596 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
of the economists in favoring profit-sharing. "There can be no doubt," he says, "that the soundest possible solution of the labor question will eventually be found in such a modification of the terms of partnership as shall bind the interests of the employer and workmen more closely together. Under such a system the weekly wages would be regarded merely as subsistence money or advances which the employer would make to enable the laborer and his family to await the completion of the interval between manufacture and sale. The balance of the value would be paid at the end of the year or half year in the form of a dividend or bonus, consisting in a share of all surplus profits realized beyond the necessary charges of interest, wages of superintendence, cost of depreciation of capital, reserve to meet bad debts, and all other expenses of production for which the employer can fairly claim compensation."' Elsewhere he says: "The partnership scheme is, I believe, by far the truest form of cooperation. I do hope very much from cooperation in many forms, but the name of the thing will not be sufficient ; the real interest of all employed must be enlisted, if cooperative societies are to prosper and grow. .... It is well understood that a successful military leader must be perfectly unfettered in judgment and supreme in executive power ; and yet he must manage tc earn the confidence and devotion of his men. It is to a position resembling this that the Messrs. Briggs seem to me to have raised themselves by the courageous adoption of a true principle, and I do believe that, when their example is followed, our workshops and factories will become so many united and well-organized regiments of laborers. Good leaders will seek good men, and good men in return will seek good leaders. We shall have an honorable rivalry between one firm and another as to which shall get the best men and pay the best dividends."' The unfortunate failure of the system adopted by the Messrs. Briggs is the most striking comment upon this prediction. It is evident that in this Pro- fessor Jevons does not look beyond the present militant organi- zation of industry upon a despotic basis, while Professor Cairnes
■ The State in Relation to Labor, p. 142. ^Methods of Social Reform, p. 142.
