and distribution where competition is possible, leaving to
public ownership those means of production and distribution
in which competition is practically impossible; and
socialism will be defined as the collective ownership,
through the state, of all the means of production and
distribution.

Mr. Bryan points out that much of the strength shown by socialism is due
to the fact that "socialists advocate certain reforms which individualists
also advocate."

Take, for illustration, the public ownership of water-works;
it is safe to say that a large majority of the people living
in cities of any considerable size favor their public
ownership--individualists because it is practically
impossible to have more than one water system in a city, and
socialists on the general ground that the government should
own all the means of production and distribution. Then, too,
some of the strength of socialism is due to its condemnation
of abuses which, while existing under individualism, are not
at all necessary to individualism--abuses which the
individualists are as anxious as the socialists to remedy.
It is not only consistent with individualism, but is a
necessary implication of it, that the competing parties
should be placed upon substantially equal footing; for
competition is not worthy of that name if one party is able
arbitrarily to fix the terms of the agreement, leaving the
other with no choice but to submit.

The civil service, says Mr. Bryan, is our nearest approach to ideal
socialism. Does it afford a stimulus to the higher development of the
civil servants?

Justice requires that each individual shall receive from
society a reward proportionate to his contribution to
society. Can the state, acting through officials, make this
apportionment better than it can be made by competition? At
present official favors are not distributed strictly
according to merit, either in republics or in monarchies; it
is certain that socialism would insure a fairer division of
rewards? If the government operates all the factories, all
the farms, and all the stores, there must be superintendents
as well as workmen; there must be different kinds of
employment, some more pleasant, some less pleasant. Is it
likely that any set of men can distribute the work or fix
the compensation to the satisfaction of