for　instance；　an　edition　of　Goethe　and　a　bottle　of　champagne；
  that　in　every　penal　code　two　things　which　appear　to　be　still　more
  heterogeneous；　a　fine　of　so　and　so　much　money　and　a　day's
  imprisonment　are　in　a　fixed　ratio　according　to　a　conventional
  standard。　Everywhere　in　the　questions　of　prices　and　of　law　the
  traditional　and　conventional　judgment；　that　this　is　to　be　called
  equal　and　not　that；　is　fundamental。　Only　should　we　have　to　begin
  every　moment　to　form　our　judgments　anew　would　this　objection　be
  reasonable。　As　things　are；　the　fact　remains　that　the　average
  earnings　of　the　employer；　compared　to　the　wages　of　the　laborer；
  can　be　raised　or　lowered　by　a　change　in　demand　and　supply　within
  such　an　economic　organization　as　exists　to…day；　that
  independently　thereof；　in　consequence　of　traditional　standards　on
  the　one　hand　and　of　the　modern　sentiments　and　ideals　on　the
  other；　this　change；　as　soon　as　it　has　reached　a　certain　extent；
  will　appear　just　or　unjust。
  And　whenever　these　and　similar　questions　are　discussed；　when
  opinions　differ　about　them；　the　controversy　is　not；　as　a　rule；
  between　those　who　wish　to　apply　the　categories　of　justice　to
  these　phenomena；　and　those　who　deny　their　applicability；　but　the
  struggle　is　between　older　and　traditional　standards　of　judgment
  and　new　ones；　the　ideals　of　the　eighteenth　century　with　those　of
  the　nineteenth；　the　struggle　is　between　a　cruder　conception　of
  right　and　a　more　refined　one；　between　ideals　whose　realization　is
  to…day　impossible　and　those　that　are　attainable　through　the
  customs　and　the　law　of　our　age；　finally　ideal　conceptions　of
  justice　which　have　already　been　co…ordinated　with　other　not　less
  justified　ideals　are　arrayed　against　those　which　have　chosen
  principles　of　justice　exclusively　for　their　battle…cry。
  And　just　because　this　struggle　never　ceases　there　is；　as　we
  have　seen　above；　no　simple；　universally　intelligible；　familiar
  and　applicable　formula　of　justice。　The　conceptions　in　question
  may　all　be　reduced　to　this　fundamental　idea：　everyone　according
  to　his　merit；　〃suum　cuique〃；　but　the　possible　application　of　this
  rule　is　always　different　according　to　the　possibility　of
  innumerable　conceptions　of　value；　estimations；　groupings　and
  classifications。　The　abstract　pretension；　for　example；　that　in
  labor　or　even　in　handiwork　rests　the　unique　standard　of　justice
  is　in　equal　right　with　the　other　pretense　that　talent；　virtue　or
  even　the　human　face　must　be　taken　into　account。　In　certain
  spheres　and　in　respect　to　certain　aims　only　will　one　formula　or
  the　other　gradually　prove　its　justification　and　thus　gain
  recognition。
  But　what　is　it　that　gives　the　final　decision　in　this　contest
  of　opinions？　Is　it　logical　reasoning？　Apparently　not；　or　at　least
  not　primarily。　Much　as　in　the　struggle　for　public　and　social
  institutions；　all　kinds　of　logical　reasons　for　the　justice　of　a
  cause　are　appealed　to；　they　seldom　convince　and　always　seem　more
  or　less　flat。　At　least　they　do　not　convince　the　opponent；
  although　they　are　capable　of　inciting　their　followers　to
  enthusiastic　and　desperate　struggles。　And　this　is　natural。　They
  are　not　logical　decisions。　Whether　they　be　traditional　standards
  of　valuation；　whose　immemorial　age　or　even　divine　origin
  impresses　our　spirits　or　newer　conceptions；　which　by　the　power　of
  passion　inflame　the　disciples　of　a　school；　a　party；　the　members
  of　a　class　or　a　people；　the　final　decision　rests　with　the　heart；
  with　the　innermost　centre　of　human　soul　and　mind。
  This　explains　the　vast　possibility　of　error；　of　delusion；　of
  vehement　passions。　Ideals　of　justice　may　appear　in　the　most
  distorted　forms；　in　its　name　the　most　insane　as　well　as　the
  highest　and　holiest　things　are　demanded。　Long　struggles　are　often
  necessary　to　purify　concepts　of　their　errors　and　to　develop　the
  ideal　in　its　purity。　But　at　the　same　time　the　inward　connection
  between　the　conceptions　of　the　〃just〃　and　the　depth　of　human
  emotions　explains　the　magic　power　of　their　effect。　That　which
  moves　the　inmost　heart　dominates　the　wills；　the　egoism；　inspires
  deeds　of　valor；　carries　away　the　individual　and　millions　to　deeds
  and　sacrifices。　Hence　the　mystery　that　a　political　platform；　an
  economic　contrivance；　only　influences　where　it　seems　an　outcome
  of　justice。　Hence　the　involuntary　tendency　to　appeal　to　justice
  in　every　discussion。　Hence　also　the　fact　that　the　same　theory
  which　proposes　a　demand　of　justice　as　its　consequence　often　is
  made　by　individuals；　but　repudiated　by　public　opinion；　and　then
  suddenly　with　irresistible　elementary　force　it　takes　hold　of　the
