the most important of man's attainments on this earth; that in which, and by virtue of which, all his other attainments and attempts find their arena, and have their value.”

The idea of association goes back to the very cradle of the human race. It is one of the first lessons of progress. It has made great accomplishments possible to man, for through association he has been able to conquer nature and transform the face of the globe. It extends to all phases of man's activities, to his work, his pleasures, his studies and his achievements. It means power united with power, force joined to force, genius multiplied by genius. By it the knowledge and skill of each becomes a source of blessing to all. It substitutes for the savagery and lack of humanity which belong to isolation, the beginning of all refinement and regard for human welfare.

The first distinct step in association was for religious or governmental purposes. It would be outside of the scope of this chapter to consume any considerable time in tracing the origin of the state or of forms of worship. According to the view of Aristotle, the family appeared first; when several families were united and association aimed at something more than merely supplying daily needs, then the village came into existence. When several villages were united into communities, perfect or large enough to be nearly or quite self-sufficing, the state came into existence. Along with this

process of evolution which gave rise to the state, numerous subdivisions or groups in society were gradually formed for common worship, or for the accomplishment of any object which required strength or skill greater than that belonging to a single individual.

Whatever may have been the specific form of association which led to political organization, the essential fact is that man's desire for associated action and social relationship caused the formation of various groups and organizations, and helpful development kept pace with his capacity for association. Thus the origin of the state, whether it proceeded from the family as a nucleus, from divine origin, from social contract, or from the acquisition of supremacy by a despot of superior strength and gift for command, is in any case an expression of a desire and capacity for that order and effectiveness which can only be obtained by the cooperation of individuals.

There are three general points connected with this subject which should be considered in their order: (1) That a close connection exists between political associations and private associations, or corporations, a connection the importance of which has been conceded, but not sufficiently elaborated. (2) That conditions have existed or did exist in earlier times such that the modern corporation with its characteristic features could not have succeeded until less than two hundred years ago, save by the

aid of monopolistic privileges.

(3) That the nat

ural growth of the corporation is characterized by three eras: (a) Monopoly. (b) Competition. (c) Combination-accompanied by state regulation. It is a notable fact that in the most primitive times, extensive operations were largely conducted by the state itself, at times by despots who built great public works or undertook mammoth enterprises for their own comfort or for a display of their own munificence. The great pyramid probably contains a larger quantity of masonry than any detached structure in the world. The kings of Assyria and Babylonia built numerous canals and reservoirs to promote agriculture by irrigation. King Solomon is said to have organized a commercial department of state and engaged in foreign trade for personal gain.

It was not alone in the field of great public works and undertakings of this nature that the ancient state exerted itself. It became at times a trader, as in the case of Rome, when she brought great quantities of grain from subject provinces or obtained it by purchase, in order to furnish food for the imperial city. There it was sold or given out in largesses. To-day, living in places where transportation facilities are available by railroad and steamship, we forget how difficult in earlier days was the problem of furnishing a supply of food to great cities. Lack of food was, in a very important sense, a limit to their growth. This condition

was notable in the case of Rome and of Athens. The large colonies of Greece, such as Syracuse, and those in Asia Minor, for a time attained a more rapid growth than communities at home, because they were in the midst of great fertile fields, where supplies of food were more readily obtainable. This shows one reason for state activity; the welfare of the state, its very life depended upon feeding its people. Demosthenes, in his orations, mentions a class of regulations under which all those who sailed ships to Athens had to bring a certain quantity of grain, and there was another law that if the shipper from the Crimea unloaded any part of his cargo on the way, it was considered an offense punishable by death.

This activity of the state is still manifest in the carrying out of public works, such as the improvement of rivers and harbors, and the construction of public buildings. In a limited way, industries are still conducted by the state, as in the case of the porcelain manufacturers of Dresden, Vienna, Berlin, and of Sèvres, in France. This participation of the state in trade is still further illustrated by the monopoly of some specific article as a source of revenue. France, Spain, Italy, Russia, Servia, Greece, Turkey, even so advanced a commercial country as the Netherlands, preserve certain monopolies, such as in tobacco, salt, or matches, salt perhaps being the most common. The most lucrative monopoly is that of spirits, reserved by

Russia, from which the empire realizes an income of $360,000,000 a year. Indeed, these state monopolies to-day yield an aggregate revenue greater than the total revenue of the same countries seventyfive years ago.

We come next to a second stage, in which the state is in close partnership with the individual and which prevailed until less than two hundred years ago. Probably the best illustration of this class of enterprise is the East India Company, established in the year 1599. The Muskovy Company, established in 1555 in the reign of Philip and Mary, the Levant or Turkey Company, established in 1581, and one known as the New Zealand Company, organized as late as 1841, are other illustrations of this class. A characteristic feature of these organizations was that the state granted the charter and conferred a monopoly of trade. The grantee paid a large share of the profits to the state, and what perhaps is more important than all, agreed that all the territory acquired should be the property of the sovereign who granted the charter.

The East India Company was more a political than a commercial organization, notwithstanding the magnitude of its trade operations and of its capital which, proportionately to the wealth of the times was greater than that to-day of the Standard Oil Company or the United States Steel Corporation. Its duties to the government, its political side, absorbed more of its energy than the devel