d buy a mule and an acre
of ground, tills it with a consistent and permanent effectiveness of
which slave labor is never capable. In the one case, moreover, there is
the average economic result, in the other, the gradual development of
manhood.

Organize a factory on the feudal lines so prevalent in current industry.
Get a strong, dominating superintendent and give him autocratic
authority. Quickly he will show results. Always, however, there is the
danger of strikes, and if the strong hand falters, the organization
disintegrates. On the other hand, let a corporation take its artisans
into its confidence, give each a small proportionate share in the annual
earnings. Each worker will feel increasingly that the business is his
business. He will take pride in his accomplishment. Gradually he will
attain efficiency, and work permanently, without oversight, with a
consistent earnestness no boss's whip ever attained,

The experience of the National Cash Register Company at Dayton, Ohio,
proves this. The experiments of Henry Ford are a step toward the same
solution. So, in lesser measure, is the plan of the Steel trust to
permit and encourage its employees to purchase annually its stock,
somewhat below the current market price, giving a substantial bonus if
the stock is held over ten years.

If you wish an illustration on a larger scale, consider the mass
formation tactics of the German soldiers, in contrast to the individual
courage, initiative and action of the French. There are the two types
of efficiency in sheerest contrast, but beyond is always the question of
their effect on manhood. France has saved and regenerated her soul; but
Germany--?

Further, the breakdown of paternalistically achieved efficiency has been
evident in Germany's utter failure to understand the mind of other
peoples, particularly of democracies. She had voluminous data, gathered
by the most atrociously efficient spy system ever developed, yet she
utterly misread the mind of France, England and the United States. The
same break-down is evident in Germany's failure in colonization in
contrast to England's success.

For offensive war, it must be admitted, the efficiency under the boss's
whip will go further. For defensive war, or war for high moral aims, it
is desirable that the individual soldier should think for himself,
respond to the high appeal. Thus for such warfare the efficiency of
voluntary effort and cooperation is superior