[121] Wilhelm Liebknecht, cited in Hillquit's "Socialism in Theory and Practice," p. 107. [122] "Das Erfurter Program," cited by Skelton, op. cit., p. 178. [123] Cf. Skelton, op. cit., ch. vii; Bernstein, "Evolutionary Socialism," pp. 1-94; Simkhovitch, "Marxism vs. Socialism," _passim_; Walling, "Progressivism and After," _passim_; Hillquit-Ryan, op. cit., ch. iv. [124] "Income," p. 152. [125] "The Wealth and Income of the People of the United States," p. 132. [126] Cf. Hillquit-Ryan, op. cit., pp. 107, 136. [127] Cf. Hillquit-Ryan, op. cit., pp. 73-77; Skelton, op. cit, p. 183; Walling, "Socialism as It Is," p. 429. [128] Cf. King, op. cit., pp. 224-226. [129] Cf. Kautsky, "The Social Revolution," pp. 166, 167; Hillquit-Ryan, op. cit., p. 72. [130] Hillquit-Ryan, op. cit., p. 80; cf. Spargo, "Socialism," pp. 225-227. [131] "Socialism: A Critical Analysis," p. 219. [132] Cf. "The Panama Gateway," by Joseph Bucklin Bishop, p. 263. CHAPTER XII ALLEGED INTRINSIC JUSTIFICATIONS OF INTEREST In his address as President of the American Sociological Society at the annual meeting, Dec. 27, 1913, Professor Albion W. Small denounced "the fallacy of treating capital as though it were an active agent in human processes, and crediting income to the personal representatives of capital, irrespective of their actual share in human service." According to his explicit declaration, his criticism of the modern interest-system was based primarily upon grounds of social utility rather than upon formally ethical considerations. A German priest has attacked interest from the purely moral viewpoint.[133] In his view the owner of any sort of capital who exacts the return of anything beyond the principal, violates strict justice.[134] The Church, he maintains, has never formally authorised or permitted interest, either on loans or on producing capital. She has merely tolerated it as an irremovable evil. Is there a satisfactory justification of interest? If there is, does it rest on individual or on social grounds? That is to say: is interest justified immediately and intrinsically by the relations existing between the owner and the user of capital? Or, is rendered morally good owing to its effects upon social welfare? Let us see what light is thrown on these questions by the anti-usury legislation of the Catholic Church. _Attitude of the Church Toward Interest on Loans_