gleams of liberality and humanity. The cold truth. remained that the laisser-faire theory of competitive capitalism which exists eve to-day in the seats of economic authority rested upon a foundation of intelligent selfishness. Nor was this selfishness redeemed by other personal qualities of economic efficiency, such as honesty within the limits of the law, industry, initiative, constructive and administrative ability. All these qualities are admirable in themselves and helpful towards personal success. But they do not carry the badge of ethical goodness. Now the personal self-sacrifice of thrift and saving, the postponement of present satisfaction to the needs of the future and the furtherance of larger human requirements — here was a definitely moral quality. Though the Charity Organisation Society approached the subject from a somewhat different angle, stressing less the public utility of thrift and more the personal element in character, it is easy to see how both the economist and the charity organizer felt and thought that any teaching which seemed to reflect on the utility or the virtue of personal thrift must be discouraged.
I found, and still find, it idle to protest that my argument against over-saving was not directed against individual thrift, that it left it open to any thrifty individual to spend as little as he chose of his income and to save as.much. Any individual may starve himself and his family and put aside three-quarters of his
