Senators to certain non-political bodies, or to juries of a specific
constitution, is at least thinkable as the beginning of a movement that
would come at last into parallelism with that in the British Empire.]

When these issues of public honour and efficient democratic
administration have begun to move towards a definite solution, the
community will be in a position to extend the operation of the new
methods towards a profounder revolution, the control of private
property. "We are all Socialists nowadays," and it is needless,
therefore, to argue here at any length to establish the fact that
beyond quite personal belongings all Property is the creation of
society, and in reality no more than an administrative device. At
present, in spite of some quite hideous and mischievous local aspects,
the institution of Property, even in land and the shares of quasi-
public businesses, probably gives as efficient a method of control, and
even it may be a more efficient method of control than any that could
be devised to replace it under existing conditions. We have no public
bodies and no methods of check and control sufficiently trustworthy to
justify extensive expropriations. Even the municipalization of
industries needs to go slowly until municipal areas have been brought
more into conformity with the conditions of efficient administration.
Areas too cramped and areas that overlap spell waste and conflicting
authorities, and premature municipalization in such areas will lead
only to the final triumph of the private company. Political efficiency
must precede Socialism. [Footnote: See Appendix I. ] But there can be
no doubt that the spectacle of irresponsible property is a terribly
demoralizing force in the development of each generation. It is idle to
deny that Property, both in Great Britain and America, works out into a
practical repudiation of that equality, political democracy so
eloquently asserts. There is a fatalistic submission to inferiority on