Price 10c -
THE
GOSPEL
ACCORDING
TO
MALFEW
SEKLEW
"The discoverer of a Great rºutº
well knows that it may be useful tº
other men, and, as a greedy with-
holding would bring him no enjoyment.
he communicates it.”—Max sººner
My diet masculine is having its ef.
ſect-my sayings of power and vigor.
I feed men, not with flatulent vegeta-
bles but with warrior food.”
SPENCELLA and WINSEX, .
Importers-Publishers-Printers-Booksellers
- 852 Belmont Ave. (Suite 11)
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, U. S. A.











**SOCIAL STATICS” (authorized
edition) by Herbert Spencer. This is
one of the very first books published
by the author. He revised it just before
his death and brought it up to date.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Happiness as an Immediate Aim.
Unguided Expediency.
The Moral-Sense Doctrine.
What is Morality?
The Evanescence (†Diminution) of Evil.
Greatest Happiness Must be Sought
Indirectly.
Derivation of a First Principle.
Secondary Derivation of a First Prin-
ciple.
First Principle.
Application of this First Principle.
The Right of Property.
Socialism.
The Right of Property in Ideas.
The Rights of Women.
The Rights of Children.
Political Rights.
The Constitution of the State.
The Duty of the State.
The Limit of State-Duty.
The Regulation of Commerce.
Religious Establishments.
Poor Laws.
National Education.
Government Colonization.
Sanitary Supervision.
General Considerations.
Currency, Postal Arrangements, etc.
Cloth bound, $1.50. Paper
Price 50c. Postpaid.
THURLAND & THURLAND
Evanston, linois (Suburb of Chicago).





THE GOSPEL
According to Malfew Sekiew.
E G O Is M. C. O N S CIO U S A. N. D. UN CON SCI0 U.S.
THE EVOLUTION OF THE EGO,
**MAN KNOW THYSE.L.F.”
By Sirfessor Superight.
*The discoverer of a Great Truth
well knows that it may be useful to
other men, and as a greedy with-
holding would bring him no enjoyment,
he communicates it.”—Max Stirner.
1.
*The maintenance of civilisation depends on nearly all people being
tools.”-H. N. Dickenson.
“Man is as heaven made him, and something a great deal worse."-
Cervantes.
*The public is not a philosopher."-Jules Lemaitre.
“The bad men of the world are occupied in undoing the evil wrought
by the good.”
Certain men, who have had the courage to probe down to the very bottom
of their own minds, have come to the conclusion that self-interest is the
one motive of all human action; I might say of all action that is not merely
mechanical and has life at the roºt of it. -
This belief, conviction, or conclusion-term it what you will-forms the
whole sum and substance of the philosophy called “Egoism,” and the man
who, after due reflection, subscribes himself to it, becomes a “Conscious
Egoist;" conscious! mark you—in that alone lies the difference between
himself and the unbeliever; for, according to his philosophy, all men are
Egoists by an inevitable law—the Supreme Law of Nature.
The question is then, with regard to Egoism, not “Are you an Egoist?”
but “Are you conscious of the fact that you are an Egoist?” Call yourself
what you will, if you are not a Conscious Egoist, you are merely an un-
conscious one.
This may seem a revoltingly dogmatic philosophy to those who are still
loundering about in the shallows of ancient reasoning, like little boys just
learning to swim and afraid to go more than a yard or so beyond the land.
But let these good people come out into the broad sea of self, let them
realise their own nature, find what is best and most pleasing within them,
draw it out to the full, and not be ashamed to say, or think, that by so
doing they are serving self and self merely: then, in the opinion of the
Conscious Egoist, they will become wise and sensible beings.
The Conscious Egoist asserts that all actions of all men are taken either
in the quest of happiness or in the avoidance of pain. This is the ground-
work upon which he builds up his reasoning.
Says he, “Whenever a man performs what the world might term a self-
sacrifice, either he finds pleasure in it or avoids pain. For instance, the
philanthropist who spends his time and money in relieving the poor and
needy, does it either to gain the pleasure or self-satisfaction of having done
a good and charitable action, or to avoid the pain, as far as it is possible,
of seeing his fellow-creatures suffer.
Or take another instance, that of the man who risks or definitely
sacrifices his own life to save that of some other person. Either he does it
from a natural desire to be courageous, or else the thought of seeing another
creature die is more painful to him than is the thought of dying himself.
Hence we see that in these two instances the term “self-sacrifice” is
not admissible; for both the philanthropist and the hero are plainly serving
and not sacrificing self. -
The Altruist (who is merely an unconscious Egoist) will most strenuously
deny this becaue it would hurt his vanity to admit that his own actions
are self-serving and not self-sacrificing. Says he, “It is possible to do an
action which shall give pleasure to or detract from the pain of another, and
yet neither attain pleasure oneself or avoid pain in the doing of it. Rather
the reverse,” he argues. “It will detract from one's own pleasure, and add
to the burden of one's own pain.
“And yet,” says the Conscious Egoist, “You would assert that Virtue
is its own reward?”
“Yes, I would,” says the Altruist.
“And you are more pleased, let us say satisfied, in being what you call
unselfish than you would be if you knew you were what is called selfish?”
the Conscious Egoist questions.
“Certainly,” says the Altruist.
“Then,” says the Conscious Egoist with a smile, “Your Altruism (which
you call unselfishness) is merely the outcome of selfishness. Do you see
the contradiction.”
The Altruist shakes his head. He will not part with his false philosophy
so easily. He has grown to love it because it has flattered his individuality
by representing his actions to be that which they are not. “I fail to see
your point,” he says in an emphatic voice, as though his failing to see a
thing proved that the thing was not there to be seen. And the Conscious
Egotist is seized with an exceeding great pity for the Altruist, who is very
blind indeed. -
2.
You will observe that I am sticking to the phrase “Conscious Egoist" in
alluding to the believer in Egoism. The whole virtue of reasoning upon
the subject lies in that word “conscious,” which so many professed Egoists
forget to prefix to themselves when arguing with the benighted ones. Says
the Conscious Egoist very often to the so-called Altruist, “I am an Egoist
and your are an Egoist; there is no difference between us.” And the Altruist
at once thinks that there is something wrong with the statement, for he
sees a great difference somewhere, though he hardly knows where it is.
