Also, the works of Taussig, Devas, Hobson, Antoine, Pesch, Carver, Vermeersch, Nearing, and King which are cited in connection with the introductory chapter. FOOTNOTES: [201] "Summa Theologica," 2a. 2ae., q. 66, a. 3. [202] "Patrologia Graeca," vol. 31, cols. 275, 278. [203] "Patrologia Latina," vol. 37, col. 1922. [204] "Patrologia Latina," vol. 14, col. 747. [205] "Patrologia Latina," vol. 77, col. 87. These and several other extracts of like tenor may be found in Ryan's "Alleged Socialism of the Church Fathers," ch. i; St. Louis, 1913. [206] Op. cit., 2a. 2ae., q. 66, a. 7. [207] Encyclical, "On the Condition of Labour," May 15, 1891. [208] Encyclical, "On Socialism, Communism, Nihilism," Dec. 28, 1878. [209] Op. cit., 2a. 2ae., q. 32, a. 1. [210] Idem, q. 66, a. 7. [211] A comprehensive, though brief, discussion of this question and numerous references are contained in Bouquillon, "De Virtutibus Theologicis," pp. 332-348. When Pope Leo XIII declared that the rich are obliged to distribute "out of" their superfluity, he did not mean that they are free to give only a portion thereof. The particle "de" in his statement, "officium est de eo quod superat gratificari indigentibus," is not correctly translated by "some." It means rather "out of," "from," or "with"; so that the affluent are commanded to devote their superfluous goods indefinitely to the relief of the needy. In the Encyclical, "Quot Apostolici Muneris," he used the expression, "gravissimo divites urget praecepto ut quod superest pauperibus tribuant," which clearly declares the duty of distributing all. [212] "The Wealth and Income of the People of the United States," pp. 224-226. SECTION IV THE MORAL ASPECT OF WAGES CHAPTER XXII SOME UNACCEPTABLE THEORIES OF WAGE-JUSTICE "It may be that we are not merely chasing a will-o'-the-wisp when we are hunting for a reasonable wage, but we are at any rate seeking the unattainable." Thus wrote Professor Frank Haight Dixon in a paper read at the twenty-seventh annual meeting of the American Economic Association, December, 1914. Whether he reflected the opinion of the majority of the economists, he at least gave expression to a thought that has frequently suggested itself to every one who has gone into the wage question free from prejudices and preconceived theories. One of the most palpable indications of the difficulty to which Professor Dixon refers is the number of doctrines concerning wage justice that have been laboriously built up during the Christian era, and that have failed to approve themselves to the majority of students and thinkers. In the present chapter the attempt is made to set forth some of the most important of these doctrines, and to show wherein they are defective. They can all be grouped under the following heads: The Prevailing-Rate Theory; Exchange-Equivalence Theories; and the Productivity Theories. I. THE PREVAILING-RATE THEORY