and navy, and on the large railways of Great Britain.

There are, no doubt, practical difficulties in the way of carrying out
these changes, as there are in introducing all new systems. You have to
meet the doubts and suspicions of those who are unacquainted with them, the
opposition of interested parties, and the general feeling which influences
all men to let well enough alone. But that there are no insuperable
obstacles in the way is evident from the fact that this system has already
been partially applied on a railway doing a very large business, the
Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore, under the able superintendence of
S. M. Felton, Esq., who, in his last Report, says, "It still works well,
and is productive of much saving to the Company. [Footnote: The cost of
operating this railway for 1859, as per last Report, was only 37.4 per
cent. of the receipts, while that of the railways of Massachusetts for the
same year was 56.9 per cent. The result is a dividend of 8-1/2 per cent.
on capital, after paying the interest on bonded debt.] It promotes
regularity in running the trains, and in all branches of our business. It
diminishes accidents, _by bringing home the responsibility directly upon
individuals_ instead of the corporation."

There is a great deal of significance in this last remark. Every one knows,
that, when an accident happens on a railway, "no one is to blame,"--which
means, that everybody should have so much blame as can be expressed by a
fraction whose numerator is unity and whose denominator represents the
whole number of employees. Such an infinitesimal dose of censure, contrary
to the homeopathic doctrine, always produces infinitesimal results.

To what is the extraordinary success of the Hudson's Bay Company
owing,--that wonderful organization which rules the wilds of British North
America with a discipline which has no parallel in the history of mankind,