And in this instance the Altruist is right. Both men are Egoists, certainly,
and yet there is a difference between them. The one is a Conscious Egoist,
the other a very unconscious one. In the case of one Egoism is recognized,
in the case of the other it is strongly denied, although it exists just the
same.
Here the Altruist might throw in what would seem to him a weighty
argument. “There is,” he might say, “a greater difference between man and
man than this consciousness and unconsciousness. For instance, between
two persons who call themselves Conscious Egoists there may be a vast
difference. The one may be a fairly good fellow, one to be tolerated in spite
of his opinions, while another may be a rogue, a vagabond, and a dis-
agreeable fellow to boot. How do you account for that?” Very easily. The
difference in this case is the difference that is always between man and




man, and it lies in a man's ego or self, and not in his Egoism, which is
merely the natural law of the ego. The ego of a man, or his individuality.
is more or less limited. He is born strong in certain powers and weak in
ºthers. Even his mentality is never perfect. Sometimes a portion of it
will attain or closely approach perfection, and then the man is called a
genius; but this development of one portion is nearly always at the expense
of another portion. Hence is genius so irregular. Well, there being, as I
have said, a difference between man and man, and all men being, by a law
of nature Egoists, it stands to reason that the difference between man and
man is the difference between Egoist and Egoist. The same difference
would be apparent if all men had the misfortune to be born Altruists (which
is an impossible supposition as in reality. Altruism is only an imaginative
quality). But supposing that Dame Nature for a moment changed the un-
changeable law, and in a fit of cruelty made all men. Altruists; I doubt
whether she would have the consistency to make them all alike.
Thus, the only thing in which men may not differ, according to the
philosophy of Egoism, is motive. This alone is unchangeable. Chris
dying in agony on the Cross, and the drunken wifebeater beating his wife
to death in a fit of passion, are inspired by one and the same motive-self-
satisfaction. Christ felt that out of respect for himself, or for his principles,
which means the same thing, he must suffer this terrible death. The wife-
beater feels that out of respect for himself he must assert his mastery over
his wife. That is the way I look at it.
“But," argues the Altruist, “if you assert that their motives are the
same, you seem to me to be putting Christ and the wife-beater on a level.
fail to see how you can make any distinction between them.”
Answers the Conscious Egoist, “As I have said before, the difference lies
in the men themselves, and not in their motives. One man nº delight in
pleasing others, while the othes delights in displeasing others. In this case
they will act oppositely, though from a similar motive. It is right and
logical to call a man a good man or a bad man; but it is wrong and illogical
to assert that there are good motives and bad motives.
A man is a good man or a bad man in our eyes accordingly as we are
pleased or displeased by his behavior. Thus all difference is relative, and
we judge an object by the relation that object bears to ourselves. This is
why the world loves its Saviours, its Messiahs, its Prophets, its Martyrs,
Its geniuses, its great inventors and discoverers—simply because they have
benefited the world. Gratitude is very clearly the outcome of selfishness,
like all the virtues.
I am not here to defend that which the world calls selfishness, and
condemns so strongly, in theory, that is. I also would condemn it; yet
I would not call it selfishness, but narrowness, littlesess, baseness. The
man who is commonly called selfish is no more selfish that the rºst of
his brethren; but his mind is stunted, his conception of himself is too
limited. His joys are petty, his sorrows are mean. He has misconceived
himself.
The secret of good and bad egoism lies in the ego's conception of itself.
A man may be conscious of his egoism, and yet sublimely unconscious of
a great part of his ego or self. The body has its needs and the mind has
its needs. These needs are many and various, and a man must grasp them
all, and strive to satisfy them ere he becomes a perfect Egoist. This seems
almost an impossible task—a task for a God, not for a man of flesh and
blood and imperfections. But we can try.
It is an unconscious recognition of his own mental need which turns a
man to what ho calls Altruism. It is a recognition (conscious or unconscious)
of mental need which makes a man love honesty, justice, mercy and
charity. It is a recognition, again, of mental need, which gives man a





longing for wholeness and continence of body and mind, and breeds in him
the thing called morality. Also it is a recognition of his own mental need
which makes a man rebel against the lºck of proportion that exists today
in Society. He sees one person suffering from want of that which is
absolutely necessary to him if he is to live, while another has all that he
can wish for, both of the necessities ºnd the superfluities of life. He feels
that there is something wrong with the world; and feels also, perhaps
without realising that he does it that the world is part of himself just as
much as he is part of the world. Therefore he strives to right the world.
because only when the world is perfect can he himself be perfect. Is this
unselfifshness? Clearly not. It is a broad, enlightened selfishness, which
has widened out self so that it includes the whole universe of things. A
magnificent selfishness, but not altruism.
4.
Usually the Altruist takes Jesus of Nazareth as his pattern to live by
to perish by; and he argues that Christ preached and practiced the doctrine
of complete self-abnegation.
This is a conclusion which can only be arrived at by those who have
halted half-way in their reasoning. Christ did not preach the doctrine of
complete self-abnegation. He mºy have imagined and even declared himself
to have been doing so; but in that case he could not have fully grasped
the import of his own doctrine. What Christ really advocated was the
abnegation (complete if you like) of one half of self to the other half, of
the physical self to the purely mental, or if you will (for to me the two words
have a synonymous meaning) spiritual self.
Christ considered that half of man was good and half was evil, and
that these two halves of man made perpetual war upon each other. One of
them, said he, must conquer in the end and trample the other underfoot.
the which defending upon the will of the individual. He preached that it
was best for the individual that his evil self should be stified and his good
self cultivated to its fullest extent. Rather a onesided doctrine to him
who recognises that only that is evil to an individual which is positively
hurtful; yet let us examine it to find whether there is in it a trace of
genuine unselfishness. -
We find that men are advised to be unselfish because it is best for them
selves that they be so to crush self because self will benefit by it. Clearly
if a man does what is best for himself for the reason that it is best for
himself, he is mistaken in calling his action unselfish.
Therefore the term. Altruist is a misnomer, even when applied to practical
Christianity.
o.
As I have said before, these are two kinds of selfishness, the broad and
the narrow. Let me illustrate this by giving you two types of men, first
the man who is narrowly selfish, then the man whose selfishness is broad
and enlightened. -
We will suppose both men to be earnestly religious; the supposition is
not an improbable one.
The first man on the promises of the Bible, sacrifices himself, as he
believes, on earth, for the sake of an eternity of aesthetic bliss in Heaven.