  masses；　leads　them　on　new　paths；　radically　influences　legislation
  and　puts　a　changed　stamp　on　whole　epochs。
  III
  Let　us　return　from　discussing　the　psychological　aspect　of　the
  question；　to　the　main　substance　of　our　discourse；　which　we　have
  hitherto　only　grazed；　or　touched　upon　by　way　of　illustrations。　We
  have　now　to　inquire　whether　the　distribution　of　income　and　wealth
  is　felt　to　be　just　or　unjust　at　all　and　under　what　circumstances
  and　conditions。
  If　we　confine　ourselves　to　the　strictly　philosophical
  reflections　of　ancient　and　modern　times；　there　scarcely　seems　to
  be　any　controversy　about　the　question。　From　Aristotle's　doctrine
  of　justice　in　distribution　to　the　philosophers　of　to…day；　there
  is　controversy　over　the　practical　effect　of　the　judgments　in
  question；　but　hardly　over　the　judgments　themselves。　Among　more
  recent　thinkers　　only　to　mention　a　few　　Herbart　conceives　the
  penal　system　and　the　economic　conditions　of　a　nation　as　a　united
  whole；　what　elsewhere　is　called　justice　he　denominates　as　equity。
  On　equity　his　so…called　system　of　wages；　which　comprises　the
  economic　conditions　and　the　penal　law　of　a　nation；　is　built　up；
  the　judgment　requires　recompense　for　benefits　and　retribution　for
  misdeeds。　The　conceptions　of　the　wage　system　must；　according　to
  Hartenstein；　be　applied　equally　to　benefits　and　misdeeds。　〃The
  general　idea　must　be　maintained；　that　the　social　institutions　and
  actions　should　be　capable　and　fitted　to　requite　equally　merit　and
  offence。〃　And　Trendelenburg；　in　a　similar　fashion；　affirms　that
  the　moral　estimation　of　political　and　economic　affairs　is；　at
  bottom；　derived　from　the　same　standpoint。　〃Indeed；〃　he　says；　〃in
  the　structure　of　the　State　the　constant　proportion　between　duties
  and　rights　is　the　fundamental　idea　of　justice；　and　the　same
  proportion　between　labor　and　earnings　should　be　aimed　at　in
  private　intercourse；　but　the　market　price　makes　the　exponent　so
  variable；　that　it　causes　a　constant　inequality。〃　The　execution
  thus　seems　dim　to　him；　but　it　appears　to　him　the　ideal　condition；
  that　labor　and　earnings　should　accord；　as　duty　does　with　right。
  There　is　no　doubt　that　this　conception　is　confronted　by
  another　which　results　from　the　investigation　of　details；　which　is
  not　the　outgrowth　of　popular　instincts　and　sentiment；　and　is　even
  often　involuntarily　denied　by　its　very　representatives；　but
  through　the　authority　of　certain　doctrines　has　become
  nevertheless　of　great　importance　for　practical　life。　I　mean　the
  conception　which　sees　in　the　difference　between　rich　and　poor
  only　an　occurrence　of　nature。　In　the　investigation　of　the
  immediate　causes　of　the　distribution　of　wealth；　this　conception
  is　not　able　to　discover　the　remoter　causes。　It　sees　only　demand
  and　supply；　proportions；　natural　phenomena；　climatic　influences；
  the　accidents　of　life　and　death；　all　these　are　unquestionably
  mechanical　causes　which　influence　this　or　that　distribution　of
  incomes。　The　earnings　of　the　individual；　it　is　said；　are
  determined　by　the　〃strength　and　the　luck　of　the　individual。〃
  Free　intercourse　appears　as　the　analogy　of　the　Darwinian　struggle
  for　existence。　Might　makes　right；　purposes　and　moral　judgments
  are　not　here　in　consideration；　or　only　to　a　limited　extent。　So
  far　as　mankind　demands　a　just　distribution　of　incomes；　their
  ideas　ate　in　the　main　foolish；　justice　may　at　the　most　be
  demanded　of　the　State　when　it　intervenes　directly；　opposed　as　it
  is　to　free　intercourse　and　the　legitimate　influence　of　fortune；
  this　striving　is　wrong。　〃Shall　we；〃　we　hear　from　this　quartet；
  〃censure　our　God；　that　He　so　frequently　interferes　unjustly？
  Shall　we　prescribe　to　Him　where　His　lightnings　shall　strike　and
  where　He　shall　permit　the　bullets　to　hit？　Shall　we　quarrel　with
  nature　because　she　grants　the　delicious　fruits　of　the　south　and
  an　olympic　existence　to　one　race；　while　she　banishes　another　to
  the　reeking　hovels　of　the　arctic？〃
  We　will　not　dismiss　this　conception　of　things　by　the
  accusation　of　materialism；　for；　though　materialistic；　it
  nevertheless　has　the　merit　of　being　realistic　and　of　having
  further　detailed　investigation　in　certain　directions。　But
  whatever　its　merits　in　this　direction；　our　question　is　not　really
  touched　at　all　by　these　arguments。　The　individual　scholar　who；　in
  his　researches；　considers　only　forces；　proportions；　demand　and
  supply；　and　endeavors　to　grasp　them；　may　ignore　the　question
  whether　the　result　be　just；　but　the　popular　mind　will　always
  repeat　the　question　as　long　as　it　sees　before　it　human　actions。
  But　only　to　this　extent　and　always　to　this　extent；　and
  furthermore　the　uncertain