68 
THE SOCIALISM OF TO-DAY. 
ment. I am amazed that I should be reproached with having 
interested myself in the solution of the social question. The 
real reproach to which I am exposed is that I have not per 
severed and conducted this work to a successful issue. But it 
did not belong to my ministerial department, and time failed 
me. War and foreign politics demanded my attention. These 
attempts at co-operative societies failed for want of sound 
practical organization. As far as production was concerne 
all went well; but on the commercial side it was otherwise, 
and the difficulties were so many that they have hitherto proved 
insurmountable. Possibly the cause may have been in the 
workmen’s want of confidence in their managers and superiors. 
In England this confidence does really exist, and co-operative 
societies flourish. At all events, I cannot understand why I 
should be reproached for making some experiments which 
His Majesty has paid for out of his private purse.” 
It will be seen that Lassalle’s plans of social reform did not 
imply any violent revolution. It was, in fact, the idea de 
veloped as early as 1841, by Louis Blanc, in his work. The 
Organization of Labour,” but with this difference, that instead 
of attacking the principles^of Political Economy, the German 
reformer invoked them in aid of his demand for the trans 
formation of the existing order of things. If Lassalle’s object 
is considered, namely, the multiplication of co-operative 
societies of production, it may be affirmed that no one would 
object to it. The solution would be perfect, since capital and 
labour being united in the same hands, all hostility between 
these two factors of production would disappear.* But is the 
gASBEES### 
University of Edinburgh, very clearly explained the advantages of 
operation: Capital and labour are indispensable ; but if represented by 
two classes, capitalists and labourers, they will be in constant strife. If 
there be but one class, possessing both factors of production, antagonism is 
no longer possible. Mr. Hodgson hoped to see co-operation take the place 
of trade-unionism. Trade unions are machines of war, co-operation is a.n 
advance towards peace in the centre of the factory. Mr. Holyoake affirmed 
fhit the sympathy of “unionists” for co-operation was becoming more 
“säS “if S'hli rÆ