He can never lose sight of the promised reward—if he did he would cease
to be religious. His every act of charity is done because he knows that
it. will be returned to him a thousandfold. I make bold to say that this
man is the most common type of religionist. He has taken the narrow
View of religion, regarding it as an unpleasant means towards ultimate
pleasure.
The broadly religious man believes in and follows a religion for its own
sake, at the bottom reckless of eternity. “This religion,” he says, “will
-
benefit me here, on earth. It will bring me nearer to what I would wish
to be. I am most happy when I am doing good, because I know that it is
good. If doing good will take me to Heaven, very well. If not, it has gone
towards making a Heaven on earth.” -
The Conscious Egoist, regarding these two believers would assert that
both were inspired by the same motive, the attainment of self-satisfaction,
but there, most probably, the similarity ends, for each goes a different way
about it according to his lights. The one whose mind is narrow and ill-
Ighted may attain a mean kind of pleasure at a great loss. The one
whose mind is brºad, open and enlightened may gain infinite pleasure at
less cost to himself.
6.
I hold that if a man makes a sacrifice he does not, nay, cannot, sacrifice
himself wholly; but merely sacrifice one part of himself to another part.
It is a law of evolution that the fittest mental attributes as well as the
fittest physical attributes, should survive; and it is this survival of the fittest
which we call the victory of right over wrong, or reason over prejudice.
Man is a creature of conflicting passions; and it is best, or fittest, for
the world that those passions, or impulses, should survive in the struggle
which are most congenial or beneficial to the world as a whole; and it is
best for the individual that he should be in complete harmony with the
world and the world's spirit, otherwise, like an obstinate cog-wheel in a
rapidly whirling machine, he is apt to get broken and to fly off at a tangent,
a useless article. Or else, if he is particularly strong as well as particularly
obstinate, the machine, by which I signify the world's progress, may be
stayed for a while until a stronger power than himself removes him and
his influence. -
7.
But I have wandered a little from the direct course of my reasoning.
You see, though Egoism is such a vast subject, it does not stand much
description. The shorter the description of Egoism, the better and clearer
it will be. One might sum it up neatly in a little aphorism, “Egoism is
everything, for everything is Egoism.” This is what the Conscious Egoist
advances against the idea of Altruism. He says, “I could prove to you, if
there was time enough in the course of a lifetime to do so, that everything
in the world and out of it is Egoism or the result of Egoism. I have proved
It to myself already, and such being the case, I do not see how Altruism
can exist. There is no room for it. In a vessel that is quite full of one
substance there is no room for another.”
8.
The thing which causes most misunderstanding between the Conscious
Egoist and the Unconscious Egoist is that the Unconscious Egoist looks
upon Egoism as a doctrine preached by the Conscious Egoist, whereas it is
an inevitable fact merely stated by him.
The difference between a fact and a doctrine should be plain to everyone.
And yet I have heard it said by people who might reasonably claim to be
intelligent that there is no real difference between them. But if a fact and
a doctrine are merely one and the same thing, how do you account for the
multitudinous number of facts that were in existence ere ever a doctrine
was preached or invented. A doctrine is a structure of reasoning raised
upon a foundation of fact. The reasoning may be correct or fallacious,
but this has nothing to do with the fact upon which it is based. If the
doctrine is wrong, and mankind becomes conscious that it is wrong, then
the doctrine will die out; but the fact remains, and another doctrine, more
in harmony with it, will be raised upon its foundation.
Were Egoism a doctrine, the Conscious Egoist would approach you with
these words, “Be selfish, for it is best that you should be so.” Instead of
which, he comes to you and says, “You are selfish, you cannot help it.





Therefore you had better recognize the fact."
I say again, Egoism is given forth as a fact and not as a doctrine. The
Conscious Egoist asks a man to look into himself and re ornise that which
is within him. “Man, know thyself.” If I do a good action it is the result
of Egoism. If I do a bad action, it is the result of Egoism. I am brave by
reason of my Egoism, and cowardly by the same reason.
º
Egoism, then, is merely a mental force which makes a man move, and
keeps him moving. It rests with a man's ego in which direction he will
move. Men have good egos and bad egos; strong, healthy egos, and weak.
morbid, unhealthy egos. Egoism is not the ego but the law of the ego.
- Difference in men's actions is no sign of difference in their motives. It
is simply a proof of difference, either inborn or cultivated. in the men them.
selves. Therefore there is no unreasonableness in saying that good actions
and bad actions (by which I mean actions beneficial to the world and
actions detrimental to it) are inspired by Egoism, the mere realisation
of self.
10.
A question was asked in my hearing some little time ago of a lecturer
in sympathy with the philosophy of Egoism, which hardly received an
adequate answer, the fault being that the answer was too concise and un-
explanatory to be convincing to the mind of the inquirer. The lecturer
forgot that the inquirer looked at matters in quite a different light to him-
self, or else he realized that he had not sufficient time to begin at the root
of the matter and lead upward.
The question was, as far as I remember, “If Universal Egoism is a fact,
how do you account for that feeling of benevolence towards others which
exists in the human mind?"
I forget the lecturer's exact reply, but I know that the inquirer was
eminently unsatisfied; and I will try myself to answer the question as fully
as I can, and as clearly; and, if the inquirer should read these words, 1
sincerely hope I shall satisfy him that, taking Egoism fully into consided-
ation, the feeling of benevolence he alludes to is not entirely unaccountable.
In the first place, what is this feeling of benevolence? Looked at logic-
ally, it is simply a desire for the expansion of self. When there is another
per on seemingly outside yourself, whose joys and sorrows affect you just
as much as do your own, it is equivalent to your having two selves, for this
person's very life becomes a part of your life. Therefore to strive to make
that other person happy is to strive to make yourself happy at the same
time, because, by reason of your extension of self, you cannot be perfectly
hanny unless he is in similar condition.
This is what benevolence practically amounts to, whether it is on a large
scale, and, as it does in some highly developed egos, embraces the whole
human race, or whether it is on a small scale, and embraces a narrow circle
of acquaintances.
Take, for instance, that man whose love is so strong that he will lay
down his life to save one he loves. It is because of his love that he does
it, and what is this love? It is the merging of his own life completely into
the life of another, so completely, that at the time of his apparent self
sacrifice the body which he gave to destruction, his own body, he felt
instinctively to contain less of himself than that which he was desirous
of saving.
Renevolence is a mild form af love, mild because it is widely diffused.
