ness as economic
_service of society for private profit_, and suppose we define
politics as the accommodation of all social forces, the forces of
_business, of course, included_, to the common interest." (My
italics.)

It is evident that if the community gains by an extended control over
business, that business gains at least as much by its claim to be
recognized as a _public service_. And this Mr. Wilson makes very
emphatic:--

"Business must be looked upon, not as the exploitation of society,
not as its use for private ends, but as its sober service; and
private profit must be regarded as legitimate only when it is in
fact a reward for what is veritably serviceable,--serviceable to
interests which are not single but common, as far as they go; and
politics must be the discovery of this common interest, in order
that the service may be tested and exacted.

"In this acceptation, society is the _senior partner_ in all
business. It first must be considered,--society as a whole, in its
permanent and essential, not merely in its temporary and
superficial, interests. _If private profits are to be
legitimatized, private fortunes made honorable_, these great forces
which play upon the modern field must, both individually and
collectively, be accommodated to a common purpose." (My italics.)

Business is no longer "to be looked upon" as the exploitation of
society, private profits are to be "legitimatized" and private fortunes
"made honorable"--in a word, the whole business world is to be
regenerated and at the same time rehabilitated. This is to be
accomplished, as Mr. Wilson explained, in a later speech (April 13,
1911), not by excluding the large capitalists from government, but by
including the small, and this will undoubtedly be the final outcome. He
said:--

"The men who understand the life of the country are the men _who
are on the make_, and not the men who are made; because the men who
are on the make are in contact with the actual conditions of
struggle, and those are the conditions of life for the nation;
whereas, the man who has achieved, who is at the head of a great
body of capital, has passed the period of struggle. He may
sympathize with the struggling men, but he is not one of them, and
only those who struggle can comprehend what the struggle is. I
would rather take