Bebel; he may have learnt from any or all of them, but his theory of social reconstruction is pre-eminently and characteristically his own.  He does not believe in the private ownership of land, for example, but I do not remember that he has ever advocated the means of the “Single Tax.”  And in these sociological essays, as in his novels, his method is that of picturing the more desirable thing or condition, the method of sweet persuasion rather than that of the sectarian who has a pet specific.  Nevertheless Mr Wells uses his sharpened weapon of satire with considerable effect when he contemplates and displays for us the world as he sees it to-day.  I find no hint of sweetness or persuasiveness on that side.

It would be impossible in an exposition of this kind to dissect these essays in detail, nor would it be desirable.  Many of the suggestions with regard to actual practice, suggestions that might be embodied in modern legislation, are open to criticism in detail, and I would not pin Mr Wells down to the letter of any one of them.  He has certainly changed his mind on many points since he wrote these essays in constructive sociology, and the fact that he has so altered and enlarged his opinions is the best possible evidence of his reliability and sincerity.  He is before all else devoted to the services of growth and progress.  “To rebel against instinct,” he writes, “to rebel against limitation, to evade, to trip up, and at last to close with and grapple and conquer the forces that dominate him, is the fundamental being of man.”  And no man can hope to dominate those forces, if he is content to let his opinions crystallise at the age of thirty-five or so.  If he would retain his powers of criticism and construction he must have the patience and the energy to maintain the normal, receptive mind with which he is naturally endowed.  Unfortunately with that endowment commonly comes another—­namely, a tendency to avoid the irk or constant struggle by taking the line of least resistance; by adopting an opinion and upholding it in the face of all reason; and only a man of exceptional patience, courage and ability can keep himself free from the prejudices and fixed opinions which not only bring him a delusive peace and certainty but also are the means to worldly success.

So I would advise the readers of Anticipations and Mankind in the Making to be influenced by the spirit rather than by the letter of these two books.  The spirit is definite enough; it is the spirit of humaneness, of a passionate criticism of all the evils, miseries and disease that are the outcome of our present haphazard civilisation; the spirit for a desire for order, wider prospects and opportunities, greater freedom for growth.  Men are born unequal, with different tendencies, different desires, different potentialities, but there should be a place for every one of them in the great economy of “The New Republic.”  Each has to learn the lesson—­for