A man with a great capacity for loving may, accordingly as he is circum-
stanced, concentrate his love upon a single individul, or scatter it abroad
among the sons of men. Or he may shed it equally over all living things,
as Buddha is said to have done, who voluntarily gave his own body to
be a feast for a starving tigress and her cubs, because he could not bear
to see their sufferings—the greatest sacrifice I have heard of, even in
mythology.
Benevolence, then, is a widely diffused form of love, as passion is love
concentrated; and I argue that when a person loves, the objects of his love
become part, often the greater part, of that person's own life, therefore
practically part of that person's own self. Thus it is that even a Conscious
Egoist may derive pleasure from acts of benevolence.
You will admit that one does find pleasure in acts of benevolence, that
one is always glad to see those one loves happy and contented. I do not see
how you can deny it. And when one is happy, or pleased, it is because
one's ego—or self—is to a certain extent satisfied. Therefore self-satisfaction
is quite consistent with benevolence and self-satisfaction is another word
for Egoism.
To conclude, let me restate my case as briefly as possible. I have said:-
1. That all actions of all men are taken in order to satisfy the cravings
of the ego, or self. Therefore all men are Egoists.
2. That some are conscious of the fact and some are unconscious of
the fact.
3. That among the unconscious ones there are those who assert that
It is possible to be the opposite of Egoist, to wit Altruist, and that it is a
man's duty to bo Altruist rather than Egoist.
4. That this is an impossible theory, because the very thing which
they call Altruism springs out of and is nothing more nor less than a form
of Egoism. -
5. That there is no such thing as self-sacrifice; that the man who gives
his life to save another values his life less than that other, or he would
never do it.
6. That to say all men are Egoists does not put them, on a level. It
merely gives them a common motive. Widely different actions may spring
from this motive. The difference, where there is one, lies in a man's ego,
or self. Egoism is the law of the ego.
7. That Egoism is a fact which cannot be escaped from, not a doctrine
which may be followed out at will; and it is best and most honest to
recognise this fact, thereby becoming a Conscious Egoist. The motto for
the Conscious Egoist is “Man, Know Thyself,” or “Find Thyself Out.”
8. That all those actions which it behoves a man to do who would call
himself an Altruist may be done by a man who would call himself a
Conscious Egoist, without the slightest inconsistency. The only difference
between the two men in that case would be that the Conscious Egoist was
more alive to the nature of himself than was the Altruist.


THE MAN WITHOUT. A. SOUL
ON
* P_0 L IT I C & A. N. D. P. A. R. L. I. A. M. E. N. T. *
“Behold, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed."—John
Selden.
“Rich men without conviction are more dangerous in modern society
than poor women without chastity."—G. B. Shaw.
“The House of Lords—An institution at which the divorced meet the
divines to resist the destitute."—Truth. -
“The House of Commons—An Institution at which the representatives
of the people sell the interests of the constituents."—Truth.
“The Englishman is never so happy as when he is ostentatiously re-
forming—something, so long as it is not himself.”
Politics is the Battle of the Ballot. It is a Battle for a Bauble. The
Electors play with the Bauble while the “Elected” juggle with the “Boodle."
The ballot is the battle-cry of bipeds looking for peace, retrenchment and
reform, for they think it is the Bulwark of “John Bull and his Island,” the
Palladium of their liberties, and the Pass key to Progress. It was given
to the common people—after much agitation—by Disraeli, the wisest Jew,
and wittiest, and wickedest Statesman of the 19th century, because I be
lieve he saw that it would soothe the Republican soothsayers into quietude
—as it certainly has done, for there are no Red Republicans to be found
nowadays in England.
Another thing that few reformers know is, that as the franchise has
been extended, the powers of the police have been enlarged, until today
we have practically a police army, commanded by military officers, who
are rapidly Germanising and Russianising the system. At the present time
the police tyrannise over the shopkeepers until they are in a state of mental
meekness; and terrorise the lower orders of society until they drive the
strong into jail, and the weak into silent slavery and dumb submission.
The people prefer the arbitrament of the ballot to the arbitrament of
the bullet, forgetful of the fact that Liberty will never be granted, but
must be taken. The arbitrament of the ballot is a renunciation of arbitra.
tion; a glorification of the rule of the majority; with its corollary the en-
slavement and subjection of the minority. It is the rule of Force—not the
reign of Equality, Fraternity, and Liberty, which so many yearn for.
The ballot is not a panacea for the ills of society, nor a nepenthe for
the sorrows of the common people, but a pseudo-paraclete that fills the
calamity-howler with beatific bliss, minus thought: a mental hasheesh that
holds the helot in leash without the lash; and transforms the Revolutionist
into an Evolutionist saturated with optimism and delirious day dreams.
Politics is a game played in Parliament. It is a pastime for the idle
rich, and a game of bluff, mixed with blarney and bunkuin for the poor.
It is a confidence game played upon the people, for the people are per
suaded into the belief that Parliament respects the will of the People.
while the truth is Parliament is actually an instrument to preserve the
privileges of the rich, and to strengthen their position, founded on economic
power. Parliament really registers the power of the owners of economic
wealth in the shape of land, money, and other kinds of property. Property
rules the Rostrum of Parliament, as surely as self-interest rules the world.
“The People is a beast of muddy brain.”
That knows not its own force, and therefore stands
Loaded with wood and stone; the powerless hands
Of a mere child guide it with bit and rein:
But the beast fears, and what the child demands,
It does; nor its own terror understands,
Confused and stupified by bugbears vain,
Most wonderful with its own hand it ties
And gags itself-gives itself death and war.
For pence doled out by Kings from its own store,
Its own are all things between earth and heaven:
But this it knows not and if one arise
To tell the truth, it kills him unforgiven.”
They know not that Might is Right and Justice is built on property
qualifications. - - -
Political power is the recognition of class interests. All political reform
ls the outcome of class agitation to cement class interests. Economic
power always precedes political privileges. Politics is an appanage, and
an appendage of property. Politics prove the power of policy over principle.
The power of principle is the principle part of progress. As Hazlitt has
it:-"Great acts grow out of great principles, working changes in Society,
and tearing it up by the roots.” -
The prejudices of the Picaroon appear to dominate the actions and am-
bitions of the professional politician, rather than the principles of the purist.
