ent forces of professional pride to which the present industrial
order makes little appeal, and which, indeed, Capitalism, in its war
upon trade union organization, endeavored for many years to stamp out
altogether.

Nor does the efficacy of such an appeal repose upon the assumption of
that "change in human nature," which is the triumphant _reductio ad
absurdum_ advanced by those who are least satisfied with the working of
human nature as it is. What it does involve is that certain elementary
facts should be taken into account, instead of, as at present, being
ignored. That all work is distasteful and that "every man desires to
secure the largest income with the least effort" may be as axiomatic as
it is assumed to be. But in practice it makes all the difference to
the attitude of the individual whether the collective sentiment of the
group to which he belongs is on the side of effort or against it, and
what standard of effort it sets. That, as employers complain, the
public opinion of considerable groups of workers is against an
intensification of effort as long as part of its result is increased
dividends for shareholders, is no doubt, as far as mere efficiency is
concerned, the gravest indictment of the existing industrial order.
But, even when public ownership has taken the place of private
capitalism, its ability to command {149} effective service will depend
ultimately upon its success in securing not merely that professional
feeling is no longer an opposing force, but that it is actively
enlisted upon the side of maintaining the highest possible standard of
efficiency which can reasonably be demanded.

To put the matter concretely, while the existing ownership of mines is
a positive inducement to inefficient work, public ownership
administered by a bureaucracy, if it would remove the technical
deficiencies emphasized by Sir Richard Redmayne as inseparable from the
separate administration of 3,000 pits by 1,500 different companies,
would be only too likely to miss a capital advantage which a different
type of administration would secure. It would lose both the assistance
to be derived from the technical knowledge of practical men who know by
daily experience the points at which the details of administration can
be improved, and the stimulus to efficiency springing from the
corporate pride of a profession which is responsible for maintaining
and improving the character of its service. Professional spirit is