A Russian nobleman has been quoted as saying that "The best talent and the highest ability and character among the Russian people naturally gravitate toward the throne." In America they gravitate away from public service, and both systems are deplorably bad. In Germany, England and other highly organized democracies it is truly wonderful what great ability drifts into state-craft, and it is also remarkable that the democratic opposition to their centralizing work comes from men of inferior races or lower layers of the upper race. In America some of the highest are still in the democratic ranks as a matter of course, for we began by all being democrats.

The difference between the struggle for titles and the race for wealth can now be appreciated. In a well organized society of any kind, whether it be a railroad, factory, army or nation, it is necessary to have men to guide and direct groups of units so that efficient "team work" is done. That is the spirit of cooperation, enabling a thousand organized men to do far more work than a thousand acting independently. A regiment of soldiers who obey orders can overcome thousands of men who act as a mob. The growth of European nations was due to the fact that the kings discovered that a standing army - a regular force of trained professional soldiers - was able to prevent the unorganized opposition of independent feudal kings or lords. The feudal system collapsed as a result of the evolution of society into larger masses, and huge nations resulted from the amalgamation of many little ones. Likewise big factories replaced the little ones through the operation of the same laws. A thousand laborers whose work was coordinated by bosses, could make things more cheaply than the thousand men who worked at home with inefficient machinery.

Now, no organization is possible, unless there are titles to designate the bosses. Rank, with power to punish for disobedience, is a necessity in the nation, factory or army. Railroads and factories used titles for the managers, and these titles are sought because they indicate power and good salaries. In nations we find the same rule, and in spite of our hatred of Old World titles we were compelled to invent new ones when we organized our nation in the New World - His Excellency instead of His Majesty, Honorable instead of His Grace, and so on through the whole list.

There is a curious contradiction in public sentiment in America. We inherit the Old World love of titles; indeed, it is instinctive with all human beings, and a matter of survival of the fittest, for no others were able to survive. We blame our girls for marrying the "leaders" or "dukes," but it is the most natural thing in the world - women have been doing it for thousands of years.

As a matter of course, the leaders of men - the "dukes" - were compelled to be oppressive to certain elements of the population in order to solidify society. The ancient antagonisms between the "barons" and the "people" were, therefore, identical with the modern antagonisms of the centralizing political parties and the decentralizing or democratic parties. When a chance arose to escape from this oppression, the failures emigrated. The great men of England and the continent were and still are content to stay at home It thus happens that America is populated by the people who are "democrats" opposed to the centralizing ruling aristocrats, though reverencing rank and power.

The results of this are very deplorable. Every man is working for his own selfish ends, because there are no public honors or ranks as rewards for working for society. While men abroad will work a lifetime for the nation to be called " Lord," the public servant here works for money or a few miserable temporary titles or honors which he cannot transmit to his sons. Europe has thousands of men who spend their whole lives working for national advancement, and we have none, but we have untold thousands who spend their lives robbing the public. Europe has thousands of great statesmen who are not tradesmen; we have thousands of great merchants and princes of industry who are not statesmen. Centralization produces one class, democracy the other.

All this does not mean that we must create a titled aristocracy - far from it - such an institution would be a disaster because abnormally great men do not transmit their abilities as a rule. Scarcely any of the signers of our Declaration of Independence have left descendants in public life, and most of the families have reverted to mediocrity or become extinct. The Lords of England are even proposing to exclude their reverted types from the House of Lords by electing only those who have inherited the ability of the founders of the line. For a long time England has depended upon the creation of new aristocrats to replace the families which degenerate and die out. We are working out our salvation on other lines. Rank and power being dependent upon the man's brain must not be hereditary. In time we will give lifelong honors to public benefactors - and England shows a tendency to do the same. Both organisms are evolving toward the same mean, but from different directions. They are losing respect for hereditary lords and we are losing respect for the men who have done nothing but make money by exploiting us. Each class will eventually be suppressed. Titles will cease with the earners of them, and huge fortunes will be partly confiscated.

We, poor, foolish, misguided Americans have thought that we can upset natural law. We have become convinced that he who renders services to the community shall not be paid nor honored with titles according to the value of those services - and see the results! Public officials are given small fees or salaries, and are apt to take the balance in other ways. The people must pay for services rendered to them, just as their ancestors did, for they cannot get something for nothing. The epidemic of stealing in our municipalities is therefore natural and ineradicable as long as we imagine that men give away immensely valuable services.

It is not a whit cheaper by our present method than by the English one of enormous salaries and enormous pensions. Indeed, we probably pay more for the services of public servants than any other nation. Chinese are paid very little by salary, but very much by a method of "commissions," and "fees," which to Aryans is peculation and bribery.