The proof of principle is honesty of purpose. Politics—as given to the
poor but honest workingman,—consist mainly of piffle, platitudes, and pro-
grammes without principle. “Honesty is the best policy,” so the moralists
nurmer. It may be the best principle, but it has ever been the worst
policy-in the politics of today, yesterday, and doubtless will be the same
in the politics of tomorrow. Politics is the Might of the Mouth over
Righteousness of Thought. The great secret for the people to understand
is, that the owners of the economic foundations of Society are the manu-
facturers of the religion, morality, politics, law and justice that prevail in
the locality in which they live. That it is-only by change in the ownership
of economic forces that any change in the condition of the people can
come about—or by revolution guided by intelligence. -
Parliament is the Mecca for Masterdonic Moochers on the Make; and
a Rendezvous for the Rich, where they exchange their opinions, and keep
their interests in their own hands, or let them out at good interest.
The poor believe Parliament is a "Royal Exchange,” where they can
exchange bad laws for good laws; poverty for peace and plenty; and misery
for happines. We find it is the Mausoleum of New Thought; and the
Morgue for Martyrs who have struggled to reach the Millennium by that
path. Experience teaches this.
Men made Parliament, not Parliament men. Politics were invented to
preserve the privileges of unscrupulous Egoists and perpetuate the slavery
of Altruists and the horny-handed sons of toil as long as possible:
that is until the people find out the inutility of politics to cure their economic
evils. For they must know, some day, a political pill cannot cure an econ
omic cancer. An economic disease must be combated by an economic
remedy.
Practically, Parliament does not make laws, it only frames them or
constructs them. Judges make laws, for the last precedent embalms a
principle and assassinates the Rights of Man. As a manifestation of
this fact I refer you to the Taft Valº decision. which paralyzed the Trade
Union Acts, and inoculated many workers with the malady of thought.
The struggle for political power is between the Conservatives, the
Liberals, and the Laborites.
The Conservatives or Tories have the land and other things. The
Liberals have money and other things.
The Laborites have nothing except ambition and a strong desire to get
other things. The Conservatives and Liberals control everything worth
having, because they have property. All power emanates from the pos.



session of property. This is the reason the Laborites are powerless to-
day,+because they have no property. The Conservative Party consists of
the Peerage, the Beerage, the intellectual Steerage, -and Arthur J. Nancy
Balfour. The Liberal Party consists of the Financiers, the Middle Class
Unemployed looking for work under Gove, ument, the Nonconformist Con-
science, Winston Churchill-and John Burns.
The Labor Party consists of an accidental and fortuitous concourse of
atoms—mostly unconscious of themselves. I classify them thusly: Political
Policy-pushers with pen-pushing proclivities, Ghoul from the gutter on the
growl, Altruized Egos with a yearning for a full stomach three times a day,
Labor Church Devotees, Hinky-Dink Politicians, Sinners with a future
and Saints with a past, She-men in knickerbockers and He-women in bloom-
ers, Professional Sobbists and Municipal Yearnists, Mrs. Pankhurst and
family, and that Mogul of the Moanists—Keir Hardie.
These are forces arrayed against each other in the political arena.
The “Haves” will rule as long as they hold property, for power in this
world has always presided where property resided. The “Have Nots” must
hasten an economic evolution before they can expect a political revolution.
The Labor Party must educate their masters and pastors by bringing
them disasters for wisdom comes through sorrow and pain. As pain pre-
cedes progress, so progress must be the outcome of wisdom and wicked-
ness or-revolution and reconstruction.
Capital is brother-in-law to the House of Lords. The House of Lords
is the step-father of “Mars.” Both are next-door neighbors and next-of-kin
to Church and State, the twin-enemies of the people.
Capital is King Absolute at St. Stephens. King Edward VII. reigns
only at St. James's, for he is not allowed a seat in the Cabinet. He is
Ruler of the Social Realm. Capital is the Ruler of the Universe.
Modern aggression is commercial, not military, with 10 per cent, as
the incentive.
The House of Commons is the handmaiden of the House of Lords.
a philosophic standpoint. It has no Chairman, but is more orderly than
the “Commons." There are no “scenes” there, because there is more liberty
for the individual. Each peer perseveres to preserve his privileges without
terrible tongue-duels, wrathful riots, or Girls in the Gallery.
The House of Commons is the hand-maiden of the House of Loddº.
Capital rules the Cabinet; the Cabinet rules the House of Commons; the
House of Commons can't hear the voice of the people—and still the people
believe in the gods of their forefathers. They are governed by the tomb.
The dead hand of the past paralyses the brain of the present. The moral
of this problem is, the people must not put their trust in politics nor
Parliament, but must trust themselves before they can be Free.
-The Man without a Soul.
A NAPOLEON OF LABOR wanted to lead the Reform forces of today.
Must be possessed of psychic insight and brutality—of wisdom to know and
brutality to do. A man who is not afraid to break the Sabbath, the Ten
Commandments, or anything else he can lay his hands on; a sort of
Bovrilised Brutus—or Bloodthirsty Buddha—with a head to contrive, a
tongue to persuade, and a hand to execute any mischief. He must possess
the audacity of Chamberlain, the verbosity of Gladstone, the wisdom of
Disraeli, the persistency of Keir Hardie, the enthusiasm of Blatchford.
the wit of Bernard Shaw, the lungs of John Burns, the vivacity of Tom
Mann, the insight of Machiavelli, the strength of Sandow, the analysis of
Thomas Paine, the eloquences of Ingerson, the thoroughness of Bradlaugh,
the magnetism of John B. Gough, and the brutality of Malfew seklew-
Applicants (with or without testimonials), possessing these qualities, may
Interview. The Undersigned at this office, any day while the staff are at
Prayers-A Brutalitarian Truthist.
T H E IN VENTION OF GOD.
Its Egoistical Origin and Nature.
After conceiving the idea of God in the abstract, man could not rest
satisfied, but must needs seek to know the unknown and make definite the
indefinite. lt annoyed him to have always in his mind a sense of mystery-
to be haunted by a huge shadow, the form and nature of which he could not
even guess. His first conception of God was of an impersonal being, in-
definite in form. Now he began to feel, but vaguely, that it would be
better and more comfortable to his understanding if his God were personal
and of definite form. Comfort of mind is as essential to man as is comfort
of body. To make his mind comfortable on the subject he endowed God
with a personality and with a definite form. Having invented God, he
thought, perhaps, that he had a right to do as he pleased with God.
