The man who disassociates his ambition, however disinterested, from the cooeperation of his fellows, always takes this risk of ultimate failure.  He does not take advantage of the great conserver and guarantee of his own permanent success which associated efforts afford.  Genuine experiments toward higher social conditions must have a more democratic faith and practice than those which underlie private venture.  Public parks and improvements, intended for the common use, are after all only safe in the hands of the public itself; and associated effort toward social progress, although much more awkward and stumbling than that same effort managed by a capable individual, does yet enlist deeper forces and evoke higher social capacities.

The successful business man who is also the philanthropist is in more than the usual danger of getting widely separated from his employees.  The men already have the American veneration for wealth and successful business capacity, and, added to this, they are dazzled by his good works.  The workmen have the same kindly impulses as he, but while they organize their charity into mutual benefit associations and distribute their money in small amounts in relief for the widows and insurance for the injured, the employer may build model towns, erect college buildings, which are tangible and enduring, and thereby display his goodness in concentrated form.

By the very exigencies of business demands, the employer is too often cut off from the social ethics developing in regard to our larger social relationships, and from the great moral life springing from our common experiences.  This is sure to happen when he is good “to” people rather than “with” them, when he allows himself to decide what is best for them instead of consulting them.  He thus misses the rectifying influence of that fellowship which is so big that it leaves no room for sensitiveness or gratitude.  Without this fellowship we may never know how great the divergence between ourselves and others may become, nor how cruel the misunderstandings.

During a recent strike of the employees of a large factory in Ohio, the president of the company expressed himself as bitterly disappointed by the results of his many kindnesses, and evidently considered the employees utterly unappreciative.  His state of mind was the result of the fallacy of ministering to social needs from an individual impulse and expecting a socialized return of gratitude and loyalty.  If the lunch-room was necessary, it was a necessity in order that the employees might have better food, and, when they had received the better food, the legitimate aim of the lunch-room was met.  If baths were desirable, and the fifteen minutes of calisthenic exercise given the women in the middle of each half day brought a needed rest and change to their muscles, then the increased cleanliness and the increased bodily comfort of so many people should of themselves have justified the experiment.