If a man cannot rightfully collect more than he honestly earns, it is then a matter of the utmost importance to know how much money a man can honestly earn.  I venture an answer to this, namely, that a man cannot honestly earn more than fairly measures the value of the service which he renders to society.  I cannot conceive of any way of earning money except to give to society a service equivalent in value to the money collected.  This is a fundamental proposition and it is important that it should be clearly understood, for if one desires to collect largely from society he must be prepared to render a large service to society; and our schools and colleges, our churches and all other organizations for the improvement of man have for one of their chief objects the enlargement of the capacity for service.

There is an apparent exception in the case of an inheritance, but it is not a real exception, for if the man who leaves the money has honestly earned it, he has already given society a service of equivalent value and, therefore, has a right to distribute it.  And money received by inheritance is either payment for service already rendered, or payment in advance for service to be rendered.  No right-minded person will accept money, even by inheritance, without recognizing the obligation it imposes to render a service in return.  This service is not always rendered to the one from whom this money is received, but often to society in general.  In fact, most of the blessings which we receive come to us in such a way that we cannot distinguish the donors and must make our return to the whole public.  If one is not compelled to work for himself he has the larger pleasure of working for the public.

But I need not dwell upon this, because in this country more than anywhere else in the world we appreciate the dignity of labour and understand that it is honourable to serve.  And yet there is room for improvement, for all over our land there are, scattered here and there, young men and young women—­and even parents—­who still think that it is more respectable for a young man to spend in idleness the money some one else has earned than to be himself a producer of wealth.  As long as this sentiment is to be found anywhere there is educational work to be done, for public opinion will never be what it ought to be until it puts the badge of disgrace upon the idler, no matter how rich he may be, rather than upon the man who with brain or muscle contributes to the Nation’s wealth, the Nation’s strength and the Nation’s progress.

But, as I said, the inheritance is an apparent, not an actual, exception, and we will return to the original proposition—­that one’s earnings must be measured by the service rendered.  This is so vital a proposition that I beg leave to dwell upon it a moment longer, to ask whether it is possible to fix in dollars and cents a maximum limit to the amount one can earn in a lifetime.