Let us see how he accomplished this fact of endowing his God with
personality and form. Knowing what an egoistical ceature he was, we can
make a very good guess as to how he managed it. It was something in
this way. He said, “My soul is from God and is part of God. Therefore
the "nature of God must be as the nature of my own soul. Only he is
greater and more powerful. As to his form, it must be very beautiful,
something like my own, in fact. Ah! I have it! When God made our bodies
of the earth, he made them like himself. His own shape was the most
beautiful thing the could think of That was why he used himself for a
model in making us. God is very like us in appearance, only he is bigger
and a trifle more beautiful, and stronger.
You will notice that in endowing God with a personality, man gave him
his full share of egotism.
The Egotism of God is phenomenal.
we find it somewhere in the Holy Bible (which men have a habit of
looking upon as the Word of God) that God made man in his own image.
My own conclusion, which I have already given, amounts to the exact
opposite of this, namely, that man made God in his own image.
I think I have been sufficiently clear upon this point, that when man
granted God a form he could think of nothing better than the form in
which he happened to find himself; and when he granted God a personality
it was simply that personality which he felt to be his own.
In inventing God man gave himself a certain amount of egotistical
satisfaction. In endowing God with attributes in the manner I have tried
to explain, he satisfied his egotism still further. In making God like him.
self he glorified himself. Self-esteem is a man's mental and moral food;





self-glorification is like wine to him. This is why men cling to the personal
Deity in spite of knowledge and reason. They cling to the glorified self.
Knowledge and reason might prove to them that the real self—what they
deem the little sell-is the only self. They like the idea of the magnified
self, the glorified self, better than this; and so, instinctively, in this par-
ticular matter, knowledge and reason are ignored.
Every believer in the personality of God unconsciously glorifies himself.
He throws out a magnified and idealized picture of himself—himself as he
could wish to be, immeasurably greater and stronger, with all his conscious
weakness gone from him, but at the bottom the same man. He looks on
the picture with admiration, which, as he appreciates more and more the
grandeur of it, grows into adoration. At last he falls down and worships.
But he is not worshipping God: he is worshipping the ideal of himself, which
he calls God for want of a better name.
Not long ago I same across a quotation which seems to support this
statement of mine. It is a fragment of a dialogue, and is apparently taken
from a Play called “The Idolator,” concerning which I can learn nothin2:
beyond what this fragment tells me. The dialogue is between a Christian
and a Pagan, though I take it the word Pagan means here not a worshipper
of idols, but a philosopher. The subject of the Dialogue is God. I do not
give the whole of the quotation as I found it, but merely the latter part
of it, which bears directly upon my reasoning, and runs thus:-
Christian: “is not His glory my glory, for lo! He dwelleth in me, and
in Him?”
Pagan: “Even so. Thus hath it ever been, O worshipper of thine own
soul.”
If we look, cursorily, at a few of the great religions of the world, chiefly
those of the ancient world, because they stand out plainer to us, being so
far away that their vastness is lost in the perspective of time, and the
outline has become clearer and more measureable to the understanding,
we shall have some confirmation of this idea that God-worship is at the
bottom unconscious self-worship.
The old Jewish conception of God is perhaps the most familiar to us,
because it is embodied in the Old Testament, a book most of us, if not all
of us, were taught to look upon with superstitious reverence as the ºnly
revelation of God, a knowledge of which was supposed to be indispensable
to our happiness and virtue.
Here we have the Jewish conception of God; and it is easy to see that
the Jewish God is, in himself, a Jew, with all the national characteristics
strongly developed. Great stress is laid upon his sense of justice; and little
or nothing is said of his generosity. He is slow to anger; but if his anger
is aroused he is is a terrible fellow to deal with. He nºrses his enmity, and
will be revenged upon his foe if he waits until the millenium. He is
jealous of his power. His first commandment is “Thou shalt have none
other God but me. Above all things he is narrow. He has his own par-
ticular people (the Jews), and all the rest of the world is as dirt beneath
his feet. The Jews must flourish; all other peoples must, if it is necessary,
be sacrificied to their well-being. His one great passion is race prejudice.
These characteristics are Jewish to the core. Taking the Jews broadly
as a nation, even to-day, they are as their God was supposed to be in the
days of the patriarchs. They have changed outwardly, but inwardly, after
thousasds of years, they are unchanged. One of the characteristics of their
God is immutability. He does not change. In this also he is like his own
particular people. They are immutable as a race. They do not change.
It is because of their narrowness and race prejudice.—Sir fessor Superight.
THE wit, wisdom AND wicked.
NESS, OF MALFEw SEKLEw,
Jester-Philosopher, Founder of the
Society of Superties, and President of
the Society of Social Arictocrats and
Conscious Egoists of England:
“Egoism is a discovery of a fact in
nature, not an invention of man. It
is the gospel of Common-sense, the
evangel of Reason, the philosophy of
the ‘I,’ the catholicon of Self-conscious-
ness; the theory that self-interest
rules the world, not love, nor moral-
ity.”
“The Conscious Egoist is a social
aristocrat governed by a Master-
Morality.”
“A Socialist is a semi-conscious Ego
dominated by a State-made morality."
“Egoism is the apogee of intel-
ligence, crystallized into self-knowl-
edge.”
“Egoism is Economics without
Emotion."
“Egoism is Everything, because
Everything is Egoism.”
“The Superite is a disillusioned Ego;
a man without a Soul, except his in-
dividuality; without a God, except
himself; without Morality, except his
own; without False Patriotism; with-
out a Conscience, but with Conscious-
ness of Self; without Duty, but with
Divinity of Desire; without delusions
economical, political, social, sexual,
civil, religious, or ethical; with hed-
onistic proclivities, and libertarian
ideals; propagating Economics with-
out Agony, Politics without Tears, and
Sociology without a Sob."
“The Superite is a new laid Ego
devoid of illusions, chimerical con
centions, and heavenly hallucinations:
free from love-pox, slave pox and small-
pox. He is a “New Spirit struggling
to be free and happy.”
“The Superite is devoid of cant.
humbug, hypocrisy, prejudices, and
other brain diseases; is true to him.
self, while still being dominated by
the progressive spirit and the surplus
value of his Ego.”
“The Superite is the first manifest.
ation of Supermanism, a Superman in
the Crude.”
“The Altruist is a professional Sob-
bist, a mawkish Moanist on the moan,
a Puritan on the prowl, a Sentimental-
ist suffering from emotional diar-
rhoea.”
