it is at issue also with the prevailing political economy, in so far as it assumes or maintains the permanence or righteousness of this economic order. Of the economic optimism implied in the historic doctrine of laissez-faire socialism is an uncompromising rejection. (4) Socialism is usually regarded as a phase of the struggle for the emancipation of labour, for the complete participation of the working classes in the material, intellectual, and spiritual inheritance of the human race. This is certainly the most substantial and most prominent part of the socialist programme, the working classes being the most numerous and the worst sufferers from the present régime. This view, however, is rather one-sided, for socialism claims not less to be in the interest of the small capitalist gradually crushed by the competition of the larger, and in the interest also of the large capitalist, whose position is endangered by the huge unmanageableness of his success, and by the world-wide economic anarchy from which even the greatest are not secure. Still it is the deliverance of the working class that stands in the front of every socialistic theory; and, though the initiative in socialist speculation and action has usually come from the middle and upper classes, yet it is to the working men that they generally appeal.

While recognizing the great confusion in the use of the word “socialism,” we have treated it as properly a phenomenon of the 19th century, beginning in France with Saint-Simon and Fourier, in England with Robert Owen, and most powerfully represented at the present day by the school of Karl Marx. As we have seen, however, there are definitions of the word which would give it a wider range of meaning and a more ancient beginning, compared with which capitalism is but of yesterday,—which would, in fact, make it as old as human society itself. In the early stages of human development, when the tribe or the village community was the social unit, the subordination of the individual to the society in which he dwelt was the rule, and common property was the prevalent form. In the development of the idea of property, especially as regards land, three successive historical stages are broadly recognized,—common property and common enjoyment of it, common property and private enjoyment, private property and private enjoyment. The last form did not attain to full expression till the end of the 18th century, when the principle of individual freedom, which was really a reaction against privileged restriction, was proclaimed as a positive axiom of government and of economics. The free individual struggle for wealth and for the social advantages dependent on wealth is a comparatively recent thing. In all periods of history the state reserved to itself the right to interpose in the arrangements of property,—sometimes in favour of the poor, as in the case of the English poor law, which may thus be regarded as a socialistic measure. Moreover, all through history revolts in favour of a rearrangement of property have been very frequent. And in the societies of the Catholic Church we have a permanent example of common property and a common enjoyment of it.

How are we to distinguish the socialism of the 19th century from these old-world phenomena, and especially from the communism which has played so great a part in history? To this query socialists, especially of the school of Marx, have a clear and precise answer. Socialism is a stage in the evolution of society which could not arrive till the conditions necessary to it had been established. The first and most essential of these was the development of the great industrialism which after a long period of preparation and gradual growth began to reach its culminating point with the inventions and technical improvements, with the application of steam and the rise of the factory system, in England towards the end of the 18th century. Under this system industry was organized into a vast social operation, and was thus already socialized; but it was a system that was exploited by the individual owner of the capital at his own pleasure and for his own behoof. Under the pressure of the competition of the large industry, the small capitalist is gradually crushed out, and the working producers become wage-labourers organized and drilled in immense factories and workshops. The development of this system still continues and is enveloping the 2hole world. Such is the industrial revolution. Parallel with this a revolution in the world of ideas equally great and equally necessary to the rise of socialism has taken place. This change of thought which made its world-historic announcement in the French Revolution made reason the supreme judge and had freedom for its great practical watchword. It was represented in the economic sphere by the school of Adam Smith. Socialism was an outcome of it too, and first of all in Saint-Simon and his school professed to give the positive and constructive corrective to a negative movement which did not see that it was merely negative and therefore temporary. In other words, Saint-Simon may be said to aim at nothing less than the completion of the work of Voltaire, Rousseau, and Adam Smith. Thus socialism professes to be the legitimate child of two great revolutions,—of the industrial revolution which began to establish itself in England towards the end of the 18th century, and of the parallel revolution in thought which about the same time found most prominent expression in France. Robert Owen worked chiefly under the influence of the former; Saint-Simon and Fourier grew up under the latter. The conspiracy of Babeuf is properly to be regarded as a crude revolutionary communism not essentially different from the rude efforts in communism made in earlier periods of history. With Saint-Simon and Owen historic socialism really begins, and is no longer an isolated fact, but has had a continuous and widening development, the succession of socialistic teaching and propaganda being taken up by one country after another throughout the civilized world.

We have seen, then, that the rise of socialism as a new and reasoned theory of society was relative to the industrial revolution and to the ideas proclaimed in the French Revolution, prominent among which, besides the much emphasized idea of freedom and the less easily realized ideals of equality and fraternity, was the conception of the worth and dignity of labour. Though Owen was most largely influenced by the former and Saint-Simon and Fourier by the latter, it is certain that all three were greatly affected by both the new movements. The motive power in Owen’s career was the philanthropy and humanitarianism of the 18th century. He had grown up in the midst of the industrial revolution; he was one of the most successful pioneers in the improvement of the cotton manufacture. No one could be more deeply conscious of the enormous abuses of the factory system; and no one better knew the wonderful services it could render if technical improvement were only made subordinate to human wellbeing. In the career of Owen we see the new spirit of the 18th century seeking to bring the mechanism of the new industrial system under the direction of a nobler principle, in which the good of all should be the great and sole aim. The position of Saint-Simon was considerably different, yet akin. As Owen had before his eyes the evils of a young but gigantic industrialism, Saint-Simon contemplated the hoary abuses of an idle and privileged feudalism, fearfully shaken no doubt by the Revolution, but still strong in Europe, and in France as elsewhere powerfully revived during the period after Waterloo. Saint-Simon saw that a new world, an industrial world resting on labour, had arisen, while the old feudal and theological world— -fainéant courtiers and a clergy steeped in ignorance —still ruled. All this array of parasites, who had no longer any useful function to perform for society, Saint-Simon sought to replace by the industrial chiefs and scientific leaders...