The manner of the applicant as he expressed himself was that of a polished and educated gentleman. It was not customary for us to encourage lengthy speeches on the part of applicants, during the year 1903 nor the years following, but once in a while a man of commanding will and intellect would challenge our attention and we would listen to him as I did to Mr. Richardson. He was a sufferer from one cause, and understood the cause and its only cure far better than a philosopher who only observes and could not feel the condition it imposed on him. “It is claimed that the individual is weakened and made dependent by our system, Mr. Richardson,” said I. “The claim is also made that the man who escapes the perils of the industrial system comes out with a stronger character and a more independent manhood than if such perils had not been encountered. Have you a different opinion?” “I do not know,” was the reply, “how great a manhood your system will develop. It teaches, however, the lesson of brotherhood, and gives me protection for my wife and babies by furnishing me an opportunity to be industrious. The competitive system might not be objectionable if it would do the same. But it does not permit fair competition. It demands that a man be industrious, but gives him no chance to work. It permits a few to monopolize land, water, power, money and all the sources, means and machinery of production, and then asks the disinherited and landless ones to compete when competition is impossible. “The system called competitive is not competitive. It is a system whereby a favored few are permitted to rob the many. As for the perils of that system developing character, I admit they do. The most remarkable character and those most admired in it are the modern Shylocks. If that sort of character is desirable, then the system is a success, but I do not covet its benefits. It seems to me the perils of savagery are much more effective to bring out strong traits of character and build up a manhood more courageous, self-reliant, and even heroic, certainly not more brutal, than the trading, cozening, cheating, gambling, sordid methods which make up this so-called ‘Competitive System.’” It was not possible for me in the press of business to continue the conversation further that day. Indeed, the arguments offered by the applicant were not new to me, and it was only because of the strong individuality of the man that I stopped to converse with him at all. It was, however, a part of my business to investigate the qualifications of applicants and when they had been accepted to enroll them in the proper department. Each department had its enrolling clerk present, who received the signature of the new member in the department to which he was assigned. A few formal questions more were put to Mr. Richardson and I assigned him to the Messenger and Publishing department, where a vacancy had occurred within a week by the death of a trusted member.