“Altruism is a brain disease and the
enemy of the Superman and the law
of Progressive Life and Evolution.”
“Self-knowledge is the lever that
will emancipate the wage-slave, extir.
pate the parasite, and produce the
Super man. The philosophy of Egoism
is all that is same in ethical political.
anarchistic, socialistic thought, culled
from the writing af Nietzsche, Stir-
ner, Ibsen, Brandes, Benj. R. Tucker,
Ragnar Redbeard, George Bernard
Shaw, Stendahl, Montaigne, Machia-
welli, La Rouchefoucauld. Emerson
Thoreau, Mandeville, Tak Kak, and
the Gospel according to Malfew
Seklew."
“Christian morality is a morality
for cheap organisms." -
“Society is founded upon the pati.
ence of wage-slaves.”
“consciousness is the vivisection of
the senses.”
“Consciense is a cold storage ware-
house, where one keeps one's pre-
judices—oft-times called principles,
and other delusions, free of charge.”
“Conscience is a torture chamber.
Invented by the dead to torment the
living.”
“Man may misunderstand Egoism,
but never Egoism man.”
“There are two kinds of power,
economic wealth and knowledge. The


poor lacking wealth must have wis-
dom before they have power."
“All liberties, political, civil, social,
economic, sexual, religious, are value-
less without economic freedom. They
are dreams that pass in the night and
can't be found in the day-time.”
“The Missing Link in Progress, is
the Self-Conscious Egoist."
“The Riddle of the Ego-of the
Universe, has been solved by the
Sunerite-he has found himself Out:
id. In.”
*Can a man be a Christian on £1
a week. He can't be anything else"
“The New Golden Rule is,
yourself.”
"Do unto others as you would do
unto yourself, if you seek self-satis.
faction; if you desire reciprocity with
reason.”
“Man is a development from a
Primordial Atomic Globule to a Glori-
ous Globule of Gladness, from matter
unconscious of itself to mind con-
scious of itself: from Matter to Man,
from Man to Mind.”
“Mind is mighty and will prevail."
“Exploitation is the First Law of
Industrial and Individual Progress.”
“Self Realization is the First Law
of Human Nature-not. Self-Preserve
ation.”
“Man is a Masterpiece of Matter,
Misery and Misconception.”
“Mind is a Miracle of Motion and
the Marrow Fat of Matter.”
“Altruism is a slave morality, in-
vented by intellectual prostitutes to
cement the structure of Superstition,
Servitude, and Segregation. It is the
froth of folly, the foam of faith, the
fancy of fanatics, a decadent's dream.
a madman's malady; the weak wild
wail of weaklings, wastrels, creen
ling, meeklings, christlings, and under.
lings, for sympathy, succour, support.
and salvation.”
"It is better to be a live man in a
dead town than a dead man in a live
town.”
“Praised by these, blamed by those,
I smile at fools, defy the wicked, and
Rule
hasten to laugh at all, lest I be com:
pelled to weep.”
“Wise men make mistakes, but they
don't repeat them.”
“The man who deserves to succeed
generally does."
“If you would understand the psy-
chology of power, you must comprehend
the power of personality, for the per
sonality of power is the fulcrum of
progress, and the dynamo of destiny.”
“Altruism is the delirium tremens
of thought.”
“The unconscious man is an Evo
utionary Process; the conscious man
is an Evolutor.”
Napoleon said, The heart of a states.
man should be in his head. “The ex-
ploited will never be saved till they
make the brain the seat of their pat
riotic affections.”
NIETZSCHE
My diet masculine is having its ef.
ſect-my sayings of power and vigor.
I feed men, not with flatulent vegeta-
bles but with warrior food.”-
“Vigorous eras, noble civilizations
see something contemptible in “sym-
pathy," in “brotherly love" and in the
lack of self-assertion and self-reliance."
“And he who would be a creator of
*ood and evil. Verily, he must be a
destroyer and break conventional
values in pieces."
“But these things are not said for
long ears.”
“He who can does, he who cannot
tº e a ches.”-
NETZSCHE ON EDUCATION.
Gradually I have come to see day-
light in the general deficiency of our
culture and education: nobody learns.
nobody strives after, nobody teaches,
how to endure solitude.
some THING ENTRELY New.
Sensational and scientific.
Magic 8moke Photos.
wizard cigarette holder. It produces
photos in 2 minutes. Any photo can
be developed. Send 10c for Wizard
Cigarette holder, 10 magic developers,
and 1 wizard Cigarette holder.
Send for the
Have you seen The Superite Tie-
frame (Registered)? A simple device
to make ties to fit deep or narrow
collars, Shakespeare collars, or soft
collars.
The Latest scientific bisevery.
It saves time, money, labour and
temper.
A pleasure to put on and easy to
take off. No wearisome tying and un-
tying, always ready for use.
The movable button-hole fits on
any stud.
The elastic acts as a spring and
holds frame in position.
Can be fixed in an instant, and for
ease, oomfort and style it cannot be
equalled.
Can be used by Male or Female.
Ordinary Ties can be fixed on this
Tie-frame quickly, and worn with con
idence and comfort as no neckband
is required.
SAMPLE LOT-3 beautiful French
Sericene Silks and one Tie-frame for
50c postpaid; or, one Tie-frame and
one Silk Tie for 25c, with full Dar-
ticulars.
SPENCELLA and WINSEX,..
- IMPORTERS OF Novº LTIES –
852 Belmont Ave. (suite 11)
Near Clark St.
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, U. S. A.
Two new books on a Great Philosophy
SOON TO BE ISSUED
“THE GOSPEL ACCORDING
TO MALFEW SEKLEW’”
By Sirfessor Wilkesbarre. 350 or more
pages. Cloth bound. Postpaid $2.50.
Super-bound edition, $5.00.
“FROM AN EGO IN THE
CRUDE
TO A SUPERMAN IN THE
NUDE.”
By Sirfessor Wilkesbarre
About 300 pages. Cloth bound. Price
postpaid $2.00.
Super-bound de luxe edition, $4.00
These two volumes, now in course
of preparation, represent the bold and
aggressive philosophy of that mighty
mentoid of master-morality MALFEw
SEKLEw. If conscientiously studied
by any rational minded man, they will
teach him to comprehend the psychol-
ogy of his own Ego and thereby de-
velop within himself the pulsations of
Power and Triumph and Personality.

If you don’t like this book, don't keep it.
