The Conflationof LaissezFairewithRegulation-ImposedEugenics 35quotationaboutcharity)andFirstPrinciples. Krass’s citationleavesit ambiguousas to
whetherthe quotationis fromoneof the Spencer-authoredbooks,or fromoneof the
worksaboutSpencer.Thatquotationis not foundin eitherFirstPrinciplesorSocialStat-
ics.^85 Becauseof my inabilityto trackdownthe sourceof the quotation,I decidedto query
someonewhoknowsmuchmoreaboutthistopicthanI do. In 2013I e-mailedRobert
Bannisterhimselfto inquireas to whetherhe wasfamiliarwiththe passageattributedto
Spencer.Dr. Bannisterlookedinto it, and pointedout to me that the quotationis foundin
one of the booksthatKrasscites.ThatbookisThe Socialand PoliticalThoughtof Herbert
Spencer, the 1978Ph.D.dissertationof DavidWiltshire.^86 InSocialand PoliticalThought,
Wiltshireascribesthe quotationto Spencerand saysit is frompage81 of a 1965editionof
The ManVersusthe State, editedby the libertarianAlbertJay Nock.^87 However,the quota-
tionis not to be foundin any editionofThe ManVersusthe State. AsThe ManVersusthe
Stateis availableon the WorldWideWebin its entirety,bothon GoogleBooksand on the
LibertyFund’sOnlineLibraryof Libertywebsite,one can run a searchfor the “artificially
prevented” quotationin theseeditions.Sucha searchcomesup withzeroresults.The
quotationis mostlikelyone thatWiltshireaccidentallymisattributedto Spencer.Never-
theless,criticsquotethe “artificiallyprevented” misquotationas evidenceof Spencer’s
callousness.PeterKrasscitesthe misquotationfor thatpurpose,as do the Ph.D.disserta-
tionof StephenH. LeDrew^88 andan articlein the periodicalthatitselfonceemployed
Spencer—The Economist.
Despitehis professedadmirationfor the Englishphilosopher,Carnegiedid not convey
deep comprehension of Spencer’s economictheories. “In reality,” writes Bannister,
“Carnegie’s understandingof Spencer’s philosophywassuperficialat best.. .” The steel
magnatewentas far as expressingdisdainfor laissezfaire.“I differfrommy greatmaster
HerbertSpencerin regardto the dutiesof the state.” Thusthisindustrialistpublicly
extolledprotectivetariffs,laborregulations,the ShermanAntitrustAct,and the Interstate
CommerceAct.^89 Whensomethinggoesamissin the economy,Carnegiestated,“it al-
wayscomesbackto me thatGovernmentcontrol,and thatalone,will properlysolvethe
problem.. .”^90
In hisGospelof Wealth—thatsamemanifestowherehe defendedcompetitionas “the
survivalof the fittest”—Carnegiearguedthata multimillionaire’s fortuneis reallypublic
propertyratherthanhis ownprivateproperty.Accordingto the Carnegiemanifesto,
wealthyindividualsshouldbe permittedto maintainlegalcontrolovertheirownestates
solelybecausetheyare particularlycompetentat managingassets.Fromthis perspective,
one shouldretaincontroloverhis fortuneunderthe conditionthat he fulfillsa communa-
listicdutyto donatehis moneyto charity.Accordingto peoplewhoagreewithCarnegie,
a millionairebusinessmanunilaterallyacquiressucha fortuneat the expenseof his consu-
mers,as if the consumersthemselveshadreceivedno remunerationfromthe fact that
theyreceivedthe goodsandservicestheywantedfromthe businessman.Therefore,the
millionairehas simplycollectedthe public’s moneyand shouldlearnto “givebackto the
community,” as if he hadnot already“givenback” to his customerswhenhe handed
themthe producttheywanted.The Gospelof Wealthconsequentlypronouncedthat wheth-
er or not a millionairedeservesto live is incumbentuponwhetherhe doesthe following,
whichCarnegiecallsthe millionaire’s duty:
... to providemoderatelyfor the legitimatewantsof thosedependentuponhim;and,
afterdoingso, to considerall surplusrevenueswhichcometo himsimplyas trustfunds,
whichhe is calleduponto administer,and strictlyboundas a matterof dutyto adminis-
ter in the mannerwhich,in his judgment,is bestcalculatedto producethe mostbeneficial
resultsfor the community—the manof wealththusbecomingthe meretrusteeand agent
for his poorerbrethren,bringingto theirservicehis superiorwisdom,experience,and
abilityto administer,doingfor thembetterthantheywouldor coulddo for themselves.