- - -
-
Might is flight; ºr The Survival ºf the Fitil
New book by Ragnar Redbeard, LL.D., U. of C.
178 pp. Cloth, gilt, 5-so; paper, soc-postpaid.
This is no-ordinary book. Undeniably it is the most re-
markable publication that has appeared in Christendom for
ºf-ºries its pulosophy is that or a scientiºc Satº.
a realistic Anti-Christ with grin and Pagan logic it assail-
the first principles of moral codes, religions, politics and law:
affirming that modern civilization is - horrible hypnotic
seance, a continuation of the terrorism and gloom of the Dark
Ages. 1. marshalls an overwhelming array of facts to
rove that the man of to-day is a physical and mental dwind-
ing, a coward, a weakling a slave. Upon biologic Spen-
cerian principles it attacks the Golden Rule, the Sermon on
the Mount, the Jewish Decalogue, statute books, written con-
stitutions and representative institutions, affirming that they
are all without higher sanction or authority than organized
duplicity or armed Power. Therefore it man is ever to be
ree, these artificial and domineering “Thou Shalts' must
be strenuously swept aside.
Dr. Red-beard contends that fitness to survive must be
tested by the clash of armies: all other tests being fraudu-
lent. Victors in war are naturally entitled to dominate; and
the "defeated"—that is, the runaways who feared to die-
are equally entitled to servitude. Throughout all organic life
the chief selective agency is combat women admire war-
riºr above all other winds of men. Communities of coward-
º * descendants) are rightfully plundered, taxed, erº-
-----
- Right” and * wrong” are decided not by the Mee-
but by the Mighty, who, consequently may write laws, creeds.
constitutions, title deeds-and re-write then a pleasure.
Equality ideals are mere milenial illusions, for all life is
strife-a combat to the death.
As long as the struggle for existence is “moralized" or
limited by Governments and Gods, the unfit and base in-
stead of being trampled down (as nature intended) are
stupidly permitted to set up Imperial Injunction Seats and
deal out death, bondage and ruin to Highest Types.
Thus, by demanding his credentials, Darwinism is fatal tº
the tyrant. It rings him round with menace and destruction. It
hurls against him ten thousand trained rivals. It proclaim-
to all ºn Nothing is true; nothing is sacred; all thin-
are open to you; blessed be the vanquishers.”
will refund your money and pay postage --- ways.
RLAND & THURLAND EVANSTON CHICAGO, IL.L.
Senº - back -- or---







_
*ARADOXES AND CONTRA-1C-
TIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.
By Francis Lord Bacon.
Here is a brilliant and powerful
pamphlet printed, for the first time,
400 years ago. Alexander Pope, who
lampooned the Puritan Holy Willies
so ferociously, describes Bacon as
"The boldest, brightest, meanest of
mankind.” In Bacon's day the Great
Protest was triumphing (in England)
over the invasive bureaucratic Fed-
eralism of Rome.
Some historians seem to think that
Bacon was really Queen Elizabeth's
illegitimate son. Ignatius Donnelly,
author of “Atlantis" and “Caesar's
Column,” held that Bacon was also
the real author of Shakespeare.
When appointed Chief Judge of
the English Supreme Court Lord
Bacon accepted bribes, as a matter of
course, but from the money so re-
ceived, he financed his famous literary
works, and also subscribed very hand-
somely to the colonization of the
United States, and to the anti-Catholic
propoganda funds.
If you want to know what the first
and foremost of the great Anglo-Saxon
rationalist philosophers had to say
about the inane fallacies and foolish-
ness of Christianity send for a copy
of this pamphlet. It actually contains
the sublimated essence of almost all
that has since been uttered (in many
different ways), by Holbach, Voltaire,
Strauss, Feurbach, Schopenhauer,
Goethe, Dr. Taylor, Renan, and Nietz-
sche.
That Christianity is an evil lie was
just as plainly evident to Lord Bacon
as it is to the editor of The Eagle and
the serpent. This will also be quite
clearly known to you on condition
that you first read the pamphlet care-
fully and then cogitate thereon in a
frank and mainly way,
judice and without awe.
15c.
without pre-
Price, postpaid, (Somethin-
extra also.)
*WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF
LIFE”
A somewhat lengthened period of
time has elapsed since this conundrum
was first propounded.
Of all the philosophers and sages
and priests and scientists that have
ever lived and lied, not one of them
has given us a decent answer-not
even an approximate answer.
The real fact is, they did not know
and could not know. They knew no
more than you or I. Science and reli-
gion are both equally at fault. The
bibles lie to you and so do the news-
papers.
We are born and die apparently in-
side of some mysterious electric mon-
ster, some colossal astral machine,
that goes round and round for ever,
and has neither beginning nor end
nor meaning.
Whether it was created or not
created, we have no certain means of
knowing.
Where it came from, and where it
is going to, and why it should be
going at all. All these things are
obscure to us. How can we tell that
live within its midrifº
“Ah, when you and I behind the
veil have passed, what a long, long
while this world shall last?"
*WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF
LIFE”. Pamphlet by Frithjof Nan:
sen, Arctic Explorer. Price postpaid
10 CENTS.
THURLAND & THURLAND
“THE EAGLE & SERPENT"
EVANSTON. - - L-
(Suburb of Chicago)
|
|
|




THE HALL OF FAME BOOKS
NIETZSCHE
ºr-E *w-icº-T OF THE DO-5"
AND “THE ANT-C-R1ST"
weautifully printed. postpaid,
- 2.00-
ºthus spake zarathus traº Nietzsche
"THE NEW TORYISM" by Herbert Spencer. $ 40
"THE COMING SLAVERY”. Herbert Spencer 40
“THE EGO AND HIS OWN," Max Stirner. 1 0
"VINDICATION OF NATURAL SOCIETY,”
by Edmº. Burke. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
"MAN VERSUS STATE,” Herbert Spencer. 40
"GOD AND THE STATE,” Prince Bakunine, .50
"WHAT IS PROPERTYP" P. J. Proudhon. 200
“SOCIALISTS AND SOCIALISM," Watson 50
"THE STATE; ITS ROLE IN HISTORY,”
by Prince Kropatkin... -------------------- 15
"SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC PROBLEM,”
by Fºurschein................... - - - - - - - - - - º
-U-LA-D - T-LRLAND
EVANSTON, ILLINOIS.
BOOK DEPARTMENT,
(Evanston, Suburb of Chicago.)
Write for any book you want any kind.